As some of you may know, I’m a bit of a Facebook vigilante. If I’m your “friend,” I consider your postings no different than someone standing in the middle of Munn Park waving a sign or shouting through a bullhorn. I feel free to repeat them, and I tend to offer, ahem, perspectives on certain things that get said. If this offends, you should unfriend me. Now. Fair warning.
With that in mind, I just want to amplify a couple of Facebook gems a Polk County political figure produced late this week. Pretty good picture of the Tea Party id, I think. I’m not going to say who the person is other than he or she does not currently hold any office and is not running for anything.
First, in response to the court ruling in California nullifying the anti-gay marriage constitutional amendment:
I presume polygamists will be demanding equal rights next followed by those who want to marry their sisters or mothers followed by those who want to marry minors, etc. etc. etc. It wont be long until a man will want to marry his dog. Everyone wants to do whatever they want without government intervention but civilized people have boundaries. If marriage is expanded beyond a man and a woman where will it end?
And then, in response to theblood-drinking killing that has so titillated the pornographic snuff-film seekers among us:
This illegal immigrant will cost my county and state millions of dollars to prosecute, jail, and execute. According to our illustrious President, our local police couldn’t ask him for his documentation until he does something like this first. I hold Obama, Holder, Pelosi, and Reid responsible for making this type crime acceptable.
Because I’m a bit of a Facebook vigilante, I couldn’t just let them go. On the first, I offered to bet this person and his or her ancestors my entire estate – small though it may be – that at the time of my death bed, the country will not have offered legal sanction to hot man-on-dog action. (Honestly, who even thinks man-on-dog? Ever? What causes a person to conjure that?) I am still waiting for acceptance, just as I’m waiting for Jay Dennis to give a hoot about heterosexual divorce and not just icky gays loving each other and visiting each other in the hospital.
On the second, I just asked this person to repeat the last line. I want to hear, and/or read again that the evil Obama, et. al., are “responsible for making this type crime acceptable.” (By the way, maybe this person knows something I don’t, but where does it say this guy was here illegally? I don’t see it. Although, admittedly, I’m not paying much attention.) Got a response to that one, but it was long and couldn’t actually bring itself to address my question.
All that said, this morning, our public official has expressed some contrition — not that I was asking for it — and talked about “being better.” That deserves credit. I respect anyone who aims for self-assessment. And the irony here is that I have actually voted for this person, who I found to be a pretty responsible public official, in the past. None of that black comedy above crept into the way this person addressed the life of the community he or she represented. For a time, this person did not indulge in malign abstraction. It’s a lot harder to tell people their loving relationships are the equivalent of men banging dogs when they’re actually your flesh and blood constituents, or your friends, or your relatives, even if you think, for some bizarre reason, their loving relationships are the equivalent of men banging dogs. I don’t know why people lose that grasp of basic humanity as they move away from flesh and blood contact into the world of abstract tribalism.
Anyway, this has been yet another example of how abstraction vs. life-as-it’s-lived is the key divide among us — not race, not class, not religion. The real question is this: Are you capable of conceiving that a person you don’t know is just like someone you do?