(no subject)

[usernamenumber]

My housemate, bester just made the best comment in the history of ever. After complaining about his hayfever:

"President Bush wants to make it illegal for gay people to have sex. I think he should make it illegal for trees to have sex. That, at least, affects me".

El. Oh. El.

Comments

[bester.livejournal.com]

Oh, I know it does. The "affects me" bit wasn't referring to Shrub's bigotry, but gay sex itself. This is just my rant on how our president's legislation hurts many more people than the act that's being condemned does. In general, unnecessary legislation annoys me, and it pisses me off when such legislation hurts my friends. I say it's unnecessary because the only damage to the community that can be connected to consentual gay sex is caused by the very same people who use the "damage to the community" argument in order to further their crusade.

Meanwhile, trees having sex costs me money and lost work hours every Spring. I'm currently taking a sick day from work right now ('cause I'm gross and have a hard time concentrating), and fervently hoping that my Claritin will kick in.

Therefore, if Bush wants to legislate against a type of sex which isn't any more dangerous than straight sex and doesn't affect anyone but the participants, then I want to know what he's going to do about a more dangerous type of sex— tree sex. This directly affects millions of people across the country, as evidenced by the sheer number of Allavert and Clarinex ads on TV and in magazines, and is provably harmful to industry (lost production). Why do a few people who are simply uncomfortable with a concept trump our physical debilitation? Our voices are important, too!

[usernamenumber.livejournal.com]

...and don't forget about the children, either! Oh, won't someone please think of the children!?!?!