2009/02/24 Tuesday: Senate GOP sound off on Buttars' words

A B3 article calling for the revocation of free speech rights for senators.

Uh, let's see. Don't try to use "GOP" as a plural noun, Tribune. It really looks stupid. Go back to junior high.

"Buttars has been under fire for a week after he told a documentary filmmaker that gays pose the greatest internal threat to the country, lack morals, are demanding special rights and engage in disgusting sexual practices."

Hm, let's see.

Who has been putting him "under fire"?

YOU have, Tribune, and your deformed little Democrat legislator slaves, and your monkey-brained Public Forum pets.

1) Gays pose the greatest internal threat to the country

That's either saying that there are no especially significant internal threats to the country, or that moral threats to the country are extremely significant -- neither of which are objectionable views.

Do gays pose a moral threat? Well...

2) Gays lack morals

What are morals? Good behaviour. How do we define good behaviour? Religiously. What do all major U.S. religions historically call immoral? Gayness. Who, then, lacks morals? Gays, and everybody else who does wrong. Straights also lack morals.

3) Gays demand special rights

Holy cow... Too stupidly obvious to even need to defend. Oh, but, let's call for Buttars' censure for stating the obvious, because we're Democrats, and as Democrats, we suck, we hate fairness, and we demand, like gays, special privileges that we do not extend to others.

4) Gays engage in disgusting sexual practices

Uh, let's see. Sex is the combination of sperm and ovum. Sex does not involve combining either sperm or ovum with other stuff, and people who habitually attempt to redefine sex probably have some sort of addiction or mental illness or something. As for "disgusting", well, Buttars apparently thinks sex is sacred somehow.

Anyway, Tribune, you are idiots. Stop trying to deprive elected leaders of their rights of expressing the political, social, and religious beliefs shared by their constituents. If you make it impossible for a man with a belief to represent a population with the same belief, what do you think you're doing for democracy?

But thanks for trying, Tribune.