Burden Of Proof

« November 2005 »
SuMoTuWeThFrSa
5
6
12
13
17
18
19
20
24
26
27

Memo to WingNutDaily: YOU ARE DUMB.

Well, WorldNetDaily and a handful of other conservative web news "outlets". Really dumb. I don't know if you've been paying much attention lately to a number of scandals, revelations, and criminal proceedings brought against members of the current gang of idiots, but one thing you'll consistently see in discussions of it is an incredibly high standard for what constitutes "wrongdoing".

He only lied under oath, after all, and he did it about someone everyone knew was a wife. And she wasn't really much of an undercover agent. And there's no proof anyone lied, they were just wrong! And they were only wrong about the details. They did the right thing anyway.

This is not a strictly right-wing thing, of course. Clinton shouldn't have lied about the sex, and probably shouldn't have had the sex. But there is a certain scale to the double standard that is truly appalling when you realize it comes from people who are claiming vindication for Rick Santorum's view that gay marriage really does lead to man-on-dog acceptance.

Once again, it's important for me to stress that I'm not shitting you. In Massachussetts, according to WorldNetDaily, something called the Weekly Dig, and a really ugly* anti-gay site, "The Article 8 Allicance", bestiality is rapidly approaching legal status in Massachussets, and it's all the fault of the homos and their liberal, Democratic supporters. ACTUAL QUOTE TIME!

"How badly has Massachusetts’ moral compass suffered since dudes started honeymooning with dudes? Not one legislator, nor a single member of the God-fearing public, appeared before the judiciary committee to denounce the proposed changes." - The Weekly Dig. Holy shit. Massachussetts legalized bestiality, and nobody noticed? They must have all been busy FUCKING THEIR GAY DOGS.

"Now, I'm certainly not setting myself up as Jesus' official spokesman, or as anyone's judge--that's where a lot of evangelicals get into trouble. But I am honor-bound to be--quite often, it seems--one of the lone voices in the wilderness. Am I exaggerating? Perhaps...but then again...if others are talking about Boston's bestiality bill, where exactly is the outrage?" - Christian blog "Crosswalk.com". Get it? CROSSwalk.

And where is the outrage? Massachussetts is about to join the 20 other bastions of liberal perversion where bestiality is legal, such as Washington State, Tennessee, Alabama, Kentucky, and Missouri. Why is there no outcry?

Because it's not happening, of course.

What IS happening is, some Massachussetts legislators are going through and repealing a bunch of ancient sex laws, most unenforced. Fornication laws, adultery laws, laws against advertising abortion, that kind of thing. One of the laws is an old bestiality statute, which isn't being repealed, it's being changed. Instead of mandating a sentence of up to 20 years in jail, it now reads:

"Whoever commits a sexual act on an animal shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for not more than 20 years or in a house of correction for not more than 2 ½ years, or by a fine of not more than $5,000, or by both such fine and imprisonment."

So, at a judge's discretion, animal-fuckers might just get a fine. Or they might get the jail time. Obviously, the only possible goal of the legislature was to degrade the moral fabric of the nation and make animal-fucking more acceptable, right? While I don't have a trustworthy source for the original statute, I do have the Weekly dig, which managed to accidentally quote the original wording of what was a sodomy statute:

The original statute prohibited "abominable and detestable crime against nature, either with mankind or with beast."

Oh. Wait. That's different. They're trying to change a law that equates unnatural acts between two consenting adults and animal-fucking. They're trying to undo the work of some ancient Santorum, and the wingnut right is using it as evidence that Santorum was right all along. Fucking brilliant. They'll make that logical leap, but catch the oil companies lying about meeting with Cheney and it's hey, hey, hey, none of them liberal conspiracy theories!

It's almost as if they were, oh, I don't know. Mentally deficient hate-crazed fuckoids or something.

*In every possible sense of the word. Its anti-gay rhetoric is matched only by its abuse of HTML table code. There's gotta be at least one bigot who can code in CSS, but for some reason, he's not getting any work.