Inappropriate sharing, incomprehensible ramblings, uncalled-for hostility: yup, it's a blog.

Sunday, January 8, 2012

Let's to the Ed

I'd forgotten how fun it is to write crackpot letters to the editor.

The following is in response to this.

Early in January, 2004, my boyfriend and I left Alabama to live in New York City. We didn’t consult John Locke or Thomas Aquinas. We did, however, secure a U-Haul.

I read Larry Clayton’s recent op-ed with some interest (not a lot of interest; just a bit of interest), and I admit the op-ed was very well-cited. Mr. Clayton tossed out a lot of citations, as if he were a small-town cop trying to make a quota on traffic tickets.

He cited the Bible, Locke, Aquinas, Clinton, Obama, Congregationalists, Christians, Judeo-Christians, and Jessica Stern.

Jessica Stern, for those of you who don’t live in New York City, is the leader of Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission. For those of you who live in New York City, you may be interested to know there’s a Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission; you may even be interested to know that Jennifer Stern is your leader.

All hail Jessica Stern!

Larry Clayton says this: Very clearly, homosexuality is condemned in the Judeo-Christian context. “Rights” as such simply do not apply in the equation of sin and homosexuality.

What he means to say is this: Homosexuals were never covered by Jesus Christ--not once did Jesus complain about Peter rogering Paul.

Jesus did say a lot of really nice things, but he never got around to giving his views on gay marriage. Most people who claim to know what Jesus said ignore this. Most people who claim to speak for Jesus forget just what Jesus said.

Larry Clayton also says this: As slavery lost usefulness, for example, in the West because of changing economic circumstances in the 19th century, the pressure to end it became powerful.

Mr. Clayton will never be cited for anything (except perhaps a traffic ticket, and in this response to his op-ed) because Mr. Clayton has a poor understanding of economics. Not to be too cheeky, but Mr. Clayton doesn’t get how much money gay weddings will pump into local economies. If Mr. Clayton really thinks the reason slavery’s end was because of ‘changing economic circumstance,’ then he’s rather shaky on the economics of gay marriage.

We're in a recession. If you want to change economic circumstances, Mr. Clayton, you should admit there's nothing more beneficial to economics than gay weddings.

Larry Clayton also says this, about Clinton and Obama: That they are both Ivy League-trained lawyers (Harvard and Yale) would no doubt have Puritan and Congregationalist ministers who founded the colleges turning over in their graves, or perhaps coming out of them to lecture their descendants.

Sir, I’m sorry you are not Ivy League-trained. I’m not either. Nor are any of my family Ivy League-trained. When I left Alabama--with my boyfriend who is now my husband--my untrained family in Alabama supported me just as much as I’m sure your own family supported you when you left your own state to make a new life for yourself.

Here's the thing: Most people are happy to love those who love them back. It's absurd to suggest that love depends on the contents of Larry Clayton's Kindle: Before marrying, should one crib from Aquinas, or Locke? Sartre, or Camus?

I've been with my husband for nearly twelve years--should I wait for Stephanie Meyer to approve of our relationship?

Blog Archive

About Me

My photo
New York, NY, United States

Search Blogness