Monday, July 09, 2012

Marriage equality will lead to political correctness traffic stops!

| »

Anyone looking for a laugh usually only needs to look so far as the latest hilariously absurd video by pearl-clutching “traditional values” Christianist groups. One of the more notable repeat offenders is CitizenLink, an affiliate of Focus on the Family that’s already renown for their pants-on-head retarded “gay marriage is like upside-down gravity!” video. Here’s their latest, continuing the “redefining marriage” tack by fear-mongering about how President Obama’s personal endorsement of same-sex marriage could lead to police harassing gay marriage opponents at traffic stops … or something:

Transcript: (click the [+/-] to open/close →) []

My comments in [red brackets]:

STUART SHEPARD: Driving along, you see flashing blue lights in your mirror. What’s the first thing that goes through your mind?

HYPOTHETICAL DRIVER: Did I run a red light?

SHEPARD: The officer comes up to your window:

HYPOTHETICAL OFFICER: Marriage license and registration, please.

DRIVER: Excuse me?

OFFICER: You know, the little red light. Just push the pedal on the left.

DRIVER: Right, but why do you need my marriage license?

OFFICER: That’s how we know whether you’re sufficiently evolved.

DRIVER: What?

OFFICER: President Obama says he’s evolved on the definition of marriage, so unless you’ve evolved with him, I’m gonna have to write you up. [Because private endorsement = thought-police?]

DRIVER: Right, but redefining marriage wasn’t supposed to have any more impact on me than it would my dog.

OFFICER: Here’s what President Obama says: “I respect the beliefs of others, and the right of religious institutions to act in accordance with their own doctrines.

DRIVER: See? He respects my religious beliefs. Personally, I believe that marriage is really only between a man and a woman, but other people can do what they want. It’s a free country. [Oh, please. The last thing you shitheads care about is letting other people marry whoever they want, as all your whining makes pretty damn clear. Stop lying.]

OFFICER: Yeah, but you missed the next part. The President said, “But I believe [that] in the eyes of the law, all Americans should be treated equally.

DRIVER: Right, I’m equal. See?

OFFICER: That means law enforcement decides who’s equal [Um … no. Just – no. Have you idiots ever taken a civics class? Have you ever been to school? Seriously, I don’t even.], and the law says marriage is between anybody, now. You’re not allowed to disagree! [lowers glasses, gives creepy stare] And you just did.

DRIVER: Uh … do I have the right to remain silent?

SHEPARD: When the President talks about redefining marriage in terms of the “eyes of the law”, he’s talking about Christian business owners getting dragged to the Human Rights Commission, churches getting sued if they won’t rent out their buildings, wedding photographers landing in court if they only choose to shoot real weddings – all “In the Eyes of the Law”. [And all lies that have been debunked time and time again. Do you morons ever have anything new?]

Here’s the deal. “In the eyes of the law” means everything outside the church building, placing the weight of law enforcement and the courts on the head of anyone who disagrees. It’s already happening to real people with real lives and real beliefs. And don’t get me started about how it changes what public schools teach about marriage.

When President Obama talks about “redefining marriage” [When, exactly, has Obama ever used that term? Actually, when has anyone outside of your group of narrow-minded malcontents ever used that term?], what he really means is judgment – against you. [Oh, like you do? Like, right now?]

OFFICER: (creepily) Have a nice day.

You know, it’s one thing to dream up (or is ‘hallucinate’ a more fitting term?) alternate realities and dystopic futures where liberalism run amok leads to government-enforced political correctness and so on, but do they have to do it in ways that would make even the dumbest of four-year-olds point and laugh at them?

(via Right Wing Watch)