I don’t think so. I think I’m citing a widely held stereotype about gays that’s prevalent among fundies. I’m sure some gays have the same stereotypes about fundies, though perhaps to a lesser extent than fundies.
I live in the Bible Belt, I think I just DID describe what fundies think about gays. What are you saying, that most fundies DON’T have such a stereotyped viewpoint of gays?
Now, other groups may have stereotypes about other groups, but the OP asked why threads about homosexuality often come down to a shouting match between fundies and homos, and I think that’s the answer. I don’t have any idea why you think your point about Repubs and Hindus is relevant.
My point is that no group is as homogenous as you are painting the fundamentalists, and such sweeping generalizations are only useful to villianize (or, occasionally, lionize) the group you are describing. By issuing blanket generalizations about them, you are as guilty as people who say “gays are promiscuous” and the like.
It doesn’t help create tolerance & understanding, it causes escalation and conflict. And I’m not saying that the fundies aren’t guilty of the same thing; some of them are. Some of them.
But screw it. I’m not gay, and I don’t think I qualify as a fundamentalist, so have your fun.
Sorry. I was being a bit snarky, but I guess it didn’t really come across right. And sorry for misunderstanding you. Upon reread, it’s fairly obvious that you wanted examples from this board, not other places.
Nobody’s painting with a wide brush, Skammer. I’m asking about the fundies who are fixated on gay issues, and nowhere have I said that all of them are.
Page two, and still being diverted to discussions about the discussion.
If you examine a collection of threads where conservative Christians speak their minds, for example the Sexuality forum on Christian Forums, probably the most “popular” forum on that board, you’ll see the sort of inordinate focus on homosexuality of which lissener complains.
And as siege notes, many another “moral” stricture from Scripture is ignored. In addition to her examples, I’d offer the Biblical injunctions against the taking of interest and the permanent dispossession of land. But when was the last time you saw a group of conservative Christians picketing a bank for their sinful behavior?
I admit I hold both stereotypes about gays and American fundamentalist Christians to a large degree (not the nastier parts, stupid and weak, but the general urban v. rural stereotype; and, yes, I know that ALL stereotyping is nasty).
Am I right? No. But when I picture an American gay male in a flannel shirt and a pick-up truck, it’s L.L Bean and Eddie Bauer. But I think they should be able to contract legal unions (no matter what they are called), so I think stereotypes are a red herring. I don’t think that is the root of the frothing at the mouth the OP is trying to discuss.
Ok, I apologize for my sweeping remarks about fundamentalist christians- but I was using an extreme end of the scale, not the generic person who subscribes to strict religious beliefs. Bad tactic for not specifying this, but we all make mistakes, eh?
But really… doesn’t fundamentalist ideology (NOT in every case… appearently I’m going to have to add these clauses all the time now…) spend of lot of time focusing on how people are different, and why they therefore are not equal? Homophobia is still largely tolerated… so is sexism and racism and various isms, but anyway… so it’s ok to spend a lot of time talking about how inferior they are. That’s why it’s not black people or jewish people or things like that (AS much) anymore. My dad did just tell me of a bumper sticker he saw (nestled in between a Jesus fish and an NRA sticker, no lie kiddos) “My boss is an Austrian painter”.
I mean, there IS a reason this is even being discussed…
Homophobia is even more tolerated here than racism or sexism. I doubt you’d see a moderator admonishing a poster to be considerate and respectful of a racist or misogyinst on these boards, but we’re all required to treat homophobes like they’re simply disagreeing about a movie or something.
Here’s an idea about American homophobia, and I’m not just being goofy.
The U.S. has a very goal oriented culture; even in our recreation. We don’t spend hours staring at the sunlight on a lake or go for simple walks in the woods, we fish or hike to the top of a local mountain (in the East; I realize the Rockies are different); we drink to get drunk more than other cultures; we are great at crises, but piss off everyone else with long term foreign policy. Most of our children’s toys are [at least psuedo] educational, for heaven’s sake. Every thing we do is supposed to assist in reaching some further goal (while we’re making sweeping generalizations) or we feel guilty and self-indulgent.
Homosexual sex, while I am sure it’s lots of fun, does not per se function to advance any further goal. It therefore can be seen as wasteful (of human energy and effort).
[Heterosexual sex can result in procreation and so per se has a function.]
So, what do you think? Could the famous Protestant Work Ethic be the root of American homophobia?
Concerning the general prohibition in the great monotheistic religious triad, didn’t they ALL/it develope in a desert environment, or has the climate changed that much in the last couple of millenia?
For some odd reason “sexsins” get a lot of play among moral rigorists of nearly any type. In my own Church, there is some excuse for this, since most of the rigorists are also monks, so it makes sense for them to fixate on the one thing they’ve definitely sworn off as the “source” of all other evil (although the theological consensus tends to focus more on pride and anger). Nevertheless, even in traditions without strong monastic influences, there seems to be this grand fixation on “sexsin” in its many forms. I’d say that there is probably some lizard-brained biology going on here, something of the same nature that gets sex into so much of human behavior in the first place.
From a Christian perspective, it’s a shame that so much attention gets paid to that one aspect of human behavior when it comes to moralism. After all, what about pride? What about selfishness? What about cruelty, anger, uncharitability, and their vile brethren? It’s a package deal, we can’t just pick and choose which sins to fight, and in any case we’re supposed to get our own houses in order first.
However, moral rigorism in Western culture, for whatever reason, seems to focus heavily on sex as some sort of root cause for all evil. So, if one is going to assign the cause of all evil to sex, or at least act as if it were the cause of all evil, then pick that one sort of sex that one is least likely to indulge in. That makes it easier to denounce.
