Oddly, just since Saturday I’ve received several new comments on a post–“Virginia is for haters”–published nearly a year ago noting Virginia’s historical stance against miscegenation (fighting all the way to the Supreme Court in the 1967 Virginia v. Loving case that ultimately resulted in that court’s striking down of anti-miscegenation laws) and parallels to statements by the state’s attorney general last summer decrying the Supreme Court’s striking down of sodomy laws (which Virginia continues to keep on the books). At that time, I hadn’t even imagined the Commonwealth’s even more extreme action of this spring, taking effect on July 1, in which private partnership arrangements otherwise legal between opposite-sex participants–medical powers of attorney, asset sharing, etc.–will be made illegal when contracted between two people of the same sex.

That post of a year ago, though, seems to have taken on new life with the deluge of comments (ok, so it’s only a half-dozen or so, but given my usual volume here, that’s a deluge). Given the negative, condemnatory tone of several of them, I find myself wondering if this post has been linked from some religious-oriented site.

The comments pretty much speak for themselves, though, and illustrate pretty well how it is that we have legislators in Virginia that pass discriminatory and hate-filled legislation:

Joe, for example, says (and he repeats it in three separate comments), “You smart ass fags make me sick!”, while George supports Virginia by noting “you are commiting grave sin–and I don’t want to be with you in hell– so please stop pushing your perverted lifestyle on god fearing americans… and yes im gonna buy more virginia products than i ever have before…………..” [apparently God also hates proper capitalization, spelling and punctuation].”

And then there’s “J”, who feels compelled to quote a particularly bad translation of 1 Corinthians in which HOMOSEXUALS–along with the covetous, so I sure hope J has never wanted anything someone else owns, or we might end up sharing some fiery pit for eternity–will not inherit the kingdom of God. J goes on to witness to me, exhorting me to accept Jesus as my savior, though I must at least give him/her credit for doing so–capital letters being his/her harshest attack–in a relatively non-aggressive, almost loving–if unasked for and misguided–way.

The strangest comment on Saturday, though, was to a completely different posting of mine from just last month, “Stranger than Fiction,” about my trip to London in which I met another gay man from northern Virginia whose itinerary coincidentally exactly mirrored my own. In response, “Catalyst4Christ” remarks that my “mostly brown” web site (I assume he means the color scheme of khaki and pink) in conjunction with my being a gay man is somehow “Naughty-Naughty.”

Um. What? I’m pretty sure that anyone using multiple animated clip-art graphics and buttons, a blue rivet background, and scrolling black text on a dark green banner isn’t particularly competent to psychoanalyze me based on my design choices.

6 thoughts on “q.e.d.

  1. Giggling re “design choices”… 🙂 Say, did you guys make it to Pride on Sunday? We missed the parade, alas…

  2. So does “dink” mean in Virginia what it meant in my childhood in Ontario? Is he of the blue rivets really informing us of the color/status of his member? Redneck seems more appropriate than reddink.
    I love the bouncy angels on page 2, though.

  3. As another ‘J,’ I feel compelled to apologize for mean J’s religious zeal. It is unbecoming of J, who is normally more pious and less prideful of his own position.
    I am, however, obliged by reality to acknowledge that J’s use of pointing fingers (two of them!) to emphasize the “jail abortionists” tile in combination with the phrase “Medicate the World with Love from Above” (can I get a hit of that?) does put your nambly-pambly split complimentary color scheme to shame. Animation rules. I mean Jesus.

Comments are closed.