I am a firm believer in the sanctity of marriage.
So it’s a tragedy, truly, that Scarlett Johannson and, er, whatshisface are calling it quits:
“After long and careful consideration on both our parts, we’ve decided to end our marriage,” they say in a joint statement. “We entered our relationship with love and it’s with love and kindness we leave it. While privacy isn’t expected, it’s certainly appreciated.”
Johannson and that other guy. One might worry about the sanctity of marriage in Hollywood.
According to a source, the couple quietly split six months ago, and Johansson initiated the move. The actress began apartment-hunting in New York City and is currently in Jamaica with some girlfriends, the source adds.
Like I said. No comment.
UPDATE: Welcome, readers of PZ Myers’ Twitter feed. The line you’re looking for is down in the comments.
And, using the same logic Gavin Sullivan used in stating I “confirm” that your hero’s marriage was “ordained by God”, it’s fairly certain that Gavin Sullivan supports indiscriminate torture, since he pretty well waterboarded context.
Hmmm. How does the price of an impuslively bought snow blower compare the to cost of an impulsive airline ticket to Jamaica?
Comment of the week, right there!
Hmmm. How does the price of an impuslively bought snow blower compare the to cost of an impulsive airline ticket to Jamaica?
Depends on what you want blown.
…
…
…
…
…
I meant getting your mind blown, of course. No working blue here.
Times a wasting Mitch!
June:A cake’s no good if you dont mix the batter and bake it.
John:And love’s just a bubble if you dont take the trouble to make it.
So if your free to go with me il take you quiker than 1,2,3
June:Lets gooooo
Times a wasting
Actually, even if I were available and Ms. Scarlett (whatever shall I do, Rhett?) were a possibility, her comment about getting an AIDS test every few months or so would probably give me pause. Beauty, yes, but what the ……is in there?
So you’re telling me there’s a chance?
What do you mean, Mitch, by “the sanctity of marriage”?
I have a better game to play, Gavin.
What do you think I mean by “sanctity of marriage”. Let’s get the preconcepetions that you want to use to yank the term “sanctity of marriage”, or the utterly tongue-in-cheek message of this post, out of context first.
That sounds like it’d be a lot more fun!
I’m genuinely unclear, Mitch–and intended no game. Indeed, I can’t think of any rational justification for viewing all marriages as even being “good”, let alone “sanctified”. Perhaps we have no disagreement?
Indeed, I can’t think of any rational justification for viewing all marriages as even being “good”, let alone “sanctified”.
I see marriage as a religious institution, ordained by a God I believe in and that you (a cursory glance at your blog seems to indicate) believe is a “superstition”, meaning our definitions of “rational justification” are probably not close enough for a useful discussion of the subject.
Great swathes of modern culture have devalued the institution from the ideal I believe in. As I do with many of modern culture’s great swathes, I’ll pass, while reserving the right to observe and comment.
Many non-religious people seem to have pleasant, long-lasting marriages. Do you believe that Dr. and Mrs. PZ Myers’ marriage was ‘ordained by God’? Does “God” ordain the marriages of polytheistic people too? (If so, which God?) Can a polygamous marriage also be God-ordained? What of that most common type of marriage, globally: the arranged marriage?
Many non-religious people seem to have pleasant, long-lasting marriages.
True, and irrelevant.
Do you believe that Dr. and Mrs. PZ Myers’ marriage was ‘ordained by God’?
Yes, but also irrelevant.
I’ll skip the rest of the questions, as I have no real desire to argue faith with a person who oozes such contempt for it.
Were we ‘arguing faith,’ Mitch? That hadn’t occurred to me–I thought we were just trying to figure out what you mean when you affirm a belief in ‘the sanctity of marriage’.
From between these ears, Mitch, I don’t perceive much ‘contempt’ for gullibility and superstition. Though I certainly don’t put either on a pedestal.
I thought we were just trying to figure out what you mean when you affirm a belief in ‘the sanctity of marriage’.
No, “we” weren’t! I know what I believe marriage is; Other people are entitled to their own beliefs. Yourself, Scarlett, the other guy, PZ Meiers, your magic polygamist and polytheistic friends and everyone else included. I’m pretty clear on this. You seem to be the one with the disconnect…
…oh, pshaw. There’s no disconnect. You’re trolling for a rhubarb!
I don’t perceive much ‘contempt’ for gullibility and superstition.
A three minute troll through your blog might make a casual observer question that.
Which is fine – it’s your right. I’ve just never found atheism intellectually tenable.
And no, I’m not really in the mood to discuss that premise, either. I’m busier than a one-armed Ulsterman in a bomb-defusing contest.
Gavin,
Let me help you. Mitch has jokingly referred to his interest in the charms of Miss Johansson for a long time now. This post was in that spirit, but now you have arrived on the scene and decided to jack the thread and turn a jest into a tendentious symposium on cultural anthropology.
Lighten up.
Funny, my good Mitch–you’re the second person to accuse me of being a ‘troll’ in the past week.
The first person to call me a troll–Hegemommy–is as far to my left as you are to my right.
An admission: I have no idea what this [troll] accusation means. Is it a good thing? (I’m not exceptionally short.)
Regarding Gavin’s point, I would hope that even skeptics and atheists would concede that, for the sake of society in general, honest men and women ought to respect marriage for the sake of the families. It’s not for no reason, for example, that about one in eight murder deaths in the United States (and about 1 in 2 in Japan) is a murder-suicide related to a relationship, and large portions of suicides involve broken relationships.
Whether one chooses to call it “sanctity” or not and view Genesis as a guiding principle, we can admit the principle, no?
I’ll cop to a bit of imprecise usage; where I wrote “trolling”, I should have written “trawling”.
Man mitch the people that stumble across this blog are quite interesting huh? At least this one kept it civil, sort of.
and the proper spelling is tr0lling, don’t ask why, it just is
one final point, this guy couldn’t even properly spell opinion on his blog. Nuff said.
wait that was a comment, nevermind.
At least this one kept it civil, sort of.
Oh, I’ve known Gavin for years. He’s usually civil enough. To me, anyway.
I should have written “trawling”.
I think “goading” would be more precise. Since we are all concerned about precision in a joke post.
Back atcha, SITDers. Hugs.
Pingback: Tweets that mention Shot in the Dark » Blog Archive » Submitted Without Comment -- Topsy.com
“tendentious symposium on cultural anthropology”
I likey, thanks Mr. D!
This post was mentioned on Twitter by PZ Myers, Gavin Sullivan
You really do have too much time on your hands, don’t you?
Within a jocular post, Mitch asserted a passionate personal belief which he takes quite seriously. I attempted to get the author to defend his assertion. In said attempt, I did nothing untoward.
In reading any blogpost of mine, you are free to comment as you please. You need not mimic my spirit or mood. Speak as you please. Focus on whatever interests you.
Seen on a local church marquee:
To our Christian friends, Merry Christmas
To our Jewish friends, Happy Haunnuka
To our atheist friends, Good Luck
I liked the church marquee I saw in early December last year: Come in early, avoid the rush! (for those C&E Christians).
Within a jocular post, Mitch asserted a passionate personal belief which he takes quite seriously. I attempted to get the author to defend his assertion..
It’s not for nothing they call you “King of Comedy”.
Hey! The restraining order must have expired!
Perhaps Gav’s avocation as intellectual cop could serve society better by probing whether or not Flash actually believes in the mass-murder of members of a noble profession:
http://www.shotinthedark.info/wp/?p=16284#comment-86860
I mean, PZ Meyers’ (to say nothing of Gav’s) banal NPD flareups may be important and all, but us serious-minded folks tend to be more concered with things of more substantial import.
Get on it.