Point of Order

I am writing this here because I don't want this comment to get drowned by the myriad of other comments that have been filling up Rachelle's blog. She said so herself, she was ready to take the consequences of sharing her less-than-popular views to the world. Hey, I totally dig that. Goodness knows I've been the bearer of crappy views myself.

I just want to pause and reflect, though, on how this is shaping up to be. There have been some very personal and rude attacks on her looks, her family, and goodness knows what else. Malu Fernandez anyone?

I suppose I can't totally fault the others for lashing out in pure infantile anger (those are the fantastic kinds in which to indulge, I might add...) I do so in the confines of my own personal space. Close friends and family know that I have turned anger-lashing into a veritable art form. (Seriously. Adjectives are God's gift to angry people.) But I always force myself to tread more carefully when it comes to cyberspace. I do this not because I entertain narcissistic notions that the world waits with bated breath for every entry I write here, but because I feel as if I have a responsibility towards the lilliputian portion of the internet audience who do come to my little space.

With that said, Rachelle ought to have been more responsible with her words. What she posed as scientific research was just one fallacious statement after another, and easily disprovable. For example: Not all homosexuals are sodomites. In fact, a good portion of heterosexuals practice sodomy. Not all serial killers are homosexuals. Hitler was straight as straight can be. (I think. We weren't close. But Hollywood has not told me otherwise...)

On one level, her entry annoys me because it wasn't intelligent enough to pose itself as a strong argument against homosexuality. On another, deeper, more personal, and more existential level, her entry shook me to the core, because she condemned some of the people I love the most to eternal damnation. I don't know any murderers personally, but I have trouble flat-out condemning them to hell. I'd like child pornographers to go there, but I know very well that it's not up to me. I've already said my piece about that though, and I would hate to be redundant (over and over, again and again, ad infinitum, so on and so forth...)

She is a person whose views are entirely different from mine, and her theology is not one that I share. She and I will never ever be friends (everrrrr). The only place I can imagine being with her is on the set of Jerry Springer (wait, the film in the morning, right? Make that in one of those late-night debate shows.)

Here it comes, though. The ubiquitous "but"...

She is but one person. Her views are her own. By insulting her looks, her family, her lifestyle, we become just like her. There is a certain justice in unleashing the same kind of vitriol-fueled insults on her, but really, by doing so, have we not actually contributed to her unfounded arguments against (and here comes the shudder whenever I hear the term...) "homos" (ick-ick-ick, shudder-shudder.) Yes, what she said was hurtful. Yes, you were only acting out of anger. I get that! I was hurt and angry, too. But go rant in front of your friends and family. Don't do it on cyberspace. This goes beyond Rachelle. This is symptomatic of something so much bigger. This is sooooo not about her. Our comments are helping shape our future! Do you really want to go down in history as the one who talked smack to the person who didn't know any better anyway? You do all realize that you're becoming just as bad as she is, right?

The mob mentality is a scary-scary-scary thing to watch as it unfolds.

Take the higher road. Stop bashing Rachelle. Disagree with her, but stop attacking her below the belt. That's just mean.

Now if you excuse me, this soap box is pretty high and I'm only 5 feet tall. I'd like to get off now. Don't anybody trip on that on your way out.