Topic: LGBT (Read 63552 times)

Büge · « **Reply #340 on:** January 08, 2010, 03:00:31 PM »

Forget about getting married to your gay first cousin.

The Artist Formerly Known As Yoji · « **Reply #341 on:** January 08, 2010, 03:26:26 PM »

Please please PLEASE tell me that image is from The Onion.

...?

Quote from: Yoji on December 15, 2009, 02:53:30 PM

In other news... wait, what? Really? You're not puttin' me on?

(EDIT BY THAD: DC passes gay marriage. See? Not fucking hard. Four words.)

Excuuuuuse me, Princess!

Burrito Al Pastor · « **Reply #342 on:** January 08, 2010, 05:27:12 PM »

Quote from: Büge on January 08, 2010, 03:00:31 PM

Forget about getting married to your gay first cousin.

No, no, look at the map. You're fine in Massachusetts, Vermont, and Connecticut.

Brentai · « **Reply #343 on:** January 08, 2010, 07:10:37 PM »

Oh sweet, too bad all my first cousins are already married or in mental institutions.

Dooly · « **Reply #344 on:** January 09, 2010, 12:35:14 AM »

No one's fine in New Jersey.

Büge · « **Reply #345 on:** March 03, 2010, 02:38:40 PM »

This just in, the Catholic Church is run by ~~people who would rather foster discrimination than continue to run social programs~~ jerks.

Saturn · « **Reply #346 on:** April 16, 2010, 02:17:45 AM »

Obama instructed his Health and Human Services secretary to draft rules requiring hospitals that receive Medicare and Medicaid payments to grant all patients the right to designate people who can visit and consult with them at crucial moments.

Cthulhu-chan · « **Reply #347 on:** April 16, 2010, 07:08:21 AM »

Nice. About ding-dong time.

Royal☭ · « **Reply #348 on:** May 04, 2010, 10:36:41 AM »

Another massive homophobe leader turns out to be secretly gay. Is that even surprising anymore? Remember when you use to joke with your friends about how homophobes were all really just huge faggots? Remember when it was a joke?

This time it turns out to be George Alan Rekers, a rabid anti-gay activist.

Royal☭ · « **Reply #349 on:** June 11, 2010, 05:21:01 AM »

Panel to consider lifting ridiculous ban on homosexual blood donors

Smiler · « **Reply #350 on:** June 11, 2010, 06:07:26 AM »

I don't want any GAY BLOOD getting into my veins and saving my life.

Kashan · « **Reply #351 on:** June 11, 2010, 08:46:14 AM »

Quote from: Ghopper101 on June 11, 2010, 07:55:19 AM

I find the gay rights thing kind of silly at this point considering how stupid it makes people look when they talk about it. It's all religious or liberal mumbo jumbo depending of which flavor of lollipop you suck. Then there is the middle who I don't wish to talk about out of sheer annoyance.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/us_and_canada/10288820.stm-US tries to solve drug cartel NORTH of the border

Please die.

Dooly · « **Reply #352 on:** June 11, 2010, 10:00:29 AM »

The article states that in 1983, when the ban on gay blood donors was enacted, they had no way to screen blood for HIV. I suppose at the time it made a bit of sense to bar people with a statistically higher chance of infection, but now that blood screening is entirely possible, it just looks like they're saying "no buttfuckers allowed."

TA · « **Reply #353 on:** June 28, 2010, 06:56:36 PM »

So, the Christian Legal Society, a student group at California's Hastings Law School, has an official policy excluding homosexual members. You can't be gay, or tolerate gays, and join up. Hastings said fine, if you want to be a pack of homophobic shits, you're welcome to it, but as a State University we're not giving you funding or letting you meet on-campus, because you're violating our nondiscrimination policy. The CLS, of course, sued. In a surprising turn of rationality, this time the 5-4 Supreme Court decision came down on the side of not forcing the state to subsidize bigotry. To quote Stevens's concurring opinion, "Other groups may exclude or mistreat Jews, blacks, and women—or those who do not share their contempt for Jews, blacks, and women. A free society must tolerate such groups. It need not subsidize them, give them its official imprimatur, or grant them equal access to law school facilities."

Opinion here.

Thad · « **Reply #354 on:** June 28, 2010, 09:22:37 PM »

Good for Kennedy (though the AP writer referring to him as "moderate" is full of shit). Stevens nailed it -- I'm going to miss that guy.

Fact remains that we've still got four people who think universities should subsidize hate groups.

(I'm pretty nonplussed by Kagan, but this is one issue, at least, where she's shown she's on the side of schools with non-discrimination policies. Amazed-but-not-really at the outrage against the military recruitment ban. It's simple, guys: the school has a policy against employers who discriminate against people based on their sexual orientation. You want military recruiters on-campus? Repeal DADT. Done, military recruiters are allowed on-campus now.)

Mongrel · « **Reply #355 on:** July 20, 2010, 10:06:44 AM »

Teen at the centre of the High School prom cancellation awarded settlement.

teg · « **Reply #356 on:** July 21, 2010, 07:19:42 PM »

Good for her.
I mean, the school made a fake prom and didn't tell her about the real (private) one just for the sake of excluding her.

I wish I could have gone to prom.

Ted Belmont · « **Reply #357 on:** July 21, 2010, 09:36:32 PM »

Meh, you didn't miss much. The best part of my prom was when my friend who had graduated the year before showed up out of nowhere and we pretended to slow dance but really just kept bumping into the other couples.

Ted Belmont · « **Reply #358 on:** August 04, 2010, 01:37:53 PM »

Mongrel · « **Reply #359 on:** August 04, 2010, 01:42:10 PM »

I enjoyed the fact that the the attorney for the plaintiffs is a conservative and the judge who passed the ruling was a Bush Sr. appointee.

News:

Author Topic: LGBT (Read 63552 times)