?

Log in

No account? Create an account

[icon] They just don't make 'em like they used to - Patti
View:Recent Entries.
View:Archive.
View:Friends.
View:Profile.
View:Website (pattib.org).

Security:
Subject:They just don't make 'em like they used to
Time:12:42 pm
One of my poker buddies posted something on rec.gambling.poker complaining about California's recent gay marriage supreme court decision. One of his really bizarre concerns was that gay men might have sham marriages where one of them had health insurance and the other had AIDS. (We can safely ignore the fact that heterosexuals might have sham marriages for the same purpose.)

And then he posted this. When I got to the last sentence I had to make an emergency trip to IronyMeterMart.com. I got a six-pack.
comments: Leave a comment Previous Entry Share Next Entry


wild_irises
Link:(Link)
Time:2008-05-16 07:56 pm (UTC)
*sigh*

Was a six-pack enough?
(Reply) (Thread)


prock
Link:(Link)
Time:2008-05-16 08:20 pm (UTC)
Rick is gay and has AIDS?
(Reply) (Thread)

(Deleted comment)

rmd
Link:(Link)
Time:2008-05-16 08:26 pm (UTC)
i think the contract part of marriage is important enough to be backed up by the government.

but i would love to see the contractual part ("we agree to function financially as a unit even though one of us is doing work that does not directly earn wages, until such time as the contract is ended") split off from the religious part.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

(Deleted comment)

mangosteen
Link:(Link)
Time:2008-05-16 08:37 pm (UTC)
That's the end goal, true. No argument.

To my mind, the first step is to recognize same-sex marriage, and then change the terminology over to 'civil union', and get government out of the marriage business.

On a more pragmatic note "So, we shouldn't allow any same-sex couples the benefit of marriage until the government changes it all over to civil unions in all states separately." is the disingenuous line that a lot of anti-same-sex-marriage people use when they want to sound accommodating, so I tend to avoid it.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)


rmd
Link:(Link)
Time:2008-05-16 08:22 pm (UTC)
mmmm. sweet sweet irony.
(Reply) (Thread)


elfs
Link:(Link)
Time:2008-05-16 08:26 pm (UTC)
C'mon down to talk.origins used irony meters! They blow out for all sorts of reasons. We mix and match the best and you get the rest!

Woah. I just found that Mitch Wagner coined the phrase "Irony meter" on soc.singles in 1991. Unsurprisingly, he was talking about Ted Kaldis. Grief, the Internet really was small enough back then that it was possible to know everyone on it.

And yes, you just blew up another one.
(Reply) (Thread)


rmd
Link:(Link)
Time:2008-05-17 01:21 am (UTC)
you spelled "T*d K*ldis" incorrectly.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

songmonk
Link:(Link)
Time:2008-05-16 08:42 pm (UTC)
I feel kinda dumb, but I actually don't see the irony. :-(
(Reply) (Thread)


whipartist
Link:(Link)
Time:2008-05-16 08:45 pm (UTC)
In a thread about gay marriage, he's looking forward to his wife getting health insurance again in two months so that he can have insurance.
(Reply) (Expand) (Parent) (Thread)


gunga_galunga
Link:(Link)
Time:2008-05-16 08:48 pm (UTC)
It's a little ironic for someone who gets hundreds of dollars a month in medications, soon through his wife's insurance, to be complaining that someone with aids might get hundreds of dollars a month in medications through their partner's insurance.
(Reply) (Expand) (Parent) (Thread)

greeklady
Link:(Link)
Time:2008-05-16 11:18 pm (UTC)
Is this genius going to think that benefits are a consumable that is going to be used up if more people sign up?

I think you should have gone out for the case rather than a 6-pack.

*shakes head*

Wow, just wow.
(Reply) (Thread)


catness
Link:(Link)
Time:2008-05-16 11:23 pm (UTC)
Wow. Special.
(Reply) (Thread)

onthegojo
Subject:Four thoughts
Link:(Link)
Time:2008-05-17 07:13 pm (UTC)
First, I think the guy's comment was *both* ironic and objectionable.

Second, if we had a national healthcare system think of all the middlemen (persons) that would be left out (therefor making healthcare cheaper, but causing mass unemployment) but not having "marriage" be a factor in healthcare. Oh, and more people might be taken care of. Hmm, that's way too advanced for our (currently) backwards country. (imho)

Third, if they outlaw "marriage" between two men, there's a thought that they might outlaw the word "marriage" for heteros. Wouldn't that be funny?

Fourth, again, just as race and religion don't come into play with marriage, why does sexuality? Are we in the dark ages?
(Reply) (Thread)

[icon] They just don't make 'em like they used to - Patti
View:Recent Entries.
View:Archive.
View:Friends.
View:Profile.
View:Website (pattib.org).