Normally I don’t feed the trolls, but today, with the Supreme Court taking on the Supreme Court, I, like many friends, changed my profile picture to the HRC’s red “=” sign. Not because I think Scalia’s going to see my Facebook profile and think, Gee, I guess people are in favor of this, but because I’m proudly on the side of marriage equality. It was great to see such outpourings of support on social media. Then, in the comments on one of my friend’s photos–the exact same photo, made into his profile pic, in solidarity, I saw this comment:
Wait, you know what? I can’t even find it because he deleted it. Or my friend did. Anyway, this dude essentially said “But [x], why would you support this? What’s next, marriage between 3 people or a man and a dog? God created marriage between one man and one woman. Why not just a civil union? That’s what my homosexual friend supports, he’s against same-sex marriage.”
Normally I would let that go. I don’t know this dude. But today?
Today I rolled up my sleeves and jumped in.
Laura Stratford What the [bleep] are you talking about?Humans created the institution of marriage. For hundreds of years it’s been: 1. One man and many women (king Solomon, anyone?); 2. One woman and many men (in nomadic tribes in Asia); 3. One man and one woman and then the man’s brother inherits the woman when the man died (read the Old Testament); 4. An institution where a woman is considered a man’s property and it’s legal to kill her if she has sex with someone else that’s meant to assuage male fears that their children aren’t theirs. Adam and Eve never had a civil ceremony. We’re talking about protection under the human-created Constitutional rights of this country that was founded on the basis of separation of church and state.Laura Stratford No one is arguing that BS slippery slope of bigamy or bestiality or pedophilia. Legal age of consent isn’t going anywhere. Bestiality laws aren’t going anywhere because a dog can’t give consent. Bigamy law is not being threatened. If you don’t like gay marriage, don’t get gay married.*drops the mic*
[Person]: shame on you Laura…why only 2 homosexuals or lesbians? why not 3 people, or a person & their dog, or a father and a son? ***DON’T YOU CARE ABOUT THEIR “LOVE” FOR EACH OTHER, and WHY NOT? *** AND…sorry, but with all due respect, you don’t know your Bible…God created & defined marriage. Sinful man started bigamy etc. And if you agree to CHANGE THE DEFINITION of marriage…yes, the next thing people would challenge is 3 lovers, etc. PS People respect your opinion more without the filthy language. Cheershmmm…really? you mention “protection under constitutional rights”…so our wise & great founding fathers knew or even considered that 1 man would want to have sex & relationship with another man?…really? you think that…wow! PS It’s my side…Conservatives that believe in Constitution, so you prob shouldn’t go there 😉
Me: Shame on me? Your arguments don’t even make sense. So you want to take Song of Solomon out of the Bible? Where are your Bible verses about marriage being between a man and a woman? God made Eve out of Adam’s rib and said, have a helpmeet. Not a wife. And they had babies, and soon God let Abraham sleep with Hagar when Sarah was barren, and then Solomon, a Jewish king revered as wise above all others, had hundreds of wives, and then Jesus Christ said let’s not throw stones at adulterous women. I know my Bible, sir. Do you?
Polygamy was already accepted, in the name of the God and in the name of the Bible, in Utah by Mormons. It’s not something I’m going to argue for, but that happened.
Let me ask you something: Does giving the right to vote to women mean that next we’re going to give the right to vote to dogs? That’s the kind of argument you’re making.
Guess what, the Founding Fathers also supported slavery. We get to update it with the times. Conservatives aren’t the only ones who believe in the Constitution. In fact, many people who do not count themselves as conservatives are actually Constitutional scholars. Personally, I’m a Phi Beta Kappa with a degree from a Top 10 Liberal Arts college and could probably school you in that too.
You’re on the wrong side of history, and I hope you’re as ashamed when your children ask you why people were ever against gay marriage as the people who opposed interracial marriage–who, by the way, were the last people who argued that changing marriage laws would lead to bigamy and people marryings dogs.
Was my language civil enough for you?
Me: Wait did you delete your initial comment? Because if so, hilarious.Him: Oh my…so many fallacies in your arguments, not enough time now…where to begin?…ha! I will have to get back to you tonight…I work hard for a living so your guy, bho, can redistribute my income to those who CHOOSE not to work. Yes, congrats on making it thru your discussion with civil language. Wow, lots of patting yourself on the back about that degree & how smart you are too, really proud of yourself, ha! Congrats PS Just because you say my arguments don’t make sense (to you), doesn’t mean you’re right, ha! Cheers 🙂Me: Oh honey tear apart one fallacy, please. Cause it looks like it took me one minute to tear apart all of yours, so unless you have examples, I’m going to go ahead and ignore everything you have to say.
[Dude]: it appears [x] has deleted our conversation, unless I’m missing it?? Just getting ready to head home from work & checked & don’t see it?? Perhaps he was trying to save you from being embarrassed?? Great to see I got you smiling & happy & offering CHEERS! We can agree to disagree & still be nice, Laura 🙂
Thank you, [dude]. I agree with you that we can be nice, although I don’t really appreciate your implication of my impending embarrassment. I never intended to embarrass you, and I apologize if it seems like I did. I just strongly disagree with you. I think we would get along just fine in person, honestly, despite disagreeing on this point. It’s one of a few that really fires me up.
DISENGAGE WITH GRACE, MUTHATRUCKAHS!