dollface wrote:

Come to life, o merciful thread!

I felt a need to share this. Yes, the military actually believed they could create a Gay Bomb. What is the world coming to?

.. Wouldn't "sex bomb" be more appropriate, and far less offensive?

I love how they seem to think that gays thrive on sex. Like they never take a break for some Starbucks or to go shoe-shopping

I can't help but hope it accidentally goes off in the labs.

"Tonight at Five. Our top story : Raging Homosexuality is spreading like wildfire in the bowels of the Pentagon research facilities. Washington Officials refused to comment tonight...wait, what's this? I've just recieved word that we have just released footage of scientists and research assistants performing very explicit acts."

"...The President was unavailable for comment at this time."

dollface wrote:

I love how they seem to think that gays thrive on sex.

Sounds like that episode of South Park where homeless people survive entirely on change. Everyone knows those queers do nothing but have sex and watch Bravo.

Stormcrow wrote:

And you guys are forgetting that gay men have sex exclusively with otherwise straight children!

Oh God...
That's the prejudice that annoys (and offends) me the most.

Another one you have forgotten: gays want to rule the world and destroy hetero families!
Wait... weren't they busy having sex?

Last edited by Asfalolh (06-12-2007 09:53:20 AM)

Hey, I've seen Vandread, I know all about it!

The sad fact is that even though people are more aware of racism today than thirty years ago, actual progress has been pretty minimal there too.  School integration has been a despicable failure.  Racial segregation and inequality haven't gone away, or diminished much, and we still pretty much hate each other.  I'm actually more hopeful about homophobia than I am about racism.  If this current surge of religious zealotry and hatred subsides, it may wash a lot of the homophobia away with it, but racism is here to stay. 

Unfortunately, racism is institutionalized in some religious canon, and if not there, you don't have to dig very far.  For example, Hebrew folklore teaches that the peoples of sub-Saharan Africa are descended from Noah's wicked son (I forget his name), and the curse placed on him for raping Noah has caused his descendants to have dark skin, red eyes, and "shamefully long" penises.  Similar stories abound regarding the distinct heritages of Ishmael (Arabs) and Isaac (Hebrews).  In fact, there are some unfortunate things right in the Qu'ran about Jews and how they're not very trustworthy.  Paul had a word or two about the Jews as well.

The moral of the story:
"A Buddhist, a Muslim, a nun and a Jew were trapped in a hot air balloon,
It suddenly popped,
And though they prayed as it dropped,
It proves that god hates us all!"

Well, don't I feel uneducated The other heretics are going to be so disappointed.

And Asfalolh, there's nothing wrong with thinking positively. If you get a hold of hope, hang on! It'll keep you from drowning, like I did. [How poetic. How emo as well.]

Razara wrote:

...the pope spoke out against suing.

Seriously?  Benedict or John Paul?

A friend claimed that the coffee thing was due to the coffee served at the drive-thru being significantly hotter than the coffee served at the counter.  Sounds a little fishy, any McPloyees around here?

On the other hand, if you fall off of a roof while trying to break into a house and break your leg, that is most definitely your own stupid fault.

Is there any chance of us getting a head-shaking emoticon?  I find myself wanting one more and more.

And emoticon totally sounds like some new transformers villains.

Grrrr. That hot coffee thing makes me sick to my stomach. Everyone points it out as irresponsible litigation, but the fact is a 79 year old woman opened her coffee in a parked car and spilled it on her sweatpants, causing 3rd degree burns over 6% of her body.

Read here:

Wiki wrote:

Liebeck was wearing cotton sweatpants; they absorbed the coffee and held it against her skin as she sat in the puddle of hot liquid for over 90 seconds, scalding her thighs, buttocks, and groin.[8] Liebeck was taken to the hospital, where it was determined that she had suffered third-degree burns on six percent of her skin and lesser burns over sixteen percent.[9] She remained in the hospital for eight days while she underwent skin grafting. Two years of treatment followed.

And here:

'Lectric Law Library wrote:

A vascular surgeon determined that Liebeck suffered full thickness burns (or third-degree burns) over 6 percent of her body, including her inner thighs, perineum, buttocks, and genital and groin areas.  She was hospitalized for eight days, during which time she underwent skin grafting. Liebeck, who also underwent debridement treatments, sought to settle her claim for $20,000, but McDonalds refused.

And here:

hurt911.org wrote:

McDonald's representatives lied to the court and jury about the existence of other claims, but documents showing that they knew of more than 700 claims by people burned by its coffee between 1982 and 1992 were admitted in to evidence. Some claims involved third-degree burns substantially similar to Liebecks. This history documented McDonald's knowledge about the extent and nature of the intentionally created hazard.  McDonald's even ignored a request from the Shriner's Burn Institute in Cincinnati to turn down the temperature of its coffee.  McDonald's also said that based on a consultants advice, it held its coffee at between 180 and 190 degrees fahrenheit to maintain optimum taste. He admitted that he had not evaluated the safety ramifications at this temperature. Other establishments sell coffee at substantially lower temperatures, and coffee served at home is generally 135 to 140 degrees.

Incredibly, McDonald's quality assurance manager testified that the company actively enforced a requirement that coffee be held in the pot at 185 degrees, plus or minus five degrees. He also testified that a burn hazard exists with any food substance served at 140 degrees or above, and that McDonald's coffee, at the temperature at which it was poured into styrofoam cups, was not fit for consumption because it would burn the mouth and throat. The quality assurance manager admitted that burns would occur, but testified that McDonald's had no intention of reducing the "holding temperature" of its coffee.  McDonald's also claimed that customers buy coffee on their way to work or home, intending to consume it there, however, the company’s own research showed that customers intend to consume the coffee immediately while driving.

McDonalds ended up paying $640 000 when the judge and jury finished their deliberation. At one point, the jury had wanted to award her $2.7 million-- stated somewhere in these pages to be McDonald's profits from two days of coffee. Why? Well, because they found that the woman was using the coffee in exactly the manner that McDonald's had intended it to be used, and had even taken reasonable precautions against spillage (keeping it between her legs to stabilize it), and despite that had ended up with a $20 000 debt due to her burn injuries.

Ah, that confirms what I heard from my friend, thanks Yasha.  I'm generally not opposed to lawsuits against corporations, because I know that they'd blithely sell our organs if they could figure out how.  Lawsuits against individuals worry me a little more.  And yes, the stereotype is true, about 80% of my Jewish childhood friends have gone into law or medicine professionally.  Mostly law.

Third degree burn from coffee? Yick. Yet another reason for me to despise Mcdonalds.

On the racism/homphobia/bigotry topic..

I idealistically believe that homosexuality will become more and more accepted as time goes on. However, look at racism and sexism.. we've certainly gotten better about it, but it still exists. We still have a lot of work to do. But sadly, I think some form of bigotry will always exist.

You know.. I recall reading about something (on gaia, haha) that someone quoted somewhere about someone demanding pedophile rights just like homosexual rights. Said person quoting this was trying to scare people into believing that if we accept homosexuality, then sooner or later, we have to accept pedophilia too! Oh, and then what's to stop us from embracing bestiality next?!

At first when I read that, it made me think for a moment.. but then I realized that it was just a stupid scare tactic, and sexual acts involving two members of the same sex is definitely different than sex with an adult and child, or sex with a human and an animal. With children, they're too young and naive to know what they're doing. Sex with an adult and child is not an equal playing field. Neither is sex with a human and animal, especially since they can't even communicate. When it comes to sex and romance, things should be pretty equal, or at least close to equal, right?

However, sex with a man and women, man and man, or woman and woman, are all consentual and equal. Unless, of course, it's not. Then that's another story all together.

Sorry if that didn't make any sense. I wasn't sure how to word all of that.