Media Reacts To Conan's Same-Sex Wedding News

Hey guys!

Just wanted to share this one with you. It's probably a one of the best examples of blatant media control I've ever seen! It's also farking hilarious! =)



My take on it: Well, it's not at all surprising at all that most news outlets read a controlled script. However, I've never seen that much repetition edited together like that. It was really funny... but rather sad at the same time. It's like they're not even trying anymore.

As for the same-sex marriage thing... I say good for him! He obviously considers his co-workers as respectable human beings regardless of their sexual orientation, and he's using his media spotlight to help them out. I think that's a pretty decent wedding gift from your boss!

I love my girlfriend... She's fantastic! I'm sure there are plenty of others on here who feel the same way about their significant other. These two gentlemen in the video feel the same way about each other... It's such a great feeling! I just want to ask those who are against same sex marriage: why? In a world that needs so much more love, how can you logically be against this?

Uh-oh...I can feel everyone's Bible being opened and being mis-construed! I have no problems with gay marriage, just like I have no problems with gay lunch, gay cars, gay movies, gay socks, gay pencils, gay computers, etc. You see where I'm going with this right? It is just marriage, lose the "gay".

Originally posted by superman2012
It is just marriage, lose the "gay".

Haha! Ridiculously well said!! =)

reply to post by oaf21


Haha, thanks, it just seems that you have to be waaay over the top to get people's attention and to get them to think about things! Thanks for bringing this subject up again, nothing wrong with any type of mutual love.

That form of repetition is classic to programs "programming" you. The exact same this is going on with the Micheal Jackson trial, with the term all stations are using which is "This Is It", see if you can catch it.

S&F
Peace, NRE.

reply to post by superman2012


You can't lose the gay because marriage is DEFINED as the union of a MAN and WOMAN in holy matrimony. So anything other than that must have a different name. If words mean what you want them to mean then all the dictionaries on Earth are pointless. Man and man or woman and woman can't marry by definition. Period.

reply to post by oaf21


Looks like Conan O'Brian may be about to push the envelope on late night television.

reply to post by Ookie


Wait... so it's Websters' that defines everything now??? I thought it was the Bible...

I'm confused...

This is a perfect reason why I don't trust the media on TV these days. So blatant and obvious that the media is controlled by someone.

Gay couples should be free to enter into the same sort of church run slave contracts as straight people.

Marriage, being the worst contract a man can enter into, should not be limited to straight men. Gay men should also be able to shackle themselves to each other and then provide income for lawyers to flock down and divide assets when their "marriage" fails, just like happens to straight folks.

In the old days of Feudal marriage contracts, the man and woman would literally be tied to one another during the ceremony, by the priest. He would wrap cords around their arms, linking them to each other. This from a group of men who themselves are very gay, and yet are never allowed to get married! Haha, funny stuff.

Humans are so cute. Utterly loveable, in all their ways and silliness-es.

This begs the question... Is it pronounced ON-velope or IN-velope?

Originally posted by superman2012
It is just marriage, lose the "gay".

When marriage is equally offered to gay people, then we can ALL drop the "gay".

Hilarious video! And good for Conan!

haha CoCo you done it agian i love how this guiys show the elites for what thay are...SILLY lol makeing all the news casters read the same thing ! somebody doing a documetry should save this clip realy its clasic

I dont really mind it when people of the same sex bond...but i have a limit. Somethings in this world are unnatural. Just because we can reason and come up with concepts such as love and marriage doesn't mean sexual relations that cannot procreate are justified. They are unnatural according to nature ( what we have observed).I am not a christian or religious, but perversion is perversion.

People of the same sex can make a commitment to each other. That's ok but anything more than that is unnatural

reply to post by LiveEquation

Just because we can reason and come up with concepts such as love and marriage doesn't mean sexual relations that cannot procreate are justified.

I assume that you only have sex to make children?

reply to post by TsukiLunar


If you knew your biology and why nature makes sex so attractive and stimulating, you wouldnt ask such a lame question

Originally posted by LiveEquation
I dont really mind it when people of the same sex bond...but i have a limit. Somethings in this world are unnatural. Just because we can reason and come up with concepts such as love and marriage doesn't mean sexual relations that cannot procreate are justified. They are unnatural according to nature ( what we have observed).I am not a christian or religious, but perversion is perversion.

People of the same sex can make a commitment to each other. That's ok but anything more than that is unnatural

Excellent! Someone actually 'discussing' and respectfully giving they're opinion! Much appreciated! Star for you! =)

However, to that I would say limiting love (in the 'life partner sense') to someone with whom you can only procreate is a perversion in itself. Love knows no limits or boundaries and can evolve just like people can evolve. I see the inclusion of same sex partners as part of that evolution.

As for calling it unnatural, I'd like to see these studies that have proven it to be unnatural. Hell, just last weekend I saw 'proof' that it is indeed very natural when my cousin's two male dogs were mounting each other! So even at a raw animal level, the 'attraction' occurs. They may not understand it, but something instinctual in one of the dogs convinced him to mount the other one.

It's EN-velope


And wow.... that is awful, all reading the SAME line.... shocking and sheesh, couldn't they come up with something else??

reply to post by LiveEquation

If you knew your biology and why nature makes sex so attractive and stimulating, you wouldnt ask such a lame question

Ah, touche'. Then its okay for you to have recreational sex as long as you can, at some point, impregnate the woman even if that's not the intention, but gays cant because because they cant get pregnant?

What a lousy argument. Be ashamed.

The gaylesbianqueer fad is not for me......to decide whether it is right or wrong, that is for the Creator(s) to decide. My purpose is to give spread love to all walks of Life. I have read the Bible thrice and the one thing that sticks to my Mind is "he who is without sin, cast the first stone". I have never met ANYONE who has the right to do so.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

reply to post by oaf21


well love is an idea, a concept. Because of Love is associated with how you feel...it is subject to change. A commitment on the other hand makes feelings irrelevant. Love is a chemistry ( a chemistry nature intended to promote sex and diversity). Those dogs you saw are nothing new, animals do that when it is time for them to mate. What your friend should have done is bring a female so they could act on their drive.

You fail to understand the difference between love and commitment. They are not the same thing