Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Quick Search: in
Russians want Alaska back because Obama too gay
View unanswered posts
View posts from last 24 hours

 
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Off the Wall
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1564
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Wed Mar 20, 2013 2:18 am    Post subject: Russians want Alaska back because Obama too gay Reply with quote

Quote:
MOSCOW, March 16 (UPI) -- A fundamentalist Russian Orthodox group has filed a lawsuit claiming President Barack Obama's support of gay marriage invalidates the 1867 sale of Alaska.
Quote:
In court papers, the Pchyolki said the U.S. purchase of Alaska was not legal because the contract specified payment in gold coins and the United States wrote a check for $7.2 million
Quote:
In the lawsuit, the group said Obama's turnabout on same-sex marriage violates the freedom of religion of Orthodox Christians in Alaska, estimated to number about 50,000. The Orthodox "would never accept sin for normal behavior," the group said.

http://www.upi.com/Odd_News/2013/03/16/Russian-Orthodox-group-wants-Alaska-back/UPI-66511363449118/
_________________
juniper wrote:
I use ubuntu, which is why I am posting here.


Last edited by Bones McCracker on Wed Mar 20, 2013 2:56 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pjp
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 16104
Location: Colorado

PostPosted: Wed Mar 20, 2013 2:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Acceptance of payment and statute of limitations ought to take care of the gold issue. They should be fined for a frivolous lawsuit.

Personally the issue of gay marriage should be separate from religion. Religions should be free to embrace bigotry, misogyny, polygamy and all the other Good Christiany values they like. They of course should have no impact on law.
_________________
lolgov. 'cause where we're going, you don't have civil liberties.

In Loving Memory
1787 - 2008
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1564
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Wed Mar 20, 2013 3:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Government should have nothing to do with "marriage". The government perspective on the issue should be a legal one, and that means it's a contract issue like any other.

It also means married people, parents, etc., shouldn't be entitled to any kind of special treatment, tax breaks, benefits, privileges, etc. It's not like we need incentives to make babies so we can accelerate global warming or something.

The term "marriage" should be taken right out of the legislative lexicon, and it should be viewed as a religious term. If people want to create a domestic partnership, they see the government; if they want to get "married", the see the men with funny hats.
_________________
juniper wrote:
I use ubuntu, which is why I am posting here.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pjp
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 16104
Location: Colorado

PostPosted: Wed Mar 20, 2013 3:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Context & KISS. Government partnership = marriage, religious freedom = marriage.

Whether or not marriage & tax policy should mix is a different issue IMO. I think the idea is that more kids = more tax sources. I tend to agree with you, but I'd be curious to see any credible studies demonstrating whether or not it is good economic policy.
_________________
lolgov. 'cause where we're going, you don't have civil liberties.

In Loving Memory
1787 - 2008
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1564
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Wed Mar 20, 2013 4:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

pjp wrote:
Context & KISS. Government partnership = marriage, religious freedom = marriage.

The use of the word in both contexts is half the problem here.

pjp wrote:
Whether or not marriage & tax policy should mix is a different issue IMO. I think the idea is that more kids = more tax sources. I tend to agree with you, but I'd be curious to see any credible studies demonstrating whether or not it is good economic policy.

Is that the idea? I always figured it was based on flying spaghetti monster morality (that "going forth and multiplying" is a good thing to do, and that we must value the "family institution", and that it's expensive to raise kids, so parents are "entitled" to shoulder less of the national burden (cause, hey, it's not their fault they made babies; that's something your "supposed to" do), and because Christians are big on taking care of children (in addition to pumping them out like a factory). But you could be right.

I'm not sure the issue is separable, because what gays are really asking for here isn't to be allowed to live together; it's for the benefits, entitlements, and special privileges the state grants to "families" (spousal benefits, tax breaks, legal protection, numerous entitlements, etc.).
_________________
juniper wrote:
I use ubuntu, which is why I am posting here.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
juniper
l33t
l33t


Joined: 22 Oct 2004
Posts: 757
Location: EU

PostPosted: Wed Mar 20, 2013 11:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

BoneKracker wrote:
Government should have nothing to do with "marriage". The government perspective on the issue should be a legal one, and that means it's a contract issue like any other.

It also means married people, parents, etc., shouldn't be entitled to any kind of special treatment, tax breaks, benefits, privileges, etc. It's not like we need incentives to make babies so we can accelerate global warming or something.

The term "marriage" should be taken right out of the legislative lexicon, and it should be viewed as a religious term. If people want to create a domestic partnership, they see the government; if they want to get "married", the see the men with funny hats.


indeed. The problem, however, is that it is tangled up in law and taxation, in which case gays want those benefits as those benefits are supposed to protect similar relationships.

The gays get up in arms about stories (which are tragic) that they couldn't visit their partner in hospital because they were not technically family. Stuff like that matters.

PJP point is also relevant. KISS. It's a default way to deal with benefits, pensions and such. I agree, all could be done with contracts, but the fact is that most married people want benefits to go to the spouse. Do we really want lawyers drawing up contracts for every marriage?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1564
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Wed Mar 20, 2013 7:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

juniper wrote:
The gays get up in arms about stories (which are tragic) that they couldn't visit their partner in hospital because they were not technically family. Stuff like that matters.

Gay men shouldn't even be allowed in hospitals, without weekly HIV testing a good scrub-down on the way in the door. :P

Personally I think Canada should make a deal with the U.S. and trade Quebec and Nova Scotia for Alaska. That way you could get rid of all those Francophones and weirdos, and get all that oil and soon to be warmer land (Democrats would like to get rid of Alaska because it's full of libertarian-minded people with guns).
_________________
juniper wrote:
I use ubuntu, which is why I am posting here.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
energyman76b
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 26 Mar 2003
Posts: 2026
Location: Germany

PostPosted: Wed Mar 20, 2013 8:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The russians have a point. Please give them back Alaska.

Of course this means that we should get back Nordschleswig, Eastern Germany, Danzig, Ostpreußen and other lands stolen after WW2.
_________________
AidanJT wrote:

Libertardian denial of reality is wholly unimpressive and unconvincing, and simply serves to demonstrate what a bunch of delusional fools they all are.

Satan's got perfectly toned abs and rocks a c-cup.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
wildhorse
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 16 Mar 2006
Posts: 148
Location: Estados Unidos De América

PostPosted: Wed Mar 20, 2013 8:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mexico should get back its quarter of today's USA which was stolen by the USA in just another illegal invasion.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sikpuppy
n00b
n00b


Joined: 12 Jun 2012
Posts: 34
Location: Central Coast, NSW

PostPosted: Wed Mar 20, 2013 8:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

juniper wrote:
The gays get up in arms.

I know this bloke who used to frequent gay saunas, but he got tired of being up to his elbows in arseholes.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1564
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Wed Mar 20, 2013 11:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

wildhorse wrote:
Mexico should get back its quarter of today's USA which was stolen by the USA in just another illegal invasion.

You mean the so-called "Mexicans" (i.e., Spaniards) who stole it from the Native Americans, while wiping out 85% of their population?

While we're at it, the Celts should get back Spain from the half-breeds who occupy it now, who took it from the Moors who took it from the Gauls who took it from the ....
_________________
juniper wrote:
I use ubuntu, which is why I am posting here.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pjp
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 16104
Location: Colorado

PostPosted: Thu Mar 21, 2013 2:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

BoneKracker wrote:
The use of the word in both contexts is half the problem here.
I think a majority of the "problem" are those thinking their religion will be forced to acknowledge, accept & perform. I'm not saying there aren't those who think the word itself is the issue (regardless of how abused the institution is among themselves). If the court left it clearly open that religion was not obliged, I think the quantity of objectors would be a much smaller minority.

BoneKracker wrote:
I always figured it was based on flying spaghetti monster morality (that "going forth and multiplying" is a good thing to do, and that we must value the "family institution", and that it's expensive to raise kids, so parents are "entitled" to shoulder less of the national burden (cause, hey, it's not their fault they made babies; that's something your "supposed to" do), and because Christians are big on taking care of children (in addition to pumping them out like a factory). But you could be right.
There was probably some sort of morality play involved to get that group on board, so how much it was just that and parts other things, who knows.

BoneKracker wrote:
I'm not sure the issue is separable, because what gays are really asking for here isn't to be allowed to live together; it's for the benefits, entitlements, and special privileges the state grants to "families" (spousal benefits, tax breaks, legal protection, numerous entitlements, etc.).
Right, which is why it can't be "civil union" for gays and "marriage" for homophobes. Because with that division, there is still a value distinction. So the law should simply not force a religion to participate, completely unrelated to law.
_________________
lolgov. 'cause where we're going, you don't have civil liberties.

In Loving Memory
1787 - 2008
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1564
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Thu Mar 21, 2013 4:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I concur.
_________________
juniper wrote:
I use ubuntu, which is why I am posting here.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
juniper
l33t
l33t


Joined: 22 Oct 2004
Posts: 757
Location: EU

PostPosted: Thu Mar 21, 2013 10:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

BoneKracker wrote:
juniper wrote:
The gays get up in arms about stories (which are tragic) that they couldn't visit their partner in hospital because they were not technically family. Stuff like that matters.

Gay men shouldn't even be allowed in hospitals, without weekly HIV testing a good scrub-down on the way in the door. :P

Personally I think Canada should make a deal with the U.S. and trade Quebec and Nova Scotia for Alaska. That way you could get rid of all those Francophones and weirdos, and get all that oil and soon to be warmer land (Democrats would like to get rid of Alaska because it's full of libertarian-minded people with guns).


what makes you think canada wants alaska?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Darth Marley
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 25 Jan 2007
Posts: 105

PostPosted: Thu Mar 21, 2013 11:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

wildhorse wrote:
Mexico should get back its quarter of today's USA which was stolen by the USA in just another illegal invasion.


Culture myths are hilarious.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1564
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Fri Mar 22, 2013 2:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

juniper wrote:
BoneKracker wrote:
juniper wrote:
The gays get up in arms about stories (which are tragic) that they couldn't visit their partner in hospital because they were not technically family. Stuff like that matters.

Gay men shouldn't even be allowed in hospitals, without weekly HIV testing a good scrub-down on the way in the door. :P

Personally I think Canada should make a deal with the U.S. and trade Quebec and Nova Scotia for Alaska. That way you could get rid of all those Francophones and weirdos, and get all that oil and soon to be warmer land (Democrats would like to get rid of Alaska because it's full of libertarian-minded people with guns).


what makes you think canada wants alaska?

Did I say Canada wants Alaska? I think I said something more along of lines of... well... what's in the box above.
_________________
juniper wrote:
I use ubuntu, which is why I am posting here.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Darth Marley
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 25 Jan 2007
Posts: 105

PostPosted: Fri Mar 22, 2013 4:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Why would we want Quebec?

And just ask Harper, those Canucks in the Maritimes are lazy welfare deadbeats.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1564
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Fri Mar 22, 2013 5:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Darth Marley wrote:
Why would we want Quebec?

And just ask Harper, those Canucks in the Maritimes are lazy welfare deadbeats.

We want the land, because it gives us a contiguous water border to the North. As it stands now, we can easily be invaded by a European Army that lands in defenseless Quebec and just marches right across the border. The St. Lawrence River is our natural geographic border, and would be a powerful defensive feature. Good farmland, too. Besides, with global warming its not so cold there now in Winter.

The people of Quebec would simply be relocated to Alaska, and vice-versa. Problem solved.

That way, we could also stop having to defend Canadian airspace from the Russians, and they could take care of themselves. They've fished out and polluted the waters off of Quebec, and fishing's much better in Alaska, but hey, you can't have everything.

It just kind of makes sense: they've a chunk of our country, and we've got a chunk of theirs, so we ought to swap.
_________________
juniper wrote:
I use ubuntu, which is why I am posting here.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Off the Wall All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum