Today, human crowds re-ignited the national debate for whether or not politicians should be allowed to marry.
Marriage is defined as a union between two human beings. As such, it is unclear whether politicians qualify, as they do not strictly fall in that category.
On one hand, many of them look human in appearance, so much so that they may easily be mistaken for actual humans. This, some have argued, is a sufficient basis to allow them to enjoy the institution of marriage, since an outside observer may be left with the impression of normalcy.
On the other hand, politicians behave distinctly opposite to commonsense human norms. They are incapable compassion, understanding, and, more importantly, love. As a result of this, it is unclear whether or not politicians should be allowed to marry, since marriage is an institution designed by humans and for humans, to share love and happiness, qualities which no politician even pretends to possess, or is able to provide.
As the debate rages, there are those who consider such useless discussions a waste of taxpayer money.
“As far as I am concerned,” stated Earl Fletcher, resident of Tadpole, AL, “we should simply round up this useless and repulsive minority, and have them all executed in public, so people’s children think twice before deciding to stray away from the path of being human and decide to become politicians.”
“Couldn’t agree more,” said his neighbor Jane Longdong. “We have tolerated their existence long enough. Enough with lies and corruption. Enough with abuse of power. It is time to reclaim this world for humans only.”
Meanwhile, rumors have been circulating that a small, unnamed European country has officially closed their eyes to politician marriages, causing hundred-fold increase in diplomat visa applications and purchases of one-way plane tickets.