By now most of you have seen this brilliant letter in response to a much less recent and less famous alleged Dr. Laura rant:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Dr. Laura:
Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding
God's Law. I have learned a great deal from your show, and try to share
that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to
defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that
Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination ... End of
debate.
I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some
other elements of God's Laws and how to follow them.
1. Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves,
both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring
nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not
Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?
2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as
sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would
be a fair price for her?
3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman
while she is in her period of Menstrual uncleanliness - Lev.15: 19-24.
The problem is how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take
offense.
4. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I
know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord - Lev.1:9. The problem is
my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I
smite them?
5. I have a neighbor who insists on working on the
Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I
morally obligated to kill him myself, or should I ask the police to do
it?
6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating
shellfish is an abomination, Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than
homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this? Are there 'degrees'
of abomination?
7. Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar
of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear
reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some
wiggle-room here?
8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed,
including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly
forbidden by Lev. 19:27. How should they die?
9. I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a
dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear
gloves?
10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev.19:19 by
planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by
wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester
blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really
necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town
together to stone them? Lev.24:10-16. Couldn't we just burn them to
death at a private family affair, like we do with people who sleep with
their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)
I know you have studied these things extensively and
thus enjoy considerable expertise in such matters, so I'm confident you
can help.
Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is
eternal and unchanging.
Your adoring fan,
James M. Kauffman, Ed.D. Professor Emeritus, Dept. Of
Curriculum, Instruction, and Special Education University of Virginia
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My former boss sent it to me 'cuz she knew I'd think it was funny even if neither of us cared about its authenticity and didn't plan to pass it on to anyone else. She was right. I got a good laugh out of it and didn't even consider checking it out further.
A lot of times, when I get something like this emailed to me, it's not funny, and it's been forwarded by about a zillion people. I usually run it through Snopes.com before I make anything more out of it, but in this case, since the citation info is right there for the picking, I just fed Dr. Kauffman's info into the old Google machine and out came the following link:
http://drlauraletter.com/
...and what's there is WAY more entertaining than the original letter. Ok, maybe it's not a lot funnier, but it's far more extensive and thus entertaining over a longer period of bathroom visits, sleepless nights, or long flights. it is at least way more interesting that the typical Snopes entry (although I give the Snopesters their due deference!)
I've noticed a trend when it comes to this kind of stuff: the more official the attribution looks, the less likely it is to be legit. (Hey, don't take that the wrong way - I'm certainly not questioning the infallible word of the Lord here, just the attribution of the rest of the letter) Similarly, when you get an email that says "this is real, I checked it out on snopes," it is almost guaranteed to be NOT real, and really busted on Snopes. (apparently the boneheads who believe and pass on some of this unfunny crap and claim to have verified it don't know how to read a Snopes entry)
I don't know about you, but that tickles the living shit out of me! Even when these ridiculous things clog our boxes and include a challenge to "check it out for yourself" AND even when they provide a place to check it out, people still don't bother to apply any thought or effort of their own and pass them along as though they believe and/or agree with them.
To be clear, this particular letter is NOT what I'm talking about. I'm passing it along here because it's funny even if we never learn who originally created it, and even if Dr. Laura never actually said the homophobic garbage it was in response to. And I think I've made it clear that I'm NOT passing it along to lend it legitimacy or in the hope of spreading some important message. And to be extra super duper clear, I'm (again) not questioning the quotes attributed to God...(don't need to in this case!) I only question the authenticity of the letter's author and some of the stuff Dr. Laura allegedly said to cause it. My rant had more to do with other, far more unbelievable but presumably serious emails that get passed around like an STD in a freshman dorm.
What will it ever take for us to think for ourselves?
Anyhoo, just thought I'd share.
Luth
Out
PS Can you tell I have a paper due?
1 comment:
I am so happy that the ugly (inside and out) crazy old gym teacher reaped what she had sowed. She could have gotten her argument across by saying “N word” and not using the word and by not saying “don’t NAACP me” but like Michael Richards AKA “Cosmo Kramer”, she ends up the trash heap of history, a history of her own making. I am so happy that the free market AKA sponsors started to pull their ads (I guess they were exercising their free speech) and she finally realized that she was just another “run of the mill gabby” and her days were numbered. She realized that she was not as smart as she thought she was, finally! The first three times she used the word might not have been in anger but the last eight she was filled with hate, so good riddance.
Palin was the one who got bent over the use of the word “Retard” (she wanted someone fired for using it once), Palin also said that the people have the right to build the Mosque in NY, but out of respect for the 9/11 families they shouldn’t, but I guess this same standard is not applicable to Laura Schlessinger. Do you see the hypocrisy? The problem with Palin is the same when she mistakenly referred to Ronald Reagan Eureka College, being in California and we all know its in Illinois, same thing, she does not fact check anything she is going to say. She is soooo Palin!
http://vodpod.com/watch/3933949-keith-olbermann-mocks-sarah-palins-imbecility-stupidity-video
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-august-24-2010/the-hurt-talker
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nhGk6eF65Fo
Post a Comment