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.
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
What he means to say is this: Homosexuals were never covered by Jesus Christ--not once did Jesus complain about Peter rogering Paul.
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
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.
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?
Inappropriate sharing, incomprehensible ramblings, uncalled-for hostility: yup, it's a blog.
- ► 2017 (18)
- ► 2016 (25)
- ► 2015 (23)
- ► 2013 (31)
- ▼ 2012 (20)
- ► 2011 (42)
- ► 2010 (83)