Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

a triple turtle [chat]

1697072747582

Posts

  • simonwolfsimonwolf DEHUMANIZE YOURSELF AND FACE TO BLOODSHEDRegistered User regular
    Hey Posh, are you going to visit Tokyo when me and Inqui are there for our orientation

    Uj3Ujoh.jpg
  • WinkyWinky Registered User regular
    Sometimes I read the description of snack foods on the back of the bag

    I always feel cheated if there isn't a unique description of the flavour

    Tycho's newspost about the extreme dorritos no longer has working images

    It is basically the most upsetting thing in the world, and I've considered maybe contacting him directly to get this fixed

    f1i3ys.jpg
  • SarksusSarksus Registered User regular
    Maybe they really want the cake. They can have straight cake if they let us have gay marriage.

  • DrezDrez Registered User regular
    poshniallo wrote: »
    Drez wrote: »
    That doesn't seem any more douchey than serving wedding cake for passing gay marriage would be.

    Either way it's serving celebration wedding dessert for setting marriage right.

    Not exactly sensitive to tge other side, but this seems like a bit of an over reaction.

    nooo

    its like, haha you cant have this

    Is everyone actually this myopic?

    It's a group of people that feel Tgey have done good service in defense of marriage. Celebrating with marriage dessert is perfectly sensible in that situation.

    It's insensitive, but certainly no more insensitive than banning same sex marriage in the first place.

    There's passing a bill.

    And there's rubbing the other side's face in it through imagery and symbolism.

    The latter is more insensitive. By a lot.

    Wait... making fun of women's suffrage would be more insensitive than repealing it?

    I'm sorry guys, actively curtailing another's rights is vastly more insensitive than symbolic dessert eating.

    That isn't what you said earlier, at all.

    No, my first post was not as clear as it could have been.

    And it's still wrong either way.

    You can't separate the cake from the context. The context is: "We just banned same-sex marriage. Let's celebrate by taking a trivial tradition from that activity we just denied people and publicly partake in said activity" as a way of rubbing it in their faces.

    I can't even fathom how your mind works if you can't comprehend why this is exponentially worse than if they just banned same-sex marriage and shut the fuck up about it, with no celebration.

    It's the prevailing attitude that the celebration indicates, it's the celebration of trampling on another groups' rights, and it's the nature of the celebration all rolled into one big miasma of human filth.

    steam_sig.png
  • Rear Admiral ChocoRear Admiral Choco Registered User regular
    It's more like banning gay marriage is way worse but eating the cake afterwards is like a 1.5x combo multiplier that makes it mega shitty

    CDIOl.png
  • WinkyWinky Registered User regular
    I HOPE THEY GET FAT

    f1i3ys.jpg
  • Psycho Internet HawkPsycho Internet Hawk Registered User regular
    Sarksus wrote: »
    Maybe they really want the cake. They can have straight cake if they let us have gay marriage.

    Iunno dude have you ever had gay cake? It's pretty amazing.

    ezek1t.jpg
  • syndalissyndalis Getting Classy On the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Products regular
    Eating the wedding cake, and having it ACTUALLY be a wedding cake, just made a bad thing a little worse.

    Also, isn't it non-traditional to eat a wedding cake not at a wedding? I mean, we can't break TRADITION NOW, CAN WE YOU ASSHOLES?

    By the way...

    Screen%20Shot%202012-05-08%20at%2011.03.12%20PM.png

    Those few counties of reason and hope in the middle of the map? that's MY North Carolina. Shame they didn't have more sway.

    Fucking rest of the state.

  • DrezDrez Registered User regular
    It's more like banning gay marriage is way worse but eating the cake afterwards is like a 1.5x combo multiplier that makes it mega shitty

    Yeah, pretty much.

    With no context, which is worse? Eating cake, or banning same-sex marriage?

    With context, which is worse? Banning same-sex marriage, or banning same sex marriage and then publicly reveling in it and rubbing it in the other sides' faces?

    Obviously, there is nothing inherently wrong with eating cake. But in context, which is the only way to conceptualize such an action, it's pretty fucking disgusting and makes everything exponentially worse.

    steam_sig.png
  • KageraKagera Registered User regular
    You should secede from them. :bz

    “This is America. We’re entitled to our opinions.”
    “Wrong. This is Texas. And my opinion is the only one that counts."
  • skippydumptruckskippydumptruck FAK U HODGEHEG Registered User regular
    its a bumblebee nickname

    its cute

    but it stings

  • SarksusSarksus Registered User regular
    Winky wrote: »
    I HOPE THEY GET FAT

    Don't worry, it's the south, they already are.

  • ronyaronya Arrrrrrf. the ivory tower's basementRegistered User regular
  • durandal4532durandal4532 Registered User regular
    Yeah combo multiplier is a good way to put it. Meaningless out of context but totally makes it even worse.

    God damn

    what complete shitheels. I'm just amazed by the amount of time and effort people are willing to put in just to take good things apart brick by brick.

  • simonwolfsimonwolf DEHUMANIZE YOURSELF AND FACE TO BLOODSHEDRegistered User regular
    from sea to shiiiiining sea

    Uj3Ujoh.jpg
  • ElkiElki hegemon globalSuper Moderator, Moderator, ClubPA mod
    Winky wrote: »
    I HOPE THEY GET FAT

    Uh, can I steal this?

  • Solomaxwell6Solomaxwell6 Registered User regular
    Douchiness aside, was anyone actually surprised by the result?

    Homophobes are always going to have an advantage in referendums because fear and bigotry are a ridiculously powerful motivators and because they get a lot of money from bigoted churches. It's a southern state where (probably) most people are opposed to gay marriage to begin with. And I wouldn't be surprised in the slightest if Democrats stayed home because there's no presidential primary, although I have no idea how much of an impact it would've had.

    Eventually, we're going to have gay marriage everywhere, one way or another. But North Carolina isn't going to get it in the near future, and those constitutional amendments are unfortunately rather popular. Even California and Oregon have them.

  • Psycho Internet HawkPsycho Internet Hawk Registered User regular
    ronya wrote: »
    I'm full of peas.

    ezek1t.jpg
  • simonwolfsimonwolf DEHUMANIZE YOURSELF AND FACE TO BLOODSHEDRegistered User regular
    I've said it once, and I'll say it again

    Democracy simply doesn't work

    Uj3Ujoh.jpg
  • KageraKagera Registered User regular
    Goddammit Craig t Nelson you are a moron.

    “This is America. We’re entitled to our opinions.”
    “Wrong. This is Texas. And my opinion is the only one that counts."
  • South hostSouth host I obey without question Registered User regular
    syndalis wrote: »
    Spoiler:

    Do you live in one of the reasonable areas, or are you in one of the bad ones?

    Hope is the first step on the road to disappointment.
  • JacobkoshJacobkosh Gamble a stamp. I can show you how to be a real man!Super Moderator, Moderator mod
    Sometimes I read the description of snack foods on the back of the bag

    I always feel cheated if there isn't a unique description of the flavour

    my friends did this a couple weeks ago, only substituting penis words occasionally

    the back of a taco-flavored Dorito bag made me nearly choke to death laughing when they got to the part about "a blast of Mexican in your mouth"

  • syndalissyndalis Getting Classy On the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Products regular
    South host wrote: »
    syndalis wrote: »
    Spoiler:

    Do you live in one of the reasonable areas, or are you in one of the bad ones?
    I used to live in Reasonable NC.

    Now I live in Jersey, 20 minutes from Manhattan.

    Upgrade.

  • matt has a problemmatt has a problem Six pack on a dick Registered User regular
    syndalis wrote: »
    Eating the wedding cake, and having it ACTUALLY be a wedding cake, just made a bad thing a little worse.

    Also, isn't it non-traditional to eat a wedding cake not at a wedding? I mean, we can't break TRADITION NOW, CAN WE YOU ASSHOLES?

    By the way...

    Screen%20Shot%202012-05-08%20at%2011.03.12%20PM.png

    Those few counties of reason and hope in the middle of the map? that's MY North Carolina. Shame they didn't have more sway.

    Fucking rest of the state.

    Heh. Asheville, Charlotte, Raleigh-Durham and Boone.

    h1DI1.jpg
    All my fuckin life I lived a normal fuckin life
  • DrezDrez Registered User regular
    @MentalExercise I wasn't trying to be a dick back there.

    Anyway, bed time.

    steam_sig.png
  • WinkyWinky Registered User regular
    Elki wrote: »
    Winky wrote: »
    I HOPE THEY GET FAT

    Uh, can I steal this?

    Yes

    f1i3ys.jpg
  • MentalExerciseMentalExercise Indefenestrable Registered User regular
    Drez wrote: »
    poshniallo wrote: »
    Drez wrote: »
    That doesn't seem any more douchey than serving wedding cake for passing gay marriage would be.

    Either way it's serving celebration wedding dessert for setting marriage right.

    Not exactly sensitive to tge other side, but this seems like a bit of an over reaction.

    nooo

    its like, haha you cant have this

    Is everyone actually this myopic?

    It's a group of people that feel Tgey have done good service in defense of marriage. Celebrating with marriage dessert is perfectly sensible in that situation.

    It's insensitive, but certainly no more insensitive than banning same sex marriage in the first place.

    There's passing a bill.

    And there's rubbing the other side's face in it through imagery and symbolism.

    The latter is more insensitive. By a lot.

    Wait... making fun of women's suffrage would be more insensitive than repealing it?

    I'm sorry guys, actively curtailing another's rights is vastly more insensitive than symbolic dessert eating.

    That isn't what you said earlier, at all.

    No, my first post was not as clear as it could have been.

    And it's still wrong either way.

    You can't separate the cake from the context. The context is: "We just banned same-sex marriage. Let's celebrate by taking a trivial tradition from that activity we just denied people and publicly partake in said activity" as a way of rubbing it in their faces.

    I can't even fathom how your mind works if you can't comprehend why this is exponentially worse than if they just banned same-sex marriage and shut the fuck up about it, with no celebration.

    It's the prevailing attitude that the celebration indicates, it's the celebration of trampling on another groups' rights, and it's the nature of the celebration all rolled into one big miasma of human filth.

    ... If you can't step outside your own worldview well enough to realize that isn't what they're celebrating then I don't know what to say really. I just don't have the energy to explain looking at the world through another's eyes at the moment.

    "More fish for Kunta!"

    --LeVar Burton
  • South hostSouth host I obey without question Registered User regular
    syndalis wrote: »
    South host wrote: »
    syndalis wrote: »
    Spoiler:

    Do you live in one of the reasonable areas, or are you in one of the bad ones?
    I used to live in Reasonable NC.

    Now I live in Jersey, 20 minutes from Manhattan.

    Upgrade.

    Lucky. I'm stuck in Iredell county for the foreseeable future.

    Hope is the first step on the road to disappointment.
  • matt has a problemmatt has a problem Six pack on a dick Registered User regular
    I want to know why someone hasn't challenged anti-gay marriage amendments on 1st amendment grounds. The only justification for them is "God says gays are bad", thus enacting laws based on that is a violation of separation of church and state. "Marriage" is nothing but a contract between two people over property and financial holdings, even defining it as "it's so they can make babies" doesn't work since infertile couples are allowed to get married. It just seems like it would be cut and dried. It would have to go to the supreme court, of course.

    h1DI1.jpg
    All my fuckin life I lived a normal fuckin life
  • poshnialloposhniallo Registered User regular
    simonwolf wrote: »
    Hey Posh, are you going to visit Tokyo when me and Inqui are there for our orientation

    Sure, I'll come take you out somewhere nice if you like. I go to Tokyo for work all the time - it's about an hour from my house by train.

    Be aware I'm old and my liver is tired, so I like nice places with good food and drink.

    I figure I could take a bear.
  • Solomaxwell6Solomaxwell6 Registered User regular
    I want to know why someone hasn't challenged anti-gay marriage amendments on 1st amendment grounds. The only justification for them is "God says gays are bad", thus enacting laws based on that is a violation of separation of church and state. "Marriage" is nothing but a contract between two people over property and financial holdings, even defining it as "it's so they can make babies" doesn't work since infertile couples are allowed to get married. It just seems like it would be cut and dried. It would have to go to the supreme court, of course.

    No, they have other justifications. They're bullshit justifications, of course, but not religion oriented.

  • KageraKagera Registered User regular
    Drez wrote: »
    poshniallo wrote: »
    Drez wrote: »
    That doesn't seem any more douchey than serving wedding cake for passing gay marriage would be.

    Either way it's serving celebration wedding dessert for setting marriage right.

    Not exactly sensitive to tge other side, but this seems like a bit of an over reaction.

    nooo

    its like, haha you cant have this

    Is everyone actually this myopic?

    It's a group of people that feel Tgey have done good service in defense of marriage. Celebrating with marriage dessert is perfectly sensible in that situation.

    It's insensitive, but certainly no more insensitive than banning same sex marriage in the first place.

    There's passing a bill.

    And there's rubbing the other side's face in it through imagery and symbolism.

    The latter is more insensitive. By a lot.

    Wait... making fun of women's suffrage would be more insensitive than repealing it?

    I'm sorry guys, actively curtailing another's rights is vastly more insensitive than symbolic dessert eating.

    That isn't what you said earlier, at all.

    No, my first post was not as clear as it could have been.

    And it's still wrong either way.

    You can't separate the cake from the context. The context is: "We just banned same-sex marriage. Let's celebrate by taking a trivial tradition from that activity we just denied people and publicly partake in said activity" as a way of rubbing it in their faces.

    I can't even fathom how your mind works if you can't comprehend why this is exponentially worse than if they just banned same-sex marriage and shut the fuck up about it, with no celebration.

    It's the prevailing attitude that the celebration indicates, it's the celebration of trampling on another groups' rights, and it's the nature of the celebration all rolled into one big miasma of human filth.

    ... If you can't step outside your own worldview well enough to realize that isn't what they're celebrating then I don't know what to say really. I just don't have the energy to explain looking at the world through another's eyes at the moment.

    How do you know any better why they are celebrating than we do? Please show your work

    “This is America. We’re entitled to our opinions.”
    “Wrong. This is Texas. And my opinion is the only one that counts."
  • poshnialloposhniallo Registered User regular
    Drez wrote: »
    poshniallo wrote: »
    Drez wrote: »
    That doesn't seem any more douchey than serving wedding cake for passing gay marriage would be.

    Either way it's serving celebration wedding dessert for setting marriage right.

    Not exactly sensitive to tge other side, but this seems like a bit of an over reaction.

    nooo

    its like, haha you cant have this

    Is everyone actually this myopic?

    It's a group of people that feel Tgey have done good service in defense of marriage. Celebrating with marriage dessert is perfectly sensible in that situation.

    It's insensitive, but certainly no more insensitive than banning same sex marriage in the first place.

    There's passing a bill.

    And there's rubbing the other side's face in it through imagery and symbolism.

    The latter is more insensitive. By a lot.

    Wait... making fun of women's suffrage would be more insensitive than repealing it?

    I'm sorry guys, actively curtailing another's rights is vastly more insensitive than symbolic dessert eating.

    That isn't what you said earlier, at all.

    No, my first post was not as clear as it could have been.

    And it's still wrong either way.

    You can't separate the cake from the context. The context is: "We just banned same-sex marriage. Let's celebrate by taking a trivial tradition from that activity we just denied people and publicly partake in said activity" as a way of rubbing it in their faces.

    I can't even fathom how your mind works if you can't comprehend why this is exponentially worse than if they just banned same-sex marriage and shut the fuck up about it, with no celebration.

    It's the prevailing attitude that the celebration indicates, it's the celebration of trampling on another groups' rights, and it's the nature of the celebration all rolled into one big miasma of human filth.

    ... If you can't step outside your own worldview well enough to realize that isn't what they're celebrating then I don't know what to say really. I just don't have the energy to explain looking at the world through another's eyes at the moment.

    And now you're back to the original argument again?

    I figure I could take a bear.
  • matt has a problemmatt has a problem Six pack on a dick Registered User regular
    I want to know why someone hasn't challenged anti-gay marriage amendments on 1st amendment grounds. The only justification for them is "God says gays are bad", thus enacting laws based on that is a violation of separation of church and state. "Marriage" is nothing but a contract between two people over property and financial holdings, even defining it as "it's so they can make babies" doesn't work since infertile couples are allowed to get married. It just seems like it would be cut and dried. It would have to go to the supreme court, of course.

    No, they have other justifications. They're bullshit justifications, of course, but not religion oriented.

    They don't really, though. "It's immoral" isn't a justification, legal or otherwise. Not one that would hold up in court anyway. At its base marriage is nothing but a legal contract. "Religious" marriage doesn't exist, legally, you can have a priest say "I now pronounce you man and wife" until they're blue in the face but without the State's approval it's meaningless.

    h1DI1.jpg
    All my fuckin life I lived a normal fuckin life
  • WinkyWinky Registered User regular
    Drez wrote: »
    poshniallo wrote: »
    Drez wrote: »
    That doesn't seem any more douchey than serving wedding cake for passing gay marriage would be.

    Either way it's serving celebration wedding dessert for setting marriage right.

    Not exactly sensitive to tge other side, but this seems like a bit of an over reaction.

    nooo

    its like, haha you cant have this

    Is everyone actually this myopic?

    It's a group of people that feel Tgey have done good service in defense of marriage. Celebrating with marriage dessert is perfectly sensible in that situation.

    It's insensitive, but certainly no more insensitive than banning same sex marriage in the first place.

    There's passing a bill.

    And there's rubbing the other side's face in it through imagery and symbolism.

    The latter is more insensitive. By a lot.

    Wait... making fun of women's suffrage would be more insensitive than repealing it?

    I'm sorry guys, actively curtailing another's rights is vastly more insensitive than symbolic dessert eating.

    That isn't what you said earlier, at all.

    No, my first post was not as clear as it could have been.

    And it's still wrong either way.

    You can't separate the cake from the context. The context is: "We just banned same-sex marriage. Let's celebrate by taking a trivial tradition from that activity we just denied people and publicly partake in said activity" as a way of rubbing it in their faces.

    I can't even fathom how your mind works if you can't comprehend why this is exponentially worse than if they just banned same-sex marriage and shut the fuck up about it, with no celebration.

    It's the prevailing attitude that the celebration indicates, it's the celebration of trampling on another groups' rights, and it's the nature of the celebration all rolled into one big miasma of human filth.

    ... If you can't step outside your own worldview well enough to realize that isn't what they're celebrating then I don't know what to say really. I just don't have the energy to explain looking at the world through another's eyes at the moment.

    The difference is that they're celebrating denying someone else their rights, not obtaining rights for themselves.

    I understand that they feel like they somehow defended their own rights, but it was only in the sense that they defended their own right to be exclusive and superior. In this instance I just can't feel as though their act of celebration can be extracted from the thing that they're celebrating: if we were to eat wedding cake after defending gay marriage we would be going "wedding cake for everyone!" but when they eat wedding cake after banning gay marriage it is basically "HEY GAYS I BET YOU WISH YOU HAD THIS CAKE".

    f1i3ys.jpg
  • MentalExerciseMentalExercise Indefenestrable Registered User regular
    Drez wrote: »
    @MentalExercise I wasn't trying to be a dick back there.

    Anyway, bed time.

    S'alright, it's an emotional issue, and for good reason.

    "More fish for Kunta!"

    --LeVar Burton
  • skippydumptruckskippydumptruck FAK U HODGEHEG Registered User regular
    you guys argue about some stuff

  • ronyaronya Arrrrrrf. the ivory tower's basementRegistered User regular
    you guys argue about some stuff

    okay

  • KageraKagera Registered User regular
    you guys argue about some stuff

    No u

    “This is America. We’re entitled to our opinions.”
    “Wrong. This is Texas. And my opinion is the only one that counts."
This discussion has been closed.