Badmovies.org Forum

Right wing ignoramuses  Strike again


http://www.southernfriedscience.com/?p=10369

Oh good grief.

Trek, WHY?  Why post this crap.

That's a reach...I don't think anyone except someone LOOKING for an excuse to be p**sed off is going to interpret "animals" that way.

This thread is flamebait.  Period.

Sorry to offend, but I was just posting something silly,   there is a  link in the article  that actually explains the law.


I don't apologize for the ignoramus statement though, I am very dubious of the character and qualifications of many elected officials. 

Good, all you dorks that are getting laid need to go to jail anyways. I'll just sit here with my celibacy (as involuntary as it is) and enjoy the solitude. At least I'll have RC to hang out with.

Ignoramuses isn't inflammatory, but "right wing ignoramuses" is.  Are you sure Republicans sponsored and drafted the legislation, and only conservatives supported it?  As far as I know, the left wing is anti-bestiality as well as the right. 

I love animals.

No offense taken, really...just that the guy that wrote that article is REALLY reaching.  The whole point of his posting is stupid, pointless and sanctimonious.

No one, except some submoronic attention hound "blogger" with a chip on his shoulder perhaps, would assume "animal" in a law like that applies to people.  The whole thing is in attempt to make people angry.

I just think that posting stuff like this HERE is inviting trouble...YOU might mean it as silly, or thought provoking, etc, but the track record is that stuff like this more often than not blows up into something more heated.  It's bad enough when something controversial is posted that has merit on both sides and we try to have a discussion about it and that devolves, but this is just plain stupid.

The link the article itself explains how ridiculous it is to try to interpret the law that way, and posting the article as some sort of de facto evidence of 'right wing ignoramous' behavior is, I maintain, nothing more than flamebait.

How 'bout this?  I'd like to ignore dumb articles like this.  When I see a subject line for a thread that says something that LOOKS like a serious issue about which we should all be aware, I want to read it.  If it is NOT, if it's only a link some ill conceived attempt as self-superiority, like most of that tripe from "Yahoo News" or cracked.dot, could we not PLEASE tag the subject lines with something to that effect?

In this case, rather than "Forida Senate Outlaws Sex," maybe we could have had "Some Dumb-a$$ on the internet with the bare minimal number of working brain cells to support life wrongly interprets a Florida law so he can appear smarter than everyone else in the whole flipping WORLD."

Then, at least, i would have probably recognized the sheer and utter waste of time THIS WHOLE THING was going to turn out to be.

Thank-you, and Good Day.

I don't see anything wrong with posting the story itself.  It's quirky and silly.  If Trek hadn't written "right wing" I doubt we'd be having this conversation.   

Probably the proper place for this post would have been "weird news stories" rather than "off topic."  But I don't see a big deal here.

I agree with Rev. This was just a silly, obvious opportunity for some fun, the political barb wasn't really needed, but didn't really warrant a reaction either IMO. We all know that dumb crap comes from all angles, nothing new here. Here we had a chance to make a multitude of beastiality jokes, but the fun was killed once the political angle was thrown in.

I think a waste of time is reading long winded posts like this one.  As you wrote Ulthar, why not just ignore if you're offended by an obviously silly article?  Or do you have a compulsion to click on every thread with the word "sex" in the title?   :wink: