Tanyalee Pearson, one half of the eHarmony TV commercial couple I wrote about in January, has posted a comment on Workbench:
I would like to inform you that My husband Joshua wrote a blog about prop 8 back in Oct.
She also wrote a longer response on a blog devoted to eHarmony:
This post we oppose gay marriage, Now first off ... Joshua wrote the whole prop 8 back in oct. I tanyalee did not write the comment, I do love my husband, I have a lot friends that are gay, I love them all, they all are people, and don't judge them at all. I lived in Hollywood for a long time, and 90% of my friends were gay ... I do not judge, not is not for me to do, I think we have was too much judging going on in this world, I don't need to be a part of that. I know how it feels to be judged people have been doing that to joshua and I a lot from the moment we met ...
Pearson's comments could be fake, but the blog post to which they refer was deleted from the couple's blog within the last seven days, which suggests they are legit. The post can still be retrieved from Google's cache and was reprinted in full on Survivor Sucks.
So it appears that I reached the wrong conclusion earlier about who wrote the anti-gay marriage post on their shared blog. Instead of being written by the artistic boutique owner, the biblical argument for Proposition 8 was penned by the "geeky chemist" whose MySpace motto is "come on jesus!" I should have realized this might be the case, since the guy's church prescreens applicants to its School of Supernatural Worship with the questions "Have you ever been involved in homosexuality or lesbianism?" and "If yes, how long since last involvement?" (To any reader who might face these questions in the future, anything that happened in college when you were really drunk does not count.)
So my apologies to Tanyalee, who does not oppose the right of her 90 percent gay friends to marry, thus putting her in strong disagreement with her husband.
Unless I'm mistaken, Joshua and Tanyalee now have only 28 degrees of compatibility.
-- Rogers Cadenhead
His MySpace motto is "come on jesus"?
That's quite a different sentiment than "come on, jesus."
Hahaha, Bourne. That's exactly what I thought when I read that. Yucky! Puncuation really counts sometimes.
And Roger, I'm glad you cleared this up, because I liked Tanyalee until I read January's blog about this. Now I can like her again. Pheeew! Joshua is a big dork, though. giggles
I hate this photo of myself, this was just to document the last day in Mexico, and it was taken at 4am... our flight left at 6 am...I have no idea how you got this photo...change it please...it is so strange seeing random photos on the web, but this one... I laughed pretty hard when seeing this photo... but this was suppose to be private...
I would also like to say, Joshua and I are just a normal couple who have a cool little story about how we met... I was very excited that eHarmony wanted us to share our story...It does give others hope on finding love...
Joshua has an amazing heart, and it hurt to see people be haters... He is not a hater at all...and that is said in church, like when something amazing happens, you say "come on Jesus"...he is an awesome guy...
I have to say we all are pretty luck to be from the USA... we all have the right to say what we feel... That is one cool right... look all over the place... we have ever kind of blog on the internet, we have love, hate, anger, advice,and so on... we just have bigger problems, the economy for one...
The photo was from his MySpace page. I've removed it, though it's a shame. I liked that Chinese communist-looking hat you were wearing.
Joshua has a right to his opinion on gay marriage. I just find it ironic that a guy whose marriage is celebrated on charming TV commercials all day long doesn't think two gays should have the same right. You two look happy. So do these two.
As an aside, please pass along my compliments to Joshua for that karate move he does in some of the commercials. Clearly he has mad fighting skills.
Rogers reasons, "Joshua has a right to his opinion on gay marriage. I just find it ironic that a guy whose marriage is celebrated on charming TV commercials all day long doesn't think two gays should have the same right."
How does Joshua's thoughts about his opinion in any way disabuse any "right" of an homosexual to their own opinion?
Seriously, have you been ill?
It never occured to me that you might read these posts. I guess I'm a little slow...haha! But just wanted to let you know I like you both from what little I've seen. Your husband seems nice, and the only reason I called him "a big dork" is cus he kinda reminds me of my dad. Also, I call my own husband this sometimes. Not that you care, but I just wanted to be sure you know we're not all haters out here.
Lisa erects an effigy, "... I just wanted to be sure you know we're not all haters out here."
Yeah, I agree. Those that mock and revile morality when expressed are the real culprits; sowing hatred for the world's religious practioners, in their billions. They disparage and dehumanize all those who disagree with the sociopathic minority's effort to enforce their own pseudo-moralistic efforts onto the world's billions ...
They can call anyone any name they desire, sticking their collective tongues out in spite at the 'conservative' institutions of millenia; perhaps millions of years ... but then 'apologise' and pretend that they aren't the very minority they desperately attempt to misdirect onto that same world's billions whose 'democratic' opinion(s) mean nothing to them ...
Homosexuals don't hate the 'breeders' ... no, they just want the benefits of being 'breeders.' They are all sweetness and light in their 2% of the world's population.
"Lisa erects an effigy"
Uh, no. I was just telling the lady that I think she's cool, basically. I said it in my first post and confirmed it in my second.
Please don't use my comments to support whatever it is you're trying to say. Say what you will, but don't use my words.
Lisa directs, "Please don't use my comments to support whatever it is you're trying to say. Say what you will, but don't use my words."
You said what you wanted about someone else's moral stance, and then pretended that your comment was not the same as the real "haters," inferring that that would be one such as the "Dork's." Now, I can't disagree with you and explain my reasoning. I can't quote you ...
Seems a bit undemocratic to me ... sort of like you want your cake and eat it too! I'll bet that I'm the "Bad Guy," here, too ... correct?
No, Tadowe. You are taking what I said out of context which is so often done here on the internet. That's what bothers me. That's pretty much what happened with Tanyalee. She was misquoted, misunderstood, etc. In fact, she sounds a lot like me. I love God and Jesus, go to church, love my husband, etc. But, I also have gay friends who need support right now. I don't hate anyone.
And if you're upset about my use of the word "dork", you are taking this way too personally. If you saw me on TV and/or Myspace, you would at the very least say the same about me, I am sure. I was having fun with this. You have gotten personal.
Lisa corrects, "No, Tadowe. You are taking what I said out of context which is so often done here on the internet."
I responded to your excuse, and in reference to the thread and its various appearances. You can refute that, but haven't any ability to direct me not to respond in any way I decide to. Indeed, it amazes me when virtual individuals try and dictate their wills via broadcast communication!
I did not take your comment out of context, or else you can tell me who these "haters" are who you in no way resembled when you called someone else's moral stance dorkish? Aren't they the very moralistic majority who in their billions disapprove of homosexuality; much less some chimeric thing called homosexual "marriage?"
"That's what bothers me. That's pretty much what happened with Tanyalee. She was misquoted, misunderstood, etc. In fact, she sounds a lot like me. I love God and Jesus, go to church, love my husband, etc. But, I also have gay friends who need support right now. I don't hate anyone."
Then, who are the "haters?" Aren't they someone just like me? Someone who disagrees with the misguided effort to sympathize with the oxymoronic idea of homosexual "marriage?!?" "Dorks" who speak out against the idea that homosexuality should be a moral example for future generations to follow; with the decreased lifespans and epidemic dangers inherent in the practices used to pretend to procreate?
"And if you're upset about my use of the word "dork", you are taking this way too personally."
I delight in it! I used it to make my point, and which I can tell has reached its target, if not to you, too.
"If you saw me on TV and/or Myspace, you would at the very least say the same about me, I am sure. I was having fun with this. You have gotten personal."
This is a very important subject, and as I mentioned, to billions of people wherever they live on the planet. I don't take it for fun, but as you can see, use the opportunities I find to comment on the reality of the situation - not what I wish it were in some distant Utopian society. No society has ever survived which promoted fruitless prurience. They were inevitably destroyed by a part of the worldwide majority who considered their dead-end lack of morality to be against nature and "repulsive."
If homosexual "couples" ever start receiving the benefits designed to promote the future of the human race, here in the USA, is when I sign up for the revolution. As I've mentioned, my comments are direct and not intended to make-friends. However, I dote on collecting "enemies."
However, you laugh and joke around as much as you care to, because that is your right as a free American, and something I still find dear enough to have fought for my nation to preserve.
Please do not feed the psychotics.
Suggs should vote having said, "Lisa - Please do not feed the psychotics."
Thanks. These responses might even tend to convince sensitive people like Lisa as to who the "haters" actually happen to be, in their collectivist imperative to revile; rather than debate or respond in some reasonable manner.
The facts of the matter are ever present, and it takes an ostrich-like mentality to ignore them ... one which makes you a dupe, if not a stooge of outright misrepresentations and lies.
Flame away! It supports my commentary.
Tadowe, I think you'll be signing up for the revolution quite soon.
Hmm. That's interesting. First off, I'd like to register my opinion that this Tanyalee is smoking hot. Secondly, lot of typos in that comments, which I find...suspect. Third, if it's true that they're homophobes, that's disappointing and mildly surprising.
On the one hand, eHarmony makes no bones about and where they seem to stand on the issue of gay marriage, so why should its poster couple think otherwise? On the other hand, Tanyalee is, what, some sort of artist/clothes and this Josh guy is supposedly a chemist or something: not occupations that typically lend themselves to a conservative mindset, especially in California. But then, the same California did pass Prop 8 (and with an embarrassing 70% black support), so what do I know...
Is Joshua in favor of stoning the prostitutes to death in the town square? That's in the Bible, too.
Just asking. What a dumbass.
Also, TanyaLee's horrible English skills make me want to claw my fingernails on a chalkboard, for her ears only. SCREEEEEEEEEEEEEE! There you go, honey.
So, TL, enjoy your life with Josh the Bigot. I predict that within a few years, any gay friends you have now will not be welcome in your home. Hubby will send them away. Trust me on this one.
A military friend of mine was married in her church but had not yet been "legally married", e.g. before a government official.
A few days after the church wedding, just a day before their "legal marriage" was supposed to take place, her husband decided he did not want to be married to her. He left her at the behest of his parents, and the two of them were NOT required to get a divorce.
Because the church does not recognize "religious unions"...only legal unions. If you do not have a "legally binding government marital contract", you are not married. It does not matter if you married under a religious union.
For the person who wrote that ill-informed post about marriage as a "religious union that happens to be recognized by the government", it would benefit him/her to take some political science or marital law courses.
The whole Tanyalee and Joshua thing is a fraud, and if not a fraud Joshua has made a terrible mistake. She is older than him, she seems to specialize is accessorizing and trying to look younger and cute. Those are not real life skills. Joshua is tall, good-looking, and has a real brain. Whatthefuck is he doing with this one? I can tell the Tanyalee likes to talk A LOT and needs plenty of attention. He will grow tired of her soon enough -- and go back to the normal interests of any 29 year old guy -- banging cocktail waitresses two at a time. I pray every night -- "God please don't let that bitch Tanyalee force him into a pregnancy as the realtionship goes stale, and like Tanyalee --OLD."
Just a nice, regular guys that cares.
If anyone who read that crap statement purportedly written by Tanyalee and thinks for a second that she really did author it, then they're as stupid as the person who did. Look at the atrocious spelling and piss-poor grammar. No, that's not real at all.
This is the first time I heard a group called Puppetmastaz. Initially I thought that this has to do with the puppet world. Apparently not. memory foam mattresses
What a data of un-ambiguity and preserveness of precious know-how about unexpected feelings.|
Add a Comment