pope made homophobic slur

[Rival]

Because retaliation is the quickest way to deescalate conflict.

Certainly, you're right.

But if asking that word not be used to describe my beliefs doesn't work, maybe the shock value of turning a horrible word on the opposing beliefs will help some to understand why I find 'homophobic' needlessly offensive and ill-used.

 

[SalixIncendium]

Certainly, you're right.

But if asking that word not be used to describe my beliefs doesn't work, maybe the shock value of turning a horrible word on the opposing beliefs will help some to understand why I find 'homophobic' needlessly offensive and ill-used.

Perhaps it would be useful to examine the term to determine what attitudes and feelings would qualify as homophobic, but I'm not sure this thread would be the appropriate place to do this. Perhaps those who would qualify your beliefs as homophobic would be willing to have their claim that they are put under scrutiny in a different thread?

 

[Secret Chief]

Certainly, you're right.

But if asking that word not be used to describe my beliefs doesn't work, maybe the shock value of turning a horrible word on the opposing beliefs will help some to understand why I find 'homophobic' needlessly offensive and ill-used.

The problem is, your espoused belief (defending discrimination and prejudice) is homophobia.

"It has been defined as contempt, prejudice, aversion, hatred or antipathy, may be based on irrational fear and may sometimes be attributed to religious beliefs"
- Homophobia - Wikipedia

"prejudice against homosexuality"
- Definition of HOMOPHOBIA

"Homophobia is an irritational dislike of, or prejudice against, people who are LGBTQIA+."
- The Harms of Homophobia

"fear of or prejudice against homosexuals that sometimes manifests itself in legal restrictions"
- Homophobia | Causes, Effects & Solutions

 

[SalixIncendium]

Perhaps it would be useful to examine the term to determine what attitudes and feelings would qualify as homophobic, but I'm not sure this thread would be the appropriate place to do this.

Apparently it is...

The problem is, your espoused belief (defending discrimination and prejudice) is homophobia.

"It has been defined as contempt, prejudice, aversion, hatred or antipathy, may be based on irrational fear and may sometimes be attributed to religious beliefs"
- Homophobia - Wikipedia

"prejudice against homosexuality"
- Definition of HOMOPHOBIA

"Homophobia is an irritational dislike of, or prejudice against, people who are LGBTQIA+."
- The Harms of Homophobia

"fear of or prejudice against homosexuals that sometimes manifests itself in legal restrictions"
- Homophobia | Causes, Effects & Solutions

 

[Secret Chief]

Apparently it is...

The clue is in the title of the OP.

 

[SalixIncendium]

The clue is in the title of the OP.

I must be misreading it. I thought the title was "pope made homophobic slur".

Apologies for the oversight.

 

[Rival]

The problem is, your espoused belief (defending discrimination and prejudice) is homophobia.

"It has been defined as contempt, prejudice, aversion, hatred or antipathy, may be based on irrational fear and may sometimes be attributed to religious beliefs"
- Homophobia - Wikipedia

"prejudice against homosexuality"
- Definition of HOMOPHOBIA

"Homophobia is an irritational dislike of, or prejudice against, people who are LGBTQIA+."
- The Harms of Homophobia

"fear of or prejudice against homosexuals that sometimes manifests itself in legal restrictions"
- Homophobia | Causes, Effects & Solutions

Do you realize this word normalizes the idea that standard conservative beliefs are unacceptable? Do you understand why I might reject this as a whole concept?

It is a silencer word used against Traditionalists and to say that instead of our views being an alternative opinion it is something to be eradicated and hounded out.

The word itself only has a meaning in a world where liberal social morals are taken as the standard. I do not have this is a standard, so the word is a meaningless name-calling attack on my beliefs.

I would ask it not be used as being definitionally useless to Traditionalists.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I don't believe my beliefs being labelled homophobic is accurate, so I've no need to justify my label to you.

You don't need to do anything you don't want to do, but calling homosexuality "barbarism" is probably the opposite of what you should be doing if you don't want to be considered homophobic. If you're content to let the impression you're creating stand... well, you do you.

And while you may not agree with my characterization of certain things as homophobic, I'm more than able to explain in detail why I use the term the way I do.

 

[Secret Chief]

Do you realize this word normalizes the idea that standard conservative beliefs are unacceptable? Do you understand why I might reject this as a whole concept?

It is a silencer word used against Traditionalists and to say that instead of our views being an alternative opinion it is something to be eradicated and hounded out.

The word itself only has a meaning in a world where liberal social morals are taken as the standard. I do not have this is a standard, so the word is a meaningless name-calling attack on my beliefs.

I would ask it not be used as being definitionally useless to Traditionalists.

I provided consistent definitions from various sources. A black cat is a black cat whether or not one likes the term.

 

[Rival]

I provided consistent definitions from various sources. A black cat is a black cat whether or not one likes the term.

Not if a culture does hot have the concept of black.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Not if a culture does hot have the concept of black.

Yeah, so if there is no word for harm, there is no harm. Well, I don't believe that.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

@Rival : For starters, I'm sorry that you're so offended. This seems to be a personal and emotional area for you. If I've pushed your buttons, I apologize. It's not my intention. I just happen to believe that my argument was an important one to make, and I don't let such reactions dissuade me from making it. You seem like a thoughtful and well-meaning person, but I consider your views on homosexuality bigotry.

It's what I call cold bigotry to distinguish from angry bigotry with active hatred and malice. People with bad ideas might be motivated to do good but do harm instead because their ideas are bad. You might feel like you're a friend and advocate for the homosexual, hoping to rid his soul of some demonic affliction. If so, that's what I mean by cold bigotry.

Good thing I think Utilitarianism is absolute garbage. I didn't know people still followed that nonsense.

Utilitarianism implied in statements like "the pursuit of happiness." It's implied when one supports freedom. It's why we want people to have social and economic opportunity. What we are trying to do is to equip the most people to find happiness as they understand it.

The church prefers submission and conformity.

I get you want the civilized world to embrace barbarism. We don't. My beliefs keep being called homophobic, so I can call the idea of SSM and so on barbaric.

You equate homosexuality with barbarism? Do you still think you're not homophobic?

It is a silencer word used against traditionalists and to say that instead of our views being an alternative opinion it is something to be eradicated and hounded out?

Yes, it is, and a surprisingly effective one. I am surprised by how angry and defensive people get at being called homophobic or racist, but since they do, it makes using those terms an effective means of combatting these prejudices and marginalizing those who express them.

The right employs a similar strategy when they call liberals woke, but it doesn't seem to have the same effect. I don't get angry at being called that. Nor tree-hugger, nor Communist, nor Marxist, nor baby killer. Why would I?

The word scientism is also used as a bludgeon, frequently accompanied by words like obsession and worship, but is also not a trigger.

And yes to some of your ideas being eradicated, like calling utilitarianism nonsense and homosexuality barbarism. Yes, they're "alternate opinions," but opinions that I'd like to never read again from anybody.

 

[Alien826]

I can tell you things are changed here. Condoms are available everywhere.

I am in the UK and even with a State Church there is virtually no interference. To me the idea that the RCC is having undue influence is bizarre.

I was talking about Ireland (Eire) not the UK. And this was back in the 1960s. It's good to know things have changed. They even allow abortion now! Er, you do know that the "State church" of the UK is CofE not RCC? Incidentally, the CofE did have a huge influence on the country historically. Divorce (or the restriction of it) is an example.

The example you gave of abortions was not carried out by the Church, it was carried out by people with beliefs influenced by the Church. This is not the same, and they are entitled to do that. Otherwise I could flip it and saw the woke have overtaken the court and allowed abortion and people would shrug and say sure. Anyone on the court is allowed to try to get his views into law; we cannot bar religious people from doing this no more than we can non-religious liberals and others.

Strictly, the SCOTUS is supposed to make decisions based on the Constitution, not personal preference. And they are supposed to recuse themselves from cases where they have personal interest. Granted it is close to impossible for someone to be totally impartial, but they are at least meant to try.

I think this is being way too overhyped.

Three justices were appointed by Trump with the express purpose of overturning Roe v Wade. That's a pretty big deal in my mind and points to much needed reform of the SCOTUS. Remember these are lifetime appointments we are talking about.

To be fair though it was not just the RCC he was trying to appease, but also Evangelicals. I think any religion that gets enough power will try to extend that power beyond its own members. That's why the US Constitution forbids establishment of a religion. Very wise imo, as they could see the problems it caused elsewhere. Pity it didn't work as well as they hoped.

 

[Secret Chief]

Not if a culture does hot have the concept of black.

The quotes were straightforward lifts from the top of an internet search for "homophobia definition." I conclude that here in 2024 in the English-speaking culture (at least) - the one you live in - does therefore have this concept.

 

[Rival]

@Rival : For starters, I'm sorry that you're so offended. This seems to be a personal and emotional area for you. If I've pushed your buttons, I apologize. It's not my intention. I just happen to believe that my argument was an important one to make, and I don't let such reactions dissuade me from making it. You seem like a thoughtful and well-meaning person, but I consider your views on homosexuality bigotry.

It's what I call cold bigotry to distinguish from angry bigotry with active hatred and malice. People with bad ideas might be motivated to do good but do harm instead because their ideas are bad. You might feel like you're a friend and advocate for the homosexual, hoping to rid his soul of some demonic affliction. If so, that's what I mean by cold bigotry.

Utilitarianism implied in statements like "the pursuit of happiness." It's implied when one supports freedom. It's why we want people to have social and economic opportunity. What we are trying to do is to equip the most people to find happiness as they understand it.

The church prefers submission and conformity.

You equate homosexuality with barbarism? Do you still think you're not homophobic?

Yes, it is, and a surprisingly effective one. I am surprised by how angry and defensive people get at being called homophobic or racist, but since they do, it makes using those terms an effective means of combatting these prejudices and marginalizing those who express them.

The right employs a similar strategy when they call liberals woke, but it doesn't seem to have the same effect. I don't get angry at being called that. Nor tree-hugger, nor Communist, nor Marxist, nor baby killer. Why would I?

The word scientism is also used as a bludgeon, frequently accompanied by words like obsession and worship, but is also not a trigger.

And yes to some of your ideas being eradicated, like calling utilitarianism nonsense and homosexuality barbarism. Yes, they're "alternate opinions," but opinions that I'd like to never read again from anybody.

I don't think homosexuals are demonic or such. I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with being gay. I have been badly misread. I have written a great deal more porn than most and half of it is gay.

I just don't believe they should be given the same privilege of marriage. That's it. It's not compatible with Christian theology. My Church (Anglican), the RCC, and the OC and others have all lately agreed on this. I do not believe it is the way God planned it, it is not found within my Tradition and it is not part of my worldview. I am being namecalled and labelled for espousing beliefs my Church has held since its inception. There is no way for a gay marriage to be theologically, sacramentally recognized.

I call liberals Woke as that is the name they gave themselves.

So trying to chase me out with slur words designed to shut me up are going to do the opposite. It won't make my views go away, it will just mean you don't hear them and can live in your Liberal paradise while you put Traditionalists in a mute jail. If we did that to the Woke we'd be called fascists. How about you just shut up about SSM? No?

I reject all this 'phobic' terminology as being borderline meaningless and having no effect on those against whom it is thrown save to harden them in their beliefs. Doubling-down on it doesn't work.

I will not support SSM no matter what I'm called and if someone called me it in real life he might get a book thrown at him. I expect better conversation than 'you're a phobe!'

 

[Secret Chief]

@Rival : For starters, I'm sorry that you're so offended. This seems to be a personal and emotional area for you. If I've pushed your buttons, I apologize. It's not my intention. I just happen to believe that my argument was an important one to make, and I don't let such reactions dissuade me from making it. You seem like a thoughtful and well-meaning person, but I consider your views on homosexuality bigotry.

It's what I call cold bigotry to distinguish from angry bigotry with active hatred and malice. People with bad ideas might be motivated to do good but do harm instead because their ideas are bad. You might feel like you're a friend and advocate for the homosexual, hoping to rid his soul of some demonic affliction. If so, that's what I mean by cold bigotry.

Utilitarianism implied in statements like "the pursuit of happiness." It's implied when one supports freedom. It's why we want people to have social and economic opportunity. What we are trying to do is to equip the most people to find happiness as they understand it.

The church prefers submission and conformity.

You equate homosexuality with barbarism? Do you still think you're not homophobic?

Yes, it is, and a surprisingly effective one. I am surprised by how angry and defensive people get at being called homophobic or racist, but since they do, it makes using those terms an effective means of combatting these prejudices and marginalizing those who express them.

The right employs a similar strategy when they call liberals woke, but it doesn't seem to have the same effect. I don't get angry at being called that. Nor tree-hugger, nor Communist, nor Marxist, nor baby killer. Why would I?

The word scientism is also used as a bludgeon, frequently accompanied by words like obsession and worship, but is also not a trigger.

And yes to some of your ideas being eradicated, like calling utilitarianism nonsense and homosexuality barbarism. Yes, they're "alternate opinions," but opinions that I'd like to never read again from anybody.

I never knew you're a baby killer.

 

[Rival]

Er, you do know that the "State church" of the UK is CofE not RCC?

...Yes. I am an Anglican. I was making a comparison.

 

[Tomef]

The pope made an horrendous homophobic slur

Vatican remains silent over Pope's alleged homophonic comments

The Pope (pictured today at a World Children's Day event in Rome) has not broken his silence after reports claimed he denounced the 'air of f*****ry' in the church

www.dailymail.co.uk

I'm not angry I'm disappointed

It sends out the wrong message, that such language is acceptable

He should have known better

Shame on him!

There’s always something phoney about these religious types, even when they seem legit like this one. At least he could recognise what a cretin Trump is.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I don't think homosexuals are demonic or such. I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with being gay. I have been badly misread. I have written a great deal more porn than most and half of it is gay.

I just don't believe they should be given the same privilege of marriage. That's it. It's not compatible with Christian theology. My Church, the RCC, and the OC and others have all lately agreed on this. I do not believe it is the way God planned it, it is not found within my Tradition and it is not part of my worldview. I am being namecalled and labelled for espousing beliefs my Church has held since its inception. There is no way for a gay marriage to be theologically, sacramentally recognized.

I call liberals Woke as that is the name they gave themselves.

So trying to chase me out with slur words designed to shut me up are going to do the opposite. It won't make my views go away, it will just mean you don't hear them and can live in your liberal paradise while you put Traditionalists in a mute jail. If we did that you the Woke we'd be called fascists.

I reject all this 'phobic' terminology as being borderline meaningless and having no effect on those against whom it is thrown save to harden them in their beliefs. Doubling-down on it doesn't work.

I will not support SSM no matter what I'm called and if someone called me it in real life he might get a book thrown at him. I expect better conversation than 'your a phobe!'

Okay, I get you and I don't consider you any of those negative words and yet, your position can cause harm to other humans.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Do you realize this word normalizes the idea that standard conservative beliefs are unacceptable? Do you understand why I might reject this as a whole concept?

What "standard conservative beliefs" do you think are being labelled homophobic but should be considered acceptable?

It is a silencer word used against Traditionalists and to say that instead of our views being an alternative opinion it is something to be eradicated and hounded out.

But hurting other people is something that should be stopped.

The word itself only has a meaning in a world where liberal social morals are taken as the standard. I do not have this is a standard, so the word is a meaningless name-calling attack on my beliefs.

The Golden Rule is "liberal social morals" now?

I would ask it not be used as being definitionally useless to Traditionalists.

Why would it be "definitionally useless"?