Author Topic: The Tin Phallus Award  (Read 5118 times)

archPope Rocket P Llama

  • Outlandish
  • ***
  • Posts: 255
    • View Profile
    • http://rocketllama.deviantart.com
The Tin Phallus Award
« on: July 19, 2004, 03:36:21 am »
Every year myself and my alter-egoes give out, among many other awards, the Tin Phallus Award for the biggest cocksucker in American politics. Past winners have been Admiral Poindexter, President Bush, Ken Starr, etc. That being said, we are proud to award THIS year's Tin Phallus to Senator RICK SANTORUM! For being the most amazing queer-hating politician I think we have right now. His erm...valiant attempts to make sure that marriage stays between one man and one woman and for giving us delightful MonstersUndertheBeds stories about what Gay Marriage will do to society. (Encourage incest and beastiality, turn all of our children into crackheads. Gay marriage will rape your mother and sell hardcore pornography to your baby sister, will bring hellfire and brimstone pouring from the sky, raise your taxes, mutilate cattle, milk your cats, etc.)

Congrats Rick, for being such as asshole. Now lets show ya what gay men like to do to assholes. *shoves the award up his ass. applause for rick as he walks offstage with a funny gait.*
His Empirical Majesty archPope Rocket P. Llama, King of the Jews, GTKoRO, aka RevRev. Tokeval D. Kroenik KHG
-Bastard Children of Andy Warhol Cabal-(BCOAW)
"Buck buck buck BCOAW"

Xoder

  • Outlandish
  • ***
  • Posts: 168
    • View Profile
    • http://xoder.livejournal.com
Re: The Tin Phallus Award
« Reply #1 on: July 19, 2004, 03:56:05 am »
Quote from: archPope Rocket P Llama
Every year myself and my alter-egoes give out, among many other awards, the Tin Phallus Award for the biggest cocksucker in American politics. Past winners have been Admiral Poindexter, President Bush, Ken Starr, etc. That being said, we are proud to award THIS year's Tin Phallus to Senator RICK SANTORUM! For being the most amazing queer-hating politician I think we have right now. His erm...valiant attempts to make sure that marriage stays between one man and one woman and for giving us delightful MonstersUndertheBeds stories about what Gay Marriage will do to society. (Encourage incest and beastiality, turn all of our children into crackheads. Gay marriage will rape your mother and sell hardcore pornography to your baby sister, will bring hellfire and brimstone pouring from the sky, raise your taxes, mutilate cattle, milk your cats, etc.)

Congrats Rick, for being such as asshole. Now lets show ya what gay men like to do to assholes. *shoves the award up his ass. applause for rick as he walks offstage with a funny gait.*

But this guy's already got a lot of press, thanks to Dan Savage.
There would have been a sig here. If you loved your goddess enough!

Set your registers, initialize your program counter, and EXECUTE!

Trollax

  • Guest
The Tin Phallus Award
« Reply #2 on: July 19, 2004, 07:54:31 am »
I have yet to hear one coegent, coherent, and/or sensible, logical argument, that relies on purely philosophical grounds without resorting to bible quotes or obscure definitions as to why homosexuality is bad. and let's not forget that I was at one time a fundamentalist christian.

So... anyone wanna don the black hat and tell me why being gay is bad in purely analytical, philosophical terms?

EDIT: and while you're at it, try turning lead into gold. 8)

Guido Finucci

  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 3216
    • View Profile
The Tin Phallus Award
« Reply #3 on: July 19, 2004, 01:36:28 pm »
Quote from: St. Trollax, ODD
So... anyone wanna don the black hat and tell me why being gay is bad in purely analytical, philosophical terms?


Trollax, I seriously thought about this for a while. I got as far as figuring that the argument should rightly be about why gay marriage is bad rather than being gay per se. Unfortunately I couldn't think up a single rational argument that I couldn't shoot down before I had finished putting it into a sentence. Sorry. Maybe I just wasn't trying hard enough or something.

gnimbley

  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 3607
    • View Profile
The Tin Phallus Award
« Reply #4 on: July 19, 2004, 03:23:15 pm »
My only argument with gays were that they were not fulfilling the sole biological imperative of their species: reproduction. Donated sperm or eggs did not qualify since half of the DNA had to come from outside the relationship; they were not passing on their merged DNA. However, scientists have recently been able to create a mouse from the eggs of two females, so it is only a matter of time before they can do the same for humans. (Wait, that means men will become superfulous. Oh dear.)

archPope Rocket P Llama

  • Outlandish
  • ***
  • Posts: 255
    • View Profile
    • http://rocketllama.deviantart.com
The Tin Phallus Award
« Reply #5 on: July 19, 2004, 07:01:30 pm »
Quote from: gnimbley
My only argument with gays were that they were not fulfilling the sole biological imperative of their species: reproduction. Donated sperm or eggs did not qualify since half of the DNA had to come from outside the relationship; they were not passing on their merged DNA. However, scientists have recently been able to create a mouse from the eggs of two females, so it is only a matter of time before they can do the same for humans. (Wait, that means men will become superfulous. Oh dear.)


That's my only objection too, except I look at it from a more symbolic view. But, it's not like the world needs anymore people, so they perform a valuable service by not having children. Yay for no children.
His Empirical Majesty archPope Rocket P. Llama, King of the Jews, GTKoRO, aka RevRev. Tokeval D. Kroenik KHG
-Bastard Children of Andy Warhol Cabal-(BCOAW)
"Buck buck buck BCOAW"

eighteen buddha strike

  • Outlandish
  • ***
  • Posts: 718
    • View Profile
The Tin Phallus Award
« Reply #6 on: July 19, 2004, 09:12:59 pm »
Quote from: gnimbley
My only argument with gays were that they were not fulfilling the sole biological imperative of their species: reproduction. Donated sperm or eggs did not qualify since half of the DNA had to come from outside the relationship; they were not passing on their merged DNA. However, scientists have recently been able to create a mouse from the eggs of two females, so it is only a matter of time before they can do the same for humans. (Wait, that means men will become superfulous. Oh dear.)


Its been shown in animal species that the amount of homosexual activity increases as the population becomes more difficult to support, and while this might just be coincidence, some scientists have theorized it to be a species level survival mechanism.

Schweinepriester G.

  • Outlandish
  • ***
  • Posts: 345
    • View Profile
The Tin Phallus Award
« Reply #7 on: July 19, 2004, 09:16:33 pm »
Quote from: St. Trollax, ODD
I have yet to hear one coegent, coherent, and/or sensible, logical argument, that relies on purely philosophical grounds without resorting to bible quotes or obscure definitions as to why homosexuality is bad. and let's not forget that I was at one time a fundamentalist christian.

So... anyone wanna don the black hat and tell me why being gay is bad in purely analytical, philosophical terms?

EDIT: and while you're at it, try turning lead into gold. 8)


Rick Santorum (and a lot of other people I think) have bet against gay marriages being allowed.
(The initial jackpot was around threepence but it may be a bit more now.)

Hah if that isn't a <the adjectives you used /> argument with <the other characteristics you demanded /> against gay marriages then I don't know what would be.

Now that lead into gold turning thing is actually quite easy when you have a supercollider handy and are prepared to invest more money in your electricity bill than the gold you produce is going to be worth..

Or you go and ask ctulhu nicely tp barf up the philosopher's stone
"...it would needlessly exclude IMPS implementations that
   may utilize sub-atomic monkeys and/or multiple universes;"
RFC 2795, section 4 (Infinite-TAG)

sakredchao

  • Outlandish
  • ***
  • Posts: 450
    • View Profile
    • http://www.mailleartisans.org
Re: The Tin Phallus Award
« Reply #8 on: July 19, 2004, 11:05:46 pm »
Quote from: archPope Rocket P Llama
for giving us delightful MonstersUndertheBeds stories about what Gay Marriage will do to society. (Encourage incest and beastiality, turn all of our children into crackheads. Gay marriage will rape your mother and sell hardcore pornography to your baby sister, will bring hellfire and brimstone pouring from the sky, raise your taxes, mutilate cattle, milk your cats, etc.)


1. i thought it was straight people who did these things ?!?
B. fucking breeders.
*. i like cat milk

kim
consistancy is the blah blah-blin of blah blah blah

Guido Finucci

  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 3216
    • View Profile
The Tin Phallus Award
« Reply #9 on: July 19, 2004, 11:17:09 pm »
Quote from: gnimbley
My only argument with gays were that they were not fulfilling the sole biological imperative of their species: reproduction.


Ahhh - but they are. In communities of people, any children are likely to share some genetic material with most of the poeple in the community. It has been shown that communities with 10-15% healthy but non-reproductive adults survive better than those where all the adults are busy reproducing. Thus homosexuality allows the genes shared by the homosexual to be 'fitter' for survival, even if the homosexual themselves are not involved in the recombination of DNA to produce the kid.

Quote from: Eighteen Buddha Strike
Its been shown in animal species that the amount of homosexual activity increases as the population becomes more difficult to support, and while this might just be coincidence, some scientists have theorized it to be a species level survival mechanism.


It has also been shown that, as the temperature increases, population becomes more difficult to support. Thus we conclude that life is best suited to niches where the ambient temperature is Absolute Zero.

(Are you aware that your sentence is actually contradictory? If you want to juxtapose two contradictory ideas, English convention suggests that you have them as seperate sentences in the same paragraph. You can even have them as consecutive sentences in a paragraph. HTH)

gnimbley

  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 3607
    • View Profile
The Tin Phallus Award
« Reply #10 on: July 20, 2004, 02:02:45 am »
Quote from: Guido Finucci
Quote from: gnimbley
My only argument with gays were that they were not fulfilling the sole biological imperative of their species: reproduction.


Ahhh - but they are. In communities of people, any children are likely to share some genetic material with most of the poeple in the community. It has been shown that communities with 10-15% healthy but non-reproductive adults survive better than those where all the adults are busy reproducing. Thus homosexuality allows the genes shared by the homosexual to be 'fitter' for survival, even if the homosexual themselves are not involved in the recombination of DNA to produce the kid.


Statistics can prove anything. (It's probably because when everybody is busy reproducing they are too busy to look both ways before they cross the street.)

Quote from: Guido Finucci
Quote from: Eighteen Buddha Strike
Its been shown in animal species that the amount of homosexual activity increases as the population becomes more difficult to support, and while this might just be coincidence, some scientists have theorized it to be a species level survival mechanism.


It has also been shown that, as the temperature increases, population becomes more difficult to support. Thus we conclude that life is best suited to niches where the ambient temperature is Absolute Zero.

(Are you aware that your sentence is actually contradictory? If you want to juxtapose two contradictory ideas, English convention suggests that you have them as seperate sentences in the same paragraph. You can even have them as consecutive sentences in a paragraph. HTH)


Who would expect that someone on this site would be self-contradictory?

Guido Finucci

  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 3216
    • View Profile
The Tin Phallus Award
« Reply #11 on: July 20, 2004, 02:08:28 am »
Quote from: gnimbley
Statistics can prove anything.


Indeed they can, although you'll notice that I didn't use any. I did allude to the argument that I used against myself when I brought up the lack of reproductive capacity in homosexual relationships to see if I could argue it against Trollax when he asked so nicely.

Quote from: gnimbley
Who would expect that someone on this site would be self-contradictory?


Sadly, I am easy to troll. If someone parodies rational argument than I'll join in and parody a grammar flame; I just can't help myself.

gnimbley

  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 3607
    • View Profile
The Tin Phallus Award
« Reply #12 on: July 20, 2004, 03:15:48 am »
Quote from: Guido Finucci
It has been shown that communities with 10-15% healthy but non-reproductive adults survive better than those where all the adults are busy reproducing.


Sorry. I mistook those for statistics. Or at least the result of a scientifitic study. My bad.

Guido Finucci

  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 3216
    • View Profile
The Tin Phallus Award
« Reply #13 on: July 20, 2004, 03:28:42 am »
Quote from: gnimbley
Quote from: Guido Finucci
It has been shown that communities with 10-15% healthy but non-reproductive adults survive better than those where all the adults are busy reproducing.


Sorry. I mistook those for statistics. Or at least the result of a scientifitic study. My bad.


I figured that's what you'd done. Would it have been better if I didn't use numbers and had just said, "about an eighth" instead?

gnimbley

  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 3607
    • View Profile
The Tin Phallus Award
« Reply #14 on: July 20, 2004, 03:43:55 am »
Quote from: Guido Finucci
Quote from: gnimbley
Quote from: Guido Finucci
It has been shown that communities with 10-15% healthy but non-reproductive adults survive better than those where all the adults are busy reproducing.


Sorry. I mistook those for statistics. Or at least the result of a scientifitic study. My bad.


I figured that's what you'd done. Would it have been better if I didn't use numbers and had just said, "about an eighth" instead?


OMG. That would have made it a STORY PROBLEM!! You ARE evil!!!

::faints::