Are homophobes born that way?

[Pah]

Phobia: A persistent illogical fear.

This is at the crux of this whole thread. It was once told to me that if 3 people say something then it must be true! By the overwhelming use of this word it has become a standard label of anyone who is not sympathetic to, or agrees with the whole gay agenda. This word is being misused and abused as a rationalization that if anyone disagrees with a gay then they are homophobic. Puhleez. What is illogical about not accepting the statement that Gays are born that way? They still haven't proven it. Homophobia is just a self-serving label to throw at someone who disagrees with a Gay. That doesnt give the term any validity at all.

Nope! It's fear of having marriage being de-sanctified. It's revulsion toward homosexual sex. It's ignorance that doesn't modify the denial of equal rights. It's fear of expressing the homosexual urge present in a majority of men (as proved by the penal excitation study). It's the arrogance of denying others a common, natural sexual expression that you fear/choose not to do. You fit anyone of those and you can be justifably called a homophobe.

 

[Bennettresearch]

I guess I win.

A victim speaks:
http://www.kcet.org/lifeandtimes/archives/200307/20030717.php

http://www.americamagazine.org/gettext.cfm?articleTypeID=1&textID=1730&issueID=369 also has information, from a Catholic source, that it it not considerd a homosexual act contrary to the statements by Joaquin Navarro-Valls, the Vatican’s official spokesman. Other Google sources recounted the number of incidents involving girls.

The whole concept of child molestation as a homesexual act is ridiculous.

Now can we return to the topic?

Hi Pah,

I guess it is my turn to pick hairs here. Pedophilia is not only committed by gays. This is a fact. However, when you are talking about a man who molests a boy, then what else could it be other than homosexual in nature? To argue that it isn't so is to be in denial. Yes, the gays want to defend against anyhting that doesn't make them look good and show that they are superior intellectually, but........... what about NAMBLA? This is an openly gay group that is pedophilic and is openly so. They even want the ACLU to protect their "rights". It seems that other gays do more damage to the gay cause than anyone else could ever do.

 

[Pah]

Is that what you thought I was doing? ...

~Victor

Nah I just saw that you were supporting Theodore. My statement was not specifically "targeted"

 

[Bennettresearch]

Nope! It's fear of having marriage being de-sanctified. It's revulsion toward homosexual sex. It's ignorance that doesn't modify the denial of equal rights. It's fear of expressing the homosexual urge present in a majority of men (as proved by the penal excitation study). It's the arrogance of denying others a common, natural sexual expression that you fear/choose not to do. You fit anyone of those and you can be justifably called a homophobe.

Sorry Pah,

That is an extended and revised definition of a term that by definition states ILLOGICAL fear. Two problems here; 1. Illogical 2. Fear. To use this as a broad term is to mislable the majority of detractors to the gay movement. They are not illogical and they do not fear homosexuality. I am hearing the word fear thrown around a lot, but disgust is not fear driven. It is presumptous and arrogant to label someone who doesn't think like you do as being illogical. I am hard pressed to hear any logic coming from the gay side on this issue, only pointing the finger at someone who disagrees.

 

[Green Gaia]

what about NAMBLA? This is an openly gay group that is pedophilic and is openly so.

Oh good grief.... saying NAMBLA is a gay organization (which is it not) is like saying that the KKK is Christian. It has nothing to do with homosexuality, and everything to do with pedophilia. People need to understand that and stop perpetuating these lies in order to defame the BGLT community.

In 1994 the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) adopted a "Position Statement Regarding NAMBLA" saying GLAAD "deplores the North American Man Boy Love Association's (NAMBLA) goals, which include advocacy for sex between adult men and boys and the removal of legal protections for children. These goals constitute a form of child abuse and are repugnant to GLAAD." Also in 1994 the Board of Directors of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force (NGLTF) adopted a resolution on NAMBLA that said: "NGLTF condemns all abuse of minors, both sexual and any other kind, perpetrated by adults. Accordingly, NGLTF condemns the organizational goals of NAMBLA and any other such organization."

 

[Pah]

Hi Pah,

I guess it is my turn to pick hairs here. Pedophilia is not only committed by gays. This is a fact. However, when you are talking about a man who molests a boy, then what else could it be other than homosexual in nature? To argue that it isn't so is to be in denial. Yes, the gays want to defend against anyhting that doesn't make them look good and show that they are superior intellectually, but........... what about NAMBLA? This is an openly gay group that is pedophilic and is openly so. They even want the ACLU to protect their "rights". It seems that other gays do more damage to the gay cause than anyone else could ever do.

I really have trouble with the ignorant statements you make. If you want to continue this faulty line of arguement, then start a thread on that topic - I'll be glad to join you.. We should be talking in this thread about the source of homophobia.

 

[Quiddity]

Nah I just saw that you were supporting Theodore. My statement was not specifically "targeted"

I'll try hard to believe you but you followed it with a Catholic commentary. Was kinda hard to not make the connection.

~Victor

 

[Darkdale]

Maybe I'm looking at this too simplisticly, but people who want to deny gays the same equal rights as heterosexuals are pretty much your definition of bigoted. No one is born that way, they just develop their hatred of this group or that, out of ignorance or through experience, and there you go. That seems to be the one constant around the world. People hate other people for who they are and want to keep those people powerless, while empowering themselves, often in the name of god and religion.

Inequality should only begin when we make our choices. Those who make good choices should fair better than those that make bad choices. But just because someone belongs to one group or another shouldn't way on our minds out all, at least not in the context of law and government.

What are people afraid of anyway? Heterosexuals have been disgracing marriage for years! Why not let everyone do it? Are people afraid that homosexuals will be better or worse? If worse, how is that possible? Heterosexuals have set the bar pretty high with regard to desanctifying marriage.

 

[Pah]

Sorry Pah,

...but disgust is not fear driven. ...

Provide some evidence as it pertains to homosexuality

 

[Pah]

I'll try hard to believe you but you followed it with a Catholic commentary. Was kinda hard to not make the connection.

~Victor

It turned up in my search Victor and sheds light on the homosexual/pedological connection. It's hard not to get Catholic opinion when you use priest and molestation in your keywords.

 

[Quiddity]

In 1994 the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) adopted a "Position Statement Regarding NAMBLA" saying GLAAD "deplores the North American Man Boy Love Association's (NAMBLA) goals, which include advocacy for sex between adult men and boys and the removal of legal protections for children. These goals constitute a form of child abuse and are repugnant to GLAAD." Also in 1994 the Board of Directors of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force (NGLTF) adopted a resolution on NAMBLA that said: "NGLTF condemns all abuse of minors, both sexual and any other kind, perpetrated by adults. Accordingly, NGLTF condemns the organizational goals of NAMBLA and any other such organization."

Thanks for the info. I didn't know this. I just recently passed by an event in Long Beach CA, that was sponsored by GLAAD. I have no idea what it was.

~Victor

 

[Quiddity]

It turned up in my search Victor and sheds light on the homosexual/pedological connection. It's hard not to get Catholic opinion when you use priest and molestation in your keywords.

That's true. I see now.

~Victor

 

[MdmSzdWhtGuy]

I doubt anyone is born with any particular phobias. Perhaps there are a few extreme examples of a particular phobia which can be attributed to mental illness, but I imagine that would be rare.

As a child I personally was deathly afraid of snakes. Why is that? Well, the first major motion picture I saw in the theatre was Indiana Jones. He didn't care much for snakes either, and he was a big rough tough hero type. Also, where I grew up, out in the country, we had snakes, poisenous and otherwise around the house. It was not uncommon to find a copperhead in the yard. Repeated warnings by family (which was warranted) undoubtedly fueled this fear.

Now, the question is. . . if I was born an Inuit (Eskimo) child, and grew up never seeing a snake, would I have developed this fear? Likely not. Without learning that the snake represented danger, there would be no basis for my fear.

People with genuine homophobia no doubt had to learn this from somewhere. Without some obvious outward sign of dangerousness, children tend either not to fear these things, or fear everything (overprotective parents maybe?). I see on Animal Planet over and over again, children finding dangerous snakes in their garages, etc. . . These kids often show no fear of the snake, even if it is a giboon viper (egad!!!) or a constrictor large enough to kill the child.

Those same kids would likely be afraid of a big aggressive dog cause they have experience with dogs, and can detect from the dog's behavior he means them harm. This goes to respond to the lady who wanted an explanation of why her 9 year old is still afraid of lightening. Lightning is bright, big and fast, and the thunder associated with it, is loud and powerful. These things are startling even to an adult, and to a child, who is small and relatively powerless, big, loud powerful things are scary. Nothing complicated about it.

And by the way. You should be scared of lightning. It is very dangerous, and could kill you. That kid is smart. My guess is cave men who were not afraid of poisenous snakes and lightening, likely did not live long enough to pass these traits on to future generations.

B.

 

[Fluffy]

Either way you define it, molestation or pedophilia, to blame either on homosexuality is not accurate. That was my point.

Agreed. However, replacing misinformation with more misinformation is not productive. It simply shifts bigotry onto a different target.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I doubt anyone is born with any particular phobias. ...

Now, the question is. . . if I was born an Inuit (Eskimo) child, and grew up never seeing a snake, would I have developed this fear? Likely not. ...

My guess is cave men who were not afraid of poisenous snakes and lightening, likely did not live long enough to pass these traits on to future generations.

So they passed on traits that future generations were not born with. Thanks for clearing that up for us ...

 

[Bennettresearch]

I really have trouble with the ignorant statements you make. If you want to continue this faulty line of arguement, then start a thread on that topic - I'll be glad to join you.. We should be talking in this thread about the source of homophobia.

Pah, do you ever go back and refer to what you have said? I make unintelligent statements? If this thread is about homophobia and I am challenging the use of the word, I am off topic? You like to pick hairs and make your statements and then simply igonore that which is not part of your thinking. It is about facts here, and homophobia is being misrepresented as a fact.As I said, defenders of the cause like to act like they are superior intellectually, but they can't really back it up. To mislabel everyone who doesn't sign on with homosexuality as a homophobe is disengenuous.

 

[Pah]

Pah, do you ever go back and refer to what you have said? I make unintelligent statements? If this thread is about homophobia and I am challenging the use of the word, I am off topic? You like to pick hairs and make your statements and then simply igonore that which is not part of your thinking. It is about facts here, and homophobia is being misrepresented as a fact.As I said, defenders of the cause like to act like they are superior intellectually, but they can't really back it up. To mislabel everyone who doesn't sign on with homosexuality as a homophobe is disengenuous.

You make ignorant statements intelligently. Don't confuse ignorance with stupidity (unintelligence). Challange the word and it's use all you want, but pedophilia is not part of the topic.

I'll stand by my definitions and if the glove fits - you're guilty. Any one of the "phobias" (should it be phobae?) is laced with biogtry. Advocating exclusion is bigotry. Denial of constitutional rights and the freedom to exercise those rights is exclusion. All who who deny the rights of homosexuals are therefore homophobic.

 

[Bennettresearch]

It would be a "good point" if it were more that a bald assertion. And I'll make one too!! Peadophilic molestations did more to cause ill feelings to priests and a distrust of those in authority.

Now let's have a race - who can first come up with supporting evidence for each assertion?

There Pah,

I was only replying to your post! If it is off topic than don't get sucked into it and then beat someone else up about it. Now you can apologize for calling names.

 

[Pah]

There Pah,

I was only replying to your post! If it is off topic than don't get sucked into it and then beat someone else up about it. Now you can apologize for calling names.

You're right. I aplogize for continuing something off topic

 

[MdmSzdWhtGuy]

So they passed on traits that future generations were not born with. Thanks for clearing that up for us ...

LOL, all right smarty pants, I got caught up in what I was writing, and mixed up my stories just a bit.

I was attempting to make 2 points. Obviously I am too simple minded to keep 2 seperate points straight in the same post.

Point one: Some fears are inherent - I.E. fear of the unknown, fear of large, loud things (thunder for example, or a growling dog).

Point 2: some fears/hatreds, etc. . . are learned - I.E. fear or hatred of something not inherently dangerous. (snakes are small and quiet in general, and a gay person is just a person, nothing to make you inherently fear or hate them).

I goofed up by using the snake in both examples. Thank you for pointing out my shortcomings for the group. That being said, the cave man may have passed on a predisposition to become fearful of snakes (I am stretching to save my meager credibility here) or other potentially dangerous things, so as to live long enough to pass along genetic material to the next generation of cave dwellers.

All in all, I goofed, Jayhawker caught it and now Mdm is eating some humble pie.

B.