Consequences of Liberalism

A few things have come together at this point as a result of how stupid we have let things become with the courts. Flag burning, gay marriage, political contributions / McCain Feingold ... all show how stupid things are when the relevant authority (in this case, the Supreme Court) loses their perspective and starts "redefining" things according to their own personal agendas.

In the case of flag burning ... you had the loons on the Court saying that torching an object is "free speech" or "free expression". This is just stupid. Torching something is not speech ... and many have pointed out exactly the right point ... there are plenty of "statements" you are not allowed to make or are heavily constrained ... "hate" speech, burning a cross, etc. etc. etc.

If the court did not like any particular law, they could have struck it down using *real* objections ... with the flag issue I would say the most obvious is that it is almost impossible to define what a flag is ... if a buxom babe wears a "flag pattern" thong bikini for her mud wrestling match ... is that desecrating the flag? Hey ... stay focused here ... c'mon ... it was an illustrative point! OK OK ... how about your kindergartener drawing a flag in crayon ... that would make any law regarding a flag totally unenforceable.

But they didn't ... the idiot court totally turned common sense on its head, said that "burning" is somehow the same as speech, and now these silly ass arguments about how to protect an inanimate (and virtually undefinable) object will rage until some court (we pray) will tell us that the idiots were idiots and that we can go back to the sanity of allowing the other branches of governments to do their jobs.

Gay marraige is on the verge of becoming a similar situation, although here the recent swing in the court (and let's just hope that Bush gets at least one more selection to complete the job) will at least put off the issue for a lot longer. In this case, you have the loons trying to codify and legitimize perversion through the courts, and they are finding looney judges to weave new agendas into laws and (state) constitutions.

The perversion, however, is not the problem ... it is everything around it that is problematic. "Marraige" is a construct ... a human (religious) institution ... not a right (in fact, I cannot think of any real "rights" that have anything to do with more than a single person). The various legislatures throughout history created and modified laws literally "defining" the construct ... who could participate : only one man and only one woman ... how : obtaining a license ... at what age : age of consent ... etc. Trying to force this into the arguments about "rights" is again, just stupid, and will ultimately lead to the most bizarre problems.

Hey, if Fred can "marry" Barney, then why not other perversions ... 3 guys, 1 guy w/ a dozen women (God forbid) , lady and her horse (oh, that's ugly), how about a guy marrying his mom (eeee-yeeeww ... oh yeah? Who is Woody Allen hangin' out with these days?).

The reply from the loons to this kind of argument clearly defines exactly how stupid / bankrupt the whole discussion about marriage being some kind of a right is ... that polygamy or group marriage or incest or whatever is somehow simply "wrong" ... but their perversion is "right". Uh-huh. Now, if you *really* want to dig into it, you find out that the whole argument has deeper roots in liberalism ... mainly things like various 'benefits' that government provides to spouses and the like.

Campaign contributions is another one ... where courts really said that money is now speech. First off ... please give me as much of that kind of "speech" as you can! Seriously though ... we end up with the dumbest piece of legislation ever written as a result, where literally *real* rights ... like Free Speech (talking about one of the candidates) is constrained. How nuts is that?


My stands ... given the *current* state of affairs (i.e. loons' rules are in place)

Flag burning ... if you are not going to regulate what is a "flag" ... you should just leave the issue alone and let the ridiculously few morons that want to burn them stand out like, well ... morons. Having said that ... public officials should make it policy to blanket pardon any person (or group thereof) that chooses to knock the living crap out of any jackass that does so, perhaps even throw in a medal of honor. If you have a few cases where Marines have pummeled some pot-smokin', in-need-of-a-bath hippie puke within an inch of his life after desecrating the flag, you will definitely see a quick end to this form of "speech".

Or, more simply ... ban the burning of anything, anywhere near where some jackass might want to protest. You could still "deputize" some Marines as firemen ... with 4" fire hoses ... as a preventative measure ... who are there for public safety (prevent the fire from spreading into the crowd) and to protect the jackass from burning themselves (God knows the loser might sue the city if they did burn themselves).

Gay marraige ... first off, keep your damned perversion in the bedroom ... I don't want to hear about it or see it. And keep your gay agenda out of the kids' schools ... how sick do you have to be to encourage children to be sexual, let alone perverts. Having said that ... if we are going to have these asinine liberal programs, then there is no good reason why the "benefits" cannot go to whomever the beneficiary is living with (assuming there are benefits for "related" individuals).

McCain / Feingold ... idiot legislation written by two idiots. Blatently unconstitutional, but damn the Republicans for going along with that crap because they hoped the US Supreme Court would knock down most of what they wrote.