Carrie Prejean, icky queen.
Posted by Smiley (+847) 12 years ago
http://www.tmz.com/2009/1...a-pagneat/

Wowza. That's iccky. The only reason she is famous is because she stood up for what she believed in, then everyone wiped her hypocrisy in her face.

She has guts, but I can't believe she actually tried to get money. At least they really did boot her for good cause, and not for her beliefs. The integrity of the Miss America Pageant: 1, Carrie Prejean's intregrity: -6
Top
Posted by Lorin Dixson (+596) 12 years ago
The Heroine of the religous right
Top
supporter
Posted by Bob L. (+5094) 12 years ago
"promising solo career"

Indeed.
Top
Posted by Brian A. Reed (+6014) 12 years ago
There's standing up for what you believe in and there's stating that you don't believe that others should have the same rights as you. It's the difference between "having guts" and being a bigot.
Top
supporter
Posted by Bridgier (+9194) 12 years ago
I'm not sure those are mutually exclusive. see: beans, frank-and-
Top
Posted by Brian A. Reed (+6014) 12 years ago
Fair enough.
Top
Posted by Bruce Helland (+586) 12 years ago
Nice photos though...
Top
Posted by Brian A. Reed (+6014) 12 years ago
In her case, the beauty only goes so deep as the silicone and/or collagen.
Top
founder
supporter
Posted by Amorette Allison (+11757) 12 years ago
In her defense, I'm sure she only intended her porno films to be seen by heterosexual males.
Top
Posted by Lorin Dixson (+596) 12 years ago
Good one A A Now that you mention it I am sure that would be her intention.
Top
Posted by Lorin Dixson (+596) 12 years ago
I wonder how many of her biggest supporter (Dr James Dobson) followers were able to see it.
Top
Posted by Brian A. Reed (+6014) 12 years ago
Probably more than they care to admit.
Top
supporter
Posted by Wendy Wilson (+6165) 12 years ago
I think her biggest supporter is probably her bra.
Top
supporter
Posted by Gunnar Emilsson (+17321) 12 years ago
That was a very good one, Bob L.
Top
supporter
Posted by Kelly (+2706) 12 years ago
Good one Wendy!

Now she says she was pressured to get the boob job.

http://www.huffingtonpost...52198.html
Top
supporter
Posted by Bob Netherton II (+1905) 12 years ago
Where's all the righties?
Top
founder
supporter
sponsor
Posted by Hal Neumann (+9919) 12 years ago
>>Where's all the righties?

Watching her video??
Top
supporter
Posted by Kelly (+2706) 12 years ago
Where's all the righties?


Sleeping in their tighty whities?
Top
supporter
Posted by howdy (+4943) 12 years ago
Here she is making a fool out of herself once more...This is a very stupid woman IMO....

http://www.cnn.com/video/....upset.cnn
Top
supporter
Posted by Bob L. (+5094) 12 years ago
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

That Larry King sure is a TOUGH interviewer!!!

How INAPPROPRIATE of him

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA


Thanks for the laugh, Howdy!
Top
Posted by J. Dyba (+1350) 12 years ago
She knew as soon as he threw that out there that the discussion was going to very quickly turn to the sex tape that she was involved with and she probably panicked.
Top
Posted by Lorin Dixson (+596) 12 years ago
the most telling part was when she said Sarah Palin & Michelle Bachmann were brilliant.
Top
supporter
Posted by Bob Netherton II (+1905) 12 years ago
Give her a break! She was going "rogue".
Top
supporter
Posted by Rick Kuchynka (+4463) 12 years ago
Where's all the righties?

We're busy trying to figure out who decides who's a righty.

Top
supporter
Posted by Wendy Wilson (+6165) 12 years ago
I don't understand the point of the video. Both people were able to speak their minds. Miss Prejean was "de-crowned" because she didn't perform the required appearances pursuant to her contract.
Top
supporter
Posted by Bob L. (+5094) 12 years ago
I think Rickenhawk is attempting to make the argument that Ms. Prejean is a liberal.

You know, like Hitler.
Top
supporter
Posted by Bob Netherton II (+1905) 12 years ago
Its like porn, Rick. Sometimes its real obvious.
Top
supporter
Posted by Jim Brady (+425) 12 years ago
I don't understand the point of the video.

The point of the video was that if you don't have the "right" opinion you will be punished for it. (See Palin, Sarah)

I haven't seen any string of threads castigating Perez Hilton for his vicious attack "opinion" on Ms. Prejean's opinion, whereas, she's been the kickball here ever since the contest.

Wendy (howdy). How would you hold up to an army of mudslingers digging through every aspect of every minute of your private life? From the second you were conceived until right now? If you could come out squeaky clean, more power to you. Keep throwing rocks.

I expect for the rest of us mortals, there would be a s**t-load of 'splainin' to do.
Top
supporter
Posted by Bridgier (+9194) 12 years ago
Yeah, but I paid for my own boob job, thank you very much...
Top
supporter
Posted by Bob Netherton II (+1905) 12 years ago
What she was really punished for, Jimbo, was her lack of eloquence, not to mention getting freaky on film.
Top
supporter
Posted by Bob L. (+5094) 12 years ago
The poor wingnuts.

It's so unfair.

Everyone's mean to them.
Top
supporter
Posted by Wendy Wilson (+6165) 12 years ago
Jim,

By punished what do you mean? She caught some flak for her comments, yes. Perez Hilton catches flak for what he says all the time. The flak just comes from a different source in each case. Ms. PreJean was not removed from her perch as Miss California because of anything she said. She was removed because she wouldn't go the new Quicky Mart opening or spend a day with the disable. She didn't perform her duties and was fired. She preferred to spend her time on talk shows.

As far as mudslinging, I've hardly reached the level of most of the folks here. Why are you picking on me? Public figures give up some of their privacy. That comes with the deal. It's why I prefer anonymity.
Top
Posted by Christen LeBlanc Ramsey (+271) 12 years ago
i am all for your right to free speech; its not my fault if your linguistic skills make you sound like a moron.
Top
supporter
Posted by Buck Showalter (+4461) 12 years ago
How can I get punished like Sarah Palin? I'll take my punishment all the way to the bank. You're such a dumbass - poor, poor Sarah.
Top
supporter
Posted by Jim Brady (+425) 12 years ago
As far as mudslinging, I've hardly reached the level of most of the folks here. Why are you picking on me?

I didn't say you were a mudslinger. I asked you how you would fair with mudslingers looking up your skirt 24/7. Do you have anything in your past you would rather not see pasted on CNN and MSNBC every day?

And Bridgier, I'm glad you paid for your own boob job. Being out of pocket keeps the taxpayer off the hook. Perhaps now you can seek some protege of Dr. W.J. Freeman to assist you with anger management issues.

What she was really punished for, Jimbo, was her lack of eloquence..

What she was punished for, Bob too, was her lack of PC.
Top
supporter
Posted by Wendy Wilson (+6165) 12 years ago
I rarely wear skirts.
Top
supporter
Posted by Richard Bonine, Jr (+14950) 12 years ago
I thought you did the Seann Triubhas?
Top
supporter
Posted by Wendy Wilson (+6165) 12 years ago
A kilt is not a skirt. I stand by my original statement.
Top
supporter
Posted by Denise Selk (+1670) 12 years ago
An excerpt of an interview with Christianity Today:

You wrote that you don't regret getting breast implants. Have you ever wondered whether it might be incompatible with your Christian faith?

No, I don't think there's anything wrong with getting breast implants as a Christian. I think it's a personal decision. I don't see anywhere in the Bible where it says you shouldn't get breast implants.


Whew. That was close. Thank goodness the Bible also doesn't mention sex tapes.
Top
supporter
Posted by Bob L. (+5094) 12 years ago
Gosh, I wonder if the resident "Bible Expert" of mc.com, THE GREAT RICARDO, believes breast implants (or making seven or eight sex tapes) are compatible with Christianity.








OK, I'm lying. I really don't care.
Top
supporter
Posted by Denise Selk (+1670) 12 years ago
Cut the girl some slack. Geesh. That sex tape was the biggest mistake of her life, er, I mean, the biggest eight mistakes of her life. And by golly, those few nude photos were the second biggest mistake of her life, er, I mean, the second biggest 35 mistakes of her life. And outrageously, she shouldn't even have to be speaking of these mistakes, she was only 17 at the time, er, I mean 20.

The problem with Ms. Prejean is that she is a bald-faced liar. If she will look at the interviewer and straight-up lie, why should anything she says be given credibility? And I don't want to hear how this liberal or that liberal is a big, fat liar as well. This thread is devoted to the great mind that is Prejean.
Top
Posted by Smiley (+847) 12 years ago
Perez Hilton is my Idol. He speaks his mind, and takes the crap from it tremendously. What she said was her opinion, but really, she got way too overdramatic about it, as did he. People are entiltled to their opinion. Both of them should have realized it.

IMO- People using their reliious beliefs to influence government decisions is so awful. Just because the bible says bad stuff about gays doesn't mean gays shouldn't be allowed to get married. Is this not wacky to anyone else??
Top
supporter
Posted by Denise Selk (+1670) 12 years ago
What is galling to me is that she has the nerve to complain that her religious belief cost her the crown. Conceited much? As if there would be no conceivable way she could have lost that contest without it having been a conspiracy. Please. Several judges in their post-pageant interviews stated that she was not the favorite, before the interview portion. Why is it impossible for her to concede that she may not have won, regardless of her answer? Oh, yeah, an overblown ego, that's why.

I think that Ricky's video link disproves her claim entirely. It is obviously possible to win a major contest while stating your opinion. Doesn't seem Pres. Obama had a problem winning with the exact same set of beliefs.

As a note to Smiley, I am always curious as to the answers to these questions. In America, we allow Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, Atheists, Rastafarians, etc. to marry every single day, yet they are committing the greatest sin of all, not believing in Jesus Christ as the Lord and Savior. Why are these sinners allowed to marry, but the sin of homosexuality precludes gays and lesbians from the same right? Very confusing. Whether or not something is a sin should not be a determining factor in which civil rights are bestowed.

BTW, note to Carrie. The persecuted, hot, bimbo, Christian, woman's role has been played for some time now, and much more effectively, by Sarah Palin. Your 15 minutes of fame are up.

[This message has been edited by Denise Selk (11/15/2009)]

[This message has been edited by Denise Selk (11/15/2009)]
Top
Posted by Smiley (+847) 12 years ago
As a note to Smiley, I am always curious as to the answers to these questions. In America, we allow Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, Atheists, Rastafarians, etc. to marry every single day, yet they are committing the greatest sin of all, not believing in Jesus Christ as the Lord and Savior. Why are these sinners allowed to marry, but the sin of homosexuality precludes gays and lesbians from the same right? Very confusing. Whether or not something is a sin should not be a determining factor in which civil rights are bestowed


Thank you for that. Couldn't have sid it any other way.

But let's PLEASE not turn this into a religious thing. I don't want another week spent checking MC.com for posts lol.
Top
supporter
Posted by Denise Selk (+1670) 12 years ago
A "religious thing" is the only schtick Prejean's got going on.
Top
supporter
Posted by Richard Bonine, Jr (+14950) 12 years ago
I fail to understand how stating that marriage is between a man and a women is necessarily "Christian" or "religious". There are many who hold Ms. Prejean's view that are neither. Wrapping herself argument that she is being "persecuted" for her "faith" strikes me as very weak. She believes more in "therapeutic decisionsism" than orthodox Christianity. Seems like this is more about selling a book than anything else.

On the other hand, she is very young and made some mistakes, and it seems like she is trying to get her life together and move on.
Top
supporter
Posted by Bob L. (+5094) 12 years ago
I fail to understand how stating that marriage is between a man and a women is necessarily "Christian" or "religious". There are many who hold Ms. Prejean's view that are neither.



Just as there are many who oppose Ms. Prejean's views who are BOTH "Christian" and "religious."

Right, Ricardo?
Top
supporter
Posted by Denise Selk (+1670) 12 years ago
Seems like this is more about selling a book than anything else.


I agree Richard. Also very suspect is the timing of release of her "sex tape(s)". The controversy surrounding Ms. Prejean started back in April of 2009, when the pageant was held. Very interesting that the sex tape(s) come to light the week of her book release, over six months later, and every interview she has conducted in regard to the sex tape(s) has contained a "read my book" plug.
Top
supporter
Posted by Richard Bonine, Jr (+14950) 12 years ago
Just as there are many who oppose Ms. Prejean's views who are BOTH "Christian" and "religious."

Right, Ricardo?


Ultimately, that is up to God, not me.
Top
supporter
Posted by Steve Craddock (+2732) 12 years ago
Interesting observation, Denise. When it comes to sellebrity, there'$ no $uch thing a$ bad publicity.
Top
supporter
Posted by Bob L. (+5094) 12 years ago
Just as there are many who oppose Ms. Prejean's views who are BOTH "Christian" and "religious."

Right, Ricardo?


Ultimately, that is up to God, not me.




But it is up to you to determine who isn't "Christian" and "religious," Church Lady.

Typical.
Top
supporter
Posted by Richard Bonine, Jr (+14950) 12 years ago
Well Bob L, I guess you'll have to go spew your crap someplace else.
Top
supporter
Posted by Bob L. (+5094) 12 years ago
Church Lady wrote:
I fail to understand how stating that marriage is between a man and a women is necessarily "Christian" or "religious". There are many who hold Ms. Prejean's view that are neither.




No one spews crap like you, Ricardo.
Top
supporter
Posted by Bob Netherton II (+1905) 12 years ago
Hey, Bob. Heath and Jimbo have their days.
Top
supporter
Posted by Steve Craddock (+2732) 12 years ago
It really is hard to believe that just 60 years ago Strom Thurmond was running for president on a platform that principally centered on segregation. A lot of people who voted for him are still alive today, and I imagine they are probably quite ashamed of that vote and now understand that segregation was just an institutionally cleansed version of prejudice and bigotry - whitewash, if you will.

I'm pretty durn sure that 50 years from now, most people who today march in the "Defense of Marriage" will be feeling the same regret. When they hear the history of the fight for human rights, they'll be wondering how they could have ever been on the side that was so blind to the harm and pain caused by their fear of change and resistance to progress.

And hopefully much sooner than that, Carrie Prejean will join Anita Bryant as a reminder that sometimes ugly things like prejudice, bigotry and hate come wrapped in pretty packages with Pepsodent smiles.

[This message has been edited by Steve Craddock (11/15/2009)]
Top
supporter
Posted by Denise Selk (+1670) 12 years ago
Top
supporter
Posted by Richard Bonine, Jr (+14950) 12 years ago
I'm pretty durn sure that 50 years from now, most people who today march in the "Defense of Marriage" will be feeling the same regret. When they hear the history of the fight for human rights, they'll be wondering how they could have ever been on the side that was so blind to the harm and pain caused by their fear of change and resistance to progress.


I doubt it. I know for darn sure I won't have any regrets. And hopefully those who march on the side of shredding the value of traditional marriage between one man and one women, will see the harm and havoc they have caused on the fabric of our society.
Top
supporter
Posted by Denise Selk (+1670) 12 years ago
That's okay Richard. I'm pretty sure you wouldn't have regretted trouncing on the rights of interracial couples back in the day either. You are nothing if not consistent.

And hopefully those who march on the side of shredding the value of traditional marriage between one man and one women, will see the harm and havoc they have caused on the fabric of our society.


And go ahead and delude yourself into thinking that marriage equality is what is responsible for the "harm and havoc" on the fabric of our society. I'm pretty sure that plenty of havoc has already been wreaked on the fabric of our society by the heterosexuals. Or are all of those deadbeat dads homosexuals too?

[This message has been edited by Denise Selk (11/15/2009)]
Top
supporter
Posted by Steve Craddock (+2732) 12 years ago
Top
supporter
Posted by Denise Selk (+1670) 12 years ago
While we are at it, following your line of thinking, it would be my guess that you would also fail to sanction marriages for Atheists, Jews and Buddhists? Correct? I bet Amorette thanks her lucky stars each night that she didn't get married on your watch. Richard Bonine, the great defender of family values.

[This message has been edited by Denise Selk (11/15/2009)]
Top
supporter
Posted by Bob L. (+5094) 12 years ago
Church Lady wrote:
I doubt it. I know for darn sure I won't have any regrets. And hopefully those who march on the side of shredding the value of traditional marriage between one man and one women, will see the harm and havoc they have caused on the fabric of our society.



Yes, because granting equal rights to others takes away your rights.

Right, Ricardo?

You would have been right at home in the South in the 1960s, bigot.
Top
supporter
Posted by Richard Bonine, Jr (+14950) 12 years ago
Denise: Keep guessing. You're very wrong.

Bob L: So you think I am a bigot. No surprise there. You are very wrong. **Yawn**

[This message has been edited by Richard Bonine, Jr (11/16/2009)]
Top
supporter
Posted by Denise Selk (+1670) 12 years ago
big·ot / [big-uht]

-noun- a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion.
Top
supporter
Posted by Bob L. (+5094) 12 years ago
Ridardo:

Let me guess...some of your best friends are _____________

(a) Homos
(b) African-Americans
(c) Hispanic



You would let ____________ use your bathroom
(a) Homos
(b) African-Americans
(c) Hispanics
Top
Posted by Brian A. Reed (+6014) 12 years ago
Richard wrote:
I doubt it. I know for darn sure I won't have any regrets. And hopefully those who march on the side of shredding the value of traditional marriage between one man and one women, will see the harm and havoc they have caused on the fabric of our society.

Explain, Richard. Exactly HOW have homosexuals caused "harm and havoc ... on the fabric of our society?"

I'm not asking how they may have shocked your oh-so fragile sensibilities.

I'm not asking how your church feels.

I'm not asking for anecdotes or conjecture.

I am asking how the "fabric of our society" has been been hurt by homosexuals. Short of that, please tell us how the marriage of any two consenting adults affects your marriage - or anyone else's - in any way, shape or form.

Richard wrote:
Bob L: So you think I am a bigot. No surprise there. You are very wrong.

Prove Bob wrong. Prove all of us wrong.

Here is your opportunity, Richard. Please be so kind as to give us YOUR reasoning.

I do have to say that you are right about one thing, Richard. In 50 years, you won't have any regrets.

[This message has been edited by Brian A. Reed (11/16/2009)]
Top
supporter
Posted by Gunnar Emilsson (+17321) 12 years ago
Explain, Richard. Exactly HOW have homosexuals caused "harm and havoc ... on the fabric of our society?"




If you can't see that as harm and havoc on the fabric of our society, then there is no point in continuing this discussion.
Top
Posted by Brian A. Reed (+6014) 12 years ago
Wait ... hold on. I just realized something.

Methinks that when Richard says "our society," he's referring to the closed-off, scared-of-the-dark, xenophobic little world in which he and his like-minded bigots dwell.

He doesn't mean society as a whole. He means the mental cave he lives in.

Well then, Richard. If the fabric of your society is being harmed by people who don't think the way you do, well, that's just too effing bad. Boo hoo.

Here's to the thought of your cave collapsing.
Top
supporter
Posted by Denise Selk (+1670) 12 years ago
Gunnar, if harm and havoc means making society's ears bleed, I'm with you, however, I have to nominate





But I'm fairly certain she's not gay.
Top
supporter
Posted by Bob L. (+5094) 12 years ago
I dunno, have you seen that Adam's Apple?
Top
Posted by Brian A. Reed (+6014) 12 years ago
Denise, how in the name of breakfast did you know that at this very instant I was looking for a photo of John Elway in drag (to shatter Richard's soul)!?

Kudos, Denise. Kudos.
Top
supporter
Posted by Dona Stebbins (+819) 12 years ago
Denise, you rock!
Top
supporter
Posted by Bridgier (+9194) 12 years ago
But I'm fairly certain she's not gay.


Regardless, I'm pretty sure she's a top.
Top
supporter
Posted by Bob L. (+5094) 12 years ago
Bridgier: Thanks for the nightmare fuel.
Top
supporter
Posted by Denise Selk (+1670) 12 years ago
Photographic evidence that heterosexuals wreak much more harm and havoc on society. Irrefutable actually.
Top
Posted by Brian A. Reed (+6014) 12 years ago
We'd better stop making fun of poor Richard. He hates it when people "put words in his mouth."
Top
Posted by Brian A. Reed (+6014) 12 years ago
Top
Posted by Brian A. Reed (+6014) 12 years ago
Top
supporter
Posted by Gunnar Emilsson (+17321) 12 years ago


One can just hear the ripping sound emanating from the fabric of society when one looks at this image.
Top
Posted by Brian A. Reed (+6014) 12 years ago

The fabric is about to burst ...
Top
supporter
Posted by Denise Selk (+1670) 12 years ago
Gunnar, is that you?
Top
supporter
Posted by Denise Selk (+1670) 12 years ago
Another nomination for fabric buster:



Again, not a homosexual in the bunch!
Top
supporter
Posted by Denise Selk (+1670) 12 years ago


Okay, okay, so technically there is one gay in this fabric-ripping group. But I figured the Nancy Reagan reference, and the fact that it's for the children, must neutralize the "gayness".
Top
Posted by Brian A. Reed (+6014) 12 years ago
As evidenced by the Rock of Love series on VH1, Bret Michaels is doing everything he can to prove that he most certainly is NOT gay.

A man-whore neck deep in skanks (and STDs), yes. But gay? Never!
Top
supporter
Posted by Rick Kuchynka (+4463) 12 years ago
That's okay Richard. I'm pretty sure you wouldn't have regretted trouncing on the rights of interracial couples back in the day either. You are nothing if not consistent.


While we are at it, following your line of thinking, it would be my guess that you would also fail to sanction marriages for Atheists, Jews and Buddhists? Correct? I bet Amorette thanks her lucky stars each night that she didn't get married on your watch. Richard Bonine, the great defender of family values.


big·ot / [big-uht]

-noun- a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion.


http://dictionary.referen...rony?jss=1

i·ro·ny / [ahy-ruh-nee]

2. Literature. a. a technique of indicating, as through character or plot development, an intention or attitude opposite to that which is actually or ostensibly stated.
Top
supporter
Posted by Bob L. (+5094) 12 years ago
Rickenhawk, you wouldn't know irony if it kicked you in the head.

Top
supporter
Posted by Rick Kuchynka (+4463) 12 years ago
Sure you don't want to just misappropriate "Straw Man" again?

Seems to be the one-size-fits-all.
Top
supporter
Posted by Denise Selk (+1670) 12 years ago
Not surprisingly, you've lost me. What exactly is ironic?
Top
supporter
Posted by Bob L. (+5094) 12 years ago
Like a puppy chasing its tail.
Top
Posted by Brian A. Reed (+6014) 12 years ago
Denise - if I'm correct, Rick believes that the people who claim to be tolerant on here aren't exactly being tolerant. Never mind that we're being intolerant of bigots.

Rick can't stand idly by while we slander the bigots of America. Those poor, persecuted bigots! They have it so rough ...
Top
supporter
Posted by Denise Selk (+1670) 12 years ago
Brian, this is my assumption. However, following this train of thought, were those who fought for civil rights against those who believed that blacks were second-class citizens and interracial marriages should be banned also bigots? Like today, discrimination was justified by quoting in part, or otherwise out of context, verses from Exodus and Corinthians. Does being intolerant of hatred and injustice make one a bigot as well? I suppose that case can be made. If that is true, I will gladly wear the label "bigot".

The fight for marriage equality is simply the latest in a long line for civil rights. Hindsight, as they say is 20/20, so it is self-serving to look back and say that you would have been in support of interracial marriages back before the ban was outlawed. However, if you are of the personality that allows for public policy making based on religious belief, than I believe it to be a logical assumption that you would have also been an opponent of interracial marriage. Remember, plenty of opponents quoted the very same Bible now quoted in denying marriage equality for gays and lesbians. I can't seem to differentiate between the two, but perhaps that is just me.

In my opinion, no group's (or groups') religious beliefs should be considered while determining individual's civil rights. Just because it is your opinion doesn't make it right. That is why it is an opinion. I love religion, ALL religion. The study of all religions is absolutely fascinating. When used constructively, religion is a wonderful tool to be wielded toward finding fulfillment and enlightenment. Unfortunately, when used destructively it is a nasty weapon.

This thread turned personal when Richard chose to do more than insinuate that anyone who supported marriage equality might as well be right at home in Pentapolis. My choice to believe in and support marriage equality is no more responsible for the harm and havoc on the fabric of society than your continued belief in and support of the Denver Broncos. It is this blatant moral superiority that people find off-putting and why, as I've indicated before, people are leaving organized religion in droves.
Top
supporter
Posted by Rick Kuchynka (+4463) 12 years ago
It is this blatant moral superiority that people find off-putting

Who were we talking about again?
Top
supporter
Posted by Denise Selk (+1670) 12 years ago
Suggesting that I, as a supporter of marriage equality, am bringing about the downfall of society is moral superiority at its finest. Plain and simple (and downright ridiculous).
Top
supporter
Posted by Rick Kuchynka (+4463) 12 years ago
Well if you go back and read the sequence, he only said that after our resident 'progressives' proclaimed themselves time-capsule-civil-rights champions by internet forum proxy, and needlessly equated his beliefs with segregation.

Leading us down this tired old road again...

Hell hath no fury quite like progressive tolerance
Top
supporter
Posted by Denise Selk (+1670) 12 years ago
Top
Posted by Bruce Helland (+586) 12 years ago
Nice pictures though. (Still)
Top
supporter
Posted by Steve Craddock (+2732) 12 years ago
Rick, tolerance, like freedom, has natural limits.

My freedom ends when I begin to tread on yours, and your freedom ends when it begins to tread on mine.

Tolerance means allowing everyone to fully and equally enjoy their rights and freedom. The principle of tolerance ends when a person or group espouse beliefs and take actions that infringe upon and limit the rights and freedom of other persons or groups.

I realize this concept is a bit complicated, but it's very perplexing that conservatives find it so difficult to grasp.
Top
supporter
Posted by Rick Kuchynka (+4463) 12 years ago
Rick, tolerance, like freedom, has natural limits.


And I thought the answer was going to be "at the bedroom door"
Top
supporter
Posted by Bob L. (+5094) 12 years ago
Rickenhawk wrote:
Well if you go back and read the sequence, he only said that after our resident 'progressives' proclaimed themselves time-capsule-civil-rights champions by internet forum proxy, and needlessly equated his beliefs with segregation.


Says the man who called FDR a "fascist."

You really can't make it up.
Top
supporter
Posted by Wendy Wilson (+6165) 12 years ago
You guys forgot about this guy.

Top
Posted by Brian A. Reed (+6014) 12 years ago
Steve wrote:
Tolerance means allowing everyone to fully and equally enjoy their rights and freedom. The principle of tolerance ends when a person or group espouse beliefs and take actions that infringe upon and limit the rights and freedom of other persons or groups.

Perfectly stated, Steve. Kudos.
Top
Posted by Lorin Dixson (+596) 12 years ago
100 posts on Blondes really are dumber.
Top
Posted by Brian A. Reed (+6014) 12 years ago
We WERE holding pat on 99, Lorin. Dang it anyway!
Top