Absolutely Nonsensical LTEs -- Can someone help me understand?

[Heddi]

www.charleston.net

Appeared in today's paper:

Simple matter

With the recent announcement of Sen. John Edwards as the running mate to Sen. John Kerry, there seem to be a lot of folks torn between whom to support in the November election.

I hope this little story will help.

Suppose you are walking down the street and on the other side you see an elderly lady with a young child being teased and provoked by two teenagers. If you cross the street to help the lady and child, you will vote for the president.

If you continue walking and say, "That's not my concern, they are not on my side of the street, I shouldn't get involved," you will support Sen. Kerry.

I know there are those who will say this is too simple, the matter is more complicated. It really is not.

BILL MOORE

7058 Old Jacksonboro Road

Ravenel
---

I mean, I just don't get this at all. What the eff is this guy trying to get at?

Here's another one:

The June 14 letter concerning the homosexual marriage issue stated, "Those who don't want fairness for our community are ... closed-minded."

Ask most any doctor about the numerous complications, infections and diseases inflicted by this lifestyle. Invoking the word "right" implies a moral standard and is in opposition to the word "wrong."

Therefore, I ask the question as to whose moral standard is to be used? Today's "as long as it doesn't hurt anyone" (never defined) or the standards that have built this country? And, pray tell, what behavior is to be labeled "wrong"?

It is my opinion that the pro- homosexuals do not want to be merely treated fairly in the work place, as any human being deserves, but they want their sexual practice to be declared moral or "right." The problem is that they will have to ban that horrid, homophobic, narrow-minded, age-old book that sits on many a bedside table and from which children are taught right from wrong on Sunday mornings. The book is also the moral basis of Western civilization and has provided the foundation for the standard of living we now enjoy.

Another big, big problem is that there actually may be a transcendent God who stands ready to judge a nation which departs from his standards.

The silly argument that someone is trying to impose religion is answered by the observation that the news is lacking in testimonies of persons who have been coerced by the state into a religion. All governments have laws based on moral standards. America's past implementation of biblical standards have stood us well. Why the rush to abandon them now?

STAN TARNECKY

1570 Terns Nest Road

---
Huh?

[lolly]

1. My Explanation?

It's a Fatally Flawed Analogy Contest time at your local newspaper!

[Heddi]

3. well I should say that it's my Ex-local newspaper

I live exactly 2,937 miles to the west of that city now but enjoy reading the paper to see just how much column space they can waste on non-news.

[JustFiveMoreMinutes]

2. KISSing, pure & simpleton

Keeping It Simple Stupid is the mantra of these and those like them.

Critical thinking? Never, that's just an elitist expression to make us feel like morans!

[AspenRose]

6. "Critical thinking" is for fancy-pants elitists (tm)!

Heh.

[baldguy]

4. The first one...

There's a teenager sitting on his front porch. Ten years ago he was a bully, picking on other kids in the neighborhood. If you still think he's a punk, and go up to him and beat him up - then you will support the President*.

If you think that for an adult to do such a thing would be wrong, immoral and stupid - then you will support Sen. Kerry.

The second one...
Saying that God founded this country, and then saying that nobody is imposing their religion on others - sort of diminishes the argument.

[AspenRose]

5. "Pro-Homosexuals?"

I'm married and straight. I just happen to believe in equal rights for EVERYONE.

Because when someone is denied equal rights, EVERYONE's rights are in jeopardy.

I guess that makes me "pro-homosexual" :eyes: because I subscribe to "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness."

[Ivan Zero]

7. Rightist analogies are from Neptune

I think these guys would much prefer writing "LIBERALS ARE PUSSIES" and "GAYS ARE EVIL" in big letters, but that wouldn't be very clever of them, so it's analogy time! Whee!

Ol' Bill is clearly referring to Iraq in his letter, thus the whole "we'd better not get involved" thing. He's apparently one of the rare righties who realizes that chanting "RAPE ROOMS RAPE ROOMS" over and over has lost it's zing, so voila! the oppressed Iraqis become a kindly granny walking the streets of Charleston.

As for my man Stan, he's just dressing up the "gays want to shred the bible and force you to enjoy watching them have sex" thing in a more erudite wrapper, and throwing in the obligatory warning that supporting gay rights will piss God off.

I just love letters like this.

[Eric J in MN]

8. the first letter is trying to say the purpose of the Iraq War was..

humanitarian.

It's an amazing coincidence that Iraq has oil and Halliburton is making billions and that Cheney still own stock options in Halliburton.