The Baggage of Bigotry

The BBQ Pit
21

I don’t particularly hate homosexuals. Nor do I particularly refuse to tolerate them.

I neither know nor particularly care about your way of life, except in that I believe it wrong for people to engage in homosexual liasons. I don’t agree that they ought to be married according to the government, although I might consider legislation to abolish the government’s recognition of marriage. I don’t consider marriage to be a fundamental right, at least, not one enshrined in the Constitution, or even common law.

Being black has nothing to do with how one behaves. Neither do I particularly dislike homosexuals. Rather, I disagree with a behavior commonly (and more or less only) found with a group tat happens to contain them.

22

Then don’t do it, whatever it is you disagree with; but that the end of your right to control it. Even clicking your tounge in distaste is presumptive and condescending and makes you a bigot.

23

Yeah right. Here’s what my behavior is. I wake up and go to work. After work I come home, eat dinner, turn on the television and fall asleep. Real scandalous. This image that we all flock to the disco and hump like rabbits is pure nonsense and stereoptyping. We’re mostly just as boring as anyone else :stuck_out_tongue:

24

So, suggesting that I might posibly disagree with anyone else’s chosen course of action makes me a bigot? I personally feel that, if they can, people should not marry, but should devote themselves to religious worship, which may or may not involve Holy Orders. Does expressing that make me bigoted towards married folks.

Moreover, aren’t you being a bigot right now by telling me I’m a bigot for my beliefs? or is this the famous one-way bigotry thing? :smiley: and :dubious: all at the same time.

I don’t recall suggesting that you did. If, in fact, you are not in a relationship with another man (under the assumption that anyone with the name “SteveG1” is not female) then you are not, by my lights, doing anything wrong. Now, skipping from momentary relationship to momentary relationship is another sin entirely. Well, actually its several.

25

So what you’re saying is, it works out to the same thing.

26

May I ask, what about someone who believe that homosexuality is morally wrong, and that no one should engage in homosexual acts, but actively opposes any attempt to denigrate or discriminate against homosexuals, and believes that homosexual couples should have all of the same rights as heterosexual couples, up to and including marriage and adoption? Bigot, or not?

27

Yep. They might not be Fred Phelps but it’s a matter of degrees not substance. Don’t get me wrong, I’d prefer your hypothetical non-hating bigot to the hating variety; but prejudice is what it is. You can’t really think it’s morally wrong without denigrating our lives. That thought itself is denigrating. Again, it’s ain’t bashing so it’s less bad. But it does help foster the society which feeds the likes of Russell Henderson and Aaron McKinney.

28

No chooses what genes they get. More to the point, I don’t consider an individual’s desires an indication of morality, except to the degree that an indidivual follows them to bad ends. I happen to have a somewhat different view of bad ends than several other people in this debate. I believe that individuals so

You believe I am doing a wrong, evil, and bad thing. You are therefore denigrating my life, because my beliefs flow naturally from what I am: Catholic. And before you laughably suggest that being Catholic is less important or less intrinsic than being gay, may I point out that that particular statement would apply only for you, in that you cannot accurately describe how other individuals feel? I am Catholic based on a number of factors, incluing family, choice, introspective relfection and intellectual study. In this more or less important than the product of genetic (or, according to some researchers, purely probability-based factors?

Face it: the mere fact that people disagree with you and say so is the price we pay for living in a free society. Silencing the opposition by demonizing them is an immoral and unethical action, whether it is done by aggessively anti-homosexual individuals or by pro-gay marriage inidividuals.

Well, I don’t have a problem with legal protections, though a Christian Generic-White Straight Suburban Male I feel really, really left out. I mean, where are all the people discriminating against me, aside from the kooks who live far away on TV going on about how evil we are? I want my oppression, dammit!

… then I could start the chrisitan-generic-straight-white-male studies at a major university and become a leftist media darling.

While I would never endorse any Christian church offering homsexual marriages, I am not yet certain whether or not there should be a legal difference, because I’m not certain I like government involvement in marriages. Of course, this might open the door to polygamy, purely business-related transactions, and could eventually reduce most people’s conceptions of marriage to contractual obligations.

As far as adoption, well, given the quality of foster homes, I can hardly believe a homosexual one could be worse. And I suppose that, since it appears that males have fewer biological instincts toward child-having, they might have more mature attitude and be more prepared, though I still feel that a mom/dad/kids family might be preferable overall.

29

Fine. I’m a pragmatist. I don’t try to read people’s minds to determine their opinions. But, as SolGrundy very eloquently put it awhile back (excuse my inelegant paraphrasing), I’m tired of being told that I have to smile and agree that reasonable people may think I don’t deserve the same rights as anyone else.

Trying to use government power to stop me from doing as I wish if it doesn’t hurt others is bigotry. I don’t get this attitude that we shouldn’t call bigots bigots just because it’s not nice. You think I shouldn’t get married? Fine. Catholics think divorced people shouldn’t get married. That’s one of their religious principles. You work to stop me from getting married? Yep, you’re a bigot. You don’t like being called a bigot? Stop being one - don’t blame me for telling the truth.

30

What behavior is it that is is “more or less only” found in homosexual couples? I’m hard pressed to think of any.

Dancing together? Hetero couples do that. Oral / manual sex? Heterosexuals do that. Anal sex? Heteros do that. Getting married, having and adopting children, working, getting promoted. Wearing Gay pride t-shirts? Heteros do all of those things.

What behavior specifically is it that you object to in homosexuals that doesn’t occur in heterosexuals? Cuz I can’t think of any right now.

31

Because saying one “disagrees” with the gay “way of life” is meaningless. I’m in the same boat as SteveG1; I’m gay, and my “way of life” is so boring that no one could possibly take offense at it or “disagree” with it.

But I was talking about the definition of the word “bigot.” It means prejudice/chauvinism + intolerance. Without the intolerance, you’re just prejudiced, not a bigot. At the time I made my post, smiling bandit hadn’t posted enough to indicate whether he/she were intolerant of homosexuals – later posts clarified that he or she is, of course, but at the time I was choosing to give the benefit of the doubt.

Personally, I strongly disagree with the “way of life” of anyone who says that people should devote all their time to religious worship; my God has high enough self-esteem that He doesn’t need to create people just for the sake of telling Him how great He is. He created a world for us to experience and learn from, not just kill time while we’re waiting to get to heaven.

But am I going to do anything at all to interfere with other people’s ability to practice that “way of life?” Heck no.

No, and it’s not the “leftist” bullshit you tried to pull, either. Someone is a bigot as soon as he tries to coerce you into not being Catholic. Whether this is through legal action denying you your rights – to, say, freedom of religion – or through verbal coercion to try and shame you into changing your behavior – by, say, jumping into threads to tell you that the way you live your life is wrong and immoral – then that becomes intolerance, and that’s bigotry.

Seriously: Save it. Either say something, or stop typing. Don’t keep regurgitating the same crap we keep hearing over and over and over again, in particular the bullshit slippery slope arguments about polygamy and sham marriages, and try to pass it off as tolerance and compassion and understanding. Shit, or get off the pot.

It’s not a subtle, complicated, nuanced issue; there’s right, and there’s wrong. It’s wrong to deny a group of people the same rights that everyone else has. Full stop.

32

And while we’re at it, Smiling Bandit, what in the holy hell gives you the right to judge what another church is doing? Insofar as I know, you were not Pope – though if you are John Paul II, congratulations on your being on the road to recovery, and you’re in my prayers – nor a bishop. Which means you have fuck-all right to pontificate about other churches’ beliefs (not that they have any greater right, but they do have the teaching power, and therefore any comments they make are excusable). You clean up your own collection of beams – not merely the molestation stuff, but the bishops attempting to influence the last election, and the people teaching absurdities not in the Catechism as though authoritative for Catholics – and then you may consider what motes may be in Episcopal eyes.

And consider that in the 1840s there were laws in some places prohibiting Catholics from having full civil rights – because of their sinful rejection of the Protestant religion, you see. (Amazing how painful the shoe becomes when you try it on!)

33

I’m hoping that time has substantially changed the situation, but I was recently stunned to learn that women leaders were not allowed to walk beside the male leaders in the Civil Rights March on Washington in 1963 – not even Rosa Parks. They were not in leadership positions on the program.

It has crossed my mind several times (in discussions of the early toleration of slavery in this country) that bigotry is so deeply-rooted in our programming that some of us cannot see it in ourselves. We are as blind to it as slave owners.

I have no idea which of my viewpoints are seen as bigoted now or will be seen as bigoted in the future. Maybe my commonly held ideas on the restriction on teenage behavior will be seen as bigotry.

I see a lot of bigotry against Southerners, women, overweight people, political positions, homosexuals, mental illness, religions, foreigners – right here in a place that is supposed to be about fighting ignorance. And even some Administrators can be blind to it. I suppose no one is exempt.

34

Is “fine” a yes or a no? I’m asking because I’m genuinely curious. I don’t know how to answer my own question here, so I’m looking for your viewpoint out of genuine curiosity, not to score some Socratic debating points.

That, on the other hand, is something I agree with entirely.

Are you saying that being a Catholic necessarily means that you have to consider homosexuality immoral? That would certainly come as a shock to my mom.

35

I am in a very long term (23 years) mongamous relationship. I have no plans to discontinue it. Both my S.O and I are Catholic (surprise surprise). It is also none of your business what I do. There are people who think singing, dancing, card playing, any happiness at all is a sin. I place as much stock in their opinions as I do in yours (none). You have as much say in my life as I have in yours (none). Be prepared to take a lot of flak from many people here.

36

It all boils down to Live And Let Live. You don’t have to like me (I don’t care either way). You don’t have to approve (I don’t care either way). The problem starts if you try to “legislate” on me, or take any other action. There are plenty of individuals I either don’t like, or despise. I just don’t make laws against them.

37

I have no idea why anyone’s suprised by this.

African-Americans can be some of the biggest bigots in America, ESPECIALLY when it comes to 1) white folks 2) other black folks ('specially really thuggish niggers) 3) co-opting Civil Rights from Latinos and gays and 4) religious hatred of homosexuality. But black people’s homophobia is weird: there’s this general secular tolerance, but a desire to keep BLACK gays either A) out in the open comedic figures, or B) out-in the open female confidentes or C) closested and invisible writers, artists, sports heroes, actors, singers, politicians, religious authority, etc.

There’s ribald religious condemnation that occurs in the churches but we don’t have a black Rev. Fred Phelps yet (Farakhan is perhaps closest). It’s not personal hatred of gays or hate crimes of violence that are a major force here (although I freely admit this happens and blacks do it, too) but a desire to exclude gays from the national civil rights agenda, which is heterosexual African-American. It’s like some preverted idea to make sure that THIS particular minority remains second class citizens so WE won’t be down there. Shit’s sad. Who knew that crabs in a barrel were full of fags, too? Niggers and flies, man.

38

It’s normal, it’s the same old tired shit. Each group prays, demands, riots, wants tolerance and justice for themselves. To hell with everybody else. As soon as they “get there” they pick someone else to fuck over. In this country, the English hated the Irish. The Irish hated the Italians. The Italians hated the Puerto Ricans. The Puerto Ricans hated the Cubans. The whites hated the blacks, the blacks hated the whites. Everybody hates the Mexicans. That’s the deal.
I want freedom and justice. I want POWER. As soon as I get it, I will use it to fuck with somebody else.

Justice really is “just us”. Pretty messed up, isn’t it.

39

I don’t believe I said I did. Whatever gave you that idea?

The same thing that gives the right to judge what any other human being or organization does.

There are a great many places in the world where I am not welcome now. Calling them bigots will not convince them to stop. Reason might.

Then your mother’s beliefs are in contradiction to the Church.

40

It was probably this:

Which is opposition adorned with lots of words to make it sound like a reasoned thought process. It’s not. It’s not a complicated issue. There’s right and wrong, fair and unfair. Heterosexuals can get married, homosexuals cannot. That’s injustice, it’s not fair. It’s that simple.

You want to oppose polygamy and sham marriages, then oppose those. You want to fight for government to get out of marriages completely, then fight for that. The situation right now is that the government is getting involved in marriages, and it’s doing so unfairly. That is the injustice that needs to be corrected. And there’s no “I’m still thinkin’ about it” on the ballot – if you don’t vote to stop heteros-only marriage laws, then that’s exactly the same thing as endorsing them.

You use reason to counter a reasonable argument. The only way to counter prejudice and bigotry is by pointing it out for what it is and fighting against it.

No, his mother’s beliefs most likely come from a process of examining the teachings of the Church, her own spirituality, her role in the world, the role of faith and spirituality versus secular life, and most importantly: how her beliefs should interact with the lives of others who don’t necessarily share her beliefs.

Your path to God and Heaven is apparently not the same as hers, and clearly not the same as mine. The difference is that we acknowledge that we are both sharing the planet and living our lives with our own personal relationships with God and our faith. You do nothing more than claim that we’re wrong.