Isn’t he 28? Usually the no-premarital-sex types get married by 22, at the latest, because it’s really difficult to hold out any longer (unless you don’t actually want sex ever, or don’t want it with the gender your religion says you must).

I had a friend like that in college. He would recite Bible verses while snorting coke off a family photo then teach Sunday school the next morning. He acted fairly homophobic but everyone knew his best friend was super gay and he seemed oblivious to it. I think there are just people who never consider being gay…

Actually, the way southern closets are constructed is, be super conservative, get married and have kids and never, ever admit what is as obvious as a fabulous sweater.

Speaking as someone who was in that boat a few years ago i think you’re right. Religious indoctrination will play hell with your sexual urges and self awareness. Give the guy a few years. He’ll be WAY happier when he starts being honest with himself. I know I was.

I’m with you 100%. My brother’s best friend J from HS, who would now be 59 years old, has never had a girlfriend. He harps on women all the time about how much he loves them and he is the right one for him. But when it comes time for the nasty he can’t follow through.

Um, yeah. “Willpower”.

Eh, I have sympathy for both the dudes you describe and for this woman, provided they didn’t pressure anyone into doing anything they didn’t want to. Sometimes what looks like a minor inconvenience at the beginning of a relationship, when you’re really infatuated with someone, becomes a much bigger problem when the…

So am I. My inner Samuel L. came out.

From Napoleon to Jeanne d’Arc to the wanton bloodshed of the revolutions to the resistance living in a crypt and only emerging at night to spill the blood of Nazis like a bunch of righteous nosferatu, history should have taught people not to screw with the French by now.

Has anyone considered that this reaction is exactly what the terrorists that initiated the Paris attacks wanted? It is incredibly frightening to me that the immediate response is to go bomb Syria. Reminding you first, that any military action inside Syria by the West is very much illegal. Then recall this thing called…

This air campaign has me utterly baffled. We’ve been sending heavy bombers and attack planes on daily sorties over Syria and ISIS held Iraq for over a year now, how are there still known targets left to hit? Seems we have either not been putting nearly as much effort in as we claim, or the French hit a few…

I’d really hate if Assad is ousted. He may be a prime asshole to his people but hardly bothered the West.

US is doing very little compared to Russia

They’re basically killing everyone fighting Assad. That happens to include ISIS, and a bunch of groups fighting ISIS.

It seems like we’re all (as countries) doing exactly what they want, and taking away our civil liberties in the process.

But make no mistake about it: a different strategy, a much more risky strategy, will be necessary in order to truly take the fight to ISIS.

The bombing of the Russian commercial jet and the attacks in Paris should present an unprecedented opportunity for some realpolitik to take place between the major powers involved in this clusterfuck.

UK only attacking ISIS in Iraq, government couldn’t get a vote through parliament to operate in Syria.

Russia is protecting Assad, not so much fighting ISIS.

So we now have Russia, the US and France bombing them.