Jan. 15th, 2008
Oh if only this were appropriate...
Jan. 15th, 2008 01:57 am...but in the context, it would just shove the reader right out of the scene and leave them sputtering juice or milk or jello everywhere, wondering, "Where the hell did that come from?"
Still, it amuses me.
The anology:
He just needed to tell someone, even though doing so would feel like he was forcing a very large ferret through a very small pen tube.
I should write some sort of short story with lots more humor and irony than I usually do. And that line would go great in Who-fic.
Still wish it weren't just a note to myself about what needs to happen in my novel at some point, though. That would be fun in my novel, and my novel needs more fun.
Still, it amuses me.
The anology:
He just needed to tell someone, even though doing so would feel like he was forcing a very large ferret through a very small pen tube.
I should write some sort of short story with lots more humor and irony than I usually do. And that line would go great in Who-fic.
Still wish it weren't just a note to myself about what needs to happen in my novel at some point, though. That would be fun in my novel, and my novel needs more fun.
And I quote from my textbook: "[The Supreme Court] overruled a Texas law criminalizing sodomy when practiced by two persons of the same sex. By a 6 to 3 decision, handed down on June 26, 2003, the Court affirmed that the rights of liberty and privacy guaranteed under the Due Process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment include the right of two consenting adults to engage in such acts within the home." (Emphasis mine)
So in 2003, just 4 and a half years ago, a third of the Supreme Court thought male homosexual relations (not marriage, but the sex act itself) should be illegal. As in, the State should control actual private practices that affect no one but the two (or more, I suppose) parties involved, even if it occurs only in the parties' personal residences.
To quote the ever reliable Captain Jack Sparrow, "That's a sad commentary in and of itself."
So in 2003, just 4 and a half years ago, a third of the Supreme Court thought male homosexual relations (not marriage, but the sex act itself) should be illegal. As in, the State should control actual private practices that affect no one but the two (or more, I suppose) parties involved, even if it occurs only in the parties' personal residences.
To quote the ever reliable Captain Jack Sparrow, "That's a sad commentary in and of itself."