Al Franken: Why Not Me?
Since I didn't put together a post at all last week, I figured I should pull double duty this week, so here's your second dosing of the FMRC.
First up, Al Franken announced that he will be campaigning for the Democractic nomination for the Senate in Minnesota in 2008. For those unfamiliar with Al Franken, he wrote for SNL for years, and is most famous for his character Stuart Smalley.
Franken in 2008: Because I'm good enough, I'm smart enough, and doggone it, people like me.
Over/under on when that joke becomes old: 2 days.
Anyway, much has been made about the fact that as a comedy writer, Franken's experience in politics extends only to a SNL sketch in which he played Senator Paul Tsongas appearing at a Star Trek conventon during the 1992 presidential campaign (if you haven't seen this sketch, find it, it's fantastic).
But what nobody seems to be bringing up is Al Franken's book Why Not Me? Personally, I find it bizarre that nobody is mentioning it.
The book is a fictionalizied account of Franken running for President in 2000, winning through an amazing series of coincidences, and the horrible mess that electing a comedy writer as president leads to. (If you haven't read it, and you enjoy politics, I highly recommend it, while outdated at this point, it's still pretty fucking funny).
Anyway, I just find it strange that a man who once wrote about killing hookers while on the campaign trail is now going to be running for Senate.
Meanwhile in another state nobody gives a damn about (Washington in this case), a most interesting ballot intiative is being ciruclated. Basically the initiative says that any marriage that does not produce children within three years would be annulled.
It probably sounds a little too wacky to be true, and it is. The initiative is being pushed by a group that calls itself the Washington Defense of Marriage Alliance as a sort of back-door defense of gay marriage (pun completely intended).
See, a Washington Court recently ruled against gay marriage largely on the grounds that marriage is an institution intended to further procreation. So the WDMA (which is in fact a group of only about a dozen or so gay rights activists) figured that if that's the case, why not make it the law? If you aren't going to make babies, you shouldn't be getting married.
The group publicly admits that it doesn't want to see the intiative pass and that it's only trying to make a point about the constitutionality of the court's decision. Which is unfortunate, because I just love the idea of some right-wing fundamentalist nutjob finding out that she's barren and being forced to get her marriage annulled.
Yeah that's right, I'm taking joy in the damaged reproductive system of a hypothetical woman. That's how bitter and cynical I've become folks. And she's being legally forced to leave her hypothetical husband too, so she's doomed to die alone. That's some funny shit.
Speaking of annulments, I recently learned that in Michigan it is a felony to commit adultery. Now this is one of those laws that never actually gets enforced, but it raises some interesting questions.
The law defines adultery as sex between two persons, one of whom is married to a third person. Further, it states that if the sex is between a married woman and an unmarried man, then both the man and the woman are guilty of adultery. (As opposed to if a married man has sex with an unmarried woman, in which case only the man is guilty of adultery).
So here's my first question: What if a married woman sleeps with an unmarried woman? Is the unmarried woman guilty of adultery? Or what if a married man sleeps with an umarried man?
Or how about if a married person has sex with a dolphin? Is that adultery? How about a chimpanzee?
And pretty soon we'll probably have robots? What if you have sex with one of them? Is that adulter? How about if the robot has artificial intelligence?
What about if the unmarried person is dead? Is that adultery? And if so, does it depend on whether the orifice in question is natural or man-made?
So many quesitons.
First up, Al Franken announced that he will be campaigning for the Democractic nomination for the Senate in Minnesota in 2008. For those unfamiliar with Al Franken, he wrote for SNL for years, and is most famous for his character Stuart Smalley.
Franken in 2008: Because I'm good enough, I'm smart enough, and doggone it, people like me.
Over/under on when that joke becomes old: 2 days.
Anyway, much has been made about the fact that as a comedy writer, Franken's experience in politics extends only to a SNL sketch in which he played Senator Paul Tsongas appearing at a Star Trek conventon during the 1992 presidential campaign (if you haven't seen this sketch, find it, it's fantastic).
But what nobody seems to be bringing up is Al Franken's book Why Not Me? Personally, I find it bizarre that nobody is mentioning it.
The book is a fictionalizied account of Franken running for President in 2000, winning through an amazing series of coincidences, and the horrible mess that electing a comedy writer as president leads to. (If you haven't read it, and you enjoy politics, I highly recommend it, while outdated at this point, it's still pretty fucking funny).
Anyway, I just find it strange that a man who once wrote about killing hookers while on the campaign trail is now going to be running for Senate.
Meanwhile in another state nobody gives a damn about (Washington in this case), a most interesting ballot intiative is being ciruclated. Basically the initiative says that any marriage that does not produce children within three years would be annulled.
It probably sounds a little too wacky to be true, and it is. The initiative is being pushed by a group that calls itself the Washington Defense of Marriage Alliance as a sort of back-door defense of gay marriage (pun completely intended).
See, a Washington Court recently ruled against gay marriage largely on the grounds that marriage is an institution intended to further procreation. So the WDMA (which is in fact a group of only about a dozen or so gay rights activists) figured that if that's the case, why not make it the law? If you aren't going to make babies, you shouldn't be getting married.
The group publicly admits that it doesn't want to see the intiative pass and that it's only trying to make a point about the constitutionality of the court's decision. Which is unfortunate, because I just love the idea of some right-wing fundamentalist nutjob finding out that she's barren and being forced to get her marriage annulled.
Yeah that's right, I'm taking joy in the damaged reproductive system of a hypothetical woman. That's how bitter and cynical I've become folks. And she's being legally forced to leave her hypothetical husband too, so she's doomed to die alone. That's some funny shit.
Speaking of annulments, I recently learned that in Michigan it is a felony to commit adultery. Now this is one of those laws that never actually gets enforced, but it raises some interesting questions.
The law defines adultery as sex between two persons, one of whom is married to a third person. Further, it states that if the sex is between a married woman and an unmarried man, then both the man and the woman are guilty of adultery. (As opposed to if a married man has sex with an unmarried woman, in which case only the man is guilty of adultery).
So here's my first question: What if a married woman sleeps with an unmarried woman? Is the unmarried woman guilty of adultery? Or what if a married man sleeps with an umarried man?
Or how about if a married person has sex with a dolphin? Is that adultery? How about a chimpanzee?
And pretty soon we'll probably have robots? What if you have sex with one of them? Is that adulter? How about if the robot has artificial intelligence?
What about if the unmarried person is dead? Is that adultery? And if so, does it depend on whether the orifice in question is natural or man-made?
So many quesitons.
Labels: Adultery, Al Franken, Damaged Reproductive System, Gay Marriage
posted by drs at 12:14 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home