I don't hate heterosexuals; I just hate heterosexuality.
God hates the sin but loves the sinner, He'll judge the heterosexuals when the time comes!
And heterosexual sex is so gross! I know it's none of my buisness and I'm not in the bedroom with them when they do it. But it still grosses me out and is bad and shouldn't be done.
Why is heterosexual sex gross?
Yeah I mean, every time someone has sexual intercourse with someone of their opposite gender they strengthen hell and evil force, and wither the earth's very soul.
For those who don't understand:
It totally obliterates the meaning of every gay marriage that ever happened ever.
This is a great post, but it's not going to make anyone that is against gay marriage realize that their mind set makes no sense, which is quite sad.
I don't think they're all highly prejudicial bigots, but I see your point.
Everything you just said is true, I just don't see why it's so important to them.
"I wouldn't exactly say that it's sad."
" You may think that people against gay marriage are highly prejudicial bigots"
"but that doesn't make their opinion any less valid than yours."
Yes it does.
Now that's progressive thinking if I've ever heard it....
God hates breeders.
God hates readers
sup old LAPDANCE member
Sup, fellow communist liberal faggot?
And it really sucks when they want to have kids because you adopt and that's the only way to have kids.
Gays aren't scary people, they're just different. And just because someone's different doesn't mean you should be afraid of them. It means you should be ANGRY at them! How DARE they be different! WHAT? My way of life ain't good enough for 'em!?
Yep, pretty much. I just wrote it because I couldn't resist the Billy and Mandy reference though.
Love Billy and Mandy references.
And clowns. those damn clowns are different. how DARE they be different!
Awesome post is awesome.
Theres a button to let Anthony know how awesome it is ^
Apparently that button was clicked.
Awesome post doesn't follow logic.
"It's different from how you practice marriage and it is automatically morally wrong to do something different."
'Difference' is based on the norm. Heterosexual marriages would not be doing anything different because male-female marriages are already embedded in society; the comparison is nonequivalent.
Another assumption the OP makes is that the quality of being different, in general, somehow defies our sense of morality. ...it obviously depends.
Maybe I am trolling. But I've just noticed a recent deteriorating trend in amirite POTDs-- where we went from funny and original ideas to clichés, unoriginal material, and posts that follow nonsensical childish logic such as this.
You obviouslly didn't get the idea of the post.
To some anti gay rights people, this is how they view gay marriage. I was pretending like gay marriage is the norm and being sarcastic when I said it was morally wrong to do something different.
Wow there are a lot of gay people on this site. Lets all be Gay together!!!!
on a related note... http://ctrlv.in/55830
Every time someone argues against gay marriage, I mentally refer to this list. I think it covers the topic brilliantly; it has a rebuttal for every anti-gay argument out there. Sometimes I wonder why people are still so against it when, to me, this list covers it all.
Perhaps that's narrow-minded… could anybody give me a reason we shouldn't have gay marriage that's NOT on this list?
Becuase every time someone has sexual intercourse with someone of their opposite gender they strengthen hell and evil force, and wither the earth's very soul.
But seriously, I agree.
It's funny because this is the actual mindset of many anti-gay protesters. "These people are different and scare me so they are spawns of Satan!"
What you're doing here, yeah, it's called stereotyping. Way to be open minded.
False. I said "many". There are thousands that believe this. That is many. If I had said "all", then it would be a stereotype. That's how modifiers are used.
Okay, I can't really argue with that.
I just didn't like your wording, you make it seem like Christians are the bad guys here.
Not Christians in general. I get that it just goes against the religion. I mean the many of the people that actually protest it. It's not just Christians that protest it. Is there a reason, other than a religious one, that have for disagreeing with gay marriage?
This made my day.
Lol. Sorry; it was an accident. But it's still awesome
There's a reply button so he can know you think it's awesome a third time
Third times a charm
Damn those breeders, ruining the sanctity of marriage!
On another note, I'm in the mood to feed a few good trolls. God, I miss scrantoncity...
I miss arguing with him. He did write nice though, I won't deny that. He wrote in a way that could make a less intelligent person believe anything he said.
I don't think he wrote as he spoke. People on this site went to school with him and said he was just an ass to everyone and never could admit he was wrong, even when he obviously was.
Ex. "We're in the choir room," -scrantoncity
"No, we're in the band room. Look, the sign above the door says, 'Band Room,'" -random student
"scrantoncity going on and on about how this is the choir room"
It's not about the sanctity of marriage. It's about obeying the Lord and not letting your dyke tendencies control your actions.
Yeah... Okay. Now can you argue your point without 1.) using a religion that not everyone believes in and 2.) without using insulting words like dyke?
I'm sure they're not tendencies. Eating my pizza backwards is a tendency, consistently finding girls attractive is out of my control.
Eh, I'll give you a C-
Got anything else?
1. The Bible is true whether you believe it out not, just like global warming is caused by man, whether you believe it or not. Telling me not to use that argument is like telling me not to use math to prove scientific shit.
2. What am I supposed to use? A nice word? A dog is still a dog, regardless of the nomenclature used.
3. Then, don't have sex with women. Quite simple, actually.
1. To use something as fact in an argument, it has to be proven to be true. The only thing people can use to prove the Bible is true is the Bible ("I'm right because I said I'm right").
2. You can use whatever word you like, but using offensive words makes people take you less seriously.
3. Even if I had never had sex with a woman, I would still be a "dyke." Engaging in same sex intercourse is not what makes a person a homosexual, it is having same sex attractions that makes one a homosexual.
1. There are some things in math that you can't probe, but are absolute truths. They're called postulates.
2. As you said, the wording doesn't matter.
3. There's a difference between a homosexual and a faggot/dyke. I'm a homosexual, but I don't go around wanting people to accept the faggot lifestyle, nor do I engage in the lifestyle, so I am not a faggot.
1. Postulates do not require proof for one to know they're fact. Mathematics is not an opinion, it is a fact. Religion is an opinion.
2. Eh, whatever.
3. Faggot and dyke are slang terms. Any homosexual can be considered a faggot or dyke. Also, I do not know about this "lifestyle" of which you speak. Care to elaborate?
Fine... It was me
I should have known when you said "dyke tendencies."
First post of 2012 that doesn't have the word "awkward" in it. I was beginning to get concerned.
This post is a win sundae with a cherry on top.
Gay people shouldn't be victimized with the whole "they can't help being gay" thing. So what if they are gay. We shouldn't deny them rights, and we shouldn't feel bad for gay people.
Says the man trying to kill off muggles...
Mass murderers can have political views too!
Okay guys, everyone calm down. Can't we all just laugh at a good post, take a damned sip of coffee, and take a chill pill?
Sip of coffee and a chill pill? Thats like...doing nothing.
you said it twice.
Because it's that awesome
Has that cat only got three legs?
Flee from the coming wrath. http://www.biblegateway.com/pas...mp;version=NIV
I started reading that, then thought to myself "why the fuck am I reading this" and then I stopped!
Pretty cool eh?
I haven't seen you in a while. I thought you died.
lol thanks... I'm more alive than ever.
There are passages from the Bible that begin with "Romans"?
Truth be told, I would not trust anything those passages have to say, knowing the ancient Romans...
Quoting from the NIV? That's the pervert bible. Quote from KJV.
There are two Parts to this debate:
1) Religious - Yes Christ was for equality and agency but he also said homosexuality is a serious sin. My interpretation is that marriage has nothing to do with this; you can be gay without being married. The choice is still there and the consequences are the same.
It is my personal belief that a family should consist of a man and wife at the head. It is said throughout politics, school, work, church, etc. that the family is the basic building block of society. Given this we can conclude that with the destruction of the family unit comes the downfall of society.
I'm a guy that doesn't hate gays. I find them somewhat off putting and strange but that's just me. If you were my friend and you came out of the closet if still be your friend. I have nothing against them but in my opinion the equality arguments are outweighed by the others. Its not that they're different that makes people disagree, it's that they violate what has always been a sacred institution of both Christianity and America. If you aren't Christian or don't care for the traditional American ways, there's your vote but I'm siding with the prejudicial bigots on this one.
hmmm. on the one hand, i found your response a lot more pleasant and reasonable than the responses of some others. on the other hand, i have to respectfully disagree. i think i'll go with your numerical organization.
1. you say that your personal beliefs are that a family should consist of a man and wife at the head. no offense, but your personal beliefs aren't the foundation of our government- equal rights and equality are.
2. people raised by a single parent normally turn out perfectly fine. so far, i don't know any single parents who have caused the downfall of society. i think that sort of covers your argument about families needing to be raised by a man and a woman.
3. i'm a bit puzzled by your part about traditional American values. i see that as a bit irrelevant, considering that other common values in early America were about enslaving black people and withholding equal rights for women. i also take offense at the stuff about how being gay violates the institution of America.
4. to be quite honest, i can't quite believe that you would still be someone's friend if they came out of the closet, since you would find it a bit "strange" and "off putting".
1. While it isn't the governments set view, it is mine and that is where my vote would go. Majority rules.
2. First studies show that children raised by a single parent are more likely to fall into crime, drug abuse, and chronic depression. Not to mention, you can't compare single parents and same-sex marriage because they're completely different situations.
3. Actually, common American values didn't involve enslaving peoplein the original constitution draft slavery was outlawed. The only reason they took that out was because S. Carolina refused to ratify it. And the entire world withheld women's rights (as most still do) and realized that wasn't right. I really don't think that marriage is really a right garunteed by the constitution which is why I don't like the name of this debate. It's ultimately not about rights; they can do anything they pleasethere is no discrimination. And I didn't say gay marriage violates THE institution of America, but that it violates A institution of America (meaning marriage).
4. I have plenty of strange and off-putting friends. But this isn't an argument about me
Christ said nothing about homosexuality, or any type of sex for that matter. Though you can be gay without being married, you miss out on all the benefits of marriage, which is really what the argument is about. And granting the same rights under a different name is not good enough. You remember segregation? Separate but Equal is a good idea on paper, but in practice is just sugar coated discrimination. Also, I don't quite understand the "The choice is still there and the consequences are the same" part.
Allowing gay marriage will not weaken the family unit. Gay people already start families without getting married. Gay marriage would just strengthen gay family units. Even if they are not creating new children, their adopted families still deserve the same benefits as genetically related families. A foster child is still a child. What REALLY hurts family is high divorce rates and infidelity.
Yes he did. Try Romans 1:27, Jude 1:7, Deuteronomy 23:17. And what benefits of marriage? Spiritual ones only apply to God's definition of marriage, andlet's face itthere are no worldly consequences other than having half your stuff taken if you divorce. if its about love, they can love.
And I meant the choice to be gay and the consequences of it, worldly and spiritual.
While it would strengthen the gay family unit, it would weaken the traditional one which is the one we should be trying to protect. And I'm all for adoption...I don't see how that applies..? I think your last statement is the sacred middle ground on this argument. Failed marriages hurt the family unit more than anything and it kills me to know that the world has fallen into such a pattern of it.
Though agree that you can love without being married, I do not believe that a heterosexual couple is greater than a gay couple, and as such, they do not deserve special privileges. A gay couple can love just as strong, and start a family just as well as a straight couple. They deserve the right to marry.
There is no choice involved in being gay. The only people who say there is are heterosexuals who never made that choice, which I find pretty convenient. There are very few exceptions, but most gay people will tell you it is not a choice. I, for one, know it is not a choice. I never made the choice, I just happened to fall in love with a girl.
Are you all for gay adoption? They adopt too, and I believe their families deserve the same rights and protections as other families. A child is a child, no matter who they're parents "choose" to love. And it's fact that children are better off if their parents are married.
How does gay marriage threaten traditional marriage? Me getting married to a girl in no way affects you, does it? All it does is slightly alter the definition of who can marry who. I figured marriage was more than that though.
Okay, I'll try not to repeat what the others have already said, but I have to say this:
"The equality arguments are outweighed by the others" - that's like saying it's more important to uphold tradition than to grant equal rights. I think this is ridiculous - it's like someone in the 50s saying blacks and whites can't get married because it's against God's will and goes against "traditional American ways". What's the difference? There isn't one.
Alright then let's talk about rights. I'm going to steal some points from a politician that I thought were very valid. There are two "rights" that you say not allowing gays to marry violate: the right to happiness and the right to marry
First, the right to happiness...NOPE! Try the pursuit of happiness. Also, if all that matters is happiness, why not let three men marry, or some other motley crew? How about a mix? There are things that matter more than happiness. Also there is no need for marriage in order for these couples to practice love in their own way.
Next on the right to marry...there isn't one. Nowhere in the constitution does it give all men the right to marry, and it also doesn't fall under "human rights granted by God" because God has asked us not to. If your not Christian, it doesn't matter because that is the way our country defines rights.
Last about equality...the world isn't equal. People don't and shouldn't have all the same privileges as one another. If they did, 4 year olds would be voting, Osama could run for president, and everybody would have a lisence to kill. It isn't now, shouldn't and won't be in the future.
Okay, this is getting fun.
First, I don't think there are things that matter more than happiness - as long as the activity that is giving a person happiness is not harming anyone. So I don't think I have the right to say that three men shouldn't get married. People being uncomfortable by it is one thing - but these marriages are hardly a threat to others' safety.
About what you said about equality: You say "the world isn't equal". But I think all law abiding adults deserve the same. Four year olds can't vote because they're too young to comprehend the concept of politics. Gay people know exactly what they're doing. Osama can't run for president, because he does not have the country's best interests at heart, and people can't kill because they're hurting others. Again, gay people getting married will not do such damage to others. To make these comparsions is downright offensive - you're grouping gay people with criminals and children.
My point is: live and let live. If someone started telling you that you could no longer practise your religion publicly because of some "negative effect it has on society", then wouldn't you feel offended and hurt?
Osama can't run for president because he's dead.
Uhmm... So its worse for a child to be brought up by two loving, caring, smart, successfull people that or of the same sex. Than it would for a child brought up by a heterosexual couple that dropped out of school, have no jobs, and well are just complete assholes?
no it wouldn't. Both have problems but I agree the latter is probably more dangerous
What's the point in marriage in the first place?
It's what you do when you're done having sex.
Feeling your love grow, year by year, moment by moment. Slow dancing together in the kitchen to your favorite song. Watching your husband dance in the middle of the living room with your daughter or play baseball in the yard with your son. Seeing your wife kiss your son's boo boo. Having some one else to wake up with the kids on Saturday morning. Looking forward to seeing him or her walk through the door at the end of the day. Getting your favorite flowers on Valentines Day. Not having to shower alone, when you don't want to. Knowing you don't ever have to rely on yourself alone.
Couldn't a person experience all of these things without getting married?
Prenuptial Agreement FTW!!!
Marriage is the guarantee that all these things WILL happen. Without marriage, there is no certainty. You can leave each other whenever. I guess technically you can get a divorce after marriage, but the vows are made with the intention of being together forever.
You can still make the vows without marriage. If you need marriage to make sure you'll stay together, maybe they aren't the one for you.
As a girl with divorced parents I can tell you as well as any other person with divorced parents that it is FAR from a guarantee that all those things will happen. Although I totally believe in marriage I can completely understand that just because I get married it doesn't mean it'll be all rosy and nice. Please don't try to tell yourself otherwise.
If those things were going to happen, it wouldn't have anything to do with marriage. And as you said, you can leave each other whenever you want, regardless of whether you're married or not.
Taxes and whatnot.
Honestly, this seems to be the only reason that the government is involved. Or is it?
-binding two people together for life
-starting a family/continuing to have your family name live on
Safetynet for children.
right of passage. puts an emphasis on the roles so that it can enforce and strengthen the foundation for a family.
an example would be a jewish boy having their...what's it called... the bar mitzvah?
it marks the end of the boy's life as a child and start as a responsbile person.
If we didn't have marraiges, I'm pretty sure many children would be homeless or with single parents.
To make each other miserable
What a high population of gay people on amirite! I'm pretty sure there aren't even this many guys using the site who voted, and you have to be a guy to be gay, just sayin...
I was waiting on someone else to point this out, but I guess I'll do it.
You do not have to be a guy to be gay.
girls are straight or lesbian. Guys are straight or gay.
Why exactly would you want to fuck a pedophile? I'm sure they won't mind though, as long as you're underage.
You think you're making a good point but it really just shows how ignorant you are.
I said okay because you called me ignorant and then just stopped. I would like to hear how I'm ignorant.
Keep in mind that this post is really just a joke. I didn't make it in hopes that the entire anti-gay rights community would convert their beliefs to the same way I feel about it. I made it to give a few people a nice laugh, or just a chuckle.
Many people who disagree with homosexuality don't disagree with it merely because it's different from heterosexuality. I feel like you're poking fun at people who disagree with it, but you don't even know (or just aren't acknowledging) that many have legitimate reasons to disagree, such as certain moral beliefs or religion.
Could you elaborate on these "legitimate reasons to disagree", please? Because I don't think there are any legitimate reasons to discriminate againts people, whether it's in regards to race, gender or sexuality.
I understand what you're saying about people holding different opinions and how not everyone thinks in the same way. But use of the word "legitimate" brings up some problems, because that's trying to justify why someone disagrees with homosexuality.
You said religion, which I'm trying to understand… but similar to what pikabeau said, if a religion "disagreed" with people of different races/genders etc, would you be as willing to say it's fine because they're "human" and those are their "feelings"? I think religion is too often used as a sort of justification for discrimination, which I think is appalling.
There are no legitimate reasons to be against a group of people. I don't care if it's part of someone's religion. Some religions believe that people of other religions are automatically terrible people that should all die. That does not make that belief okay. Even if a religion taught something simple like, "All people who are left handed are sinners," holding that belief because of religion does not make it an okay thing to believe.
God (our Lord JC) hates gays. It is prety simple: if they chose to go aginst sonething that He says, they will burn. Your argument does not make sense because WE started marrige first. They wanted in and He said no. And then they have the nerve to complain that they must burn in H***?! I an not against gay rights I just dont think that God snd Jesus the savior want them to marry...our laws don't let animals marry... And I'm not racist or prejudice, just my 2 cents
But gay people aren't animals, they're people. People that can make their own decisions, and should have the right to marry.
Marriage did not begin with Christianity. :|
Also our laws do not let animals marry because they are unable to legally give consent. Same reason why we don't let children marry.
Okay, so, I'm both Christian and gay, and there are many problems with this comment. First of all, the spelling...don't get me started. Second of all, God doesn't hate. He gets dissapointed, but He certainly doesn't hate. And thirdly, God never actually said there was a problem with gay people. His people said that there was a problem with us, and His people had that particular belief at that particular time in that particular place. There are logical reasons why they thought that way, but I'm afraid I don't have the room to explain them. God is fine with homosexuality. If He were to make something someone has no choice in a sin, He would be blasphemous, and I would not believe in Him. And, even if it WERE a sin, we're all sinners. So by saying that people who against something He says will burn, then we'll all burn, because no one is perfect. Unless you are implying that you think you're perfect. Which I know is untrue. Because no one is, not me, not anybody. And gay people are not animals, we can give legal consent. If we were animals, I wouldn't want us to marry either. Oh, and marriage didn't start with Christianity. It started with civilization. Just saying.
If you're claiming to be a gay Christian, you're clearly doing something wrong.
By no means, sir.
By every means sir. The apostle Paul directly preaches against it in Romans.
26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.
28 Furthermore, just as they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, so God gave them over to a depraved mind, so that they do what ought not to be done. 29 They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, 30 slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; 31 they have no understanding, no fidelity, no love, no mercy. 32 Although they know God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.
That was an apostle. Not God Himself. Paul is saying that they are gossips, slanderers, etc. because that's what he believes and that's what everybody around him believes. Did God punish them? He might have, because if they left women just to have "shameless acts" with men, then it's sex without love. I believe that's what He meant by "shameless acts." If I went and slept with someone without loving them, I would be given the same punishment God gave them if I did not repent. Because there would be that absence of love. By "natural relations", I believe God wanted the sex to be pure and filled with love, not just lust. The Bible says that if you are going to have sex with someone, you should truly love that person. And Paul is judging these people here, as well. People make mistakes. Just because you go and have some lustful sex with someone you don't care for doesn't mean you're a terrible person. And who knows, maybe Paul was just saying this so people would take it literaly, not search for the deeper meaning, and then ban homosexuality. Who knows? He could have just hated homosexuality, and knew he had the power to try and abolish it. There's no way of knowing for sure.
If you wanna fight with scripture, I'll fight with scripture. The apostle Paul also says in 1 Corinthians 6:9-11
Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kindom of God? Do not be decieved: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And that is what some of you WERE. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.
Here he says that Christians, when baptized had their sins washe away by the blood of Jesus Christ freeing them from all punishments. However, as Christians, they should rid of their sinful lifestyles and follow God's law, which may take time. But if a homosexual does not try to rid of their lifestyle after they are saved, then yes, they are doing something wrong.
But this transition usually takes a very long time. Often many years. In the mean time, they will still be homosexuals. But I definately understand what you're trying to say
I just want you to know that when I read H*** I pronounced it as Htcccch in my head.
Hey hey hey. Hang on, man. Fellow Christian here. Jesus believed in fairness and equal treatment. So do I.
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. "Racist". Anyway, you're an idiot. Christianity did not start marriage, they just gave the contract between two people a name. "Marriage" as we see it started long long ago during times Mesopotamia. Maybe even before that, i'm not too sure.
(I think this is a troll though because the spelling is horrendous)
"Our laws don't let animals marry". Yes, because gay people are animals. In fact, why don't you ban us from entering stores and resturants as well?
Thatd be sweet if they did
I hope you know that you're going to be seen as one of the racists in the early 1900's who thought that black people were animals.
Slow down there. First of all, it was NOT the Christians who started marriage. Secondly, JC does not hate gays, nor does he hate people who lie. Each sin is FORGIVEN because Jesus loved ALL and he carried the cross to get rid of our sins. Therefore, there is NOTHING WRONG with homosexuality in christianity.
Why is this directed to America, its a world wide problem where gays aren't accepted. In Nigeria it is ILLEGAL to be a homosexual of any gender, punished by 14 years in jail, and in some areas they get stoned to death. America is not as bad as some other countries when it comes to gay rights.
Beacuse Canada accept Gay marrige
So did New York
But the diffrence between Canada and New York is that New York is a state and Canada is a whole country. That means that only a small part of the Usa accept gay marrige while Canada, A whole nation accept it or tolerate it.
Hmmmm. Where have I read this before?
Oh. I know. 12,000 times on amirite.
...Don't post something that's been posted before. Please use the search if you're not sure...
If you don't follow these rules your post may be removed by a moderator. If you see a post that doesn't follow these rules, you can report it to a moderator by clicking the red flag.
"'Hmmmm. Where have I read this before?
Oh. I know. 12,000 times on amirite."
oh where have i seen that post before?
5000 million times on amirite
Complaining about people who are against gay marriage is just as annoying as people who are against gay marriage.
I feel that this "complaining" is necessary because these people deserve the same rights as you and me. This issue is important and people need to be informed about it for people to start becoming truly equal.
I don't care how annoying it is. People need to speak their voice so that equality can be reached. These people deserve the same rights as straight people and they need to speak up for them. I'm sure that people thought the anti-racism protests in the fifties were annoying as well.
I don't think I completely understand your comment.
Forget about what?
All I'm trying to say is that it seems to me that everyone is just jumping on the bandwagon here as if it would help to post about it everywhere. I know there are some people out there that genuinely care but I many of these so called gay rights supporters do nothing to help the cause other then annoy and judge others who've done nothing wrong. I respect gay rights, but I don't like it that many people are only supporting it because they feel obliged to by others.
The problem I have with this particular post is that it's berating people who don't support gay rights yet the OP knows that most people on amirite will agree thus begging the question why posts like these are necessary and how it helped the cause in any way.
Aren't all posts created with the intention of appealing to most users?
Holy crap that was a long post, though I feel like I still haven't explained my words properly, so frustrating.
Climate change is also an important issue yet I do not see nearly as many posts about that. If that continues we'll all be equally dead.
I disagree with that. Climate change is real. However, the effects of it and the amount caused by humans has been extremely over exaggerated.
That's what many people like to believe.
Read "Super Freakonomics". It has a very interesting chapter on the subject. It's not what I like to believe. It's just what I believe. The fact of the matter is that that the current climate closely follows global trends.
Complaining about the complaint: so much better, thanks.
Call me if you need an arsehole for hire.
Sounds like something a gay prostitute would say.
Business has been kinda rough lately :(
This is my not giving a fuck face.
It's similar... But without the cat.
I get it...