incest, homophobia, homosexual, marriage, same sex, stupid,
Probably not, but op-ed, in all his fucktarded glory, made it appear that another blogger does by cleverly replacing the word "GLBT" with "incest" in his comment. (I actually had to go read the original comment to make sure the guy wasn't seriously promoting incest. Disgraceful, op-ed, just disgraceful.)
First of all, the difference between incest and homosexuality is simple: incest produces nasty genetic diseases. You can see it with purebred dogs and you can see it with the royal families in Europe and the whole hemophilia mess. The Playful Walrus argued that not all marriages produce children, but you have to be prepared for the fact that heterosexual sex will produce children even with the careful use of birth control, so suck it, TPW.
Secondly, editing someone's comment so they look like a disgusting pervert purely to prove a point that has been debunked ad nauseum is sleazy at best. At best, op-ed. You should not be proud of this.
I'm gonna go bathe now.
Monday, June 29, 2009
10 comments:
Comments are for you guys, not for me. Say what you will. Don't feel compelled to stay on topic, I enjoy it when comments enter Tangentville or veer off into Non Sequitur Town. Just keep it polite, okay?
I am attempting to use blogger's new comment spam feature. If you don't immediately see your comment, it is being held in spam, I will get it out next time I check the filter. Unless you are Dennis Markuze, in which case you're never seeing your comment.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The Playful Walrus argued that not all marriages produce children
ReplyDeleteSeriously? The one who argues that marriage is for procreation?
yes, that would be the asshat.
ReplyDeletePlease tell me I didn't just read something that basically suggests that Loving v. Virginia should be overturned?
ReplyDeletebasically, yes. he would like a return to miscegenation laws.
ReplyDelete*belabored sigh*
ReplyDeleteindeed.
ReplyDeleteyou're absolutely right. the way he had the words replaced, it read like he was just reminding the reader of what we were discussing. i didn't realize the original commentor wasn't some sort of nambla perv until i read the original, unedited comment.
ReplyDeleteI'm not quite clear here, it's it's just about informed consensual sex, what is the problem with incest?
ReplyDeleteI know your larger point here is that op-ed is dishonest. (That has been my experience with him as well).
ReplyDeleteBut, to add to your point about incest and genetic disease, sociologist Claude Levi-Strauss argued that the taboo on incest also came from the need for kinship groups to build alliances with other kinship groups in order to avoid war. Marriage was an exchange of women between men, for purposes of building alliances.
Isn't it fun how much marriage has changed over the years?
Wow. I was going to give the guy the benefit of the doubt, and assume that he was doing something similar to the "internet tradition" of "Fixing" quotes by playfully changing clearly visible quotations on a page in order to make it so that the quotation now undermines its own point/is hilarious. That's what I'm sure he was trying to do, by implying "Hey, this argument for same-sex marriage could be used to argue for incestuous marriage too, lol". Sadly, he made no effort to assure that this was what he was clearly doing, and thus deserves as much scorn as you can possibly heap upon him.
ReplyDelete