Rockin' in the free world since 2005.

[Total: 41    Average: 3.6/5]
42 Comments - View/Add
Hits: 15545
Rating: 3.6
Category:
Date: 12/22/11 03:08 PM

42 Responses to Gays Apologize For Killing Amy Koch`s Marriage

  1. Profile photo of fancylad
    fancylad Male 30-39
    18499 posts
    December 22, 2011 at 3:06 pm
    Link: Gays Apologize For Killing Amy Koch`s Marriage - While cheating on her husband with a campaign staffer, Amy was busy trying to end same-sex marriage. The gays apologize.
  2. Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10722 posts
    December 22, 2011 at 3:26 pm
    BURN
  3. Profile photo of DiePSPolice
    DiePSPolice Male 30-39
    493 posts
    December 22, 2011 at 3:36 pm
    l o l

    Seriously, too funny. Usually the crazy anti-gay people just turn out to be self-hating gay people themselves, but this is pretty awesome in that she`s just a straight person who happens to be terrible.
  4. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12390 posts
    December 22, 2011 at 3:44 pm
    That letter contains more gems than the crown jewels. For the rest of her life, people who have read it will point at her and laugh.
  5. Profile photo of HolyGod
    HolyGod Male 30-39
    6183 posts
    December 22, 2011 at 3:49 pm
    This should be in the dictionary under "schadenfreude".
  6. Profile photo of SmagBoy1
    SmagBoy1 Male 40-49
    4432 posts
    December 22, 2011 at 3:55 pm
    HolyGod, "shadenfreude" doesn`t quite capture the nuance. Given Ms. Koch`s asshattery leading up to the revelations that she`s a hypocritical twat, a much better word would be "karma".
  7. Profile photo of nubblins
    nubblins Female 18-29
    1743 posts
    December 22, 2011 at 3:58 pm
    Gross.
  8. Profile photo of Gerry1of1
    Gerry1of1 Male 50-59
    36176 posts
    December 22, 2011 at 4:13 pm

    I wish the Republitard Leadership would get off this morals-crucade schtick.
    It doesn`t track well and is distracting from the actual republican message of
    small government. The current party leaders want a goverment just small enough
    to fit in our bedrooms.
  9. Profile photo of AvatarJohn
    AvatarJohn Male 30-39
    1059 posts
    December 22, 2011 at 4:16 pm
    That letter was so gay.
  10. Profile photo of DiePSPolice
    DiePSPolice Male 30-39
    493 posts
    December 22, 2011 at 4:20 pm
    @Gerry1of1:

    The Republicans (aside from Paul) haven`t been for small government for decades. If anything, they expand the power and reach of the federal government even faster than the Democrats do.
  11. Profile photo of xiquiripat
    xiquiripat Male 18-29
    2423 posts
    December 22, 2011 at 4:28 pm
    It`s hilarious when members of the American Taliban turn out to be hypocrites. Delicious.

  12. Profile photo of maddux32
    maddux32 Male 30-39
    926 posts
    December 22, 2011 at 5:12 pm
    Nothing against the Gays, but you`re turning into PETA. Would you stop it?
  13. Profile photo of ReBoot
    ReBoot Male 18-29
    233 posts
    December 22, 2011 at 6:24 pm
    Lol it`s funny cuz it`s insincere

    never got the whole "ruining tha sanctity of marriage" thing. strait people do that plenty

    just admit you hate gay people already
  14. Profile photo of DiePSPolice
    DiePSPolice Male 30-39
    493 posts
    December 22, 2011 at 6:43 pm
    @maddux32: "Nothing against the Gays, but you`re turning into PETA. Would you stop it?"

    I`m sure they`ll stop it when they don`t have to fight against persecution and for their rights anymore.

    If you`re tired of hearing it, make equality happen faster.
  15. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    31761 posts
    December 22, 2011 at 6:58 pm
    Hideous bint! She deserves to lose her career, what a tool.
  16. Profile photo of maddux32
    maddux32 Male 30-39
    926 posts
    December 22, 2011 at 7:03 pm
    @DiePSPolice

    Yeah, good for them, and I`m all for their individual and collective rights, but don`t go PETA over it. Just don`t. It`s not the way to get it done. It unnecessarily breeds more enemies against a group that already has healthy supply. I`m on their side, but sick and tired of their played out, in your face antics. It doesn`t help them. At all.
  17. Profile photo of Kain1
    Kain1 Male 18-29
    1473 posts
    December 22, 2011 at 7:23 pm
    H.I.larious... i`m drunk..
  18. Profile photo of Batmanners
    Batmanners Male 18-29
    4007 posts
    December 22, 2011 at 7:24 pm
    ""Nothing against the Gays, but you`re turning into PETA. Would you stop it?"

    PETA fights for the "rights" of animals, the LBGT community is trying to have equal rights (they want to be able to get married...I don`t know how else they are persecuted outside of high school otherwise)
  19. Profile photo of Draculya
    Draculya Male 40-49
    14544 posts
    December 22, 2011 at 7:24 pm
    Religious people can define ceremonial marriages within their own religion as they want, but we shouldn`t try to restrict the definition of civil union or common-law civil union because it denies important legal rights and protections to those that have a need and a right to expect it.

    The concept of a legal civil union relates to the status of two people living in a what is equivalent to a state of matrimony. The ability to reproduce is not a prerequisite for such a union, or divorce would be compulsory at menopause.

    This is a fundamental human right and is simply beyond the moral jurisdiction of religion.
  20. Profile photo of SilverThread
    SilverThread Male 30-39
    3435 posts
    December 22, 2011 at 7:50 pm
    Pure Poetry.
  21. Profile photo of I-IS-BORED
    I-IS-BORED Male 18-29
    2419 posts
    December 22, 2011 at 8:16 pm
    I think it`s pretty obvious that a woman hearing "Ms Koch?" everyday is eventually going to hear "Ms, Koch?"
  22. Profile photo of I-IS-BORED
    I-IS-BORED Male 18-29
    2419 posts
    December 22, 2011 at 8:21 pm
    "Nothing against the Gays, but you`re turning into PETA. Would you stop it?"

    Nothing against the Blacks, but you`re turning into PETA. Would you stop it?
    Nothing against the Women, but you`re turning into PETA. Would you stop it?
    Nothing against the Children, but you`re turning into PETA. Would you stop it?
    Nothing against the Common Folk, but you`re turning into PETA. Would you stop it?

    Ya, that sentence is definitely not hate speech or offensive and totally DOESN`T compare fighting for gay rights to fighting for animal rights (and thus call gays animals)
  23. Profile photo of LillianDulci
    LillianDulci Female 18-29
    2674 posts
    December 22, 2011 at 9:44 pm
    Wtf does this have to do with PETA?
  24. Profile photo of I-IS-BORED
    I-IS-BORED Male 18-29
    2419 posts
    December 22, 2011 at 10:48 pm
    @LillianDulci
    nobody said the trash spewed from maddux32`s mouth had to make sense
  25. Profile photo of jkfld
    jkfld Male 30-39
    138 posts
    December 22, 2011 at 11:55 pm
    Somebody open a window before the smoke alarm goes off, because that bitch just got burned.
  26. Profile photo of Vimto
    Vimto Male 40-49
    2852 posts
    December 23, 2011 at 3:23 am
    Who said the Americans don`t get sarcasm? Certainly the gay community have nailed it.
  27. Profile photo of MattPrince
    MattPrince Male 40-49
    2220 posts
    December 23, 2011 at 4:22 am
    @vimto, they certainy have, a nailing for a nailing...
  28. Profile photo of xCYBERDYNEx
    xCYBERDYNEx Male 18-29
    4903 posts
    December 23, 2011 at 6:21 am
    @Vimto, "Who said the Americans don`t get sarcasm?"

    Good question because that`s a pretty f*cking retarded statement.
  29. Profile photo of jtrebowski
    jtrebowski Male 40-49
    3348 posts
    December 23, 2011 at 7:17 am
    Doesn`t the bible say something about how she should be stoned to death now?
  30. Profile photo of Viking864
    Viking864 Male 40-49
    1444 posts
    December 23, 2011 at 9:25 am
    Koch is an idiot for what she did as well has her stance, but that was pretty classless.
  31. Profile photo of robosnitz
    robosnitz Male 40-49
    2737 posts
    December 23, 2011 at 9:57 am
    Damn gays.
  32. Profile photo of SarahofBorg
    SarahofBorg Female 18-29
    3564 posts
    December 23, 2011 at 1:35 pm
    It`s funny, most of what the gay marriage controversy is about is just semantics. There`s no point to "civil unions" for gays anymore than there`s a point to have "civil unions" for atheists. Even atheists can get legally married, so obviously it has nothing to do with religion. There`s simply no non-religious reason the government can`t just call a gay marriage a gay marriage.
  33. Profile photo of LazyMe484
    LazyMe484 Male 18-29
    10443 posts
    December 23, 2011 at 2:45 pm
    Hypocrisy should be punishable by public tazing.
  34. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12390 posts
    December 23, 2011 at 3:53 pm
    Wtf does this have to do with PETA?

    I thought that it was obvious that maddux32 was drawing a comparison between the methods used by PETA and the methods used by LGBTetc advocacy groups.

    Not a comparison between the twos sets of advocates. A comparison between the methods they use for their advocacy.

    I`m surprised at the level of incomprehension and (from other posters, not necessarily you) knee-jerk unsubstantiated accusations against maddux32. Which rather supports his point - the responses he`s getting are extremely PETA-like, especially the irrational and completely unconnected raving from I-IS-BORED.
  35. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12390 posts
    December 23, 2011 at 4:02 pm
    It`s funny, most of what the gay marriage controversy is about is just semantics.

    True, but it does have some very real effects.

    There`s no point to "civil unions" for gays anymore than there`s a point to have "civil unions" for atheists.

    I think the easiest way is to have *all* government recognition of formalised personal relationships labelled "civil unions" (or "civil partnerships", as they`re called here). Put all the legal rights and responsibilities in there, everyone gets equal treatment under the law and the contentious word "marriage" is avoided.

    But it`s better to have the same legal status with different official names than different legal status. People who accept homosexual marriages call them that anyway, regardless of the official term, and people who don`t won`t call them marriages even if the government forms do, so it`s the quickest way to get both th
  36. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12390 posts
    December 23, 2011 at 4:04 pm
    Even atheists can get legally married, so obviously it has nothing to do with religion.

    I`d be prepared to bet that the people who oppose homosexual marriage also oppose atheist marriage and would outlaw it if they could.

    There`s simply no non-religious reason the government can`t just call a gay marriage a gay marriage.

    Religion and politics aren`t seperate, though. So a religious reason is also a political one. It shouldn`t be, but it is.
  37. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12390 posts
    December 23, 2011 at 4:13 pm
    I`ve just noticed that a previous post of mine fell prey to the invisible character-eating monster that lives in IAB`s server.

    "it`s the quickest way to get both th" should read:

    It`s the quickest way to get both the rights and the word.

    Here in the UK, we have civil marriages (heterosexual only) and civil partnerships (homosexual only), purely as a pragmatic political move to get homosexual marriages into law as quickly as possible with as little fuss as possible (it worked very well). They`re legally defined as being exactly the same in every respect and it`s normal to call them both "marriage" anyway. So even people who care about getting the word "marriage" far more than they care about the legal rights (a position I really don`t understand at all) should at least consider that route, because it works.
  38. Profile photo of ryanwi
    ryanwi Male 30-39
    73 posts
    December 24, 2011 at 8:37 am
    It could be for religious reasons. Or it could be simple f-ing common sense. Here, let me look up the word "marriage" in my dictionary:

    Marriage (n) "the state of being united with a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual or contractual relationship recognized by law"

    So it looks like athiests can get "married" but 2 dudes or 2 chicks can`t. No religion involved at all. Just common word definitions.

    Reality is I don`t particularly give a horse testicle what they call it. Doesn`t bother me in the least. But to say that there is absolutely no secular argument is idiotic.

    My opinion, get the government completely out of the marriage/civil-union/friends with tax benefits/incest business altogether. Call them all civil unions for tax and legal purposes and let the people or churches or wiccan circles or gay communes or athiest clubs or whoever else needs a group identity call them whatever the f
  39. Profile photo of ryanwi
    ryanwi Male 30-39
    73 posts
    December 24, 2011 at 8:39 am
    ... they want. *Character counter is a liar.
  40. Profile photo of OldGumbieCat
    OldGumbieCat Female 18-29
    19 posts
    December 24, 2011 at 8:39 am
    Ok, this is awesome. I know they`re lowering themselves to the hateful level of the Christian right but in this case it`s completely deserved and far more effective IMO. If people like Amy could understand kindness then they`d be a different kind of "Christian" in the first place, not a bigot who uses the bible to justify their bigotry! BTW Amy, there`s far more said against adultery AND gluttony (ahem) in the Bible than there is against homosexuals.....


  41. Profile photo of ryanwi
    ryanwi Male 30-39
    73 posts
    December 24, 2011 at 9:03 am
    Of course, if the bible doesn`t agree with conservatives they can just change it...

    http://bit.ly/3evLmk

    (Conservapedia`s Conservative Bible Project)
  42. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12390 posts
    December 24, 2011 at 3:13 pm
    My opinion, get the government completely out of the marriage/civil-union/friends with tax benefits/incest business altogether. Call them all civil unions for tax and legal purposes

    Your opinion contradicts itself and is therefore invalid.

    If you think there should be any "tax and legal purposes", then you think that the government should be in, not out.

Leave a Reply