You may hate obama for various reasons, but I would think many if not all would appreciate that this move takes balls. And I'm very happy, and somewhat shocked that he actually pulled the trigger.
Printable View
You may hate obama for various reasons, but I would think many if not all would appreciate that this move takes balls. And I'm very happy, and somewhat shocked that he actually pulled the trigger.
sad it took this long, but politics gonna politic... good thing that the ball is rolling though.
didn't he 'endorse' it last election season also, and then hasn't done shit about it since?
he also needs to stop raiding pot shops like a DICK.
IF U VOTE FOR OBAMA, UR A #FAG
appeared on my Twitter Timeline like 50 times this afternoon. I didn't realize how scary this country is (naive I know).
this definitely is not funny in the least bit, yet I cracked up when I read it. I guess I just have a /b/ perspective on things.Quote:
Originally Posted by baudib
How does voting for Obama have anything to do with being a cigarette?
speaking of the b perspective
http://i.imgur.com/UMbsQ.png
What is wrong with you people:
In the US, 31 states have passed constitutional amendments or legislation against same-sex marriage.
Source: BBC News - Obama says same-sex couples should be able to marry
Constitutional amendments! Isn't that a huge deal, amending the constitution?
I bet /b/ is the key to solving string theory.
edit: or better yet, since a theory of everything would by definition have to also explain /b/, /b/ is the sole reason a theory of everything has not been worked out. Thereby making /b/ the ultimate troll of the universe.
They have amended their state's constitutions. The Federal Constitution supersedes all state constitutions where they are in conflict.Quote:
Originally Posted by rong
Well that's ok then.
ya, so just in case we aren't clear-- the reason it's such a big deal that Obama loves they gheys, is because if there is an amendment which bars discrimination in marriage when it comes to same sex marriages, then all of those state amendments would become null and void. The gheys in Sante Fe would no longer have to travel to Vermont to get tax breaks and destroy the sanctity of marriage.
So if the prez says it's so, can he be over ruled?
Troll theory?Quote:
Originally Posted by boost
Congress has to pass it and the Supreme Court has to not overrule it. Both of which are highly corruptQuote:
Originally Posted by rong
BTW, most of the US is fucking retarded because of fiscal and monetary unity. Basically, the garbage regions are perpetually bailed out by the productive regions. Imagine the EU crisis, but with Germany and the ECB continually bailing out Greece/Spain/etc without changing the paradigm to make sure that future bailouts are not necessary.
We have basically subsidized ignorance. This is a structural flaw, not so much a behavioral one. Just like how the EUR was doomed to failure due to not having fiscal unity in the EU, the US is doomed to stupidity by having monetary unity among the states i.e. allowing shit regions to exchange at the same rates as strong regions
It's all playing right into Ron Paul's hands.
It is about time. It's completely and utterly ridiculous that this is even an issue, and that people aren't booed off the stage like a member of a KKK in front of a general audience. It's obscene that hate groups comprised of Christians are given equal voice in the "debate" about LGBT rights. Yes, in 10 years time this won't be a partison issue (well, at least no more than minority rights continue to be currently - which isn't good, but is vast improvement over what teh gays deal with now).
That being said, for a sitting president to take this stand in an election year is pretty unbelievable. Yes, it may rally the base, but in my mind the clearest result of this will be to inflame christian conservatives who until now really didn't have a strong motivation to support Romney... it seems highly probable that this will be a massive boon for his support from bigots and homophobes, i.e. social conservatives.
RALLY THE LEFT AND THE YOUNG!
Pretty sure he could have waited 6 or 7 months to throw this out there after he wtf stomps romney. Now itll for sure rile up the dbags that are anti-everything but someone like me who thinks 'i dont care who.gets married' if i wasnt going to vote (im not), its really not getting me to run to the polls to.vote for.obama.
Seems like a bad strategy to get votes iyam.
Dranger is now a political advisor.
He probably just shrugged and dropped the hammer when he found out about the press Biden's comments were getting.
I kinda thought Biden dropped him in it and he had to come out (HAR HAR HAR) with that or appear divided against his partner (HUR HUR HUR) in election year.
Oh man is there gonna be another VP debate this year? I want me some more of that third person goodness
Pretty sure I'm not wrong, bro.Quote:
Originally Posted by BooG690
Obama has very steadily been making positive changes on gay rights issues. They're one of his largest donors, and Obama supporting them is one of the more obvious ways to keep Democrats on his side. The timing of his statement is probably due to the election kicking off (so he's partially Campaign-Obama, wants more donations, wants more progressive cred), and the North Carolina thing. My guess is that Biden was told to word his opinion on it similar to how he did i.e. wait until Obama broke the news of the Administration's position. Biden's comments were probably also political calculus in gauging the reaction because it is an actual political risk to out for gay marriage since the nation is about split on it
I don't think it will give his opponents much more fervor because they're already at the brim with hate. I think Obama can say just about whatever he wants and it wouldn't change how the right-wing views him because they have been thinking of this Imagination-Obama for so long. He's already a muslim commie faggot, so him declaring his position now won't make too many of his opponents actually realize he didn't declare before. It's like how the overwhelming majority of Republican voters believe he has raised taxes and is trying to pry their guns from their hands; when the reality is that he has lowered their taxes and hasn't done one single thing about guns
I'm not that up to date on USofA politics but from I can gather:
US president is black and wants to marry a man?
you nailed it
Biden was def the trial balloon.
Seems like they must have decided the more conservative swing states are out of play.
w/e, I am thrilled, maybe I'll even vote for him, probably still vote for some left wing weirdo.
That man writes one hell of a rant.
You can imagine someone being offended by the letter because their religious beliefs mean so much to them, but all that meaning was invested by them. That gays are perfectly normal people deserving of all the same rights is equally meaningful, but it's self-evident.
I hope that shit brain politician gets a little cocklust after gay marriage is legalized. Just because it'd tear him up inside.
And in doing so divorce his wife and kick his 2 kids to the curb. It's all politics.Quote:
Originally Posted by WillburForce
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b92vAucJg2Y
teh gay marriage in the scotus. one time.
I poasted to the topic on a different forum. Even though I have not looked at the details whatsoever, let's see if my assumptions of the system are accurate
Quote:
I have not followed the issue at all, but mark my words: SCOTUS will side with the liberals/gays/homosecksuals/etc
The reason for this is that the Roberts court doesn't hear things that Roberts himself doesn't want to hear, and, despite views to the contrary, he is cognizant of populism. The 2012 election has demonstrated that the public will not put up with shit against gays, and the SCOTUS will adhere to that. While it has not been so in every instance, the court has mostly been on the liberal side of the perceived electorate (abortion and evolution, anybody?). We haven't yet reached an era where five of the jurists are ideologues who don't give a fuck about public opinion.
Not tryin to lick my own balls, but this was pretty awesome.Quote:
Originally Posted by boost
lol a theory of everything doesn't have to explain b, it only has to explain itself
consider balls unlicked
>be boost
>be solving string theory
>mom busts into room
>says a boy like me should be out gettin that sweet poon
>she wants the d
What. You can have a self explanatory theory which is not a theory of everything. I mean, it's right in the name, the theory would need to be capable of explaining everything, otherwise I'm afraid it would be something besides the theory of everything.Quote:
Originally Posted by wufwugy
dude, that's gross.Quote:
Originally Posted by wufwugy
damnit I'm trying to find the 'YO SIZE...' post to make a more appropriate >be boost thing.
#lukieyouhavesooverplayedthatjoke #idontevenusetwitter #amidoingitright
haha, I'm sure no one but me and you know what you're referring to.
story of my life :D
I was genuinely surprised to find out sodomy was illegal towards the early 80s. But things have been getting better pretty quickly for gays since.
It turns out they were people the whole time. Who could have known?
I'm pretty sure sodomy is still illegal in multiple places in the country still.
edit: not quite, but pretty close. SCOTUS struck down anti sodomy laws across the board in 2003.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodomy_..._United_States
Court is likely not gonna do jack at this point in time. But...they likely areny overturning the lower court's prop 8 decision either. So say writers on the scotus blog.
I read the oral argument. Justice Kegan laughs at the petitioner, a proponent of prop8, for his "Marriage = procreation" argument. I laughed too.
However, they will likely strike down DOMA. Kennedy seems to want to side with the liberals in this one.
Alls I know is the game is won.
If it comes down to a State's rights, States decide thing, it'll be like 35 states snap high-5s and handshakes legalize marriage between consenting adults while Mississippi and co. hold. Eventually we make a federal law which forces states to recognize the legality of the marriage in other states within their borders (if we don't have this already) and then in 2113 Mississippi is the last state to officially OK gay marriage.
When is Mississippi going to do something first?
Probably to legalize cannibalism.
The play I was trying to run there was "incest slant" but I like the option route you took.
"Incest is not wrong. Adam and Eve were related by rib." - unnamed southern preacher
http://cdn.bleacherreport.net/images...png?1369657532
The NHL is so gay
it's cuz they're all Canadian amirite?Quote:
Originally Posted by kingnat
NHL is bout 50% Canadian, 24% American, rest Euro
Just a bunch of ice dancers who weren't pretty enough for the olympics.Quote:
Originally Posted by kingnat
"landslide" 61%
It's not bonkers to call 61/39 a landslide in American politics. It might be more accurate and less sensationalist to call it a definitive margin, though.Quote:
Originally Posted by kiwiMark
MLB in the closet, amirite?
No, really - prevalence of Southerners, amirite?
Of the four, they do utilize the most prevalent phalic symbol, in the baseball bat.
Also, it's much more of a game than a sport.
pitcher/catcher metaphor
imho -
Attachment 506
They don't get married in the porn I watch.
I looked at the article, and it turns out only 62 players were surveyed. if I could wager at the actual nfl number being much lower I'd be happy to.
Why does the one dude have his ring on the right hand?
That marriage is a sham!
how do your hands work
Explain.Quote:
Originally Posted by boost
They should upgrade same-sex unions from civil union to gay "marriage" [quotes included]. Baby steps here, people.
Same way darts is more of a game than a sport. You can be a fatass alcoholic who stands around not moving most of the time you're playing and still excel at the game!Quote:
Originally Posted by Lukie
I was talking about baseball.Quote:
Originally Posted by d0zer
I must have missed the flow of the thread. apologies for not being more clear.
So was I, but I have to admit I was just trolling Americans because I know how much you guys love your baseball. I played as a kid and enjoyed it but now I find it painfully boring to watch.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lukie
That's what I was kind of figuring, but at the same time a lot of people think that way re: lazy, fat baseball player isn't an athlete. I think that is more of an accurate descriptor of the local co-ed softball team than it is for those who excel at baseball (or softball for that mater.)Quote:
Originally Posted by d0zer
I would say football (i.e. handegg) is more popular here in the states, at least in the area that I reside in. Local sports radio is all about Browns, Browns, Browns even in the off-season, while the Indians are in-season and don't get talked about nearly as much.
I admit to loving the game of baseball but also often finding it rather boring to watch.
People go so wrong with this, Darts is definitely a sport.Quote:
Originally Posted by d0zer
Let's make up our own definitions of words, woooo!
Gotcha.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lukie
Yeah, sure, the people who play it at the top echelons are obviously athletic. There is some required running involved, and strength is important in some aspects. But if we were to draw up a line graph with game on one end and sport on the other end, baseball would be further towards Candyland and Uno relative to sports like Hockey, Basketball, Football (both), etc.
meh.. I'm not big into word shenanigans, puns, and those sorts of things when formulating an argument. It's not much different than Lebron James always saying 'the game of basketball'....... actually, the way that sounds might be good enough reason to never use that wording again. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by boost
I'm sorry boost, you are a friend, and your views and arguments are usually top notch, but the rest of the post is such a joke that I don't even know where to start. Candyland and Uno? Come on man.
Well let's start with that the definition of sport is very amibugous, and among the various traits that arguably make up a list of what constitutes it involves activities that involve some combination of strength, power, speed, agility, coordination, etc.
Throwing a ball 90+ miles per hour, running the bases, fielding, hitting a ball 400+ feet etc all involve a great deal of the above qualities.
There is certainly a point that the game is largely played in explosive intervals.. e.g. an outfielder might not do much for a while outside of backing bases up, and then all of a sudden there is a sprint to the ball and a throw to a base.
As far as I know, constant movement among all players has never been a prerequisite for what is considered a sport. What about the 300+lb american football linemen? He looks fat, a play lasts a few seconds, and then there might be 40 seconds until the next one. Is he no longer playing a sport? Or is it just the brute strength involved that makes it more impressive?
Why is the skill-power aspect overlooked? I mean if it was purely about physical strength, stamina, and power, the only activities that would be considered sports would be things like powerlifting, running, and olympic weightlifting.
That's mostly true yeah. Most pro players are in great shape, but baseball did get the stereotype I trolled with in no small part due to the fact that one of the biggest names in the game's history, babe ruth was a fat drunk. The fact that this list exists gives some merit to the stereotype, even though of course it is highly cherry-picked and a lot of the examples are antiquated.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lukie
http://www.complexmag.ca/sports/2011...rs-of-all-time
The way that baseball is played out certainly means there's the opportunity to excel at some positions without having the greatest of cardiovascular health, which differs from basketball, soccer, hockey, and others but in the interest of avoiding a boring semantics debate about game vs sport, I'll just say that baseball is a sport and move on.
If one of your definitions of sport is that it should be able to double as a cardio session, so be it. Obviously, some of the baseball positions don't fit that description (first base, or especially designated hitter. I hate the DH rule.)
It is hard to classify what is a sport. Here are some questions you can reasonably ask yourself as to what should qualifty as one. The more yes answers the better, although not every question must be answered yes for it to be considered a sport.... just my opinion:
Does the activity involve a ball of some sort? (e.g. MMA vs baseball)
Does the activity involve highly developed skills involving coordination, timing, accuracy, etc. (e.g. powerlifting vs american football)
Are those expressed via speed/power/etc. derived from the human body? (e.g. NASCAR vs triathlon)
Does the activity require another opponent or team to play the game in its (near) complete manner? (e.g. golf vs tennis)
edit: those left vs right things weren't meant to say that one activity isn't a sport and the other is, just examples of what would be no/yes for that specific question..... if that makes sense