Wino Posted October 21, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 21, 2009 Not even Georgie. There is a rumor going around that Eve, of Adam and Eve fame, was blonde. Adam is talking to God and says: "Thank you for putting Eve on earth for me, please tell me why you made her skin so smooth" God: "So that you will want to hold her against you always" Adam: "Ah, and please tell me why you made her smell so nice?" God: "So that you will always be drawn near to her" Adam: "I see, I really appreciate that and don't mean to seem ungrateful but why did you make her so stupid" God: "That is the easiest one to answer - I did that so that she would love you!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WannaGo Posted October 23, 2009 Report Share Posted October 23, 2009 Granted, she is a dim whitted bimbo, but why categorize her as low life?Everyone has something they hate...for me, it's the vapid rich. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wino Posted October 26, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 26, 2009 Although no relation to Paris Hilton, I think Perez Hilton is pretty much of a low life. I have no idea why he likes to "out" those who he claims are closeted gay celebrities. What an idiot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WannaGo Posted October 26, 2009 Report Share Posted October 26, 2009 My consolation is that people like this rarely have happy lives or come to good ends. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lvdkeyes Posted October 27, 2009 Report Share Posted October 27, 2009 I agree with outing if the outed person had been making homophobic comments or, in the case of politicians, had voted against bills designed to aid gays. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WannaGo Posted October 27, 2009 Report Share Posted October 27, 2009 I agree with outing if the outed person had been making homophobic comments or, in the case of politicians, had voted against bills designed to aid gays.Yeah, I'm with you under those circumstances...but if some actor who never says anything wants to keep his orientation to himself, seems like that would be his business. I think Hilton outs those guys too, doesn't he? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wino Posted October 27, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 27, 2009 I agree with outing if the outed person had been making homophobic comments or, in the case of politicians, had voted against bills designed to aid gays. I disagree. What consenting adults do in the privacy of their own home is their own business. I don't care if you are a movie star, politician, or president of the USA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lvdkeyes Posted October 28, 2009 Report Share Posted October 28, 2009 However, if they are in a position to influence other people's opinions (as celebrities are) and they are gay bashing when they are gay themselves, they need to be outed and shown up for the hypocrites that they are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wino Posted October 28, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 28, 2009 However, if they are in a position to influence other people's opinions (as celebrities are) and they are gay bashing when they are gay themselves, they need to be outed and shown up for the hypocrites that they are. Let me try and understand this. Are you saying, let's sling mud instead of talking about issues? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wino Posted October 28, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 28, 2009 Talking about slinging mud, young Levi might be saying a few more words about Sarah Pallin. Here is news from the Huffington Post. "Levi Johnston will appear on CBS' Early Show Wednesday to discuss among other things, the upcoming release of Sarah Palin's memoir "Going Rogue: An American Life." While the former Alaska Governor continues to promote her inside story, excerpts from Johnston's interview suggest that he has some juicy details of his own to reveal. The father of Palin's grandson tells host Maggie Rodriguez, "I told a little bit of stuff, and you know, I'm just not going to take it anymore." In recent weeks Johnston has seized the media spotlight, after the announcement that the 19-year-old plans to pose nude in an upcoming issue of Playgirl magazine. Johnston dismisses some Palin remarks as "kind of ridiculous" -- a reaction not all that shocking. More interesting is his previewed statement, "If she's going to go out there and say things to me, about me, I'm going to leak some things on her. I mean that's just how it is." http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/27/levi-johnston-on-cbs-earl_n_335866.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lvdkeyes Posted October 28, 2009 Report Share Posted October 28, 2009 Let me try and understand this. Are you saying, let's sling mud instead of talking about issues?You can't talk about issues with people who are not honest. Call it mud slinging if you like, but I think of it as setting the record straight. (No pun intended.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wino Posted October 28, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 28, 2009 You can't talk about issues with people who are not honest.Maybe be the person believes in the "don't ask, don't tell" policy? To say you have to tell all about your personal life in order to honestly discuss important issues is something I will have to disagree with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lvdkeyes Posted October 29, 2009 Report Share Posted October 29, 2009 My point is that people who are gay and are also gay bashers need to be exposed for the hypocrites that they are. If someone is gay and subscribes to the don't ask, don't tell policy, that's fine, but it is not fine for them to be bashing gays while hiding in the closet. Does anyone else have an opinion on this subject besides wino and me? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wino Posted October 29, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 29, 2009 My point is that people who are gay and are also gay bashers need to be exposed for the hypocrites that they are. If someone is gay and subscribes to the don't ask, don't tell policy, that's fine, but it is not fine for them to be bashing gays while hiding in the closet. Does anyone else have an opinion on this subject besides wino and me? People who are gay and gay bashers need to be exposed? Why? Looks to me, if you can’t win the case on its merits, you are advocating attacking the person. That is not very nice in my book. What do others think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lvdkeyes Posted October 29, 2009 Report Share Posted October 29, 2009 Exactly what case are we trying to win? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wino Posted October 29, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 29, 2009 You can talk about any case, situation, circumstance, issue that you would like to talk about. The fact that you have to know the person’s personal information in order to determine whether that person is able to honestly discuss the subject is extreme. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lvdkeyes Posted October 29, 2009 Report Share Posted October 29, 2009 I am not following your logic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wino Posted October 29, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 29, 2009 Here is it in short. You agree in outing people if they make homophobic comment or against bills designed to aid gays. When these people are outspoken you say “they need to be outed and shown up for the hypocrites that they are.†I say this is not right because you are attacking the messenger and not talking issues. You say, “You can't talk about issues with people who are not honest.†I disagree. You say, “People who are gay and are also gay bashers need to be exposed for the hypocrites that they are.†This in my book is not talking the issues but simply personal attacks and that is not right. What do other people think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lvdkeyes Posted October 29, 2009 Report Share Posted October 29, 2009 You are missing my point. I will let others debate with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wino Posted October 29, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 29, 2009 Before you dismiss this discussion, let me make sure I understand your position by giving you an example. Former Senator Larry Craig is from the conservative state of Idaho. His voting record reflects his constituent's view in that he is conservative on most issues. He is married with children. If he was not discovered toe tapping at the airport, you would be in favor of outing him. Digging into his private life is legitimate because he has supported anti-gay legislation?He really cannot discuss gay issues because he is not honest with his sexuality. Does that sum it up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WannaGo Posted October 30, 2009 Report Share Posted October 30, 2009 Lvdkeyes is right about this. If you are a politician -- meaning you have the power and authority to create laws by which the rest of us have to live -- and you are passing laws that discriminate against gays, while being secretly gay yourself, then you deserve to be outed, without a doubt. It's both a moral issue, because you are a big, fat hypocrite, and a practical issue because the public has every right to know if the judgment of someone who helps pass legislation is being affected by personal issues. This is no different than if a senator wanted to give drug dealers the death penalty because his own son died of an overdose...the public deserves to know what is driving his agenda. And, think about it like this: These are people in a position of power (whether that power comes from the legislative process or a celebrity's ability to sway public opinion) who are using that power to marginalize gay people, while simultaneously protecting themselves from being marginalized. To say that calling them on their bullshit is "mud-slinging" is both simplistic and disingenuous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wino Posted October 30, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 30, 2009 I see no reason in the world why a politician’s private sexual issues has any bearing whatsoever on how he views or votes on say the “marriage amendment.†Whether the politician is gay, straight or bisexual should make no difference. I think it is a tactic that some radical gay people and groups use because they think it furthers their cause. It does not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finebyme Posted October 31, 2009 Report Share Posted October 31, 2009 Whew. This is intense. Cool it down a bit you guys. So, when's the Playgirl issue coming out? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wino Posted November 2, 2009 Author Report Share Posted November 2, 2009 Whew. This is intense. Cool it down a bit you guys. So, when's the Playgirl issue coming out? According to this quote, "No date has been set for the Playgirl photo shoot, but Butler expects the world will get a gander of the finished product by the end of the year." http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33217038/ From what I was able to find, I think negotiations are still in process at to whether he will pose in his underwear or "all natural." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WannaGo Posted November 3, 2009 Report Share Posted November 3, 2009 I think it is a tactic that some radical gay people and groups use because they think it furthers their cause. It does not.It's not a tactic used by "radical gay people." It is, in fact, a fairly mainstream sentiment, which is why the Ted Haggard/Mark Foley/Larry Craig scandals got so much coverage in the media and became fodder for late-night talk show hosts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts