While reading some of the comments left by the readers of a Canadian news source I began to see a pattern that I've noticed before. Some readers welcomed the tolerant position taken by the court while some others criticized it and wondered when people would be allowed to marry their pets. I noticed during this debate and the recent gay marriage debates from last year that the people that oppose such decisions seem to have inferior writing skills compared to those who supported them. Below is an example of an opposition viewpoint:
To all the fools that keep saying that gays should allow to marry and that it does not affect me. You are now a witness to the actual agenda that the gay community has had all along. Let's let them think that this marriage game is tame and it doesn't 'hurt anybody'. You myopic stupid people. This is a slow death to the real family which is the agenda of the so called a 'gay lifestyle that is normal'. This is the hidden agenda of the gay community. To indoctrinate and argue on an economic front that this makes sense. I guess they forget about the vulnerable children that don't have a say in the matter. You better reinforce the psychological network because this society will need it in the future. Being all screwed up due to the 'normal lifestyles.'
God help us all.
Tony
It is muddled and badly written. When I start reading something like this I can't help but eventually hear it spoken in the distinct dialect of a stereotypical caveman on a bad TV show. The tolerant seem to be much better writers than intolerants. I wonder why that is.
God help us all.
Tony
It is muddled and badly written. When I start reading something like this I can't help but eventually hear it spoken in the distinct dialect of a stereotypical caveman on a bad TV show. The tolerant seem to be much better writers than intolerants. I wonder why that is.
No comments:
Post a Comment