There’s a reason why the gay marriage question is going bad for the Liberals, and it’s mathematical.
Because we all have a sister (Abbott) or a son (Robbo) or a cousin (me) or a schoolmate (everyone) that we are fond of and don’t want to see suffer any more than they did as a child or a young adult, coming out, or shamed and hiding something, a condition, a tendency, they didn’t choose. We are all in the mix of sympathy now. And we all are soon moved by the need for acceptance, for affirmation, for illumination, for hallowing in such good people, people we too long thought promiscuous, impetuous and shallow.
Stephen Fry and Ian McKellen and Ellen de Generis and Alec Guinness and Alan Bennett have helped, probably; and so have Don Dunstan and Fiona Shaw and Gerry Connolly. And the Liberals voting on Abbott’s orders against this decent, ordinary aspiration, a public promise of love, don’t like it very much any more, and they never did. They know in life so many of these people, and they like them.
And the strain is beginning to show.
And they’re losing tens of thousands of votes over it.
Discuss.
Name:
Bob, it’s going equally as bad for us Labor types as well on this issue.
As John Faulkner and Doug Cameron said during the Senate debate, gay marriage is part of the ALP platform. Why it was hijacked into the realms of a conscience vote beggars belief. Whose conscience?
Certainly not the constituency of Australia generally according to the numbers (some 65%).
The Laborconnect facebook page runs hot with votes going west because
of a few atheists or religious bigots.
Forgot BC+PK Bob
Here in the UK, the Deputy Prime Minister and leader of the Liberal Democrats had to scrap a section of a speech labelling people who oppose gay marriage as “bigots”, after pressure from his own office. More must be done to combat prejudice against gay people, but fighting intolerance with intolerance isn’t the way.
I presume Gillard, Rudd and the catholic crew in parliament don’t have any gay friends they want to talk about, much easier to remain ignorant bigots.
But then they did sell away the rights of refugees to appeal to other bigots.
The removal of the disaster that was Rudd as PM required Gillard to do a deal with the Catholic Right of the Party. To be socially conservative on these issues was inevitably a part of it; promising a conscience vote was probably stretching the ‘alliance’ as it was.
Same sex marriage will happen; there has been a steady progression in its favour and so it has been for at least 40 years.
Patience is a virtue.
YOu must be the most partisan blind man in the country if you believe your own lies old man.
Do you EVER read a post??
Be careful, Marilyn. Your bad language has eased off, but your hyperbollicality is undimmed.
I do not need a fanatic as my ally. I do not.
Be careful. Or you will be banned, again, for life.
NSW government downgrading the hospital system just before the weekend footy extravaganza reeks of cynical political opportunism. No surprise
Very elegantly put.
If Tony wants wishes to persist in characterizing Cory Bernardi’s recent remarks on gay marriage as “ill disciplined’ rather than ‘fuckwitted’ then he is bigger trouble than he realizes.
The more important question is what right does a fornicator really have to deny another form of fornication? Heterosexuals, since Playboy, have been busily sleeping around, stifling relationships, creating untold emotional damage, preventing pregnancies, divorcing, remarrying, separating, cohabiting, aborting their children…
This is all mainstream now. It is perfectly acceptable and almost inevitable. So. What right does a decadent, emotionally blind, impulse-driven, ego-imprisoned, bloodstained majority of heterosexuals have to extoll the natural virtues of their sexuality?
This is why democracy does not work.
Your mock-indignation at the misery of the homosexual only underlines your own shame and guilt. A generation that abandoned it’s moral authority and responsibilities to society - that can only think that the freedom they had to destroy themselves and others should naturally be extended to those who, when sunk in the same swamp, will never get out.
Oh what a wretched and evil generation it is that preys on confused teenagers, prying into their still-forming sexual identity and snatches them from an authentic development and locks them into miserable, isolated sin. Yes, Jimmmy, you’re gay - that’s all there is to it. Now, tell your father, tell your mother, your friends and demand equality. A life divided between wicked, unnatural acts that cry out to heaven for vengance and a seething rage at the objections of any - objections made all the more potent because they echo their conscience every day…
Just fuck off. And take your faux moralising with you.
There is nothing worse than a self-righteous bigot.
Thank you DQ. Hear hear, to your sentiments.
What a pair. You deserve each other.
Temper temper.
I’m not moralizing and I’m too young to be self-righteous. I also don’t pretend that I don’t have big problems containing sexual urges in light of the anonymous, isolating, cheap and pornographic internet. Oh howl! Howl!
It all disturbs and impacts me, m8, as much as my fellow-malformed contemporaries. Your reaction, however, is consistently unenlightening.
Banned for life.
The bullshit meter is off the scale.
Way off, but then that’s what you get when you get a wingnut on the job.
Now look here you rabble, my arguments are an implicit invitation for you to articulate the other point of view. Believe it or not, but some of us are open to a good argument. Your failure to argue and instinct to swear and dismiss is, frankly, appalling.
Banned for life.
I’ll break my promise to no longer reply, but just this once.
Quixote’s right. Just fuck off, you add nothing of serious content to this blog.
You consistently fail to address the questions raised in response to your posts, and that’s a fail by any assessment of contributory content.
If you can’t or won’t respond to reasonable requests for clarification of your points, then one can only assume you’re a time-wasting troll.
Banned for life, and good riddance.
Thank god for people like Allan Bennett and Robert Dessaix, whose wonderful books I’m reading at the moment…
I have plenty of time for Stephen Fry, reading the first one of his autobiographies and loving it…managed to get the second one at one of The Tulip Festival book tables…( I have enough Tulips)…
Helvi, how lovely for you to be amidst the tulips. I’m envious.
Never mind the Tulips, just testing the waters, if any of the monsters here start swearing at me I’ll be off as fast than the rat up the drain pipe (hope I got that Aussie-ism right…)
His ‘An Ode Less Travelled’ is well worth a read if you want to write non toxic poetry.
It’s been a long day; Helvi, the above is for you.
Thanks Chris for ‘An Ode Less Travelled’,sounds very Stephen Fry-ish…
Hope I’ll come across it on my ‘travels’…
The gospel that Cory preached in his maiden speech (quaint anachronistic terminology) goes thusly: “Marriage has been reserved as a sacred bond between a man and a woman across times, across cultures and across very different religious beliefs.” In other words, it is a divine law, universal and immutable, which must be protected from infernal attempts to tinker with it – always was always will be – end of story. Appealingly simple, but bullshit. History doesn’t help; scripture doesn’t help. Nor does anthropology.
Here’s a roadbump on the Cory Highway of Ordained Wedlock.
All the same arguments and bigotries and were used in nineteenth century USA to establish the race-based limitations on marriage which were not completely removed until 2000, when Alabama finally removed its state law banning marriage between a Negro and Caucasian from its books. (Mind you, 40 percent of Alabamans — nearly 526,000 people — voted to keep it!!).
Seven year later, Mildred Loving died of pneumonia on May 2, 2008, in Milford, Virginia, at age 68. She had been born Mildred Delores Jeter, a woman of African and Rappahannock Native American descent. In June 1958, she had left Virginia to marry a white man Richard Loving, as there was a state law banning marriages between any white person and any non-white person, this being considered an offence to God. On January 6, 1959, the Lovings were sentenced to one year in prison, with the trial judge proclaiming that:
Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix.
O wise, worthy, noble, upright judge! O wise Cory!
Judge not, lest ye be judged. Wasn’t that one of the wisdoms transmitted through the ages?
Our enemy seeks to implant three ideas in man, and is pretty successful:
-All opinions are equal
-Never judge anyone
-Step on no toes
It’s a good strategy to keep us helpless in tr face of intrinsic evil.
But the scripture you quote is properly applied as not judging a man’s “soul”; his standing with God and eternal destination - only God knows how each man has responded to the individual graces he has been given.
But actions should always be evaluated and ‘judged’. Jesus knew that and did it all the time - with prostitutes, tax collectors, money changers, pharasies… How else would a society function? Don’t judge a murderer? The same is true in the same-sex debate. They are proposed actions that we can rightly weigh the good and evil of.
Formerly one sought the feeling of the grandeur of man by pointing to his divine origin: this has now become a forbidden way, for at the portal stands the ape, together with other gruesome beasts, grinning knowingly as if to say: no further in this direction!
Nietzsche - Daybreak
Our guide and interpreter was a South African shaman of the Venda tribe. We repeatedly deferred to him when it came to determining the authenticity of the people standing before us and the dangers they represented. He would instinctively assess the situation as we approached the armed “officials” and either cajole them with his winning smile and humor, or sternly rebuke them, much like a father lecturing an errant child. Sometimes he would ebb and flow from laughter to a completely uncompromising demeanor, gauging which technique would serve us best. He would also invoke his status as an elder shaman to appeal to the best values of the highwayman’s culture.
Mysteries of African Shamanism: What Can’t Be Explained Must Be Experienced, Geral Blanchard
To Peter: you write like a 17 year old who thinks he’s rather brighter than he actually is.
Given your age, I don’t suppose your attempts to combine Roman Catholicism and masturbation are all that surprising
You’re the wanker. Stop rubbishing everyone who has a different take on things. You and DQ need serious professional help
Thankyou Shad. At least someone out there also finds it odd that any post not ‘on message’ is met with a barrage of insults and an arrogant dismissiveness.
Polybius, m8, I’m sure that I don’t know what you’re talking about ???
Talk more about arrogance, Peter - I could do with a laugh.
You come here reeking with moral vanity and making a ludicrously exhibitionistic display of your overcooked ‘piety’, and then get miffed when people tell you to fuck off.
As well as being a model of sanctimonious hypocrisy, it appears you’re an idiot as well.
Are you familiar with the term ‘Creeping Jesus’, Peter? If not, I suggest you google it. You’ll learn something about yourself.
Thanks m8, I did google it and was interested to discover that the term has evolved from its original use to now describe any one with wankery hypocritical politics/opinions, for instance like those found in ‘progressive politics’. Hope! Change! Light on the hill! Free everything!
If anything, I’m a counter-creep to you ;p
My politics can hardly be described as progressive, petey.
Another typically self-serving and evasive post from you.
I don’t rubbish everyone who has a different take on things.
However it is true to say that I have rubbished everyone of your posts that I have ever replied to, Shadly.
The reason being that you manage to combine sickly sentimentality and profound ignorance in a uniquely irritating way.
Not that I’m trying to shut you up, you understand.
After all, every village needs an idiot.
I can think of no other explanation for your presence.
The trouble is Poly that this village seems to have several! The two of them with unfortunate verbal incontinence today : shadley and peter.
‘every village needs an idiot’…
Nicely put, Polybius.
In olden times village idiots were tolerated. After all, they couldn’t exactly get kicked out of town to fend for themselves.
Tolerated, not listened to, not heeded, for after all, they were idiots and what reasonable man would willingly listen to or engage with idiots except at a functional level?
Watch as the local chapter enjoy their nascent symbiosis, but don’t feed or pet them, look the other way or cross the street if they approach.
How rude Polywannacracker. You ignored Reader and behaved like Conguro in your usual dereistic manner
Well, Peter, we of the left fairly routinely assert that our opinions are right while others are wrong, step on toes even to the point of facing arrest, and judge the rightness or wrongness of people’s actions even in the face of unpopularity. So by your own standards we are remote from “the enemy”. Look to your own standards.
And we have weighed homosexuality and not found it immoral; according to our human-based ethic based on benevolence and honesty.
Catholics of course say it is immoral but on what basis? The Bible? Catholics, Christians in general, are not even consistent in following the Bible; there is nothing to argue about here. So even Christians don’t really believe it is the word of God, the hypocrisy again.
Catholics of course say that it is immoral, but their actions are another matter.The Catholic priesthood always has been a refuge for homosexuals of course, just as you would expect from an institution that insists on celibacy. Maybe this refuge was to some degree a positive in a society that persecuted homosexuals, but against that one has to weight the promotion of bigotry that made a refuge necessary in the first place; and the hypocrisy which is an assault on the human mind. The Church’s misogyny and warping of sexuality also of course encourages child-abuse, sexual and otherwise. If you think that kiddie-rooting is not a good thing (for the secular reason that it harms children) then it is hard to see how the Church can be a good thing.
We of the left are obviously far closer to the preachings of Jesus than you are; from my point of view that doesn’t prove anything, I would hold the same values in any case, but from your point of view it should give you pause.
Christianity at bottom is a yoga for transforming negative emotions, with sexual desire being treated for this purpose as a negative emotion. The Gospels are explicit enough on this if you read them with “ears to hear” as Jesus put it. Or to put it another way, Christianity resembles the Kundalini Yoga in that it calls for the transformation of sexual desire into “soul matter”; but Christianity adds the transformation of anger and hatred etc to the mix.
But the modern Church has forgotten this, being like a dog in the manger that neither eats nor allows others to eat, and behaves much like a cargo cult going through the motions of practical procedures (such as sexual restraint in this case) without understanding the reasons…..and of course getting into trouble. People who pracice sexual abstinence without transforming the energies just get very horny and twisted.
Just thought you’d like to know.
Thanks for the serious reply Jeremy. There is much to say!
First, you’re right the left stand for certain broad policy aims and fight for them. But a disturbing trend is the vicious labeling of opponents as ‘bigots’ - not just ignorant but dangerously hateful and in need of silencing. This is true of the homosexual debate and the ruthless gay lobby. Again I say, the lady doth protest too much - ie there would not be so much disproportionate emotion here if the cause was one of true justice.
Second, you don’t know why the church opposes it, other than sacred scripture. The scripture is an excellent guide, the Verbum Dei, but we can reason too. It’s plainly against natural law - virtually all societies outside of Christendom have understood this. It poses a compromising threat to good healthy relations between the sexes - relations which lead to families, the building blocks of society. Indeed this gender confusion is a sure sign of societal rot - no longer convinced of anything beyond animal instinct, not prepared or mature enough to take on the responsibilities of family life and selfless sacrifice. Oh, I could go on! But I think you should look up Christopher Pearson’s story - a homosexually orientated person that Ellis cites as Abbott’s best friend. Pearson is a smart guy and he simply saw the truth; that the Church is the light of the world, that his orientation could only lead to his unhappiness and destruction, rather than peace, happiness and increased sanctity. There’s a good reason why he’s friends w the Abba.
Your point on the priesthood is silly. Yes there are prob homo clergy and it’s a problem. Thiugh gays deserve dignity and freedom, they cannot, unhealed, be authentic ‘fathers’. They have a deep wound in their masculinity that they are trying, unsuccessfully, to repair by ‘consuming’ other men. Like cannibals. Anyway, the pope is addressing this issue by screening seminarians v thoroughly.
And you’re wrong about the church teaching on sexuality. And so were the 0.001% of abusive priests. It’s not an impossible “no”, but a big fat Yes - a ‘no’ to corrupt sexuality, which makes a ‘yes’ to the authentic, joyful, life-giving expression.
Yeah you’re right that some people are not called to the celibate life and become twisted by not being fulfilled in that way, but you’re talking about throwing out the baby with the bath water.
I’ve been called a spaghetti monster apologist, advised against approaching strangers preaching in the street. I am also curious Peter, as to where you rediscovered your conviction? What did you do? I am avoiding the cliches very carefully, in an attempt to uphold the respectful nature of my query, I don’t want to offend you. I fear though that the shape and form of my spirituality conflicts with yours. Perhaps we can move forward together if you can answer me this. Where do you stand on evolution, specifically, how do you feel about hoofed carnivores evolving to become the ocean’s vacuum cleaners, only to be harpooned and sucked into mechanical death, ending up in a fat man’s freezer? I mean, go nuts, get abstract. I am holding up ink blots, what do you see? Where is God on the killing deck? Free Willy. I’m beached as.
I’ve been told a story by a Jeweller that had a shop in Alice Springs, about a man who had a great big bulldog and never left the house. Another analogy from a jeweller, the beheaded-lazy-ant. It is quite strange, it should be noted, how conservative ideologies, that perhaps could be argued as the unthinking political outcomes of a lazy and unthinking spirituality, produce sociological realities that are ultimately anti-christian. Did you miss the one about the god-bothering step mother that kept a padlock on the pantry and told my beautiful Nanna that one day, she would come to a bad end? The woman was hit by a bus mate, at a bus stop, on the way to church.
The number one cause of abortion? Right-winged conservative economic fundamentalism. What a bloody ludicrous parasitic palindrome. What ideology is responsible for the fudged unemployment rates, here, that should read at somewhere around seventeen percent if it considered all of those of working age who have moved from unemployment benefits to the disability pension? This is socialism? What say ewe?
Man you’re ill. You always seem to have one point buried under a pile of babbling shit and it’s almost never worth digging it out, lol.
On evolution I’m indifferent. As far as I’m aware there are still holes in the theory, but I don’t stake my faith on it’s accuracy. All that a Catholic need believe is that God created the universe and man; no one knows exactly how all matter came into being. Why is there something rather than nothing? That is rightly a scientific question and the Bible/Genesis is not a science textbook - even Augustine said so.
The point is that we have faith that God started the whole thing, maybe with a big bang, maybe with infusing a hitherto ape-like creature with a soul at some point. Mysterious ways! It’s interesting, but won’t brake the bank on an authentic faith.
I can’t make anything of your ludicrous statement on abortion. If you mean to say that a mother has no choice but to terminate because a government won’t pay her enough to give birth, then that’s ridiculous, offensive, ignorant….
Well, Peter, “bigot” is after all a contraction of “by God”….If a person hates or seeks to harm a group of people for non-rational or “faith-based” reasons then a bigot is what such a person is. Objecting to the name is the sort of political correctness that in other cases you might mock. Leftists and liberals can of course be self-righteous and moralistic about people they disagree with (it is a common human failing) but it is bizarre to hear this accusation from a Christian.
You admit there are probably homosexual Catholic clergy. No kidding. Are there any straight Catholic clergy? Actually, yes, there are a few and they are more the problem than the gay ones I would have thought.
You say that in criticising the celibate life I am throwing out the baby with the bathwater….but what is the baby? Jesus spoke of being a “eunuch for the sake of the Kingdom of Heaven” which is a reference to the spiritual practice or yoga of transformng sexual energies. But where in the Christian Church is this practice now known? Instead Catholic priests are taught to maintain celibacy by cultivating disgust for the female body which is the negation of the spiritual practice. So where is the baby here?
The secular ethic as I understand it is benevolence (equivalent to the command to love your neighbour) and honesty or respect for truth (the secular equivalent of the command to love God). These principles are the touchstone of morality not this or that holy book; and not your irrational fears of people you find strange either. Homosexuals and lesbians do not in fact threaten healthy relationships between the sexes, why would they? That is just, well….bigotry, Peter. Unless you have some kind of rational argument.
Cultivate disgust of the female body? Bizarre that Christians cite an unfair bias against them? Straight priests are the problem?
Much of what you say is just plainly unfair.
For one, why do you think Marian devotion is so important to us and especially to Priests? The new Eve, the Virgin thru whom we were redeemed. She’s kind of a big deal and, as Mother of God, holds a special place in heaven to hear our prayers and intercede to her Son for us.
And, at the risk of shocking you, you dont have to have sex with a woman to be refreshed and fulfilled by her unique company. Women usually run most things in the parish and nuns often need priests to give them the sacraments. It’s a healthy, joyful relationship. There is no isolation or hatred at all! What a bizarre suggestion!
You know, my belief is that the only acceptable prejudice these days is against Chrisitians. I dot expect you to notice, but we cop a huge amount of bile just for being what we are. Whereas the buddist, the Muslim, the atheist, the muddled agnostic are celebrated, toerated, respected, feared, whatever. I wasn’t concerned with the word “bigot”, but with the anti-Christian climate post 9-11.
So i have no probs with your secular ethic, as you put it, except that you’re blind if you think it works that way. Secularism just seeks to push all religion, all supernatural belief out of politics - the stuff that most people hold dearest and most essential, considered only private and marginal.
I dont know if you’re taking about gay marriage or gays in general. There will always be homosexuality orientated people and their orientation is a trial for them. They are called to be celibate and can only be happy in that state of life. Again, google Chris Pearson.
Man and woman are complimentary in a physical, psychological and emotional sense. This ensures that they can have the most stable relationship and also, surprise, have children. It’s well documented that any child needs a mother and a father, especially ones who give them an example of love, to develop best. We need to develop a sensitivity to masculinity and femininity, how to cultivate the one and respond rightly to the other.
Homosexuals unfortunately can’t offer this. And in this place, I would ‘inelegantly’ say that they are threatening. In many ways, the real homosexual doesn’t care whether the object of their affection is homosexual or not. In fact it’s a great prize for them to secure a ‘straight’ person in their clutches. This is because, on an unconscious psychological level, they realize that something is wrong with them, that they are deficient in masculinity, and are desperate to repair the wound. So what better way to reassure yourself of masculinity by being intimate with someone authentically masculine? Once consumed and aware that fulfillment can’t come from the current partner, they move on, leaving a trail of misery, confusion and brokenness. Imagine a teenage son of yours, still maturing, vulnerable to a more mature predator’s attentions at school. Vulnerable to the sexual expression that progressives actively encourage school kids to dive into. Why, it could derail a whole life.
Though I doubt that you care m8. Why would you? Life is random and absurd to you, given only vague guidance by a mere two broad ‘ethics’ that you plucked from thin airrrrrrr
Well, Peter, it is certainly nice that Isis worshio persists under the cover of Marianism in the catholic Church. A redeeming feature but a small one given the general Catholic misogyny. It is truly strange that you think an ehtic of benevolence and honesty is plucked from thin air; unless you just mean that it isn’t founded on a paranois schizophrenic fantasy in the sky.
But anyway, the discussion is about homosexuality. And you have nothing to say but some horrible daydreams. Seriously, I am curious here, have you any actual sexual experience? Or are you “called to celibacy”?
What would you suggest that they are founded on? Youve already stated that they are the two great commandments of Christ - love the Lord your God will all your heart, soul and might and love all of mankind as you love yourself. Yet then you spit all over Our Blessed Lord. Why? You can’t pick and choose with Jesus. Either He is the Son of God like he said, or a dangerous, lying fanatic.
And now you’re curious about my sexual experiences. Good grief, what a guy. What an age we live in!
As St Thomas More once said of Luther: in the effort to get the shit out of his mouth, i find shit on my hands
No, Peter, I didn’t say the secular ethic was founded on Jesus’ 2 commandments just that it was equaivalent. I don’t know why think I “spit” on Jesus; it is is you who peddle hatred here not me. And I’m not really curious about your sex life, just wondering waht your hateful fantasies are based on.
Nicely put, JD, and on the money. This is the first mention in this blog of the esoteric potential of religious practice as a vehicle for psychological transformation.
As you correctly say, this understanding is almost completely missing in modern Christianity, whatever its stripes.
For those with a serious enquiry into the nature of what it means to be a human being and what is the potential of this existence, well, unfortunately, the church is one of the least likely places to provide appropriate answers to these questions.
The practice of mauvaise foi, bad faith, as elucidated by Sartre and de Beauvoir is entrenched within the Roman Church, and like all deep trenches whether physical or other it’s hard to see how they can dig themselves out of the mire.
The village was laughing at you because you and your partner forgot to close your bedroom curtains last night but you told the village that the joke was on them because you wern’t home last night
You stick around Shad, no matter what, stick around, “The mind of Mr.Soames”, I think I cried in the end.
My other theory is that you are two 16 year olds, here’s a hint get rid of the dumb one he’s letting you down.
Pls work on sentence structure, with particular attention to full stops.
It would be so thoroughly enjoyable Peter to chat with, but last time, well it caused you an embarrassing and very public crisis of confidence in your whole existence, remember, (failing at your studies, failed as a student priest, failed getting a gig with an aboriginal community) and now here you are back, sharp as a tack and all bright-eyed and bushy tailed. Well isn’t that interesting, Shad thinks you are the dumb one. Bob do you offer group discounts for subscribers or something?
Temper
You will really have to stop being so rude and butting in when it suits you so shush! quiet, Peter, I was speaking to Shads, he/they is/are more interesting than you, he’s on a real crusade, to get Rudd back into the leadership of the ALP, that is much more interesting than your never ending drone. Stick around and listen as to how is going to go about getting it done, resurrection from the dead, right up your street M8.
I’m trying to rehabilate him with little success
sorry full stop
Help Mohammed go viral.
http://mohammedgoesviral.wordpress.com/
Michael love that link was about as funny as a poke in the eye with a blunt stick.
Have you got a link to that Serbian doco on SBS about prewar pipe making instead? xo
To Jeremy : See what happens when you feed a troll? A religious concern troll, at that. Please desist.
Go to any Chinese zoo and watch the visitors throw stones and poke sticks at the tigers, just to get them pissed off. Sound similar?
Am I a tiger or a visiting Chinaman?
A blind, flatulent panda with a penchant for pulling.
Bahahahaha!
Though this madness be, there’s method in it!
Thanks m8. Made my night
There’s no method. You’re not trying to save us, you’re just trying to gee up yourself. You’re a show pony. A deliberately hateful, bigoted show pony. Not like Shad, he’s got substance. The qualitative nature of that substance is hard to discern but it seems safe to say he’s an authentic sixteen year old and not a greedy, power hungry religionbot. What kind of person gives offence so prodigiously and deliberately and yet is so overly trigger happy in regard to offense taken, using offense itself as a weapon and cheap strategy? I’ll tell you who. Right wingers. Right wingers and Helvi, who may as well be right wing and is so a millimetre under the show pony surface. I looked up The True Finns at her direction and learnt that the Finnish are actually Mongols who deny it in order to pass themselves off as pristine white in worshipful thrall to the European class structure.
These themes are not new, Peter. As Dirk Gently said, it’s all interconnected.
Well you’re just a big ol Teddy bear that i want to cuddle wuddle until all the resentment goes away
You are definitelyauthentic Reader. I think we all put you at the head of the charts http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5kZ2xtfyaAU