The Paranoid Guide to Better Living: America's Reading Comprehension Creates Controversy

And now your host, Paranoia:

Man I love America. It's not just patriotism, it's a true heartfelt love for America. Right below how much I love our new robot overlords, to right above how much I love anything deep fried in the fat of a dead animal. America rocks. I think what I really love about America is the way that the American public create controversy where there really is none, completely misconstruing an issue and turning into much more than it is.

It's all about reading comprehension folks.

Take the new proposed bill in South Dakota. The bill would "bar prosecutors from pressing charges against a family member who kills an assailant attacking a pregnant relative." This is from the originator of the bill, Phil Jensen, a Rapid City Republican. However, the headline on the Reuters article (and many more around the web) reads:

"Proposed South Dakota abortion law stirs controversy."

Say what now? So first the media fucks with the heads of the ignorant, then the poor reading comprehension sets in and they don't read the rest of the article and suddenly this is an abortion debate. Now, I'll agree — there is a point for a bit of conversation considering abortion. By a stretch, an abortion doctor is "harming" a pregnant person, but generally by their choice. So while abortion groups do find the bill a bit undefined, they know that killing abortion doctors is not the point of the bill.

"I don't believe the intent is malicious," the executive director of NARAL Pro-Choice South Dakota said. "But the potential legal implications of the bill are what make it dangerous. If it passes without an amendment exempting attacks on providers, it could incite violence from individuals who believe their actions will be found justifiable in court."

Now let's go back to the subhead of the aforementioned article: "South Dakota will debate a proposed law on Tuesday that supporters say would protect pregnant women from attack and critics fear could legalize the killing of abortion providers in the state."

Say what now? Critics don't fear that the law would legalize the killing of abortion providers. They fear that it could incite violence from people who think that their actions are justifiable. Killing would still be a crime. They aren't worried that killing would become legal, just that some misguided assholes think it's legal.

So raise your hand if you read this article earlier in the week and actually shared on a social network or otherwise that South Dakota is considering legalizing killing abortion doctors. I know I saw at least a couple in my Twitter feed. It's that kind of blatant ignorance and lack of general comprehension that breeds the fear, confusion and outrage in this nation.

So you see the conundrum right? If you've made it this far, I should hope so. I'm not calling Americans stupid, just the ones that can't figure these things out for themselves. You dumb white trash slow-brained fools are the ones who are keeping the media flush with "controversy" and muddying the real issues.

Should South Dakota pass this bill? Hell yes. Should they put in a provision to protect abortion doctors from mentally unprepared asshats out for blood? Hell yes. Should you be able to discern the difference between a bill about justifiable homicide against someone attacking a pregnant woman and a woman choosing to get an abortion? Hell yes. Paranoia out.