Two Sacred Things, or Your Rights Are Grass...

The BBQ Pit
21

This is my 1313th post, and I can’t think of a better way to spend Double 13 than ranting against those anti-Constitutional idiots.

If you blow someone’s brains out with a gun in a very violent, realistic way, you get a PG-13 and elementary school age kids can see it. Repeatedly. With friends and bored parents in tow. However, if you show a single sex act, or some exposed skin, the film becomes R or even NC-17 and very few kids see it. After all, the taboo against love is so much stronger than the taboo against hate. War is a natural part of life, whereas sex is something to be prevented and used only when it can be justified. And you must think of the Pope and the Virgin while doing it, or you’ll go to Hell forever. :slight_smile:

All of the sarcasm aside, the US is severely screwed up. We need to realize that Puritanism causes pornography. The very concept of pornography only has meaning in a Puritanical society that believes the body is evil and that we, the worthless humans, abominations before God, are only pure when we glorify the blood-soaked power structure. If you want an edifying read, pick up “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God”, written by Johnathan Edwards sometime in the 1600s. In it, he says God hates every stinking one of you, nobody can ever deserve, let alone earn, salvation, and it is only by the grace of a deity that despises humanity in general, and you in particular, that you are not now roasting in the very depths of Hell. The phrase “Smile, God loathes you!” comes to mind. Johnathan Edwards perfectly summed up the Puritan, Calvinist beliefs in that sermon. A few choice passages exist here. Read them, then realize that the religion expressed in them is all to alive in the Moral Majority groups. I shudder to think what might happen if Buchanan ever gets in to office for that reason.

We need to shed the dingy flasher’s trenchcoat of Puritanism and go to a more Libertarian policy before the government destroys all the rights we have!

22

I remember when Stockwell Day was in the leaders’ debate in the last election, slamming Jean Chrétien for permitting a Supreme Court ruling allowing the possession (as opposed to the manufacture or distribution) of child pornography. He kept going on and on about the children.

I wanted to yell, "You’re a fine one to talk about the children! What about the children in the schools with no books in Winnipeg? What about the children who die of asthma because there’s no room in the emerge in Toronto? What about the children who are starving in Vancouver? What about the children who will never get a post-secondary education without going into debt for the rest of their lives in Montreal? What about the children who are getting cancer because they live next to the tar ponds in Sydney?

“I’m not interested in hearing about the children until I have evidence that you’ve done one thing for the 20% of children in poverty in this country, you neoliberal schmendrick!”