Smacktard of the day...

[SR]

Originally Posted by Mythor

This applies to partners of the opposite sex who just can't be arsed getting married, too.

Yeah, but defactos are pretty much given most of the same benefits married couples have already, aren't they?

[Mythor]

I'm not sure about whether defactos exist in the states? And if so, what their standing is?
In Australia it's something like 6 months living together I believe?
Whereas a marriage can be recognised within a month or something? I believe someone posted the specifics before.
There're probably other differences as well, so even currently the law is a bit of an ass towards hetero couples. Homos don't have a monopoly in this regard.

[smuffy]

Smacktard of Monday (yeah, I know it's a little late):

Melbourne Central management.

Noticing a theme here?

This time for turning off the power to the food court on Sunday without bothering to notify all shop owners and/or managers, but taking it upon themselves to jump the counter and turn our salad bar refrigerator off at the power point. The result for us?
1) Confusion as the manager tried to (initially) work out which staff member was responsible for having turned the fridge off.
2) Hundreds of dollars wasted as we were forced to dispose of food.
3) Stress for all staff members as we tried to do our normal jobs as well as clean up the mess.
4) CLEANING UP THE MESS IN THE KITCHEN WHERE THE GREASE TRAP HAD BACKED UP!

[hails]

Firstly, some of the differences in rights between same sex couples and hetero couples can be found > here < and if you think that it's wrong just coz I wrote it, then there's a reference link on the page as well. So ner ;p


Long rant ahead - this is what happens when someone raises one of the few topics Miss Apathy feels passionate about


If Bush wants to protect the word 'marriage' as a hetero word, does that mean all the same sex couples can protect the words 'civil union' as a homo word? Straight people can have civil unions too, and there would be quite a stand if homos tried to 'protect' the phrase as their own. Generally, I don't think same sex couples really give a shit what we call it, so long as it's exactly the same. Same sex couples deserve the same rights that hetero couples currently have access to, I don't think anyone here is doubting that (and if you are, best not to chat to me about it). The only thing everyone is getting all in a flap about is the one word - marriage. I don't know why Bush is having a sooky about this word, but since he is, let's have a look at the possibilities -

1a. Religious reasons part the first. Marriage is the union of two heteros in the eyes of the Lord. Awfully strange then that marriage started out in pagan Rome, isn't it? And, if you want to believe this page, there were even same sex marriages carried out by the Catholic Church. Sure, the page inspires the skeptic in me, but I figure they know more about it than what I do *s*

1b. Religious reasons part the second. Coz God says so. To this I say that everything is designed to be read IN CONTEXT. All the HSC students, say it with me! CONTEXT. It is crucial to the reading of any text. If you deny the context, you deny the meaning. Further to the point, the Bible has been written and rewritten so many times - that little line that says "Thou shalt not lay with mankind as he does with womankind~" might have been written in by a cranky monk in the Middle Ages, who knows? Certainly not you, certainly not me, and certainly not George W. Bush. My religious beliefs are far too complicated to discuss here, but I think that the phrase "God is love" should be the base of Christian doctrine. Not "God loves everyone, except for the queers". God doesn't care - for Christ's sake (no pun intended, promise *s*) , he bloody made you, of course he doesn't care!

2. Scientific reasons. If people don't marry, they won't bonk and produce young healthy Americans that future presidents can use in future wars. Firstly, people are going to bonk anyway, and unless we end up living in some "Brave New World" universe, there's going to be kiddiewinks born. Secondly, although this is classed as a scientific reason, it also links back to religion and, as much as Bush likes to think that everyone thinks the same sloppy way he does, not everyone is Christian. Even some Christians that love the Lord will still bonk before marriage if given the opportunity. Thirdly, has he not heard of the alternative uses of a turkey baster? In the great wide land of science, surely he wouldn't be so backwards as to dismiss alternative forms of conception? Or is this another way of separating the sexualities?

3. Tradition. Marriage, and all it encompasses, belongs to tradition. Okay then. If that's the case, which of the pagans on the board wants to explain the traditions of Easter, Halloween and Christmas to a man who wouldn't know the religious spectrum if it sporked him in the behind? Added to that, we make our own traditions every single day. I sure as hell know that my traditions aren't dictated by the leader of the country, they're created by my family. Noone is going to dictate to me who my family is, either. My closest friends are family. My boyfriend is family (c'mon kids, no dirty jokes now *s*). My mum's best friend is family. There is no absolute definition of what a family is, and there's no way a government could attempt to make one. Family is tradition. Both terms are relative to the individual in question and by no means specified by the state.

4. Love of linguistics. Well, since he has shown himself to be such a fantastic wordsmith during his time in the White House, this point hardly needs questioning. For fuck's sake, it's a word. Let the queers use the freaking word and maybe everyone can get on with caring about something more important than who's fucking who and why it matters so much to the man running the world.


Admittedly, this rant may simply be that - a rant. It is something I do feel very passionately about, therefore it may not make sense If it doesn't, I'll fix it in the morning or let you bitch at me until you find something better to do

~ = Taken from memory...it's something like that, isn't it?

[Mythor]

Smacktard of the day: People who regularly jump all over someone suspected of committing a crime, denouncing them, abusing them, telling them they'll rot in hell, etc.

Innocent until proven guilty!

The police questioning someone doesn't mean they did what they were accused of, only that they think they might have something to do with it!

This is mainly to do with the Bulldogs players who have been accused of sexual assault at the pool. Given that it is the Bulldogs, I think many people won't be surprised if it's true, but just because some woman has said they raped her, doesn't mean they really did.

I have my suspicions about who is going to be named as the people involved - the names will come out eventually, you can be sure of that - but I think it's premature to be assuming they're guilty.

I know everyone is guilty of a little bit of this; I'm mostly talking about the serial offenders, such as journalists.


Runner-up: The gay activists in America who are urging Mary, daughter of Vice President Dick Cheney, to come out in opposition to Dubya's bid to amend the constitution to prevent gay marriages.

Firstly, if her dad isn't already opposing the idea and is well aware his daughter is gay, her speaking up about it isn't going to change her own dad's opinion, much less Dubyas.

Second, she is her own person and you have no right to hassle her into making a public statement.

Last, but most importantly, the fact that she is gay is not a guarantee that she agrees with gay marriages!!! She may very well agree with Dubya, no matter how unlikely it may seem, and thus would not help your cause by speaking out!

You shouldn't assume that just because someone is gay (or black, or a smoker, or a christian, etc) that they'll agree with everything "everyone" else in your group agrees with. If Mary has not spoken out so far it may just be that she doesn't want to... Or it could be she disagrees with you.
So lay off! :P


Honorable mention: people who assume that because I have issues with some parts of a group, that I have issues with the group as a whole.
Example: people who assume I'm a homophobe/anti-gay because I don't agree gay marriages are a fantabulous thing.
Helloooo, my girlfriend is queer. Shut the fuck up! :P

[Munchkin]

My smacktard of the day is my sister!

The instruction was that once Mum gave me money we would go after work to buy her text books.

That does not mean she she goes down gathers up all the books then calls me to say come pay for them when I can't leave work and haven't recieved the money yet. I have $46 dollars to my name and she wants me to leave work in the middle of the day to spend $410 on books so that she won't have to make the 5 fucking minute walk home and back again later today.

Tonight she goes over the balcony!

[nikksta]

My smacktard of the day: The cunt who stole my dog!

[hails]

Originally Posted by Mythor

Runner-up: The gay activists in America who are urging Mary, daughter of Vice President Dick Cheney, to come out in opposition to Dubya's bid to amend the constitution to prevent gay marriages.

you'd think those people would know something about coming out - parents are the hardest people to talk to#. making it a potential world issue, and certainly a US issue, will not make family gatherings any easier. if she wants to, by all means go for it. but just coz she's the lesbian daughter of a politician doesn't mean she has to be a walking talking political billboard. fuck, do these people have no common sense? -_-

Originally Posted by Mythor

Honorable mention: people who assume that because I have issues with some parts of a group, that I have issues with the group as a whole.
Example: people who assume I'm a homophobe/anti-gay because I don't agree gay marriages are a fantabulous thing.
Helloooo, my girlfriend is queer. Shut the fuck up! :P

have people been sporking you for having an opinion again? *frowns* *glares at the nasty people* *quotes Voltaire~ at nasty people* i mock you with my philosophical intellect! *snort*

and awww, you didn't call me a lesbian this time *beams*

# = big fat juicy generalisation.
~ = "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

[smuffy]

Smacktard of today: The guy at uni collecting money for the Homeless Association.

He asked me if he could talk to my group for a moment (I was showing about 15 jaffys around). No problem. Said what he was doing. no problem. Asked them for any change. No problem. Said that he had to give someone a tax receipt, and if it was okay if he gave it to me (He got about eight bucks). No problem. Asked me for my surname, which I spelled for him cos people always get it wrong. Then ....

Him: 'Are you related to the footballer Adam Goodes? No, you can't be, he's Aboriginal.'

*smacks self on head*


He was very surprised when I told that, yes, I was, somewhere along the line (about 6 generations back).

Shoulda told him that I had once been asked if I was Aboriginal (which surprised me at the time, and those of you who have met me would see why!).

The really funny thing is that Adam has almost the exact same facial structure as my paternal grandfather. Shoulda told the guy that too!

[stubbadub]

Smarktard = JETSTAR!

You barstards! U get my hopes up with cheap fares, then your fucking servers can't handle the fucking load and now when I look all of the cheap fares have gone well at least on Friday and Sunday AND I HATE YOU SO MUCH!

Goddam, I thought at $60 I could take a weekend off and see Melbourne in the winter, GODDAMMMMIIT

[SR]

Originally Posted by hails

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

Psst... s'not a Voltaire quote.

[Mythor]

It is often attributed to Voltaire (François-Marie Arouet) but it was in fact a summation of one of Voltaire's philosophies, written by Evelyn Beatrice Hall under the pseudonym Stephen G. Tallentyre.
Voltaire said things that were similar in meaning, but didn't write that particular phrase.

Google is your friend.

[hails]

Originally Posted by Mythor

Google is your friend.

i know, i googled it too before i posted it...but the original sounded even more wanky than i was intending on being -_- so i decided to attribute it to him, coz he has a french name and frenchness makes me

[Stripes]

Originally Posted by hails

...but I think that the phrase "God is love" should be the base of Christian doctrine. Not "God loves everyone, except for the queers". God doesn't care - for Christ's sake (no pun intended, promise *s*) , he bloody made you, of course he doesn't care!

Hear hear! The all-loving God must love queers because otherwise he wouldn't be all-loving. It's funny how blind the religious importants can be to their own hypocrisy in self-contradiction.

Originally Posted by hails

2. Scientific reasons. If people don't marry, they won't bonk and produce young healthy Americans that future presidents can use in future wars. Firstly, people are going to bonk anyway, and unless we end up living in some "Brave New World" universe, there's going to be kiddiewinks born. Secondly, although this is classed as a scientific reason, it also links back to religion and, as much as Bush likes to think that everyone thinks the same sloppy way he does, not everyone is Christian. Even some Christians that love the Lord will still bonk before marriage if given the opportunity. Thirdly, has he not heard of the alternative uses of a turkey baster? In the great wide land of science, surely he wouldn't be so backwards as to dismiss alternative forms of conception? Or is this another way of separating the sexualities?

Fourthly, the world is overpopulated by a lot already, therefore the same-sex couples who don't breed are a good thing for environmental stability and long term survival or the human race.

Bonk. What a cool word. A great example of onomatopoeia turned into yet another word for sex. Funny.


I think a lot of Western religion (talking the Churches of Christ) need to come out of the medieval times in regard to sexuality. It's dicrimination, and I thought that good people were supposed to work to eliminate discrimination. All men are equal, but some are more equal than others. (I don't know who said it before my Dad, but it'll do.) It doesn't work that way. People should have the same chances in life. And it's a good thing to work towards, to try to make happen without killing people (as happens when Communism goes to far too fast). But the 2nd Bush is a smacktard, that is plain to see, and obviously isn't a good person.


Yeah, I came in when the argument's almost over. I know.

[Mythor]

Originally Posted by Stripes

Hear hear! The all-loving God must love queers because otherwise he wouldn't be all-loving. It's funny how blind the religious importants can be to their own hypocrisy in self-contradiction.

Then God must love mass murderers, rapists and lawyers, too.