This whole article, and this comment in particular, makes me so happy I want to share it with everyone. Problem is, as a 32-year-old woman, I don't know many people who share my specific loves of hating on the Pats and transferring Harry Potter references to everything.

THIS.

I don't know if you noticed that I'm a different person than the OP, but I didn't suggest that these are common complaints. Frankly, my experience isn't wide enough and I'm not well-read enough to know. I am curious, though, as to why you, a self-identified white man, seem to know that these aren't common complaints.

And THIS is why people bring up race, gender and sexual orientation in contextualizing speakers. It informs so quickly. Why, exactly, should I take your claim that these are not common complaints seriously?

You're doing a very poor job here. I'm not sure if it is a case of willfully misunderstanding Emma and Jia's points, or if it is a reading comprehension issue. I'm frankly not even sure I want to launch into a discussion of just how wrong you are, because it looks like you'll take me down a rabbit hole, but I highly…

Who? When? By whom? Are you just conflating "liberal circles" with the comment section of Gawker articles?

Really, though, who cares? Is beets preventing you from talking to me? Is beets preventing you from sharing this article with friends and discussing it to your heart's content? Is beets doing anything other than annoying you?

Let's be clear what you are talking about. Accepting your thesis that these people thrive here in the comments section of Gawker, what have they achieved? They have achieved annoying asshole status in a comment section of a website. Again, a website comment section. This is not power. This is something easily ignored…

I imagine she would have based her rebuttal on largely the same ground: it is a poorly argued piece bolstered by vapid examples.

Everyone does that. That is part of the experience of life. I think it is questionable whether an app that replaces such a learning process is a good idea, or a sad crutch.

This comment deserves so many more likes.

Just like in the 50s, children now are at much greater risk from adults they know than from strangers. There has been no point in recent history in which children have been significantly victimized by street crime.

Additionally, there has been no point in time in which crimes against children walking on the streets were a substantial risk. Even when crime rates were much higher, children were not the likely victims of street crime. Children are at much greater risk from people they know than from strangers.

No. Discrimination is not per se unconstitutional. It is a bit complicated, but basically, if the discrimination is based on a legitimate purpose and that purpose is not related to a protected class characteristic, then it is okay. If it is related to a protected class characteristic, the legitimate purpose must be…

The marriages won't necessarily be nullified. The marriages performed in California pre-Prop 8 were upheld.

We can still win a partial but significant victory if they rule that states must recognize marriages performed in other states.

I think you're exactly right, and I'm sure it was a strategic decision to include the second question, whether states can choose not to recognize a marriage performed in another state.

Relying on precedent has worked out pretty okay for the last 900 years....

With you. I used a local couture shop to make my gown. My mother had considered making my dress, but when we went to that shop she checked out the fabrics and construction and said that once her time was accounted for, she couldn't make them cheaper.

Yes, scouting and development is more important than the club NOT going up on a Tuesday. 100% granted.