Homophobia

[Shadow Wolf]

Not at all. Children need something from both parents (male and female) because they have different things to give. Men don't give children what women do and vice versa.

They learn those things from same sex siblings, peers, role models, just like any other kid.
It's not the sex of the parents that matter, it's not even the biology and blood. Kids need love, support, a stable environment and consistent discipline (sans hitting) to grow up into well adjusted and psychologically healthy adults.

 

[Jedster]

I wish there was a bull**** frubal

Yes and a Gordon Bennett one.

 

[Secret Chief]

Sauerkraut is disgusting.

Very true.

 

[an anarchist]

Not at all. Children need something from both parents (male and female) because they have different things to give.

Is it really hard for you to fathom 2 loving mothers or 2 loving fathers?

Having heterosexual parents does not guarantee a good upbringing AT ALL.

It is a non factor

 

[ChristineM]

I really want to type out some words. But my post will get moderated. So here is a toned down version of what I would like to say…

Please don’t ever speak again. Take some time, reread everything you wrote on this thread, and consider how it is that you have such disgusting views. Consider the stupidity of your words. The world is worse off with you chatting away publicly. You have soured everyone’s mood and no one is enjoying talking to you. You don’t even serve as a mental punching bag, you are more like a cheese grater against the fleshy brain. The grotesqueness and foolishness that you so haughtily display is a reflection of the cesspool of you and your inner circle.

Never compare anything to r*pe again. Do not compare consensual activities to r*pe.

I hope that the Hell that you believe in is real so that way your skin can be torn off and your eyeballs be continually plucked out by devil ravens. One day, you will die, and the world will not have to hear the cow manure that comes out of your mouth. That day we shall bring out the champagne! For the person who views homosexuals as r*pists is dead.

You suck big beans.

I think the ignore option is good.

 

[an anarchist]

I think the ignore option is good.

Done lol. It was the first thing I saw in the morning and I reacted poorly.

 

[Argentbear]

Do you deem anal sex the very symbol of a love in marriage then? I don't see much of a difference. Especially considering how many women are either forced to participate or pressured to do so.

If someone is forced to participate in any sexual act it is rape.

Why do you have trouble understanding that?

Not at all. Children need something from both parents (male and female) because they have different things to give. Men don't give children what women do and vice versa.

Children aren't raised in isolation. There are always extended family, friends, neighbors, educators and so on.

 

[Secret Chief]

Done lol. It was the first thing I saw in the morning and I reacted poorly.

Yes, but it was a fine piece of prose.

 

[Pawpatrol]

No, I care enough to want to see a society where peace and harmony are the norms

If you think that's where your society is going to you must be living under a rock.

Matthew 5:45
Isiah 45:7

I said, make it make sense. I didn't say refer me to something irrelevant please, I love wasting my time.

That gods "guidance" includes allowing the sperm squirter to sell his own daughter into slavery.

You aren't guided right. That's your problem.

That's in places where they greatly favor sons to the point of aborting daughters (like China with the one child policy). That also isn't unmarried men in general but unmarried men in societies where the is an imbalance qnd surplus of men and not enough women for them to be able to get a life.

No, that particular topic was related to that, but the issue of too many single men is present in America, for example, today.

 

[The Papist]

Homophobia, in my mind, means having a fear or hatred of those who practice homosexuality. Believing that homosexual acts are immoral does not mean you fear or hate those who practice them, just as believing that drug abuse is immoral does not mean you hate everyone who struggles with drug addiction. Thus, I don't think I'm being inconsistent in believing that homosexual acts are immoral and still loving my friends and family members who practice them.

Why do I think homosexual acts are immoral, you might ask? First of all, I would say that merely being consensual does not make a sexual act moral. If a father and his adult daughter both consent to have sex with each other, is that moral? I don't think many would say so. "But it doesn't hurt anyone! They both consented!" Yes, but the act is contrary to nature. I would say that homosexual acts make less biological sense than even consensual incest. They can cause disease and create major health problems. This is why I don't buy "love is love." I think that to love is to desire the good of the other, and since homosexual acts often harm those who participate in them, they are inherently unloving and therefore immoral.

But again, drug abuse is objectively harmful, but that doesn't mean I fear or hate those who struggle with drug addiction.

This answer, simple as it is, doesn't seem to satisfy some people, though. If you still think I'm homophobic, why is that? Peace

 

[Argentbear]

Homophobia, in my mind, means having a fear or hatred of those who practice homosexuality. Believing that homosexual acts are immoral does not mean you fear or hate those who practice them, just as believing that drug abuse is immoral does not mean you hate everyone who struggles with drug addiction. Thus, I don't think I'm being inconsistent in believing that homosexual acts are immoral and still loving my friends and family members who practice them.

Homophobia - an irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuality or people who are identified or perceived as being lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender. It includes antipathy, contempt, prejudice, aversion, and hatred of homosexuals.

You talk about loving friends and family members "who practice them" but in the same breath you are comparing them to substance abusers
That comparison is a fine example of homophobia.

You bring another example of homophobia out into the spotlight when you talk about practicing homosexuality. People don't practice homosexuality any more than people practice heterosexuality. LGBT people are LGBT even if they have never had sex of any kind. I am reminded of racists who insist they don't hate or have any animosity towards black people saying their issues are with those black people who ignore the word of god and engage in the immoral behavior of acting as if they were the social and moral equals of white people They will say that they have no problem with black people and in fact love their black friends as long as "they know their place"

Why do I think homosexual acts are immoral, you might ask? First of all, I would say that merely being consensual does not make a sexual act moral. If a father and his adult daughter both consent to have sex with each other, is that moral?

So now being gay is the equivalent of being incestious?

I don't think many would say so. "But it doesn't hurt anyone! They both consented!" Yes, but the act is contrary to nature. I would say that homosexual acts make less biological sense than even consensual incest.

and now LGBT people are unnatural.

They can cause disease and create major health problems.

Just like heterosexual intercourse can cause disease and major health problems.

This is why I don't buy "love is love." I think that to love is to desire the good of the other, and since homosexual acts often harm those who participate in them, they are inherently unloving and therefore immoral.

and again heterosexual acts cause harm and are therefor unloving and therefor immoral

But again, drug abuse is objectively harmful, but that doesn't mean I fear or hate those who struggle with drug addiction


This answer, simple as it is, doesn't seem to satisfy some people, though. If you still think I'm homophobic, why is that? Peace

you are homophobic because you have just irrationally declared LGBT people are unnatural, immoral and disease ridden.
so you are expressing irrational fear of LGBT people antipathy, along with contempt and outright hatred.

You have brought up how horrible homosexuals are for hurting (in your mind) other people but will pause for a moment to consider how your attitudes and homophobia are hurting people?

 

[The Papist]

You're conflating homosexual acts with those who practice them, which is really the root of disagreement.

Homophobia - an irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuality or people who are identified or perceived as being lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender. It includes antipathy, contempt, prejudice, aversion, and hatred of homosexuals.

You talk about loving friends and family members "who practice them" but in the same breath you are comparing them to substance abusers
That comparison is a fine example of homophobia.

You bring another example of homophobia out into the spotlight when you talk about practicing homosexuality. People don't practice homosexuality any more than people practice heterosexuality. LGBT people are LGBT even if they have never had sex of any kind. I am reminded of racists who insist they don't hate or have any animosity towards black people saying their issues are with those black people who ignore the word of god and engage in the immoral behavior of acting as if they were the social and moral equals of white people They will say that they have no problem with black people and in fact love their black friends as long as "they know their place"




So now being gay is the equivalent of being incestious?

and now LGBT people are unnatural.

Just like heterosexual intercourse can cause disease and major health problems.

and again heterosexual acts cause harm and are therefor unloving and therefor immoral

you are homophobic because you have just irrationally declared LGBT people are unnatural, immoral and disease ridden.
so you are expressing irrational fear of LGBT people antipathy, along with contempt and outright hatred.

You have brought up how horrible homosexuals are for hurting (in your mind) other people but will pause for a moment to consider how your attitudes and homophobia are hurting people?

"So now being gay is the equivalent of being incestuous?"
Explain how there is any moral difference between consensual incest and homosexual practice.

You're conflating homosexual acts with personhood and misrepresenting my position. I never said that any people were unnatural. I said that acts were. Everyone has committed unnatural acts of one kind or another. That doesn't make people unnatural. You are not your sexual desires. That is a heresy to the modern world, but it is the plain and simple truth. Until you can demonstrate a moral difference between homosexual acts and consensual incest, your argument won't make sense to me.

You rightly point out that some heterosexual acts can cause harm too. You're right, which is why I don't believe that any and all heterosexual acts are morally acceptable either. Playing the race card doesn't work either, as physical features are innate qualities while sexual acts are chosen actions. There is no equivalence between the two. I'm not aware of any way in which holding this position causes harm to someone, any more than I am aware that being opposed to incest means that I harm those who have a sexual preference for family members.

Thoughts? Peace

 

[Argentbear]

You're conflating homosexual acts with those who practice them, which is really the root of disagreement.

"So now being gay is the equivalent of being incestuous?"
Explain how there is any moral difference between consensual incest and homosexual practice.

Is your own marriage any morally different from consensual incest?

You're conflating homosexual acts with personhood and misrepresenting my position. I never said that any people were unnatural. I said that acts were.

and you are dehumanizing an entire minority by reducing them to a sexual act.

Everyone has committed unnatural acts of one kind or another. That doesn't make people unnatural. You are not your sexual desires.

just like LGBT people aren't a sex act.

Calling love unnatural doesn't make it so it just shows your contempt for these people.

That is a heresy to the modern world, but it is the plain and simple truth. Until you can demonstrate a moral difference between homosexual acts and consensual incest, your argument won't make sense to me.

how is a heterosexual relationship any different morally form an consensual incestious relationship?

You rightly point out that some heterosexual acts can cause harm too. You're right, which is why I don't believe that any and all heterosexual acts are morally acceptable either.

Yet you use this nebulous idea of harm to justify personal prejudice against one group but not the other

Playing the race card doesn't work either, as physical features are innate qualities while sexual acts are chosen actions. There is no equivalence between the two.

Sexual orientation is inborn

and again racism and homophobia are the same thing just carried out against different minorities.

Homophobia is like racism and anti-Semitism and other forms of bigotry in that it seeks to dehumanize a large group of people, to deny their humanity, their dignity and personhood.

I'm not aware of any way in which holding this position causes harm to someone, any more than I am aware that being opposed to incest means that I harm those who have a sexual preference for family members.

Thoughts? Peace

Hate causes harm no matter how you justify it

 

[The Papist]

Is your own marriage any morally different from consensual incest?

and you are dehumanizing an entire minority by reducing them to a sexual act.

just like LGBT people aren't a sex act.

Well, if I were married, it would be to someone of the opposite sex to whom I was not related. My point with the incest example was that if you believe consensual incest is wrong, then consent is not the only factor in deciding whether or not sexual acts are acceptable. If it is the only factor, then you are hateful, bigoted, and harmful toward the minority of people who are simply attracted to their family members. If it is not the only factor and there is some element of biological logic in sexual morality, then homosexual acts are wrong by the same standard.

Calling love unnatural doesn't make it so it just shows your contempt for these people.

how is a heterosexual relationship any different morally form an consensual incestious relationship?

Yet you use this nebulous idea of harm to justify personal prejudice against one group but not the other

Sexual orientation is inborn

Equating "sexual acts" with "love" is shallow and superficial. Some people have an inborn propensity for alcoholism. Does that make it acceptable? I never denied the humanity, dignity or personhood of those who commit homosexual acts. By equating their homosexual acts to their entire identity, it is the LGBT movement that has reduced people to their sexual preferences and dehumanized them. At the end of the day, if you were really consistent, you'd stop being so bigoted and hateful toward those who have a sexual preference for their family members, or for animated child pornography. But you don't, because those things are unnatural. You're not "bigoted" toward the incestuous, nor am I toward homosexuals.

 

[McBell]

Well, if I were married, it would be to someone of the opposite sex to whom I was not related. My point with the incest example was that if you believe consensual incest is wrong, then consent is not the only factor in deciding whether or not sexual acts are acceptable. If it is the only factor, then you are hateful, bigoted, and harmful toward the minority of people who are simply attracted to their family members. If it is not the only factor and there is some element of biological logic in sexual morality, then homosexual acts are wrong by the same standard.


Equating "sexual acts" with "love" is shallow and superficial. Some people have an inborn propensity for alcoholism. Does that make it acceptable? I never denied the humanity, dignity or personhood of those who commit homosexual acts. By equating their homosexual acts to their entire identity, it is the LGBT movement that has reduced people to their sexual preferences and dehumanized them. At the end of the day, if you were really consistent, you'd stop being so bigoted and hateful toward those who have a sexual preference for their family members, or for animated child pornography. But you don't, because those things are unnatural. You're not "bigoted" toward the incestuous, nor am I toward homosexuals.

Sounds to me that you judge how natural/moral something is by the "ew" factor.

Consensual incest is high up on your "EW" factor list, thus unnatural/immoral.
Same with homosexuality.

You brought up incest simply because you are trying to tie the ew factor of incest to homosexuality.
You evern flat out state that if you find one to be "ew" factor high then the other should also be "ew" factor high.

 

[Argentbear]

Well, if I were married, it would be to someone of the opposite sex to whom I was not related. My point with the incest example was that if you believe consensual incest is wrong, then consent is not the only factor in deciding whether or not sexual acts are acceptable.

Did I somehow miss it when you showed that this any one was saying that consent is the only factor?

If it is the only factor, then you are hateful, bigoted, and harmful toward the minority of people who are simply attracted to their family members. If it is not the only factor and there is some element of biological logic in sexual morality, then homosexual acts are wrong by the same standard.

the idea that there is an element of biological logic in homophobia doesn't follow from the idea that social taboos regarding incest exist..

it would seem that the only reason to connect these two unrelated things would be a desire to be hateful, bigoted, and harmful toward LGBT people

Equating "sexual acts" with "love" is shallow and superficial.

Yet you keep doing just that

Some people have an inborn propensity for alcoholism. Does that make it acceptable? I never denied the humanity, dignity or personhood of those who commit homosexual acts.

You just compared LGBT people to substance abusers which is an attack on the humanity, dignity and personhood of LGBT people

By equating their homosexual acts to their entire identity, it is the LGBT movement that has reduced people to their sexual preferences and dehumanized them.

Its a good thing they don't then.

At the end of the day, if you were really consistent, you'd stop being so bigoted and hateful toward those who have a sexual preference for their family members, or for animated child pornography. But you don't, because those things are unnatural. You're not "bigoted" toward the incestuous, nor am I toward homosexuals.

you just equated being gay with child pornography. It is difficult if not impossible to think of a more hateful and bigoted comparison

 

[The Papist]

Did I somehow miss it when you showed that this any one was saying that consent is the only factor?

the idea that there is an element of biological logic in homophobia doesn't follow from the idea that social taboos regarding incest exist..

it would seem that the only reason to connect these two unrelated things would be a desire to be hateful, bigoted, and harmful toward LGBT people

Yet you keep doing just that

You just compared LGBT people to substance abusers which is an attack on the humanity, dignity and personhood of LGBT people

Its a good thing they don't then.

you just equated being gay with child pornography. It is difficult if not impossible to think of a more hateful and bigoted comparison

Frankly, I’m done with this argument. You can’t seem to understand the notion that believing someone does immoral things is not incompatible with valuing them as a person. You continue to strawman my positions. But I’ll focus on one point of agreement—we both agree that people shouldn’t be reduced to their sexual desires. That’s why I think that though some sexual desires are immoral, people cannot be reduced to them and still have inherent value, worth and dignity regardless of what they’ve done. Whether anyone thinks I’m a “bigot” or “homophobe” for holding these positions is pretty irrelevant to me at the end of the day; social mores change from year to year. Among my generation, Gen Z, support for same-sex “marriage” dropped 10% in the last two years. Things are changing.

Let’s cap it off there, then—people cannot be reduced to their desires. Have a good day and go in peace, my friend.

 

[Tamino]

I live in a stable and happy relationship with another woman. Our sexual practices do not cause injury or risk disease. We work quiet jobs, we can support ourselves and pay our taxes. We assist our elderly neighbor, take part in the social life of the community and support animal welfare. I tutor school children who struggle with language classes, and I am a member of the city council where I advocate for sustainable practices, affordable housing and good elementary schools.

Tell me, please, how my "homosexual lifestyle" is in any way immoral or harmful?

 

[Argentbear]

social mores change from year to year. Among my generation, Gen Z, support for same-sex “marriage” dropped 10% in the last two years. Things are changing.

Is this something to be proud of?

 

[Argentbear]

Frankly, I’m done with this argument. You can’t seem to understand the notion that believing someone does immoral things is not incompatible with valuing them as a person.

you can't value people while you are comparing them to substance abusers and incest and child pornography