New Game: Bullshit Bigot Boilerplate

I’ve lived in five different states–Oklahoma, Louisiana, Maryland, New Mexico, and Indiana. I was very proud last year when one of my former home states, Maryland, legalized gay marriage by popular vote.  It made me want to boil a crab and joyfully whack it with a hammer. Maryland is also home to Brendon Ayanbadejo, who continues to show us that football is gay whether you like it or not. (Somehow I suspect that Oklahoma and Louisiana will continue to lag behind Maryland on this issue for quite some time…)

But not everyone in Maryland has come to terms with the fact that their state is finally on the right side of history. Responding to this op-ed from the Baltimore Sun, reader William Engle wants to let everyone know that an op-ed is…an op-ed.

I found Dan Rodricks‘ column on Dr. Ben Carson jaded and biased (“Ben Carson’s biblically based conservatism,” March 31).

His opinion editorial was biased! It lacked that detached objectivity that people normally have when expressing a thought that is clearly labeled as their own personal opinion.

Mr. Rodricks accused Dr. Carson of making homophobic remarks, but it was just his opinion that the remarks were homophobic in nature.

Mr. Rodricks expressed his opinion in his opinion piece! Egads!

Interestingly, Engle has in fact expressed a fact (in the sense that any tautology is a fact), but the “fact” he thinks he’s expressing is one of those conservative “facts” where information which contradicts what one already believes is rejected on the basis that one didn’t already believe it. Hence Carson’s opinion is not homophobic because Engle didn’t already believe it was homophobic. So when Rodricks called it homophobic, clearly that’s “bias” rather than “fact”. If it were fact, then Engle would have already believed it to be homophobic before he read Rodricks’ piece.

Mr. Rodricks should write a column every week denouncing those who oppose gay marriage for their anti-gay bigotry.

I’ll be honest. I’m not exactly sure what to make of this sentence. But I do agree with it. I certainly intend to do this.

I believe that homosexuals should have the same rights as any other citizen.

Hey everybody, let’s play my new favorite game, Bullshit Bigot Boilerplate (BBB)! And now for the “Guess What the Next Sentence Says!” segment.

Today we have a conservative semi-southerner who thinks “bias” means “different from my beliefs”. He’s just splurted out a sentence about thinking everyone should have equal rights.  Which utterly predictable, bullshit right wing non-thought will follow in the next sentence? Will it be…

A.) Homosexuals have the same right to follow the Bible and do all and only what it says?

B.) Homosexuals have the same right as any other citizen to have me tell them they can’t marry?

C.) Homosexuals have the same right to marry an opposite sex person as any other citizen?

D.) Homosexuals have the same rights as any other citizen, except for the following rights which I exclude arbitrarily?

Let’s find out!

However, if they need to legalize their actions they should do so and call it something other than marriage.

DING DING DING DING DING! It was D, everybody! If you picked D, add 5 points to your BBB score card. If you guessed something else, never fear–it’s inevitable that some bigot out there will say A, B, or C at some point.

Centuries of civil and religious ceremony lie behind the relationship between a man and woman who chose to join together, and it is called a marriage.

Centuries of religious ceremony also lie behind one man marrying multiple women and selling his daughters to marry other men as if they were property. Will you be writing a letter to the editor in favor of this any time soon?

And now, we go to the Meaningless Dogwhistle section of BBB. What empty, tired cliche of a term will Engle use to try to make us believe his dumbshit opinion is actually daring and interesting?

Just because that isn’t politically correct shouldn’t make us change the definition to suit those who practice homosexuality.

Oooo, “politically correct.” That’s worth 10 points in BBB.

If you look up marriage in the dictionary it is specific in definition and not arbitrary.

Huh. Okay. Gimme a second to go to Dictionary.com and look that up

mar·riage [mar-ij] Show IPA

noun

1.a.the social institution under which a man and woman establish their decision to live as husband and wife by legal commitments, religious ceremonies, etc. Antonyms: separation.

b.a similar institution involving partners of the same gender: gay marriage. Antonyms: separation.
Yep. Pretty specific.
To include homosexuals under the same centuries old identification denigrates the past and current relationship of millions of persons in a marital union.
“My own rights suck if other people get them too!” 20 points in BBB.
It is not homophobic to have this opinion or belief.
It most certainly is. You honestly believe that someone else merely being able to marry somehow magically harms your marriage. If that’s not an utterly irrational fear of gay people, then I don’t know what is.
Legalizing gay unions and calling the union a marriage will flaunt cultural mores and the sensibility of millions of people.
Fuck their rights! What about MY FEELINGS?
It is as ridiculous as calling one of the partners in such a relationship the wife, if both partners are male; or calling one of the partners in such a relationship the husband if both partners are female.
But asserting that you must prevent people you don’t even know from marrying because the mere possibility of them marrying denigrates your own marriage? Nothing ridiculous about that at all. Unless you’re totally “biased”, by which I mean you’re a separate human being with thoughts that somehow don’t correspond to my own.
(15 points in BBB for naive doxastic solipsism.)
Additionally, Mr. Rodricks chose to discuss other concerns that Dr. Carson has expressed.
How dare he? I’m so offended by the concerns Rodricks expressed about the concerns Carson expressed, that I must write in to the Baltimore Sun to express my concern! There’s a bonus 20 points if he follows this up with a statement that shows a complete and utter lack of self-awareness…
Mr. Rodricks obviously disagree with Dr. Carson on a range of subjects. But when he implies that all those who agree with Dr. Carson are to be disregarded, one wonders who set him up as an authority on anything?
This brilliant insight on the nature of political debate was brought to you by William Engle, Authority on Who’s an Authority on Anything. 20 points!
If anything, Mr. Rodricks’ column reflects the views of a man who has no tolerance for any point of view other than his own.
Because when people write something that says they disagree with someone, that means they have no tolerance, and that’s why I’m writing in to disagree with him! 2x multiplier on the previous lack of self awareness, for a total of 40 points!
(And another 30 points for the tired cliched tu quoque of mistaking disagreement for intolerance, all while intolerantly insisting that other people can’t get married because it causes evil Leprechauns to destroy your own marriage.)
Come to think of it, this game sucks. The bigots make it too easy.
Advertisements

2 responses to “New Game: Bullshit Bigot Boilerplate

  1. Pingback: Gay marriage vs. “science” I pulled from my ass | Riffing Religion

  2. Pingback: More Oklahomans make fools of themselves | Riffing Religion

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s