G4TV

News From The Feed

Bruno Crashes Anti-Gay Marriage Rally

Posted by Ty Colfax - Monday, November 03, 2008 11:02 AM

In what will probably eventually become scenes in the actual movie, Bruno is popping up everywhere you least expect him. Bruno, the next character slated for a feature film treatment by British comedian Sacha Baron Cohen, has recently turned up at a rally in Los Angeles supporting anti-gay legislation on Tuesday's election ballot.

Bruno donned a blonde wig and seamlessly mixed in until noticed by reporters and photographers. There was much hubbub as a film crew, no doubt the FOX crew working on the subversive film, shielded Cohen until he was ushered into a van and whisked away.

Where else we might see Bruno before the film comes out is anyone's guess? Although, if he knows my family, I'll see him at Thanksgiving inciting a fight between my straight cousins and gay fashion icon uncle. -sigh-

Source




Comment(s)

Posted by cmdluke - Monday, November 3, 2008 11:28 AM

this guy is over rated and obnoxious

Posted by ObSoL33tSNiiPer - Monday, November 3, 2008 11:37 AM

VOTE YES ON PROP 8

Posted by cmdluke - Monday, November 3, 2008 12:00 PM

Homophobe ^^

Posted by Smartguy81 - Monday, November 3, 2008 12:01 PM

^^maybe he just thinks one man...one woman..

Posted by Mr_Eko_73 - Monday, November 3, 2008 12:11 PM

Ty, can you get a discount on his line 'cause I need new clothes...bad!...lol

Posted by cmdluke - Monday, November 3, 2008 12:27 PM

@Smartguy81

maybe its against our constitution to discriminate against people

Posted by Chuckupman - Monday, November 3, 2008 12:46 PM

Did you know he was paid 45 million dollars to make this film?

Looks awesome, hopefully its as good as borat.

Posted by Smartguy81 - Monday, November 3, 2008 12:55 PM

@cmdluke
you also have the freedom of assembly in the constitution. If a bunch of ppl want to get together and promote one man, one woman then so be it.

Your discrimination argument is vague and imprecise. Are we discriminating against criminals by removing them from society? No. Are we discriminating by our drinking age? No. You see where this is going. Marriage is a ceremony rooted in religion. Honestly I have no problem with 2 gays/lesbians having a civil union. Maybe they should call it that instead of marriage. If you leave the M word out of it...the religous activists will ignore it. However right now....marriage has a religous root and is recognized by the state as a means of sorting out community property and the like.

Posted by cmdluke - Monday, November 3, 2008 12:57 PM

@Smartguy81

there are some churches that accept homosexuality. should they not be allowed to be married in that church?

why should only straight people in a committed relationship get the benefits of "marriage"?

Posted by Smartguy81 - Monday, November 3, 2008 1:33 PM

@cmdluke
you hit the nail on the head. it is the benefits that should be equal under the law...not the title. the states can't make the churches accept that "marriage" can now be redefined.

there are some churches who handle snakes as well. just because one church does it, doesn't mean they all have to do it.

bottom line: leave marriage to one man and one woman, and the gay community can come up with something else that is only for them in order to receive the benefits the state recognizes for hetero couples.

seriously...since the church dislikes homosexuality you'd think gays and the like would be all over having something "different". One lesson has been learned over time...it's very hard if not impossible to spite the church.

Posted by cmdluke - Monday, November 3, 2008 1:55 PM

@Smartguy81

no church will be required to marry and gay people. if they don't agree with it, they don't have to do it.

if marriage should solely be kept within religion, why then are the states allowed to marry people?

the same religion that marriage was founded in does not allow divorce either and look how many married couples end up getting divorced.

Posted by TylerColfax - Monday, November 3, 2008 1:59 PM

this is not a church issue. this is a state issue. religion does not belong in the discussion.

Posted by cmdluke - Monday, November 3, 2008 2:01 PM

@Smartguy81

The churches don't have to recognize the marriage between gays. Let the state handle that. but if the state is allowed to marry people, then they should have to marry gays as well.

Since the law requires separation of church and state, marriage is no longer just a religious issue once the state was allowed to marry people, therefore gays should not be denied that legal right.

Posted by cmdluke - Monday, November 3, 2008 2:03 PM

@beardedlamb

thank you =)

Posted by Smartguy81 - Tuesday, November 4, 2008 5:57 AM

@cmdluke and beardedlamb
Let me clarify this. You have to think 3 dimensionally for this to take effect. A man and a woman get married...that started off as a religous ceremony right? Good. Marriage has evolved to give spouses equal rights to property, tax benefits since often one partner does not work, and insurance coverage. Those rights were extended to protect a spouse, not to show favoritism. If you haven't noticed..hetero couples not married are not entitled to marriage benefits. With this evolution in the definition of marriage...it still has its roots in religion. Do you get it now? The religous zealots won't let it go away. That is the argument they make. They don't care if the homosexuals have a wedding. They just don't want it to be called a marriage. Granted there are some who are just hateful and spiteful. However the majority just don't want their ages old tradition of one man, one woman warped. It is their right to express the opinion.

Posted by cmdluke - Tuesday, November 4, 2008 7:53 AM

@Smartguy81

thats fine, let them express their opinion. but their opinion should not infringe on the rights of others.

this is an issue about equality. leave your religious beliefs out of it, let your church deal with the religious issues, but its not your place to say that they can't have the same benefits as straight people.

Posted by Smartguy81 - Tuesday, November 4, 2008 12:07 PM

@cmdluke
I never said I was a religous person. I have the ability to be objective about issues. Don't mistake that with bias.You still miss the fundamental core of the argument...the hetero ppl who love church and jesus..or allah...or buddah...do not want homosexuals to call their unions marriage. I think a gay couple should be entitled to the same rights as a hetero married couple. That isn't up for debate. Sad part is...religion can't be left out of the debate. Religion is a part of our society. Remember the country was founded by christians. We also have the freedom of religion in this country. Like it or not...it will not go away. Here in Louisiana..ppl were against gambling...couldn't have that stuff down here!! However once the legislature called it "gaming" instead...the referendum passed. The point being call it something else besides marriage.

do not call me a religous zealot because I am able to counterpoint you. I have enjoyed talking with you thus far.

Posted by cmdluke - Tuesday, November 4, 2008 12:39 PM

@Smartguy81

just because some religious people don't want gays to be "married" does not mean that they shouldn't be able too. there are plenty of people who believe that black people should not have equal rights as well. does this mean that their beliefs should be protected by the constitution so that they can treat black people unfairly?

making gays call "marriage" something different so they can get the same benefits is still not treating them equally. its a bit different to call gambling something different to make it acceptable.

religious people who want to keep the term "marriage" to themselves need to remember that, while founded by christians, this country was founded on the basis that all men are created equal and should therefore be treated the same.

not calling you a zealot. I am actually a rather religious person. whether I agree with gay marriage or not is not the issue. the issue is that its no ones place to tell them they can or cannot get married.

Posted by Smartguy81 - Tuesday, November 4, 2008 1:13 PM

I also think that non-religous people come into the fray when the gay married couple want to either adopt/create a child and raise. I am sure this is a far more underlying apprehension to their plight.

The question has to be asked...are gay rights protected under civil rights? That is a very hard question indeed.

Personally I think that ppl should just take care of themselves...the world is much better off that way. However...I can't give a definitive answer on the child raising issue. It's not that I think they are not able to do this...but would it affect the child unnaturally? As in...would they not think heterosexuality is cool. Also...kids are mean. Their peers will no doubt give them hell over something they can't help.

Posted by cmdluke - Tuesday, November 4, 2008 1:53 PM

I agree. live and let live. if you don't like it, don't practice it. go ahead and let your opinion be known but don't force it on anyone.

as for the child raising issue, I think that it comes down to other people's prejudice. everything would be fine if people where accepting of it.

plenty of kids come out just as messed up from hetero families. some people are just not good parents.

kids at school are just mean. they will find any reason to pick on each other.

You must Login or Register to post.
Feed Theme Preference Light | Dark
Sponsored Ad
ADVERTISEMENT

Stay connected to TheFeed 24/7. Follow us on Twitter and never miss a transmission.

Start following now »

The Feed Poll

Will You Play The New 'Transformers' Game?

View Results

Tip The Feed

Know of breaking news that should be on The Feed? Send us your "Tip" and we might post it.
Get video game news alerts on your phone.
Text G4TV to 44636
Or enter your phone number:
 
T & C | Privacy | Cancel Alerts
Powered by 4INFO. Standard Messaging Rates or other charges apply. To Opt-out text STOP to 4INFO (44636). For more information text HELP to 4INFO (44636). Contact your carrier for more details.
Advertisement
Games
News
Videos
Features
Previews
Reviews
New Releases
Trailers
Cheats
TV Shows
Attack of the Show
X-Play
Comic-Con 09
E3 2009
Ninja Warrior
The International Sexy Ladies Show
Web Soup
2 Months. 2 Million.
Movies That Don't Suck
G4 Underground
The Chaser's War on Everything
Duty Free TV
Heroes
LOST
Cops
Cheaters
 
Whacked Out Videos
Human Wrecking Balls
Code Monkeys
Totally Outrageous Behavior
Arrested Development
Unbeatable Banzuke
Freaky
Trigger Happy TV
Wired for Sex
Cheat!
Spaceballs
Super Big Product Fun Show
Tech TV Vault
 
Schedule »
Channel Finder »
Web Shows
Sessler's Soapbox
The MMO Report
Fresh Ink Online
First 15
The Electric Playground
Freestyle 101
Videos
Video Index
Viral Videos
Video Game Trailers
Tech TV Vault
 
Multiplex
PS3 Portal
Wii Portal
VOD
Podcasts
Mobile
Events
Comic-Con
E3 2009
GDC
DICE
CES
Tokyo Game Show
E3 2008
Community
Forums
Open Source with Neal Tiles
Cops 2.0
Video Viewer Mail