Louie Gohmert: If You Limit The Number Of Bullets In A Clip, Polygamists Will Gay-Marry Your Dog
On a slow news day (seriously! so slow! can't someone make some news for us to be mean about?) Louie Gohmert really is the gift that keeps on giving. He stone coldparks wherever he pleases, and believes that the sequester should mean that Bamz never gets to leave the house. Today, he's rescuing yr Wonkette from no-post-oblivion by gunsplaining about how if you limit the number of rounds in a magazine, you can't limit how many people the gheyz marry at a time, or something?
In fact, I had this discussion with some wonderful, caring Democrats earlier this week on the issue of, well, they said "surely you could agree to limit the number of rounds in a magazine, couldn't you? How would that be problematic?"
And I pointed out, well, once you make it ten, then why would you draw the line at ten? What's wrong with nine? Or eleven? And the problem is once you draw that limit; it's kind of like marriage when you say it's not a man and a woman any more, then why not have three men and one woman, or four women and one man, or why not somebody has a love for an animal?
There is no clear place to draw the line once you eliminate the traditional marriage and it's the same once you start putting limits on what guns can be used, then it's just really easy to have laws that make them all illegal.
Let's go on a journey to sort this out together, shall we?! Also shut up at us about the long blockquote. We were hoping if we pulled the whole statement it would make sense. Nope!
So we should never limit how many bullets can be in a murder-death-kill machine, because freedom, but we SHOULD limit how many people you marry to exactly one opposite sex person, because freedom. Is that right? We have no idea. Let's try it another way. If you limit the amount of bullets people can cram into a magazine, then you can't limit people from marrying friends, neighbors, the dog, and some birch trees en masse? Wonket is in favor of this tradeoff! Less bullets, more group marriages! (Though not with dogs because setting aside the ewwww factor, sexytime with the unable to consent is not cool. We're sort of neutral on if you want to sex up a tree though.)
Gomer-Gohmert also took this radio opportunity to explain to conservative Christians that they need to get into politics more (because they're not meddling enough already?) because if they don't, they'll be forced to employ Dr. Frank-n-Furter:
You need to understand that when there is a law being pushed, as it has for several years, that says that religious institutions should not be exempt from discrimination laws, that it is going to devastate the church, the synagogue, the places of worship that hire people because ultimately they're saying you have to hire whatever Satan-worshiper, whatever cross-dresser you think might be immoral, that's against your religious belief.
THE JIG IS UP. Our secret plan to pack the evangelical churches with Satan-loving ladies in pants is DESTROYED, everyone. Wonketsians, please use the comments to come up with a new plan to make far-right Christians gay marry our dogs while we worship Satan in their churches. Heathen Buttsecks America is counting on you.