Forum Settings
       
1 2 3 Next »
Reply To Thread

Well, if they legalize SS marriage in Maine and NH...Follow

#52 May 16 2009 at 12:31 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
******
29,919 posts
Oh yeah. Them. Well you can't marry one of them either.
____________________________
Arch Duke Kaolian Drachensborn, lvl 95 Ranger, Unrest Server
Tech support forum | FAQ (Support) | Mobile Zam: http://m.zam.com (Premium only)
Forum Rules
#53 May 16 2009 at 12:55 PM Rating: Good
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts
I typically refrain from quoting the dictionary, but the basic definition and long history of the word lends credibility to my interpretation of it. Words are being redefined all the time (e.g. marriage) and I'm not opposed to it. I am hardly a villain, however, for interpreting the word as it has been historically represented.

Are you fucking joking? Really? Your ego driven pettiness rises to this level? It's awesome that you found a 10 year old dictionary specifically written to cater to conservatives. You know it's main selling point is pictures, right?

Hey, let's see what the definition of "marriage" is in that classic tome:

NOUN: 1a. The legal union of a man and woman as husband and wife.

Awesome.


____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#54 May 16 2009 at 12:56 PM Rating: Excellent
The Great BrownDuck wrote:
I am hardly a villain, however, for interpreting the word as it has been historically represented.


So, your confusion in reference to the word "husband" when used in relation to the coupling of two gay men is that you just don't know by title alone which is the "master of the house"?

Again, doesn't it all boil down to your confusion as to whom is the top and the bottom? Doesn't it all really boil down to an obsession with **** penetration, Stubs? Well I'll clue you in, friend: due to your tiny little baby hands, and your tragically under-developed ********** you're a bottom. And to complete the train of thought, to fulfill your hopes and end this argument once and for all: you may call yourself "wife" if it pleases you.

Honestly. If you look at the definition you provided, the further you trace the word back the less it's gender-specific, even. Of course, it's but a word all the while, and semantics really pale in contrast to concepts, you filthy, self-hating, homophobic sodomite.

Edited, May 16th 2009 1:57pm by Barkingturtle
#55 May 16 2009 at 4:06 PM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
******
20,643 posts
So I guess this means we can't acknowledge SS marriage till Funk & Wagnalls updates their definitions, huh?
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#56 May 16 2009 at 4:14 PM Rating: Decent
Smasharoo wrote:
I typically refrain from quoting the dictionary, but the basic definition and long history of the word lends credibility to my interpretation of it. Words are being redefined all the time (e.g. marriage) and I'm not opposed to it. I am hardly a villain, however, for interpreting the word as it has been historically represented.

Are you fucking joking? Really? Your ego driven pettiness rises to this level? It's awesome that you found a 10 year old dictionary specifically written to cater to conservatives. You know it's main selling point is pictures, right?

Hey, let's see what the definition of "marriage" is in that classic tome:

NOUN: 1a. The legal union of a man and woman as husband and wife.

Awesome.


Really? Are you honestly this fucking stupid, Smash? You really intend to make your argument about my dependency on the antiquated definition of a word directly in spite of the fact that I specifically stated I was aware the definition was old and subject to change? You really intend to claim some how that a statement of historical fact (the origin of the word Husband) is "catering to conservatives?" Come on, man.

This reminds me of that line from Dumb and Dumber where the girl asks Jim Carey to pick her up at 7:45 and he says he'd rather pick her up at a quarter to 8:00. Incredibly stupid, that was.
#57 May 16 2009 at 5:39 PM Rating: Decent
*****
10,359 posts
When was the last time you admitted that you were wrong to someone stubs?
#58 May 16 2009 at 9:42 PM Rating: Decent
Pensive the Ludicrous wrote:
When was the last time you admitted that you were wrong to someone stubs?


That would be... the last time I was wrong.
#59 May 17 2009 at 9:03 AM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts


Really? Are you honestly this ******* stupid, Smash? You really intend to make your argument about my dependency on the antiquated definition of a word directly in spite of the fact that I specifically stated I was aware the definition was old and subject to change? You really intend to claim some how that a statement of historical fact (the origin of the word Husband) is "catering to conservatives?" Come on, man.

This reminds me of that line from Dumb and Dumber where the girl asks Jim Carey to pick her up at 7:45 and he says he'd rather pick her up at a quarter to 8:00. c


Bored with this now. Your B movie version of Gbaji's act is somehow even less interesting than the real thing. A few words of advice though:

1. Comparing our relative intellects is an argument I can make, but you can't. You are objectively crushingly stupid compared to me, so when I as if you're really stupid enough to believe something, it's plausibly genuine. I may really not be able to see the point of view of someone with your level of ignorance and inability to process information.

2. You're not Yoda. Ending a post with "Incredibly stupid, that was." just serves to highlight your rhetorical weaknesses.

3. The entomology of "Husband" is unrelated to marriage. It's from Norse for "homeowner".

We're done, now, understand? You have nothing left to defend. Move on.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#60 May 17 2009 at 9:09 AM Rating: Good
Quote:
1. Comparing our relative intellects is an argument I can make, but you can't. You are objectively crushingly stupid compared to me, so when I as if you're really stupid enough to believe something, it's plausibly genuine. I may really not be able to see the point of view of someone with your level of ignorance and inability to process information.


A good way to prove this would be to get a phrenologist to take both of your measurements.
1 2 3 Next »
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 211 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (211)