Homophobia

[Shadow Wolf]

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

How so Christian conceited of you.
But, yes, your god allows a man to sell his daughter into slavery. It is in the Bible.
That means this "god" (rather the men who had the audacity to claim to speak and write for a god) can take his crap opinions of queers and shove it.

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

For different reasons. Single Chinese men simply don't have options because there are not enough women. Chronically single men in America, where their are single women available, are often losers and bad people which is why they are single.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

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.

Which, of course, is a hateful comparison homosexuality is nothing like drug addiction. You might as well compare it to pedophilia or bestiality. It's just as wrong and hateful.

 

[The Papist]

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

…which only proves my point further. You’ve just admitted that you don’t value substance abusers as people. Mind you, none of these examples are 1:1 comparisons.

A lot of this goes back to Freudian philosophy, which centered human identity on sex. Classifying people into boxes like “gay” or “straight” and insisting that the fulfillment of sexual desire is necessary for happiness—these are Freudian ideas that I think are flawed.

Maybe this would help straighten things out: what do you think is the standard by which sexual acts are moral or immoral? Clearly you have one, as you think homosexual acts are moral and child pornography is not. So what is the standard for you, and why?

By the way, simply saying that I am “hateful” is not an argument, any more than calling someone “dumb.” Acting outraged is not an argument. Engage me on a philosophical level, please, not a schoolyard level.

 

[an anarchist]

Clearly you have one, as you think homosexual acts are moral and child pornography is not.

Are you conflating these two things?

 

[The Papist]

Are you conflating these two things?

No. If child pornography depicts an actual abused child, it is far worse than any consensual homosexual acts.

I’m curious, though—unfortunately, some people produce animated child pornography that does not depict actual people. Do you think it’s wrong for people to view this? It doesn’t technically “hurt anyone.”

I think it’s wrong, and again, far more wrong than even consensual homosexual acts, because the person who views such things harms their psyche by doing so. They are encouraging immoral desires. Would you agree with this?

 

[Argentbear]

…which only proves my point further. You’ve just admitted that you don’t value substance abusers as people. Mind you, none of these examples are 1:1 comparisons.

You posted them as 1:1 comparisons

A lot of this goes back to Freudian philosophy, which centered human identity on sex. Classifying people into boxes like “gay” or “straight” and insisting that the fulfillment of sexual desire is necessary for happiness—these are Freudian ideas that I think are flawed.

You do realize Freud and his writings are valued for their historic importance and no one has used his models of development and mental health for decades

Maybe this would help straighten things out: what do you think is the standard by which sexual acts are moral or immoral? Clearly you have one, as you think homosexual acts are moral and child pornography is not. So what is the standard for you, and why?

are you seriously asking that?

By the way, simply saying that I am “hateful” is not an argument, any more than calling someone “dumb.” Acting outraged is not an argument. Engage me on a philosophical level, please, not a schoolyard level.

If you were saying the same things about black people as you are about LGBT people is would be called hate and rightly so.
If you were saying the same things about Jewish people as you are about LGBT people is would be called hate
If you were saying the same things about he handicapped as you are about LGBT people is would be called hate

Your words are hateful, I'm sorry you don't like that but its the truth. If you don't want people to think of you as hateful then you might do well to examine the things you are posting

 

[Shadow Wolf]

which only proves my point further. You’ve just admitted that you don’t value substance abusers as people. Mind you, none of these examples are 1:1 comparisons.

No, that's your very bad reading that inserted things that aren't there.

A lot of this goes back to Freudian philosophy, which centered human identity on sex. Classifying people into boxes like “gay” or “straight” and insisting that the fulfillment of sexual desire is necessary for happiness—these are Freudian ideas that I think are flawed.

Well Frued has very largely and mostly discarded. And, by the way, Frued was among the first clinicians to say it doesn't matter if you're gay (just lesbian).

Maybe this would help straighten things out: what do you think is the standard by which sexual acts are moral or immoral? Clearly you have one, as you think homosexual acts are moral and child pornography is not. So what is the standard for you, and why?

Proper age and consent. It makes things easy and doesn't needlessly intrude.

By the way, simply saying that I am “hateful” is not an argument, any more than calling someone “dumb.” Acting outraged is not an argument. Engage me on a philosophical level, please, not a schoolyard level.

It is hateful when you compare homosexuals to drug abusers.

 

[The Papist]

You posted them as 1:1 comparisons

No, I didn’t. Stop putting words in my mouth.

You do realize Freud and his writings are valued for their historic importance and no one has used his models of development and mental health for decades

I never said anyone was using his “models of development and mental health.” I was pointing out that his views on the centrality of sexuality in the human psyche and the necessity of sexual fulfillment for happiness have influenced much of modern thought on the subject.

are you seriously asking that?

Yes, I am. Do you have an answer?

If you were saying the same things about black people as you are about LGBT people is would be called hate and rightly so.

I still haven’t said anything negative about LGBT people. I’ve been stringently careful to refer only to acts. People are more than their actions. These arguments aren’t applicable. Being Black isn’t an action. Participating in homosexual acts is. Equivocating between them diminishes Black experiences and exploits Black history for another purpose.

Your words are hateful, I'm sorry you don't like that but its the truth. If you don't want people to think of you as hateful then you might do well to examine the things you are posting

I really don’t care if you think of me as hateful. To me, by referring to them as hateful bigots, you seem pretty hateful toward Catholics, Muslims, most African and Asian cultures, and just the general majority of people on earth who do not view homosexual acts as morally acceptable. But that’s not an argument against your position, and your accusations of hate are not an argument against my position—just a name.

So, please avoid non-answers and schoolyard insults, and simply tell me: what is it that, in your mind, makes a sexual act moral or not?

Also, I’m curious what you think of people like Rosaria Butterfield, a former lesbian who since married a man, had children, and became Christian. She says she’s far happier now. Read up on her and other similar stories, if you’d like. To be clear, I’m certainly not advocating “conversion therapy,” which seems largely ineffective and even possibly harmful. (I’m pretty sure she was never involved in such “therapy.”) But people can and do change, and their stories deserve to be heard.

 

[an anarchist]

what is it that, in your mind, makes a sexual act moral or not?

Certainly not some commandments from a “holy” book.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

If you don't want people to think of you as hateful then you might do well to examine the things you are posting

I.e. "shut up and only post when you agree with me, or we'll call you names!".

 

[The Papist]

Certainly not some commandments from a “holy” book.

You’ll notice I haven’t quoted the Bible, the Qur’an, the Gita, etc. once on this thread.

 

[Gargovic Malkav]

There is an African saying that goes like:
"Don't insult the mouth of a crocodile until you've crossed the river."
These kinds of threads remind me of why this saying is considered a wisdom.
The ironic thing is that it tends to put people "in the closet" as it were...

 

[an anarchist]

You’ll notice I haven’t quoted the Bible, the Qur’an, the Gita, etc. once on this thread.

Well, where do you get this silly and homophobic idea that homosexuality is immoral? That is your stance, is it not?

 

[Subduction Zone]

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.

"Researchers from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, found heterosexual men were increasingly watching anal porn online.

Top searches on PornHub and other pornographic websites often feature the terms associated with this type of intercourse.

Researchers found that more and more women being pressured into having painful anal sex because it has been normalised online.

Worryingly, teenagers have internalised terms like ‘accidental’ penetration of the anal area. Teen girls are increasingly likely to accept these so-called ‘slips’." Source

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.

You need to stop working off of your prejudices and start supporting your claims with evidence. If you do not do so you cannot blame others for dismissing unevidenced nonsense. If you cannot find any supporting evidence then that is a good indication that you just might be wrong. Or even very wrong. Not every woman likes anal sex, but some do. A lot. There are a whole lot of nerves back there that can be aroused. That is why both some women and some men, even straight men, like a bit of play around the back door.

 

[Argentbear]

I.e. "shut up and only post when you agree with me, or we'll call you names!".

he is free to make any and all sorts of statements comparing minorities to all sorts of crimes to justify his personal prejudices. But he shouldn't complain when statements get called out for what they are.

 

[Pawpatrol]

speculation is not evidence.
spec·u·la·tive engaged in, expressing, or based on conjecture rather than knowledge.

It isn't speculation. It's statistical fact.

And yet again we're back to the question of how does this affect you in any way at all?

I've replied that question twice I believe. Definitely once and I'm not going to repeat myself. Try to keep up.

All kinds of things and people have been hated throughout society's existence. So what?

Most things that have been hated through all times have been hated for good reason. Like homosexual acts, for instance.

I don't hate gay people. Why do you?

I don't. I hate homosexual acts. Why don't you? Don't you find them disgusting?

I find turnips repulsive but that doesn't mean someone else doesn't like them and it doesn't make them bad or immoral.

You're probably the first person in history to ever compare a penis in the anus to eating turnips.

I'm also not repulsed by gay people as you seem to be. You really should speak for yourself

I'm not repulsed by gay people, I'm repulsed by gay acts. You have to understand the difference.

What's "normal" anyway?

Normal is, generally speaking, what most people are or do.

Also, how do you know it's based on "God's guidance to mankind?" Which god?

There's only one God, but since you don't know where things are put in general, I'm not surprised you're confused.

 

[Argentbear]

No, I didn’t. Stop putting words in my mouth.

just as believing that drug abuse is immoral

If a father and his adult daughter both consent to have sex with each other

Some people have an inborn propensity for alcoholism. Does that make it acceptable?

toward those who have a sexual preference for their family members,

or for animated child pornography.

all 1:1 comparisons

I never said anyone was using his “models of development and mental health.” I was pointing out that his views on the centrality of sexuality in the human psyche and the necessity of sexual fulfillment for happiness have influenced much of modern thought on the subject.

and you also said: " Classifying people into boxes like “gay” or “straight” and insisting that the fulfillment of sexual desire is necessary for happiness—these are Freudian ideas that I think are flawed."

Yes, I am. Do you have an answer?

Child pornography even animated or computer generated material normalizes the sexualization of children and the abuse and exploitation of children

In other words, even if images of child pornography don’t show real children, it still puts children in harm’s way. Multiple studies show a link between watching generated child porn and sexually abusing children in real life. Individuals who watch generated child porn are up to 60 times more likely to actively sexually molest children.

It is both sad and disturbing that this has to be explained to you. Almost as sad and disturbing as our comparison to child pornography to homosexuality.

I still haven’t said anything negative about LGBT people. I’ve been stringently careful to refer only to acts. People are more than their actions. These arguments aren’t applicable. Being Black isn’t an action. Participating in homosexual acts is. Equivocating between them diminishes Black experiences and exploits Black history for another purpose.

Racists don't hate people because of their skin color. they hate black people because of how they act, specifically when they act as social and moral equals of whites. Racists will happy says they have know problems as long as black people "know their place"

I really don’t care if you think of me as hateful. To me, by referring to them as hateful bigots, you seem pretty hateful toward Catholics, Muslims, most African and Asian cultures, and just the general majority of people on earth who do not view homosexual acts as morally acceptable. But that’s not an argument against your position, and your accusations of hate are not an argument against my position—just a name.

Oh please. You are trying very hard to make it an argument. Man up and own what you post.

So, please avoid non-answers and schoolyard insults,

You first

and simply tell me: what is it that, in your mind, makes a sexual act moral or not?

How about the context?

what in your mind makes love unnatural? What in your mind turns love into a means to hurt other people? What in your mind makes love comparable to substance abuse?

Also, I’m curious what you think of people like Rosaria Butterfield, a former lesbian who since married a man, had children, and became Christian. She says she’s far happier now. Read up on her and other similar stories, if you’d like. To be clear, I’m certainly not advocating “conversion therapy,” which seems largely ineffective and even possibly harmful. (I’m pretty sure she was never involved in such “therapy.”) But people can and do change, and their stories deserve to be heard.

In her 2015 book, Openness Unhindered she states she was never a lesbian.

She is also an advocate for conversion therapy especially for young children not that she believes that sexual orientation can change but as a means to train children who are LGBT to understand they need to hide and be ashamed of who they are.

people need to "cut off any shows, movies or books that present LGBTQ people as anything other than being morally evil... A loving, consensual, monogamous same-sex marriage is more evil than the heterosexual nonconsensual sexual assault of a child."

 

[Argentbear]

It isn't speculation. It's statistical fact.

I've replied that question twice I believe. Definitely once and I'm not going to repeat myself. Try to keep up.

Most things that have been hated through all times have been hated for good reason. Like homosexual acts, for instance.

What good reason?
Bigotry is not a good reason
Fear is not a good reason
Because evil wants you to hate is not a good reason

I don't. I hate homosexual acts. Why don't you? Don't you find them disgusting?

I find bigotry disgusting. Why don't you?

 

[The Papist]

just as believing that drug abuse is immoral

If a father and his adult daughter both consent to have sex with each other

Some people have an inborn propensity for alcoholism. Does that make it acceptable?

toward those who have a sexual preference for their family members,

or for animated child pornography.

all 1:1 comparisons

I clearly stated above that child pornography and homosexual acts were not morally equivalent. I used the above examples to illustrate my point, not to make any evaluation of whether they were better/worse than homosexual acts.

and you also said: " Classifying people into boxes like “gay” or “straight” and insisting that the fulfillment of sexual desire is necessary for happiness—these are Freudian ideas that I think are flawed."

Uh, yeah. Those ideas have Freudian roots. And they’re ideas people still hold to today. What’s your point?

Child pornography even animated or computer generated material normalizes the sexualization of children and the abuse and exploitation of children

In other words, even if images of child pornography don’t show real children, it still puts children in harm’s way. Multiple studies show a link between watching generated child porn and sexually abusing children in real life. Individuals who watch generated child porn are up to 60 times more likely to actively sexually molest children.

Yep, I agree, all forms of child pornography are wrong. If we’re arguing based on potential for abuse here, why do you think it is that homosexuals make up about 1 to 2% of the general population—yet boys are more likely to be abused as children than girls?

Racists don't hate people because of their skin color. they hate black people because of how they act, specifically when they act as social and moral equals of whites. Racists will happy says they have know problems as long as black people "know their place"

This is a distinction without a difference. Who are the people being hated by racists? Black people. What makes someone Black? Their skin color.

what in your mind makes love unnatural? What in your mind turns love into a means to hurt other people? What in your mind makes love comparable to substance abuse?

Nothing makes love unnatural. But sexual desires are not the same thing as love. They can be a part of some loving relationships. But the vast majority of sexual desires are not “love.” And yes, sexual desires can be comparable to substance abuse. That’s why there are organizations like Sex Addicts Anonymous. (Again, not drawing a 1:1 comparison here—just using an example to illustrate my point.)

In her 2015 book, Openness Unhindered she states she was never a lesbian.

Well, she was in a committed sexual relationship with another woman. Make of that what you will.

She is also an advocate for conversion therapy especially for young children not that she believes that sexual orientation can change but as a means to train children who are LGBT to understand they need to hide and be ashamed of who they are.

people need to "cut off any shows, movies or books that present LGBTQ people as anything other than being morally evil... A loving, consensual, monogamous same-sex marriage is more evil than the heterosexual nonconsensual sexual assault of a child."

Where is this quote from? It’s not cited. By the way, if you want to have any moral foundations for calling something creepy or disgusting, maybe don’t refer to “LGBT children.” Children shouldn’t be sexualized by anyone in any way.

 

[blü 2]

The question could be refined and expressed in erudite language as: "Which sacred scripture addresses sexual relations between women?

I think Romans 1:26-27 is as close as it gets.