Liberalism and the spread of disease

SHARE

Someone calling himself “BOB” sent this terse e-mail:


Liberalism is pretty much the same as AIDS.

I had no idea which article of mine, if any, he was responding to, but I was intrigued by his statement. So I sent this reply:

Do you mean liberalism is transmitted through the exchange of bodily fluids? Do you mean liberalism is often considered a homosexual disease, though in the U.S. it is increasing at an alarming rate among heterosexual black women? Do you mean liberalism is rampant in Africa? I’m sorry, you’ll have to explain what you mean before I can possibly begin to take you seriously.

He replied, his e-mail address this time betraying his real name (Tom A.):

Well all homosexuals are liberals and their dangerous lifestyle puts them at great risk for AIDS! Pretty much if you are sick in the head to some degree and you can’t see things for how they really are you are a liberal.

Ah! Now we had something we could work with. I replied:

Ah. Obviously I have said something that leads you to believe I am a liberal. Your comparison is still not apt, though.

First of all, not ALL homosexuals are liberals, though it’s probably true that most are.

Second of all, as long as we’re talking about “not seeing things for how they really are,” I’m sure you know it’s a gross exaggeration to say that a gay person’s “dangerous lifestyle” puts them at great risk for AIDS. ANY person who has unprotected sex with a lot of partners puts himself or herself at great risk for AIDS. Not all gays lead dangerous lifestyles, though. For that matter, lesbians are at practically zero risk for AIDS, regardless of how many other women they fool around with.

Third, I’m still not making the connection between liberalism and AIDS. Are you saying that all gays are liberals and all gays also have AIDS? Surely not, for that’s ludicrous.

Are you saying that liberalism, like AIDS, spreads quickly when people do not understand the facts? That makes a little more sense, at least from a rhetorical standpoint. But then there’s you, apparently a conservative, suggesting that all gays are liberals and that all gays are also at risk for AIDS — thus making you guilty of the same thing you accuse liberals of (i.e., not seeing things for how they really are).

I suspect liberals feel the same way about conservatives: If they knew more facts, they’d become liberals. It goes both ways, see? Everyone thinks the other side is wrong.

I’m curious, though, what I said that made you think I was a liberal. Or was there nothing, and you just wanted to point out the liberalism/AIDS thing to me?

He came back with this:

Oh I was just poking around on the web and somehow came across and article you wrote on the Michael Moore deal at a Utah College. [He is probably referring to my review of “This Divided State,” a documentary about the incident.] Honestly I do not disagree with you that much, and from your writting you seem to be well educated and fair. Obviously I believe liberalism to be disgusting and wrong. I know my e-mail about all homosexuals are liberals is inncorrect but just bairly. I do agree with Michael Savage and his medical views of liberals. Anyways Sir I wish you a good day and thank you for your reply.

P.S. Are you a liberal?

For those fortunate enough to be unaware of Michael Savage, he is an uber-right-wing radio personality who believes (or at least pretends to believe) that liberalism is a mental defect. He gained notoriety in 2003 when MSNBC fired him for telling a gay prank caller that he “should only get AIDS and die.” (What if the guy DID get AIDS and die? Could his family sue Michael Savage for wishing it on him? I’d love to see “Law & Order” tackle that one.)

SHARE