Wiley Miller is on a roll, and has produced part 3 of his Non Sequitur series on America’s anti-gay hate laws (h/t Linda Grilli):
One of Them: Part 3
April 29, 2015 • 7:00 am
Why Evolution is True is a blog written by Jerry Coyne, centered on evolution and biology but also dealing with diverse topics like politics, culture, and cats.
I can never get my Big Orange Kitty to sit on my shoulder. 🙁
That’s one of the glories of cartoons, they can suspend the rules of physics, chemistry, and biology. So the Roadrunner can run through a painted tunnel. Daffy duck reattaches his bill every time it gets shot off. And cats behave.
I don’t think the cat on the shoulder is so much a matter of behaving as it is whether or not the cat thinks that that’s a good place to be….
b&
This reminds me of the good old days of Doonesbury when (as William F. Buckley, Jr., once pointed out in an introduction to a collection of Trudeau’s work), contrary other comics, the punch-line is to be found in the “penultimate panel.”
It’s also very relevant to Ireland right now as the country approaches a referendum on same sex marriage.
While I think that one can say that the majority (including the Catholic majority) support same sex marriage, the push-back is vocal, vociferous and appear to have no qualms about touting misinformation, lies and personal smears in an attempt to hold back the tide.
I’ve checked the register and encouraged people to get to a Gardaí station to register, which they can up until the 5th of May.
I’ve my day planned, I’m driving to the boglands early to make sure I get in to vote.
My worry is that the yes vote is soft and won’t turn out.
Breda O’Brien, David Quinn and John Waters will all be voting
Are any of the Supremes known to be Non Sequitur fans? I’m thinking about the timing….
b&
I think the whole lot of ’em are too caught up in this embarrassing, fringe, pseudo-historical Shakespeare-didn’t-write-Shakespeare’s-plays BS to devote any time to worthwhile reading like Non Sequitur.
Um, that was 1987 and the three justices involved are dead or retired. Did you not notice the time stamp and names, or does the issue just really bug you that much that you want to keep it alive 35 years after it happened?
Not sure what article you read, Eric, but the November 2011 Slate one linked to above, while it recounts the Court’s colorful history with this issue going back 1987, brings that history up to 2009 (when all the current justices, save the two Obama appointees, Sotomayor and Kagan, were sitting members of the Court) and clearly states that, as of that time, i.e. 2009 only two of the then-sitting nine justices accepted that William Shakespeare actually wrote William Shakespeare’s plays.
If you follow the Court at all, you know that several now-sitting justices (including at least one of the Obama appointees, but with Justice Scalia serving as primary ringleader) will, at the drop of a hat — Elizabethan plumed or not — carry on and on about Edward de Vere and the so-called Oxfordian theory this, and the so-called anti-Stratfordian theory that.
And, for what it’s worth, no the issue does not “bug me that much”; I think it’s silly (as I’m sure many justice present and past would find interests of mine silly). But I was primarily just having a little fun at the expense of folks who, due to the nature of their position (as Justice Jackson famously said “we are not final because we are infallible, but we are infallible because we are final”) are usually taken all too seriously.