I just read in our Dutch newspaper that the state of Indiana now actually passed a law that allows companies to forbid gays from entering their business. It reminds me of second world war, when all the stores in the Netherlands were obliged to have a sign outside saying "VOOR JOODEN VERBODEN" (No Jews allowed).
What's this? Is this secretly part of the Iran nuclear deal or something? Like, Iran doesn't make nukes, if America bans gays?
I can see UN sanctions coming against the US for this. Maybe even airstrikes on Indiana. Damn backwater fundamentalist terrorist country.
I agree this Indiana law is appalling, but before you go too far off the deep end please recall that you folks keep electing, for example, Geert Wilders.
Geert WIlders is an sociopathic manipulator, and yes, sadly, not just the Netherlands, but the entire European electorate has seen a not unsignificant part shift to populist glorious leader parties like Wilder's party. Luckily though, they are still a minority, and the one time they did manage to get into a government coalition in our country, it was over pretty quick.
Although part of their votes come from people that are islamophobic, or anti-immigration for more generic rascist reasons, the sad part is that a lot of their votes come from those people that would have traditionally voted for social democratic or left wing labour parties, but have been so desillusioned by either those parties never getting into a government coalition, or, if they do, completely shedding off their labour ideals just to please their more conservative coalition partners, that they abandoned their traditional voting preference.
A lot of people don't vote for Wilders because he's anti islam, but they vote for him because he promises better care for the elderly, better social benefits, and better wages for the underclass jobs.
And they vote for him because for some reason our media prints everything Wilders says page-wide, three times over, while if the same thing is said by the traditional social party, it doesn't even get half a column.
I know I've never voted for him and never will.
But yeah, if I had been serious with my UN airstrike remark, you would have had a good point. But did you really think I was serious there?
When will people ever learn that most things I write are studded with cynicism and encrusted with silly absurdism?