Brangelina to Tie the Knot When Everyone Else Can

I'm not one to follow celebrity news.

In fact, I resent it.

But I thought this was an interesting political move by a celebrity (though it won't make any difference at all):

Brangelina To Tie The Knot When Everyone Can
9/8/06 - 5:44 P.M.
By Jennifer Fong

(andPOP) - Brad Pitt reveals in Esquire magazine's October issue that he and actress Angelina Jolie will think about marriage when there are no longer restrictions on who can tie the knot.

"Angie and I will consider tying the knot when everyone else in the country who wants to be married is legally able," said Pitt, 42. He and Jolie are well known for their social activism...

Wow. And I thought the guy was kind of stupid.

He's refusing to marry the woman he impregnated out of wedlock, but is putting himself on a higher moral ground than the rest of us.

And what's wrong with this? He isn't discriminating anyone, not hurting anyone. As Plaw would say, 'As long as it doesn't interfere with my business'.

Then again, he is supporting gay marriage, so he's "going to hell" regardless.

Kudos. All I can add is that for someone who divorced his wife of 5-6 years for a fling-and-boot-knocking with Angelina, who also coincidentally left her husband to pursue the life of an alley cat.

Yep, talk about a moral compass...heavy on the "ass." :p

Let's have a pity party 1-2-3 awww :rolleyes:

If I remember correctly, he wasn't so much of an activist when he was married to Jen Anniston. Oh, well, to each their own, I always say. I think he's just saying that to make Angelina happy.

Yeah, its kinda like, not worth my attention? Ya know what I mean? Like I shouldn't even be wasting brain power on this. Damn celebrities

I'm all for gay marriage, but gawd, Brad is annoying--spineless and grasping at cool things to be associated with.

Nothing so self-righteous and hypocritical as a man that leaves his wife and impregnants his gf before he is officially divorced from his wife lecturing US on on the institution of marriage and giving US ultimatums.

Brad, how about you don't accept any more money from magazines, movies, appearances, photo shoots or any other popularity gimmic until world poverty is abolished? Please?

People, you all seem to not realize that everything in Hollywood...from films to TV appearances to even love...is business-oriented.

If anything, Pitt might be wise to not get married. Why? Because if one has studied the tabloids at the supermarket over the years, one realizes that save for one freak incident, most celebrity marriages collapse under 10 years, with under 5 being the new "breaker".

Unless one has a pre-arranged contract in the case of a marriage breakup, male actors/musicians/execs lose bundles in Hollywood. Pitt lost much, along with potential, millions to Aniston because of that split-owned production company of theirs (which unless I'm mistaken, is a company involved with Scorsese's upcoming THE DEPARTED).

Anyway, the only Brad Pitt that I honestly care about is the actor, when he bothers to act that is.

Sadly, he's like Tom Cruise. No, not in the nutty department. I mean in that for every great turn that Pitt did like say FIGHT CLUB, SE7EN, TRUE ROMANCE, 12 MONKEYS, etc....he does several more movies where he so so so COASTS like a mother fucker. You know, when movie stars don't bother to act and simply "coast"(self-explanatory). Such examples for Pitt include TROY, SPY GAME, THE DEVIL'S OWN, OCEAN'S 11, the sequel, SEVEN YEARS IN TIBET, and so many that I thankfully can't remember.

Other than that, Pitt doesn't matter at all in my radar.

And what's wrong with this? He isn't discriminating anyone, not hurting anyone. As Plaw would say, 'As long as it doesn't interfere with my business'. [/b][/quote]I'm not making a judgment -hey, live and let live. If living together is your thing, go for it. I'm also for the states' right to decide whether to acknowledge and allow gay men and women to marry.

However, there's no need for him to address publicly the issue of his marital status, but he apparently felt compelled to do so for reasons about which I can only speculate. I just think the guy is completely disengenuous in his statement and reason for not marrying the girl. I don't know if he's incredibly naive and stupid, or just thinks the rest of us are.

He didn't express this concern during his first marriage. Are we to believe if he were married at the time he was hit with this epiphany and new concern, he would divorce his wife and not be married since it is so important for him to be single at this time?

If he were concerned with the starving children in the Sudan, would he suddenly stop eating?

If he were concerned about the paucity of roles for older or minority actors, would he stop making movies?

If he were concerned about the quality of films and acting, would he find another job?

It's ironic that he is speaking out on the issue of gay marriage at a time when it is personally convenient for him. He is merely exploiting the issue to manufacture a justification for his action, and that is reprehensible.