10
Gaywads Want To Persecute Religious People!
That’s the basic gist of the following wingnut conversation, which boils down to, ‘homosexuals are intolerant of religious nuts’ intolerance!’
David Frum Canada starts it off, cites a new British law that requires all adoption agencies, including religious ones, to stop discriminatiing against homosexual couples. The outrage! Even more sickeningly, religious schools may no longer demonise homosexuals. BLARGH!1!!
There is a widespread view that gay liberation is a movement toward greater freedom. Up to a point, that was true. That point, however, is now receding in the background. The movement for gay equality has rapidly evolved into movement to restrict personal freedoms, including freedoms of religion and conscience. The British example is not a special case. What is being done there today will be demanded here tomorrow.
Then, gratutiously, he predicts that the new rules will only apply to virtuous Christian and Jewish bigots, not to the nasty Islamic bigots.
Above: Charles Nelson Reilly, destroyer of religious freedom
Andrew Stuttaford, a libertarian and frequently an adult voice in contrast to the Corner’s playground cacaphony, writes back to the effect that Frum wants to exempt religious bigots from anti-discrimination laws, which will not do in a democracy.
Frum says: ‘Sure, laws must apply equally. And that is…’
…precisely why the gay rights movement is inherently an illiberal one. When you decide to extend your nondiscrimination principles to behavior condemned by your society’s majority religion, you are embarking on a course that will sooner or later require the state to police, control, and punish adherents of that religion.
You can’t legislate away the majority’s bigotry! It’s from scripture: no man can take it away from a believer! Incidentally, Frum’s Schmittian reasoning here is identical to that which he used to justify the teaching of ‘intelligent design’:
Whether he personally believes in evolution: “I do believe in evolution.”
What he thinks of intelligent design: “If intelligent design means that evolution occurs under some divine guidance, I believe that.”
How evolution should be taught in public schools: “I don’t believe that anything that offends nine-tenths of the American public should be taught in public schools. … Christianity is the faith of nine-tenths of the American public. … I don’t believe that public schools should embark on teaching anything that offends Christian principle.”
But anyway, Stuttaford’s answer inspires Doughy Pantload to reply in an argumentative clusterfuck of wingnuttery. It’s difficult to parse, but I’ll try.
First Pantload says that what liberals regard as bigotry caused by religion is actually just the natural effect of the ’social fabric’ that the Founders first weaved. Ok, then forgetting that discrimination is ‘not religiously based,’ he says it is, but that multiculturalism and other liberal movements are religions, too, presumably with their own forms of bigotry. Devious leftists know this, which is why they identify such movements with any word except ‘religious’. He says he’s opposed to Christian efforts at controlling society, but he just doesn’t see this happening much. But on the other hand, he is very tolerant of Christians controlling society at the local level. Thus, Pantload unwittingly reveals what Republicans actually mean by ‘federalism.’ But he is also against secular forces doing the same thing (no caveat here, of course, about ‘local’ efforts). He says that a movement shouldn’t be free to tell people how to live, simply because that movement is not religious. I missed where homosexuals were telling people how to live by demanding to not be discriminated against, but whatever.
Then Pantload strikes the familiar majority/religious notes of self-pity and persecution: Why should Gay Pride Day be allowed but Christian Pride Day be forbidden? Natually, the next step is invoking the Constitution — in favor of bigotry! Pantload insists that the Constitution gives wide latitude to religious freedom, and so it does, but not the freedom to legally nullify the civil rights of others. Simple, right? Not to Pantload.
Nor is it to Cornertard Jack Fowler, whose comments are generally few and brief, what with his other jobs of cleaning cubicles, sweeping Cheetos crumbs, and using a cattle prod on local bovines JPod and K-Lo. Fowler sneers that the filthy liberals can’t take away the Bill of Rights’ language which guarantees the “free exercise…of religion’, so the fags can put that in their pipe and smoke it! The majority is free to perpetuate or even strengthen the structures of institutional bigotry! And if fags don’t like it, well they can repent of their sins and stop being atheisticcommimexifascisthomofagfags!
Moral of the story: these Christians and Jews believe bigotry is an indivisible part of their religion, which says a lot not only about what they think of those against whom they discriminate, but about what they think of religion.
STOP TRYING TO DESTROY RELIGION, FAGG0RTS!!1!!!
Jillian said,
March 10, 2007 at 19:27
All those anti-murder laws are illiberally prejudiced against my religion, too.
God told me I have to put to death women who aren’t virgins when they marry! Why do all these Western liberal democracies hate religion so much?
Marsupial said,
March 10, 2007 at 19:34
How do they feel about Santeria? That’s a nice Xtian based religion for them. Would they still believe in their total religious freedoms if there were some animal sacrifices going on next door?
Jillian said,
March 10, 2007 at 19:37
Teh spam is slipping through a bit more than usual lately, it seems.
davis said,
March 10, 2007 at 19:42
Well, The Emancipation Proclamation contraticted Scripture, too.
klyde said,
March 10, 2007 at 19:45
In the UK religious schools are funded by the government. They want parliament’s money but not the rules.
RSA said,
March 10, 2007 at 19:46
Why should Gay Pride Day be allowed but Christian Pride Day be forbidden?
Why am I reminded of an adult’s response to a small child? “But Jonah, every day is Children’s Day.”
mikey said,
March 10, 2007 at 20:01
Now, come on y’all. The constitution expressly guarantees my right to hate select groups of people who are not like me. The founding fathers intended it to be that way. So if any of those groups try to prevent me from exercising my constitutional right to hate and discriminate, those people are simply by definititon anti-freedom, anti-democracy, anti-AMERICAN. And likely terrorists, too…
mikey
Otto Man said,
March 10, 2007 at 20:03
This is just like during the civil rights movement, when segregationists complained that blacks were depriving them of their right to discriminate. They thought they had a right to keep blacks out of their neighborhoods, stores, restaurants, etc. and were incensed that society said they couldn’t do that anymore.
Nothing like a persecuted majority to make the conservative blood boil.
His Grace said,
March 10, 2007 at 20:04
Look, it’s a clear cut constitutional principle here: Freedom of religion grants me the right to discriminate against anyone for whatever reason without challenge. On the other hand it doesn’t grant anybody who disagrees with me the right to express that opinion or immunity from persecution.
Ok, they’re allowed to have that opinion, but they can’t shout it very loudly. It would offend my sensibilities.
owlbear1 said,
March 10, 2007 at 20:06
“Thou shalt have no god before me” certainly is a fun and empowering commandment ain’t it?
Snag said,
March 10, 2007 at 20:12
The thing is, in the Bible, God hates the homos. Pigs too, and seafood if I remember correctly. Jefferson was not a lobsterman. Ergo, Q.E.D., ipso facto, and res ipsa loquitur, it is constitutional to discriminate against gays.
If you need me, I’ll be writing at the Corner.
bloix said,
March 10, 2007 at 20:26
He’s precisely right about this. When the government forces people to do things their religion tells them not to do it’s impinging on their religious freedom. Like forcing them to let black people eat at the same lunch counters and go to the same schools as them. Or forcing them to hire women and work alongside them. If my religion says that black people are inferior and women exist to serve their husbands then any rule that makes me treat women and black people as if they were equal to me is illiberal. Isn’t this obvious?
Kathleen said,
March 10, 2007 at 20:32
Moral of the story: these Christians and Jews believe bigotry is an indivisible part of their religion, which says a lot not only about what they think of those against whom they discriminate, but about what they think of religion.
word.
Non Nato said,
March 10, 2007 at 20:35
I like how the founding zombies allowed for total religious freedom (except for the religions of the native americans and slaves from Africa).
fardels bear said,
March 10, 2007 at 20:43
Wait. Charles Nelson Reilly was gay?
jhe said,
March 10, 2007 at 20:52
I thought we were calling him SpongeBob Doughpants now. Did I miss a meeting?
J— said,
March 10, 2007 at 20:52
How do they feel about Santeria?
You know, one could argue that there are some neighborhoods in Miami and New York where santerÃa is the majority religion, in that a majority of the residents believe in it and practice it to varying degrees. Join Frum’s argument on the religion of the majority and Goldberg’s on the local and you have a formula for putting santero priests in charge of community improvement associations.
nolo said,
March 10, 2007 at 20:59
How do they feel about Santeria?
Oooh — I know the answer to this question!!! They hate it!!! One of my totally favorite U.S. Supreme Court opinions is Church of Lukumi Babalu Aye v. City of Hialeah, which aside from having a great name, is all about what happens when an average whitebread city council figures out what those Santerians do in their churches. Heh.
mikey said,
March 10, 2007 at 21:05
…..and you have a formula for putting santero priests in charge of community improvement associations.
Now THAT’S a Faith Based Initiative I could get behind. It’d be off-the-charts funny to watch it all unfold…
mikey
Jillian said,
March 10, 2007 at 21:08
ahem.
Lesley said,
March 10, 2007 at 21:10
But Christian Pride is banned. Gay Pride is well-funded.
It sounds like Doughy is jealous of the support Gay Pride Day has. The parade wouldn’t happen if thousands didn’t participate. Local municipalities provide some funding and permits for Gay Pride Day because the event has enormous support in the larger community to do so. Gay Pride is festive and fun and thousands of people, gay and straight, enjoy it.
Bite it, Doughy.
Has anyone even heard of Christian Pride Day? I can’t imagine a more dreary parade, but if one were held and it shut down a few blocks for an afternoon, I doubt anyone who isn’t Christian would give a shit (or attend).
Smiling Mortician said,
March 10, 2007 at 21:15
Is this close enough, Lesley?
HTML Mencken said,
March 10, 2007 at 21:15
This was always one of my favorite sites. Fittingly, sadly, it appears to have been euthanised sometime last year.
It’s too bad; the pictures of their organized protests were hilarious. They used to cook baby dolls on bbq grills and people would dress up as giant penises.
Good times.
Rugosa said,
March 10, 2007 at 21:16
So why not Santerian community improvement associations? I presume Santerians also want clean streets with nice flower boxes and a traffic light on that corner where the kids cross to get to school.
Dr. BDH said,
March 10, 2007 at 21:22
Stuttaford said it best: “… an idea that, however well-intentioned, is irrational at best, dangerous at worse.” Pretty much sums up the Corner.
mikey said,
March 10, 2007 at 21:24
From the Santeria Faith-Based proposal for Federal Grant Money:
Item 167.e(3): $1200.00 to be used for the purchase and storage of 200 chickens. NOTE: This is a quarterly, recurring cost center in the operational budget.
mikey
Some Guy said,
March 10, 2007 at 21:29
It’s a classic religious right maneuver. “Liberals are actually the intolerant ones, because they won’t tolerate us trying to oppress others.”
mikey said,
March 10, 2007 at 21:36
Similar construct to the whole “evolution is a religion” stupidity…
mikey
owlbear1 said,
March 10, 2007 at 22:07
I think this goes further than just “Evolution as a religion” to “Scientific Method” is no more valid then “Faith”.
It really always has been.
Is the universe more completely interpreted via Faith in a plan and Judge?
Or will the universe be understood through observation, measurement, prediction, and observation?
tb said,
March 10, 2007 at 22:12
Waitaminit, Charles Nelson Reilly is gay?
Jeopardude said,
March 10, 2007 at 22:22
Serrated Edge by the Dead Milkmen
Up on the hilltop where the vultures perch,
That’s where I’m gonna build my church,
Ain’t gonna be no priest, ain’t gonna be no boss;
Just Charles Nelson Riley nailed to a cross.
I don’t piss, I don’t shit, I’m gettin’ no relief,
People shake there heads in disbelief.
GO!
Just me on a hilltop with 15 girls,
In a Nelson Riley orgy that’ll make your hair curl.
I don’t piss, I don’t shit, I’m gettin’ no relief,
People shake there heads in disbelief.
Yeah Charles Nelson Riley he’s our man,
He can’t heal the sick with the touch of his hand,
He can’t walk on water, can’t make wine flow;
Just another greedy actor on the late late show!
I don’t piss, I don’t shit, I’m gettin’ no relief,
People shake there heads in disbelief.
GO!
Just me on a hilltop with 15 girls,
In a Nelson Riley orgy that’ll make your hair curl.
I don’t piss, I don’t shit, I’m gettin’ no relief,
People shake there heads in disbelief.
owlbear1 said,
March 10, 2007 at 22:22
Trust me. I have it on good authority he is Teh Gay.
elephty said,
March 10, 2007 at 22:26
No right to discriminate if they receive federal funds. It is this
and only this that has the religious leaders up in arms, because
the gravy train they were expecting under faith based initiatives
will be cut off if and only if they insist on being creeps about their right
to discriminate against anyone because of race, religion, sex, or age.
Knowing Bush and gang, they’ll just ignore the troublesome law
that prevents them from bribing church leaders who teach intolerance.
Hey, guess what, it is just about all of them. “Whoopee we’re all
going to die.”
“Them thar pearly gates will be a swingin’ closed on dem preachers
who been waitin’ in line with their damn hands out.” Every church has
a program now, that requires funding. Get if from their congregation
not from the tax payers who may not share their prejudices and
superstitions.
As long as the church is not preaching terrorist thoughts of discrimination, they’ll be able to receive all the federal funds that Georgie porgie can slip in their direction for those religious meetings where they discuss which political party god is behind. Hint: God is especially opposed to religions that use his name to start wars of aggression as well as singling out different individuals as if some swing d**k knows what God feels about each person. Don’t try to hand me some old book with a heroic fantasy, and tell me it’s the word of Yahwey or whoever. I want to meet this guy before I die and start hallucinating that he/she/it is talking to me and me alone.
Until god speaks to me personally about this matter, I’m not giving one plug nickel that I think might end up in the hands of witch doctors, Eckankar,
the Moonies, Father James Jones, or any other whack-o-the-week religion, which, of course means that I’m not going to give to any of them.
I want to know what percent of my salary goes toward discriminating against minorities and individuals so that a church can be as anti-social, and anti-love as it wants to be, but not with my damn money. I’ll deduct the percentage set aside for faith based initiatives, and keep it myself, and with the savings start my own Xtian cult that discriminates against WASPs and Aleister Crowley fans.
Mudge said,
March 10, 2007 at 22:35
If Charles Nelson Reilly is gay..what does that make Britt?
The world has gone topsy turvy. Where is the nearest Christian Pride Parade..I need one………..Oh..
Give me a double Maker’s Mark instead then..
elephty said,
March 10, 2007 at 22:44
With a little luck Harrison, Arkansas will have an earthquake
from March 30th through April 1st 2007. I couldn’t think of
a better group of people to experience the Revelation prophecy
first hand. If any of them survive it, they can go on television
and tell us all about it.
tb said,
March 10, 2007 at 23:04
I can handle that, as long as I’ve still got Paul Lynnde. Good old Paul. I don’t know what I’d do if I found he was you-know-what.
kingubu said,
March 10, 2007 at 23:15
Rip Taylor. Now there’s a man’s man.
Galactic Dustbin said,
March 10, 2007 at 23:18
Christian Pride Day
What? Wait- wait a minute! There are TONS of holidays for the Xtains: Christmas, Easter, ect… and if you are Catholic- man, everyother day was some St.s day, or some event took place some time ago- and when I lived in NYC, the Church down the street was constaintly celibrating something, blocking traffic, wearing fab outfits and marching, other then the tempo of music being slower, it wasnt all that different from a Gay Pride Parade.
If the Pantload wants to have a Xtain Pride Day, he should find a different chuch, if indeed he goes to one.
TRex said,
March 10, 2007 at 23:25
STOP TRYING TO DESTROY RELIGION, FAGG0RTS!!1!!!
Fuck.
There go my plans for the weekend.
the_millionaire_lebowski said,
March 10, 2007 at 23:32
What?! You try walking through a mall with a cross around your neck and see how people look at you.
kathleen said,
March 10, 2007 at 23:47
It always makes me laugh when the Jewish Jonah Goldberg puts himself in the position of defending Christian conservatives. It seems to happen quite a lot. It *almost* makes me feel sorry for him.
In other news, I used to think Jonah was a very cool name for a baby boy. That was before I knew about blogs. Now it is ruined for me. Thanks a lot internets.
Smiling Mortician said,
March 10, 2007 at 23:48
Actually, GB, it’s every day.
Jillian said,
March 11, 2007 at 0:14
Okay, a small bit of cheerful news from the frontlines of the Great American Homo Wars…..
A couple of my students came up to me the other day and breathlessly informed me “Miss! Did you know that (one of my male seniors) is going out with (another male student who is a sophomore)”. The consternation on their faces was evident.
I mentally prepared myself for yet the 637th repetition of the “It’s perfectly okay for students at this school or anywhere else to be gay, and just like I don’t let anyone say bad things about you for being black, I won’t let you say bad things about anyone else for being gay” speech, and began by saying “Yes, I did know they were going out…..”
Before I could say another word, I got treated to “But Miss! That’s not right! (One boy) is a senior and (the other boy) is a sophomore!”
Through a supreme effort of will, I kept a straight face, assured them that the boys would find a way to overcome this seemingly insurmountable class difference, closed the door to my classroom, and laughed my ass off for ten minutes.
Kids these days….I really do love ‘em sometimes.
ifthethunderdontgetya®©³² said,
March 11, 2007 at 0:22
Speaking o’ holidays, Proclamation Day was yesterday. Saint Patrick’s Day is next Saturday.
Slainte!
Matt T. said,
March 11, 2007 at 0:39
I think this goes further than just “Evolution as a religion� to “Scientific Method� is no more valid then “Faith�.
It really always has been.
It goes further than that. When dealing with issues of faith, reason is totally useless and it’s set up to be that way. I’ve been doing a lot of reading lately on the early history of the Christian faith, the turnover from Greek rationalism and Roman social order to burgeoning Christian empire and early Christian church, plus stuff on the early fathers like Augustine and Jerome. I just got through reading Charles Freeman’s excellent The Closing Of The Western Mind, and he says the conflicts between the Apostles and Paul the Persecutor set the stage for early Christians in that authority and orthodoxy trumps all and views the rationalism of Greek philosophy with much suspicion.
I’m also reading Jennifer Michael Hecht’s Doubt, which explores religious skepticism throughout Western history, and Susan Jacoby’s Freethinkers, which concentrates on American free thought, and all three are must reads for those who feel the whole “seperation of church and state” thing has something going for it. Is astounds me sometimes how little, it seems, American Christians know about the history of their faith and just how much politics played in the shaping what we now consider “God’s law”, from eliminating competing heresies for social stability to translation mishaps to just the flat-out lack of communication or cooperation between Rome and Constantinople. It’s illuminating stuff, even to someone who has little more than total disdain for orthodox religion in general and the argument that it’s “always been done this way because that’s what Jesus said”.
Then I think to myself, ‘If they knew about all this, they may not pay much attention to them preachers anymore” and figure that answers my question.
DeeLuzon said,
March 11, 2007 at 0:55
fardels bear said,
“Wait. Charles Nelson Reilly was gay?”
i’ll bet he still is (unless he’s spent a couple of weeks at the Ted Haggard Gay Rehab Center).
Lawnguylander said,
March 11, 2007 at 0:58
I don’t believe that anything that offends nine-tenths of the American public should be taught in public schools
WTF?? David Frumundacheese thinks 90% of Americans are offended by evolution? How the fuck could anybody make such a statement? 90% of the assholes he associates with maybe. He really is a member of the Taliban. We should just encourage whatever % of the population really thinks this way to form their own Christian madrasas and be fucking done with it already then lobby all the good universities to make a basic understanding of evolution a prerequisite to admission. Let them form their own underclass if they want to.
Random Observer said,
March 11, 2007 at 1:03
And then after laughing you called the police and had the senior jailed for statutory rape and sodomy.
Jillian said,
March 11, 2007 at 1:11
The only problem with that is, Lawnguylander, is that they’ve gone from doing their own homsechooling to running their own college accreditation agencies to chartering their own universities to offering large numbers of internships in Washington, D.C. to those university students.
They’re creating a shadow version of American society right alongside our regular one, and the two are slowly starting to bleed togther, with disastrous consequences for anyone who likes the old, regular reality.
Oh, and evolution doesn’t offend 90% of Americans, only about two-thirds of them.
Jillian said,
March 11, 2007 at 1:13
Nah, RO - they’re both under eighteen, and they’re both not that type of boy. At least, not as far as I know. And I know the one really well.
Some Guy said,
March 11, 2007 at 1:30
At least they’re focusing on what really matters in school, Jillian: social hierarchy.
Jillian said,
March 11, 2007 at 1:33
I think we’ve all been out of high school for far too long to remember what a big deal it was when a senior dated a sophomore.
Trust me - it’s a BIG DEAL. The kind of thing that can get you kicked out of somebody’s Top Eight, even.
Be kind, guys - we were all sixteen and silly once.
mikey said,
March 11, 2007 at 1:45
Ah jeez, major tragic loss. It seems that Brad Delp died yesterday. Man, that dude sang some righteous rocknroll, and for at least 24 hours none of you better say “corporate rock” or we’re gonna go…
mikey
Lawnguylander said,
March 11, 2007 at 1:59
I hear ya Jillian but surely there must be some real world consequences that will be specific to the wilfully ignorant. I’d be interested to see the economic demographics behind the real hardcore Christianist movement if such statistics have ever been compiled. Do the economic elites even in red states really want to give their kids educations that are inferior to the education the kids of blue state elites get? Or even the kids of non elite blue staters. A good % of rich kids in the bible belt must already go to private schools and if the Christianists get their way and talibanize the public schools completely then what? I think it was you who posted the links to the articles on the dominionist movement a little while back and I’m beginning to wonder if the whole thing isn’t a plot by The Man to give a certain segment of the population a one way ticket to economic palookaville. It just seems like common sense that if you choose to be ignorant you will eventually be at a disadvantage. If there were a God there would be anyway. And I half feel sorry for those people and half think the dumb fucks deserve what they get. Any of you that have to live side by side with these people have my sympathy.
Lawnguylander said,
March 11, 2007 at 2:08
Mikey,
That is sad. I’ve got nothing bad to say about Boston(the band or the city but fuck the Pats, Bruins and Celtics). I think I got to 3rd base for the first time with them playing in the background so how could I hate on them?
Jillian said,
March 11, 2007 at 2:09
Yet another reason I’m an atheist, my dear……if there were a God, there would indeed be such consequences.
There are two stripes of neocons, as far as I can tell: the Straussian disciples like Bill Kristol, who think that the “little people” need their religion to keep them in line, and that it behooves the proper ruling classes to pretend to a piety they do not feel in order to keep the little people appeased, and the true believers (I’d peg Bush as one, unlikely as it seems - he’s too stupid to be bothered by the hypocrisy necessary for him to hold such a position), who really do believe things like “there’s no need to care about global warming, because God is coming back soon”.
Ultimately, it really doesn’t matter which they are, as Kurt Vonnegut has already told us - “We must be careful what we pretend to be, for we are what we pretend to be”.
In the long run, yes, there will be consequences for the huge amount of dumbfuckery that’s taking over our country. We’re going to fall behind in biosciences and technology, and India is going to wipe the globe with us. We’ll end up a second tier, washed up, has-been country - but at least we’ll have Jesus.
In the short term, it’s actually pretty profitable for them. Christians work for Christian firms, shop at Christian stores, give money to Christian charities, which kick the money back into their communities….they’ve set up a completely separate world inside of ours, and they keep the resources they have within the community.
If you aren’t scared of the Christian right, you just aren’t paying attention.
Psycheout said,
March 11, 2007 at 2:18
Jillian, it makes me sad that you haven’t found Jesus. But Jesus is calling you. Can’t you hear Him? Can’t you open your heart?
Jillian said,
March 11, 2007 at 2:24
Opening my heart requires, at the least, a scalpel, surgical retractors, and an environment sterile enough to risk breaching the pericardium. I don’t have any of those things, so I suppose that I really can’t open my heart.
Why? Are you a thoracic surgeon? Are you single? My mom always wanted me to date a doctor…..
Lawnguylander said,
March 11, 2007 at 2:26
I heart Jillian.
mikey said,
March 11, 2007 at 2:29
But Jesus is calling you
Ewwww. I get this mental image of jesus in hunting garb tooting on his “people call” from a tree hide with his shotgun on half-cock…
mikey
Some Guy said,
March 11, 2007 at 2:40
Everyone knows Jesus hunts with a full-auto rifle, mikey.
Hysterical Woman said,
March 11, 2007 at 2:41
Is Jesus calling collect?
Jillian said,
March 11, 2007 at 2:44
Of course he is, Hysterical Woman.
How else do you think Jesus saves?
Herr Doktor Bimler said,
March 11, 2007 at 2:45
Do the economic elites even in red states really want to give their kids educations that are inferior to the education the kids of blue state elites get?…
It just seems like common sense that if you choose to be ignorant you will eventually be at a disadvantage.
You’re sounding a tad naive there, Lawnguylander. The whole point of being an economic elite is that you get to define what constitutes a superior education, and that definition is always going to be “The sort of education my kids are receiving”.
Look at the British ruling class in the 19th/20th centuries, and their tradition of sending their kids to private schools to learn about Latin, Greek, energetic outdoor sports and buggery. It was not as if an education consisting only of dead languages and the rules of soccer would disqualify them for lucrative careers in the Foreign Office or the City… if anything, it was a requirement.
islmfaoscist said,
March 11, 2007 at 2:47
the Church down the street was constaintly celibrating something, blocking traffic, wearing fab outfits and marching, other then the tempo of music being slower, it wasnt all that different from a Gay Pride Parade.
I especially loved the part where all the leetle cheeldren joined in the parade to help to crush the Jew Egg.
atheist said,
March 11, 2007 at 2:49
But Jesus is calling you
That one’s bad. What is even worse is:
“You made the baby Jesus cry.”
I seriously don’t think I could continue to associate with someone who said that to me.
mikey said,
March 11, 2007 at 2:51
I dunno, Some Guy, Fish and Game says full auto is against the rules. Besides, we humans need full auto, or in my case I always loved three-round burst, but if you are the infallible son of god, you’re gonna hit what you’re shooting at every time, aren’t you?
mikey
Psycheout said,
March 11, 2007 at 3:05
Now that is funny! Nice one Jillian. I won’t say anything about the baby Jesus crying, but he does love every one of us, especially you Jillian.
Psycheout said,
March 11, 2007 at 3:06
Hmm, mikey’s post before mine was at 3:51, while mine was at 3:05.
Perhaps this is a miracle! LOL.
Sadly, not.
Jillian said,
March 11, 2007 at 3:17
Awww………..if Jesus loves me, tell him my birthday is December 30.
And I wear a size 10 shoe.
And I happen to look especially fetching in black leather boots with stiletto heels.
Then we’ll see how much he really loves me.
Herr Doktor Bimler said,
March 11, 2007 at 3:25
And I happen to look especially fetching in black leather boots with stiletto heels.
Don’t we all?
mikey said,
March 11, 2007 at 3:36
I dunno. I have this thing for Machetes, and Bobby the Cat likes the dry food…
mikey
Psycheout said,
March 11, 2007 at 3:36
He already knows your birthday, Jillian. I’m sure he’s got stilletos for you in Heaven. Size 10? So you don’t have to wear flippers when you go snorkling, do you? j/k
So what do you think about Sam Brownback? Worse or better than media darlings Clinton, Guiliani, McCain and Romney? Personally they seem like the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse to me.
J— said,
March 11, 2007 at 3:39
Fish and Game says full auto is against the rules.
Render unto Fish and Game what is Fish and Game’s. Render unto God infinite rounds per minute.
Jillian said,
March 11, 2007 at 3:42
What good will stilettos do me in Heaven? Unless God has a shoe fetish that we haven’t heard about before…
Besides, now Jesus sounds like all the other rotten dates out there. “Sure, I’ll give you what you want - just come home with Me first”. I may have been born at night, but it wasn’t last night, mister! How naive do you think I am to fall for that line? Why, that’s right up there with “hey, why don’t you come back to my place, and I’ll show you my stereo!”
Hmph! I think not.
Qetesh the Shaved Abyssinian said,
March 11, 2007 at 3:42
Look at the British ruling class in the 19th/20th centuries, and their tradition of sending their kids to private schools to learn about Latin, Greek, energetic outdoor sports and buggery.
Damn you, Doktor, I’d just cleaned the tea out of this keyboard…
It was not as if an education consisting only of dead languages and the rules of soccer would disqualify them for lucrative careers in the Foreign Office or the City… if anything, it was a requirement.
I note you didn’t mention the buggery.
/levity
Alas that the ‘fine education’ these days is not about learning languages, but learning the language: who you know and how you speak, not what you know and what you say. I remember one complete tossbag in my city, almost universally reviled as a member of the neighing upper class and a pretentious arrogant twat with not enough brain cells to stop his earwax sloshing from one side to the other, who walked, strolled, indeed, into a role as a government minister.
I bet they regret that now, every time they hear the dickhead speak on radio.
Some Guy said,
March 11, 2007 at 3:46
While I’m sure Jesus Our Lord and Savior, Son of God, is an expert marksman, sometimes you just need that little something extra to take down a blood-lust enraged groundhog.
mikey said,
March 11, 2007 at 3:48
Hey Jillian. I’ve got a pretty amazing stereo. Lots of buttons and LEDs. Just sayin…
mikey
Zython said,
March 11, 2007 at 3:59
But Jesus is calling you. Can’t you hear Him?
Crap, I should turn my cell phone on then.
Lawnguylander said,
March 11, 2007 at 4:10
Herr Doktor,
Do you really think the elites don’t care these days about the practical quality of their kids’ education? Check out what happens in a wealthy school district when the trigonometry or chemistry regents show a drop off year over year. Whatever the relevance of 19th century British education, I’m just saying I don’t see a time coming soon where home schoolin’ and a degree from Bob Jones U. are a new grad’s ticket in to Goldman Sachs, a white shoe law firm or the fast track at any multinational. And in a globalizing economy having xenophobia as part of your core educational philosophy is not advisable either. My point about elites and even those a rung or two below elite status was that anyone who aspires to send their kids to the top levels of Wall St. etc, would likely be wary of undue wingnut influence that would merge the two educatonal worlds as Jillian described. Last night’s subject of mockery aside, I’ve seen more than one or two Ivy league kids getting hired over smarter state school grads based only on the school brand and the family country club(s) that can be name dropped in an interview. Whatever naivete I ever had about that kind of thing is long gone but if a kid gets through a prep/ivy kind of education without actually learning anything practical he could be reciting the Iliad backwards at meetings and it won’t help much in the long run if he’s not productive.
Jillian said,
March 11, 2007 at 4:19
Lawnguylander, what makes you think those guys want to work for Goldman Sachs?
They want to work in government. In Congress. In the White House.
In fact, they already do.
This shit’s been going on for years. It’s only now becoming noticeable, because the decades of groundwork they’ve done are only now starting to pay off.
Jillian said,
March 11, 2007 at 4:20
Err, there’s supposed to be a link there.
http://72.14.209.104/search?q=cache:uG7m4ZqO4tUJ:www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/050627fa_fact+patrick+henry+university+washington+internship&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us
There. Try that monstrosity.
Priscilla, Queen of the Beach said,
March 11, 2007 at 5:00
OH MY! Christian Pride day is EVERY DAY! Today is the Feast of St. Dominic Savio. From his biography:
Born into a peasant family at Riva, Italy, young Dominic joined St. John Bosco as a student at the Oratory in Turin at the age of 12. He impressed John with his desire to be a priest and to help him in his work with neglected boys. A peacemaker and an organizer, young Dominic founded a group he called the Company of the Immaculate Conception which, besides being devotional, aided John Bosco with the boys and with manual work.
Oh dear, this seems, well, a bit innapropriate in today’s Roman Catholic world, doesn’t it?
Lesley said,
March 11, 2007 at 5:15
This is good.
Moominpapa said,
March 11, 2007 at 5:24
[J. Peterman moment] “Bosco….. BOSCO!”
D. Sidhe said,
March 11, 2007 at 5:43
Late to the party again, but I still have to turn up long enough to tell Jillian, yet again, I totally want to marry her. My partner, as always, is cool with this.
And Herr Doktor, I dunno what you look like, but my overheated imagination and the heels thing will carry me to my dreams tonight….
jurassicpork said,
March 11, 2007 at 6:36
Fox “News” at its finest: A pictorial spread.
These are but a few clues as to why the Nevada Democratic party pulled out of Fox’s debate.
Random Observer said,
March 11, 2007 at 7:14
That link is priceless!
“All Out Civil War in Iraq: Could it be a Good Thing?” Too bad I missed that debate, I’m sure it was very thoughtful.
craigie said,
March 11, 2007 at 8:56
“hey, why don’t you come back to my place, and I’ll show you my stereo!�
To which the only reasonable reply is “Stereo!? Come on, you loser, whip out your iPod right now!”
Psycheout said,
March 11, 2007 at 9:00
I’ve got a nice set of etchings. And a lovely bunch of coconuts.
kingubu said,
March 11, 2007 at 9:35
And a lovely bunch of coconuts.
Yes, and evidently they are all in your head. ‘Blogs 4 Brownback’? Seriously?
Psycheout said,
March 11, 2007 at 9:36
Seriously! Why, is the “4″ that’s bugging you?
I didn’t set the blog up, I just work there. ;-)
kingubu said,
March 11, 2007 at 11:58
Hm, let’s see… names Jesse Helms as his mentor, believes there’s a ‘debate’ about evolution (and favors teaching ID-Creationism), opposes equal protections for gay couples, co-author of that despicable court stripping Constitutional amendment, is essentially the Wingnut that other Wingnuts point to in order to prove their relative moderation by contrast…
No, you’re right, its the ‘4′.
Ted said,
March 11, 2007 at 12:09
The outrage! Even more sickeningly, religious schools may no longer demonise homosexuals. BLARGH!1!!
HTML, are you British?
Herr Doktor Bimler said,
March 11, 2007 at 12:24
Whatever naivete I ever had about that kind of thing is long gone but if a kid gets through a prep/ivy kind of education without actually learning anything practical he could be reciting the Iliad backwards at meetings and it won’t help much in the long run if he’s not productive.
Hey, I don’t want to get into a More-Cynical-Less-Naive-Than-Thou competition, Lawnguylander. That could only end in disaster.
I am happy to argue, however, that what is considered to be a Good Education goes involve an awful lot of what one might call “Socially-constructed knowledge”, as opposed to “objective-reality knowledge”. Examples of the former would include fine arts, or an old-fashioned Liberal Arts background, or legal jurisprudence. And example of the latter might be ‘melting points and ductility of various metals and alloys’. So who earns more, a lawyer or a welder?
Now I don’t know much about the dominationist people, because we don’t get them in New Zealand, not in the fully-fledged or ‘rabid’ state of development. But it seems to me that it is not completely irrational for the home-schooling, Bible-University people to hope for a future where they can install their socially-constructed corpus of knowledge as the definition of a good education. Sick, yes; twisted, yes; but not completely unrealistic. This seems to be Jillian’s concern.
Imagine a sufficiently large cohort of kids emerging from St-John-of-Patmos Revelations College with an in-depth knowledge of intelligent design to balance their ignorance about evolution. In any sensible economic system they would now be facing a future as street-sweepers. But this is not acceptable if their families have sufficient electoral clout, so one way or another, those dubious qualifications are going to have to become acceptable; jobs for them will have to be created.
OK, their weird views about geology are not going to qualify them for a career in oil exploration, under any political dispensation.
And I have had too many beers tonight to qualify me for a career in making sense.
Herr Doktor Bimler said,
March 11, 2007 at 12:33
…precisely why the gay rights movement is inherently an illiberal one
And that’s really the money shot from Frum’s piece, isn’t it? Any kind of agitation to protect minorities is intrinsically illiberal. Though only for imaginary or complex values of ‘liberal’.
The phrase has a kind of beauty, in its odd way, like one of Shakespeare’s oxymorons. I can imagine it turned into a big neon sign, flashing on and off, at the top of the Ministry of Truth building.
Jillian said,
March 11, 2007 at 14:50
Please watch this Youtube clip. It shows an Evangelical mother “homeschooling” her son into believing that global warming is a liberal myth and so is evolution.
Then stop to think that this child stands a good chance of going on to Patrick Henry University, from where he stands a good chance of serving an internship in Washington, D.C.
Then stop to think that those internships are often the doorway into Congressional staff positions.
To understand exactly what makes that so scary, you have to think about what a Congressional staffer does. We like to think that the people we elect to Congress are informed about the major issues of the day. This particular belief is, alas, the grownup equivalent to belief in Santa Clause. Members of Congress tend to know jack-all about everything - what they do is use their staff to fill them in on the issues. They hire staffers to help them figure out what to think about legislation and how to vote on it.
This kid will someday be telling your senator how to vote on critical pieces of legislation.
Hope I didn’t put you off your breakfast.
Jillian said,
March 11, 2007 at 14:55
I blame my bad spelling on my lack of breakfast.
Jillian said,
March 11, 2007 at 15:07
Kids who were once like him are already telling your senators and congressional reps how to vote on important issues.
Qetesh the Shaved Abyssinian said,
March 11, 2007 at 15:51
Jillian, you’ve put me off tomorrow’s breakfast. That’s scary, and I say that as a citizen of a country physically far removed from the US, but all too closely nestled in your sphere of influence. Our copycat Prime Monster will be hopping up and down, all mad keen to institute the exact same system as his friend George has.
I’m sure he also buys the same underwear. Unless he nicked some from the White House when he was there, so he can have his Special Saturday Night when he puts on The Undies, and drives Jeanette wild.
BOSSY said,
March 11, 2007 at 16:26
Bossy is intolerant of intolerance.
Jillian said,
March 11, 2007 at 16:48
If that part of the documentary bugs you, you should all see the part where the children pray to the life sized cardboard cutout of George W. Bush.
Dr. Squid said,
March 11, 2007 at 16:49
Does anyone know where I can find a Christian poker room?
Lawnguylander said,
March 11, 2007 at 17:23
Hey, I don’t want to get into a More-Cynical-Less-Naive-Than-Thou competition, Lawnguylander. That could only end in disaster.
Oh come on, Herr Doktor, let’s. Even though I think you would probably win. Now would be my best chance though as my level of cynicism is greatly enhanced this morning by a hangover with a personality of its own. My attempt to envision a future where people who reject thousands of years of accumulated knowledge do pay a price probably means I’m not far removed enough from my own religious past where I thought there was such a thing as cosmic justice. I’ve been trying to construct a scenario in my own head that has the religious right and the economic elites here colliding over education but I can’t seem to even convince myself so I’m going to stop trying now.
Lawnguylander said,
March 11, 2007 at 17:38
Oh and, Herr Doktor, my regards to the Coromandel peninsula. I’ve got Irish passports in order for my kid and me just in case but that would be an alternative if you’ve got any pull with the immigration authorities.
Marmoset said,
March 11, 2007 at 18:18
This may be even bigger than suggested!!!
In researching the topic, I found that the US government has been defying God’s Law for years by making it illegal, among other things, to stone adulterers and kill those who have defied the lord by not wearing their hair in the approved fashion. Until the book of Leviticus is codified into law we can fully expect to continue to face God’s most righteous wrath.
Beware, sinners!
ifthethunderdontgetya³² said,
March 11, 2007 at 18:57
Next thing you know, youse guys and gals are going to be telling me you don’t believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monsterâ„¢! (Bless His Noodly Appendage)
Psycheout said,
March 11, 2007 at 20:47
So other than that, kingubu, Sam Brownback’s got it going on! Right?
I do realize you probably aren’t likely to vote GOP, but if you had to choose between two candidates, one from each side, what would be your ideal matchup?
Most of my liberal friends dislike Clinton as much as they dislike whoever the GOP candidate is going to be. So who do you want? Who’s got game?
Democrat party: Silky Pony? Obama? Shrillary? Other?
Republican party: RINO Rudy? Flipper Romney? Washed-up McCain? Or Sam Brownback (Principled. Conservative. Republican)?
Psycheout said,
March 11, 2007 at 20:50
Have some breakfast, Jillian.
You can’t start the day without breakfast!
Of course if your observing Lent, well….
annieangel said,
March 11, 2007 at 20:51
http://youtube.com/watch?v=mHjczyA75jU
annieangel said,
March 11, 2007 at 21:00
I love how Jillian links to a scene from an anti-Christian Movie.
thelogos said,
March 11, 2007 at 21:04
*cough*Richardson*cough,cough*
fardels bear said,
March 11, 2007 at 21:15
So tell me, Psycheout, what exactly makes Brownback a “Principled Conservative Republican.” If conservatives are supposed to be about small government, how do you square that with the party platform and Brownback’s insistence that the government intrude into the most intimate details of daily life, including marriage, family decisions about life and death, and specific details about how to raise children?
There is absolutely nothing conservative about Brownback’s principles, he is the least conservative candidate running.
DAS said,
March 11, 2007 at 21:21
precisely why the gay rights movement is inherently an illiberal one. When you decide to extend your nondiscrimination principles to behavior condemned by your society’s majority religion, you are embarking on a course that will sooner or later require the state to police, control, and punish adherents of that religion.
Dear Mr. Frum,
If I am not mistaken, you and I have more in common than the same first name. We also are members of the same religion. Our society’s majority religion is a different one, a religion which has historically condemned the behaviors associated with our religion. Are you arguing that it would be illiberal to extend non-discrimination principles to those of us who, for example, light candles and make kiddush on Friday nights, two behaviors that the Christian Inquisition would have deemed condemnable? Just wonderin’ …
Toodles … see ya when Torquemada comes for the both of us!
Luv,
David Weltlich (*)
* not my real last name but a bad attempt at a pun …
DAS said,
March 11, 2007 at 21:30
If conservatives are supposed to be about small government, how do you square that with the party platform and Brownback’s insistence that the government intrude into the most intimate details of daily life, including marriage, family decisions about life and death, and specific details about how to raise children? - fardels bear
Not that I think this way by any measure (nor that you asked me anyway ;) ), but it’s not as inconsistent as we liberals would tend to think: the idea is that if government forces us all to be moral people in our most intimate matters, we’ll magically turn into good people and hence the government won’t need to regulate businesses, etc. — because people will, by being morally disciplined, do the right thing without government meddling.
annieangel said,
March 11, 2007 at 21:34
What is with that bot or whatever it is???
Psycheout said,
March 11, 2007 at 21:38
I don’t know, Annie. It started stalking me here last night on the previous thread. I hope it’s not my fault!
J— said,
March 11, 2007 at 21:39
You’re not late, D. Sidhe. The party’s just getting started! Look who’s here—Psycheout and Annie Angel! Hopefully this one will go until 15 o’clock.
Psycheout said,
March 11, 2007 at 21:39
The posts are always dated December 31st, 1969. Maybe it has something to do with Daylight Savings Time?
Jillian said,
March 11, 2007 at 21:40
Breakfast was awesome, thanks. French toast, eggs, toast, and hashbrowns. And sushi for lunch. I’ve been working all weekend, so I indulged in a few treats to keep my spirits up.
Lent is silly.
Jillian said,
March 11, 2007 at 21:41
Hi, D Sidhe!
I may marry you yet, you know…… ;)
Smiling Mortician said,
March 11, 2007 at 21:47
Mmm, I’m jealous of Jillian’s breakfast. And yes, lent is silly. I need to go scavenge the kitchen now, but before I go, I just have to point out how disappointed I am in psycheout, who started out so nicely and then oozed into the swamp where adjectives morph into nouns (at least those that refer to non-republicans). Tsk tsk.
Jillian said,
March 11, 2007 at 21:52
I like Psycheout….just a gut feeling here, but I think he’s going to turn out to be the most fun troll we’ve had in a long time!
I like him enough that I even totally overlooked the whole “your/you’re” thing - and that’s a lot for me!
mikey said,
March 11, 2007 at 22:01
Besides, his nom de blog, Psycheout is beyond just amusing - it’s accurate! He’s been psyched out by war loving racist bigots to abandon what principals he used to have and join the cheerleaders for endless war, the destruction of the American constitution and the creation of a permanant militarized authoritarian oligarchy. A true American Patriot, with the courage to stand up for the things America is supposed to stand for…
mikey
Psycheout said,
March 11, 2007 at 22:03
Lent is not silly, oh “tolerant” ones.
I suppose you mock Easter, too.
Andrew Byrne said,
March 11, 2007 at 22:05
*Click Click* well, _he looks_ clear, sir… just let me check the… oh wait… yep… almost got past, but 6/7 jus’ don’ pass the carlin standard.
Oh man… you almost had it…
civility shattered in a “fuck art!”
Jillian said,
March 11, 2007 at 22:07
But Psycheout, “tolerate” does not mean the same thing as “endorse”.
I am VERY tolerant of Lent. I just don’t endorse it - it’s silly.
And why would I mock Easter? It’s when we celebrate the rebirth of the Great Bunny who Gives Birth to Chocolate Eggs! It’s the second best holiday of the year, after Halloween.
I mean, seriously, how does that damn bunny do it? Not just lay eggs, but chocolate eggs? It is a mystery.
Psycheout said,
March 11, 2007 at 22:09
Brownback opposes the troop surge, mikey.
So that means you must be for it, right?
But President Bush is for the surge, so you have to oppose it.
Uh oh, now you’re agreeing with Sam Brownback.
[mikey's head explodes]
annieangel said,
March 11, 2007 at 22:09
Oh for crying out LOUD.
Sadly, LAME! sucks these days.
Psycheout said,
March 11, 2007 at 22:10
Er, Jillian, those round brown things you found behind the bunny…they weren’t eggs.
Jillian said,
March 11, 2007 at 22:10
But they had cream filling!!
annieangel said,
March 11, 2007 at 22:15
STOP IT!
Jillian said,
March 11, 2007 at 22:18
Who doesn’t like pie?
Especially chocolate pie. With cream filling.
Smiling Mortician said,
March 11, 2007 at 22:18
Dammit, Jillian rendered my explanation of tolerance vs. endorsement moot. I’ll just have to think about cream-filled bunny eggs instead.
oudemia said,
March 11, 2007 at 22:30
Back when I worked in children’s publishing, my boss (the art director) received an Easter card from a well-known and beloved children’s book author/illustrator. The pen-and-ink front of this card depicted a bunny crucified and bleeding with several other bunnies, prostrate at the foot of his cross, wailing and gnashing their bunny teeth. Slapped across the front of this very detailed drawing was — in bright red ink — a generic/institutional DECEASED stamp.
(Everyone in children’s publishing is a sick, sick fuck.)
annieangel said,
March 11, 2007 at 22:36
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/19144/the_origin_and_history_of_the_easter.html
Idiots.
mikey said,
March 11, 2007 at 22:38
I suppose you mock Easter, too.
I have a policy of not linking to my own blog, but this was just irresistable.
mikey
Herr Doktor Bimler said,
March 11, 2007 at 22:52
If you like Paul Delvaux paintings, you can enjoy Easter and Hallowe’en at the same time!
g said,
March 11, 2007 at 22:53
Easter - It’s kinda like Pet Semetary, isn’t it?
Only with chocolate cream-filled eggs. Or hollow chocolate bunnies.
Me, I always liked the jelly bird eggs best. The white ones that are speckled in color and teh awesome.
I bought some Peeps the other day. Oh, the delicious grittiness of the colored sugar! Now THAT’s a heavenly thing.
His Grace said,
March 11, 2007 at 22:53
Whereas the Christian theme park I saw on the news that crucified Jesus at 4:16 daily was a hallmark of good taste.
Jillian said,
March 11, 2007 at 22:56
PEEEEEEPS!
Peeps are beyond awesome.
Did you know they aren’t kosher? They’re basically boiled pig’s hooves covered in colored sugar. MMmmmmmm………sugared hambones!
Shoelimpyâ„¢ said,
March 11, 2007 at 23:00
I am sure that peeps not being kosher is a real problem to the Jews. I can just imagine them sitting down for dinner on Easter Sunday, rubbing their bellies after eating that delicious Easter ham, and then mama brings out the peeps and suddenly all the Jews are like “we can’t eat the peeps! They aren’t kosher!”
g said,
March 11, 2007 at 23:01
the Christian theme park I saw on the news that crucified Jesus at 4:16 daily
What, only one show a day? Lightweights.
I have an actor friend who always gets cast in the Easter and Christmas shows at the Crystal Cathedral down in Orange County. Apparently, these shows are a great source of income for local actors, as well as professional stage flying technicians.
sugared hambones
I am rather dogmatic when it comes to Peeps. I only endorse the yellow, chick-shaped Peeps. I am intolerant when it comes to purple or blue or pink Peeps for me….not to mention, I think the bunny-shaped ones are heretical.
Purple bunny-shaped Peeps make the baby Jesus cry.
I am intolerant
Psycheout said,
March 11, 2007 at 23:04
Uh, no, not really. It’s more kinda like about Christ’s Resurrection. You might try looking that up on the Wikipedia or the Google sometime.
g said,
March 11, 2007 at 23:05
You know, the ugly history of Peeps is that during the 19th century in Poland, during Holy Week the Catholics would rampage through the ghetto, forcing Peeps upon the residents.
What the czar’s troopers used to use Peeps for was equally vile.
Can I say this, or is it just too offensive - have I crossed a line here?
His Grace said,
March 11, 2007 at 23:06
What, only one show a day? Lightweights.
I believe, though having never been to this theme park nor wanting to, it is a reference to John 4:16.
Psycheout said,
March 11, 2007 at 23:06
Word, g.
Jillian said,
March 11, 2007 at 23:07
Peeps go way beyond just bunnies and chicks nowadays…they’ve got ‘em for almost any holiday you can think of.
http://www.marshmallowpeeps.com/
I have a friend who drew up a phylogenetic tree for the various Peeps life forms (Peepiformes, don’t you know?)
Oh, lord - they have sugar free Peeps now! That’s just not right.
g said,
March 11, 2007 at 23:15
Oh, I am thrilled with the Peeps site, Jillian. Check out the history section!
Did you know Peeps were first made in 1953?
Jillian said,
March 11, 2007 at 23:20
Peeps - offending Our Saviour since 1953.
Now there’s a marketing slogan for you.
I mean, I know that they really, objectively, are gross, but I can’t help it. They just taste soooooo good.
If you eat a whole strip of them at once, the sugar will make you incredibly hyper…..I have been known to do a line or two of Peeps at work to make a slow afternoon go by faster.
I’m sorry - were we supposed to take the discussion of religion seriously? This is just way more fun.
tigrismus said,
March 11, 2007 at 23:21
Oh my deity, Shoelimpy actually made a joke! A real joke! And it was pretty damn funny!
And Jillian and D., if you do ever decide to tie the knot, come to Mass. and I’ll bake the cake(s).
billy pilgrim said,
March 11, 2007 at 23:22
actually, g, I believe ALL the peeps were made in 1953.
They’ve just been selling the same batch since then.
It’s what accounts for the gritty, chewy, nigh-indegistible character.
I am a Peeps Heretic.
Jillian said,
March 11, 2007 at 23:23
Will you put Peeps on them, tigrismus?
g said,
March 11, 2007 at 23:25
On the Peeps website, it says they’re coming out with green Peeps for St. Patrick’s Day.
Lesley said,
March 11, 2007 at 23:31
And why would I mock Easter? It’s when we celebrate the rebirth of the Great Bunny who Gives Birth to Chocolate Eggs!
Personally, I prefer the Belgian Praline-Chocolate laying Bunny sect.
tigrismus said,
March 11, 2007 at 23:38
Heck, I’ll ice a mound of peeps if that’s what you’d like. Actually, that sounds pretty gruesome, doesn’t it?
g said,
March 11, 2007 at 23:51
Then there’s always this tradition:
http://www.broadwaycares.org/events/easter.cfm
mikey said,
March 11, 2007 at 23:53
tigrismus as mob hitman: I’ll ice yer peeps for ya. Fifteen large. Half now, half when your peeps are down…
mikey
Shoelimpyâ„¢ said,
March 11, 2007 at 23:54
Matthew 15:10-11
mikey said,
March 11, 2007 at 23:57
Hey, g!! BC/EFA is a client of mine. The performance will be shot by Bradshaw Smith, of Broadway Beat. I’ll make and package the DVDs. You’ll be able to buy them from the BC/EFA website. I’m working on the ABC Daytime salute show right now! You can get the previous years Easter Bonnet shows at their site too…
mikey
annieangel said,
March 11, 2007 at 23:58
NIV!?!?!?!?!?????????????!!!!!!!!!!!!
Must be a Shoelimpy NAMESTEALER.
Oh, you are gonna BURN!
Shoelimpyâ„¢ said,
March 11, 2007 at 23:59
Matthew 15:10-11
Posted by the real Shoelimpyâ„¢
annieangel said,
March 12, 2007 at 0:00
You need to repent Shoe.
Shoelimpyâ„¢ said,
March 12, 2007 at 0:01
Penance is between myself and my God, Miss Annie. I am not Newt Gingrich to make public that which is most private in the relationship between myself and the Lord.
annieangel said,
March 12, 2007 at 0:05
Bullshit! You were dumbing yourself down for the room by using the NIV.
Shoelimpyâ„¢ said,
March 12, 2007 at 0:06
When one is discussing the Bible with barely literate heathens, one must at times make concessions, such as using translations which can be more easily read, even though said translation does not bear the accuracy of that which was authorized under the reign of King James.
annieangel said,
March 12, 2007 at 0:11
Wrong! This is the internet, what if they search out your quote and start reading the NIV?? What if they base their decision to turn to Christ off of what they read in it??
It is NOT authorized by God, Shoe!!! Can they really be saved based on the information you are leading them to? You should pray.
billy pilgrim said,
March 12, 2007 at 0:14
I can’t be saved by pie.
Peeps, maybe.
Some guy said,
March 12, 2007 at 0:15
Dicklimpy (and your imaginary gurlfren, annie):
Please fuck off, die and fuck you again. You are either the biggest loser or best parody ever, but either way, you are annoying and stupid. Your vlogs are high comedy cause you look like a faggot, playing with your hair so much. Come out of the closet and admit it.
Shoelimpyâ„¢ said,
March 12, 2007 at 0:15
Oh Lord, I pray to you this day that those who have read this message board shall not be led astray by the perversions of your Word posted here in the form of a quotation from the New International Version, that vile concoction bred from the depths of Satan’s heart to mislead your followers and take them down the path of Destruction. I pray, dear God, that you might rectify both their hearts and their minds and that they may see thy Light of Truth shining through the darkness of that secularism which is the god of this age. We know, sweet baby Jesus, that you are The Way, The Truth and The Life, and it is only through the atoning blood of your sacrifice for us that we shall live in eternity in Heaven with you.
Some guy said,
March 12, 2007 at 0:16
Oh, and MissDicklimpAnal, please stop pretending to be Christian, go and slurp Bush’s cock since that is what you already do figuratively ervery day on your socalled blog.
g said,
March 12, 2007 at 0:21
Hey, mikey! No kidding, small world. I used to be involved with some BC/EFA benefits that took place on the road, given by casts of touring productions.
Good stuff. The Easter Bonnet competition sounds way cool.
even though said translation does not bear the accuracy of that which was authorized under the reign of King James
Right, Cause as we all know, the King James version was written in the language Jesus used.
I am not Newt Gingrich to make public that which is most private in the relationship between myself and the Lord.
Newt’s adulterous relationship with a woman 23 years his junior who was also a member of his staff was hardly “that which is most private” in his relationship with the Lord. It was common knowledge at the time.
annieangel said,
March 12, 2007 at 0:21
FAGGOT????
Oh you fucking HYPOCRITES.
Shoelimpyâ„¢ said,
March 12, 2007 at 0:24
Some guy, while you are performing admirably in demonstrating the innate hatefulness which is the core of the democratic philosphy, you might want to stop with your bitching before you shoot yourself in the fucking face.
Psycheout said,
March 12, 2007 at 0:24
I think Annie is right about the NIV.
The King James Version is the real thing.
What Bible do the rest of you read?
Shoelimpyâ„¢ said,
March 12, 2007 at 0:25
“Newt’s adulterous relationship with a woman 23 years his junior who was also a member of his staff was hardly “that which is most privateâ€? in his relationship with the Lord. It was common knowledge at the time.”
Publicly acknowledged affairs and private penance to God are two separate issues, G.
Shoelimpyâ„¢ said,
March 12, 2007 at 0:26
“Right, Cause as we all know, the King James version was written in the language Jesus used.”
Actually, if you had read the words you quoted, you would know that the King James Version is not written in the language Jesus used, but is a translation.
Some guy said,
March 12, 2007 at 0:28
Shoelimpyâ„¢ said,
March 12, 2007 at 0:24
Some guy, while you are performing admirably in demonstrating the innate hatefulness which is the core of the democratic philosphy, you might want to stop with your bitching before you shoot yourself in the fucking face.
Yeah, well you’re still a faggot. So bite me.
g said,
March 12, 2007 at 0:32
No shit, limpy
Isn’t it teh awesome how people totally without a sense of humor can be so funny anyway? You crack me up! You and Psychobabble are like a paid of vaudeville comics - opening for annieangel’s burlesque act.
annieangel said,
March 12, 2007 at 0:33
He’s hitting on you, Shoe.