[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
You don’t know the first thing about the Bible, and I don’t feel the need to wisen you up.[/quote]
So you’re not denying that slavery was considered valid by people who interpreted the bible one way?
What?
[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
There was no content to dodge - my point. You’re “content” was based entirely on a word without meaning.[/quote]
Homophobia (from Greek homós: one and the same; phóbos: fear, phobia) is a term used to describe irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuals. It can also mean “irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuality or homosexuals”. Homophobic is the adjective form of this term used to describe the qualities of these characteristics while homophobe is the noun form given as a title to individuals with homophobic characteristics.
There, I gave the word meaning. More?
The term homophobia is often used collectively with other terms denoting bigotry and discrimination. In a 1998 address, Coretta Scott King asserted that, “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.” Likewise, George Yancey, writing in Christian Ethics Today associates “sexism, racism, class distinctions, or homophobia” with one another and views them all as “varieties of discrimination,” although he argues that they are not identical.
Does that clarify what people mean when they say “homophobia”?
[quote]Makavali wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
There was no content to dodge - my point. You’re “content” was based entirely on a word without meaning.
Homophobia (from Greek homós: one and the same; phóbos: fear, phobia) is a term used to describe irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuals. It can also mean “irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuality or homosexuals”. Homophobic is the adjective form of this term used to describe the qualities of these characteristics while homophobe is the noun form given as a title to individuals with homophobic characteristics.
There, I gave the word meaning. More?
The term homophobia is often used collectively with other terms denoting bigotry and discrimination. In a 1998 address, Coretta Scott King asserted that, “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.” Likewise, George Yancey, writing in Christian Ethics Today associates “sexism, racism, class distinctions, or homophobia” with one another and views them all as “varieties of discrimination,” although he argues that they are not identical.
Does that clarify what people mean when they say “homophobia”?[/quote]
Not really. For liberals, anything type of behavior or belief they don’t agree with is some sort of phobia.
This is funny. I have an aversion to having another man in my ass. Therefore, I’m a bigot!
@ PRCalDude -
I’m actually understanding your argument. It is classic social conservative, in the truest sense. You want to not fuck with something that has worked. I see your point.
But as well, that could have been said about segregation. And slavery. And countless other things that “worked”.
Do you believe allowing homosexuals to marry, therefore changing the definition of marriage to read “When two consenting adults form a legal contracted relationship and pledge to stay together… ect…”, will bring about an end to western society as we know? If not, than what effects on western culture and society, positive or negative, do you think it would have?
Plenty of morally reprehensible institutions stood for very long because they ‘worked’. If you agree that homosexuality is NOT morally reprehensible, than can you agree that not valuing there relationship in society the same as a normal, heterosexual marriage between two barren people, is morally reprehensible? If not, why?
I’ve read large portions of the Bible (a friend of mine took Bible as lit and carries one with him as ‘light reading’) and one can most certainly interpret it in many, many ways. Many of it’s most major rules, rules still continued and outlined in the New Testament, are currently being ignored by a majority of Christians. Would you call these people non-Christians? Or would you say the Bible is meant to be a flexible, interpretable document, a parable, if you will?
A lot of these questions are less about this argument, and more for my own curiosity. It is rare that I meet a Christian who is both feverish about his or her faith, and well educated about it and other subjects (a bit of an assumption about you on my part).
[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
This is funny. I have an aversion to having another man in my ass. Therefore, I’m a bigot! [/quote]
Not really. That would make you heterosexual. The bigot part comes from you thinking other people shouldn’t do it.
[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
Or them pushing it on us. [/quote]
I must have missed the gay brigade forcing me to marry a man.
[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
I’m saying, that as a building block of society, we ought to leave the definition of marriage alone that we’ve been using for 15 or so centuries unless there’s solid data showing that it will have no adverse effects on society. By adverse, I mean that it will not drive normal marriage rates down, normal birthrates down, and that the children raised in these gay marriages won’t be more ill-adjusted than the heterosexual mean.[/quote]
In that case, slavery should never have been abolished. It was the building block of America (cheap free labor) and you got rid of it because some people got their panties in a twist about equal rights?
What’s up with that shit? I mean come on, you yanks need to man up. There was no data to suggest that slavery could be abolished without some sort of negative effect, why the fuck did you do it? Are y’all retarded or something? And whats up with allowing interracial marriage and removing segregation? I mean jeez people, you gotta take society into account here.
Do you see what I’m doing here?
[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
I’m sorry. I forget what parts still count and what dont. Didn’t I hear recently that the catholic church no longer endorses the idea of purgatory?
I think you should try reading it yourself, then maybe you’ll come to an understanding.
[/quote]
Um, it wasn’t a question about the bible, it was a question about the churches current stance on a particular issue.
Ooooh, its semantics. Ok, reread everything I wrote, only instead of “homophobic” or “homophobia”, replace with “anti-gay”, or “bigoted against homosexuals”.
Its sad when you have to play games like these in order to avoid actual discourse.
[quote]
You dont know? Seems to me you’ve just got a case of “My team is winning so I want to keep it that way.”
In reality it isnt even a fact of them “pushing” anything on you, but getting you to stop pushing your agenda on them.
Or them pushing it on us. [/quote]
Aw, poor thing. You don’t want gays to get the same rights as straights. Those mean ol’ gay people are just pushin their agenda on you. You know, shit like “equality” and “civil rights”.
[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
Aw, poor thing. You don’t want gays to get the same rights as straights. Those mean ol’ gay people are just pushin their agenda on you. You know, shit like “equality” and “civil rights”.[/quote]
Come on man, surely you’ve realized that equality is not for everyone? It’s only for heterosexual Christians. Try to keep up.
[quote]Makavali wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
This is funny. I have an aversion to having another man in my ass. Therefore, I’m a bigot!
Not really. That would make you heterosexual. The bigot part comes from you thinking other people shouldn’t do it.[/quote]
Oh, good! I’m not one then, because I don’t care.
[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
Oh, good! I’m not one then, because I don’t care. [/quote]
If you don’t care, then why are you so against gay people calling their union marriage and having the government recognize that?
Well, according to the definition of homophobia you provided, anyone that discriminates against the same sex for sexual partners is a homophobe. Since the ‘substance’ of your argument revolved around accusing everyone who disagrees with sam-sex marriage of homophobia, perhaps it’s time for you to instrospect, unless your a homosexual yourself.
[quote]Makavali wrote:
CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
Aw, poor thing. You don’t want gays to get the same rights as straights. Those mean ol’ gay people are just pushin their agenda on you. You know, shit like “equality” and “civil rights”.
Come on man, surely you’ve realized that equality is not for everyone? It’s only for heterosexual Christians. Try to keep up.[/quote]
Not quite. A man and a woman. I went to a wiccan wedding once. My cousin’s a wiccan. I certainly didn’t tell her not to get married (to a man) because her faith isn’t mine.
[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
Well, according to the definition of homophobia you provided, anyone that discriminates against the same sex for sexual partners is a homophobe. Since the ‘substance’ of your argument revolved around accusing everyone who disagrees with sam-sex marriage of homophobia, perhaps it’s time for you to instrospect, unless your a homosexual yourself. [/quote]
Once again, here is the definition for you. Posted again, because you like this argument of homophobia not being valid because of the semantic of the word. For the purpose of this argument, this is the definition to go from. Read the second part carefully.
Homophobia (from Greek homós: one and the same; phóbos: fear, phobia) is a term used to describe irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuals. It can also mean “irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuality or homosexuals”. Homophobic is the adjective form of this term used to describe the qualities of these characteristics while homophobe is the noun form given as a title to individuals with homophobic characteristics.
There, I gave the word meaning. More?
The term homophobia is often used collectively with other terms denoting bigotry and discrimination. In a 1998 address, Coretta Scott King asserted that, “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.” Likewise, George Yancey, writing in Christian Ethics Today associates “sexism, racism, class distinctions, or homophobia” with one another and views them all as “varieties of discrimination,” although he argues that they are not identical.
So because heterosexuals have an aversion to homosexual sex, we’re all homophobes. So are you a homophobe or a homosexual?
Not an aversion to the act. Homosexuality doesn’t necessarily mean sex.
But no, please keep arguing semantics. Your argument just gets stronger and stronger each time you claim homophobia isn’t real.
Also, I class myself as a heterosexual who believes in equality. Funny that.
The definition just says ‘aversion.’
Homo-sexual. No sex necessarily implied there. Got it.
So you’re a homophobe?
[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
The definition just says ‘aversion.’
Homo-sexual. No sex necessarily implied there. Got it.
So you’re a homophobe?[/quote]
-
Aversion to homosexuality or homosexuals. Obviously you should learn to read. I hear it’s a useful skill.
-
Non-sexual relationships are possible. I know it sounds outrageous, but it’s possible. Crazy, huh?
-
I am not a homophobe, nor am I a homosexual. Crazy how it’s not one or the other, but that’s how the world works. Sort of like how marriage isn’t exclusively man and woman or exclusively monogamous.
[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
It can also mean “irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuality or homosexuals”.
So because heterosexuals have an aversion to homosexual sex, we’re all homophobes. So are you a homophobe or a homosexual?[/quote]
Worst fail ever.