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

#331    Detective Mystery 2014

Detective Mystery 2014

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,516 posts
  • Joined:31 Jan 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:twilight zone's outer limits

  • Mysteries are tomorrow's histories.

Posted 20 March 2013 - 02:17 AM

View Postshadowhive, on 19 March 2013 - 08:55 AM, said:

That sounds exactly like how most religions operate and have done for centuries.



No, I criticise all religions that act that way, not just christianity. I also criticise christianity because it 'takes the moral high ground' as justificationor it's actions. Well it's taken the moral high ground before historically with disastorous results against pretty much every section of humanity. I judge adherents by what they do and some are just hypocritical to the extreme. As I mentioned before all 'sins' are mentioned as being equal, but homosexuality is singled out for special worse treatment unlike all of the rest, despite actual mentions of homosexuality in the bible being thin on the ground.

There is a reason why you shouldn't judge all homosexuals in such a way. Gay people don't all follow a dogma. There is nothing unifying that all gay people must do (the same way there's nothing holding together all hetrosexuals, women, black people or people with blue eyes). Judging gay people (or any of those other groups) based on the actions of a few is ridiculous to the extreme. However, in the case of christianity (and other religions) the adherents are holding to a dogma which they can be judged by in a way those other groups do not. Put plainly, christians have the bible, but people with blue eyes don't have a 'blue eyed text' or something similar.

That's incorrect. Not all churches or clergy have the same beliefs, so you can't make blanket statements about all Christians just like you can't make blanket statements about all gay people. It's also unfair to rant about past injustices. My ancestors were massacred by Catholics. I don't blame the present church for that. In fact, I recognize its myriad acts of charity and instruction in contemporary times. I also respect all belief systems' *right* to preach what they choose on this subject. You can write as many anti-Christian screeds as you wish, but freedom of conscience will stand.

There is one reality with billions of versions.

#332    shadowhive

shadowhive

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,956 posts
  • Joined:21 Nov 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Uk

Posted 20 March 2013 - 02:17 AM

View Postciriuslea, on 19 March 2013 - 10:59 PM, said:

That's fine your entitled to your opinion, as I am I or am I ? I guess not

It appears, despite trying my best, that somehow you're unclear as to what I'm saying. Where did I lose you exactly?

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."

#333    shadowhive

shadowhive

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,956 posts
  • Joined:21 Nov 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Uk

Posted 20 March 2013 - 02:31 AM

View PostDetective Mystery 2013, on 20 March 2013 - 02:17 AM, said:

That's incorrect. Not all churches or clergy have the same beliefs, so you can't make blanket statements about all Christians just like you can't make blanket statements about all gay people. It's also unfair to rant about past injustices. My ancestors were massacred by Catholics. I don't blame the present church for that. In fact, I recognize its myriad acts of charity and instruction in contemporary times. I also respect all belief systems' *right* to preach what they choose on this subject. You can write as many anti-Christian screeds as you wish, but freedom of conscience will stand.

It's surprising isn't it? The christian church has one book, the bible that it's meant to go on and yet there's, what? A dozen at least different factions to it, all differing yet coming from the same source material. It really makes you question how it all happened.

I recognise that those past injustices form a pttern: that the church will be unjust to any group as long as it can get away with it. Thankfully we've whittled away the churches power to go against most groups, but to this day you still seem them using that power against gay people. They also use a staggering amount against gay people too. If they used all the money they used in campaigns against gay marriage, they'd be able to a great deal of good in terms of charity. The fact that they'd rather spend millions to deny a group rights than to help people says quite a bit.

I don't respect the 'right' of religions to preech hatred against a group and then scamper behind the 'freedom of conscience' excuse. Why? Every other week a news story will come up. A christian owner of a buisness denies a gay person or couple the right to use that buisness the moment they find out they're gay. Now anti-discrimination and equal rights law is meant to ensure that doesn't happen, but christians play that 'freedom of conscience' card and play the victim.

This isnt an issue where 'freedom of conscience' is going to cut it. As said before, such a thing doesn't excuse rascism or sexism, regardless of the belief behind it. Why should this belief be held up so highly?

Last I checked people choose their religion. That's a fact. Why should their choice of religion override another's sexuality? (Especially when someone's sexuality, unlike religion, isn't a choice.)

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."

#334    Detective Mystery 2014

Detective Mystery 2014

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,516 posts
  • Joined:31 Jan 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:twilight zone's outer limits

  • Mysteries are tomorrow's histories.

Posted 20 March 2013 - 03:17 AM

This is my last post on the subject. People have a right to believe what they choose. Many good men and women believe that gay relationships are wrong. That is their right. Not all Christians agree with them. That, too, is their right in a free country. Shrill cries of "homophobia" are counterproductive and smack of juvenile reasoning. Moral people may or may not share the same views on this subject.

As for the broader issue of Christians, from the past to the present, your account of the historical record is remarkably revisionist, at best. I realize that you're wont to admit that Christians did and do millions of great things for millions of people, but the truth of this can't be denied by fair people. I see propaganda for what it is, as do many Americans. That's why we won't change our Constitution to suit the questionable demands of disingenuous pressure groups, whose motto should be, "rights for me but not for thee", when they attempt to *dictate* what clergy can preach.

There is one reality with billions of versions.

#335    shadowhive

shadowhive

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,956 posts
  • Joined:21 Nov 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Uk

Posted 20 March 2013 - 09:52 AM

View PostDetective Mystery 2013, on 20 March 2013 - 03:17 AM, said:

This is my last post on the subject. People have a right to believe what they choose. Many good men and women believe that gay relationships are wrong. That is their right. Not all Christians agree with them. That, too, is their right in a free country. Shrill cries of "homophobia" are counterproductive and smack of juvenile reasoning. Moral people may or may not share the same views on this subject.

As for the broader issue of Christians, from the past to the present, your account of the historical record is remarkably revisionist, at best. I realize that you're wont to admit that Christians did and do millions of great things for millions of people, but the truth of this can't be denied by fair people. I see propaganda for what it is, as do many Americans. That's why we won't change our Constitution to suit the questionable demands of disingenuous pressure groups, whose motto should be, "rights for me but not for thee", when they attempt to *dictate* what clergy can preach.

I know you won't reply, but I'll state what I think regardless.

First off. Many homophobic people are (or see themselves as) 'moral people'. They think that by torturing gay people and labelling it as a cure is the 'right' thing to do. They think demonising them and comparing them to pedophiles is the 'right' thing to do. They think encouraging negative treatment of gay people is their 'moral duty'. They think gay relationships are so wrong they must treat them as lesser to straight ones (to varying degrees).

Now I don't see why we shuld just shrug and act like all that ok. That people have the 'right' to treat gay people like **** just because a preecher tells them gay people will rape their children. I fail to see why it's unreasonable to encourage people to treat gay people as equals with decency instead of satan's lackeys. These religious beliefs are very much the problem because they can turn an otherwise good person who wouldn't wish ill on anyone, into someone who wants a gay person locked up and tortured until they repent out of some insane sense of morality.

Why should encouraging violence and hatred against a group be encouraged when we KNOW such teaching leads to it?

Cries of homphobia aren't counterproductive. If I see a snake, I call it a snake, not an elephant. You may believe with all your heart that snake is actually an elephant but that doesn't change what it is.

I admit that christians do good things, I never said they didn't. What I have said, is that them doing good things doesn't excuse them from any bad they may do. I's not like some system where you go 'Oh you've given $100 to charity? Ok then, that gives you right to compare gay people to pedophiles without evidence without consequence.'

As a teenager I, like many kids that aren't straight, was bullied. I was bullied relentlessly by my christian peers. Called names, kicked punched, had things thrown at me. It got to the point where it was pretty much every other day. The teachers? They did **** all, because like you they were much more interested in protecting religious beliefs. Like many others I was driven to the brink. At the time you know what I got told repeatedly? They're just kids. Somehow I found the strength to pull through (not all do) and now that's behind me. But you know what shocked me when I did to my horror? That adults do exactly the same thing! I was told for years it's just kids, but no, adults do the same thing and protection of beliefs is more important than breaking the cycle. People seem to be only interested in stepping in and doing something when it's too late. Well I'm sorry, but I don't think it's acceptable for people to go through what I went through and worse with no one actually dealing with the root cause that starts it all.

Equal rights is not a questionable demand' nor is expecting to be treated like a human being without having religious beliefs to hide behind and excuse people. But I see you're a lot like those teachers and others of that ilk. You're much more interested in protecting the religious belief than people who become the victims of it. Funny how that only works for gay people doesn't it?

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."

#336    Professor Buzzkill

Professor Buzzkill

    Integrity is all we have

  • Member
  • 2,598 posts
  • Joined:20 Oct 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:White Cloud

Posted 20 March 2013 - 11:46 PM

View Postshadowhive, on 20 March 2013 - 02:13 AM, said:

Ah that old arguement. It's a tired one really, but one that always gets bought up as if it's a valid arguement when it's not.

In a lot of cases civil unions/defacto relationships/civil partnerships are just watered down versions of marriage. They cover a varying amount of bases depending on where you are, but a lot of the time they actually don't have 100% equal rights as a marriage does.

A thing I'll point out (and I always will) is that mariage as an institution has evolved over the years. Everyone seems to act as if it's set in stone, but it's not. While yes it has always been a male/female partnership it has changed. Women were, fo a long time considered property and weren't given a choice who to marry. You couldn't marry someone of a different race, or religion. You'll find that marrying for love with both parties consent is a very recent concept yet it's held up as being tradition. Many of the rights that are part of marriage are also fairly new as well.

Nice post. No substance in it though. Let me ask again in bold so you can't miss it.

WHAT RIGHTS ARE HOMOSEXUALS DENIED???

Also, civil unions have exactly the same status as marriages in my country. Can you post the differences in rights between marriage and civil unions in your country?

Even when the defintion of marriage gets changed legally, gay marriages will still be termed "gay marriage" not "marriage" by the common person. Also, in the future marriage will be changed again to include more than 2 people. Why not? It has already happened (well at least a court case over a three-way marriage) in Brazil.

Some people place a huge religious significance on marriage (not me personally, but i am a firm believer in the bill of rights- that no one should be discriminated based on sex, sexuality or religious beliefs)  and are disgusted by the state bastardization of marriage even before the gay marriage movement. Do you not believe in religious freedom and freedom of expression?

Edited by Professor Buzzkill, 20 March 2013 - 11:47 PM.


#337    Odin11

Odin11

    Paranormal Investigator

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 872 posts
  • Joined:15 Jun 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Michigan

  • I like your Christ.
    I do not like your Christians.
    They are so unlike your Christ.
    -Gandhi-

Posted 21 March 2013 - 02:29 AM

View PostProfessor Buzzkill, on 20 March 2013 - 11:46 PM, said:

Nice post. No substance in it though. Let me ask again in bold so you can't miss it.

WHAT RIGHTS ARE HOMOSEXUALS DENIED???

Also, civil unions have exactly the same status as marriages in my country. Can you post the differences in rights between marriage and civil unions in your country?

Even when the defintion of marriage gets changed legally, gay marriages will still be termed "gay marriage" not "marriage" by the common person. Also, in the future marriage will be changed again to include more than 2 people. Why not? It has already happened (well at least a court case over a three-way marriage) in Brazil.

Some people place a huge religious significance on marriage (not me personally, but i am a firm believer in the bill of rights- that no one should be discriminated based on sex, sexuality or religious beliefs)  and are disgusted by the state bastardization of marriage even before the gay marriage movement. Do you not believe in religious freedom and freedom of expression?

They are denied the right to marry the ones they love. You know this, and if you really believed in the bill of rights you would be for for marriage equality not against it.

This weird perverted logic, that gays have the same rights because they can marry someone of the opposite sex, is one that I’ve started seeing more and more these pass couple of years. And I have to say that I find it quite sad really, that people think its good reasoning.

"If we believe absurdities, we shall commit atrocities." -Voltaire

Geology shows that fossils are of different ages. Paleontology shows a fossil sequence, the list of species represented changes through time. Taxonomy shows biological relationships among species. Evolution is the explanation that threads it all together. Creationism is the practice of squeezing one's eyes shut and wailing "Does not!" ~Author Unknown

#338    Professor Buzzkill

Professor Buzzkill

    Integrity is all we have

  • Member
  • 2,598 posts
  • Joined:20 Oct 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:White Cloud

Posted 21 March 2013 - 02:37 AM

View PostOdin11, on 21 March 2013 - 02:29 AM, said:

They are denied the right to marry the ones they love. You know this, and if you really believed in the bill of rights you would be for for marriage equality not against it.

This weird perverted logic, that gays have the same rights because they can marry someone of the opposite sex, is one that I’ve started seeing more and more these pass couple of years. And I have to say that I find it quite sad really, that people think its good reasoning.

Where is it written that you have a right to marry the one you love? Is that the magna carta or bill of rights? Oh wait, marriage isn't a human right.....

What you are really arguing for is a change in the definition of a word. A word that represents a deeply religious concept that the state has adopted and adapted.


#339    Frank Merton

Frank Merton

    Blue fish

  • Member
  • 14,405 posts
  • Joined:22 Jan 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

  • fmerton.blogspot.com

Posted 21 March 2013 - 02:39 AM

All I can say is that marriage is not the same as some sort of partnership or "civil union."  My wife and I were married for 35 years until she died, and I have to say it is the only way to go.  Other things would never be the same.  Therefore I understand why gays want this and I completely do not understand why anyone with compassion would fail to understand.


#340    Professor Buzzkill

Professor Buzzkill

    Integrity is all we have

  • Member
  • 2,598 posts
  • Joined:20 Oct 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:White Cloud

Posted 21 March 2013 - 02:59 AM

View PostFrank Merton, on 21 March 2013 - 02:39 AM, said:

All I can say is that marriage is not the same as some sort of partnership or "civil union."  My wife and I were married for 35 years until she died, and I have to say it is the only way to go.  Other things would never be the same.  Therefore I understand why gays want this and I completely do not understand why anyone with compassion would fail to understand.

My sister is gay and i love her very much. I would hate to think she had to suffer any form of discrimination at all. I have compassion for everyone who has to struggle against societies norms to live life as who they are. I am also against discrimination against religious beliefs, although I do not follow any major denomination and have my own personal religion.

Why do you feel that homosexuals have to be "married" to feel what you felt with your wife? Why couldn't they be "unioned"? As shakespeare once wrote "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet".


#341    The Silver Thong

The Silver Thong

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,254 posts
  • Joined:02 Dec 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Calgary Alberta Canada

Posted 21 March 2013 - 03:11 AM


In 20 yrs gays will be as common as all of us none so called gays. However I bet there will be a flood of bi sexuals sooner. Its a loosing stance to try to put legal terms to gays. It`s pointless and I feel most closet gay or bi sexuals that are of a religious nature or political bigotry will flood out and suprise the very gay church and republican party.

Sittin back drinkin beer watchin the world take it's course.


The only thing god can't do is prove he exists ?

#342    Frank Merton

Frank Merton

    Blue fish

  • Member
  • 14,405 posts
  • Joined:22 Jan 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

  • fmerton.blogspot.com

Posted 21 March 2013 - 03:17 AM

View PostProfessor Buzzkill, on 21 March 2013 - 02:59 AM, said:



Why do you feel that homosexuals have to be "married" to feel what you felt with your wife? Why couldn't they be "unioned"? As shakespeare once wrote "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet".
"A rose is a rose is a rose.


#343    Frank Merton

Frank Merton

    Blue fish

  • Member
  • 14,405 posts
  • Joined:22 Jan 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

  • fmerton.blogspot.com

Posted 21 March 2013 - 03:21 AM

View PostThe Silver Thong, on 21 March 2013 - 03:11 AM, said:

In 20 yrs gays will be as common as all of us none so called gays. However I bet there will be a flood of bi sexuals sooner. Its a loosing stance to try to put legal terms to gays. It`s pointless and I feel most closet gay or bi sexuals that are of a religious nature or political bigotry will flood out and suprise the very gay church and republican party.
Yea I suspect that may happen.  Once the fear that "I might be gay," or, "Someone might think I'm gay" goes away a lot of people who have suppressed such attractions will relax.  I don't think, however, that it will have much effect in general -- only a small minority are ever going to actually be gay.  A lot more will when the circumstance is right "try it out," so to speak, but won't do it more than that


#344    The Silver Thong

The Silver Thong

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,254 posts
  • Joined:02 Dec 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Calgary Alberta Canada

Posted 21 March 2013 - 03:27 AM

View PostProfessor Buzzkill, on 21 March 2013 - 02:37 AM, said:



Where is it written that you have a right to marry the one you love? Is that the magna carta or bill of rights? Oh wait, marriage isn't a human right.....

What you are really arguing for is a change in the definition of a word. A word that represents a deeply religious concept that the state has adopted and adapted.

Christians did not invent the term or meaning of marriage nore do they have a right to define it in any sort let alone legalize it. They need to wake up along with quit a few other religious secs.

Sittin back drinkin beer watchin the world take it's course.


The only thing god can't do is prove he exists ?

#345    The Silver Thong

The Silver Thong

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,254 posts
  • Joined:02 Dec 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Calgary Alberta Canada

Posted 21 March 2013 - 03:30 AM

View PostFrank Merton, on 21 March 2013 - 03:21 AM, said:


-- only a small minority are ever going to actually be gay.  A lot more will when the circumstance is right "try it out," so to speak, but won't do it more than that

I think you might be suprised how sexually open society has become and I think its cool.

Sittin back drinkin beer watchin the world take it's course.


The only thing god can't do is prove he exists ?




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users