Dan Savage, obsessed with santorum? Nay.
Re: Savage Love, August 18
You are so obsessed with your degradation and cruxification of Rick Santorum AT THE EXPENSE of gay men everywhere that your "santorum" jokes have become old and stale. Are you going to keep this up for another 20 years? Does your whole life revolve around Rick Santorum and "santorum"? Do you need a whip?
I dare you to go after the truly virulently homophobic pastors, such as Scott Lively, Lou Engle, and Fred Phelps, who are actively seeking to destroy all homosexuals.
You cower at the thought of going after them, don't you, Dan Savage, you coward, you bastard? —Name withheld
Re: "Two Chicago pols say it's time to talk about legalizing pot" posted on the Bleader by Mick Dumke, August 16
Drawing arbitrary lines when it comes to personal rights IS bad. If something is the law, there should be a good reason for it. There aren't awesome statistics on marijuana use because it's hard to get people to admit to it sometimes, but it usually isn't a factor in car crashes and doesn't cause any major health issues. It's also nonaddictive. However, alcohol and tobacco are legal. Alcohol was the cause of 41 percent of fatal accidents in Illinois last year, causes multiple health issues, and is addictive (to those predisposed to alcoholism). Tobacco does absolutely nothing for anyone except kill them slowly and painfully, and make millions in tax money for the government. I am NOT saying these things should be illegal. But why are they OK, and pot—which has been shown to be less harmful than both—isn't? People have such a stigma associated with marijuana for no good reason. What's the difference between getting high and getting drunk?
Aside from that, police arrest minorities for a tiny bag, while rich white kids from the suburbs can smoke all they want at festivals and no one seems to care (as Alderman Burnett pointed out). If marijuana is going to continue to be illegal, shouldn't all people using it be treated the same way? —L