Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

why is homophobia commonplace?


  • Please log in to reply
415 replies to this topic

#241    Rlyeh

Rlyeh

    Omnipotent Entity

  • Member
  • 9,055 posts
  • Joined:01 Jan 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The sixth circle

  • Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. - Terry Pratchett

Posted 08 March 2013 - 01:33 PM

View PostTesla II, on 08 March 2013 - 01:31 PM, said:

Dont need to back a evolution theory...
We aren't talking about the evolutionary theory.

Quote

Men... Tell me what is natural for a highly evolved species then before you go smartass ?
Are you thick? Please look up the word natural.


#242    Frank Merton

Frank Merton

    Blue fish

  • Member
  • 14,045 posts
  • Joined:22 Jan 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

  • fmerton.blogspot.com

Posted 08 March 2013 - 01:38 PM

I think "normal" and "natural" are being confused.  Pretty much anything that happens without human control is "natural."  Therefore homosexuals are natural.  I suppose one can say that what is normal is what is in the majority, although there are other definitions available.  So in that definition homosexuals are not in the majority.

But then genius or sainthood are not in the majority either.


#243    SurgeTechnologies

SurgeTechnologies

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,248 posts
  • Joined:21 Feb 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Not disclosed

  • "Why not take what seems to me the only chance of escaping what is otherwise the sure destruction"

Posted 08 March 2013 - 01:52 PM

View Postshadowhive, on 08 March 2013 - 01:25 PM, said:

See a lot ofwht you just said is ridiculous. Gay people are the minority. The vast majority of the human race are hetrosexual. as a result, there's never going to be even gay people to make a significant dent. However, even though gay people don't have hetrosexual sex, that doesnt mean they can't have children. Via artifical insemination and surrogacy gay people are capable(and mre importantly) willing to have children. The difference is that gay couples have to plan for children while straight ones can have them simply by accident.

What happened, or didn't happen, a thousand years ago is a moot point. 1000 years ago we had slavery, we had rampant sexism, very few people had the vote and we had people dying from the simplest diseases. Should we go back to that? N. We shuld keep improving our society which includes giving equal and fair rights to everyone.

To the 'every kid needs a mom and dad' I'll give two examples. Firstly, let's you have a family and one parent is killed by an accident/disease. Should we take the children right away from the surviving parent or force them to find a replacement? Second, what about cases where one parent has been abusive so the other leaves with the kids. Should we force them to remain together, or force the other parent to find someone else?

I ask these things because everyone that says what you do uses it to justify same sex parents not having children. But in those situations where one parent is lost from a hetrosexual relationship it doen't seem to matter as much does it?

You know what a child needs? A child needs love. That's the most important thing. A kid needs a loving parent/parents  that will raise and care for that child nd who are ready for the responsibility. Having parents of different enders means nothing if they're not loving.

It is important to note that  child doesn't just have one male and one female role model in its life. There are other family members, teachers, carers that can fill the missing role just as well sometimes better. A kid doesn't need two views of life on the world. A kid needs, and gets much more that that.

Natural behaviour is a rather odd concept since much of what we do isn't natural.

Whatever really... If one familty member dies in normal family life goes on nothing changes except that they find other better half once wounds from loss heal. If you have abusive situtation in most cases it's someones fault in relationship that made an error but it's going for the other even if beaten or forced. There is law for such things and there are courts that if parent isnt fit the kid goes into certain homes for that. It is all up to parents how they will act upon certain situations

And if kids would only need love which is very plainly said you are not living on earh... Kids need upbringing ( that was the word it came out of translation dont have a clue how to say in english )... a sort of a manner so they arent plainly stupid, but they know how to behave in certain situations, if someone is provoking them very bad to know how to defend themself, if they fall in first love to know how to act on it, and so on... Giving them only love will spoil them and make them unprepared, they need manners and character...That is why you are ignoring the fact of mother and father part... From mother kid gets love and soft edge, from father he gets the courage and hard edge... Well every culture is different..  But basics stay...

" Technology has exceeded our humanity. "

#244    SurgeTechnologies

SurgeTechnologies

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,248 posts
  • Joined:21 Feb 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Not disclosed

  • "Why not take what seems to me the only chance of escaping what is otherwise the sure destruction"

Posted 08 March 2013 - 01:54 PM

View PostRlyeh, on 08 March 2013 - 01:33 PM, said:

We aren't talking about the evolutionary theory.

Are you thick? Please look up the word natural.

Listen ... one more insult and bad things will said ... Read this... do some education READ.

" Technology has exceeded our humanity. "

#245    Frank Merton

Frank Merton

    Blue fish

  • Member
  • 14,045 posts
  • Joined:22 Jan 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

  • fmerton.blogspot.com

Posted 08 March 2013 - 01:54 PM

My wife use to say that too many people grow their children instead of raising them.


#246    SurgeTechnologies

SurgeTechnologies

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,248 posts
  • Joined:21 Feb 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Not disclosed

  • "Why not take what seems to me the only chance of escaping what is otherwise the sure destruction"

Posted 08 March 2013 - 01:58 PM

So technology isnt a natural product of human species... Hmmm so ones mind, brain power, capability to think, all of those arent natural...What are we than? Machines?

View PostFrank Merton, on 08 March 2013 - 01:54 PM, said:

My wife use to say that too many people grow their children instead of raising them.

That was the word i was looking for raising... They need to be raised properly...

Thank you :D !

" Technology has exceeded our humanity. "

#247    Frank Merton

Frank Merton

    Blue fish

  • Member
  • 14,045 posts
  • Joined:22 Jan 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

  • fmerton.blogspot.com

Posted 08 March 2013 - 02:00 PM

You are welcome.


#248    Moon Gazer

Moon Gazer

    Remote Viewer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 566 posts
  • Joined:17 Jan 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:Pineapple under the Sea

  • Stonewylde.... follow me to Stonewylde....

Posted 08 March 2013 - 02:02 PM

Shadowhive - I wanted to like every single post you made on here but didn't want you to think I was stalking you lol.


#249    shadowhive

shadowhive

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,936 posts
  • Joined:21 Nov 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Uk

Posted 08 March 2013 - 02:08 PM

View PostTesla II, on 08 March 2013 - 01:52 PM, said:

Whatever really... If one familty member dies in normal family life goes on nothing changes except that they find other better half once wounds from loss heal. If you have abusive situtation in most cases it's someones fault in relationship that made an error but it's going for the other even if beaten or forced. There is law for such things and there are courts that if parent isnt fit the kid goes into certain homes for that. It is all up to parents how they will act upon certain situations

And if kids would only need love which is very plainly said you are not living on earh... Kids need upbringing ( that was the word it came out of translation dont have a clue how to say in english )... a sort of a manner so they arent plainly stupid, but they know how to behave in certain situations, if someone is provoking them very bad to know how to defend themself, if they fall in first love to know how to act on it, and so on... Giving them only love will spoil them and make them unprepared, they need manners and character...That is why you are ignoring the fact of mother and father part... From mother kid gets love and soft edge, from father he gets the courage and hard edge... Well every culture is different..  But basics stay...

The point was that in such situations having two hetrosexual parents is less important than the child's welfare.

Yes they do need a good upbringing. I assume that went without saying. A good upbringing can come from a hetrosexual parent family, a single parent family, adoptive parents and, yes, same sex parents. They can all provide the same thing. That's a rather bland sterotype. Every parent is different. I've known a number of people who have had fathers more loving than their mothers and I've known mothers more courageous than fathers. You can't dilute prenting down to something so simple. Every family is different, every parent is different and every child is different.

Now one man + one woman doesn't = perfect child rearing material simply because they're hetrosexual and able to breed. Raising a child is a lot more than that. A same sex couple can have the qualities to rise a child and you know what? They have to go through significant effort to get a child, something your average hetrosexual couple simply doesn't have to go through.

All you're doing is thinking on stereotypes, which is meaningless in the real world.

View PostMoon Gazer, on 08 March 2013 - 02:02 PM, said:

Shadowhive - I wanted to like every single post you made on here but didn't want you to think I was stalking you lol.

Awww thanks :)

Edited by shadowhive, 08 March 2013 - 02:09 PM.

So just take off that disguise, everyone knows that you're only, pretty on the outside
Where are those droideka?
No one can tell you who you are
"There's the trouble with fanatics. They're easy to manipulate, but somehow they take everything five steps too far."
"The circumstances of one's birth are irrelevent, it's what you do with the gift of life that determines who you are."

#250    Rlyeh

Rlyeh

    Omnipotent Entity

  • Member
  • 9,055 posts
  • Joined:01 Jan 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The sixth circle

  • Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. - Terry Pratchett

Posted 08 March 2013 - 02:27 PM

View PostTesla II, on 08 March 2013 - 01:54 PM, said:

Listen ... one more insult and bad things will said ... Read this... do some education READ.
Don't threaten me. If you're going to throw insults, don't expect a warm reception.

BTW Did you read the link before posting it?

Quote

So technology isnt a natural product of human species... Hmmm so ones mind, brain power, capability to think, all of those arent natural...What are we than? Machines?

According to this logic, homosexuality is therefore natural because it comes from brain power.

However from the link you failed to read;

"There are five branches of natural science: astronomy, biology, chemistry, the Earth sciences and physics.[2][3] This distinguishes sciences that cover inquiry into the world of nature from human sciences such as anthropology, sociology and linguistics, and from formal sciences such as mathematics and logic.[2] Despite their differences, these sciences sometimes overlap. For example, the social sciences and biology both study human beings as organisms while mathematics is used regularly in all the natural sciences.[2]"

Not very bright are you? You realise engineering is *artificial*. Does such a word exist in your vocabulary?
Artificial is the antonym of natural, that means the opposite. http://www.thefreedi....com/artificial

Edited by Rlyeh, 08 March 2013 - 02:48 PM.


#251    Detective Mystery 2014

Detective Mystery 2014

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,322 posts
  • Joined:31 Jan 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:twilight zone's outer limits

  • Mysteries are tomorrow's histories.

Posted 09 March 2013 - 06:07 AM

View Postshadowhive, on 08 March 2013 - 11:24 AM, said:

Why aren't they in the same neighbourhood? It's still a form of predjudice against a group of people. It's still treating another group as inferior. The only difference to me is that is seems more excusable.

I am hoping that a similar thing will happen now with christians, that the change will happen on this issue, just like it did on other things.

I think the problem is that one church may preach that gay people should be stoned. Preaching violence against another group of people was, last I checked, wrong. Yet if it's violence against gay people? It's magically fine. I don't know why. I don't understand why people are ok with violence being preached towards gay people or why I should accept it. You know why I don't? Because those people that hear that message will be encouraged by it, encouraged to be violent against any gay person they see (at worst, at best treat them as inferior).




My problem is that those clergy that do condemn did, often do so in fearful or hateful terms. In any other circumstances comparing someone to a pedophila would be cause for condemnation, but it a member of the clergy does it (and many do) its ok because it's 'preaching god's will'. I think there is a line an I think many members of the clergy are willing to cross it because they know they have religious protection to do so.

Now from where I'm sitting, comparing gay people to pedophiles is hateful. I don't care what your religious beliefs are, the comparison is the same to me. The comparison is still wrong.

You know what else the problem is? That people in the church are told these comparison and they go into the world and believe them. They treat any gay person they meet with fear and hatred, because they think they might molest their children or smething based on what those clergy say. As long as the church isn't called on it's behaviour (like any other organisation) then people will still leave the church and treart gay people negatively which will include denying them the rights to those things you say gay people should have.

I think the attitude that religious groups foster against gay people is a huge problem and I don't see why it should be protected. God's will should not be a magic get out clause.

If I said 'I think it's god's will that black people should be stoned' is that not racist? If I said 'I think it's god's will that women are inferior' is that not sexist? If I said 'I think its god's will that all jews should be killed' is that not anti-semetic?

God's will does not act as get out for these things, nor does it change those statements from being anti-semetic/rascist/sexist simply by it's presence. Nor does it matter how sincerely held I believe those views to be. Why, then, does a view that would otherwise be considered homophobic, become ok because of the presence of god's will in the belief? Why does the sincerity of the belief matter nd make it ok? It wouldn't for those other things, would it?

Like I said, religious groups need to be called out on these actions and beliefs, not shielded.

That's not to say religions can't preach it's a sin (although I'd rather they didn't) it's just that, well. You don't see them comparing people that lie or have sex outisde marriage to pedophiles, or calling for them to be stoned do you?

When and where did I say that preaching violence was okay? I want a specific quote. In any event, churches have a right to teach what they want on this subject. You don't have to agree with it. You can tell them what you think of their beliefs, and they can tell you what they think of your beliefs. It's all fine and dandy if no violence is involved. That's how it's done in the USA with our First Amendment. Freedom of speech goes both ways, as it should. It's none of your or the State's business what they preach. It's nobody's business what you do in your personal life. I'm fine with gay people having civil rights on par with straight people, but I'm not fine with control freaks trying to control churches' free speech. I'm also not fine with the ridiculous comparisons of this issue to the struggles of Black people in the past.

There is one reality with billions of versions.

#252    shadowhive

shadowhive

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,936 posts
  • Joined:21 Nov 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Uk

Posted 09 March 2013 - 11:04 AM

View PostDetective Mystery 2013, on 09 March 2013 - 06:07 AM, said:

When and where did I say that preaching violence was okay? I want a specific quote. In any event, churches have a right to teach what they want on this subject. You don't have to agree with it. You can tell them what you think of their beliefs, and they can tell you what they think of your beliefs. It's all fine and dandy if no violence is involved. That's how it's done in the USA with our First Amendment. Freedom of speech goes both ways, as it should. It's none of your or the State's business what they preach. It's nobody's business what you do in your personal life. I'm fine with gay people having civil rights on par with straight people, but I'm not fine with control freaks trying to control churches' free speech. I'm also not fine with the ridiculous comparisons of this issue to the struggles of Black people in the past.

So you're ok if churches preach want they want, if if that includes preaching that 'gay people should be stoned'. (Something mentioned in your last post). That, is preaching violence and encouraging it. And why should the line only be crossed when it becomes violence? What about all those churches that preach that gay peple shouldn't have the same rights as straight people and such rights should be opposed? I guess that's all 'fine and dandy' is it?

Well I'm not fine with the church using 'free speech' to encourage violence and discrimination against another group. Like I pointed out, there really is absolutely no need for it. If there was, why aren't the churches calling for people that divorce, lie, have sex before marriage or don't believe to have less rights and be treated so badly? After all, their religious text calls those things 'sinful' and all sins are suppoed to be the same right? Yet no they have some sort of strange liscence to take this one too far unquestioningly, despite it being barely mentioned mentioned in the source material.

The comparison is made for two reasons. Reason 1, this is an issue about violence and discrimination against a minority. Reason 2, this is about a minority gaining civil rights. So it's not that ridiculous a comparison. Or is it just because it's not a clear cut thing? After all race is an obviously born trait, is it becomes homosexuality isn't as obviou as the colour of your skin from birth? Alright then, how about the comparison to left handed people, or, better, interracial couples.

You now what I find rather telling though? You've comment on the 'ridiculous comparison' of homophobia to rascism at least three times now. But not once have you made a single comment about the far more ridiculous comparison that churches make comparin gay people with pedophiles. Why is that?

Edited by shadowhive, 09 March 2013 - 11:34 AM.

So just take off that disguise, everyone knows that you're only, pretty on the outside
Where are those droideka?
No one can tell you who you are
"There's the trouble with fanatics. They're easy to manipulate, but somehow they take everything five steps too far."
"The circumstances of one's birth are irrelevent, it's what you do with the gift of life that determines who you are."

#253    Detective Mystery 2014

Detective Mystery 2014

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,322 posts
  • Joined:31 Jan 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:twilight zone's outer limits

  • Mysteries are tomorrow's histories.

Posted 10 March 2013 - 04:09 AM

View Postshadowhive, on 09 March 2013 - 11:04 AM, said:

So you're ok if churches preach want they want, if if that includes preaching that 'gay people should be stoned'. (Something mentioned in your last post). That, is preaching violence and encouraging it. And why should the line only be crossed when it becomes violence? What about all those churches that preach that gay peple shouldn't have the same rights as straight people and such rights should be opposed? I guess that's all 'fine and dandy' is it?

Well I'm not fine with the church using 'free speech' to encourage violence and discrimination against another group. Like I pointed out, there really is absolutely no need for it. If there was, why aren't the churches calling for people that divorce, lie, have sex before marriage or don't believe to have less rights and be treated so badly? After all, their religious text calls those things 'sinful' and all sins are suppoed to be the same right? Yet no they have some sort of strange liscence to take this one too far unquestioningly, despite it being barely mentioned mentioned in the source material.

The comparison is made for two reasons. Reason 1, this is an issue about violence and discrimination against a minority. Reason 2, this is about a minority gaining civil rights. So it's not that ridiculous a comparison. Or is it just because it's not a clear cut thing? After all race is an obviously born trait, is it becomes homosexuality isn't as obviou as the colour of your skin from birth? Alright then, how about the comparison to left handed people, or, better, interracial couples.

You now what I find rather telling though? You've comment on the 'ridiculous comparison' of homophobia to rascism at least three times now. But not once have you made a single comment about the far more ridiculous comparison that churches make comparin gay people with pedophiles. Why is that?

Churches have the right to preach what they wish, as long as it doesn't break the law, under the US Constitution. Ministers can criticize gay rights if they choose to do so. They can officiate at gay union ceremonies if they choose to do so. We rightly don't live under speech codes enforced by thought police, and, yes, I'm fine and dandy with that.

You're also generalizing with your assertion that ministers wink and nod at sins not associated with homosexuality (if I correctly understood your point). Some churches excommunicate divorcees. Some of them even do that to members who commit adultery, fornication, etc. As for political activism, they're involved in all kinds of lifestyle issues, not just gay rights.

I still don't buy your comparisons to gender or race. The Church doesn't control the State, and they can't pass laws that affect gay people. There were real laws on the books that kept certain groups from voting, going to certain schools, congregating at certain places, etc. Your argument should be with the government.

Since you brought it up, I certainly don't link homosexuality with bestiality or pedophilia just as I don't link fundamentalists with the Ku Klux Klan. I'm not even sure why you felt it necessary to construct that straw man. Anyway, you don't have to put words in my mouth now. I just say what I think so there's no need to jump to conclusions with unfounded assumptions.

There is one reality with billions of versions.

#254    Mike D boy

Mike D boy

    ...from the Desert...

  • Member
  • 2,401 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Palm Desert, Cal US America

  • he's Native and Indio-geneous to the Americas.

Posted 10 March 2013 - 07:10 AM

Organized religion dogmas can't explain why people are born gay/homosexual as much they're unable to describe the causes of disabilities, deformities and other visible differences in people. God always has a plan and homosexuality is a special plan I take it...because God don't do mistakes. With more education on the subject, Detective Mystery, you'll see the bigger picture of the causes of homosexuality can't be helped in individuals who are homosexual.

Comparisons of the struggles of gay rights with civil rights of minorities and women are relevant: back in the 1960's, you had some people falsely believed in inferiority of mentioned groups and didn't respect the rights of people struggled with oppression and discrimination at the time was fervent and widespread. Today, LGBT people are encountering a similar pattern, and states refusing to recognize same-sex marriage pinpoints governments aren't accepting of LGBT constitutents' concerns and matters. Those states unwilling to grant same-sex marriage rights should be ashamed and they failed in their obligation to serve their state populations, based on their sexual orientation, the right to marry equally like straight people.

:innocent: The Truth is Out There - the X Files. :alien:

#255    shadowhive

shadowhive

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,936 posts
  • Joined:21 Nov 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Uk

Posted 10 March 2013 - 07:30 PM

View PostDetective Mystery 2013, on 10 March 2013 - 04:09 AM, said:

Churches have the right to preach what they wish, as long as it doesn't break the law, under the US Constitution. Ministers can criticize gay rights if they choose to do so. They can officiate at gay union ceremonies if they choose to do so. We rightly don't live under speech codes enforced by thought police, and, yes, I'm fine and dandy with that.

You're also generalizing with your assertion that ministers wink and nod at sins not associated with homosexuality (if I correctly understood your point). Some churches excommunicate divorcees. Some of them even do that to members who commit adultery, fornication, etc. As for political activism, they're involved in all kinds of lifestyle issues, not just gay rights.

I still don't buy your comparisons to gender or race. The Church doesn't control the State, and they can't pass laws that affect gay people. There were real laws on the books that kept certain groups from voting, going to certain schools, congregating at certain places, etc. Your argument should be with the government.

Since you brought it up, I certainly don't link homosexuality with bestiality or pedophilia just as I don't link fundamentalists with the Ku Klux Klan. I'm not even sure why you felt it necessary to construct that straw man. Anyway, you don't have to put words in my mouth now. I just say what I think so there's no need to jump to conclusions with unfounded assumptions.

I think there does need to be limits and the fact that churches get away with it never sits well with me.

I didn't say they 'wink and nod' but they certainly have a stronger attitude against homosexuality than most of the sins. Sure, some do act like in (equally backward) manners to those that you mention, but for the most prt, homosexuality is singled out as being worse (bar the things that actually break laws). Religious groups in America have tax exempt status, which should be removed the moment they get involved with political activism. Freedom of religion also includes freedom from religion and the moment any religion gets involved in politics it crosses the line.

The comparisons to gender and race are simple. I thought I made it clear but apparently not. Women fought for equal civil rights. Black people fought for equal civil rights. Gay people are fighting for equal civil rights. Not the thing present in all three: they're all fighting for equal civil rights. Are you saying there's no comparison there?

The church had it's hand keeping the status quo. For example, when interracial couples fought to gain marriage rights who was against it? The church. And it made a simple civil rights fight so much harder because religion got dragged into it. Now whenever gay people fight for civil rights religion gets draged into it and the thoughts of religious groups get better thought of even if they're baseless.

Gy rights should be an open and shut civil rights issue. So why does religion seemingly have to be taken in consideration for it?

I made the comment because about three times (four now) you commented on the racism/homophobia comparison, but ignored the homosexuality/pedophiia one. So yes, I found it strange how you ignored it repreatedly, but made your distaste about civil rights comparions as plain as the nose on your face.

Edited by shadowhive, 10 March 2013 - 07:38 PM.

So just take off that disguise, everyone knows that you're only, pretty on the outside
Where are those droideka?
No one can tell you who you are
"There's the trouble with fanatics. They're easy to manipulate, but somehow they take everything five steps too far."
"The circumstances of one's birth are irrelevent, it's what you do with the gift of life that determines who you are."




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users