Tuesday, July 12, 2011

Michele Bachmann Owns Slaves...Or Something

I'll try my best to sum this up without letting loose an unnecessarily dramatic sigh and trying to gouge my brain out through my ear and nose canals.

Apparently, a conservative group called THE FAMiLY LEADER (the lowercase 'i' is presumably to symbolize all those little boys being raped by priests) drafted a document called The Marriage Vow that they want every presidential candidate to sign by August 1st.  Because, you know batshit petitions are so successful, right internet community?  Michele Bachmann, who as far as I can tell looks like a cross between Christine O'Donnell and the soulless reapers of...you know what...another Christine O'Donnell was the first to sign.

Where the delicious-as-pie controversy comes from is the preamble to the document, specifically a part that reads:

Slavery had a disastrous impact on African-​American families, yet sadly a child born into slavery in 1860 was more likely to be raised by his mother and father in a two-​parent household than was an African-​American baby born after the election of the USA’s first African-​American President.”

 Quite frankly, I'm surprised they didn't just go right to, "A Jew born in the 1930s in Germany had a better chance of being raised by his mother and father..."  Would have saved us all a lot of time.  Predictably the backlash was immediate and severe over the Bachmanns and several others saying "hey remember slavery?  That was awesome!" and the offending language has been removed from the document.

What the hell is it with conservatives trying to push these women to the forefront of politics?  Palin, O'Donnell, Bachmann?  Don't they know that the first thing that people are going to say is, "psh, a woman?  she's probably a psycho bitch."  Might it behoove them to at least find some women that aren't actually psycho bitches?  There has to be at least one conservative woman who is capable of addressing people and not being eleven hundred cowbells of ear splitting crazy.

The document, which can be read here is nothing short of unadulterated awesome.  The first thing that jumped out at me was the defiant crowing that THE FAMiLY LEADER will not support any candidate that doesn't sign their stupid LiveJournal post.  Or whatever.  I can't imagine anyone would want to risk losing the support of an organization that isn't even cool enough to have its own Wikipedia page.  Losers.

After that it talks about blah blah blah homophobic rhetoric, blah blah blah synonymizing bigotry with family values, and about relieving the burden on American families.  It seems like a good way to do that would be to stop making them give 10% of their income to an invisible man in the sky and an institution that has committed far more acts of pedophilia than "teh gays" that they so fear.

Less than a page in, I'm already annoyed.  The entire thing looks like it was written by a drunk Stephenie Meyer.  Word choice errors and unnecessary quotation marks abound.  "We are intentional (as opposed to accidental) about the opportunity to take another step in fulfilling our mission to "Strengthen Families"  (glad the quotes let us know that that's not what you're really doing) by providing The Marriage Vow to candidates."

The third page makes no mistake in relaying how archaic this institution and its members are.  "Enduring marital fidelity between one man and one woman protects innocent children, vulnerable women, the rights of fathers (are you detecting the subtle sexism yet?) and the liberties of all American Citizens (huh?) under our republican form of government."  Wait, why am I complaining about this, my rights as a future father are going to be protected.  And vulnerable women will be protected from the scary world by my strong backhand whenever they venture out of the kitchen.  Everybody wins!  Check the last bullet on the third page for the longest run on sentence ever.  Is it over yet?

I think my favorite part is when the font on the fourth page gets smaller for no reason at all.  It looks like someone had their grandma write this, and she accidentally clicked on about five different things and didn't know how to fix them.  I find it funny that religious groups are so opposed to the "redefinition of marriage," since that's how the modern definition of marriage came about in the first place, by religious groups bastardizing shit from the pagans.  (This is where religion gets practically everything.  They just invented better folksy stories.)

The document also calls for the reform of divorce law and the institution of "second chance" and "cooling off periods" for couples that want a "quickie divorce."  (I don't know what a quickie divorce is, but it sounds awesome.)  So they want all this new legislation, presumably because it fits in so well with the earlier part where they said they're committed to "downsizing government."  You know, with more laws.

Then there's maybe my favorite line of the whole damn document (and I promise to say that at least six more times).  "Humane protection of women and the innocent fruit of conjugal intimacy (translation: babies made from groin ramming) - our next generation of American children (because innocent fruit of conjugal intimacy wasn't verbose enough) - from human trafficking, sexual slavery, seduction into promiscuity, and all forms of pornography and prostitution, infanticide, abortion an other types of coercion or stolen innocence."  Awesome.  It's like they took three things they hated, and threw them in with five things that are universally bad to make their point.  Then they decided, "ah, fuck it, we'll add a vague cap to the whole damn thing so we can rightfully bitch about anything we want."  (Which I've gathered to be the whole point of conservatism, bitching about whatever you want and then justifying it with jesus.)


And then "sign this document, and the irrelevant bunch of whackjob christians will support you.'

At the bottom there is a blurb about the Alliance Defense Fund, which is a bunch of nutty christian lawyers who do stupid things like draft The Marriage Vow.  Apparently since they conducted a "totally random" survey of 124 "totally swing voters" (because that's a big enough sample size and not at all suspicious), and found DATA, HOLY SHIT DATA, they feel that the majority of Americans oppose Marriage Equality.  My favorite part was when they just stopped including numbers and simply said "Americans believe..."  Finally, they admit that their research partner's acronym is POS.  Awesome.  And that will sum up my prevailing thought in regards to this document.


No comments:

Post a Comment