[Image from globaloctopus.blogspot.com]Now that isn't hard for Mr. King to do - make an ass of himself. You may recall how he warned that if Barack Hussein Obama was elected president, al Qaida and other nefarious groups around the world would be dancing in the streets. And he used the middle name, "Hussein," just to remind everyone that Obama might be a secret Muslim.
King is back in the news these days damning the Iowa Supreme Court for legalizing gay marriage. He's also very worried that Congress may repeal DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act), a bit of legislative mischief dear to the hearts of the rightwhitewingnuts, for whom the sex lives of Americans is red meat, and who feel it is their business to turn the United States into a christianist country.
But what's really got his shorts in a knot is "socialism." He doesn't like socialism. I'm not sure he has a freaking clue what socialism is all about but he knows it when he sees it and he doesn't like what he's seeing.
According to an article in The Hill's Blog Briefing Room by Michael O'Brien, King, while pontificating on a conservative news radio program, said this:
"If there's a push for a socialist society where the foundations of individual rights and liberties are undermined and everybody is thrown together living collectively off one pot of resources earned by everyone, this is one of the goals they have to go to, same sex marriage, because it has to plow through marriage in order to get their goal. They want public affirmation, they want access to public funds and resources."
Huh?
Yup. If socialism cometh, same sex marriage is right behind, because same sex marriage people want to feed in the public trough.
Maybe he got kicked in the head by a horse when a yong ass?
Same sex marriage is, not only "a radical social idea, it is a purely socialist concept in the final analysis," saith Mr. King.
Of course it is.
One more thing: King referenced Rick Santorum's comment that "legal same sex marriages would open the door to legal polygamy or bestiality." King said Santorum was right on.
And this, my friends, is the state of Repugnican discourse in our country today. Moronic and utterly without value. But they live in the unreal world of christianist theology and prey on the ignorant, uniformed and stoopids.
1 comment:
I do really wonder if an abusive mate, in a legal marriage, harms the entire institution of marriage by a bad example. Why should my neighbors’ bad marriage have any influence on my other neighbor’s good marriage? Why do we have annulment, divorce etc sanctioned by the same people that want to regulate other’s marriages? If marriage is forever, according to church doctrine, why is there a provision in most religions to untie the knot? Does that not leave it to the individual? I am not aware of a seat for God at any divorce hearing. Is it possible that God does not want to interfere? I know that is a ridiculous assumption because so many that KNOW what God wants, tell me that He is very interested in marriage. I wonder, meaning no disrespect. HE did not marry, yet he fathered a child.
Post a Comment