Apparently, the owner of the lot where the billboard was posted told the advertising company that they needed to remove the ad or remove the billboard. I would seem Jesus was threatened by the following sign:
Holy fuck! They were telling people who didn’t believe in god that they might not be the only ones! How offensive!
Let’s turn this around for a moment. Had a billboard read “Believe in god? You’re not alone,” would anyone have complained that the message was offensive? Had an atheist owned the land where that billboard was posted, would they have demanded it be removed?
Of course not. But if you don’t believe in god and you tell people about it, that’s offensive. You are attacking their faith!
Except you aren’t. You aren’t saying “aren’t people who believe in god stupid???”
Because you don’t think that. Unless we are talking about the dude who bitched about this sign. I think he’s kind of stupid.
If you click through to the link, there is video of a man being shot to death. That’s important to know because you might not want to watch such a thing.
Early reports about this incident indicated that the victim tried to take the officer’s taser and the officer shot him in self-defense. That was the story the officer repeated over and over again. And it was a lie.
Even if the victim had tried to take a taser before the video starts, it is obvious he posed no threat to the officer when he was running away and eight bullets were fired at his back.
Without that video, the officer would not be facing murder charges. Thousands of people would be telling us that we weren’t there so we couldn’t know what really happened. We should take the word of the police officer because why would he lie?
I don’t know. Maybe for the same reasons as anyone else?
In a move that I hope will eventually be ruled unconstitutional, Indiana is the first state in the nation to pass a law allowing businesses to avoid liability arising from discriminating against homosexuals. It will not be the last.
Billed as an attempt to save “good” Christians who simply want to follow god’s law by refusing service to gay people specifically because they are gay, the law is basically protection for a persecuted class that isn’t persecuted.
So what happens if a gay couple runs out of gas in rural Indiana and is refused service by the closest gas station? It’s legal. I know that this law is mostly about florists, bakers and wedding photographers but it applies to anyone who wants to discriminate against someone on religious grounds.
It protects anyone. The Christian right might want to remember that should a time come when they are no longer the majority.
Seriously – since the conservative Christian douchebags managed to get this one passed, I think they should be instructed to put signs in their window saying “No Gays.” I mean if they are going to be given the right to legally discriminate, they should be up front about it right?
Because they are proud of it, right????
Listen up Congress.
I know that you guys are all supposed to hate each other and I confess I think the Tea Party Republicans are kind of loony.
But here’s the thing, you could at least pay the office of the Presidency a bit of fucking respect. Someday one of your people will hold that office again. Do you really want the Democrats to act like a bunch of petulant school children when your guy (I’m just assuming it’ll be a guy) says he’s done running for office?
If you can’t learn how to sit on your fucking hands for the fucking State of the Union address, you shouldn’t have applied for the fucking job.
Grow the fuck up.
If you didn’t miss it, that was pretty much what Obama said to you when he slammed the door on you hard. So quit whining about what he did because you fucking deserved it.
Man do you assholes make me want to say “fuck” a lot!
I know this new Pope is cool and all but he seems to be swayed by Bill Donahue and the Catholic league in regards to Charlie Hebdo. This week he has suggested that freedom of expression should be limited when it is directed at religion. He stopped short of blaming the victim, as Donahue did, so full credit for avoiding that rhetorical pitfall.
Now I understand there need to be certain limits to freedom of expression. If your idea of freedom of expression is to get pictures of yourself peeing on local sports players in the middle of a game, that shouldn’t be allowed.
If, however, you want to make a cartoon criticizing religion or, as I do, regularly criticize religion in a blog, that freedom should absolutely be allowed and welcomed.
Religion is an institution. Like politics. Nobody argues that we should stop making fun of politicians because we might offend someone who voted for them, do they?
Yet a religion should be afforded a special right? We should limit those who would make fun of religion because…why? God can’t take it? Mohammed can’t take it?
Sorry, Francis. Charlie Hebdo’s satire may not be your cup of tea but freedom of expression means they have as much right to do what they do as you have to criticize it.
I just keep thinking if the dude is exploiting a loophole in your system and you want him to stop, you could just close the fucking loophole.
Instead of figuring out that problem, they are suing a guy who isn’t making any money. He just outsmarted them. What an asshole, right?
They have lawyers sitting around waiting for something to do. It’s probably cheaper for them to threaten this kid than it is for them to figure out how to fix the gap in their own procedures.
Or they could just accept that some people are going to get a cheaper fare and stop giving out free pop on flights. I mean, they’ll do that eventually anyway, right?
This video is actually fucking hilarious. The stinger at the end – freaking brilliant.
But I can’t get the song out of my head. It is an earworm of epic proportions. On Christmas Eve, we weren’t singing holiday tunes. We were singing the damn Shia LaBeouf song.
In the kitchen! Shia LaBeouf!
Cooking up the meat! Shia LaBeouf!
Opening the Presents! Hollywood superstar Shia LaBeouf!
It’s probably best if you don’t watch the video. Your sanity may depend on it.