RECENT  POSTS:  » What most people aren't getting about the fake non-troversies of the anti-gay right » 'Weekly Standard' asst. editor equates Tim Cook with man who pits God against him » Michigan pastors make unfortunate lifestyle choice; say they'll go to jail rather than not discriminate » PFOX's Quinlan says SBC leader's opposition to 'reparative therapy' is cruel » That Idaho wedding venue posts new 'rules and regulations'; will still perform non-Christian weddings » Another deceptive thing about NOM's duplicitous anti-Hagan ad » NOM trying to shape Arkansas politics without even learning state's abbreviation » Video: Focus on the Family staffer who calls homosexuality 'particularly evil lie of Satan' hangs out in Chicago's Boystown » Video: Another new NOM ad targets Sen. Mark Pryor (D-AR); uses James O'Keefe video as source » What the heck is 'NOM Victory Fund'?  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »

12/30/2008

My hate mail can beat up your hate mail!

by Jeremy Hooper

This week, as part of his solicitation of end-of-year donations, Peter LaBarbera has been posting some of the angry emails that he's received from gay people. Well, we at G-A-Y don't want your recession-battered money. But since Pete has put forth this game, we do want to once again demonstrate that virulently anti-gay hate mail is an almost daily occurrence for those of us who take a pro-gay "culture war" stance. Here's one of our latest:

Picture 29-11

And of course unlike LaBarbera and friends, the only thing we've done to earn our mail is to voice the "radical" idea that LGBT people are human beings deserving of respect and inclusion. The only thing we've done to deserve these slurs is stand in firm opposition to the same.

For Pete, laying bare his Inbox's dirtiest missives might be a convenient fundraising ploy. For us, however, these messages (which we usually keep quiet) are a constant reminder that by merely waking up every morning, we are under some degree of danger, be it towards our physical existences or civil liberties. That difference shows the consequential chasm that divides our two movements.

**UPDATE: Oh, and we guarantee that our messages are more absurd. We frequently get logic like this:

Picture 30-12

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper


Your thoughts

Jeremy,

These people have NO IDEA - God made us as he did them - what they are saying is He/She made a mistake! They say we made a choice. I hate to tell these people but I was attracted to my same sex (I didn't know what it was, of course)when I was around 4 years old - when I think of THEM together - penis/vagina it grosses me out (like they feel about us) - that's the way God made me and when they go home to God (if he accepts intolerant people) they'll find out how WRONG they have been and are being! Have they ever thought about when THEY made their choice to be heterosexual?

Posted by: tom | Dec 30, 2008 4:32:28 PM

If I've understood the logic of that second person, it's okay for men to be OBSESSED with a woman's genitalia and for a woman to be OBSESSED with a man's genitalia.
That's...rather odd.
Or is his point that homosexuality is abnormal because it's an attraction to someone with a body part they already have? Because that's even odder-by that logic, nobody should be interested in looking at another person's face.

Posted by: Bill S | Dec 30, 2008 5:04:18 PM

Fags and lesbians? I would have expected "fags and dykes." Oh well, we all no how stupid these people are.

Posted by: RainbowPhoenix | Dec 30, 2008 5:49:36 PM

And I thought their God wanted us to love ourselves before we love others. Well, that includes genitalia...folks.
Hope you go a new shovel for the holidays JH...to get rid of the garbage.

Posted by: LOrion | Dec 30, 2008 7:44:36 PM

Lol! What the fuck is a "spiritual disorder"? Is that the cultists' new & improved term for "demonic possession"?

Posted by: TheRadicalRealist | Dec 30, 2008 9:21:48 PM

A spritual disorder? Oh you'll have to see a specialist on that one. I think the conversation would go a little something like this:

"I told the witch doctor I was in love with you!
And then the witch doctor, he told me what to do
He said that "Ooh Ee Ooh Ah Ah, Ting Tang, Walla Walla Bing Bang!"
Ooh Ee Ooh Ah Ah, Ting Tang, Walla Walla Bing Bang?"

Posted by: Daimeon | Dec 30, 2008 11:07:29 PM

You have amused me Daimeon. :)

Posted by: Bill S | Dec 31, 2008 7:03:55 AM

Your second letter is too funny! I have to go now. I'm obsessed with another man's genitalia (something that I too also possess).

Posted by: KZ | Dec 31, 2008 8:57:40 AM

What's always hilarious to me is how they write as if they have MAYBE graduated the fourth grade (not just typos, but repeated mispellings/misuse of words like "your" instead of "you're", repeated punctuation/capitalization errors, and egregious grammatical errors with sentence structures that would make Sarah Palin proud) yet they expect you to take them and the point that they're trying to make serioiusly.

If you were going to go to the trouble to put your thoughts into words and write them down to try and convince someone that your argument is the right one, that you have thought this issue out logically and that everyone should come around to your point of view, wouldn't you want to at least SOUND like you're intelligent enough to know what you're talking about?

Evidently not. I guess when you firmly believe that God is on your side, a coherent sentence is an unimportant detail.

Posted by: JWSwift | Dec 31, 2008 10:42:05 AM

What is it with them and caps-lock? Anybody who feels the need to constantly scream to get their message across obviously has a weak message and/or issues dealing with dissenting opinions.

Posted by: Buffy | Dec 31, 2008 6:00:53 PM

That second email seemed oddly familiar to me. Then, I remembered the same garbage message posted verbatim over on a few "gay" youtube videos. This person must be a bit "obsessed" themselves, if you know what I mean...

Posted by: Andros | Dec 31, 2008 11:36:44 PM

"Or is his point that homosexuality is abnormal because it's an attraction to someone with a body part they already have? Because that's even odder-by that logic, nobody should be interested in looking at another person's face."

IMO, this is one of those phrasings that tells you more about the writer than the subject. Apparently this guy has the same attitude toward sex and sexual relationships he accuses gay people of having; i.e., limiting it to physical sensations and body parts.

In other words, an attitude toward sex that's essentially profane, however aggressively the writer might trumpet his church affiliation.

Posted by: Bobs Friend | Jan 1, 2009 12:27:03 PM

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails