Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag.(show it anyway)

Especially interesting that he references Rachel's own sexual orientation at the end of the interview- which doesn't happen much on the show.

Hey, I'm straight and I never really bonded very well with my father. Is there a program I can enroll in to make me gay?

*politics

Adding video to channels (Politics) - requested by NetRunner.

wow, rachel really seemed to be taking this very personally... claws out *rawr*

as an interesting aside, penn & teller's bullshit! season 3, episode 2 'family values' has a section (begins at 14:50) on cohen and his 'therapy' - what's particularly interesting in the clip is that it shows cohen 'treating' a black man who has 'unwanted same-sex attraction' ... if you watch rachel's coverage and the p&t clips carefully, you'll notice that the cohen 'patient' and the cohen 'rep' sent to uganda to speak-out... are one and the same person

For fucks sake..... why the hell does ANYONE give a shit who I decide to fuck? Why are the people who are gay so frightening to those who are not? I can not wrap my brain around it, and frankly, I am fucking glad that I can't.

If you believe in tolerance then stop spewing hate. Or STFU. Where would we be without our gays and lesbians??

This angers me inside to the deepest part of my soul. I am sad for humanity.

I'm gay for Rachel Maddow.


ps. sexuality exists on a spectrum throughout then entire animal kingdom. you dont come out straight. if you get a boner for a lady, then you got a boner for a lady. big fucking deal.... oh or you dont really have a boner for your lady and your just a lying self loathing selfish jackass. and yes, you do have blood on your hands.

*promote

Promoting this video back to the front page; last published Wednesday, December 9th, 2009 8:58am PST - promote requested by peggedbea.

I love the - dude! i'm reading it from your book.

i think you can hear the camera guy laugh a bit.

I'm all for statistics being respected even if they're considered undesirable - because otherwise what we're doing isn't science - but the Paul Cameron guy they discuss at 6:40 sounds crazy.

Lol: "Cameron was quoted in Rolling Stone as saying that homosexual sex was more pleasurable than most heterosexual sex, and as a result, if homosexuality were tolerated then it would become predominant within a few generations." (Wiki)

Another scientists "identified at least six errors in sampling technique and data analysis. He concludes "an empirical study manifesting even one of these six weaknesses would be considered seriously flawed."

Why do we have to have labels? Don't we all start out as female in the womb? Does that not mean were all straight/gay?

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag.(show it anyway)

>> ^inflatablevagina:
For fucks sake..... why the hell does ANYONE give a shit who I decide to fuck? Why are the people who are gay so frightening to those who are not? I can not wrap my brain around it, and frankly, I am fucking glad that I can't.
If you believe in tolerance then stop spewing hate. Or STFU. Where would we be without our gays and lesbians??
This angers me inside to the deepest part of my soul. I am sad for humanity.


It's often wrapped up in "Family values" and saving children from being exposed to the gay. I think its roots are mammalian fear for their offspring.

Personally, the saddest thing to me, and I'm guessing the most angering aspect to Rachel, is that this guy is also homosexual and perpetrating some of the biggest crimes against his own kind for the sake of religion. That to me is one of the strongest damning points against religion. Brainwash a young gay child into believing that "the gays are evil" and they'll become some of the most heinous conspirators against their own kind just to hide their "evilness" from their religious peers. Fuck religion.

>> ^chilaxe:
I'm all for statistics being respected even if they're considered undesirable - because otherwise what we're doing isn't science


I agree that it shouldn't be taboo just to tabulate those kinds of statistics that Cohen presents. The focus should be more on his bad science than his undesirable hypotheses.

>> ^peggedbea:
I'm gay for Rachel Maddow..


I'm gay for Rachel too, or would that be straight for Rachel?

I guess it'd be straight either way, eh?

*quality factual massacre of an ass with NO facts on his side.

Boosting this quality contribution up in the Hot Listing - declared quality by BicycleRepairMan.

Interesting that he pronounces 'heinous' like 'penis'. Paging Dr. Freud.

>> ^shuac:
Hey, I'm straight and I never really bonded very well with my father. Is there a program I can enroll in to make me gay?


Come with me.. we have much to discuss...

>> ^inflatablevagina:
For fucks sake..... why the hell does ANYONE give a shit who I decide to fuck? Why are the people who are gay so frightening to those who are not? I can not wrap my brain around it, and frankly, I am fucking glad that I can't.
If you believe in tolerance then stop spewing hate. Or STFU. Where would we be without our gays and lesbians??
This angers me inside to the deepest part of my soul. I am sad for humanity.


Because religion is fundamentally about exclusion. The sex thing is just a single flavor of all the hate that religion is based on... go back to the old days and you'll see all sorts of reasons that religion has come up with to hate people. For example: hating people for wanting the bible to be in a language other than Latin. A stupid fucking thing, and yet, people were put to death for wanting/suggesting such things.

Not that religious fucktards don't have the ability to have good-old-fashioned inquisitions anymore, they have to lash out at whatever is left and alternative sexual identity is something which is still not completely socially acceptable, and therefore is a target.

>> ^shuac:
Hey, I'm straight and I never really bonded very well with my father. Is there a program I can enroll in to make me gay?


I'm lesbian and I'm a man. What the fuck do I do?!?!

/also dumbstruck by people like this guy..."Hey it's just how you think!", what about these physical non-choice factors: penis, vagina, testicles, ovaries, symmetry cognition (beauty, telling faces apart - men/women), hormones, involved neurotransmitters, reproduction "instinct" (again as said above, this is everywhere). Instinct<---!!!!! //

However you slice it, rejecting reality and substituting your own hate filled version is never acceptable.




>> ^dag:
>> ^inflatablevagina:
For fucks sake..... why the hell does ANYONE give a shit who I decide to fuck? Why are the people who are gay so frightening to those who are not? I can not wrap my brain around it, and frankly, I am fucking glad that I can't.
If you believe in tolerance then stop spewing hate. Or STFU. Where would we be without our gays and lesbians??
This angers me inside to the deepest part of my soul. I am sad for humanity.

It's often wrapped up in "Family values" and saving children from being exposed to the gay. I think its roots are mammalian fear for their offspring.

Because religion is fundamentally about exclusion.

That is your OPINION about religion. But real Religion isn't about exclusion; it is the epitome of INclusion. The point of religion is to improve the lives of all people through a moral code of behavior that benefits the self and all others. You are talking about flawed, uninspired, selfish MEN who use religion to advance thier own causes. Do not make the mistake of thinking of men like Cohen as being representative of religion when they do nothing but represent themselves. Such men advocate their own opinions, not God's or "religion's". They cloak themselves with religious trappings to acquire an audience or to use as an escape hatch - but they do not represent religion.

As far as the video is concerned - it is nothing but two different kinds of fools puking on each other from opposite sides of an issue. Cohen is an idiot who - like "climate scientists" - has been making up numbers to justify his desired outcomes. Maddow is an idiot using a public forum to be equally preposterious. such as accusing Cohen of having 'blood on his hands'. It's like watching that South Park episode, "Cripple Fight".

Wow - that was brilliant and I did it as an afterthought... How is what this Cohen dork's practice of faking his numbers any different than what the climategate guys did by weighting their models and hiding their primary data when it disagreed with their conclusions? And yet to the liberal left, the faking of numbers is OK for climate data, but it's 'bad' for this Cohen guy? Talk about trying to have your cake and eat it too...

" How is what this Cohen dork's practice of faking his numbers any different than what the climategate guys did by weighting their models and hiding their primary data when it disagreed with their conclusions? "



Are you serious? Think about what you just wrote for a moment...

And btw, way to bring in something you feel pissed off about into something completely unrelated, and on a different scale of morality. Uh oh, I dropped a hint.

The video seems to be gone. It's playing something about a senior Al-Qaida official being killed?

This guy is so far in the closet he's in fuckin' Narnia.

That guy is so far in the closet his ass smells of mothballs.

That is your OPINION about religion. But real Religion..



And just like that, you invalidated your entire argument before you started. Your opinion is every bit as prone to flaws as ponceleon's are, except of course, that ponceleon has history and reality on his side. Time and again, religion is essential in convincing otherwise normal people about the most absurd nonsense. Do you really mean to tell me that this mans obviously confused view of sexuality is purely a result of his fallibility, and that he merely "abuses religion" to suit his own agenda? puhlease.

What separates "real" religion from "fake" religion? clearly religious people do not agree, and that really says it all, whether you are of the Fred Phelps type or the mother Theresa type, you all have 2 things in common:
1.No evidence in general that your religion is true, and
2.No evidence that your particular take on a particular religion is more "real" than any other take.

And dude, what the fuck is up with this "climategate" nonsense, I mean , seriously, what the fuck? Look, the science is in: Global warming is happening, it is man-made, and its time we deal with it. To think otherwise at this point is to suggest a worldwide conspiracy so vast, so tightly knit and so fantastically absurd that David Icke, who believes the world is run by reptiles in disguise, would be proud.

what about bisexuality?

Time and again, religion is essential in convincing otherwise normal people about the most absurd nonsense.

No - time and again absurd people USE false religion to convince people of nonsense. There is a difference. You throw out the baby with the bath water.

Do you really mean to tell me that this mans obviously confused view of sexuality is purely a result of his fallibility, and that he merely "abuses religion" to suit his own agenda?

Yes - congratulations on an accurate summation even though you don't beleive it.

1.No evidence in general that your religion is true

Religion is about faith, not physical proof. Still, there are basic common-sense conscience checks. God (if you believe in him) would be logical and just. Clearly this guy's interpretations are not, and therefore his beliefs are not 'religion' except as he defines it.

2.No evidence that your particular take on a particular religion is more "real" than any other take.

If I put forward a definition then you be able to weigh the differences between and arrive at a decision in regards to that. But I have not currently laid out 'my definition' of what I would suggest is God's position on sexual morality. I believe I have more than sufficient 'proof' that my definition of proper religious sexual morality is far far closer to God's reality than this chump's. But even I would not dare to presume that I understand God's FULL truth on all things. Such a claim would make me God, which I'm not. I don't think any human currently has or ever has had that full reality. I think humans have only been provided as much as God thinks they can handle. And guys like this prove pretty conclusively that humans even have troubles with THAT much...

Look, the science is in: Global warming is happening, it is man-made, and its time we deal with it.

Ah - I see you also have chosen a religion. Have you paid for your indulgence carbon credits yet? Seriously though - no the 'science' isn't in because the leaks prove the 'science' is faulty, meddled bunk. And even that faulty, meddled bunk has never once proven that human beings did anything to cause climate change, or could do anything to 'deal with it'. And for the record - it isn't Global Warming anymore. It's 'climate change' - which allows the bunk-peddlers to claim they were right no matter what happens because the only thing constant about the climate is that it changes. Nice racket they have going - way to go at being their tool.

I will answer all your points in time,but currently I will start with one: (as I am tired and need some sleep at this point)
No - time and again absurd people USE false religion to convince people of nonsense. There is a difference. You throw out the baby with the bath water.


So, let me get this right: the hijackers of 9/11 and the people behind it all merely USED religion to promote their hatred against the west, the Pope and the Vatican (in 2009) told countless Africans who cannot read that condoms worsens the AIDS problem.. right? or maybe, as you suggest, this nonsense is all "false religion"


Well, as a non-theist, I completely agree, except or course that i dont see any evidence that an Islamic sect that strictly forbids suicide and a Christian sect with a sane relationship with birth control has ANY more right to claim to be a "true religion"

Ah - I see you also have chosen a religion. Have you paid for your indulgence carbon credits yet? Seriously though - no the 'science' isn't in because the leaks prove the 'science' is faulty, meddled bunk. And even that faulty, meddled bunk has never once proven that human beings did anything to cause climate change, or could do anything to 'deal with it'. And for the record - it isn't Global Warming anymore. It's 'climate change' - which allows the bunk-peddlers to claim they were right no matter what happens because the only thing constant about the climate is that it changes. Nice racket they have going - way to go at being their tool.


Religion is about faith. Climate change has proven science behind it. Just because you like taking pieces of information out of context (and I mean WAY out of context) doesn't discredit everything else. If I lied about getting home at 10pm last night does that mean I've lied my entire life about what time I get home?

Additionally, the data that climategaters like to use to prove climate change doesn't exist is called an outlier, or in other words, something that doesn't make sense. The scientists were trying to figure out why it was they way it was. Normally you would just simply ignore outliers, but for some odd reason these scientists were trying to be fully inclusive and not leave anything out.

And lastly, so a few scientist may have been wrong. Does that mean every other scientist who studied independently are wrong too? Does that mean every religious person burns witches? Rapes children? Murders non-believers? No? Weird . . .

Since it's been climate change for decades until the news stations needed a better tag line . . .

Wait, I think I got lost here. How the hell did we get on climate change and how the conservative right is focusing on a few details and ignore the mountain before them? Wasn't this supposed to be about how it's unethical to kill people for being the way they are? You know, like being black or white. Being 6 foot or 5 foot tall. Being a size 1 or a size 12? I think Maddows has a problem with this guy because she has a conscious and doesn't understand why someone would intentionally fake credentials, fake statistics and let it be used to MURDER people. They're talking about taking away someone's right to life because they are happy being with someone of the same sex. How dare they be happy! How dare they be free! Because, you as a religious person have the only moral authority and must kill those who don't agree with you . . .

Ah - I see you also have chosen a religion. Have you paid for your indulgence carbon credits yet? Seriously though - no the 'science' isn't in because the leaks prove the 'science' is faulty, meddled bunk.

No it isnt. just because a few loud, ignorant fox talking heads have come up with the word "climategate" does not remove the robust underpinning of the science: The evidence is overwhelming, and there really is no scientific controversy, only a political one, human presence is having an effect on the climate, of this there is no more doubt. This is not "religion", it is science, I dont know how to spell it out more clearly. Reasonable people do not "believe" in climate change, we accept it as evidence-based fact. I also find it a curious way to argue a case by sarcastically hinting that I might find carbon tax to be expensive, what the fuck does that have to do with anything? Do you mean to suggest that all scientists are cooking a devilish plan to make me pay more taxes?

Tell me, while these ingenious conspiring scientists are cooking the books, faking reports and grinning their evil faces, when to they ever find the time to whip out their hairdryers and melt glaciers? How are they making hurricanes stronger?, how did they open the north-west passage?