Posted: Tue Oct 26, 2004 4:30 pm
Just think of the most cliche-ed annoying pre-pubescent kid sidekick in any movie you've seen, multiply annoyance factor by ten, turn into a whiney teenager in a lycra jumpsuit and there you go.
That's actually one of the better descriptions I've heard.Aldo wrote:Just think of the most cliche-ed annoying pre-pubescent kid sidekick in any movie you've seen, multiply annoyance factor by ten, turn into a whiney teenager in a lycra jumpsuit and there you go.
ah, now you see it.Raa wrote:McCaully Kaulkin (sp?) in spandex?
*shudders*
Of course he is. The sooner he makes it a dirty secret the sooner he can claim that it's an aberation that very few people have and therefore we can get back to stoning people who do it.aldo wrote:Are you saying that homosexual couples should not admit to be homosexual or display that in public, or what?
It is an aberation. It doesn't have to be a dirty little secret for it to be. It's unnatural if nothing else. Everybody is worried about offending the gay segment. What about me? Homosexuality offends me.karajorma wrote:Of course he is. The sooner he makes it a dirty secret the sooner he can claim that it's an aberation that very few people have and therefore we can get back to stoning people who do it.aldo wrote:Are you saying that homosexual couples should not admit to be homosexual or display that in public, or what?
If you consider ok to be against someone, I consider it ok to be against you. Sorry if that's harsh, but I'm a pretty pacifistic 'find the best solution for all', pro-tolerance type bloke.liberator wrote: It is an aberation. It doesn't have to be a dirty little secret for it to be. It's unnatural if nothing else. Everybody is worried about offending the gay segment. What about me? Homosexuality offends me.
So, it's not okay to be against homosexuality. However, because I and hundreds of millions like me are against it, it's okay to be against us?
What I was saying is that you can't publically start stoning gay people now cause there are millions of them but if you succeed in driving it underground you can then execute the few who do stumble into the public eye and claim that there are only a few of them.liberator wrote:It is an aberation. It doesn't have to be a dirty little secret for it to be. It's unnatural if nothing else. Everybody is worried about offending the gay segment. What about me? Homosexuality offends me.karajorma wrote:Of course he is. The sooner he makes it a dirty secret the sooner he can claim that it's an aberation that very few people have and therefore we can get back to stoning people who do it.