Also, "Race grifters". Teri O'Brien? My EYES are watering from the dog whistle you're putting out. You are a garbage person.

Christians as a group don't believe a physical body is necessary for the day of judgment. Some denominations might believe that, but most mainline churches are fine with cremation. You're jumping to a ton of conclusions here.

So, just to be clear, anyone who is concerned about income inequality is only allowed to eat Banquet frozen dinners? AND you're shamelessly linking to your blog?

Mansassin, the new men's fragrance by Stetson. Available at Walgreens!

You spent all that time typing out that ridiculous, tangential nonsense (the Republican party? What?) when you could have taken two seconds and found out that men are also required to cover their ankles in mosques. A little more research time would have yielded the general consensus that freedom of religion allows…

But YOU'RE the one who's deciding it's "pearl-clutchy". You have no idea the extent to which exposed ankles are offensive in a mosque or in Arab countries. You aren't even clear as to WHY what Selena did was offensive. Again, you're overlaying your values and your culture onto a situation where they're not…

No, you're making that mistake. Nobody asked Selena to refrain from drinking or eating pork or having physical contact with men she wasn't related to. No one asked her to pray five times a day, give to the poor or make a pilgrimage to Mecca. All they asked was that she obey the rules about modesty while she was in…

In related news, God said, "Taking the gift back? Why didn't I think of that?"

You're not giving gifts, you're engaging in transactions. The deal was your kids were good, they'd get presents. They were good, they got the presents, now you want to change the terms. How would you feel if you paid off your car and then three months later, the bank wanted seven more payments or they'd repossess it?

How are your parents forcing you to go? Weapons? Threatening to expose your connections to a terrorist organization? Financial pressure? What?

"Unless you're the older relative who has the experience to realize how annoying you're being?" This appears to be a dependent clause, not a sentence. If it's a sentence, is it a question? If it's a question, what are you asking, Megan? If you're not asking a question, why is there a question mark at the end? Since…

You've yet to come up with a reason your behavior is not a) rude and b) avoidable by staying at home. I don't believe that the behavior you're exhibiting is perfectly acceptable in whatever culture you belong to. All you do is keep bringing up reasons why you don't like these people and don't want to be around them. …

Well, then, I guess you don't realize how rude it is in American culture to act that way. Because it is — sitting in a corner, ignoring people and reading is what poorly socialized children do. It's a social event; if you don't want to be social, stay the fuck home. Maybe on Alpha Centauri adults are routinely drugged…

Oh please. You're 24 years old, staying home is an option unless someone's dragging you to events at gunpoint. Sitting there reading, refusing to engage in conversation unless YOU find it meaningful, is actually more rude than just not showing up. How fucking self-centered do you have to be to show up at someone…

I "come from a geneology" that can actually communicate coherent thoughts.

Nobody's harassing you. They're not particularly interested in your life, they just come from an earlier era where people didn't sit in rooms ignoring each other while they play on their phones. Bring up another topic, ask them about themselves. And if you don't want to be bothered talking at all, stay the fuck…

You might want to ask yourself what you find appealing about people who are unfaithful to their partners and emotionally unavailable to you. Does "stealing" someone else's man make you feel more desirable? Are you avoiding intimacy? Playing out some childhood trauma? It sounds really trite, but the fact that you…

It doesn't matter whether you are more or less culpable than your sexual partner. What matters is that you are culpable, you're bringing pain to someone else and you could choose to avoid playing a part in that scenario. Maybe he would have cheated with someone else, maybe not, but you're in real murky territory if…

Wait, isn't at least part of the reason Jackie's story has been questioned because the fraternity had no member who met her description? So who, exactly, has been falsely accused here? Also, she didn't make a report to the police, which is necessary for criminal prosecution of false charges. So it's really unclear…

You're not encouraging anyone to report; you're attacking people who don't behave exactly like you. You're dismissing the very real concerns of victims and those who care about them. It's bad enough that they've been violated by their attackers, they should be further violated by civil crusaders who've appointed…