“If your parents were homosexuals, you wouldn’t exist!”

I saw this argument used today in response to a letter to the editor written by a woman supporting New Hampshire House Bill 436, which, if passed by the state senate, would render banning same-sex marriage unconstitutional.
I am certain that the triumphant troglodyte who issued that comment–and followed up with the claim that homosexuality was “un-natural”–thinks he’s made a logically airtight statement and not taken a dump on his keyboard. His statement is inane because if someone’s parents had been strictly homosexual, they wouldn’t be her parents. That’s like saying that if my parents has been Bill and Hillary Clinton, then I wouldn’t exist because they never had a son named Kevin.
I told the guy that extreme stupidity was a survival disadvantage (not altogether true, but no matter) and was therefore just as unnatural, and yet there he was, writing dumb comments on the Internet. With the vote on HB 436 coming up, the trogs have really come out of the woodwork to make noise, and it’s yet more evidence I don’t need of how moronic the citizenry as a whole can be. It’s no wonder so many folks have weight and substance-abuse problems and have affairs; eating, screwing, and pickling our brains is about all most of us can figure out how to do.

Advertisements
  1. #1 by Russell on April 16, 2009 - 8:56 pm

    Hmmmm. If my biological father and mother hadn’t committed adultery and fornication, respectively, I wouldn’t be here. Ergo, everyone should be doing that!
    ;-)

  2. #2 by Sigmund on April 17, 2009 - 12:37 am

    Extreme stupidity is not a survival disadvantage when society as a whole deems it good and proper that all individuals, even the extremely stupid, are protected and cared for by the not so stupid. In this situation extreme stupidity actually becomes advantageous since they inevitably stupidly do what they stupidly do best – producing stupid numbers of stupid babies.
    Its all just too stupid.

  3. #3 by Karen on April 17, 2009 - 1:44 am

    Your passing potshot at those of us with weight control and/or other issues you allude to, and your equating of these with stupidity, angers me almost beyond responding. I can only wish that you acquire some empathy the hard way — by experiencing personally some of the troubles that you ascribe to the stupid.

  4. #4 by Kevin Beck on April 17, 2009 - 2:05 am

    Karen, note the use of the word “us” in the offending passage. I’ve been a sot off and on for my entire adult life. And although this is understandable, you read that part in a way I did not intend. I was not equating overeating, addiction, or wanderlust with stupidity, but joking that some people are so dumb that the only thing they can do is engage in purely instinct-driven behaviors. That was not meant to imply that anyone who happens to do these things to harmful excess may not be brilliant in other ways. Put more simply, avid eating, drinking, and so on is necessary to establish stupidity but not sufficent.
    Imagine that I had said, “most people are so unmotivated and uncreative that all they can manage are vacations to Disney World and Word-Search puzzles.” This would not be equating indulging in these things with a dull mind and a slack spirit.
    I can’t believe I’m dissecting my own offhanded words using informal logic, but I’m sorry I offended you, and I can see why I did.

  5. #5 by catgirl on April 17, 2009 - 3:13 pm

    If my parents had been taught abstinence-only education and actually followed it, I wouldn’t exist!
    If Bristol and Levi had practiced abstinence-only, that baby wouldn’t exist. We need stop encouraging abstinence. Won’t someone please think of the children (that will never be conceived)? On the plus side, abstinence-only education actually increases teen pregnancy, so maybe that was their plan all along.

%d bloggers like this: