Mitt Romney Destroys America!!!

Jump to Comments

Listed on humor-blogs.com…

This is almost something I never do – I’m going to write about something that happened today. I know how you feel…I was surprised too.

Consider it an early Christmas present. Or consider it a pre-Triassic mammal that looks like a hamster but has a really impressive name like verymightyandvirilehampsteradon.

It’s really up to you.

Mitt “Mittens” Romney delivered a speech today in which he hoped to dispel the fears of non Mormon Christians by not talking about the fact that he is a Mormon. This is very much like what I do when my daughter asks me where I’m going as I sneak outside to smoke.

“Daddy, where are you going?”

“Hey Look! Dora is on!”

This works pretty well for now, but I obviously need to quit smoking.

In the same vein it is widely perceived (especially by Governor Romney’s pollsters) that many fundamentalist Christians have concerns about the specific differences of the Mormon Church. Can this speech allay their fears?”

So Mittens says, “Freedom requires religion.”

Wait…what?

Freedom requires religion? Freedom REQUIRES religion? Freedom frikkin’ requires frikkin’ religion!?!

Religion requires freedom in order to be practiced and this is a no-brainer that most people respect without much in the way of an argument. Not that there aren’t people who don’t agree, but instead of forming a carefully worded explanation, they explode. Or they turn into Christopher Hitchens. (Ha! Irony!)

I understand that is just pandering to religious conservatives and Baptist hair engineers. However, when a person states that religion is a necessity for a civil society, I’m inclined to gag.

Gagging requires inclination…no scratch that, gagging is a reflex.

The last time freedom required religion was back when the Catholic Church owned all the printing presses and wouldn’t let anyone learn to read Latin. Wait…that doesn’t sound right.

That must be because it’s wrong. Of course, so is Mittens.

On its face, what Mittens said is like stating that we must have diapers in order to have shit.

Personally, I only need diapers when I want to feel extra confident around the office, but that’s not the point.

Freedom comes first in the order of things, not religion. Humans have appetites: we want things. Be it personal safety, personal expression, chili fries or the completely denuded skull of Ben Affleck, we are creatures who seek out goals that we perceive to be good. This applies to very high minded things like universal human equality, but it also applies to having shiny, moistened gherkins slowly inserted into our nostrils by a prostitute. It also applies to religion and wanting to be President.

Freedom is nothing more or less than the ability to pursue these goals unimpeded. It’s basic, it’s primeval and it comes well before things like ladders, rain coats, tacos, accounting tables and anyone’s belief in any god. Religion is not a prerequisite for freedom; it is just an expression of freedom. Civil society and the application of freedom are the best things that ever happened to religion.

So, I would argue (and I would win) that religion is closer to the hooker with the glistening nose gherkin than it is to one of the basic engines of human nature such as the freedom of the individual.

I guess it probably doesn’t need to be pointed out that when Mittens says ‘religion or ‘faith’ what he likely means is ‘Christianity as practiced by those who can vote’. This is all about how Mittens is not a weirdo because he’s a Mormon, and that ‘regular’ Christians should just still vote for him. (As opposed to Democrat Mike Gravel, who is a weirdo because he eats urinal cakes…)

If he were really talking about no faith in particular then I think that he would also be a liar. Do we think that Mittens finds Islam, Wicca, Christianity and Norse polytheism to be equally vital to the continued existence of freedom?

If so, I’m assuming he’d appoint a Supreme Court Justice who wanted to swear his oath while holding a replica of Odin’s eye patch.

Does religion remain necessary to freedom if it promotes violence?

Does religion remain necessary to freedom when it discriminates?

Does a lame, church-pandering, politically calculated speech by Mitt and his Important Hair warrant this much bitching and moaning on my part?

Actually it does.

In the practice of moderate and reasonable people, religion is just dandy even if I disagree with the premise. Heck, in some hands, religion is genuinely noble. But if freedom requires religion then your government needs religion to keep you free. If your government has religion then the one freedom it can never give you is freedom from religion, and that pretty much rips the guts out of your freedoms entirely. So really, as far as government is concerned, the only thing that freedom needs is for someone like Mittens to leave you alone.

Now get those pickles out of your nose, you pervert.

Oh yeah, Mittens? Please shut the hell up.

 

 

 

Exercise Your Freedom and Visit Humor-Blogs.com !!

20 Comments

Filed under Atheism, Blogging, Humor, New Ego, Philosophy, Politics, Religion, Skepticism, Stupid Conservatives