legov Posted May 12, 2012 Share Posted May 12, 2012 I wonder if she (Dr Laura) ever got around to read that. Brilliant, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qwpzxjor1 Posted May 12, 2012 Share Posted May 12, 2012 Because heterosexual marriages are so sacred. Jennifer Lopez and Cris Judd Wed October 2001, split July 2002. Elizabeth Taylor and Nicky Hilton May 1950, split January 1951. Courtney Thorne-Smith and Andrew Conrad Wed June 2000, split January 2001. Shannen Doherty and Ashley Hamilton Wed September 1993, split February 1994. Carmen Electra and Dennis Rodman Wed November 1998, split March 1999. Charlie Sheen and Donna Peele Wed September 1995, split February 1996. Pamela Anderson and Kid Rock Married July 2006, split November 2006 Lisa Marie Presley and Nicolas Cage Wed August 2002, split November 2002. Pamela Anderson and Rick Salomon Wed October 2007, split December 2007 Ernest Borgnine and Ethel Merman Wed June 1964, split July 1964. Drew Barrymore and Jeremy Thomas Wed March 1994, split April 1994. Axl Rose and Erin Everly Wed April 28 1990, split May 24th, 1990 (after allegations of serious domestic violence) Mario Lopez and Ali Landry Wed April 24, 2004, split May 8, 2004. Cher and Gregg Allman Wed July 1975, split July 1975. 9 days later Dennis Hopper and Michelle Phillips Wed October 1970, split 8 days later. Britney Spears and Jason Alexander Wed January 3, 2004, annulled January 5, 2004. Zsa Zsa Gabor and Felipe DeAlba Wed April 13, 1983 annulled April 14, 1983 Rudolph Valentino & Jean Acker Wed and split November 1919 - She locked him out of the honeymoon suite and they split within 6 hours of the ceremony. And my personal favourite: Kim Kardashian and Kris Humphries They sold the TV and photo rights to their wedding for $17.9 million dollars, and got divorced 72 days later, splitting the $17.9 million 50/50. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrackpotForeigner Posted May 12, 2012 Author Share Posted May 12, 2012 "Doctor Laura" herself is no great respecter of the sanctity of marriage. From her Wikipedia page: "Schlessinger met and married Michael F. Rudolph, a dentist, in 1972 while she was attending Columbia University. The couple had a Unitarian ceremony. Separating from Rudolph, Schlessinger moved to Encino, California in 1975 when she obtained a job in the science department at the University of Southern California. Their divorce was finalized in 1977. In 1975, while working in the labs at USC, she met Lewis G. Bishop, a professor of neurophysiology who was married and the father of three children. Bishop separated from his wife and began living with Schlessinger the same year. Schlessinger has vociferously proclaimed her disapproval of unwed couples "shacking up." But according to personal friend, Shelly Herman, "Laura lived with Lew for about nine years before she was married to him. His divorce was final in 1979. Bishop and Schlessinger married in 1985." So it's hard to know whether to congratulate her for being a financially successful cynic, or condemn her for being a hypocritical bitch. I think I'll go for "condemn", considering her judgemental and sanctimonious tendencies. Quite amazing that she has any credibility at all, really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThunderPower_14 Posted May 12, 2012 Share Posted May 12, 2012 The most sickening arguments against gay marriage are from people who claim to be pro gay but believe marriage should only be between a man and a woman. Those who claim that they are right behind gay "civil unions" The rights that the union entitles them to is very important, but for a lot of these people the most important thing is just having their love and their relationship recognised by their country as being identical to a heterosexual relationship. Having the same rights is not the same as being the same thing. People who try to argue that completely miss the point and miss the reason that this is such a big issue. It's like Rosa Parks on the bus. Sure, the bus takes you to the same place whether you're sitting or standing up so a white person can sit, but simply where the bus takes you isn't the point here. I'm pretty passionate about this issue tbh. I'm a married heterosexual man, but i'm basically a single issue voter on this exact issue because i'm embarrassed that my country is so backward and bigoted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
legov Posted May 12, 2012 Share Posted May 12, 2012 "Doctor Laura" herself is no great respecter of the sanctity of marriage. From her Wikipedia page: "Schlessinger met and married Michael F. Rudolph, a dentist, in 1972 while she was attending Columbia University. The couple had a Unitarian ceremony. Separating from Rudolph, Schlessinger moved to Encino, California in 1975 when she obtained a job in the science department at the University of Southern California. Their divorce was finalized in 1977. In 1975, while working in the labs at USC, she met Lewis G. Bishop, a professor of neurophysiology who was married and the father of three children. Bishop separated from his wife and began living with Schlessinger the same year. Schlessinger has vociferously proclaimed her disapproval of unwed couples "shacking up." But according to personal friend, Shelly Herman, "Laura lived with Lew for about nine years before she was married to him. His divorce was final in 1979. Bishop and Schlessinger married in 1985." So it's hard to know whether to congratulate her for being a financially successful cynic, or condemn her for being a hypocritical bitch. I think I'll go for "condemn", considering her judgemental and sanctimonious tendencies. Quite amazing that she has any credibility at all, really. Someone tell me how people like Schlessinger and goddamned George W Bush manage to get into the best universities in the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrackpotForeigner Posted May 12, 2012 Author Share Posted May 12, 2012 Some more gems from Wikipedia on the lovable Doctor Laura: "In 1998, Schlessinger was in a Costa Mesa surf shop with her son when she began perusing the skateboarding magazine, Big Brother. On her radio program, Schlessinger declared the magazine to be "stealth pornography." When the owner of the store publicly denied that she found pornography in his store, Schlessinger sued him for lying, claiming that his denial had hurt her reputation. When the case went to court, the judge dismissed her suit, but the shop owner's $4 million defamation countersuit lodged for hurting the reputation of his store was allowed to stand. The suit has since been settled, but the terms of the settlement have not been revealed. In 1998, Schlessinger's early radio mentor, Bill Ballance, sold nude photos that he had taken of Schlessinger in the mid-1970s to a company specializing in internet porn. The photos were taken while Schlessinger was involved in a brief affair with then-married Bill Ballance. Schlessinger sued after the photos were posted on the internet, claiming invasion of privacy and copyright violation. The court ruled that Schlessinger did not own the rights to the photos; she did not appeal the ruling. She told her radio audience that she was embarrassed, but that the photos were taken when she was going through a divorce and had "no moral authority." On August 10, 2010, Nita Hanson, an African-American woman married to a white man, called Schlessinger's show to ask for advice on dealing with racial comments made by acquaintances. During the call, Schlessinger used the word "nigger" eleven times. When Hanson asked, "Is it ever OK to say that word?," Schlessinger responded, "It depends how it’s said. Black guys talking to each other seem to think it’s OK." After the call Schlessinger said, "If you're that hypersensitive about color and don't have a sense of humor, don't marry out of your race." A day later, Schlessinger apologized. Hanson questioned the motivation and sincerity of Schlessinger's apology, believing it to be result of being "caught". Hanson also said that Schlessinger did not apologize for her comments on interracial marriage." Anyway, so the moral of the story is: As long as your radio show panders to the preconceived views of morons, it only matters what you say. What you actually do is irrelevant. Amazing really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarewsEyebrowDesigner Posted May 12, 2012 Share Posted May 12, 2012 So Romney comes out (ooh-err) against it. Shocker. How a **** mormon can be in with a shout for 'leader of the free world' says it all. the mad words removed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brumerican Posted May 12, 2012 Share Posted May 12, 2012 Someone tell me how people like Schlessinger and goddamned George W Bush manage to get into the best universities in the world. They didn't . They studied in America. :winkold: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted May 12, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted May 12, 2012 Marriage is simply a contract allowing 2 individuals to be treated in some circumstances as one. I don't really give a shit who engages in such a contract provided both are able to knowingly consent to it and it's connotations. And nor should anyone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MMFy Posted May 12, 2012 Share Posted May 12, 2012 Asking a Church to perform a gay marriage is like asking a Mosque to perform a Christening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qwpzxjor1 Posted May 12, 2012 Share Posted May 12, 2012 Marriages don't have to happen in churches.. Gay or otherwise.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
will87 Posted May 13, 2012 Share Posted May 13, 2012 Asking a Church to perform a gay marriage is like asking a Mosque to perform a Christening. or a gay marriage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesWithe Posted May 13, 2012 Share Posted May 13, 2012 Asking a Church to perform a gay marriage is like asking a Mosque to perform a Christening. Spot on its the same with Halal meat the way in which the animal has its throat cut is utterly barbaric...yet it is allowed We are too scared of upsetting religions which are stopping us moving forwards... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted May 13, 2012 Share Posted May 13, 2012 Asking a Church to perform a gay marriage is like asking a Mosque to perform a Christening. I don't think that's quite right. I think there are a good few churches that would happily marry gay couples already. Not least, those with gay church leaders, but not exclusively. In many areas there is a don't ask / don't tell attitude to relationships. This is stretched to the limit when a leader is quite clearly living with another man. It's just that they've never said they actually play hide the penis, and the congregation hasn't bothered to ask (because they patently already know the answer). There are already 'blessings' carried out in churches whereby civil ceremonies are 'endorsed' later in a church. I've been to one, and it wasn't some trendy Islington urban church either, it was a chocolate box twee little place where the average age of the punters was well over 60. I think if the law on gay marriage was changed in late May, the first wedding would be around about early June. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted May 13, 2012 Share Posted May 13, 2012 Marriages don't have to happen in churches.. Gay or otherwise.. Whilst they don't have to happen, perhaps they should if we want to prove we really are a progressive society (at least until no marriages happen in church which would be the other way of solving the inequality). As mentioned earlier, telling Rosa Parks she can have a seat just not one down the front really isn't good enough. We are equal, or we are not. You can offer people their own separate bus, it isn't the same. Many years ago I had a job in a Working Men's Club. They had a rule that women couldn't join independently. The rule sounded sensible at the time. Women could join, if invited by men. They could also set up their own women only club if they wanted to. After years of bother, the rule was changed, women could join. Lordy Lord, it turned out the world kept turning. The club is still there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PussEKatt Posted May 13, 2012 Share Posted May 13, 2012 I personally don"t give a stuff what gay people do, as long as they keep me out of it.I actually know a lesbian couple and they are 2 of the best people you would ever hope to meet.What worries me though is if they adopt kids ?! I mean the kid will get heaps of stick at school because all the other kids will talk about their mum and dad and this kid can only talk about his dad and dad or his mum and mum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norton65ca Posted May 13, 2012 Share Posted May 13, 2012 PussEKat, that kind of thing will dissipate once the culture becomes accustomed to it. Read my earlier comments re:bullying. Yes, the vanguard of the movement will experience some bullying, but it won't take long before that fades away. Already, here in Canad, straight kids are sticking up for gay friends, they've already decided as a youth culture they won't be having any of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maqroll Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 I'm a supporter of equal rights Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts