Skip to main content

Another crazy letter-to-the-editor

I'm not exactly sure why I tend to enjoy torturing myself by regularly reading through the Columbus Dispatch letters-to-the-editor, but I again did so today, and as usual, I was not left disappointed. By disappointed, I mean, due to the rather high frequency of grammatically putrid and laughably inaccurate letters I read in the Dispatch, my expectations are such that, if I didn't read such a letter in a given day's viewing, I'd walk away being quite surprised and oddly missing the typical laughter such letters tend to prompt.

The winner for craziest letter-to-the-editor of the day goes to one Mike Queen of Lucasville, Ohio, who wrote the following piece, which was entitled, "Strickland should fear God, not voters":

"Democratic Senate candidate Ted Strickland has insulted God and betrayed the values of the people of Southern Ohio from where he comes ( Dispatch article, May 8). By referring to marriage exclusively between one man and one woman as prejudice - considering that the Holy Scriptures clearly condemn homosexual behavior in both Old and New Testaments - Strickland has indicted God himself as a bigot.

Unlike Strickland, people from his home area have not bowed to the idols of self interest and political correctness. Traditional values taught by our families and churches continue to be honored and highly respected among the people of Southern Ohio.

Strickland said he can't wait to celebrate when gay marriage is legalized, but he should remember his Bible Belt roots and be much more concerned with what the Supreme Being has to say on the topic."


...and what does the Supreme Being have to say on the topic? Or how about the man Christians worship, Jesus? What does he have to say about the topic? Why do people like Mr. Queen seem to ignore that whole bit about loving thy neighbor and instead move directly toward scripture(s) which may or may not have anything to do with homosexuality? Yes, there is still heavy debate on the topic, with a growing chorus believing the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah was that of inhospitality and not homosexuality. So why do some still obsess over that which is anything but an absolute as far as the Bible's position on homosexuality goes? Especially since it doesn't directly impact these people's lives and there are so many other more troubling and worrisome actions about which could be obsessed?

What does Mike Queen and his ilk think will happen if and when gay marriage becomes legal nationwide (it's really only a matter of time), both in this life and in a possible afterlife? Will God take it upon himself (or herself or whatever) to destroy this world because the United States of America, like many other developed countries, made it legal for two men or two women, whom love one another, to marry? Seriously? God didn't think the Holocaust was any reason to destroy this world, but would if we legalized gay marriage? Riiight... As far as an afterlife goes, what, God will look into a person's eyes and say, "I know my son, the lone perfect person in the history of mankind, said to love your neighbors, but you took that a bit too far with the whole gay thing. I know you're a decent person, you treat everyone with love, decency, and respect, but the fact you fought hard for same-sex couples in love to legally wed, I'm afraid I'm going to have to send you to hell."? Meanwhile, does Mr. Queen then expect God to also say, "Yeah, you killed a lot of people and spent your life behind bars, but you asked for forgiveness, so you can go on up to heaven for eternity. You made some mistakes, but it's not like you supported grown adults of the same sex to legally marry one another, right? Go on up there! I'll talk to you in a bit."?

Mike Queen didn't write the Bible. He wasn't around during the time of its composition. Whether such a being exists or not, he's not God. So, with a straight face, how can he claim it's any worse for a grown man or woman to marry a same-sex partner in the eyes of a supreme being than it is for him to attempt to speak for this higher power, quite possibly being inaccurate to some extent along the way? Perhaps it's not Ted Strickland and LGBT supporters that should have to worry about advocating for love and equality while alive in this world; it's people like Mike Queen, whom continually attempt to speak for God, quite possibly misleading people in his name, and doing anything but loving their neighbors in the process. God isn't a bigot; the person choosing to make him one is the true bigot.

http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/editorials/2015/06/08/strickland-should-fear-god-not-voters.html

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun...

Face guarding is legal in college football and the NFL

I just wanted to remind fans and announcers especially, that face guarding is legal in both college football and the NFL. It all comes down to contact. So long as a defender doesn't make contact with an intended receiver, he doesn't have to turn around to play the ball. I can't tell you how many times every week I hear announcers talk about face guarding being a penalty. It's not. I even heard one announcer yesterday state, "If the defender doesn't turn around and play the ball, the ref will call pass interference every time." That's simply not true. Courtesy of referee Bill LeMonnier, he says this with regard to the rule at the college level (answered on 8/12/13): "NCAA rules on pass interference require the face guarding to have contact to be a foul. No contact, no foul by NCAA rules." In the NFL rule book, this is written:  "Actions that constitute defensive pass interference include but are not limited to: (a) Contact by a ...