If you guys want an example of the kind of person I'm making fun of, check out "Save the Males" in the Gay and Lesbian section, which is a perfect example of the "slippery slope"argument that some people actually use to try to stunt gay marriage.
-Jim
P.S. To lighten the mood!, I've posted a new story in the fiction section about the shortcomings of college roommates.
Posted by Military_Wife on January 26, 2006 at 5:10 PM (permalink)
Posted by jollyjeff on January 26, 2006 at 5:07 PM (permalink)
Posted by RckyMtnActivist on January 26, 2006 at 1:00 PM (permalink)
Well you're new to Blogit and I see you are from Long Island, me too. I was quite offended by your post and I usually do not comment on posts I disagree with, don't need an arguement. However I couldn't resist commenting on your post. Are you aware how hateful you seem to be? Are you truly like this? Do you have anger issues? Why do you hate gays and it also appears you hate blacks, by your comment, why? You my friend are creating some "Bad" karma in this lifetime. Also, gay people do not "choose" to be gay, it's genetic. Learn your facts. Why would anyone in their right mind "choose" to be gay and have to deal with hateful people like you. If you don't change your ways I can bet in your next life you will be reaping what you have sown. I guess at this point I'd say welcome to Blogit....but I don't welcome your horrific and hurtful words. And no, I'm not gay, but I don't judge . 
---
Thankfully, Chris explained everything that needed to be explained!......
Apparently you folks did not actually read the entire post. It's pretty clear from the final paragraph that M.L. is poking fun, not at gay people, but at the mentality a lot of people still have towards them.
He's pointing out the underlying hypocrisy of an America that says one thing while thinking another, or does one thing while saying another.
America is, in its purest ideal form, a free country. Not free as long as you follow an unwritten moral code pressed on you by society, but free for real.
He can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe it's the violation of that basic principle that M.L. was pointing out.
I believe there's a lot to be said for the use of simple common sense. For instance, it is not fact that being gay is genetic. It has not been proven. It is mere speculation based on when people "learn" that they are gay, and other similar factors.
I suspect that being gay is not nearly as simple as a gene being swapped somewhere. Probably, chemical imbalances combined with upbringing, childhood abuse, neglect, or trauma of a certain form, and other factors that relate to personality and responses to environment and society.
People have tried to push the genetic thing because they want "gayness" to be "natural". The rather obvious fact is that men were meant to mate with women to procreate, and not with each other. This says that on a basic, biological level, gayness is not "natural". Evolutionarily speaking, gayness--if genetic--would be a mutation. Yet supposedly species mutate towards survival and procreation, not away from it. So does that mean that gay people are "mutants"? Or are they "handicapped"? Are they "freaks"?
Of course not. Gay people are simply people. People who responded to their upbringing and surroundings in a certain way. So, why don't we all just get past the whole "they're special" or "they're unfortunate". Because when you say those things to yourself in your head, what you are really doing is pitying them. Do gay people want your pity? Some might, but that's just on an individual basis. My guess is that the majority of them want the world quit making such a big damn deal out of it and simply accept that they exist and are just as much people as you or I. I suspect that they have enough life problems of their own without everyone going around treating them with kid gloves, or bombastically insulting them for no reason.
That's all I have to say.
Posted by ChristopherSaint on January 26, 2006 at 7:17 PM (permalink)
------
"Reading Comprehension 101" is the perfect title for that comment, because obviously Chris was the only person to actually have read the essay. In said class, you learn that sometimes, if you want to argue FOR something, you take the opposite stance------dare to be interesting, bloggers. Chris is exactly right----I'm not making fun of homosexuals---I'm making fun homophobes. I'm really glad to have posted this essay, because it proves to me that this website is barren when it comes to talent, or even intelligence. This is your basic model for a "reductio ad absurdum" essay. I'll paste the definition here, which I found in about two seconds on wikipedia...
Reductio ad absurdum (Latin for "reduction to the absurd", traceable back to the Greek ἡ εις άτοπον απαγωγη (hi eis átopon apagogi), "reduction to the impossible", often used by Aristotle), also known as an apagogical argument or reductio ad impossibile, is a type of logical argument where we assume a claim for the sake of argument, arrive at an absurd result, and then conclude the original assumption must have been wrong, since it gave us this absurd result. This is also known as proof by contradiction. It makes use of the law of non-contradiction — a statement cannot be both true and false. In some cases it may also make use of the law of excluded middle — a statement which cannot be false, must then be true.
Reading Comp. 101. You guys claim to be writers? In all seriousness, would anyone actually use "kkk.bz," the official website of the Ku Klux Klan, as a reference? The argument is full of contradictions----"proof by contradiction."
A writer should be on an edge; strive to transcend the obvious!
Thank you, Chris, for being a reader. If not for you (and the 12 bucks I already paid), I'd have headed for the hills by now.
-Jim
Posted a new essay about gay marriage in the Humor section. Will repost "The Future, Lola," at a later date. I know nobody will have the patience to read all of it.
-Jim
Am beginning to realize that this website is more about money or, specifically, BLOG-money. Am beginning to realize that users give people comments without reading their work, just so they get a quick click. I will play the game for a month, but will probably quit. Chris, you're right about the nature of posts that receive high click-volume----but I'm really wondering if anyone's actually reading anything. Anyway, I'm putting up a flag in the fiction section, a somewhat long story called "The Future, Lola," a Celinian reference.
But fiction is tough. I'm no Don DeLillo.
-Jim
Have cut down my massive BLOG. Have posted a short essay about when a young buck realizes hitting a homerun on the baseball field isn't quite as much fun as hitting a figgerative one. Will continue to alternate between Humor and Fiction.
-Jim 1:33 A.M., still hooked on the Australian Open.
Have decided that "Humor" is better suited for my work. Sorry about the mix-up!
-Jim
Just wanted to let any readers know that since my blog consists of both personal essay and fiction, I plan on bouncing back and forth between Fiction and Non---also, I've changed my little sub-heading from "Too Lost to Call it Lost" to "Miss Lonelyhearts' New Work!" ---- as I am gradually gaining a better understanding of this site.
Thanks to all who have read my work so far---I will be on in the middle of the night to do some reading, post reply comments, and also to cut the weight of my massive BLOG.
-Jim
P.S. How about a specific category for the personal essay? Eh?