sucker punch

Absolutely. And I would fight for your right to express your feelings about said art, whether it be positive or negative, whether I agree with you or not. What I have a problem with, in this case, is the alleged violence that took place. As an example of my views, let's take the Westboro Baptist Church. You know, the people who picket soldier's funerals with signs that say things like "God Hates Fags." I think they're the scum of the Earth, and hate who they are and what they stand for. But I would never stop them from making their opinions heard. Control where they protest perhaps, so they're not taunting the family of the deceased, but it is their right to do what they're doing. As much as I despise them, I would go to bat to protect their right to free speech as well.

The Pope murdered 17 gay black jewish children. Discuss.

1. We want everyone to be tolerant. 2. Normal people? You're an ass.

Agree 100%, and I'm not paranoid at all either! Damn those gay people, and their absurd, evil, secret plans for equal rights. Gay people are sinners, and should be stoned to death, not given the right to marry. And while we're at it? Women aren't even people. Where did our society go wrong, letting property vote? Next thing you know, we'll be letting our pet dogs vote too! Where did this country go wrong?!

No! NONONO! It's a sin! My infallible invisible friend told me through a book written by people thousands of years ago! This cheapens my marriage with my wife! How is my family supposed to survive when people that have nothing to do with me are doing things that don't affect me!? This is an outrage!

Is English your second language, sweetheart? If so, then I apologize. If not, I'm stunned at your ability to be literate and yet have such a flimsy grasp on sarcasm, implications and sub-text. Your clever combination of being condescending and pretending to be ignorant is fascinating though.

Oh please. Now you're just being ridiculous. We both know exactly what you meant by that post. And if you want to talk semantics, I never told you to stop expressing a hope or a wish, I told you to stop being foolish. Not that you don't have the right to be foolish if you want to. And it seems you're exercising that right.

http://www.whowouldtheworldelect.com/ For some weird ass reason, they don't post all the votes together, but at a glance, it seems like Obama is running away with it.

We can debate the intricacies of race-fueled comedy until the end of time, but it isn't really applicable in this case. (I'd hope) that anyone with common sense can see this obviously crosses a line. What if a bunch of people dressed up as catholic priests and pretended to rape little boys? You think they'd just let that pass?

Why not? They have every right to be upset and morally outraged. They don't have the right to be violent. Stop being foolish.

Privatization is a very dangerous route to follow.

I don't remember the health care systems being ranked per se, but it was obviously Moore's intention to imply the Canadian system was immeasurably better than the American. From what I remember, the French or British system were portrayed as the best.

This is sad and pathetic. Its ****ing art. Grow up. We really need to start respecting free speech.

And therein is the problem. Not polygamy. But evil people who use others for their own gain. Men who dominate and manipulate women is a completely separate issue. Don't get the two confused.

Luckily, you don't have to understand, since it doesn't affect you. Maybe she is bisexual and loves the other woman as well? Maybe she is marrying 2 men? Maybe she believes in open marriages? Maybe she doesn't believe in monogamy? Maybe she feels her husband would be much happier with a second wife? Maybe its cultural and she feels its the proper thing to do? etc The fact that you don't get it has no bearing on whether or not it should be legal. Actually, the fact that you don't seem to understand it should completely invalidate your arguments because you're preaching from ignorance.

So polygamists can't legally have sex with them, obviously. Polygamy doesn't cause abuse towards women, sweetie. Scumbags who abuse women do. Where we end up? Hopefully in a country where there aren't laws against actions that don't have a victim. You're right. Damn that abortion. I wish we could have many more unwanted children. That always turns out so well.

They drag the rest of us down! We should really get rid of the people we arbitrarily decide are weak and lame, then we could create A Supreme Race! That would be fantastic! Why has no one though of this before!?

Are you serious, or are you being a sarcastic caricature of ignorance, a la Stephen Colbert?

Come on now. Common sense? Logic? Critical thinking? Don't bring those into a religious/moral debate! Blind faith is the only thing applicable here.

You forgot to pray on it.

Absolutely, I don't want my tax money to go towards that damn Atheist Schoolboard. The public school system, however, I think should take more of my tax money.

I find it very interesting that the conclusion you jump to is "sluts." Why don't you ask any stand-up comic since the beginning of time? PEOPLE LIE ABOUT THE NUMBER OF PARTNERS THEY'VE HAD!

Like what, for example?

Polygamy is the root of the problem? Please. People who think that, in my opinion, are either completely confused, or are using the issue as a means to another end. Polygamy is not the root of the problem. Sick, twisted, pedophiles that like to rape little girls, and control women are the root of the problem. Polygamy is just an excuse/pathway they use to achieve their goals. Heroin junkies use syringes to get their fix. Are syringes the root of the problem? Should they be outlawed? If I love two women, I want to marry both of them, they want to marry me back, and they understand the situation, there is no reason to not allow us to do that. There shouldn't be laws against actions that have no victim.

You honestly want me to explain to you how two women can have sex? Seriously? And that is relevant how? Testing is unnecessary and that is just a foolish thing to say. Social engineering games? Please. The nuclear family isn't the standard anymore. Is there something about two of the same sex inherently worse than all the other ways children are raised? What about families with an abusive parent. Or families with an alcoholic parent. Or single parent families. Or families in which both parents work. Or families which employ a nanny. Or orphans. Or foster families. Or children raised by their older sibling. Or parents who use drugs. Or parents who teach their children intolerance and hate. Maybe we should take children away from Mothers who aren't married? After all, the child is missing the necessary different and complementary personality of the father. A child being raised by a loving lesbian couple is the least of our problems as far as child-rearing goes. The fact that that even concerns you in the slightest makes me feel you have more of a problem with homosexuality itself than with the welfare of the child.