NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.dn.se/DNet/jsp/polopoly.jsp?d=1042&a=848345

Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt in a radio interview said that the government had abandoned its trials at reaching an agreement with the Christian Democrats (KD) on the issue of gender neutral marriages.

It has thus decided to introduce a common proposition on a new marriage law and will leave it up to the Riksdag (where 6 parties, representing 90+% of the mandates support gender neutral marriages) to add to it provisions that render marriage in Sweden gender neutral. In fact, the three other parties in the coalition government will file the addition and have already invited the opposition (that has already introduced their own motion favouring gender neutral marriage) to vote in unison with them. KD will thus not even get the chance to officially reserve themselves in the government's proposition - they will be completely sidestepped.

Hurrah! I couldn't have hoped for a better solution to the KD blockage. It's late in the game, but it has finally come. I really like what the Liberals' leader, and Minister for Education, said on it:

"Kd har inte velat att homosexuella ska får använda ordet äktenskap. Men det är ju det som är själva poängen med vad vi vill uppnå nu. Kd:s förslag var ju därför inte användbart"

"KD didn't want to make it so that homosexuals could use the word 'marriage'. But that is the entire point with what we've wanted to achieve through this (civil unions already 100% equal marriages in all but name). KD's suggestions were thus not usable."

I love, love, love parliamentarianism and minority protections. Don't you? :D

Elsewhere, in a creepy place far far away with an antediluvian Zeitgeist, marred by retardation when it comes to social progress... (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-gaymarriage6-2008nov06,0,2331815.story) *rolls eyes, then points and laughs*

I think Proposition 8 taught us the importance of advertising.

Supposedly, all the "yes" people were advertising in far greater amounts and numbers than the "no" people.

The result is unfortunate. The result in Sweden, however, is fortunate.

Well, once again Europe gets it right and America fucks it all up.

Anyone else now seeing banner ads for gaycupid photos?

....crap, it's going to be just me, I know it....

Anyone else now seeing banner ads for gaycupid photos?

I have a for/against Gay Marriage voting ad.

I have a for/against Gay Marriage voting ad.

Link me!

Yay Sweden!

Nay United States!

Fass, I congratulate Sweden on its enlightenment, I really do.

That said, and bearing in mind I'm neither an American nor an apologist for its current policies, why do you feel the need to point and laugh at the fact that gay people that are just like YOURSELF except for language and place of birth will suffer? Is it not better to be saddened and wish they have the same enlightenment?

Anyone else now seeing banner ads for gaycupid photos?

....crap, it's going to be just me, I know it....

What are these 'ads' of which you speak?

That said, and bearing in mind I'm neither an American nor an apologist for its current policies, why do you feel the need to point and laugh at the fact that gay people that are just like YOURSELF except for language and place of birth will suffer? Is it not better to be saddened and wish they have the same enlightenment?

I am under the impression; that is not how Fass works. His dislike for Americans is so great he doesn't give a shit who they are.

I am under the impression; that is not how Fass works. His dislike for Americans is so great he doesn't give a shit who they are.

Not much of a gay man, then, IF (and only if) he's willing to be joyful at the prospect of gays that happen to be Americans suffering.

I have a for/against Gay Marriage voting ad.

I had an ad for bharatmatrimony.com which I believe to be a dating site for Indian expatriates, which makes sense as there are a metric fucktonne of them in Kuwait.

Fass, I congratulate Sweden on its enlightenment, I really do.

I would expect no less of you. :)

That said, and bearing in mind I'm neither an American nor an apologist for its current policies, why do you feel the need to point and laugh at the fact that gay people that are just like YOURSELF except for language and place of birth will suffer? Is it not better to be saddened and wish they have the same enlightenment?

An important part of living this life as a homosexualist is having an ability to appreciate the tragicomedy of events. Sucks to be gay in the USA - it always has and seemingly it will continue to be so in what is supposed to be billed as one of their more "liberal" states - but it's really a hoot, the mean-spiritedness of the entire referendum. I can't do anything else but laugh - "c'est vraiment la vie", and I'm just glad it ain't mine. My commiserations to my fellow fags, but I do think they see my point.

Well Fass, congratulations on living in a country almost as progressive as Canada. :p

But seriously, good for Sweden.

http://www.dn.se/DNet/jsp/polopoly.jsp?d=1042&a=848345

<snip>

It took some time, but finally, welcome to the club :)

I would expect no less of you. :)



An important part of living this life as a homosexualist is having an ability to appreciate the tragicomedy of events. Sucks to be gay in the USA - it always has and seemingly it will continue to be so in what is supposed to be billed as one of their more "liberal" states - but it's really a hoot, the mean-spiritedness of the entire referendum. I can't do anything else but laugh - "c'est vraiment la vie", and I'm just glad it ain't mine. My commiserations to my fellow fags, but I do think they see my point.

Yes, Fass, you actually CAN do something.

You see, that law in Sweden was passed through a few means. The correct pressure applied in the correct way. Not unlike choosing the way to perform a surgical procedure. One of the things you could do for the benefit of all people, American or otherwise, of this forum - perhaps even many people in other countries as well, should your information spread - would be to show how it was done in Sweden. And to remind people that your model must be adapted in order to work in other countries.

That would help the gays in California, in Brazil, in Germany, and so on and so forth. Everyone can do something. I'm pretty sure I actually talked a guy I know off voting for McCain - the guy is from Indiana, a swing state. Locally, you know that idiotic homophobic bigot you are forced by oath to treat? You can inform to him your sexual orientation right after patching him up and leaving him indebted to you for his life. And so on. Holistics, Fass. It's a beautiful thing.

"Kd har inte velat att homosexuella ska får använda ordet äktenskap. Men det är ju det som är själva poängen med vad vi vill uppnå nu. Kd:s förslag var ju därför inte användbart"

"KD didn't want to make it so that homosexuals could use the word 'marriage'. But that is the entire point with what we've wanted to achieve through this (civil unions already 100% equal marriages in all but name). KD's suggestions were thus not usable."Applicable?

Yes, Fass, you actually CAN do something.

But that would require me to actively want the USA to improve domestically. I do so only passively, in the sense that I want the world to be a better place, yadda yadda yadda, but I have other places much closer to my heart to which I concentrate my efforts - continental Europe, for one. It's not all Scandinavia and The Netherlands, you know. There are dreadful places like Ireland and Poland and Portugal. *shudders*

You see, that law in Sweden was passed through a few means. The correct pressure applied in the correct way. Not unlike choosing the way to perform a surgical procedure. One of the things you could do for the benefit of all people, American or otherwise, of this forum - perhaps even many people in other countries as well, should your information spread - would be to show how it was done in Sweden. And to remind people that your model must be adapted in order to work in other countries.

Our model is not replicable in the USA. For one, they're not a democracy of modern standards. They have referenda on the rights of minorities, for goodness sake! They may as well have plebiscites on pieces of shattered pottery deciding who's popular enough to be a person before the law... but also, they don't have a parliamentarian system. How we did it is utterly incompatible to how they've done even their little things, like Massachusetts and whatsthatotherplace. They have to rely on courts - courts! - for social progress. It's... again, hilarious, this inability to deal with things as a society, but to have to rely on referees... puerile.

That would help the gays in California, in Brazil, in Germany, and so on and so forth. Everyone can do something. I'm pretty sure I actually talked a guy I know off voting for McCain - the guy is from Indiana, a swing state.

You like to waste your efforts in places where I do not. So?

Locally, you know that idiotic homophobic bigot you are forced by oath to treat? You can inform to him your sexual orientation right after patching him up and leaving him indebted to you for his life. And so on. Holistics, Fass. It's a beautiful thing.

I would never do such a thing. My personal life is not something I parade in front of people in my care. Such degree of unprofessionalism may be very idolised on "Grey's Anatomy" or "House", but in real life, things don't work that way. The people in our care deserve, and can expect, much more respect than that.

You like to waste your efforts in places where I do not. So?



I would never do such a thing. My personal life is not something I parade in front of people in my care. Such degree of unprofessionalism may be very idolised on "Grey's Anatomy" or "House", but in real life, things don't work that way. The people in our care deserve much more respect than that.

1- It's not always wasted. ;)

2- Come to think about it, yeah, it WOULD be a tad ridiculous. Sorry, got carried away, I guess. :(

>.>

<.<

And "Scrubs", actually. I don't watch House or Grey's. :p

Applicable?

I don't understand your question. "Användbart" is the adjective form of the verb "använda", which means "use". "Användbar(t)" means "usable" or "useful" depending on context. Here it means "usable". Why would there be question about its applicability?

*rolls eyes, then points and laughs*

Oh, fucking shut up.

1- It's not always wasted. ;)

At least you give credit where credit is due. :P

2- Come to think about it, yeah, it WOULD be a tad ridiculous. Sorry, got carried away, I guess. :(
>.>
<.<
And "Scrubs", actually. I don't watch House or Grey's. :p

If it consoles you, my sexual orientation is for most parts not something I have to "reveal". It's nothing I've hidden - I don't answer questions gender neutrally, so people "get it" matter-of-factly. "What did you do last weekend? I and my boyfriend went to..." and that's that.

I think Proposition 8 taught us the importance of advertising.

You mean "the efficacy of well-funded pathological dishonesty."

Though perhaps that is a distinction without a difference. Marketing is what it is.

At least you give credit where credit is due. :P

I didn't understand the answer... o_O

Oh, fucking shut up.

Oh, come on. Don't tell me you don't see the humour in it?

I didn't understand the answer... o_O

An allusion to you wanting to bask in the "glory" of Obama's achievement by inferring that you had something to do with it.

Oh, come on. Don't tell me you don't see the humour in it?

Explain it to me like I'm a four year old.

Explain it to me like I'm a four year old.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=14173293&postcount=13

I thought I'd already done so. What would you like elaborated?

Oh, come on. Don't tell me you don't see the humour in it?

The "humour" in seeing hundreds of thousands of people denied equal rights by vote of their fellow citizens?

No. I can't honestly say I see any humor in that.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=14173293&postcount=13

I thought I'd already done so. What would you like elaborated?

I'd like the part where it's funny elaborated. For all the made up words like tragicomedy, I'm not sure why you find "the mean-spiritedness of the entire referendum" such a hoot. I get the tragi- part, but perhaps you could explain the -comedy part, because I'm not seeing it.

An allusion to you wanting to bask in the "glory" of Obama's achievement by inferring that you had something to do with it.

Chuckles. Relax. Indiana wasn't a needed state, I did not "flip" it, and I'm well-aware of that. I only annoyed a guy out of voting for McCain.

The "humour" in seeing hundreds of thousands of people denied equal rights by vote of their fellow citizens?

No. I can't honestly say I see any humor in that.

Pity, it makes life much less depressing. Look at it this way: this is California. The place that's supposed to be as godless as the USA can ever stretch itself to; what with Los Angeles and all the celebs, and San Francisco and all the faggy hippies... and not even there can decency towards people stand up to rightist douchebaggery. It's tragicomic, yes, but the tragedy just adds to the "lulz" of happenstance.

Chuckles. Relax. Indiana wasn't a needed state, I did not "flip" it, and I'm well-aware of that. I only annoyed a guy out of voting for McCain.

But you see, that means you've socially associated with someone who'd vote for someone like McCain. That's a pyrrhic victory if ever I saw one... sort of like California turned out to be for USA gay people, no? See it now?

I don't understand your question. "Användbart" is the adjective form of the verb "använda", which means "use". "Användbar(t)" means "usable" or "useful" depending on context. Here it means "usable". Why would there be question about its applicability?Dunno. My Swedish is non-existant. It sounded similar to "anwendbar" in German, which is closer to "applicable" than "useable".

But you see, that means you've socially associated with someone who'd vote for someone like McCain. That's a pyrrhic victory if ever I saw one... sort of like California turned out to be for USA gay people, no? See it now?

He's my friend, Fass. I'm pretty sure you associate with people that voted for the Christian Democrats in beautiful Sverige...

I'd like the part where it's funny elaborated. For all the made up words like tragicomedy, I'm not sure why you find "the mean-spiritedness of the entire referendum" such a hoot. I get the tragi- part, but perhaps you could explain the -comedy part, because I'm not seeing it.

Oh, there is much comedy in villainy - in this case, the scale is cartoonish. So much effort and time and money and zeal to end something that doesn't affect anyone but the people who engage in it. I find such expressions of group insanity humorous, yes. Especially when they achieve their goals in such a way as to give an ironic tinge to the other side's hitherto perceived fortune - their "victory" in the regional Supreme Court precipitated this. I can but laugh at the kookiness of that.

The place that's supposed to be as godless as the USA can ever stretch itself to; what with Los Angeles and all the celebs, and San Francisco and all the faggy hippies...

San Francisco went "No" rather overwhelmingly, but California is much more than San Francisco.

and not even there can decency towards people stand up to rightist douchebaggery.

Yes. The thing is, contemplating this fact makes me alternate between horrible sadness and utter fury. I'm not sure how you see any humor in it.

Bigotry can be funny, yes, but bigotry is funniest when it is powerless and defeated. Not when it has dealt what is by any estimation a severe blow to the marriage equality movement.

It tragicomic, yes, but the tragedy just adds to the "lulz" of happenstance.

Tragicomedy is one thing. Pointing and laughing at the misfortune of others is quite another.

He's my friend, Fass. I'm pretty sure you associate with people that voted for the Christian Democrats in beautiful Sverige...

I really don't. Not socially, and not elsewhere if I can help it. I had an acquaintance in gymnasiet once that turned out to be a "Bible-believing" (her words) Christian who admitted that she honestly thought a fundamental reading of the Bible was best, which I could have lived with... but when she said she was going to vote KD, our acquaintance was over.

Oh, there is much comedy in villainy - in this case, the scale is cartoonish. So much effort and time and money and zeal to end something that doesn't affect anyone but the people who engage in it. I find such expressions of group insanity humorous, yes. Especially when they achieve their goals in such a way as to give an ironic tinge to the other side's hitherto perceived fortune - their "victory" in the regional Supreme Court precipitated this. I can but laugh at the kookiness of that.

I'm sorry, but I vehemently disagree. And I figured you might show a bit more solidarity with your homosexual brethren across the globe, but I suppose your world does not extend beyond your own nose. I think that's what's truly tragic here.

San Francisco went "No" rather overwhelmingly, but California is much more than San Francisco.

Of course San Francisco went no overwhelmingly, but as you said there is more to California than San Francisco - there is being part of the USA. *sigh*

Bigotry can be funny, yes, but bigotry is funniest when it is powerless and defeated. Not when it has dealt what is by any estimation a severe blow to the marriage equality movement.

As someone who isn't affected by it, I am in position to find the funny in both situations. I have even when I have been affected by it - the whole KD thing in Sweden, for instance, has been such a glorious political farce, there is a part of me that will miss the ways KD managed to stall the entire thing for six years. The ingenuity and outright hilariousness of the straw-grasping has been a great show.

Tragicomedy is one thing. Pointing and laughing at the misfortune of others is quite another.

Yeah, and you've never laughed at someone who's taken a spill... right...

Yeah, and you've never laughed at someone who's taken a spill... right...

That's because physical humor is actually funny, while the repression of minority rights is not.

I'm sorry, but I vehemently disagree. And I figured you might show a bit more solidarity with your homosexual brethren across the globe, but I suppose your world does not extend beyond your own nose. I think that's what's truly tragic here.

No, what's truly tragic here is that you think that my love of the cock should blind me from seeing a "be careful what you wish for..." situation when it's staring me right in the face. But do feel free to try to claim that I should mould my personality into the shape of your cookie-cutter. I see the humour in that, too.

That's because physical humor is actually funny, while the repression of minority rights is not.

See: Southpark and AIDS-jokes. "Too soon, man! Too soon..." :rolleyes:

"KD didn't want to make it so that homosexuals could use the word 'marriage'. But that is the entire point with what we've wanted to achieve through this (civil unions already 100% equal marriages in all but name). KD's suggestions were thus not usable."


Horray for Sweden, here's hoping the UK government follows suit soon enough. Since we're currently in the same position of civil partnerships being gay marriage in all but name, let's get it properly sorted and use the same term. Of course for us it will involve getting round both a good part of the Conservatives and a good section of the Lords. The latter is easy enough (Parliament Act) but the former may take some doing.

No, what's truly tragic here is that you think that my love of the cock should blind me from seeing a "be careful what you wish for..." situation when it's staring me right in the face. But do feel free to try to claim that I should mould my personality into the shape of your cookie-cutter. I see the humour in that, too.

Your love of the cock or not, your total and complete lack of anything even remotely resembling sympathy for another person's misfortune is rather upsetting, as I had previously thought somewhat highly of you. I'm sure you'll return with some self-congratulating witty retort about your total disdain of my opinion of you.

Either way, you find humor in the misfortune of others. That's a negative quality, no matter how vainly you attempt to spin it.

See: Southpark and AIDS-jokes. "Too soon, man! Too soon..." :rolleyes:

Is this an actual argument, or something? I don't see how Southpark is relevant. This isn't a joke, and it's not a TV show, and the only one laughing seems to be you.

I would expect no less of you. :)



An important part of living this life as a homosexualist is having an ability to appreciate the tragicomedy of events. Sucks to be gay in the USA - it always has and seemingly it will continue to be so in what is supposed to be billed as one of their more "liberal" states - but it's really a hoot, the mean-spiritedness of the entire referendum. I can't do anything else but laugh - "c'est vraiment la vie", and I'm just glad it ain't mine. My commiserations to my fellow fags, but I do think they see my point.
You think mistakenly, then.

Link me!
I get the Gay Marriage Yes/No (http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/imgad?id=CKKDzd_ansrkZxDYBRhPMghodvZU3aLlpw) ad too.

Your love of the cock or not, your total and complete lack of anything even remotely resembling sympathy for another person's misfortune is rather upsetting, as I had previously thought somewhat highly of you. I'm sure you'll return with some self-congratulating witty retort about your total disdain of my opinion of you.

I think it's quite odd that you have such a black-and-white view, you of all people here, whom frankly I would expect more from. You honestly seem to think that my seeing humour in all this would somehow preclude me from being sympathetic. You'd never make it doing what I do without being able to find things to laugh at in the ghastliest of things. This California business doesn't hold a candle to what I have been able to appreciate the humour in.

Either way, you find humor in the misfortune of others. That's a negative quality, no matter how vainly you attempt to spin it.

That's a quality we all have - at least I don't lie about it or pretend as if that weren't the case in a sanctimonious attempt to come across as holy.

You think mistakenly, then.

You think you can claim so and that I would give it credence.

That's a quality we all have
You are mistaken, again.

Is this an actual argument, or something? I don't see how Southpark is relevant.

That's probably because you haven't seen the episode where they make fun of people like you and your holy cows of "*gasp!* we can't laugh at that!"* Funny, because that's what most of their episodes end up being about, anyway...

This isn't a joke, and it's not a TV show, and the only one laughing seems to be you.

You seem to think numerics matter.

You are mistaken, again.

You think you can claim so and that I would give it credence, once more. Do you have a bridge to sell me, too?

Yeah, and you've never laughed at someone who's taken a spill... right...

I think we are operating on different understandings of "misfortune."

Sure, I've laughed at minor hurts and inconveniences, of others and of myself... but a majority of the people of a state voting people into second-class citizenship does not fall into that category.

And I do not laugh when even a minor hurt or inconvenience is the result of malicious bigotry.

I think it's quite odd that you have such a black-and-white view, you of all people here, whom frankly I would expect more from. You honestly seem to think that my seeing humour in all this would somehow preclude me from being sympathetic. You'd never make it doing what I do without being able to find things to laugh at in the ghastliest of things. This California business doesn't hold a candle to what I have been able to appreciate the humour in.

No, what I think is that this is indicative of your well-documented ability to find fault in the United States and Americans regardless of circumstances. On a night where the United States takes a great step back from the cliff it had been standing on the edge of, you enjoy the vindication of having your beliefs of the backwardness of Americans, perhaps truthful beliefs, justified. I think it demonstrates that, in this online persona you have carefully constructed, your disdain for the United States trumps all other concerns, beliefs, viewpoints, and opinions. In this respect, I find you no better than the common ultra-conservative troll, just from a different part of the spectrum.

That's a quality we all have - at least I don't lie about it or pretend as if that weren't the case in a sanctimonious attempt to come across as holy.

It's a difference of scale. To borrow your previous example, would I laugh at a guy who tripped and fell on the sidewalk? Maybe. Would I laugh at a guy getting shot in the kneecap? Probably not. Do I laugh at the guy whose wife won't talk to him now because he named his daughter Sarah McCain Palin behind her back? Sure. Do I laugh that gay couples who finally got the chance to marry in California are going to have that taken away from them? No.

But that would require me to actively want the USA to improve domestically. I do so only passively, in the sense that I want the world to be a better place, yadda yadda yadda, but I have other places much closer to my heart to which I concentrate my efforts - continental Europe, for one. It's not all Scandinavia and The Netherlands, you know. There are dreadful places like Ireland and Poland and Portugal. *shudders*



Our model is not replicable in the USA. For one, they're not a democracy of modern standards. They have referenda on the rights of minorities, for goodness sake! They may as well have plebiscites on pieces of shattered pottery deciding who's popular enough to be a person before the law... but also, they don't have a parliamentarian system. How we did it is utterly incompatible to how they've done even their little things, like Massachusetts and whatsthatotherplace. They have to rely on courts - courts! - for social progress. It's... again, hilarious, this inability to deal with things as a society, but to have to rely on referees... puerile.



You like to waste your efforts in places where I do not. So?



I would never do such a thing. My personal life is not something I parade in front of people in my care. Such degree of unprofessionalism may be very idolised on "Grey's Anatomy" or "House", but in real life, things don't work that way. The people in our care deserve, and can expect, much more respect than that.

This makes more sense than anything else I've read yet today...

There are dreadful places like Ireland and Poland and Portugal. *shudders*

Normally I'd rise to this but I agree with you.

Ah, Fass, I love how you use NSG to vent. :D

Good for Sweden. Keep it up, my Nordic brothers and sisters!

Anyone else now seeing banner ads for gaycupid photos?

....crap, it's going to be just me, I know it....

They are on to you :p

Actually I'm getting those ads too.

I really don't. Not socially, and not elsewhere if I can help it. I had an acquaintance in gymnasiet once that turned out to be a "Bible-believing" (her words) Christian who admitted that she honestly thought a fundamental reading of the Bible was best, which I could have lived with... but when she said she was going to vote KD, our acquaintance was over.

Really? You can't even be friends with people who have different views to you? Gee what is that like?

Huh. Sweden did something right for once. I guess even a blind squirrel can find a nut every once in a while.

Really? You can't even be friends with people who have different views to you? Gee what is that like?

It's not just different views, it's a view that Fass shouldn't have the same rights as she does. I'm sure I (and you, if I recall correctly) would have trouble being friends with an anti-Catholic. It's not impossible, but far from easy.

It's not just different views, it's a view that Fass shouldn't have the same rights as she does. I'm sure I (and you, if I recall correctly) would have trouble being friends with an anti-Catholic. It's not impossible, but far from easy.

Well actually I am friends with someone who describes himself as a 'militant atheist' and someone else who is anti-catholic. The argument we got into over World Youth Day wasn't pretty but those sorts of things just slide between the two of us and we would still chat and share a beer. It depends on how bad they go about though if they are always in your face about it and it is annoying you then yes it would be hard if it isn't something that comes up often then it would be easier. I have, however, a feeling that Fass would be the one in people's faces about these issues more than the other way around, and may explain why he needs to be with people who will nod their head in agreement.

Our model is not replicable in the USA. For one, they're not a democracy of modern standards. They have referenda on the rights of minorities, for goodness sake! They may as well have plebiscites on pieces of shattered pottery deciding who's popular enough to be a person before the law... but also, they don't have a parliamentarian system. How we did it is utterly incompatible to how they've done even their little things, like Massachusetts and whatsthatotherplace. They have to rely on courts - courts! - for social progress. It's... again, hilarious, this inability to deal with things as a society, but to have to rely on referees... puerile. That's a pretty interesting way to look at...well most common law countries.

Is it actually the common law that causes this to happen, I wonder? Or is the common law so inextricably caught up in a particular culture, that it's simply cultural imperative? Chicken, or egg...

*snip*
I'm sure Fass's personality is not entirely blameless. But I don't think he's obliged to be friends with everyone, and if he feels he can't get along with someone who was voting KD, it doesn't reflect poorly on him for wanting to avoid that person.

It is pretty sad that, as my mother put it...the US took one step forward, two steps back.

Right now, we have no idea whether Obama will be the force of change he is expected to be, above and beyond the simple fact of his breaking the 'racial' barrier. We DO know, however, that people allowed their fear, and ignorance, and bigotry to strip others of their rights. Don't let Obama overshadow that tragedy.

Congrats, Sweden.

I'm sure Fass's personality is not entirely blameless. But I don't think he's obliged to be friends with everyone, and if he feels he can't get along with someone who was voting KD, it doesn't reflect poorly on him for wanting to avoid that person.

Oh I'm not saying he should be friends and didn't mean to come across like that. I am sure he can find it hard to be get along with someone who was voting opposite to his beliefs I just found it strange that he couldn't be at all.

And I do not laugh when even a minor hurt or inconvenience is the result of malicious bigotry.

Ugh.

You people actually seem to think that 'laughing' means 'taking joy in'.

Have you never been so happy you cried?

Some things are so awful, they need to be mocked, ridiculed, and laughed at.

But you see, that means you've socially associated with someone who'd vote for someone like McCain. That's a pyrrhic victory if ever I saw one... sort of like California turned out to be for USA gay people, no? See it now?

I don't define people solely by their political beliefs. Granted, there is certainly justification if said beliefs do involve oppressing your rights.

That said, I know many McCainanites who are on the whole, very decent people. And though I agree with you quite often politically and disagree with them almost all the time politically, I still respect them a great deal more than I respect you.

You think you can claim so and that I would give it credence, once more. Do you have a bridge to sell me, too?

What gives him less credence than you? All we have so far is your word against his.