In 2001, Barack Hussein Obama’s mentor Bill Ayers wrote a book recounting his experiences with the Weather Underground.
48 comments
Assuming Bill Ayers ever said such a thing, and that Barack Obama's status as his student automatically means that the latter believes in those alleged doctrines now, then Mitt Romney's belonging to the same religion as Warren Jeffs and the Lafferty Brothers means he automatically believes in forced plural marriages of underaged girls and slitting the throats of "disobedient" women and little girls. Yes, by all means, let's start reasoning that way.
What, exactly, is so fucking important about this "institution" anyway, and what, exactly, does it mean to "undermine" it? Even the legal benefits of marriage are a purely human invention that are only awarded based on the presupposition of its importance (although that doesn't stop me from demanding that same-sex and non-monogamous couples receive the same benefits simply on principleI am entitled to what everyone else receives for falling in love with the "correct" gender, since the same gender is the "correct" one for me).
What you're worried about having "undermined" here is little more than your heterosexual privilege and the preferred status that heteronormativity awards you and your relationship.
Even IF Bill Ayers ever did or said what this fool claims more than 11 years ago no heterosexual marriages were affected.
Similarly, conservatards have been calling women who demand equality "feminazis" since the mid-1970s. Number of healthy homosexuals marriages affected? ZERO! (I don't count cases where women were able to liberate themselves from abusive husbands who were unable to cope with their wives as equals.)
And Huge Hefner began publishing Playboy (which only the most repressed fundies would consider to be "porn") more than 58 years ago. If Hef is trying to destroy the institution of marriage, he'd better get a move on!
Even if fewer people enter into traditional marriages, why exactly am I supposed to care? I can still have a heterosexual, monogamous marriage; the fact that other people aren't is no skin off my back.
It always amazes me how utterly convinced bigots are that allowing non-heterosexual marriages will somehow cause Bad Things to happen, yet continually fail to explain how that's supposed to work.
It is impossible to destroy an institution by participating in it, and Obama is no more a terrorist than the previous dozen or so US Presidents.
Also, anyone who uses the term "feminazi" with all serious immediately loses the argument forever and always. Taking people who want equal treatment for women and comparing them with the most murderous regime in the history of the planet is idiocy beyond calculation.
@Extraintrovert: While you're right, I've seen a blog by a feminist who was "reviewing" Firefly. She believes that all sex is rape (the reasoning being that it's apparently impossible for women to give free consent in this society... yeah), that it is sexist to ever have a woman take orders from a man (even if this man is her superior, being the captain 'n' all), is certain that Joss Whedon beats his wife, and believes her cult of feminism is the only true feminism. Often, I wonder if the term "feminazi" was originally intended for people like this - it would still be an overstatement, of course, but it would seem to make more sense than the way fundies use it to refer to basically every woman who doesn't submit to their every will.
@OhJohnNo: Yeah, no matter how ridiculous her "reasoning" is, comparing her to Nazis is offensive to people who were actually affected by Nazis and the Holocaust and to sane feminists in the normal sense of the word (i.e., the majority of feminists). Being an irrational jackass does not a Nazi make. If she were proposing a "final solution" for males or something similarly frightening and genuinely Nazi-like, then maybe I'd understand calling her a "feminazi." Still, giving people like her a special name only validates them and insinuates that at least a sizable minority self-identified feministsif not moreare actually like that, and they're not.
How does gay marriage undermine the institution of marriage? If it were legalized everywhere, I'm pretty sure I'd still be married, and my wife would still be a woman. If you think gay marriage is going to make everyone run out and turn homosexual, then you must be gay yourself. Otherwise, you'd know this is impossible.
"Love, the strongest and deepest element in all life, the harbinger of hope, of joy, of ecstasy; love, the defier of all laws, of all conventions; love, the freest, the most powerful moulder of human destiny; how can such an all-compelling force be synonymous with that poor little State and Church-begotten weed, marriage?"
I'm guessing Hefner ain't exactly big on the whole "abstinence only" and "saving yourself for marriage" business.
@ Raised by Horses:
For some reason I thought that Freepers, who associate sexual conquest with the pinnacle of manliness, would prostrate themselves before Hefner and say, "We're not worthy!"
Sadly that mental image has to go.
The Weather Underground weren't Marxists, fuckwit. Marxism is a real ideology with real defining features, not just a nasty label you can attach to any political position to the left of Ghenghis Khan. The Weather Underground were Leninists and no, it's not the same thing.
If Ayers ever said any such thing, he would hardly be the first would-be revolutionary to be deluded about his own importance.
And Ayers was never Obama's mentor, they just served on a charity board together for a while. That's about as accurate as saying Osama Bin Laden was George Bush's mentor because they both held BCCI accounts.
Maybe I'm just slow, but how, exactly, does someone attending bi-sexual orgies affect anything at all outside said orgies?
In fact, one English teacher's class plan was nothing but her stupid activist shit .
Attending those classes, and being associated with those teachers, does not mean that I was then, or am now, a supporter of any of their various causes.
translation: "I hate them gays with their demanding equality all the while walking round with their long, luxurious hair and their tight bodies I just want to ... Um... I mean, NO, I AM NOT GAY! I HATE gays!... yeah..."
I don’t need some homosexual with a newspaper column to ask “how does same sex marriage threaten heterosexuals marriages?”
Why not? I think that's a very good question, actually.
a fool You got that part right, but in paradise, Free Republic
¿¿¿ WTF ???
"n 2001, Barack Hussein Obama’s mentor Bill Ayers wrote a book recounting his experiences with the Weather Underground."
You live in a fantasy world where Bill Ayers is a Sith Lord and Obama is his disciple, don't you?
Loser.
Why is this not on CSTDT?
@ OhJohnNo: (re Firefly bashing 'feminist')
When a Marxist terrorist radical admits that the goal of such actions are to subvert traditional marriage, I don’t need some homosexual with a newspaper column to ask ...
So when a white power radical admits that the goal of KKK action is to kill all minorities, that means all white people everywhere are evil and belong behind bars, if not outright executed. Right?
Ok, Obama was seen in the vicinity of Ayers once or twice many years ago. It's still not known if Obama really knew about Ayers' past.
Jesus purposedly associated himself with whores, criminals, lepers, and all kinds of social outcasts.
What does that tell us about Jesus?
And there's another thing about Jesus. His name, Yeshua, sounds kind of Arabic. Better keep an eye on that Jesus guy.
@checkmate
@Extraintrovert
No shit?
Really, did you take me seriously?
I really have to invest in an irony flag. It seems to be necessary.
A conspiracy involving feminists, Bill Ayers, and Hugh Hefner? Tell me more!
A lot of people have probably pointed this out already, but never has a username been more apt.
Bull. Shit.
The whole Feminazi bit was an exaggeration because a few women were raving lunatics worthy of getting listed on FSTDT.
Hugh Hefner had no problems with marriage, he just liked the bachelor lifestyle. He was quoted as saying people were entitled to their philosophies, as long as he got some.
This is simply more scarehead ignorance.
Wait... so he doesn't need someone asking how it would threaten heterosexual marriage, and in the very next sentence he simply asserts it is undermining monogamy without any description of how, or why for that matter. Apparently he *does* need someone to ask the question, because I still don't know. Just asserting that it will is not a discussion, it's loonery.
You know the economy is improving when the conservatards resort to all these unfounded rumors and made up stories to try to besmirch the reputation of President Obama.
And secondly, I'm still waiting for one good explanation of how gay marriage harms traditional marriage any more than a ~50% divorce rate and people deciding they don't need to be married to live together. If conservatives are so worried about the institution of marriage they'd be concerned about these problems instead of whether Bob and Steve can participate.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
