pacino wrote:Looks like less destruction than a college basketball party, to be honest

except for the multiple injured police

drsmooth wrote:

pacino wrote:Looks like less destruction than a college basketball party, to be honest

except for the multiple injured police

and multiple stores getting looted

Both have happened over sporting events. This seems to be blown up for no teason. Just get it under control and you're fine. It's not a big group or the entire city going nuts.

the news coverage of the goings-on is largely rotten

pacino wrote:Both have happened over sporting events. This seems to be blown up for no teason. Just get it under control and you're fine. It's not a big group or the entire city going nuts.

it's blown up because it's "riot TV!"

coverage is almost non-contextual. Amazing numbers of aged white mail 'reporters' with hair on fire. And this is on MSNBC

I stopped following twitter. It seems like a lot of hearsay on any side.

remember that time people destroyed shit and injured people after the phillies won the world series? ah, great times. now back to condemning these minority youths for doing the same thing because they're mad about racist and just generally bad police practices.

Justice Samuel Alito suggested that basing marriage on lasting bonds and emotional commitment — instead of providing stable homes for children — might open the right to marry to siblings who live together or close friends who are not romantically or sexually involved.

It's hard for me to believe that a current SC Justice would even say something so stupid.

Doll Is Mine wrote:

Justice Samuel Alito suggested that basing marriage on lasting bonds and emotional commitment — instead of providing stable homes for children — might open the right to marry to siblings who live together or close friends who are not romantically or sexually involved.

It's hard for me to believe that a current SC Justice would even say something so stupid.

I didn't realize that the government was investigating all married hetero couples to confirm that they are romantically and sexually involved. Dear god, every sitcom marriage is a sham!

Doll Is Mine wrote:

Justice Samuel Alito suggested that basing marriage on lasting bonds and emotional commitment — instead of providing stable homes for children — might open the right to marry to siblings who live together or close friends who are not romantically or sexually involved.

It's hard for me to believe that a current SC Justice would even say something so stupid.

Alito is on a very slippery slope musing about 'the' legitimate bases for marriage - a serious examination of that topic may bring about the eradication of the whole institution

in fact, he may bring down all of contract law if he trips down that 'legitmate reasons for the marriage contract' path

drsmooth wrote:Alito is on a very slippery slope musing about 'the' legitimate bases for marriage - a serious examination of that topic may bring about the eradication of the whole institution

That would be a good thing for all, IMO. It's only because governments are bestowing favorable treatment on married individuals that it really matters. Then it's just a commitment ceremony.

Note: it's too firmly entrenched in too many areas of the law to expect it to be removed in my lifetime.

Doll Is Mine wrote:

Justice Samuel Alito suggested that basing marriage on lasting bonds and emotional commitment — instead of providing stable homes for children — might open the right to marry to siblings who live together ...

Pfft, like that stopped 'em in Appalachia

Doll Is Mine wrote:

Justice Samuel Alito suggested that basing marriage on lasting bonds and emotional commitment — instead of providing stable homes for children — might open the right to marry to siblings who live together or close friends who are not romantically or sexually involved.

It's hard for me to believe that a current SC Justice would even say something so stupid.

So if you are a hetero married couple and don't have children what does that make you in Alito's world?

The fact that he is a Phillies fan is the only thing keeping me from wishing for his demise (I can't say the same for Scalia and Thomas)

Doll Is Mine wrote:

Justice Samuel Alito suggested that basing marriage on lasting bonds and emotional commitment — instead of providing stable homes for children — might open the right to marry to siblings who live together or close friends who are not romantically or sexually involved.

It's hard for me to believe that a current SC Justice would even say something so stupid.

He is a diehard Phillies fan.

Alito has complete confidence in Ruben Amaro.

pacino wrote:Alito has complete confidence in Ruben Amaro.

Alito thought resigning Chad Durbin was the right thing to do.

Clinton eyes the end of ‘the era of mass incarceration"

Then say you will legalize you hypocrite

Jon Stewart destroys Judith Miller; nothing comedic about this interview:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2 ... ntons.html

Daaaaaaamn gina

destroys is a bit much