This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - Mad Max
Pages: 1 ... 848586 8788 ... 251
2551
« on: February 09, 2015, 05:55:06 PM »
I've been saying that this is the right direction to go for some time, but for different reasons.
I believe that marriage is a religious construct which has no place in a properly separated government.
The reason gay marriage was made illegal in the first place was because straight men were abusing it to get legal benefits, however the exact same happens between a man and a woman who are not actually interested in each other.
If marriage is part of your religion, that's fine and dandy, but it doesn't belong in our government.
Honestly I'd be fine if the government got out of the marriage business, and couples [regardless of sex] could file for a civil union contract. Want to be married? Go to church.
2552
« on: February 09, 2015, 05:17:37 PM »
If you went there for a spicy chicken sandwich, no.
That's actually what I got.....
CFA's spicy chicken sandwich is by far the best available fast food chicken sandwich, ever.
2553
« on: February 09, 2015, 04:18:50 PM »
I'm at work, so..
Oh my god I'm going to throw up
GUISE WATCH OUT THE FASHION POLICE ARE HERE
I would rather kill myself than go out in public like that
It's a good thing I'm only at work and nobody cares.
>Dressing for other people and not for yourself
I don't see what's wrong with a polo shirt, chinos, and casual dress shoes, but whatever. I'm comfortable and look nice.
>black socks
>brown shoes
>grey pants
vomit.jpg
OH NO ITS THE END OF THE WORLD
Find something else less petty to be a dick about. We've seen the way you dress. We don't care. Go hang out in /r/mfa more.
Truthfully though you should have black or navy blue pants on.
Unless you're not wearing a suit, in which case it really doesn't fucking matter.
Nope, no suit. I only own two suits - one for job interviews, one for weddings.
Cool.
Not an overly formal work environment?
Not at all. Just anything that isn't t-shirt and jeans and sneakers.
2554
« on: February 09, 2015, 04:12:47 PM »
I'm at work, so..
Oh my god I'm going to throw up
GUISE WATCH OUT THE FASHION POLICE ARE HERE
I would rather kill myself than go out in public like that
It's a good thing I'm only at work and nobody cares.
>Dressing for other people and not for yourself
I don't see what's wrong with a polo shirt, chinos, and casual dress shoes, but whatever. I'm comfortable and look nice.
>black socks
>brown shoes
>grey pants
vomit.jpg
OH NO ITS THE END OF THE WORLD
Find something else less petty to be a dick about. We've seen the way you dress. We don't care.
Mad
LOL I'M MAD BECAUSE YOU PICK STUPID SHIT TO CARE ABOUT ok guy
2555
« on: February 09, 2015, 04:12:10 PM »
I'm at work, so..
Oh my god I'm going to throw up
GUISE WATCH OUT THE FASHION POLICE ARE HERE
I would rather kill myself than go out in public like that
It's a good thing I'm only at work and nobody cares.
>Dressing for other people and not for yourself
I don't see what's wrong with a polo shirt, chinos, and casual dress shoes, but whatever. I'm comfortable and look nice.
>black socks
>brown shoes
>grey pants
vomit.jpg
OH NO ITS THE END OF THE WORLD
Find something else less petty to be a dick about. We've seen the way you dress. We don't care. Go hang out in /r/mfa more.
Truthfully though you should have black or navy blue pants on.
Unless you're not wearing a suit, in which case it really doesn't fucking matter.
Nope, no suit. I only own two suits - one for job interviews, one for weddings.
2556
« on: February 09, 2015, 04:08:44 PM »
I'm at work, so..
Oh my god I'm going to throw up
GUISE WATCH OUT THE FASHION POLICE ARE HERE
I would rather kill myself than go out in public like that
It's a good thing I'm only at work and nobody cares.
>Dressing for other people and not for yourself
I don't see what's wrong with a polo shirt, chinos, and casual dress shoes, but whatever. I'm comfortable and look nice.
>black socks
>brown shoes
>grey pants
vomit.jpg
OH NO ITS THE END OF THE WORLD Find something else less petty to be a dick about. We've seen the way you dress. We don't care. Go hang out in /r/mfa more.
2557
« on: February 09, 2015, 04:01:47 PM »
only if you went because you wanted more money to go to their homophobic organization donations.
If you went there for a spicy chicken sandwich, no.
2558
« on: February 09, 2015, 04:00:08 PM »
I'm at work, so..
Oh my god I'm going to throw up
GUISE WATCH OUT THE FASHION POLICE ARE HERE
I would rather kill myself than go out in public like that
It's a good thing I'm only at work and nobody cares.
>Dressing for other people and not for yourself
I don't see what's wrong with a polo shirt, chinos, and casual dress shoes, but whatever. I'm comfortable and look nice.
2559
« on: February 09, 2015, 03:55:54 PM »
I'm at work, so..
Oh my god I'm going to throw up
GUISE WATCH OUT THE FASHION POLICE ARE HERE
I would rather kill myself than go out in public like that
It's a good thing I'm only at work and nobody cares.
2560
« on: February 09, 2015, 03:48:25 PM »
I'm at work, so..
Oh my god I'm going to throw up
GUISE WATCH OUT THE FASHION POLICE ARE HERE
2561
« on: February 09, 2015, 03:05:08 PM »
2562
« on: February 09, 2015, 02:56:37 PM »
Proof =/= evidence.
Genuine question - what's the difference?
2563
« on: February 09, 2015, 01:58:31 PM »
http://www.myfoxal.com/story/28027027/chilton-county-probate-judge-no-longer-performing-marriage-ceremonies?clienttype=generic&mobilecgbypass
Chilton County Probate Judge Bobby Martin will no longer perform marriage ceremonies at the county courthouse.
The judge said he typically performs about 16 marriage ceremonies a month.
When asked about the reason for the change, Martin said he isn't required to perform the ceremonies and as of Tuesday he "just stopped having ceremonies in the courthouse."
However, he told the Clanton Advertiser "I believe that marriage is between a man and a woman, and because of that, I will not perform a ceremony for a couple that doesn't fit in that criteria."
Martin wouldn't confirm to WSFA 12 News if the decision was related to the recent federal ruling that struck down the ban on same-sex marriage in Alabama. A hold on the ruling is set to expire Monday unless the U.S. Supreme Court approves Alabama Attorney General Luther Strange's motion for a stay.
Martin said he will issue marriage licenses to any couple who comes in starting Monday.
The current marriage license form includes spaces to enter information for the "bride" and "groom." Martin said he's expecting to get a new marriage license form from the Alabama Department of Public Health sometime Friday, but it will take some time to enter the new form into the computer system. He said the new form might not be in the system Monday if they don't get it until late Friday.
I guess they were right - gay marriage IS destroying traditional marriage.
I have never been vaccinated
That has nothing to do with this discussion.
2564
« on: February 09, 2015, 01:32:24 PM »
Give him the stick
DONT GIVE HIM THE STICK
2565
« on: February 09, 2015, 01:29:10 PM »
it's public opinion.
HA, so are things like anti-LGBT views that you--rightfully--criticise. Being 'opinion' doesn't grant it any form of legitimacy or freedom from criticism. I'm not asking you to move the world, I'm asking you to not assume people are transphobic just because a strongly Democratic website managed to shoehorn their biases into a vague bill from a GOP member.
If you're going to insist on calling this guy--specifically this representative and his bill--transphobic on that basis, you're both bigoted and stupid.
I applaud you for your objectivity. I'm just not convinced.
2566
« on: February 09, 2015, 01:09:30 PM »
Stupidity, however, isn't quite the same as transphobia.
But the GOP and their supporters have demonstrated a history of anti-LGBT positions and attempted legislation. It's not exactly a stretch.
You can criticise the policies of the Republican Party generally and the moral underpinnings of its religious support base, but if you're going to start attaching allegations to names you need something a lot more fucking substantial.
You can't just say, "Well, the fact that he's a Republican means I need less evidence for these allegations". THAT is prejudiced.
This isn't a court of law, it's public opinion.
2567
« on: February 09, 2015, 01:01:59 PM »
Stupidity, however, isn't quite the same as transphobia.
But the GOP and their supporters have demonstrated a history of anti-LGBT positions and attempted legislation. It's not exactly a stretch.
2568
« on: February 09, 2015, 12:50:58 PM »
That's a fucking serious allegation of bigotry and you know it, tantamount to racism.
...not coming out of the GOP camp, it isn't. They've been fighting same sex marriage and LGBT-rights tooth and nail.
2569
« on: February 09, 2015, 12:40:59 PM »
I'm complaining that entering the bathroom that doesn't match your birth sex carries the threat of a fine and a year in jail.
So you're complaining about excessive punishment? That's probably a better angle than transphobia.
Sure, I agree with that. Now change your title and the body of your post to something that is empirically supported and not mindless GOP-bashing.
But using the "wrong" bathroom already carries the threat of civil suit, so I'm not sure what the point of this bill is if it isn't about forcing trans people to use the "correct" bathroom
2570
« on: February 09, 2015, 12:35:50 PM »
You're the only person talking about unisex and family bathrooms here. You're complaining that sex-based bathrooms are being segregated on the basis of sex.
No, I'm not complaining about that. I'm complaining that entering the bathroom that doesn't match your birth sex carries the threat of a fine and a year in jail.
2571
« on: February 09, 2015, 12:27:36 PM »
Bathrooms outside of this segregationist arrangement are excluded from the provisions of the bill.
You're the only person talking about unisex and family bathrooms here. Obviously there's nothing to do there.
2572
« on: February 09, 2015, 12:24:07 PM »
Post-surgery?
I'd say so. The bill is fucking retarded in defining it as "at birth".
..which is a pretty good indicator of the author's intentions
2573
« on: February 09, 2015, 12:20:45 PM »
could be interpreted that way by a conservative judge?
I don't give a shit if some transphobic judge is going to be stroking his gavel as he fines/jails a person for using the wrong bathroom. Bathrooms are segregated on sex not gender. People are always--rightly--adamant to maintain the difference between the two.
So, let's do it here, too.
So when's the acceptable time for a trans person to switch over to using the other bathroom? Post-surgery?
2574
« on: February 09, 2015, 12:12:42 PM »
It literally does nothing to hinder the accommodation of trans people.
...except threaten them with jail time and a fine if they use the "wrong" bathroom
2575
« on: February 09, 2015, 12:02:38 PM »
If this bill isn't anti-LGBT
It fucking isn't, the bill doesn't even mention transgender people. You cite a source which claims a "hateful" GOP rep. put it forward, explicitly tries to make it look as if a transgender person--specifically--using the wrong bathroom is what's being criminalised and then implies that the bill is trying to say trans people are rapists and perverts. With no evidence for any of it.
then who will be monitoring the bathrooms to make sure they're only used by the appropriate biological sex If you read the bill you'd know either the person making the unlawful entry, or the owner promoting the unlawful entry, is liable in cases of civil action from somebody lawfully inside said room.
...and is that not the case in almost every state already? What's the purpose of this bill, then?
2576
« on: February 09, 2015, 11:47:37 AM »
You're developing a horrible habit of misrepresenting the intentions and actual consequences of certain actions. From the bill itself:
(a) This section does not apply to public facilities that are conspicuously designated for unisex or family use. (c) This section does not require any place of public accommodation, school, or place of employment to construct or maintain single-sex public facilities or to modify existing public facilities.
Literally all this bill does is essentially mandate that single-sex bathrooms are used by that fucking sex. It doesn't, at all, require bathrooms to be designated as single sex, it doesn't require the construction of single-sex bathrooms and it doesn't require the maintenance of single-sex bathrooms.
If there's an anti-LGBT bias here, I can't find it in the bill.
Yes, I see that and I didn't assert otherwise. If this bill isn't anti-LGBT, then who will be monitoring the bathrooms to make sure they're only used by the appropriate biological sex? And if such a bill can't be enforced, what's the fucking point in proposing it?
2577
« on: February 09, 2015, 11:21:57 AM »
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2015/02/07/florida-gop-introduces-bill-to-put-transgender-people-in-prison-for-using-the-bathroom/Transgender people already lead incredibly difficult lives, even above and beyond the difficulties faced by the cisgender lesbian, gay, bisexual, and otherwise queer people that they share a community with. Well, a hateful, bigoted GOP representative from Florida wants to make their already difficult lives even more so.
Representative Frank Artiles of Miami put forth a bill this past Wednesday that would actually make it a crime worthy of a $1,000 fine or up to a year in jail for a transgender person to use the bathroom that does not correspond with his or her birth sex.
Further, the bill, should it become law, would allow anyone to sue the trans person for “unlawful entry” in single sex public restroom facilities. For your reading disgust, here is a bit of an excerpt from House Bill 538:
“The purpose of this act is to secure privacy and safety for all individuals using single-sex public facilities. Single-sex public facilities are places of increased vulnerability and present the potential for crimes against individuals using those facilities, including, but not limited to, assault, battery, molestation, rape, voyeurism, and exhibitionism.”
Now, the very assertion that anyone needs protection from transgender people for this reason is just ridiculous. In fact, transgender people, especially transgender women, and transgender women of color in particular, are much more likely to be beaten, raped, and even murdered than their cisgender counterparts. So, if anything, trans people are the ones who need protection, not cisgender people. Everyone gets on my ass about how the GOP isn't anti-LGBT, but that certainly seems to be the case demonstrated over and over again. Also, lolFlorida Here's the actual text, before 'lolbiasedsource' http://www.myfloridahouse.gov/Sections/Bills/billsdetail.aspx?BillId=53629
2578
« on: February 08, 2015, 09:35:29 PM »
I'll catch up on all my shows, including Saul and TWD, later this week after my week calms down.
2579
« on: February 08, 2015, 07:42:12 PM »
At least you were never here.
I don't know where "here" is, so..
2580
« on: February 08, 2015, 07:38:53 PM »
Shitty city
Literally the best city in the US.
You mean Flagstaff, AZ? Yeah, it really is.
I'd rather kill myself than live anywhere in Arizona.
Pages: 1 ... 848586 8788 ... 251
|
Show Posts
