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
Exactly. If they passed equal marriage rights and then decided to serve cake, it'd be like "Sweet... Cake!"
The douchebags are keeping the cake to themselves and bragging about how awesome and heteronormative it tastes..
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.
I had wedding cake yesterday. It is the end of the cake.
My mother in law has the top layer. We had to call her to make sure she MEGA WRAPPED THAT BITCH in a clingwrap/aluminum foil parfait. If that shit isnt tight next year, I will be sad.
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.
Too bad that's not what you said.
Also, the point is it is more douchey because they're in the moral wrong here.
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.
So a celebration of bigotry isn't douchey?
No, I'm saying that serving wedding cake isn't the douchey part.
"More fish for Kunta!"
--LeVar Burton
0
Options
Deebaseron my way to work in a suit and a tieAhhhh...come on fucking guyRegistered Userregular
@Drez we should get a wedding cake to celebrate NYS not being a bunch of fucksticks. That'll show those NC people.
0
Options
21stCenturyCall me Pixel, or Pix for short![They/Them]Registered Userregular
edited May 2012
So, what does Amendment one mean? They can never ever ever have gay marriage now? IIRC, didn't they already not have gay marriage there? Is this, like, double no gay marriages now?
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.
Things like this are great examples of why democracy sucks and we should leave everything to the dictators.
On the other hand, Chris Christie vetoing the gay marriage bill even though only a third of the state is actually opposed to gay marriage is a pretty good example of why democracy is awesome and we should leave more things to the people.
Really I just kind of wish we had a benevolent dictator that would lead America into enlightenment.
No, referendums are the stupidest fucking idea. The fact that they very rarely actually arrive at a correct conclusion against the prevailing votes of the legislature/governor is not a good reason to keep them around.
Yeah, no shit. Having a benevolent dictator around would be a stupid fucking idea, too. I had assumed you'd be able to see at least a trifle of sarcasm there.
Solomaxwell6 on
0
Options
AManFromEarthLet's get to twerk!The King in the SwampRegistered Userregular
So, what does Amendment one mean? They can never ever ever have gay marriage now? IIRC, didn't they already not have gay marriage there? Is this, like, double no gay marriages now?
It removes all the rights and protections to civil unions thanks to its super vagueries. It also defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman iirc.
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 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.
I figure I could take a bear.
0
Options
21stCenturyCall me Pixel, or Pix for short![They/Them]Registered Userregular
Or rather that what you're saying is dumb. Passing the bill is douchey. Celebrating with wedding cake is much more douchey.
And if you keep blathering on like this I'm going to put a big, fat piece of wedding cake in your mouth.
i'll disagree. Preventing a minority from having equal rights is way, way douchier than eating cake in celebration of preventing a minority from having equal rights.
Or rather that what you're saying is dumb. Passing the bill is douchey. Celebrating with wedding cake is much more douchey.
And if you keep blathering on like this I'm going to put a big, fat piece of wedding cake in your mouth.
i'll disagree. Preventing a minority from having equal rights is way, way douchier than eating cake in celebration of preventing a minority from having equal rights.
I think that what Drez means to say is that the act of celebrating with wedding cake makes the already super douchey act more douchey than it already was.
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.
I'm sorry guy, but I think you need to run this topic through a few more mental exercises.
The cake is a symbol of their attitude, the attitude that led to the reprehensible thing they just did. Is the cake, itself, evil? No. But the attitude it symbolizes is. The attitude is worse than the act of banning same-sex marriage.
Or rather that what you're saying is dumb. Passing the bill is douchey. Celebrating with wedding cake is much more douchey.
And if you keep blathering on like this I'm going to put a big, fat piece of wedding cake in your mouth.
i'll disagree. Preventing a minority from having equal rights is way, way douchier than eating cake in celebration of preventing a minority from having equal rights.
Me too.
But people were responding to ME's initial post, which didn't say that in the slightest, but instead says that it's the same as if gay rights supporters won and had a celebration with wedding cake.
It's hard to restrain from being snarky when the two posts are saying entirely different things.
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.
Or rather that what you're saying is dumb. Passing the bill is douchey. Celebrating with wedding cake is much more douchey.
And if you keep blathering on like this I'm going to put a big, fat piece of wedding cake in your mouth.
i'll disagree. Preventing a minority from having equal rights is way, way douchier than eating cake in celebration of preventing a minority from having equal rights.
Except they are doing both. The context of the cake thing is that they just banned same-sex marriage. It's not like I'm saying the cake itself is the most reprehensible thing in the world. But in context, yes, it is.
Switch: SW-7690-2320-9238Steam/PSN/Xbox: Drezdar
0
Options
Rear Admiral ChocoI wanna be an owl, Jerry!Owl York CityRegistered Userregular
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
Posts
Or by forcing black people to eat wedding cake.
Exactly. If they passed equal marriage rights and then decided to serve cake, it'd be like "Sweet... Cake!"
The douchebags are keeping the cake to themselves and bragging about how awesome and heteronormative it tastes..
So a celebration of bigotry isn't douchey?
I just had brownies.
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.
--LeVar Burton
this cheered me up after seeing the NC thing. Not like a lot but enough to make me go "aww"
I had wedding cake yesterday. It is the end of the cake.
My mother in law has the top layer. We had to call her to make sure she MEGA WRAPPED THAT BITCH in a clingwrap/aluminum foil parfait. If that shit isnt tight next year, I will be sad.
Too bad that's not what you said.
Also, the point is it is more douchey because they're in the moral wrong here.
No, I'm saying that serving wedding cake isn't the douchey part.
--LeVar Burton
Check out my site, the Bismuth Heart | My Twitter
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.
I want you to know that I like you.
But my wallet is plotting your demise.
There is context behind the cake. The cake does not exist in a vacuum.
Yeah, no shit. Having a benevolent dictator around would be a stupid fucking idea, too. I had assumed you'd be able to see at least a trifle of sarcasm there.
It removes all the rights and protections to civil unions thanks to its super vagueries. It also defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman iirc.
It's a celebration of the the previous douchey act, making it an additional douchey act.
I helped, but sadly I don't think that it's going to make it.
And we're saying you're wrong.
And we're correct.
And if you keep blathering on like this I'm going to put a big, fat piece of wedding cake in your mouth.
That would be wrong, but much more acceptable.
Having a spiteful wedding cake celebration afterwards makes it clear they just hate gay people and are being childish and hateful about it.
Which is worse, partly because it's childish and dumb, partly because it makes it clear that it does come from bigotry, not religious principles.
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.
--LeVar Burton
That isn't what you said earlier, at all.
i'll disagree. Preventing a minority from having equal rights is way, way douchier than eating cake in celebration of preventing a minority from having equal rights.
Check out my site, the Bismuth Heart | My Twitter
has basically ended my desire to gain closure with some people in my life who happened to be homophobes and shit
fuck those people.
See what you've done, bigots.
I think that what Drez means to say is that the act of celebrating with wedding cake makes the already super douchey act more douchey than it already was.
I'm sorry guy, but I think you need to run this topic through a few more mental exercises.
The cake is a symbol of their attitude, the attitude that led to the reprehensible thing they just did. Is the cake, itself, evil? No. But the attitude it symbolizes is. The attitude is worse than the act of banning same-sex marriage.
Me too.
But people were responding to ME's initial post, which didn't say that in the slightest, but instead says that it's the same as if gay rights supporters won and had a celebration with wedding cake.
It's hard to restrain from being snarky when the two posts are saying entirely different things.
No, my first post was not as clear as it could have been.
--LeVar Burton
Except they are doing both. The context of the cake thing is that they just banned same-sex marriage. It's not like I'm saying the cake itself is the most reprehensible thing in the world. But in context, yes, it is.
I always feel cheated if there isn't a unique description of the flavour
From this we can discern that the really douchey thing is eating cake.
Fucking cake eaters.