Join 3,524 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


An informed view of prop twenty-two.
March 22, 2000 7:49 AM   Subscribe

An informed view of prop twenty-two. This may be a bit belated, but it's astonishing that someone could come up with a comparison like this and actually believe that it had any worth in judgment or persuasion.
posted by EngineBeak (13 comments total)

 
oh and they have an 800 number. you would think that any intelligent human being could of written a more persuasive article.

"god said this and god said that and im just a pawn and puppet and i follow the leader and read lies out of the big book of fiction"
posted by sikk at 8:28 AM on March 22, 2000


I dunno, I kinda liked the argument, if only because it made me think of an All Male Revue called "Mobius Strip" (well, that and burly bavarian men squirting mustard on each other...).

Next on the agenda: "Why a 'Royal Pair' should replace 'Two of a Kind' in poker.
posted by CrazyUncleJoe at 8:46 AM on March 22, 2000


"But using pretzels as money would cause all sorts of problems for people using vending machines"

HAHAHA HAHA HA HA AAAA!!! HA HAH HA uuuuu... stop! yer killing me! Oh... uh... deep breath.... wooo.

I love this woman! This is better than The Onion! I had to do a search for her other articles. They're all this good! This woman is a comic genius!
posted by y6y6y6 at 9:03 AM on March 22, 2000


A one-sided coin, eh? What would that look like? I wonder.... would one side be blank? Or would both sides be the same - I suppose that would make it a two-sided coin! Oh I give up!
posted by SuperGoat at 9:08 AM on March 22, 2000


"Not useful." Oh, and all the straight marriages that involve legal battles and domestic abuse and infidelity are useful. I forgot.

Maybe useful for our own entertainment, in a perverse sort of way.
posted by jason at 9:47 AM on March 22, 2000


Yet another reason to love the kind, gentle folk at the Family Research Council. I remain convinced that "1-sex marriage" would look exactly like the real thing, and that's the problem. How bigoted can you remain about someone when they live next door to you and act perfectly normal? Not impossible, but harder by far.

What would a one-sided pretzel look like? Now I'm all confused.
posted by mrmorgan at 10:04 AM on March 22, 2000


I don't get it. Why would anyone bring up G-d in a referendum about the laws of one of the United States of America? I am a devout believer in G-d, but that doesn't mean that anyone else has to be (or even should be).

Her argument is non sequitur, and doesn't seem to address the question at hand. Prop 22 is about civil marriage, not religious marriage. I don't see any reason why churches should automatically recognize civil marriages or vice versa. Let your religion be your religion and your government be your government.
posted by CalvinTheBold at 12:26 PM on March 22, 2000


Folks....read this bit...

"For Family Research Council, this is Janet Parshall with today’s Washington Watch. "

Is her opinion anything other than what could be expected? Nope!

'Nuff said.
posted by tomcosgrave at 1:23 PM on March 22, 2000


I expected her opinion, yeah. But the "logical" argument was damn funny. ;)
posted by veruca at 4:05 PM on March 22, 2000


She's brilliant! Move over world leaders, Janet posted by Markb at 4:06 AM on March 23, 2000


Oops! Note to self: don't go to lunch half way through a post.
posted by Markb at 4:08 AM on March 23, 2000


Oooo-ee! This is too great: Doktor Laura recommends the "factual information and intelligent points of view and intelligent arguments" of the Family Research Council.
posted by EngineBeak at 3:42 PM on March 24, 2000


And here she is peddling paranoia.
posted by EngineBeak at 3:45 PM on March 24, 2000


« Older Why the Future Doesn't Need Us...  |  Medicate 'em!... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments