Friday, October 16, 2009

He still has a job...why?

I recently came across a story about a justice of the peace in Louisiana who decided that refusing to marry an inter-racial couple was a good idea. Wait, it gets better...

His reasoning is as follows:

A Louisiana justice of the peace said he refused to issue a marriage license to an interracial couple out of concern for any children the couple might have. Keith Bardwell, justice of the peace in Tangipahoa Parish, says it is his experience that most interracial marriages do not last long.

"I'm not a racist. I just don't believe in mixing the races that way," Bardwell told the Associated Press on Thursday. "I have piles and piles of black friends. They come to my home, I marry them, they use my bathroom. I treat them just like everyone else."

I'll give you all a moment to process all of that.

For those of you who's mind has not imploded due to the density of stupidity exceeding the Chandrasekhar limit, we have to ask ourselves some very simple questions. No, not 'how did this moron end up a judge' (although that is a rather good one and hopefully the answer involves him losing said position) but 'how can someone say so much wrong in so little time' for starters.

After one is done pondering that (and hopefully not lost complete faith in the future of our species), we, unfortunantly get to look a little closer in what exactly is wrong with what he said.

First he starts off with the classic phrase used so often to try and explain away bigotry "think of the children!". But besides the normal idiocy of this phrase, it has a second hidden level of wrong waiting to be uncovered (kind of like those annoying 'magic eye' pictures that I can never get to work which leads me to believe that it is all a conspiracy by the optometrists to get us to stare at blurry images thus ruining our eyes). He is essentially insinuating that if two people do not get married then they cannot have children (perhaps this explains why his state has one of the countries highest rates of teen pregnancy). If I had known this secret (one that seems only to be known to the mentally deficient) then I would never have to again worry about contraceptives (no wait, I almost forgot I'm not an idiot there for a moment).

Those two stupidities alone are bad enough, but put them together and you get one grand unifying theory of stupid (think of it as his own personal TOE of fail). This is the idea that if there are no mixed race couples, then there would be no mixed race children and therefor less racism! ...Wait, I think someone is confused (and its not just me trying to follow his bigoted crazy). This is like saying that the best way to reduce racism is to let there be less of that very race in the first place... Ok, still not following him. Oh wait, I figured it out, he thinks that if we put our heads in the sand and pretend such people don't exist they will go away and life will go back to the happy all white 1950's suburb.

Before I start sustaining brain damage by trying to understand this, I'm going to move on. Surly he couldn't have packed in more idiocy, right? ...right?

His next line starts with "I'm not a racist, but...". Dear non-existent deity, stop with the cliches already. Anytime anyone ever says anything along the lines of "I'm not a 'insert kind of asshole here', but...", you know that this individual is most assuredly that very kind of ass. I don't mean the kind of ass that is annoying in passing but the kind that is so pervasive that it may just be possible to bottle their hate in a scent that would attract bigots from miles around. Just like the phrase "I don't mean to offend, but" it is a way to announce to the world exactly what you are and are about you really think. Have people like this judge really not picked up on this little tidbit?

Next we go from cliche abuse to a combination of confusing and disturbing. He says that he has "piles and piles of black friends". Now many kinds of things can be described as being in piles. You can have a pile of leaves, a pile of rags, you can even have a steaming pile (like what this man's entire defense really is). Humans, however, don't tend to come in piles, at least not when they are in the best of working order (and one would certainly hope not when ones 'friends' are involved). No, humans tend to get in piles when they are placed there (or when they decide to jump on one another in the absurd spectacle that is American football). These poor individuals, more then likely, do not (or even more likely, did not) think that this was a fun proposition, as such active humans will actively try to scurry away from any piling. This can making piling quite difficult and can only be rectified by preventing said pileable humans from doing any scurrying.

Now that we have learned that the judge is either a mass murderer or is about as skilled with the English language as a narcoleptic ape is at driving a vehicle. We are left with one final vexing question about the content of this man's response. What does his allowing his black 'friends' to use his toilet have to do with absolutely anything, especially about how supposedly not racist he is? Is there a hidden racism gauge out there somewhere with the line between racist and not being racist set at if you let someone of another race relieve themselves in your house? How does that thought even come into someones head? Isn't there at least one part of the judge's internal filtering mechanism working that could have picked up on this line of idiocy?

I give up, this man is, besides a bigoted ass, far to stupid to actually walk around not drooling on himself constantly.
Facebook Digg Stumble Delicious Twitter Reddit Technorati