Homophobes’ One Weakness – English Lessons

[I’ve been absent for the last few months, and if it weren’t for the fact that I’ve got at least 200 posts under my belt, I’d be worried that I’d achieved my second greatest fear: becoming this guy.

No apologies, though.]

Today – well, a few days ago –  I got linked to this. For those of you who haven’t clicked through, it’s an article describing the opinions of many young people* at a rally to “protect traditional marriage”. Now, the ideas are obviously atrocious; this is plain for all to see. But why  is it that none of them can spell or write? I mean, just look at this:


1 – She uses no punctuation at all. At all! Try reading it aloud. Also, I’m pretty sure “eww” only has two “w”s.

2 – This one uses punctuation, but incorrectly; unless he was planning a long list or writing in shorthand, that comma is pretty terrible. And I shouldn’t have to point out that “God’s Law” needs a possessive apostrophe, as well as an “s” to go with it. Unless it’s assumed that he owns everything.

3 – Frak, the self-satisfaction bleeds through the screen! But yes, in the bibble marriage is between “one man and one women”. Just look at Solomon.**

4 – Marriage. Not “marraige”. If you can’t get the right spelling, how can you be expected to get the number of men/women right? (Also, “I believe” is not like, like.)

5 – Where to start? Crossing out man with “man”; “would make fall in love”; crossing out wom with “man”; no comma at the start; atrocious handwriting – frankly I’m amazed this person can tie their shoes.

6 – It’s. Not “its”. Beyond that, best so far. I think brevity is the way to go here.

7 – Beyond the rogue capital “Y” in “Your mother and father” and lack of a full stop, this is also acceptable.

8 – Wow, did you steal your writing structure from a bad poetry class? Well, beyond the lack of punctuation and the inaccurate statement – “God” made Adam and Eve separately; he didn’t make humans as man and woman – and weird logic that is clear, also fine. Are these getting better?

9 – Oh, OK, no then. Can you make sense of this, internet? “Men and woman make the people they produce I guess I ran say il(?) say that and if you put all the guys on one island they won’t last long”. Why can no-one match up men/women and man/woman? Points for being the first one not to mention GOD, though.

10 – No problems beyond the idiocy. Also the lens flare over his face that makes him look like a Doctor Who villain.

11 – It’s. Not “its”. You got it right on “God’s”; why not here?!

12 – Also “it’s”, not “its”. And your letters seem to hate being on the same line as each other.

13 – SO. MANY. ROGUE. CAPS. Also, with such a short message, you couldn’t manage it in one go? You still fucked up and had to scribble stuff out?

14 – … Nothing wrong here. Actually, at all. Why is this girl even here, when her views don’t even say anything explicit about gay marriage?

15 – OK, this is just scraping the vacuousness barrel. And wrong, but not in terms of her grammar.

16 – Oh god, it finally showed up – “Not Adam and Steve”… And is that… You wrote YOLO in the corner? You fatuous!… Unoriginal!… Just die.

17 – Like 14, this is the sign of a person at the wrong rally. Correctly spelled and parsed, there’s nothing here about gays getting married either. Or even relevant to it. It’s just laughing at gay people for not being able to procreate.

18 – … Huh?

19 – Rogue capital, and I spy an impostrophe in “deserve’s”, which is a bastard word that should never exist.

20 – OK, I’ve made it all the way through talking about grammar, not content, but this one is just too weird to pass up. Are married childless couples doing it wrong? And if it bonds kids to parents, then what is… you know, childhood? And what the hell is all that “’til death do us part” shit, then?

There. I’ve just expended more time and effort on this than the person who wrote the article. Seriously, why can a bunch of anti-gay marriage advocates not spell? They couldn’t make us look better if we’d picked our opponents ourselves. Hell, the only well written ones were the ones that ultimately seemed to defend gay rights most.

I hope I haven’t fallen afoul of Skitt’s Law. That’d be sooo unrainbow.



** Ironically, he was far from a “solo man”. ZING!


Posted on March 30, 2013, in Atheism & Skepticism, Feminism, Politics, Right Wing Nutters in America and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. Leave a comment.

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 )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: