Facebook follies, got to love it.

I have this Mormon co-worker who showed his true colors last night by responding to a pro-gay marriage comment of mine with the following:

"Your consistent insinuations that all opposition to so-called 'gay marriage' is fueled by the hateful and the ignorant demonstrates your lack of understanding of the other side of the issue. The majority of opposition cannot be defined by the motives of a small subset. The majority of the opposition would also oppose any legislation or program promoting extramarital sex, polygamy, abuse, divorce, abortion, violence, racism, drug use, or any other practice deemed as immoral. These practices are destructive to society and individuals."



Comments?

Atleast he didnt completly swing and miss because he mentioned racism, abuse and violence

I asked if he hated racism so much why he wasn't opposed to homophobia.

I also asked if all those should be made illegal, especially extramarital sex and divorce.

EIther way, hes still a crazy twit whos views should have no bearing on society

NineOneFour wrote:Facebook follies, got to love it.

I have this Mormon co-worker who showed his true colors last night by responding to a pro-gay marriage comment of mine with the following:

"Your consistent insinuations that all opposition to so-called 'gay marriage' is fueled by the hateful and the ignorant demonstrates your lack of understanding of the other side of the issue. The majority of opposition cannot be defined by the motives of a small subset. The majority of the opposition would also oppose any legislation or program promoting extramarital sex, polygamy, abuse, divorce, abortion, violence, racism, drug use, or any other practice deemed as immoral. These practices are destructive to society and individuals."



Comments?

His implied equation reveals his hateful ignorance.

There's a lot of anger there for sure but I'm flummoxed as to exactly what's being said. Perhaps it's some weird Mormon dialect. Usually I've no problem with the slightly different way North Americans write English.

What does "The majority of opposition cannot be defined by the motives of a small subset." mean?

The first sentence seems to have a problem with it's grammar too. Although I must confess it might not since the authors use of the word "defined" appears to indicate a definition I'm unfamiliar with.

He opposes polygamy? Are you sure that he's a Mormon?

Yes, modern Mormons oppose polygamy, or mainstream ones do.

It was a joke, but it still seems ironic.

Well, it is....

NineOneFour wrote:Yes, modern Mormons oppose polygamy, or mainstream ones do.

Not in the afterlife they don't.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celestial_ ... _Mormonism

He's probably not hateful, as in actively despises gays people, but his ignorance his clearly apparent. Especially if he thinks ALL those things have a negative impact on society.

"Being lectured on what constitutes a marriage by a Mormon is a bit like being scolded for loitering by a crack whore" - Betty Bowers, America's Best Christian

mark1961 wrote::dunno:

There's a lot of anger there for sure but I'm flummoxed as to exactly what's being said. Perhaps it's some weird Mormon dialect. Usually I've no problem with the slightly different way North Americans write English.

What does "The majority of opposition cannot be defined by the motives of a small subset." mean?

Judging by the rest of the comment, I think it means, "The majority of us who oppose gay marriage are not opposing it for the same reasons as the vocal, homophobic few".

Ah! Ok. With you now. Although it's not clear who is actually the "small subset". I think the Mormons may be calling themselves that. I'd say the guy is mis-quoting a phrase he's heard but doesn't quite understand himself. Although it's more likely (I'd say) he's copied and pasted the whole thing from somewheres. That would explain the fractured grammar of the first sentence. He missed a bit when he was highlighting. Easily done when you're dragging a mouse.

I'd also say it's an attempt at obfuscation of the notion that they aren't bigots having bigoted opinions because their god tells them they aren't.

Logically speaking that makes non-Mormons who oppose Gay marriage bigots but they aren't for believing the same thing. Gotta love that American grammar!

Just as much as our ways of doing the same thing.

Jumbo wrote:Wouldn't legalising gay marriage reduce the incidence of extra marital sex (between gay people)?

Goddamnit, I wish I'd thought of that one!

His latest reply"

"The only thing more frustrating than pressing ENTER and posting instead of getting the expected line return is the insinuations that attempting to redo an incomplete post has anything to do with anything else. I thought you were the tolerant people? Apparently, since I view homosexuality as immoral, I am either a hatemonger myself or influenced by hate mongers. (But calling someone stupid for taking a moral stance isn't hatemongering?) Once you've characterized your opposition as brainless hate mongers, you've moved past rational debate. You prove that rather than discuss the merits of your case you would rather marginalize your opposition. Is that democracy? Are my morals too icky for you? Since you're more interested in name calling and playing 'gotcha' than having the patience for a rational conversation, I'll leave you to your group think activity with the following: I know that homosexuality is immoral and destructive to persons and societies. I have no problem interacting personally or professionally with homosexuals. I am more than willing to do what I can to help anyone get past any moral failing because God knows I need help sometimes. I will not support legislation that seeks to rationalize immorality."

What a patronizing, hypocritical douchebag. Did you ask him how he "knows" homosexuality is immoral and destructive, or why he thinks that the bedroom behaviours and personal lifestyle choices of others are any business of his or the government?

King David wrote:What a patronizing, hypocritical douchebag. Did you ask him how he "knows" homosexuality is immoral and destructive, or why he thinks that the bedroom behaviours and personal lifestyle choices of others are any business of his or the government?

No, I asked him why he thought it was okay to use government to force his religious views on everyone else.

But, if you're on facebook, you can ask him that.

PM me.