The law’s proponents’ most common ploy is disguising schoolyard arguments with “adult” diction. In other words, soldiers may feel that non-heterosexuals may “make a move” and have “cooties,” consequently disrupting group unity. Therefore, homosexuals and bisexuals should not be welcome to track terrorists. After all, they may offend the Taliban.

Others label D.A.D.T. as a non-issue. In an interview with Fox News, for example, world-renowned rhetorician Sarah Palin, criticized Obama’s goal to repeal the law. “Not right now,” she said. Right, the segregation issue should be shelved because it is unimportant. We ought to at least wait until the next season of American Idol ends.

Religious D.A.D.T. supporters present the most troubling non-elucidating elucidations. They claim that reversing the legislation would infringe on religious rights. By extension, all heretical activity infringes on religious rights. Lady Gaga, Madonna, Ron Jeremy, and Bill Maher should be exiled. And, those who do not engage in daily prayer sessions must be imprisoned.

These lines of reasoning exemplify the omnipresent nitpicky excuses of a homophobic society. They are rooted in conjecture, perversion, and procrastination. Put simply, America uses illogical defenses to circumvent the sexualistic reality.

Gays, lesbians, and bisexuals are not a distinctly visible minority. But, sexual orientation, contrary to self-accredited biologists’ postulation, is not a choice. It is a truth that D.A.D.T demands the “unfavorable ones” hide. In simpler terms, the rule is unreasonable state discrimination with a side of thought control.

Evidently, former Presidents Reagan and Clinton believed malice was a key lawmaking initiative. Reagan’s Defense Directive 1332.14, which deemed homosexuality “incompatible” with military service, and Clinton’s creation of D.A.D.T through Defense Directive 1304.26 are pathetic instances of government-created bigotry.

These two former White House occupants were not trailblazers for intolerance.

Even in an era of mandated equality, the courts are still pondering the legality of a blatantly prejudiced edict (via the Log Cabin Republicans vs. United States of America lawsuit). Such an unintelligent creed need not warrant an intelligent discussion, as one’s sexual preference should not offend a reasonable person. If gays, lesbians, and bisexuals insult the intolerant, let them cry into their Pat Robertson pillows.

Alas, in “the land of the free…” if you are straight “and the home of the brave…” if you are straight, the ubiquity of prejudicial babble carries harmful corollaries.

1. “Thank God for IEDs.”
-Westboro Baptist Church

Members of this infamous church carry signs that display the message above at American soldiers’ funerals. In their fantasy world, a higher power kills soldiers to punish the masses for their sins, most notably, they argue, homosexuality. Someone should thump these brainwashed ignoramuses over the head their bibles. They spread hateful messages through the guise of religion. Many of these vermin are indoctrinated when children. Sadly, we can only observe and lambaste.

2. “Israeli apartheid, you ain’t fine, you ain’t got no alibi, you ugly.”
-Queers Against Israeli Apartheid (QuAIA) chanting at Toronto’s Gay Pride Parade

This cheer was not only painfully immature and out of place. Its message was, plainly, stupid. Labeling Israel as an apartheid state is unfair and incorrect. The nation is under constant threat and must employ some segregationist measures to ensure its survival. These precautions are not extreme. Palestinians are not routinely subjected to cavity searches and forced to strip. In reality, Hamas is the Palestinians’ governing party. The organization’s goal is Israel’s destruction. A brief viewing of their horrendous Mickey Mouse spin-offs in which they tell children to become martyrs is an adequate synopsis of Hamas’ goals. As such, regardless of one’s sexual orientation, calling for Israel to end its “apartheid ways” is idiotic.

3. Anarchy could work.
-The assumption of some G-20 protestors

No, it cannot. An anarchist state would encourage more idiots, like the Black Bloc thugs, to run wild. But, if you want more Madoffs, choose anarchy.

4. “She is a rubber-stamp hardcore leftist, and she is there not to enforce the Constitution but to reinterpret it for Obama.”
-Rush Limbaugh on pending American Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan

That is correct! And, the Democratic Party is actually a group of socialist aliens who plan to transform humans into baby eating dinosaurs and force LeBron James to sign with the Charlottte Bobcats.

5. “Did Michael Jackson die a Muslim?”
-Headline from The Nation Online

Attempting to identify a more useless talking point than the aforementioned headline would be difficult.

Alas, like countless noble pursuits, small groups use a social platform for red herrings. Indeed, political agendas appear in places at which they have no business.

Queers Against Israeli Apartheid’s presence at Toronto’s G.P.P. was certainly a case of group using an inappropriate arena to spread its message. While this corner believes that QuAIA’s arguments are harmful balderdash, the organization’s merits are, in this instance, irrelevant.

Alleged Israeli apartheid protesting and gay activism are mutually exclusive. But, due to public backlash and a supposed threat of losing city funding, the parade’s organizers allowed QuAIA to march. Freedom of speech and expression defeated commonsense.
And, as QuAIA strutted through downtown Toronto chanting “Israeli apartheid, you ain’t fine, you ain’t got no alibi, you ugly,” (How can one take a “political” voice seriously with that childish mantra?) the day’s meaning was, in those moments, non-existent.
A few Zionist and Jewish groups encouraged adherents to contest the anti-Israel message. Thankfully, their rallying calls were not answered in great numbers. A shouting match concerning Middle Eastern tensions would further distract the masses from G.P.P.’s vitality and palpable importance.

Toronto’s Pride Parade planning committee ought to increase the stringency of its participation criteria. Only individuals with relevant (to the event) material should be permitted to participate. If guidelines were clear, litigious civil rights activists would not have a reasonable freedom of speech and expression case against the G.P.P. disallowing QuAIA to partake in the proceedings. Additional distracters, like Queers Against Obama, would also lose potential advocacy stages.

Sadly, at this year’s parade in Toronto, the planners were bullied into diluting their display.

Rep. Damon J. Baldone’s House Bill 1357 would make “sexting” a misdemeanor with a minimum ten-day jail sentence. According to the bill’s supporters, this form of teenage sexuality constitutes child pornography. As such, culprits would be added to sex offenders lists.

Louisiana’s fight against underage e-sex is not unique. Last year, six Pennsylvanian teenagers were arrested for “sexting.” An eighth-grade Texan spent a night in prison for having a nude picture of a fellow-minor on his cellular telephone. In short, many states, including Florida and Alabama, have filed charges that, in retrospect, were harbingers for the continued crusade against “sexting.”

While we should warn our youth of the dangers that electronically sending explicit images presents, childhood immaturity should not warrant a governmental response.  Legislative and judicial capricious hysteria is especially troubling.

The notion that a kid can be on the same register as an aggravated sexual assaulter or an adult possessor of child pornography is ludicrous. Indeed, a “child child pornographer,” legally, ought to be a gross misnomer.

Youths should not be prosecuted for consensual behavior. Not only are such measures a frivolous use of resources, they also represent governments which have excessive control.

Frankly, legislative authorities must not conclude that “the medium is the message.” In other words, the avenue through which one is exposed is insignificant to a child pornography charge. There ought to be no legal distinction between cyber-stripping and face-to-face nudity. Should Big Brother’s S.W.A.T. teams rip down the doors of imprudent teens?

Of course, e-transmission is less safe than old-fashion mediums. But, governments are not babysitters. Besides, teenagers should have freedom of expression, for it is a hallmark of a cultured society in which the government does not manufacture the people’s thoughts.  

Children who “sext” ought to be given protection from prosecution. Their actions circumvent the spirit of child pornography laws, namely the indictment of adults who possess or distribute revealing pictures of minors. 

Critics may contend that there must still be punitive measures for “sexting.” Child pornography charges may be too strong. However, they might argue, cyberspace should be deemed a public place, consequently making “sexting” indecent exposure.

This suggestion would present a myriad of problems. First, it would blur the distinction between the private and public sphere. A computer and webcam, for example, are in one’s (private) residence. Ergo, under the abovementioned proposal, a public place can exist inside one’s home, which creates an obvious contraction. Most notably, the majority of the issues that arose with the child pornography charge would reappear if the crime were reclassified as indecent exposure. Governments would once again exercise unreasonable power.

 “Sexting” should not be officially vilified. Its merits must only be (constructively) discussed in educational institutions, as well as between guardians and their children.

Louisiana’s Senate, sadly, may be among many legislative bodies that believe they are everyone’s teacher and custodian. Surprisingly, TLC has not asked these large families to appear on a reality television show.

After a thwarted terrorist attack, players and ticket buyers ought to enjoy the company of friends and family. In short, they all deserve days off, for the emotional pain that they had to endure is unparalleled.

Thanks to the courage of a local police officer, the lesson of carpe diem has been bestowed on the hitherto ignoramuses. Those in attendance at the Cardinals-Phillies series’ first tilt are, frankly, fortunate to be alive.

The life-threatening violence is difficult to describe due to its gruesome nature. The following details may induce nightmares, cold sweats, and/or Bleeding Eye disorder. You have been warned.

In the game’s eighth inning, a 17-year old jumped onto the field. He was dressed in radical clothing, which included a Phillies’ World Series Championship t-shirt, baseball cap, and khaki shorts. Most disturbingly, the teenager was holding a white towel with Phillies insignia.

The heroic officer, who should be awarded with a statue of himself, a key to the city, Commendation for Valor, and Jack Bauer t-shirt, injected thousands of watts into the evil criminal. Following a petrifying 30 seconds of the culprit running in circles, he was Tasered.

Of course, violent tactics ought to be used for a heinous crime, like trespassing.

The Phillies organization should certainly ameliorate stadium security to prevent such wickedness from penetrating its sanctuary. Permitting threats to national security to enter Citizens Bank Park is an appalling breach of the public’s trust.

Tasers are an insufficient deterrence and form of protection. Hence, the franchise needs a new defense strategy.

First row seats ought to be armed with guard dogs. A canine patrol unit needs to “subdue” anybody who comes near the field with dangerous equipment, such as white towels. Only pit bulls on steroids should be part of the squad.

Next, the organization must implement a lockdown policy. If a trespasser bypasses the pooches, fans should immediately hide under their seats. All sections should recline into a bunker that would be 500 feet below field level.  A shelter with steel towel-proof doors needs to be built. Until these projects are completed all events scheduled to take place at the park have to be postponed or canceled.

Finally, at least 70 snipers must patrol the regular season home of the Phillies. Trespassers or owners of fundamentalist paraphernalia (i.e. khakis) must be shot in the heart.

The club’s owners and Major League Baseball are responsible for the allowing the terrorist trespasser to spread his perniciousness.

Without Officer Hothead’s bravery, the night probably would have ended tragically. Now, meaningful changes are needed.