Help me respond to this "religious" man

[DU9598]

Here is an editorial in my local newspaper. I want to send a "fun" response back doubting that it will ever be published by our local conservative rag. Anyway, here is what this man writes:

I have a couple of friends who live across town who make it a practice of driving down the wrong side of the street. I told them it was an unwise thing to do and probably dangerous. They said, "What I do in the privacy of my own car is none of your business. Don't start pushing your morality off on us." When the cops pull them over, they say, "Why are you treating us like that? That is discriminatory! We want equality with everybody else." When the cop told them that that is irresponsible behavior, they replied, "We can't help it. We drive on the left side of the street because it has something to do with our genes. We were born that way. God created us that way. You are just going to have to accommodate us." As they travel down the street and a sign is posted "One Way" or "Keep to the Right," they say it is offensive to them and become very indignant and threaten to sue the city. If they come right at you on the wrong side of the street and you holler out, "Get over into the right lane," they classify that as hate speech and claim we are trying to incite a riot against them. Now they want the City Council to put them in a special category with special rights. Moreover, they would like the state to issue them special license so they can drive down the wrong side of the street. -- Rev William Tucker


Can anyone give me some ideas of what to include in a reply? I would like to start making an argument that because freedom to choose to practice a religion is a mere constitutional right - as gay marriage obviously is if we need an amendment to stop it - then a mere amendment could someday be passed to stop the practice of evangalism or catholicism, etc. Any other help would be appreciated. Thanks!

[Gman]

1. You cannot win an argument with an idiot

and you will only get frustrated in the process. I'd let it go. People like you that read it will react as you did. YOu're not going to change anyone else's mind that thinks like this guy.

[BOSSHOG]

2. What an ignorant dumbass conservative spokesman

Yo Rev, the state is issuing licenses for people to drive on your side of the street. Its okay for the state to sanction you and your ways right dumbass. What a fucking idiot you are. Married gays will not cause you to have a carwreck dumbass. Actually you should appreciate the gay marriage issue. It gives you another reason to exercise your enlarged hate gene.

I apologize for the lack of "humor." The Rev and his kind piss me off as they go merrily on their way enjoying "their" constitutional freedoms.

[Gringo]

3. Dumb abalogy.

Driving on the wrong side of the street is a clear and present danger to everyone. Gays getting married doesn't adversely affect anyone, except that tthey just "don't like it".

I don't like multiple body piercings or tongue-splitting, (in fact I find it incredibly repulsive) but that doesn't mean it should be against the law. (Insurance shouldn't cover infected tongue-splits, though!)

[truhavoc]

4. broken logic?

The writer seems to not even have the slightest clue of how to create a concrete argument, or even a simple understanding of the law or the laws of logic.

1.) Driving in your car is a public act, what you do with that car concerns EVERYONE.

2.) Laws governing driving on one side of the road are for a purpose, the general safety of all drivers. Without it the roads would be pure chaos.

3.) Obviously the writer comes in with a preconcieved notion of homosexuality that shapes his opinion in the hypothetical, he first would need to justify that notion before his argument can even get off the ground.

4.) Damn I hate people like this!

[HFishbine]

18. Good points

Gays are simply asking that they be allowed on the road.

[Th1onein]

21. You are right: the premise is faulty

The "religious" man is comparing apples to oranges. Driving on the wrong side of the street is not analogous to marrying a same sex partner. The first is an act which infringes on the rights of others, to safety; the latter is an act that is private and infringes on no one else's rights to anything.

[mac2]

5. Driving laws are there to protect us all.

What would happen if everyone decided to do as they please on the highway? It has nothing to do with God. Let Ceasar's laws be his and God's his....etc.

Is this post a joke?

[robertarctor]

6. Let's play a game called ...

Name That Logical Fallacy!

Here's a site that will help you deconstruct this guy's bullshit premise:
http://www.infidels.org/news/atheism/logic.html

[sadiesworld]

7. I would use the opportunity to write a letter about:

job loss, SS cuts, deficits, overextended military, etc. Speak to him about issues HE is more likely to care about.

[displacedtexan]

8. The good reverend must have skipped the shortest verse in the Bible:

Jesus wept.

Shame on Reverend Tucker! Comparing the systematic oppression of God's children to traffic rules is hateful.

[nedlogg]

9. This is too stupid to deserve an honest reply!

Just call the author an asshole and be done with it.

[Don Claybrook]

10. I don't know about a humorous response, but...

It's clear that this LTTE (which smacks of something that's been circulating on the Internet for a long time) attempts to take equality issues and twist them such that they seem to present a danger to the community.

I personally don't know of any groups that want special rights under the law, just equal rights under the law. Of course, you're stuck with this idiot speaking in parables instead of concrete examples--it would be nice to corner him into giving you real-world examples. Because if he mentions gay marriage, you could point out that the GLBT community doesn't want special rights, they just want to be treated equally for a change. If he's referring to affirmative action, you could point out that minorities just want an equal playing field, not any special priviliges. And so on and so on.

The reverend is hiding behind non-specific figurative language that implies that there are groups which are a nuisance or a menace to society. If you want to go allegorical on him, I'm sure you could exploit the "reverend" angle and point out that his tearing down of the wall between church and state is destructive behavior. You could definitely throw in a WWJD/Jesus was a liberal unlike the hateful reverend sort of thing. I mean, why in the hell is the man of god defending hate speech? Call him out. Good luck.

[kiahzero]

11. Throw his words in his face.

I have a couple of friends who live across town who make it a practice of driving down the wrong side of the street. I told them it was an unwise thing to do and probably dangerous. They said, "My religion compels me to drive as I do. Would you have me deny my faith?" When the cops pull them over, they say, "Why are you treating us like that? That is discriminatory! We want equality with everybody else." When the cop told them that that is irresponsible behavior, they replied, "God told me I have to drive down this side of the street. Why do you keep trying to repress me?" As they travel down the street and a sign is posted "One Way" or "Keep to the Right," they say it is offensive to them and become very indignant and threaten to sue the city. If they come right at you on the wrong side of the street and you holler out, "Get over into the right lane," they classify that as hate speech and claim we are trying to incite a riot against them. Unfortunately, the City Council has already given them special rights. Now, they want to force everyone else off the road so that they can drive as they please.

[yellowcanine]

19. excellent comeback. so simple yet so effective.

But it probably wouldn't make any difference. I think sometimes these things are best responded to with no response. Just ignore it and it will be as it is when someone says something really inappropriate and there is a deafening silence afterward. The person who popped off gets embarrassed and shuts up for a while.

[Design8edGrouch]

22. This is the best reply, I would only add

God is never honored by lies and false analogies. (Which in a sense is also a lie.) Warped logic must always be exposed as quickly as possible. But religious people need to be informed that God calls His people to extremely high standards of truth, integrity and a loving attitude that must include justice. Alas and Alack, we believers fail in these far too often.

[Bronco69]

12. First of all

who said it was the "wrong" side of the street. Granted, it's a "different" side of the street, but it's paved and you are able to drive down it, so it isn't necessarily wrong. Secondly, perhaps the reason they are going down that particular side of the street is because when they try to go down the reverend's side of the street he keeps tailgating! :-)

[LatteLib]

13. I think it is a ridiculous analogy

First off, driving down a one-way street could cause an accident and injury to others. Same sex marriage isn't going to hurt other people. This fellow is obviously predjudiced against gay people and if being gay wasn't genetic, I would wish he would wake up gay and be that way for a few years so he could get a good idea of what it must be like to be the subject of such intense prejudice, judgement, and hatred from so many other people.
I doubt my response is helpful because it seems that this fellow has his mind made up, closed it, locked it up and threw away the key. It is just the way I see his argument and the ludicrous analogy he chose to support it.
Peace

[cardlaw]

14. Someone who uses

the word "holler" in a formal LTTE is probably not someone who fully thinks things through before spouting off. I doubt there's any use in responding.

[ContraBass Black]

15. Simple

All you need to do is tell him that homosexuality and stupidity are two very different issues, and that no one is going to ram him head on by being gay.

[GordonOKC]

16. Here's a site that might be a funny reply.

Take as look at "Kissing Hank's A**" Could change a** to bottom, foot, or behind to help ensure he reads it.
http://www.jhuger.com/kisshank.mv

[HFishbine]

17. At least one point you should include

is that driving on the wrong side of the road has consequences that result in injury to other people. Gay people who marry injur no one.

[Bertha Venation]

20. I'm sorry, but I can't help you.

No newspaper I know of would print my response:

"Cute, but pal, you are a serious dumbass."

:shrug:

[Skittles]

23. WHAT TOWN IS HE IN?

I NEED TO GO THERE AND KICK HIS ASS FOR BEING SUCH A F***ING NINNY.

[Qutzupalotl]

24. Tell him this story.

I have a friend across town who makes it a practice to sit at stop signs. Cops would come up to him and say, "What's the problem? Car trouble?" He'd say, "No. I'm obeying the sign. It says 'Stop,' so I'm stopping." The cop would say, "But you're holding up the progress of the people behind you." My friend would be insistent, and say, "Well, if they want to break the law, that's their problem." The cop would get mad and say, "Look. You're supposed to continue on after you come to a full stop." He'd reply, "Well, then, they should change the sign to say 'Go' if that's what they want you to do." It seems some people mistake obedience for morality!

[Nadienne]

25. Hey!!

I got the same editorial in my local paper (Sioux City Journal)...

Anybody else?!?

(edit to add link to the sioux city journal's find,

http://www.siouxcityjournal.com/?search=go&o=0&l=20&s=recent&r=&q=tucker

the paper is starting to bill for viewing from the archives...)

[Avalon Sparks]

26. When I read crap like that...

I'm reminded that one of the most annoying things about Conservatives is their piss poor analogies that lack any sense of logic.

It's usually due to there not being any type of logical explanation for the bullshit they attempt to present an analogy for in the first place.

God, I don't even find their bad analogies funny anymore, it justs makes me want to slap them on the back of the head with the hopes of knocking some sense into them.

Sorry I don't have any suggestions other than that.

[bobbyrlib]

29. that is so true

It is a good thing (for conservatives) that the vast majority of Americans are not educated on how to think logically. I have never seen a logical argument in support of a conservative position in my life. I mean NEVER.

[newyawker99]

33. Hi bobbyrlib!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[bobbyrlib]

27. That's Easy

I'm presuming this is in response to the Gay marriage debate. Driving down the wrong side of the street endangers others. Gays don't endanger others. Being in your car you are not in private. Being in your home you are. Marrying a person of the same gender does not cause a risk to anyone else's life (in fact is not dangerous at all). Driving down the wrong side of the street endangers others. It does not discriminate against people who put others in jeopardy by insisting that they follow traffic laws, that if not followed endangers others. It is discrimination against Gays to prevent them from marrying because two men or two women getting married does not endanger others. Discrimination endangers others.

As it stands now it is heterosexuals who want special rights. They want the right to marry and do not want it for homosexuals. Marriage is a special right for heterosexuals. Eliminate special rights: vote for Gay marriage.

[bobbyrlib]

28. That's Easy

sorry this was a double post...

[emetzl]

30. widening our roads

I would answer to him:

when you say "they would like the state to issue them special license so they can drive down the wrong side of the street." you actually mean they would like the state to issue a two-way street sign... which seems like a great idea, no matter which direction one is driving!

[swinney]

31. Paul Waldman book --"Fraud"

He covers many things such as Religiousnuts.

"Fraud" is a great great great book. Buy it.

www.liberalslikechrist.org
a great forum by a Minister.

[struggle4progress]

32. I'd tell him ...

"If G*d had meant for us to drive, we would all have been born with wheels. Show me where in the Bible it says anything about cars being OK."