Sean (darksoul) wrote,

  • Mood:
  • Music:

Don't you NEVER say an unkind word about The Time!

Occasionally old classmates of mine from high school will send me forwards. Usually I just delete them because it isn't worth the effort to make them stop. This isn't a story about that sort of email. Instead, this is the story of an email that offended me enough that I went on a tirade in response and hit reply all when I sent it.
>If you are a supporter of traditional marriage, which
>includes one man and one woman, I urge you to go to:
>WWW.TLOTOPEKA.ORG and sign the "Keep Families Strong"
>statement. Truth In Love Outreach (TLO) will present
>these signed statements to the U.S. Congressmen and
>Senators from Kansas, as well as our state legislators
>and city leaders. If we do not make our convictions
>known now, it may be too late before we know it.
>Thank you for caring about the family, the lost and
>for your support of biblical standards in our society.
> The Truth in Love Outreach Council
I was highly annoyed to find this bigotted garbage in my mailbox. As I said a week or so ago, I don't really care if two people in love decide to get married, it isn't my business. To actively promote "seperate but equal" is wrong. To not even bother offering an alternative is reprehensible. To actively pursue the segregation of a significant group is deserving of a kick in the face. Thus was I forced to click reply all and give my rebuttal.
...and what, pray tell, made you think that I might possibly be interested in your fascist homophobic political email? Of all the issues to be up in arms about, you choose marriage? American soldiers are dying every day in Iraq because the Bush administration misinterpretted poor intelligence. Poverty in urban areas is increasing while Republicans claim that the economy is turning around because the tax breaks they gave the rich are helping them to buy Humvees and Escalades. People are being arrested in airports for things as minor as reading the wrong book or looking funny. Afghanistan is barely a memory in the minds of the public and our politicians. But no, the issue you choose to bring to my attention is whether or not homosexuals have the right to marry one another. What right does anyone have to tell two people that their love isn't valid enough to qualify them to be married? Wait, let me guess, you're argument is going to be that the Bible says homosexuality is wrong, is that it? Would you like me to give you a litany of stupid things the Bible says is law? Is it because you feel homosexuality is unnatural? In that case, give up wearing polyester, preservatives, and use the rhythm method. Could it be because it children are not born out of such marriages, preventing the propogation of our race? Alright, then it is now illegal for the old and infertile to get married. Maybe you don't think gay marriages are as meaningful and wouldn't teach our children to respect the sanctity of marriage. I know Britney Spears makes me respect the sanctity of marriage. Same goes for Elizabeth Taylor and Jennifer Lopez. Perhaps you feel that families with gay parents are unhealthy for children, therefore if we stop them from getting married, it'll keep gay families from forming, thus keeping them from adopting kids and making them be gay. The only way to stop people from being gay is by having straight parents! Besides, kids need a positive male and female role-model in the home. That's why, as well as denying homosexuals the right to marry, we should make it illegal for anyone to be a single parent. Single parents are a bane to society because they don't provide their children with equal parental representation.

Should I go on? If two people are in love and want to give up the legal luxuries they have as single people, who are we as a society to say no? You tell these two sweet old ladies that their love is invalid and that they have no right to be married.

In the future, I have a simple litmus test for you to use before you decide to mass mail people with political crap.

  • Are there people dying/suffering because of this issue?

  • Is this issue based on what's fair to all parties involved?

  • Is this issue free of religious bias?

  • If this issue regards a particular group of people, would the statement be non-partisan and considered socially acceptable if you replaced the name of that group with "blacks"? For instance, in the sentence "The court has agreed to allow two homosexuals to marry", let us replace homosexuals with blacks.

If you answered "no" to two or more of those questions, then delete the email because it probably isn't worth the time it'd take the rest of us to delete it. Otherwise I might "accidently" click "Reply All" and get on my soapbox again. And my apologies to anyone that might be upset about this hitting their mailbox. Take it up with Richard.

Sean Canady
I think "tirade" definitely defines this well. C'est la vie. I didn't really know the guy anyway. It was a fun waste of time though. :)

  • My tweets

    Fri, 10:25: RT @ mmpadellan: Nobody: Not a single living soul: The former guy: "I'm not into golden showers." 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 Fri, 10:31: RT @…

  • My tweets

    Tue, 18:29: RT @ OhNoSheTwitnt: If Dean Cain is mad about Superman being bisexual we should probably make a gay Hercules and a trans Chachi…

  • My tweets

    Mon, 14:46: RT @ mmpadellan: Ashli Babbitt was not a hero. She was a domestic terrorist. THE END.

  • Post a new comment


    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.