About us Login Get email updates
Quick Clip
Print

Quinn:"[T]the last time I checked, two guys doing the bone dance with Mr. Sphincter was not going to produce the next generation of children"

June 19, 2009 1:32 pm ET

From the June 18th edition of The War Room with Quinn and Rose:

Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.

EMBED
Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by Easy to refute wingnuts (June 19, 2009 1:36 pm ET)
      5  
      "Mr Sphincter?"

      Quinn is more self-referential than I thought.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by chavez_frank9414 (June 19, 2009 1:38 pm ET)
      4  
      Has it occurred to anyone, that maybe that's why homosexuality exists, at least from an evolutionary standpoint? Perhaps it is nature's population control.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by NdlovukaziThor (June 19, 2009 2:14 pm ET)
        1  
        It happens in other species besides humans, too. Along with other "deviant" acts, but I will not go into that...

        There are biological, as well as sociological, arguments as to why various sexualities exist, and it always astounds me to hear the other side... That people would "choose" to be different (sexuality, social class, or gender and race) - because persecution is so much fun!

        It's really sad how society has used people's uniqueness to create inequality.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by NiceguyEddie (June 19, 2009 2:26 pm ET)
        4 1
        Perhaps, but that doesn't that kind of put a really negative spin on it?

        Another one of nature's great crowd control devices afetr all was SMALL POX.

        Once we got rid of that, nature created HIV/AIDS... "An immunodeficiency virus that makes us vulnerable to everything else that comes along which is spread sexually thus making us somewhat reluctant to engage in the act of procreation." ~George Carlin (PP)

        So while you may have a point, you might want to be careful how you put it. ;)
        Report Abuse
      • Author by shaggles (June 19, 2009 2:54 pm ET)
        3  
        Actually I think from an evolutionary standpoint it's the opposite of population control. In order to reproduce at a rate that will maintain or increase the population animals have to have strong sex drives. In the animal kingdom if you are top dog (or lion or whatever) you may not get a chance to mate with a female but you still need to get your rocks off (to use the scientific term.) Homosexuality is a natural outlet for sexual frustration in most, if not all, species.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by youngcynic (June 19, 2009 4:29 pm ET)
            1
          Actually, homosexuals tend to have, on average, larger extended families on their mom's side. So if it's not the opposite of population control, it at least balances it out. The theory behind this is that the little bit of extra sexuality in these women that causes them to have want big families gets impressed onto their children in the womb through hormones, pushing them towards the "liking men a lot" side of sexuality.
          Report Abuse
    • Author by KLJTech (June 19, 2009 1:41 pm ET)
         
      You just know that this hack was just dying to say that once his buddy gave him the line. Just like the former vise president I'd bet if he had a child that was gay that he'd have a different opinion. Of course maybe there's no hope for him and he would hate his own kid.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by Max Credits (June 19, 2009 1:42 pm ET)
      5  
      Rumor has it that a certain website is still seeking payment from this guy for the last time he checked.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by Leftym0m79 (June 19, 2009 1:42 pm ET)
      5  
      1. Ewwww!
      2. The government only has an interest in marriage because of the money it generates.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by pete592 (June 19, 2009 1:43 pm ET)
      6  
      "It's fun to watch all this evolve."

      Almost as fun as it is to watch paranoid, hatemongering, homophobic ***holes like you devolve.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by pros2pros2940 (June 19, 2009 1:47 pm ET)
      5  
      Geez.........conservatives with their preoccupation with people's sex lives.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by nerzog (June 19, 2009 2:06 pm ET)
      4  
      They just can't leave it alone, can they? Need I state the obvious? If we follow his logic, then the government should refuse benefits to childless heterosexual couples, as well.

      After all, they aren't contributing to the next generation.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by foghornleghorn (June 19, 2009 2:29 pm ET)
      5  
      Mr. Quinn can kiss my Mr. Sphincter.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by budrykzp9226 (June 19, 2009 3:36 pm ET)
      3  
      Um... and YOU are? Nice neck folds, Casanova.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by vysotsky (June 19, 2009 4:13 pm ET)
      3  
      Dear Jim Quinn: when you make the same argument against the state recognition of marriages among infertile couples and against legal adoption and you may be downgraded from hypocritical moron to just plain stupid.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by Bad News (June 19, 2009 4:54 pm ET)
         
      Hate is never the answer.


      Mr. News
      Report Abuse
    • Author by njguy93 (June 19, 2009 5:00 pm ET)
      3  
      I never really understood this argument about procreation. So what if a gay couple is married? How does that stop a straight couple from getting married and having children? What's the connection? I'm straight, and if I decide to get married and have children, that won't be affected by what any gay couple does. It makes no sense. Just like the "sanctity of marriage" argument. Where's the "sanctity" when 1 out of every 2 marriages ends up in divorce? More non-sensical arguments from ignorant, bigoted losers.

      THANK YOU.
      njguy93@yahoo.com
      Report Abuse
      • Author by pags2 (June 19, 2009 5:09 pm ET)
        1  
        I don't get it either. Do these people opposed to gay marriage think gay people will be forced to marry the opposite sex and procreate? I fail to see the logic of opposing gay marriage. I think gay people should have the right to be married and miserable just like heteros.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by nerzog (June 19, 2009 5:43 pm ET)
          1  
          There is no logic. I've been butting heads with these Troglodytes for several years over this issue, and have yet to see one argument against Gay marriage based on logic.
          Report Abuse
      • Author by shaggles (June 19, 2009 5:16 pm ET)
        1  
        I think it baffles everyone who isn't obsessed with what others do in the bedroom.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by snoopy (June 19, 2009 5:43 pm ET)
      3  
      Doing the bone dance with your friends wife doesn't create kiddo's either. But it does make you a contender for the republican presidential nomination.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by pags2 (June 19, 2009 5:55 pm ET)
        2  
        I should think the conservative Christians would find more fertile ground castigating people who commit adultery, but that would leave their churches empty.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by oscar the grouch (June 19, 2009 7:55 pm ET)
        1
      Despite the jerk's lame Letterman-like impersonation, there is an underlying truth in what he tried to say. Doesn't make him any less a jerk, however.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by mjh (June 19, 2009 8:11 pm ET)
      1  
      Quinn:"[T]the last time I checked, two guys doing the bone dance with Mr. Sphincter was not going to produce the next generation of children"


      The last time YOU checked??

      Who'd you check with, Jeff Gannon?

      Report Abuse