[quote]bald eagle wrote:
I will say that is very hard to find the leaders in the gay community that will condemn certain behaviors. For example - I have not seen one “gay leader” condemn the ones who intruded on the Catholic mass several weeks ago in California.
[/quote]
“Gay leaders”? What?! It’s not a military unit. They’re just people, why do they need some leader or something to represent them. What other population groups have leaders?
I’m not really comfortable with homosexuality. I have nothing against gays, and understand that it’s not my place to judge their lifestyle. I would never degrade or disparage a gay person or do anything to make him feel bad. Still, when I see two guys holding hands, I can’t help but be grossed out. It’s just an abberation to me.
[quote]malonetd wrote:
bald eagle wrote:
I will say that is very hard to find the leaders in the gay community that will condemn certain behaviors. For example - I have not seen one “gay leader” condemn the ones who intruded on the Catholic mass several weeks ago in California.
“Gay leaders”? What?! It’s not a military unit. They’re just people, why do they need some leader or something to represent them. What other population groups have leaders?[/quote]
Religious ones.
Religious people are the ones condemning them, so they just assume they’re a rival religion. They think Gay’s are united, have a leader and special rituals, and go around trying to convert people.
It’s funny, when you think about it.
[quote]malonetd wrote:
“Gay leaders”? What?! It’s not a military unit. They’re just people, why do they need some leader or something to represent them. What other population groups have leaders?[/quote]
Unfortunately, lots of groups have people who claim to be leaders or spokespeople - and those people often advance their own agenda and engage in rent-seeking behavior rather than simply representing the views of their supposed constituency. But the media gives them a platform and sets them up as “spokesmen” for their communities because the media is lazy (much easier to get a soundbite than do a scientific sample and get a representative survey) and the spokesmen tend to represent opinions that reflect the way the media itself believes things should be.
[quote]malonetd wrote:
bald eagle wrote:
I will say that is very hard to find the leaders in the gay community that will condemn certain behaviors. For example - I have not seen one “gay leader” condemn the ones who intruded on the Catholic mass several weeks ago in California.
“Gay leaders”? What?! It’s not a military unit. They’re just people, why do they need some leader or something to represent them. What other population groups have leaders?[/quote]
I am referring to the heads of various gay organizations that the media tend to go to for interviews and opinions.
[quote]Makavali wrote:
bald eagle wrote:
I will say that is very hard to find the leaders in the gay community that will condemn certain behaviors. For example - I have not seen one “gay leader” condemn the ones who intruded on the Catholic mass several weeks ago in California.
Define intrude. Did they cause a scene or did they go in and sit down?
Got a link?[/quote]
No I do not have a link, I saw coverage on the news. I can try and find one. They were clearly there to cause a scene and make the people there feel very uncomfortable. They did not just go in and sit down. It is the kind of thing that causes people to view them in a negative way.
Clearly, when you see this sort of thing it is quite obvious that many gays are very troubled people psychcologically speaking. Normal people do not act in this way.
A little off topic but when you deviate away from what nature and I believe God intended - and that is the male/female relationship for the purpose of procreating - then one is left with a void in their life. I am not here to ridicule or condemn - just point out why some people have a negative view of gays.
[quote]bald eagle wrote:
Makavali wrote:
bald eagle wrote:
I will say that is very hard to find the leaders in the gay community that will condemn certain behaviors. For example - I have not seen one “gay leader” condemn the ones who intruded on the Catholic mass several weeks ago in California.
Define intrude. Did they cause a scene or did they go in and sit down?
Got a link?
No I do not have a link, I saw coverage on the news. I can try and find one. They were clearly there to cause a scene and make the people there feel very uncomfortable. They did not just go in and sit down. It is the kind of thing that causes people to view them in a negative way.
Clearly, when you see this sort of thing it is quite obvious that many gays are very troubled people psychcologically speaking. Normal people do not act in this way.
A little off topic but when you deviate away from what nature and I believe God intended - and that is the male/female relationship for the purpose of procreating - then one is left with a void in their life. I am not here to ridicule or condemn - just point out why some people have a negative view of gays.
[/quote]
Because the are prejudiced-
The fact that you can point to your prejudices and that they have long tradition does not change that you belong to that group.
What’s with the use of “Homophobia?” Does that include people who aren’t afraid of homosexuals, yet find them perverted? I mean, I think those who participate in scat play are engaged in a revolting sexual lifestyle. Does that make me a fecalphiliacaphobe?
[quote]Makavali wrote:
bald eagle wrote:
I will say that is very hard to find the leaders in the gay community that will condemn certain behaviors. For example - I have not seen one “gay leader” condemn the ones who intruded on the Catholic mass several weeks ago in California.
Define intrude. Did they cause a scene or did they go in and sit down?
Got a link?[/quote]
Just providing a link to further discussion. This has been an interesting topic.
I find it hard to believe they weren’t there to make some sort of trouble based on their slogan of �??Go forth and sin some more�?? but it doesn’t sound like they made a huge scene.
[quote]bald eagle wrote:
They were clearly there to cause a scene and make the people there feel very uncomfortable.
[/quote]
Yeah, I HATE being uncomfortable.
But don’t you think homophobia makes them uncomfortable all the time, not just once or twice a year? On top of that, I’m pretty sure the people made to feel uncomfortable at this sit-in weren’t worried about their physical well-being, or even life. Likewise, the people that happen to see a gay pride parade don’t have that concern. Gay folks don’t have the same luxury, and that might be part of the reason why they do what they do.
[quote]BostonBarrister wrote:
malonetd wrote:
“Gay leaders”? What?! It’s not a military unit. They’re just people, why do they need some leader or something to represent them. What other population groups have leaders?
Unfortunately, lots of groups have people who claim to be leaders or spokespeople - and those people often advance their own agenda and engage in rent-seeking behavior rather than simply representing the views of their supposed constituency. But the media gives them a platform and sets them up as “spokesmen” for their communities because the media is lazy (much easier to get a soundbite than do a scientific sample and get a representative survey) and the spokesmen tend to represent opinions that reflect the way the media itself believes things should be.[/quote]
Yeah I get this, but other than the media, I didn’t think anyone took these people seriously. It seems to me anyone with half a brain…nevermind, I’ll just stop there.
Way back in high school I knew guys who were queer stompers. I never went along and most of the time they were cool but they’d tell stories about finding some gay guy and pounding the shit out of him. One of these guys was later caught setting fire to bums. The cops saw him squirting lighter fluid on a bum and at first thought he was pissing on the guy. For all I know, the dude is still in prison.
I knew some crazy motherfuckers growing up. Glad I stayed sane!! ;D
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
I knew some crazy motherfuckers growing up. Glad I stayed sane!! ;D[/quote]
That is most definitely up for debate.
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
I knew some crazy motherfuckers growing up. Glad I stayed sane!! ;D
That is most definitely up for debate.[/quote]
You seem to be very fired up by this thread, bro. Is there something you’re not telling us? I know English majors are kinda famous for certain ‘inclinations’, like having their lover whisper poetry in their pinkshell of an ear, from behind.
I guess I can understand you being upset by my attack on your lifestyle.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
What’s with the use of “Homophobia?” Does that include people who aren’t afraid of homosexuals, yet find them perverted? I mean, I think those who participate in scat play are engaged in a revolting sexual lifestyle. Does that make me a fecalphiliacaphobe? [/quote]
Yes. Yes it does. Are you going to deny them their right to shit on each other? If not, than no one gives a shit.
Plenty of people find homosexuality disturbing, yet they don’t give a shit if gays get married, adopt kids, or have sex with each other. They’re homophobes, but they’re tolerant homophobes.
Tolerance isn’t liking of encouraging something, it’s tolerating it.
[quote]belligerent wrote:
I’m not really comfortable with homosexuality. I have nothing against gays, and understand that it’s not my place to judge their lifestyle. I would never degrade or disparage a gay person or do anything to make him feel bad. Still, when I see two guys holding hands, I can’t help but be grossed out. It’s just an abberation to me.[/quote]
But see, there’s nothing wrong with that. It’s when you start to discriminate against them because of it that there’s a real issue.
[quote]Ouiser wrote:
Just providing a link to further discussion. This has been an interesting topic.
I find it hard to believe they weren’t there to make some sort of trouble based on their slogan of �??Go forth and sin some more�?? but it doesn’t sound like they made a huge scene.[/quote]
See that’s just moronic. They hurt themselves by doing that.
[quote]Beowolf wrote:
Sloth wrote:
What’s with the use of “Homophobia?” Does that include people who aren’t afraid of homosexuals, yet find them perverted? I mean, I think those who participate in scat play are engaged in a revolting sexual lifestyle. Does that make me a fecalphiliacaphobe?
Yes. Yes it does. Are you going to deny them their right to shit on each other? If not, than no one gives a shit.
Plenty of people find homosexuality disturbing, yet they don’t give a shit if gays get married, adopt kids, or have sex with each other. They’re homophobes, but they’re tolerant homophobes.
Tolerance isn’t liking of encouraging something, it’s tolerating it.[/quote]
But Homophobia means one fears homosexuals. Sort of like arachnophobia, where one would literally run and scream if confronted with a spider. Or, Claustrophobia, where one will NOT ride an elevator, possibly even if it was the only exit out of a burning building.
So “Homophobia” comes off as an pretty bad misuse of words. I’ve yet to meet someone opposed to male on male marriage, who would break into a sweat, and run from a store, because a flaming homosexual was heard lisping at the register.
And, I definetly think “tolerant homophobe” is silly. Anyone else object to Phobias being so dumbed down, that people use the term to shut up the other side in an arguement? “Hey you Democratophobe!” “You Christianophobe!” “You Iraq warophobe (muhaha)!”
Edit: Does this mean if I oppose two heterosexual male long term roommates “marrying” (hey, they’re committed life long bachelors as far as women go, so why not?)for the benefits, I’m a heterophobe?!
[quote]Sloth wrote:
But Homophobia means one fears homosexuals. Sort of like arachnaphobia, where one would literally run and scream if confronted with a spider. Or, Claustrophobia, where one will NOT ride an elevator, possibly even if it was the only exit out of a building.
So “Homophobia” comes off as an pretty bad misuse of words. I’ve yet to meet someone opposed to male on male marriage, who would break into a sweat, and run from a store, because a flaming homosexual was heard lisping.
And, I definetly think “tolerant homophobe” is silly. Anyone else a little. Anyone else object to Phobias being so dumbed down, that people use the term to shut up the other side in an arguement? “Hey you Democratphobe!” “You Christianphobe!” “You Iraq warphobe (muhaha)!”[/quote]
This isn’t a discussion on how they picked the wrong word to describe it. I labeled this topic as such because that’s how intolerance of gay people is labeled.
[quote]Makavali wrote:
This isn’t a discussion on how they picked the wrong word to describe it. I labeled this topic as such because that’s how intolerance of gay people is labeled.[/quote]
Well, if you used the label, it’s open to discussion.