Hey, Tennessee. Yeah, you, little guy. Can I have a word?
I see you’ve got some sex ed programs there. That’s nice. We want our kids to be able to make safe and informed decisions about their sexual health.
Oh, “abstinence only”? You say it’s the only way to keep kids from getting pregnant or passing STDs? That’s funny, your abstinence only program that’s been around for a while now hasn’t impacted the 26.7% of 10-19 year olds that were pregnant in 2010.
What’s that little guy? You got a plan? Okay, lay it on me.
What the-? Oh god, what is this? SB 3310 and it does what? It potentially bans hugging? Because it might lead to sexual behavior?
Hugs might also lead to friends. Should we ban human emotion?
Let’s get this straight. If you have to tack on an ad-hoc amendment that steps outside of actual sex education to put restrictions on behavior outside of the classroom, your program isn’t working.
Abstinence-Only education doesn’t work. Morals don’t play into it. The numbers speak for themselves.
I love the title of your post, and I agree with the points you made, but I read through the bill… this is probably a reflection of my trading comprehension at 2AM but where did it potentially ban hugging? Also… just… why?! Really? If hugging led to sex, I would have enough past sexual partners to populate a small town!
#wanton hugmistress of the night
Rick Santorum, winner of Iowa
And let’s not forget the reason you can’t google his name without SafeSearch on.
While watching MSNBC in silence, well, horror, earlier this evening, I turned to my dad, pointed at Santorum as he was giving his speech, and shouted, “Dad, you do realize that that man compared being gay to child molestation and bestiality, right? What the fuck is going on?” My dad got up and walked out.
…Um. Wow. If consensual gay sex within your home could potentially destroy your neighbors’ marriage, maybe they shouldn’t be looking inside your bedroom…
It’s now up in the air whether the Obama administration will actually veto the NDAA. In past weeks, the president has established his firm opposition to the bill that would allow for the “indefinite detention” of terror suspects (though only because he wants the power for himself). Today, the Huffington Post reported that sponsors of the National Defense Authorization Act are “[adding] language on national security waivers and other changes that they [hope] would ensure administration support for the overall bill,” after hearing “personal appeals” from the administration to amend the bill.
Perhaps it’s Obama’s conscience coming to save the day!
Unfortunately, it’s quite the opposite. The administration called for amendments to the bill that would allow for greater “flexibility” for executive, military, and legal procedures in handling cases of terrorism. In short, Obama wants to be able to dictate what he wants the letter of the law to be when it is convenient. Pretty fucking scary if you ask me.
But wait! There’s more!
According to Senator Carl Levin, it was actually the Obama administration that first pressed lawmakers to ”remove the language which says that U.S. citizens and lawful residents would not be subject to [indefinite detention].” Wonderful.
If this doesn’t look like the prologue to a dystopian novel, I don’t know what would. But the cherry on the top to all of this? FEMA detention camps are being prepared for operation. Surrounding by threatening barbed wire fences, these frightening constructions are reminiscent of the Japanese interment camps set up by Executive Order 9066 in 1942. And it’s believed that these will be used to lock up mass amounts of people in the case of a declaration of martial law.
If this isn’t enough evidence to make you suspicious of what your government is plotting, I don’t know what would suffice.
I’m sorry, but this has me convinced.
This is one of the many reasons I hate Obama and America.
Fuck. FUCK. Get me out of here.