Adam Baldwin & Nick Searcy’s Twitter Meltdown That Began With An Anti-Gay Tweet

Adam Baldwin (L) & Nick Searcy (R)

[This article has a full update – click through to read]

What began as an article on New Now Next has blossomed into a full-scale Twitter meltdown for former Firefly alum (as well as current anti-gay conservative and cast member of TNT’s The Last Ship) Adam Baldwin. And in the process he dragged acquaintance Nick Searcy from FX’s Justified into the fray as they both spent the better part of their Saturday afternoon and evening trolling my twitter account over an off-the-cuff commentary tweet on anti-gay remarks initially made by Baldwin.

It began when Baldwin wrote a tweet stating, “What’s wrong, now, with a father marrying his son for love & to avoid tax penalties?” Dan Avery at New Now Next saw the tweet and wrote about it which lead to Baldwin’s eventual meltdown. And the rest, well – here’s a handy dandy Storify of this evening’s events so everyone can see exactly what transpired (below).As a side note, while I normally wouldn’t contact someone’s employer to report anti-LGBT behavior on Twitter, having a public, influential role such as actor or politician is different (in my opinion). If you’re being paid enough to influence thousands – if not millions – of people with your opinion, and if you rely on your public image and clout to maintain that work, you can’t cry foul when someone holds you accountable for your publicly spoken or written words.

Edit to add as of February 22, 2014:
Later in the evening, Nick Searcy’s tweets took a decidedly negative turn toward an anti-weight, fat-shaming tone so I first attempted to step away from the debate and ask him to get help, and then completely disengaged from conversation. Neither worked, as you’ll see in the tweets below. Fat-shaming is never okay.

Edit to add #2 as of February 23, 2014 @ 11:30pm ET:
To address a question/criticism that seems to be rampant on social media boards at the moment: this article was written after the fact. Several  people have insinuated that I “set up” their conservative actor hero(es) for pageviews. To that all I have to say is this: I never intended to make this a big deal (otherwise my initial tweet wouldn’t have been as snarky and hashtagged as such). Baldwin didn’t have to respond – and when he did respond (and called in Searcy), they didn’t have to be belligerent in their conversation and tone. I didn’t set out to make these actors look like wingnuts; they did it fine all by themselves. I merely aggregated the tweets after the conversation was (mostly) over and posted them here since I think the world deserves to know what these two actors really believe. Responding to their attacks doesn’t make me disgusting, doesn’t make me ‘as culpable,’ or any other combination of absurdity I’ve heard since this began. It makes me a random blogger in Boston who spoke out against a ridiculous marriage equality comparison. It makes me that same blogger who suddenly became the target of two ultra-conservative D-list celebrities and their poorly-phrased, playground-level insults that reflected more on their personalities than anything. And just so we’re clear, my take on the conversation (though it touched on being overly offensive at times) never truly veered too far off the “it’s insanely ridiculous that this is happening” mindset. In fact, I said (in part) on Facebook of the incident as it was happening, “I think it’s hilarious that they’re both spending their Saturday night on Twitter trolling a random guy in Boston for saying something about Adam Baldwin on Twitter.”

Update #3 as of February 25, 2014 at 11am ET:
We’ve been cited by a few notable national publications like HuffPoJezebel, and The Escapist. One consistent question I’ve received that seems to keep cropping up (other than the questions addressed in the last update) is the fact that I used the hashtag #idiot in my initial tweet to Baldwin. Though I addressed this briefly above, I think it deserves more than a one sentence throwaway.

I never expected Baldwin to respond. Honestly. Had I truly thought my comment would spark a (ahem) conversation, I probably would’ve been more diplomatic.  Alas, we don’t always get to choose what goes viral…and in this instance, all I can do is choose how I react to the aftermath of the situation. Furthermore, I hashtagged it as such for a reason: mainly, making that sort of comparison – even if it was in a non-sexual sense – was idiotic. Using that same logic mothers and sons/fathers and daughters would currently be getting married if that was such a concern. But it’s not; it’s an irrelevant distraction and Baldwin is smart enough to realize that.

While harsh language isn’t always the most PC way of making a point, sometimes it’s the most efficient. And in this case, it highlighted the egregious opinions of two celebrities that apparently enjoy bullying others online. [And on that note, as of today – Day 4 – both men (Searcy in particular) are still copying me on belligerent tweets.]

Update as of March 5, 2014 at 2:00pm ET:
It appears as if Adam Baldwin has been doing some house cleaning – that is, he’s scrubbed many of the more heinous tweets from his Twitter account after he believed this all died down. I’m not the only one who’s noticed either Chez Pazienza at The Daily Banter wrote a follow up article on a similar encounter he had with Baldwin that ended with similar results. He said in part:

“What followed that were a hell of a lot of iterations of the word “lie” from him directed at me (with one tweet wondering whether I was fired from CNN for lying). I’d put them up here, but as a follower of his told me as the Twitter feud broadened out, he has a habit of “cleaning” his feed every so often, which is certainly his right but it makes it difficult to actually track what he says. It’s easy for somebody to say you’re lying about him when there’s no way to prove what he actually said and you’re forced to just trust him or his followers on his intent.”

Also, for the record, I’m not fat. I do believe fat-shaming is wrong regardless of body size, but apparently by Hollywood standards my 34″ waist makes me Shamu. Thankfully, by Boston standards, it just means I need another cheeseburger.

[The title of this article has been modified to more accurately reflect the full culmination of events and conversation.]

[View the story “Adam Baldwin and Nick Searcy’s Twitter Meltdown” on Storify]

For virtually his entire life, Tim has been writing. Over the years he’s dabbled in mainstream fiction, science fiction, dystopian fiction, and personal essays. The one consistent thread through his entire writing career has been blogging – he’s been doing it since 1997 in one form or another. In addition to writing Tim has frequently worked and volunteered as a civil rights advocate including on campus LGBT advocacy as well as interning with the Colorado Civil Rights Division.
140 comments
Malcolm
Malcolm 5pts

I want to thank Esango Priest for restoring back my marriage. I got married to my lovely wife in 2012 we both loved and cherished each other so much, i got a new job that required of me to travel a lot due to my position in the company so this made me to have less time for my lovely wife. So there was this trip i went for in Mumbai, India that kept me so long there as i majored in inspecting a project my company new got involved with in Mumbai then i met in Indian woman we got so closed and became very intimate which kept me away from to the extent that i even stopped talking to her on phone my wife. After i had finished my project in Mumbai i came back to New york with her and we both lived in a new apartment that i had just rented. We lived happily together. On the 20th of December 2014 i got back to my senses and remembered that i had left my lovely a wife, so i went on to look for her in the house that i used to live with her and i saw my pretty wife whom i loved so much at home. Immediately she saw me we both busted in to tears, so i told her all that had happened to me ever since i left her then was when she also told me how she had contacted a man called Esango Priest to help restore back her marriage, she went on further to reveal to me that when Esango Priest looked in to it spiritually, he was told that i was under a spell a woman from India had placed on me and my wife has to cast away the spell then i will come back to her three days later. She said she gave Esango Priest money on the 17th of December 2014 to get the items needed to cast away the spell and as soon as Esango Priest got the money he got the items and eventually helped her in pushing out the spell away from my life. I told her to call Esango Priest to thank him for restoring my marriage back to life. You should contact Esango Priest via email: esangopriest@gmail.com to help restore love, joy and happiness in your marriage.

Tim Peacock
Tim Peacock 5pts

Two consenting adults is completely different from family members marrying one another. Why? I shouldn't have to spell this out for you, but the prohibition on incestuous marriage stems from medical, not cultural concerns. Why is it only an issue for you to argue in favor of same sex family members marrying? Why not make an issue of opposite sex family members marrying if your analogy is anything other than disingenuous.Why? Because, as I said before, incestuous marriage literally has zero to do with two consenting same sex adults entering a legal, civil marriage. Want to make the argument that same sex incestuous marriage should be legal because the medical reasoning doesn't apply? Have at it - that's a separate legal issue than basic access to legal marriage for same sex adults.And where did I say I believe Christians are "evil"? You have no ideas whatAs far as your response regarding previous atrocities and how we no longer tolerate them, why does it matter if other countries still do it? What bearing do they have on U.S. law? You seemed to miss the entire point being made there insomuch that using "tradition" and history to argue for something shouldn't be the primary or even a major reason to maintain a status quo.And where exactly did I proclaim to believe Christians are "evil"? (Hint: I never did because I don't believe any such nonsense.) Such rubbish is the pretense of someone looking to claim religious persecution where none exists.That aside, I couldn't care less what the Bible has to say about homosexuality. We do not live in a theocracy and the law is not based on the Bible. Science disagrees with your religious contention that homosexuality is unnatural (it appears in literally hundreds of species naturally outside of homo sapiens), so how exactly is it unnatural? Furthermore, hypothetically speaking, why would the government have a compelling interest in banning something unnatural? Humans do unnatural things all the time like wear glasses, use microwaves, and drive cars. Should we ban those things for being unnatural too?Finally, as far as rights and the word marriage go, we as a nation have already determined that separate institutions for different classes of people are not equal. Using a separate word for heterosexual and homosexual legal (civil) marriages creates two distinct classes. Plus, literally all law as it pertains to the legal institution references the word 'marriage' meaning that in order to even feasibly consider creating a "separate but equal" institution for LGBT people would cost millions and entail rewriting hundreds of laws. And why? Because an increasingly smaller sect of one religion in the U.S. has religious objections to a legal institution.This isn't Iran. We don't let one religion run rampant over people's rights because it appeases those person's religious sensibilities. Like it or not, LGBT marriage equality will be a 50 state reality within the near future.

MozartFX
MozartFX 5pts

You believe two consenting adults should be able to marry. What if they are related? That's the question. I mean, you say that the Constitution "guarantees equal treatment for all citizens". ( There are caveats to that though. Handicap people receive special rights. People who have been arrested lose some rights...etc.) So who are YOU to tell a brother and sister they can't get married...right?As far as the "subjugation of women, slavery and religious intolerance" is concerned, it is alive and well today in the Islamic countries of the world. I realize that people like you have been led to believe that Christians are evil, but, the Bibles description of homosexuality as "unnatural" is a fact. Like it or not, two men having sex is an unnatural act. Personally, I don't care what people do in their bedrooms or who they fall in love with. Love is natural, that's all I know. And you don't change minds by calling people evil. The "thousands" of rights married couples receive should be afforded to gay couples. No one has a problem with that. It's the word "marriage" we're talking about. Men and women are married and gays are...I don't know...there must be some other word that could be used to describe a legal union of two people.

Tim Peacock
Tim Peacock 5pts

You know what also invented "thousands" of years ago? Subjugation of women, slavery and religious intolerance of anything other than the accepted majority norm. We've (for the most part) moved past the misconceptions regarding women's rights in society and embraced the fact that slavery is a bad thing and that religious freedom applies to everyone - not just heterosexual Christians.Additionally, actual professional non-partisan studies conducted on two parent same sex households over the past decade disagree with your notion that opposite sex households do better than same sex parent households. One study of lesbian parents even found their children fare better than those children raised by heterosexual parents in no small part due to the fact that most LGBT parents plan their families ahead of time.Then again, children literally have nothing to do with civil marriage in the United States in modern day America. No state in the union requires an opposite sex couple procreate in order to obtain a marriage license. In fact, infertile couples and senior citizen couples - two groups that are incapable of naturally producing children - are free to marry at will. Excluding LGBT people from the civil institution of marriage and claiming it's for the children isn't just legally suspect, it's disingenuous. And to answer your questions....It should be called marriage because the Constitution guarantees equal treatment of all citizens. Reserving legal institutions to specific groups violates the very spirit of that document.Furthermore, the legal institution of marriage (not the religious institution) affords married couples over a thousand rights and privileges not afforded to unmarried and/or "civil union" possessing couples. As for your incest question, I don't see what it has to do with same sex marriage. Why do you see a connection between family members marrying one another and same sex individuals in love marrying one another? One has nothing to do with another.

MozartFX
MozartFX 5pts

Race and Gender are different. Let me ask you something. Why do you think marriage was created thousands of years ago? Was it to legitimize two peoples love for each other? Or, was it to protect children and women and stop men from going around knocking up every woman they wanted. Did they figure out long ago that the best environment for a child to be raised was with a mother and a father. (Yes, I know many children are raised in loving homes of homosexuals and I think that's wonderful). I'm saying the BEST environment for a child to be raised is with their mother and father. That's why I think marriage was invented. I'm not opposed to two gay people legally becoming a couple by law. Does it need to be called a marriage? Why? I ask this questions not to be a smart ass, but to learn why the word "marriage" is so important. It seems like all the responses I get are from people who just want to prove to others how non judgmental they are by judging anyone who disagrees with them. Do you believe two people who are related should be able to marry? By the way, I'm not a practicing Christian.

Tim Peacock
Tim Peacock 5pts

If you want to be taken seriously as a legitimate troll, at least take the extra ten seconds to spell check your drivel.

crazyottojr
crazyottojr 5pts

The simple fact you were going to get Jane Firefly tattoo betrays your total disconnect with reality.

crazyottojr
crazyottojr 5pts

You don't sound very tolerant. However Baldwin never sold this country out like that the disgusting Jane Fonda. He simply made a comment you didn't agree with. How silly and feckless.

crazyottojr
crazyottojr 5pts

I have lost total respect for Tim peacoke. Wait a minute who is this guy? He apparently has to hide behind his dog. Some tough gay mafiaso.

FiachSidhe
FiachSidhe 5pts

The guy plays pretend for a living and thinks he's king shit. Bill Murray said once that you have a good two years after you become famous where you're either a total asshole or not, and after 2 years you either get over yourself, or you stay an asshole for life. This was in reference to Chevy Chase (still an asshole). But it really applies to Searcy in spades.

FiachSidhe
FiachSidhe 5pts

These two are an utter embarrassment to Hollywood, as if the place had much dignity left. Searcy is a pathetic aspergers riddled man-child who calls every person he hates a "fatass" regardless of weight. The guy is either the world's best troll, or the world's most socially retarded actor. The guy spends the bulk of his time talking up his own success like some horrid parody of prima donna actors.And Baldwin argues like an seven year old who just discovered hashtags. Except replace fights over favorite pokemon, with gun laws. He practically argues by hurling pogs at you.Its a shame both hate gay marriage as they're practically common law at this point on Twitter.It's also a real shame, but they are both really talented actors. A shame they're both such unlikable assholes.

Jay, King of Gay
Jay, King of Gay 5pts

As I said, the onus is on Clary to make his case. Since it's hypothetical, it's little more than stirring the pot.

Bob61
Bob61 5pts

I missed his correlation between personal belief and religious ideology.Did you edit that out of his post,or just make it up based on your bigotry against Christians?

Bob61
Bob61 5pts

"Marriage between you two would be redundant."Big picture.Same sex marriage proponents cite as a primary practical reason they support marriage is the expansion of benefits from one spouse to the other.I doubt that Clary's mother is currently eligible for his work provided health insurance,but would be as his spouse.That's quite a reason,and not redundent.

Bob61
Bob61 5pts

You could refer him to Jerry Lee Lewis,he did it in the 50s.

Bob61
Bob61 5pts

Careful,or you'll get a nasty tweet,and a "fat shaming" label from Peacock for your generalizations about people who eat junk food and "fap".

Bob61
Bob61 5pts

Irish aren't "white"?Wow,I've got a lot of calls to make to my family and let them all know we qualify for affirmative action.

AustinTXmom
AustinTXmom 5pts

there was no racist comments and just because someone adopts a kid does not make them a saint, black, white, asian etc..

AustinTXmom
AustinTXmom 5pts

yes it seems he is.. and an egotistical jerk also.

AustinTXmom
AustinTXmom 5pts

what? of course we know who Mel Gibson is, we don't personally know him, but we've seen enough videos or read enough to know how he feels about Jews when he's drunk.. we know that Jodie Foster stands by him.. we know she's gay.. so we know of them, but we don't know them.. the firefly guy, I don't feel personally betrayed but now I wonder WTF Nathan Fillion is like? they seem good friends and brother I could never be friends with a turd like Baldwin.. now I don't like Firefly as I once did.. I would never watch anything with either of them in it now.. so while I may not personally know them, I know enough now to be disgusted.

AustinTXmom
AustinTXmom 5pts

Boy.. I am late to this unbelievable exchange.. I have and still have no idea who Searcy is an I did IMDB and google him.. he seems seriously mentally ill, if one reads the Ann Coulter rules of interaction with a liberal/democrat she says that name calling, name baiting is fine.. these two jokers just worship at the feet of Coulter (sick person she is).. did you notice these two idiots (Baldwin and Searcy) seem to be in some sort of cabal? like they are drinking some drug laced kool-aid? intelligent discourse (conversation that these two wouldn't even understand) is beyond their capability.. Searcy.. "if you could see my house" does this dip actually think he does anything worthwhile? anything purposeful except be a minor actor? does acting really make one a speaker for the tea bagging conservative cause? I doubt it.. in ending.. this is why I don't follow tweeting, it seems one has to come across losers like Searcy and Baldwin.. for no matter WHAT this country stands for, it doesn't stand for two egotistical, middle aged actors... what a joke.

oicu812a
oicu812a 5pts

That Peacock troll got worked! Don't start nothing, won't be nothing!

GraceAlexander
GraceAlexander 5pts

I have better things to do that hang out 24/7 in momma's basement eating cheetoes, fapping and watching for replies to my comments :) Run along now, Davie boy, and troll somewhere else. I guarantee to disappoint you! :D

JuneBug81
JuneBug81 5pts

As a fan of Baldwin's acting work, reading this made me extremely sad. And will definitely impact - whether it should or not, I can't help it - my opinion of and enthusiasm for his future work. :(I don't know what to tell people who don't understand or accept that the comparison he made was insulting to others in and of itself.

Dave Clary
Dave Clary 5pts

Took you two weeks to write that?

GraceAlexander
GraceAlexander 5pts

Guy who can't comprehend thinks he's schooled someone else on interwebs - meanwhile ruining his own case. Brilliant. Read up on your history. Irish were subject to miscegenation laws regardless of who pale their skin color was; incest and bestiality are still illegal and gay marriage won't change that; if you want to do your sister and she's amenable for the love of Pete wear a condom so you don't have deformed little incest babies and if you want to do your dog, don't get caught. Claiming that since incest and bestiality haven't been legalized yet proves that they will is so pathetically inane. *sigh*

Tim Peacock
Tim Peacock 5pts

We value evidence-based discussion here, so I look forward to you providing solid, academic peer-reviewed studies to support the up to now unfounded assumption that "redefining" marriage to eliminate legal inequalities to accessing it as a fundamentally required Constitutional institution between consenting adults. After all, no one in the United States has been able to provide such evidence yet (choosing instead to cite a religious text that's detrimentally redefined marriage more times than the entire history of the American legal system combined).

MozartFX
MozartFX 5pts

It's hilarious to read the comments of all these "Wonderfully, open-minded, non-judgemental people" who HATE anyone who disagrees with them. "What's that? You disagree with me? You should lose your job and be eternally ridiculed! How DARE anyone have a differing opinion!"Has it now become IMPOSSIBLE to hear someone's opinion, disagree with it, say why, and move on? No! You must wish death upon them and their family!If someone disagrees with gay marriage.....it DOES NOT mean they are homophobic. That's a fact. Personally, I don't have a problem with it. But, I CAN understand the argument that changing the definition of the word "marriage" could have detrimental effects. That's it. There is not hatred in my heart for anyone. I'm NOT homophobic. I want to understand what the legal implications are....that's it.

sflcat
sflcat 5pts

How about this then, civil contracts for ALL couples who seek legal standing for their 'union' before the government. Then let the churches decide who they will and will not hitch during a religious ceremony. Everyone gets their rights before the law, and no one forces religious folks to rubber stamp a life-style if they don't agree with it.

47ronin100 .
47ronin100 . 5pts

I think our foreign policy needs to be more aggressive and Obama shouldn't push his gun laws on the populace. Your point? That said, I'm a straight, cisgendered male. And sex is gross regardless of it's homo or hetero. It's natural but it ain't nothing special. And unless we're talkin' about the oppression of the rights of a marginalized minority, then yeah fuck PC. As far as I'm concerned, if an individual can't express their sexual orientation because there is people out there who have a small problem with it, then maybe we should take a look at ourselves instead of shifting the blame on said individual.

Tim Peacock
Tim Peacock 5pts

I always find it curious when people use hyper-sexualized metaphors when proselytizing against LGBT people's struggle to secure basic, fundamental, Constitutionally-guaranteed rights like marriage. It speaks more to the antagonist than it does the struggle.

TruthMan
TruthMan 5pts

I can see being pissed off at Searcy because that was completely uncalled for, but I actually kind of agree with Baldwin. Why is it wrong for a father to marry his son or daughter if they are consenting and of age? Because of your opinion?

Bradio311
Bradio311 5pts

I had never heard of either of these actors before this but now think they are INCREDIBLY hateful and seemingly very insecure with a sh*t ton of issues that need resolving. I hadn't care about either of them or their careers before but I'll be sure to avoid anything they're in from now on.

Samantha Arthur
Samantha Arthur 5pts

Never heard of Nick, have heard of Alan. GOD! Never watching them on tv again after this, they've lost all respect me and my uni friends once had for them. We were following this as it happened at uni over the 2 days, and eventually have over 150 people watching it at the end unfold on the projector. I think they're going down hard, especially as a lot of them have popular YT channels...

guestwho
guestwho 5pts

Your are right :) They are only in Season 5 lol I have just been going with the motion with the show. I don't' like it as much as the first 2 seasons. IMO, it seems the writers are running out of ideas for the characters and the story line is getting old and boring. As for Searcy, he needs to go. I would love for Art to get Searcy's comeuppance lol

Zed75
Zed75 5pts

Justified has one more season after this one. I'm sure Searcy has become a huge headache for the producers (and many fans), but he's probably too integral to the show to dump.

guestwho
guestwho 5pts

I have lost respect for Searcy. I used to be a fan before reading his abhorrent twitter rant. I guess its a good thing its "Justified"'s last season, otherwise they would have to kill off his character lol This Adam Baldwin guy...small bit parts actor....who is a total moron! Piece of advise for those two who thinks they are 'big shots' but arent...get off twitter!!! Take it from a real 'big shot" actor like George Clooney who said Twitter is not for him because you say things you cant take back! lol OY VEY!!!

Jay, King of Gay
Jay, King of Gay 5pts

No. The state, for the purposes of legal rights and responsibilities defines marriage, so yes, it can redefine what sorts of marriages it will or will not recognize for tax and legal purposes.Letting two consenting, non-related adults marry does not open any floodgates. Consent is a foundational part of our laws. The difference between theft and borrowing is consent. The difference between trespassing and visiting is consent. We are not going to do away with consent. Dogs have yet to show any interest in marriage whatsoever. They don't even show any comprehension of what it is. There is no danger of people marrying dogs because we have yet to see dogs organizing protests in favor of marrying humans. Until we start seeing movement from animals themselves, there's nothing to worry about. Bonus: wives used to be the property of their husbands. Pets are the property of their owners. So you are already "married" to your dog, if you want to look at it that way.We've arrived at a point in history, through trial and error, where we basically agree that incest has more drawbacks than it has advantages. If someone wanted to marry their daughter, they would have to prove their case in court. Nothing about allowing gay couples to wed defacto lets anyone else through the door with them.

Jay, King of Gay
Jay, King of Gay 5pts

Marriage establishes familial and kinship rights. Rights your mother and you already have, actually(assuming your mother isn't still married to someone else). Marriage between you two would be redundant. But,ultimately the onus is on you to prove your case either to the legislature or to the Supreme Court. It took gay people around 30 years or so to get marriage equality, so you might want to get started, Mom's not getting any younger, is she?

Anonymous
Anonymous 5pts

I think you're discounting something very important.Adam Baldwin?Is someone who's inspired a lot of people, myself included, to try my hand at writing. If it hadn't been for his creative inspiration? I wouldn't have the career that I do, nor would I be a percentile as happy. And I know for a fact I'm not alone in that. I owe him a thank you, and keep hoping I'll get the chance to give it to him one day. What has your article inspired? #FoodForThought?

SemperWhy
SemperWhy 5pts

I think it all started when Baldwin hit Peacock back.

SemperWhy
SemperWhy 5pts

You have an absurdly low threshold for "terrorism".Sigh. There used to be a time when words meant something. Nowadays, people who disagree with marriage policy are "homophobic" and people using the political process are "terrorists".

SemperWhy
SemperWhy 5pts

A few days ago, some leftist tool was claiming that the Tea Party and the Klu Klux Klan were "one and the same". This just a few weeks after MSNBC had Melissa Harris-Perry mocking Mitt Romney's adopted black grandson and their twitter feed claiming that the "right wing" would hate a Cheerios commercial with a mixed-race family.Searcy has an adopted black son. He takes such bigoted accusations of racism... poorly.http://photos.exposay.com/Nick_Searcy/photo/829058/

Terry Richardson
Terry Richardson 5pts

Well, to be fair, all signs point to his character dying this season, so it may not be an issue for long.

Katherine Wintersnight
Katherine Wintersnight 5pts

They think that the state shouldn't be allowed to define marriage because they think that they alone should be allowed to define marriage for everyone else.

Katherine Wintersnight
Katherine Wintersnight 5pts

Only the degree of incest is in question, Dave, people marry cousins of various degrees limited only by the exact relationship by each state's, country's, or religion's differing laws. Consanguine marriage has a long and solid history in the USA.

Katherine Wintersnight
Katherine Wintersnight 5pts

Emily, it wasn't so long ago that it was considered impossible for a woman to be raped by her husband. She didn't have the right to withhold consent from her husband, to not give him his "marital rights." I find it most interesting that the people who automatically equate gay marriage with incest and bestiality are automatically equating a marrage relationship with a loss or lack of the ability and/or right to give consent.

Athena Hollow
Athena Hollow 5pts

I just can't help but notice how they are able to take such things in stride, and still rake in millions of fans and dollars. It is disappointing, of course, but with the course of our government and celebrities alike saying such things, and still getting multi-million mansions and the like, there has to be something to it....

DXW
DXW 5pts

So does your husband.