Wednesday, October 24, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Support Canadian snark!
Syndicate
Blog Archive
-
▼
2007
(2146)
-
▼
October
(110)
- Deja vu all over again.
- None dare call it "censorship."
- Concealed carry for me, but not for thee.
- Mom! Mom! Hey, Mom! Look at me! Mom! MOM! MO...
- When dumbass bloggers attack.
- Don't cloud the issue with facts, dammit!
- I mean, what could possibly go wrong?
- Heh heh ... I love being right.
- ... and in conclusion, you smell bad.
- Heh. Indeed.
- Canada: The world's peacekeepers?
- Whoopsie.
- Irony is officially dead.
- Sunday morning snark-o-rama.
- Right whingers ar stoopid.
- If you squint, you can just tell the difference.
- Kreationists ar stoopid.
- Got water?
- And now, dumbassitude that requires no introductio...
- Heh. Indeed.
- Crap crap crappity crap.
- Where's the outrage, Denyse? HERE'S the outrage.
- Airwolf: The awesome awesomeitude.
- The mote in one's eye, and all that.
- Hyper-ventilate much?
- Great minds think alike, fools seldom differ.
- Flaherty, rump melon of the week.
- Right-wing humour, as it were.
- Immunity gone...
- For reasons I shouldn't have to explain ...
- Yeah, about that "civility" thing ...
- Pay no attention to those climatic catastrophes, K...
- SHRRIIIEEEEKKKKK!!!! Never mind, we're good here.
- The classics never go out of style.
- Let's not contaminate a good rant with accuracy.
- Because you always need a good punchline.
- Can you say "shameless pandering," boys and girls?
- Faith resolved!
- The stupid! It burns!
- If the irony were any thicker ...
- Gie us a wee dram...
- Get down ...
- Dinesh D'Souza: The gift that keeps on giving.
- Please tell me that this is a joke.
- That's some serious irony you got going there, Steve.
- Nice family you got there ...
- Would someone explain to Mark Steyn the meaning of...
- Simple answers to simple questions: Oct 16, 2007.
- Sometimes playing to your demographic isn't such a...
- They're so adorable when they're that optimistic.
- The Blogging Tories get their Al Gore marching ord...
- Yeah, about that prudent fiscal restraint ...
- Don't hold your breath waiting for a retraction.
- The bottomless bucket o' irony.
- Heh.
- I'm just sayin'.
- Stenography, as it is done.
- Just another day in Wingnuttia.
- Simple answers to simple questions: Oct 12, 2007.
- Those popping sounds you hear ...
- You can feel the intellectual vacuum from here.
- Simple answers to simple questions: Oct 12, 2007.
- Let's talk about hiding behind kids, shall we?
- Your "liberal" media in action.
- It's all a matter of perspective, isn't it?
- Somehow, the name "Dick" just works, doesn't it?
- Smithers ... release the hounds!
- There's "raising the bar," and then there's ...
- If you want to bitch slap Kathy Shaidle, you'll ha...
- Into the wayback machine, Sherman.
- Unhinged Catholic, redux.
- Time to reap the whirlwind, eh, Dick?
- A world of philosophy in eight little words.
- Yeah, that's kinda bad timing, don't you think?
- Must ... resist ... cheap shot ...
- It's why you read Chester.
- Even Bible-whomping SDA whackjobs have their limit...
- Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
- "Can you hear me now? No? Can you hear me now? N...
- And sometimes, the market gets it right.
- Would you like an extra chair for your second pers...
- That's why they call it crime AND punishment, Larry.
- Oh, that gosh-darned "liberal" media.
- "Welcome to Microsoft technical support ..."
- Richard Evans, the Calgary Sun and setting the rec...
- Dear Cjunk: Let me explain that for you.
- "What? Was it something I said?"
- So long, Zorph, and thanks for all the fish.
- One of these things is not like the others ...
- Funny you should mention that, Paul ...
- Slow news day at CNN.
- 'Cuz it's all about the kids, remember?
- Dick Evans: Pulling back the curtain, and time to...
- Richard Evans: The early days.
- What? Gays should have RIGHTS? Since WHEN!?
- PZ does Canadian crackpot Denyse O'Leary ...
- Who are these people? And why are they all CC?
- When dangerous weiners attack.
- lads and lasses...
- And sometimes, high-tech isn't all it's cracked up...
-
▼
October
(110)
10 comments:
Makes you wonder how many pictures Darcey looked at to get to that one, eh?
In other news, I'm already getting ideas for an accompanying graphic for my next piece on Catholic priests ...
Why not use the same one? :)
I ain't touch that one with a ten foot pole.
They must be getting desperate if they have to pick a photo from the Folsom Street Fair (a leather/bondage festival for BOTH gays and straights) to illustrate their point.
From the pictures I've seen of Darcey, I wouldn't be surprised if he's one the guys in that photo.
*bleah*...
Anyway, I can't plow through whatever gay-themed issue got the beer-soaked redneck all discombobulated to start posting amateur porn...anyone care to give a capsule commentary?
It's hard to say. First of all I take nearly anything in the Telegraph with a grain of salt, but evidently a Council in the United Kingdom is removing a foster child from a fundamentalist Christian family because they refused to sign a consent to the new Sexual Orientation Regulations.
According to the article they say that they are being "forced" to "promote" homosexuality by allowing the child access to pro-gay literature, associations, etc. which goes against their religious beliefs.
Another example of the big bad Homosexual Agenda (tm) at work. As if you can get a bunch of gay people to agree on anything.
"...a Council in the United Kingdom is removing a foster child from a fundamentalist Christian family because they refused to sign a consent to the new Sexual Orientation Regulations.
According to the article they say that they are being "forced" to "promote" homosexuality by allowing the child access to pro-gay literature, associations, etc. which goes against their religious beliefs."
And if the child ends up in a non-fundamentalist, non-Christian home will the same council rule the child should be removed if there's no Bible, or Koran, or Torah, or whatever in the new home?
I think it's odd how tolerance seems to cut one way in these situations.
Well, I re-read the thing, and it's probably an hysterical reaction to equality legislation that, at its core, prohibits foster parents from brutalising their charges with regard to sexual orientation.
I don't think there's any obligation to promote, just a requirement *not* to condemn. Then again, this is Britain...a state that prohibited teachers from portraying homosexuality in a positive light during the Thatcher (*ptui*) years.
Hey, if you don't like what the State says, stop taking in foster kids.
And it's not as if the UK is forcing the fundies to subscribe to The Advocate, Out, or the UK-equivalent of those magazine. All they're demanding is that the foster house doesn't restrict access.
I'd certainly expect that an atheist household would be kept to the same standards if their foster sprog wanted to bring home a piece of fiction like the Bible.
And if the child ends up in a non-fundamentalist, non-Christian home will the same council rule the child should be removed if there's no Bible, or Koran, or Torah, or whatever in the new home?
Nice bait and switch. They aren't required to keep pro-gay literature in the home but they can't keep the child from accessing it. They aren't allowed to keep a child from accessing holy books either.
Post a Comment