With the passing of Carl Karcher (owner of Carl’s Jr./Hardees), I’m reminded that I’d always “heard” he was a huge racist and/or homophobe, but I don’t recall ever seeing any evidence of this. A very quick Google search and a perusal of Snopes told me nothing other than that the rumor is out there.
So what evidence, if any, IS there that he was any of those things?
Is this good enough for you?
Which, of course, does not make him a homophobe or racist, but merely someone who didn’t think teachers should be homosexual.
Yes, I don’t believe blacks should be teachers. That doesn’t make me a racist.
Can’t have the gay rubbing off on the kiddies now can we?
If Carl Karcher had promoted an initiative that attempted to fire black teachers, he could be legitimately accused of being racist.
However, where your analogy fails is that homophobia is not the same as racism. Racism is the application of different standards to people of different races. Homophobia is a virulent and irrational hatred of people who are homosexual. Thus, not everyone who advocates treating those who are homosexual differently is a homophobe.
It doesn’t make him a racist. But, yes, it does make him a homophobe.
I am sorry, but mere discrimination against homosexuals is not homophobia. Homophobia is, at a minimum, a hatred of homosexuals. Conflating the concepts causes a significant difficulty to dealing with the issue of discrimination against homosexuals, because it attempts to paint anyone who has a feeling that homosexuality is morally wrong as a person who is a hater. Thus, instead of dealing with the feeling that there is something “wrong” with that sexual preference, and learning to overcome that feeling, the issue is shunted aside, for fear of being tarred with the same brush.
By the same token, not everyone who discriminated (or discriminates still) against Americans of African descent should be equated with people who burn crosses and engage in anti-“black” violence.
For the purposes of my original question, I completely agree with DSYoungEsq. My understanding was that Karcher was truly a homophobe and not “only” someone who discriminated against homosexuals. Although I’m curious about evidence of either.
People who discriminate against people because of their race are racist. It’s obviously worse to kill somebody because they’re black then to deny them a job because they’re black but both are forms of racism.
People who discriminate against people because of they’re gay are homophobic. It’s obviously worse to kill somebody because they’re gay then to deny them a job because they’re gay but both are forms of homophobia.
You can have all the moral values you want. But when your moral values lead you to discriminate against black people (or other races) then you are a racist. And when you moral values lead you to discriminate against gay people, then you’re a homophobe. Anyone who finds comparisons about their moral values to be unpleasant should probably take a good look at those values.
Bull.
Anyone who is opposed to gay people being teachers is homophobic. There’s no other possible explanation. If you want to redefine homophobia by a narrow definition than everyone else, that’s your problem. But we all know what the term homophobia generally means (including various narrower meanings), and it’s not possible to be a supporter of the Briggs Initiative without being homophobic. I’m not one to throw around the word “homophobic” casually, but in this case it’s appropriate.
From Wiki’s article on homophobia:
[citations omitted]
The article goes on to contain criticism of the term, but the usage in this thread is consistent with the basic summary of the term in the article.
Cite, please.
Merriam-Webster’s defines homophobia as “irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuality or homosexuals.”
OK, I’ll bite. What rationale could someone have for calling for all homosexual teachers to be fired that wouldn’t constitute an irrational hatred of them? I’m drawing a blank.
They’re jealous of the gays better sense of fashion?
I’m guessing that DSYoungEsq is trying to make the distinction that homophobia is strictly the fear of homosexuals, which is the narrow literal meaning of the term. People might hate homosexuals without fearing them or they may have other emotional responses towards homsexuals that cause them to discriminate against them. Which is why the common meaning of the term homophobia is any general discrimination against homosexuals regardless of its specific motivation.
Well then, let’s eliminate all language, since every word (with the exception of some proper nouns) is a generalization. Of course “homophobia” contains more than one meaning, just like almost every other word.
I agree. The issue of how many different ways you can define homophobe isn’t the one under discussion here. We were talking about whether or not Carl Karcher fit the common definition of a homophobe. And the answer is yes.
However, nobody’s brought any evidence about his racial views yet.
The quote irks me. It seems to me they’re trying to tie in the fact that he’s a conservative Republican with his support of a homophobic measure.
One does not always lead to the other.
As it is commonly used, “homophopia” is a catch-all term for prejudice and bigotry towards homosexuals. Advocating that a person be fired for no other reason than being homosexual is homophobic and that’s all there is to it. Saying that “homophobia requires hatred” is a fake and overly-simplistic definition.