Book banning? Indecent statues? Don’t say gay? Just a start as we introduce the full scope of our own LGBTQ revisions

As Republicans wrestle with the meaning of the terms “woke” (not one in 10 can accurately define what the word means), “CRT,” and “grooming,” censorship and the attempt to force-feet moral standards continue unabated, conjuring up the famous declaration of former New Orleans Mayor Martin Behrmann who said in 2017 of the federal efforts to shut down prostitution in the city, “You can make it illegal, but you can’t make it unpopular.”

In Florida, a school principal was forced to RESIGN  after parents, ignorant of art in general and Michelangelo in particular, raised holy hell over the display of the artist’s classic sculpture of David – after which everyone went home to watch 50 Shades of Grey, Eyes Wide Shut, or The Wolf of Wall Street. (Well, somebody was watching those movies, right?)

Now that the issue of book content in public libraries has become the issue du jour, it seems a good time to reveal a recent LouisianaVoice informal poll taken at meetings of the Livingston Parish Council where the burning issue of library books held sway over such trivial issues as flood control and impassable roads and highways where small cars could disappear into the abyss of a pothole from hell.

Fully 73 percent of those polled declared that they did not think President Barack Obama did enough to aid the victims of Hurricane Katrina.

Even more interesting, 87 percent got their dander up when I broached the idea that President Biden had announced that he would mandate that the U.S. rely solely on the Arabic numbering system, beginning in 2024.

The response to that scenario was instant and downright hostile. One woman declared that she was “against anything Biden wanted,” so I asked her what she did with her pandemic stimulus check. She gave me a blank stare, so I rephrased the question: “Did you send your check back?” Still no response.

Another person, a man who is a member of the parish governing council, replied with a question of his own: “What’s wrong with the system we have?” he asked indignantly before adding, “I don’t know how to respond to that. I’ll have to study it first.”

Respondents almost unanimously (97 percent) literally bristled when I asked them how they felt about Hunter Biden receiving $2 billion from Saudi Arabia in 2022. “He oughta go to jail,” spat one of those present to protest the perceived easy access of certain books by children. I never bothered to inform him that it was Jared Kushner, not Hunter Biden, who received the $2 billion from the Saudi Investment Fund. Oh well, details, details.

Maybe they would’ve recognized the bogus questions if they ever visited a library to read newspapers and news magazines.

But more important than all that, now comes the news that 39 of the 50 states, including Louisiana, may be forced to tear down their phallic-shaped state capitol buildings and build new, less objectionable ones.

Lunatics Gone Big Time Quirky (LGBTQ) has launched a nationwide movement to remove all phallic-shaped buildings from the landscape in order to protect the delicate eyes of youngsters who might accidentally look up from their cellphones and see sone of these structures that LGBTQ says might pollute and otherwise corrupt young minds.

It’s somewhat interesting that the state political leaders would tend to erect (no pun intended) phallic-shaped buildings in which to conduct state business. It’s somewhat indicative (again, no pun intended) of what the legislators do to the citizenry when they’re in session.

It’s also no coincidence that the title of the Biggest D**k goes to none other than good ol’ Looezeana, whose capitol building towers an impressive 450 feet.

Louisiana State Capitol

Nebraska is second at 400 feet (maintaining its phallic shape despite having a unicameral legislature), followed by another state of many gigantic d**ks, Florida, whose capitol building stands at 322 feet. The domed House and Senate chambers on either side only serve to accent the current abundance of Florida’s d**ks.

Florida State Capitol

The cost of the new, more modest State Capitol building in Baton Rouge is expected to exceed $480 million, not including graft and kickbacks. Disguised as legitimate cost overruns (as more politicians demand their take), that could escalate the cost by as high as an additional $1 billion – or more, depending on how creative they are at fooling the feds.

But state capitols aside, all the suggestive capitol buildings may be history if LGBTQ has its way. Each of those 39 state capitols, as well as hundreds, perhaps thousands, of similarly-endowed structures may be on the LGBTQ chopping block (okay, bad choice of words).

Florida legislators, in anticipation of action by Gov. Rhonda Santis, have already begun preparing legislation to construct a giant fig leaf to cover the State Capitol building in Tallahassee, a project that could rival the cost of a new Louisiana structure given the fact that the state elected Rick Scott first as governor and then US senator despite his having presided over a company that was found guilty of 14 felony violations and fined $1.7 billion for ripping off Medicare, Medicaid. Graft obviously isn’t just tolerated in Florida, it’s encouraged.

Alternative to constructing a new Florida Capitol Building

Florida legislators and Rhonda Santis are also moving forward on an even more ambitious campaign to superimpose a map of the state over the statue of David to cover that 520-year-old marble appendage that has caused such an uproar – even though such a move will undoubtedly present David as considerably more conspicuously endowed (unless lawmakers choose a much smaller map), but will still be better than a map of say, Tennessee or, heaven forbid, Idaho or New Hampshire.

Florida’s solution to the unacceptable statue of David.

Unacceptable Substitutes

In Florida public schools, math books have been purged of controversial material, history book references to slavery and civil rights were expunged, and all English grammar books have been edited to delete any mention (or use) of periods. The same prohibitions are also being considered for colons and dangling participles.

Meanwhile, the Hyde Park Obelisk in Sydney, Australia, has already been fitted with a giant pink condom to conceal the obviously lewd phallic edifice. That should deflect attention from the suggestive obelisk, which will have its name officially changed to “Buildo” in order to comply with the anticipated demands of LGBTQ.

Sydney’s Hyde Park Obelisk in all its lewdness (above) and covered by a condom (below)

In addition to the suggestive buildings, LGBTQ is also targeting several cities and towns, including Dry Prong, Grosse Tete, Bunkie, Hardwood, and Waterproof in Louisiana, as well as a host of other cities in the US and Europe: Slickpoo, Idaho; Mud Butte, South Dakota; Climax, Georgia; Intercourse, Pennsylvania; Nellie’s Nipples, California; Weiner, Arkansas; Titty-Ho street in Raunds, Wellingborough, England; Bitchfield, Lincolnshire, England; Muff, County Donegal, Ireland; Sandyballs, Hampshire, England, and Wetwang, England. The Austrian village of F**king, in anticipation of the wave of decency and political correctness (and to reduce the frequency of city sign thefts), changed its name in 2021 to the more acceptable Fugging. That should work.

Certain Louisiana parishes have not escaped the attention of LGBTQ, either. Catahoula Parish could conjure up mental images of cat houses, which could cause irreparable damage to the psyche of young children. Morehouse sounds a lot like…well, you know. And the last syllable of Natchitoches could be mistaken for “tush,” so it has to be changed forthwith as does Tangipahoa, for the same reason: “Hoa” could send the wrong message as could the last syllable of Terrebonne. And the middle syllable of Ouachita just isn’t acceptable for young children. Not sure what Calcasieu implies, but it sounds dirty, so it goes, as well. And “Union” can mean only one thing: pre-marital intimacy between impressionable teenagers.

Here are a few other buildings likely to be replaced by more acceptable architectural designs: