Talk is Cheap

Alright, so I know I haven't posted anything in a while. Mostly because I've been tired as hell, but today's experiences have enraged me enough to get on here.

If there's one thing -- one thing -- I learned (or confirmed, since I've thought this for a while) that people are idiots. Complete and utter morons.

Just once I wish he wasn't.

"But Kyle," you stupidly attempt to argue with me, "I'm people. I am not stupid!" Yes, you are. Sit down; shut up. Read. Maybe you actually are intelligent, but since those kind of people area rare breed, it's pretty safe to assume that you're an idiot. Whether a slightly-below-average idiot or a I-write-my-name-on-my-undies idiot, you're an idiot nonetheless. Or maybe you're not. The hell if I know.

Anyway, as always, I have an example. Evidence to support my claims is always nice, isn't it? I could go off on that, but that's another rant for another time. Today, during an English class, we looked through USA Today's website and check out some pictures of war protesters (y'know, about the Syria thing). The first one to illicit an idiotic reaction was one of a group of protestors... well, protesting.

This one.

And holy shit, can you guess what my classmates did? Go ahead, guess. It shouldn't be too hard.

If you answered "said something intelligent and meaningful in relation to this image," then you'd be dead wrong. However, if you answered "HAHAHA OBAMA = AL... how do I pronounce that word?" Then you are one of those idiots and I hope this offends you enough to write me hate mail. I'm not even going to tell you what Al-Qaeda is, Google it for yourself. There was one person -- a male of the Negro (I can say that, dammit! If you find it to be racist, it's you own fault) variety -- who didn't even know what Al-Qaeda was. Al-Qaeda; the arch-nemesis of this imbecilic "war on terror." The group synonymous with the September 11 attacks. And he didn't know who they were. Holy shit. I'm not sure if he's just that stupid, or the educational system is letting us this far down (to be fair, it's already letting us down pretty far). I mean, sure I watch the news every morning, but you'd think that we, as a country, would know about a rather large terrorist group that dislikes us.

And do you want to know what a good 25% of the rest of the class did? Laugh. Like overgrown children, they laughed. My best guess is because "Al-Qaeda iz ud fonny werd."

And that's not even everything. There was a picture that followed just after that one.

It's this one.

Now what could this possibly mean? Is it about how the newlywed couple were protesting in their own right? Is it about finding happiness even in tough situations? I actually have no clue, because the caption didn't say. But if there was one detail you would notice, what would it be?

Funny enough, that same 25% of my class noticed "the white girl with the phone." And you know what they thought about her? That she was "childish." Please, for the love of all that is holy, please explain to me just how her behavior is childish? She could have been recording the protest (it's happened before). Or perhaps she's taking a picture of the person taking a picture. I'd get pretty hyped if I saw someone from USA Today taking a picture of me. But no, that painfully large percentage of people thought it was childish. Idiots.

There's only one thing worse than an idiot, and that's a loud one. Oh yea, I had to deal with one of those today too. Well, not just one. There are a multitude of them that run rampant around the school. I come in close contact with several every day.

Every single thought they blurt out sounds as if it were ground in a cow's intestines and just about as intelligent. Words can't even describe how unsurpassably dense I find these people. Seriously. I just tried using a thesaurus, and even then there wasn't anything descriptive enough.

I hate things like this, and yet I still feel compelled to use it.

Idiots will be the death of me.

What might cause others to hesitate, might stimulate others to ejaculate.

As the wise words of Anon have requested, this rant shall be about gay marriage. And I'll be good Guy Kyle and tell you this now: there probably won't be anything here that hasn't already been used in an argument before. And yes, this title was totally stolen from Daniel Tosh.

"So what is your stance on such debauchery, Kyle?" You will ask from your shallow, Republican face-hole. Personally, I think they should be given equal rights.

"Are you sure, Kyle?" You'll tempt like devil-spaw. See below image for just how sure I am.

Just how sure I am.

Message across? Good. Now let's start with actual supporting evidence.

The Constitution.

This is mostly thrown towards American, my home land. I'm not quite sure about other countries (except for Australia, which allows it. Woo Aussies!), so best not to even go there. 

Anyway, the central document of our country says some pretty cool stuff (even thought there are plenty of typos) that lets us -- as legal citizens of the country -- do some pretty cool stuff. Some examples are:

• Not to be killed
• To express your opinion
• To practice your religion
• To pursue happiness, unless you can't be taxed for it
• And a bunch of other things

Now, I've actually found something interesting on that page I linked. I'll quote it here so you don't have to look for it: 

Note that there is no right to marry or bear children included among any of the rights listed above. It is not a "natural" right, because natural rights are only rights of individuals, and exercise of a "right" to marry, without the consent of the other, would be an assault. Since consent is required, it is a matter of contract, and contractual rights are created by the community, even if it is a "community" of only two persons. Since the community is normally a larger polity, and since all legal contracts are agreements not only between the contracting parties, but also with the entire community, therefore the community has the power to regulate marriage and childbirth, and has exercised that power since time immemorial, for the benefit of the community.

Quite a mouthful, correct? Not that your moth can fit a lot; as specified before, it's quite shallow and Republican.

"Ha!" You shout at your monitor, thinking you have foiled me once more. "It says in there that the community can regulate marriage!" Congratulations, you're correct!

And congratulations, you don't understand what a community is! It is not, and I can't stress this enough, it is not the government or judicial system. You see how big and bold and italic and underlined that word is? Let is burn itself into your mind for a moment. Go ahead, I'll wait.

Took you long enough. Thoroughly implanted now? Good.

"But just what is a community then, Kyle?" You'll ask me, finally realizing the futility of arguing with me through the internet and my own post. Well, it could be as little as only two persons, as said in that paragraph. Of course, it could also be a neighborhood, or a church or something. "But wait!" Your morale has risen. "Jesus will save us!" And again, you get another point. Damn, you're on a roll today.

A church, no matter how large or small (see those dirty Catholics), does have the right to regulate who marries who within their boundaries. Fair enough, the independent beliefs decide who they wed in a spiritual sense. That all makes good sense. However, religion does not rule law. Or at least not anymore. Thus, though separate belief systems may prohibit homosexual unions, there can be no justifiable reason to discriminate the right to marriage (an extension of "Life, Liberty, Pursuit of Happiness") on legal grounds. And yes, religious nut-jobs, a judge can marry you. To another person, that is. Though don't let that stop you from marrying a judge.

Family Matters

Here's another big one: how homosexuality would re-define what a family is. As always, I'll be trusting dictionary.com for all of my definition-y needs:

fam·i·ly

[fam-uh-lee, fam-lee]noun, plural fam·i·lies,adjective

noun

1.

a.

a basic social unit consisting of parents and their children,considered as a group, whether dwelling together or not:the traditional family.

b.

a social unit consisting of one or more adults together withthe children they care for: a single-parent family.

2.

the children of one person or one couple collectively: We want alarge family.

3.

the spouse and children of one person: We're taking the family onvacation next week.

4.

any group of persons closely related by blood, as parents,children, uncles, aunts, and cousins: to marry into a socially prominent family.

5.

all those persons considered as descendants of a commonprogenitor.

Check out that first one there. Mm. Sure doesn't seem to include anything about heterosexual couples only. But that's not even the tip of the ice berg. Oh no, some people have gone so far to say that "children do better in a heterosexual parent household," to which I just have to drop the science on and prove everyone wrong. That's just what I do.

Another argument on this matter is as thus "Then why can't I marry my dog? I love her a lot, so why can't I?" Not kidding, a friend of mine said that. I pray to Cthulu he was only kidding. But my response is -- and this is earth-shockingly devastating, so I suggest sitting down if you aren't already -- dogs don't have legal standing! That's right, they can't agree to any form of social contract, which marriage is! Mind blowing, right? this also applies to any non-sentient beings and objects.

Finally, people claim that legalization of gay marriage would lead to group marriages, which doesn't really make much sense, and actually commits the slippery slope fallacy.

God said so!

No. No he didn't. In fact, if we were to take a literal interpretation of the Bible (which a lot of people seem to do for some reason), we'll get the several verses about homosexuals, a good bit of which seem to actually condone such relationships an encourage them.

And the ones that do talk negatively about the subject, are ever only about gay sex. Big difference between marriage and sex. Pretty sure about that. HIV positive about it.

And the point about how "God made Adam and Even, not Adam and Steve" is possibly one of the most ridiculous and idiotic premises I've ever heard. I mean, really? You think the creator of everything ever doesn't know how basic biology works? Seriously? At this point, it's pretty safe to call you a dumbass for saying that. How the hell else were they supposed to reproduce? It's basic fucking math, for Christ's sake! Get that shit right!

Sorry, got a little heated there. Anyway, this was for you Anon. Hope you enjoyed.