NC Catfish Social Thread! *<3 KEV*

[Dorsey]

oh i'm not surprised either really. but, that made me spit beer on my monitor... hidden message did it all.

oh and i replaced the pic... pretty sure it's suitable

 

[RaphaelRobo]

My google search for "Dr Peepee" also gave me some other interesting images.

Spoiler

I think that's a good way to end it.

Apparently PP edited this post, but I can't work out what he changed. If removed an image, it must not have been a very memorable one.

 

[ph00tbag]

Dorsey, the issue with 'civil unions' is in the fact that it's inherently discriminatory. You break it down to its composite parts, and say, "oh but it's the same thing." And sure it is, but that's really only half the story. For a homosexual, it really stinks of the whole "separate but equal" philosophy. Yes, they're told they get the same stuff, but then they're cordoned off, by the "civil union" moniker, into their "****" group, apart from all the so-called normal people who had the good sense to be born wanting to **** the opposite gender. Ultimately, it's no better than not letting homosexuals get the same benefits at all.

We can also touch on the fact that if a gay man touches you in a way that makes you feel uncomfortable, there's totally a legal way for you to make him stop. It's called filing sexual harassment charges, or if you don't want to get too melodramatic about it, telling them to stop. Generally speaking, this is the socially acceptable way to deal with sexual harassment. There's no need to resort to violence. Indeed it's really worrisome that your first reaction to sexual harassment is violence.

 

[enCouRaging Bear]

that dude has a ridiculous amount of hair on his torso

 

[Dr Peepee]

I actually liked all da pics

 

[Dorsey]

For a homosexual, it really stinks of the whole "separate but equal" philosophy.

are you speaking for all homos by saying this? I didn't make any assumptions like this...

all I did was relate homosexuality to parallel my own sexual feelings, considering them a complete equal to myself concerning this matter, which is the entire issue here. i also cracked several jokes that apparently went over your head james, idk what to tell you. marriage has always been between a man and a woman(this phrase is not a point therefore not ARBITRARY), and the majority of our state thinks that this arrangement is of high importance in their lives, mainly for religious reasons(i am not religious, apparently I can relate with both sides in an unbiased way though).......

so, **** the majority of our state? America adopts **** when it's ready, cali usually being the first state to do so with just about everything typically. you and I are part of a generation where gay marriage is actually discussed, but that doesn't mean it's the right time to do it, nor does it mean that it's an appropriate measure.

if I was a homosexual, I'd carry on just like ANY PERSON does. i'd strive to set an example for my equivalence as your every day american, no matter how different I am. I'd do it with pride, too....but, I wouldn't think of myself as above the process or the majority of our citizens, no matter how right I think I am, or how wrong I think others are.

 

[enCouRaging Bear]

regardless of the fact that marriage is an arbitrary title/ceremony/etc.

its funny/wrong that certain groups of people (majority or whatever) keep other people out of their little clubs

edit: @Dorsey you know that's how Hitler came to power...

everybody thought well hey i don't think jews suck... but everyone else does.... so maybe later we can.... and then bam! LOL HOLOCAUST!

....

fascist

 

[ph00tbag]

are you speaking for all homos by saying this? I didn't make any assumptions like this...

all I did was relate homosexuality to parallel my own sexual feelings, considering them a complete equal to myself concerning this matter, which is the entire issue here. i also cracked several jokes that apparently went over your head james, idk what to tell you. marriage has always been between a man and a woman(this phrase is not a point therefore not ARBITRARY), and the majority of our state thinks that this arrangement is of high importance in their lives, mainly for religious reasons(i am not religious, apparently I can relate with both sides in an unbiased way though).......

so, **** the majority of our state? America adopts **** when it's ready, cali usually being the first state to do so with just about everything typically. you and I are part of a generation where gay marriage is actually discussed, but that doesn't mean it's the right time to do it, nor does it mean that it's an appropriate measure.

if I was a homosexual, I'd carry on just like ANY PERSON does. i'd strive to set an example for my equivalence as your every day american, no matter how different I am. I'd do it with pride, too....but, I wouldn't think of myself as above the process or the majority of our citizens, no matter how right I think I am, or how wrong I think others are.

Well, you'd be a pretty ****ing pathetic homosexual. I have a really hard time believing that if you spent your whole life being subjected to a society that thinks you're a second class citizen, you'd just continue to let the world **** on you, and not even try to fight back once you learned that you weren't alone. I guess I took you for having better convictions than that, but it seems like you're ultimately going to take a defeatist stance on the issue.

So no. You have no ****ing clue where homosexuals are coming from, and you're doing a pretty *** job of thinking about things from multiple points of view, because you aren't even trying to imagine a life of oppression. If you had, you would totally agree that every effort should be made by homosexuals, and their allies, to completely obliterate state-sanctioned discrimination. You'd realize this isn't just about acquiescing to majority opinion, it's not about appealing to tradition (what a lovely logical fallacy), it's about fighting for one's right to be treated like a ****ing human being.

 

[Bl@ckChris]

oppression?

but don't they have the same thing but different? that doesn't sound like the usual meaning of oppression...

*insert more ignorance*

 

[[FBC] ESAM]

@Chris you are black so you should at least get the discrimination bit. They are TREATED as lower-class citizens. They have most of the rights that "normal" citizens have, yet they are still treated like **** and people make a big deal about them being able to do certain things even though all they are doing is loving a different gender than the "norm". How the **** is that fair that because they love different than what we accept as the "norm" they aren't allowed to actually get married? The **** kind of logic is that? Love is love regardless of who you love.

 

[Dorsey]

Well, you'd be a pretty ****ing pathetic homosexual. I have a really hard time believing that if you spent your whole life being subjected to a society that thinks you're a second class citizen, you'd just continue to let the world **** on you, and not even try to fight back once you learned that you weren't alone. I guess I took you for having better convictions than that, but it seems like you're ultimately going to take a defeatist stance on the issue.

So no. You have no ****ing clue where homosexuals are coming from, and you're doing a pretty *** job of thinking about things from multiple points of view, because you aren't even trying to imagine a life of oppression. If you had, you would totally agree that every effort should be made by homosexuals, and their allies, to completely obliterate state-sanctioned discrimination. You'd realize this isn't just about acquiescing to majority opinion, it's not about appealing to tradition (what a lovely logical fallacy), it's about fighting for one's right to be treated like a ****ing human being.

ummm... because homosexuality has a history of oppression, then we should use that as a pretext to allow them to get married? That's the only inference I can really make by sifting through the insults/throwing out **** like "they're treated like 2nd class citizens, the world ****s on them, etc. etc". personally i think that's taking a defeatist stance in this discussion, being that my points have very little to do with convictions at all. additionally, let me remind you that we're talking about gay marriage here...

But since you want to play the convictions card, what about the convictions of the majority of the country, which is evangelical/christian... What if they ACTUALLY take the constitution literally when it says "one nation, under god"? They do. they passionately believe in it, just as they do with the importance of marriage. Do gays not believe in democracy, inasmuch that they would reject these views of the majority entirely? Not to mention, they are already able to have all the contracts and benefits that a marriage entitles, only without the word 'marriage'. in your words, they would be "****ting" on the constitution, and "****ting" on the bible, in the eyes of the majority. If the NC amendment passes, denying their right to be married would be treating them as equal, under due process just like all americans.

btw, thanks for indirectly calling the vast majority of my gay friends(whom have never got the impression that I treat them as 2nd class citizens nor have they ever questioned my convictions), pathetic.

Love is love regardless of who you love.

Agreed. Having everything that a marriage entitles, the only difference it being referred to as a civil union, does not hinder their ability to love at all.

 

[[FBC] ESAM]

Why do you put them as a civil union though and not married? Just definitions? Why not just change the definition of the word?

 

[Lightsyde]

I am attempting to derail the **** out to this conversation.

 

[Dr Peepee]

lmao

I 400% agree with the pic

<33333 dave

also <3 dorsey too (yes really)


discussion is interesting to me though. dorsey's argument is something I never really thought about and I enjoy reading it because it's new to me if nothing else.

not taking sides(because I'm trying to make one) just observing.

 

[Lightsyde]

You guys do realize that most of the uproar about that amendment has NOTHING to do with gay people getting married (which NC law already doesn't allow) but that it actually encroaches on the rights/lives of non-married couples (straight and gay), right? As in, this would actually strongly affect how someone like my mom's (who lives and co-owns a house with her fiance of 15 years but is not married) insurances, taxes, social security benefits etc works. Read the image then realize you guys are arguing about the non-issue of this Amendment.

 

[lord karn]

I don't see why anyone gives a damn about marriage. It's silly. That being said, gays have a right to be silly, too.

 

[Dorsey]

just want to point out briefly that my opinions on the homosexual community are quite different than my outlook on legalizing gay marriage for a large number of demographics. i feel like the first is for me to decide, and the 2nd is not. that is why i've been discussing it without relaying my own personal views/opinions on it...

i don't get the pic, lol.

but thanks kevbo. the topic does not need to be de-railed, i'll stop. despite any posts by anyone. time to busy myself with life and go inactive off THE BOARDS for a few weeks...<3

edit: josh, I think I was the only one who was using the nc amendment in the argument. I was REALLY drunk when I was first mentioning it... and in my last post, pretty much just imagine that one sentence without 'nc amendment' in it. although, this issue is what sparked the discussion, yeah.

 

[Lightsyde]

The section that says "Key Facts" on the right side is what I was calling attention to.

 

[RaphaelRobo]

I actually liked all da pics

I just worked out which one you removed. I was expecting you to remove it, but wanted you to see it anyway.

 

[Dorsey]

The section that says "Key Facts" on the right side is what I was calling attention to.

yeah, I understand. what I was pointing out, is that the nature of the debate is not about the nc amendment, but gay marriage itself. despite the nc ammendment being mentioned incorrectly for this issue or not(I was the only one who mentioned it anyway, no one else did). Which is why i said "pretend that it isn't there", because it wasn't the subject of the debate(i only refer to the nc amendment, I don't mention it's content at all...), only what sparked it.

 

[ph00tbag]

Dorsey, you're going to have to reread that constitution, because I'm pretty sure it says the total and complete opposite of "one nation under God."

I'd also say that your approach to politics is pretty repulsive to me. You argue that the rights of one segment of society should take precedent over another segment simply because the first segment is larger, and that is absolutely, positively not what America is about. And it doesn't just end at the termination of "due process." You would argue that after the first cycle, that smaller segment should just shut up and go away, and never strive to have their rights properly given their due. That, in and of itself is an argument for inequality. You're saying that once everyone's been given their right to argue their point once, and the rights of one side have been duly stripped, that that status should hold, and the rights of some individuals should be alienated in perpetuity. You can't tell me that you find this state of affairs acceptable.

 

[big sleep]

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOLOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOLOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO@dorsey's post

 

[big sleep]

I don't see why anyone gives a damn about marriage. It's silly. That being said, gays have a right to be silly, too.

mmmmmmmmmhmm.

my n**** karniferous.

 

[[FBC] ESAM]

And either way, even if it went the way Dorsey said, NOTHING HAPPENS to the people who are already married. It doesn't affect the straight people in any way, so why not give more rights to everybody?

 

[big sleep]

esam n**** have u read?


the irony and stupidity about anti-gay-marriage people voting for this amendment enflamed with the cause that marriage remains in the realm of straitness is that the ****ing thing directly ****s with strait people even more than gays (who btw... already couldn't get married)


does this amendment really make it impossible for gay marriage to be a possibility in this state (shoutouts to amending amendments)? ughh...the sacrifices some conservatives are willing to force onto others (esp for an absurd and irrational cause)... nothing less than evil imo

 

[[FBC] ESAM]

My smashboards goes weird sometimes, so what is the "amendment 1" crap? I'll look back a few pages, will edit. BRB.

Edit: Woah WTF that's ********. I was talking about LEGALIZING it/giving it the same name as marriage, not taking it away. The **** is up with that ****?

I swear, I hate people that can make rules sometimes -_-

 

[Dorsey]

just reminding everyone that I used the nc amendment incorrectly with my words, all I was referring to was gay marriage... all I did was glance at the bill for a SECOND while drunk as hell guys. the stuff that the amendment prohibits I am totally against you can tell from my posts. I was really just putting emphasis on due process and equality in terms of democracy.... i could actually give 2 ****s if two gay dudes got married...

 

[Bl@ckChris]

@Chris you are black so you should at least get the discrimination bit. They are TREATED as lower-class citizens. They have most of the rights that "normal" citizens have, yet they are still treated like **** and people make a big deal about them being able to do certain things even though all they are doing is loving a different gender than the "norm". How the **** is that fair that because they love different than what we accept as the "norm" they aren't allowed to actually get married? The **** kind of logic is that? Love is love regardless of who you love.

@esam: yeah, but the "oppression" i'm used is not "separate but equal" but "separate and the degraded person gets something ****ty, less funded, and overall obviously lower class". It took quite some time for separate but equal to even be a lawful concept, and to me, it hasn't even been reached yet. I agree with you on the whole gay marriage act, but hearing the word "oppression" tied to the situation seems like a little dramatic to me.

that's all

intelligent discussion between phoot and dorsey may continue...

 

[Lightsyde]

Good **** to Cam and Esam actually realizing the Amendment One uproar has nothing to with gay people wanting to get married; the James/Dorsey argument is about the stuff the media uses as gloss job for it why it should pass and really only still fires up people who have anti-gay rights sentiments, for whatever reason. Marriage is an invented institution anyway, I fail to see why people can't realize everyone should be allowed to play dress up with whoever they choose.

Anyway, I had originally just posted and wanted to make it abundantly clear that the actual amendment more strongly affects unmarried straight couples than homosexuals.

 

[Dorsey]

GREAT WORK CAM/ESAM, to starkly read a few sentences, without any conflict, eye cramps, or natural disasters occurring. I can't believe they actually realized it... Truly an abundantly magnificent feat.

lmfao

 

[Juno McGrath]

Lmao James no matter what you just said (TL:DR) ***** you like my little pony

Lmao

 

[Juno McGrath]

Seeing that avatar and James trying to post some srs **** just made me Dop Doo in my spinny chair

 

[big sleep]

GREAT WORK CAM/ESAM, to starkly read a few sentences, without any conflict, eye cramps, or natural disasters occurring. I can't believe they actually realized it... Truly an abundantly magnificent feat.

lmfao

LOOOOOOOOOOLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL

 

[Dr Peepee]

oh my gosh

 

[[FBC] ESAM]

I'm the ****ing best ****

wtf N I G S is censored? The ****?

 

[Lightsyde]

Yeah Jesse! It was really something. :]

 

[SleepyK]

Seeing that avatar and James trying to post some srs **** just made me Dop Doo in my spinny chair

i read that as Doo Doo in my spinny chair

i don't know if i'm relieved or disappointed

 

[RaphaelRobo]

Disappointed,

 

[Juno McGrath]

Zupposed to be Doo but my phone changed it to Dop

Wtf iphone

 

[ph00tbag]

I read dop doo, but I assumed it meant the same thing, but Dylan just said it that way because he thinks he's creative.