Acrimony aside it seems to me that your suggesting we should accept homosexual’s words that it’s not a choice is at odds with your behavior re: Conservatives. To refresh your memory you do not accept the word of conservatives regarding their beliefs and insist that they are either lying or deluding themselves.
Now, I have no problem with homosexuality not being a choice. I’m sure it’s not. Why should somebody who beleives it is a choice accept the word when you do not accept that as a standard of proof through others?
Next up, as regards to attacking “homophobes,” the problem as I’m sure you well know is confusing the label with the thing.
Despite what you said earlier, you are nothing more than what you do. Lissener is not a homosexual, a male, or any of the other things that compromise your being of which you have no choice.
You are nothing more than the sum of your choices, and the actions that follow.
If you choose to be a jerk to anybody you choose to lable a homophobe, you lessen yourself.
As my Daddy says “Your capacity to hurt and loathe others cannot but equal the the loathing and hatred you contain for yourself.”
In a nutshell, JerseyDiamond, I think (and I hope I’m not being presumptuous here) that **Lissener and I have reached a state of near-agreement that, although it is technically possible to regard homosexuality as a personal choice and not be a homophobe, it is simply the case that most (or possibly all) people with that view were actually driven to the decision that it is a choice by their pre-existing homophobic prejudices.
Yes, it is logically possible to believe that homosexuality COULD be a choice but you’re closing your mind and tirade to remove that from any conversation without calling it homophobia. I’ve got a friend that was married to a woman and after 12 years of being married, his wife ended it and he then came out. I’ve got another that came out as a lesbian when she was thirteen and is now happily married to a guy and has 4 kids. I’ve chosen to live my life as a gay male. I do believe I was born gay and have no attraction to the opposite sex. I’m pretty sure I was born this way and am happy as I am.
Sexuality isn’t as black and white as you make it and I don’t think you have all of the answers, knowledge, brain power, or ability to scramble to the top of the average intelligence heap to see out on the information horizon with your myopic vision.
LISSENER,…> I am a bit apathetic to you, and your beliefs. You will not survive the game of LIFE. Enjoy the freedoms that are granted you in this life. Why do you have so much hatred for folks that do not share you’re lifestyle? It is a lifestyle, no corraborating research has been done to understand why you get moist looking at hairy asses when you are porking your S.O. …I allow myslf to looking and fantisizing about women who are older than my oldest niece, or younger than my Mother…
Ooops, I noticed Ryle Dup raised this question way back on the first page, and I wanted to address it:
Please reread my earlier post: I said that my fiancee and I have agreed to adopt in the event that we couldn’t have children. What I said is that we wouldn’t use an artificial method of conception, at least one which the Church decided was illicit.
I hope my second and subsequent posts make this clearer: we’re not simply asking “how high” when the Church says “jump;” rather, we investigate the issues to determine why the Church says what it does. I think it’s fair to say that we presume that what the Church says is correct, since they’ve been playing the theology game for hundreds of years longer than we have. This is based on a lot of prayer and thoughtful consideration, however: as Christians, we’re concerned about the state of our souls, and REALLY don’t want to do anything to mess them up.
Man that’s a horrible sentence. I had to read it 3 times. lol
Anyway, so being that I think it is a choice, I am a homophobe, right?
So, can thinking that, and only thinking that make someone a homophobe, or does there have to be more to it?
I am just trying to understand what gays think makes a homophobe: a little of this, a little of that, etc.
It is so commonly said around here so I just wanted to know.
NB: Because ResIpsaLoquitur posted and announced some time off, I respectfully reserved this post.
Since your OP suggests your departure from the Board, I think it’s very important to interject here. Forgive me for posting something to which you are presently incapable of an answer, but you really opened up with that last one. That’s commendable.
I’m a little surprised by your attitude toward the possibility of adoption for you and your future wife, though; I hope it was just an off-hand comment. Unlike you, I’m not particularly devout, but I would feel a definite galvanizing force from my god, should it ever strike me sterile.
Your statement about “the pain of adoption” has me puzzled. It seems a little extreme. lissener: you’re simply making it easier for homophobes to crouch in the dark behind a hanging Carhartt. Your rants make the debates fractious; your ubiquity makes them angry.
Please keep in mind that when a man feels “it move” during an scene or encounter about which he’s been trained to feel revulsion, there’s a bitter conflict. I suspect that inner revulsion is part of what fuels homophobia.
An analogy: rubbing The Bell Curve in my face will never make me think that whites are smarter than blacks. In fact, I’m never going to believe that. Does it make my viewpoint less valuable?
Not necessarily (in my view); why do you think it is a choice?
No, if the sole thought in your head is “it is a choice”, that doesn’t make you a homophobe; however if you arrived at the decision that it is a choice because of some pre-existing opinion about homosexuality being a bad thing, then you are already a homophobe and the opinion that it is a choice is incidental.
You know what? You are absolutely right. It IS irrational.
Contempt? Yeah, maybe. Born out of fear? Absolutely. But fear of what? Fear of homosexuals? Maybe. Fear of you, personally? Unlikely. (I don’t know, you might be a scary guy)
Yes, it’s prejudice. IMO, it’s more likely learned behaviour and attitudes. Either taught by their parents, their peers, their church… They are part of the belief system, Changing these attitudes and behaviors can be a scary thing and it will NOT happen overnight, overwhelming evidence or not.
You want to call someone a homophobe because they believed their church? Their parents? Hell, a good part of the society? That’s up to you. But I submit that someone who holds these beliefs CAN change. Discussion and argument can help with their enlightenment. Condemnation cannot.
People can change, their ignorance can be fought and defeated. But the approach is important. As Mr B points out, your approach may be counter-productive to our stated goal.
Resa is trying to open his mind up to new possibilities. This should be encouraged.
Res said, “I, for one, will continue to study the issue further. I really will. I want to reclarify that this is largely how I study religious issues that I don’t understand or don’t have an answer to–”
The thing of it is, is that this is a huge, non-religious issue for so many. The inequalities that Lissener is (rightfully) ranting about affect those that DON’T have religious convictions, as well. Non-religious people can’t simply step back from the church and no longer be bothered by this issue. It has infiltrated our government as well.
I think your point is important, Kalhoun, and goes to the heart of how I differentiate morality and ethics. Morality is that which is between a man and his God (if he is a theist) or a man and his conscience (if he is an atheist). But ethics is that which is between a man and his fellow men.
No matter what the moral implications of homosexuality, homosexuals are entitled to the same rights as anyone — including the right to pursue their own happiness in their own way.
Lib makes an important point which I feel can’t be emphasised often enough; as long as an action is ethically neutral or positive, it is no legitimate business of anyone (except perhaps any authorities to which the individual willingly submits) other than the person performing it, even if, by the definition of another individual, the action is the most morally depraved thing imaginable.
