501. Surgeon General Nominee Dismisses Homosexuality Paper

Comment #215210 by kkelly on July 21, 2008 at 1:43 pm

At least he didn't say that homosexuality is IMMORAL, although I don't doubt that at the time of that paper he felt that it was. If he's changed his views then I can't really feel anger if he gets appointed. Then again I don't know how unscientific and bigotted the paper actually was.

The injuries he's referring to are probably hemorrhoids, anal fistulas, loss of anal tone. It's sad but true, the anus and rectum don't handle repeated cock-poundings all that well. But why would a straight man care enough to investigate it?

502. The brain in love

Comment #215169 by kkelly on July 21, 2008 at 12:45 pm

67, Right. But I wouldn't say that weddings reveal the materialistic desires, rather the self-centeredness of the brides (men are equally self-centered, just in different ways), and the only reason we put up with it is the free booze.

503. The brain in love

Comment #215164 by kkelly on July 21, 2008 at 12:37 pm

sorry, it was a topic on the first page, I didn't read the second before posting that.

504. The brain in love

Comment #215157 by kkelly on July 21, 2008 at 12:23 pm

There isn't strong evidence that lesbianism is genetic, but some evidence that male homosexuality is the unintended result of genes that bestow greater fecundity on females who have those genes; so in a sense it could be considered a 'misfiring.' I'm glad I'm gay because I could never tolerate a woman enough to be in a relationship. I don't know how straight guys do it.

505. Nine face stoning death in Iran

Comment #214679 by kkelly on July 20, 2008 at 6:48 pm

63, I already apologized 11 minutes before you posted that rebuke, you must type pretty slowly.

506. Nine face stoning death in Iran

Comment #214674 by kkelly on July 20, 2008 at 6:44 pm

61, I don't think you read my post correctly.

Anyway, it goes from him, without any context, going "they let me have catnaps", me making a joke alluding to his lack of context, him getting weirdly pissed, me thinking he was either joking or insanely hypersensitive, and then mildly making fun of him, knowing that the both of us know that I have no clue what he was talking about. Lighten the fuck up, all of you.

507. Nine face stoning death in Iran

Comment #214667 by kkelly on July 20, 2008 at 6:35 pm

OOOHHHHHHH he was talking about vietnam?!?! why didn't you just say so? You assumed I knew your life history but I don't read these forums often. Apologies.

508. Nine face stoning death in Iran

Comment #214662 by kkelly on July 20, 2008 at 6:29 pm

47, but that would be lying. I can't really see how an anonymous comment in jest on a message board could ever be offensive. I don't know him or anything about him, and he knows that, so how could anything I say have the power to hurt him? Trust me, it can't.

509. Nine face stoning death in Iran

Comment #214652 by kkelly on July 20, 2008 at 6:21 pm

whoa lighten up people, how was I supposed to know he was serious about being a part of that? What are the odds?

510. Nine face stoning death in Iran

Comment #214644 by kkelly on July 20, 2008 at 6:16 pm

35, world peace?

511. Nine face stoning death in Iran

Comment #214639 by kkelly on July 20, 2008 at 6:06 pm

mordacious, why would your schizophrenic break 35 years ago be documented in history books?

Unless you're referring to that psychological prisoner experiment? I saw some video of that, were you the one sobbing in the corner or the one licking up your piss?

512. Nine face stoning death in Iran

Comment #214614 by kkelly on July 20, 2008 at 5:10 pm

20, who's this "they" you speak of? can they read your thoughts? are they watching you right now?

513. Nine face stoning death in Iran

Comment #214601 by kkelly on July 20, 2008 at 4:41 pm

mordacious, you went 9 straight days without sleep? Some radio personality in the 50s did 8 days for a publicity stunt, and suffered permanent personality changes. If I go even 24 hours I get so disoriented I can get lost in my own neighborhood.

514. Nine face stoning death in Iran

Comment #214591 by kkelly on July 20, 2008 at 4:34 pm

Why the hell doesn't this shit get wide press coverage in america? The honor killing covered on this site was not mentioned on tv, they never are. Not to denigrate Lindsay Lohan's haggard vagina, but this stuff is much more interesting and important.

515. PLEASE WRITE IN SUPPORT OF PZ MYERS

Comment #210369 by kkelly on July 14, 2008 at 11:17 am

mordacious,

blech, PZ is not going to lose his job over this. If he did, then yes, I would fully support whatever legal repercussions that would befall the ones who issued death threats, but only if they also aided in the efforts to get him sacked.

Right now, PZ needs wider perspective. He's been an outspoken critic of religious idiocy for years, with the full knowledge of the university, but just NOW they're going to fire him?! Over an expressed opinion that the vast majority of educated americans would agree with?! Get real. Christalmighty, it's like he thinks he's Ayaan Hirsi Ali. He wishes.

516. PLEASE WRITE IN SUPPORT OF PZ MYERS

Comment #210364 by kkelly on July 14, 2008 at 10:57 am

mordacious,

sigh, obviously that last statement was sarcastic.

517. PLEASE WRITE IN SUPPORT OF PZ MYERS

Comment #210360 by kkelly on July 14, 2008 at 10:45 am

mordacious,

The problem was that it was an empty threat. If he truly felt that the threat was serious then he would have contacted the authorities. The fact that he didn't do that means that his motivation for posting the email address was only vindictiveness; he did not feel that his life was actually being threatened. Everybody has selfish retaliatory urges, but I think it was very cruel to try to cause a person actual suffering because of online words.

He posted a second person's address, and that person didn't even issue a threat!! All he did was WISH tragedy upon PZ. Obviously the motivation for posting that person's address was not concern for personal safety. And, expectedly, the pharyngulists, who take the internet way too seriously, tracked this person's information down and some are trying to mess with his livelihood too.

The internet is serious business.

518. PLEASE WRITE IN SUPPORT OF PZ MYERS

Comment #210347 by kkelly on July 14, 2008 at 9:58 am

And then PZ turned that witchhunt around and posted the work email address of a nobody who sent him an obviously EMPTY threat, knowing that all the pharyngulists would then try to get that person fired (and believe me, they're trying). You're a class act, PZ.

519. It can be right to discriminate against the religious

Comment #202318 by kkelly on July 1, 2008 at 9:39 am

Well technically, belief is largely involuntary (you can't choose to beleve the sky is green), so I wouldn't use that distinction to disqualify religion from this bill. The relevant difference is that all those other characteristics are immutable, and religion isn't. Not to say that you have NO control over your religious beliefs; you just have to not be, or aspire to not be, retarded.

520. Pop Goes Christianity

Comment #181491 by kkelly on May 17, 2008 at 9:44 am

Crikey, an evangelical AND a John Stewart fan? They must be the worst people ever.

521. Texas Megachurch Minister Busted in Internet Sex Sting

Comment #181488 by kkelly on May 17, 2008 at 9:39 am

Sometimes I'm happy that such a thing as pedophilia exists because of the joy I feel when self-righteous hypocrites like this fall hard. Does this make me a bad person? As if I care.

522. Richard Dawkins Responds to Rabbi Shmuley Boteach

Comment #181484 by kkelly on May 17, 2008 at 9:32 am

Oh god, this guy. I first became aware of his annoying existence when I was falling asleep one night while watching tv, and Shalom in the Home came on, and his grating voice jolted me awake. I was so angry I almost threw the phone at the screen, but settled on crying myself to sleep. That is one scare Jew.

We can all see how egomaniacal this fool is, as demonstrated not just in his speaking style, but his constant references to his accolades and achievements in his letter to Dawkins. Still, I wish Dawkins would point this out to him as blatantly as possible, just to rub it in his face.