Lets discuss: Homophobia

[civ_king]

I suppose it's possible to support freedom and not like the US much. However, no one and this is in about 300 threads in OT in recent years, has come up with a reason for blocking gay marriage other than that you cannot accept them having the same freedom that you do.

I don't have the freedom to marry someone of the same gender...

 

[Cutlass]

I don't have the freedom to marry someone of the same gender...

Do you have the freedom to marry someone you want to be married to instead of pretending that a strawman is reality?

 

[Traitorfish]

I don't have the freedom to marry someone of the same gender...

You say that as if straights should not consider themselves entitled to marry people of the same gender. I certainly consider myself entitled to; whether I want to or not is entirely my own business, not yours.

 

[Elrohir]

Elrohir, do the words Pot, Kettle, and Black mean anything to you?

I admit, I can be rather verbose at times, but I don't think I've ever written a post that long. What I just wrote was pretty bad, but it was in response to such a monster I'm not sure I could have responded at all without making it pretty long.

 

[LucyDuke]

Honestly, I'm pretty much tired of debating this analogy. I don't see how it helps either of us, at all.

It's just what started this whole thing. You complained about it and I explained why and how I think it's applicable.

Sure. But I'm not sure how my belief that action x is wrong is necessarily discriminatory against people who perform x, unless I act in such a way that I deprive them of some opportunity they would otherwise have, and should have. (I'm using discriminatory in a negative sense here -- "He discriminated against that black guy!" rather than "He's very discriminating when it comes to apples.") Can you explain how I'm being discriminatory?

As I said before, if you just have a belief and it doesn't have any impact on your behavior, it's the most harmless sort of judgment possible and I'm not going to get up anyone's ass about it.

If I'm abnormal for not engaging in any sex in an adult relationship, just because statistically most people do, then I think it'd be equally fair to label homosexuals abnormal because they engage in sex that most people's don't. It's a slightly different sort of abnormal, but abnormal nonetheless. You didn't answer my question, though. Do adult relationships necessarily involve sex? That seemed to be what you were saying, and I'd like some clarification.

And I'm not taking some self-righteous "Well, if some Christians can do it, then you have to!" approach, which would just be silly. What other people can and can't do isn't particularly relevant for what other people are allowed to do. If that's what you think I'm doing, then you're misunderstanding or I'm miscommunicating it.

I think it's obvious that adult relationships don't necessarily involve sex.

And I'm not calling you abnormal, I'm calling your abstinence abnormal.

We've kinda strayed from the point, though. I maintain that it's a bad whitewashing when someone says they have nothing against homosexuals or homosexuality except sex.

I'm not so sure. I know a lot of young Christian people who think gay marriage should be legal who still think gay sex is wrong. I imagine a lot of those people are fine with both, but you can't neatly extrapolate from one to another.

That wasn't intended as a part of our conversation. I'm sure the numbers aren't 1:1, but it'd be a hell of a stretch to argue that the pattern is unlikely to hold.


This thread is getting nauseating so I think I'm done here. I'd be happy to continue the conversation on walls or in chat or whatever, if you like.

 

[civ_king]

Do you have the freedom to marry someone you want to be married to instead of pretending that a strawman is reality?

I don't have the freedom to marry someone of the same gender nor bisexuals or homosexuals, no one does (on the federal level).

 

[SG-17]

Humans have formed civilizations, traveled to the moon, harness electricity and most of all invented the Civilization series

And?

We've also built nuclear weapons, killed billions of our own species, completely wiped out other species, and continuously fail to humble ourselves.

 

[civ_king]

And?

We've also built nuclear weapons, killed billions of our own species, completely wiped out other species, and continuously fail to humble ourselves.

Who said wisdom comes with intelligence?

 

[Traitorfish]

I don't have the freedom to marry someone of the same gender nor bisexuals or homosexuals, no one does (on the federal level).

But, again, don't you think that you are entitled to be able to do so, if you wish? Your argument only stands for as long as you willingly prostrate yourself before the arbitrary intervention of the state into private life, which is to say, for as long as you reject the principle of individual liberty even as it applies to yourself. It's an essentially slavish attitude.

 

[Cutlass]

I don't have the freedom to marry someone of the same gender nor bisexuals or homosexuals, no one does (on the federal level).

which is utterly and completely changing the subject in order to inject a strawman where you don't have an actual argument......

Moderator Action: Please be more civil. Accusing other posters of purposefully injecting a strawman because they don't have an argument isn't. Point out the problem with their argument without the attack.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[civ_king]

But, again, don't you think that you are entitled to be able to do so, if you wish? Your argument only stands for as long as you willingly prostrate yourself before the arbitrary intervention of the state into private life, which is to say, for as long as you reject the principle of individual liberty even as it applies to yourself. It's an essentially slavish attitude.

It isn't intervening into private life, if two dudes or two chicks hold a lavish marriage ceremony good for them, but the government declining to recognize it is intrusion?

 

[Mathalamus]

i have to admit that i am homophobic.

but, since i legally cant condemn a person for being gay or lesbian, i decide to simply ignore them, and never offer my support for any reason.

 

[SG-17]

Who said wisdom comes with intelligence?

You're not getting it. Everything we have ever invented, everything that we ever do, at its base, is driven by instinct.

 

[MobBoss]

They won the right to marry black people.

Actually, black people can have red hair too....just sayin.

Or, the marriage can cleanse the act (which is my take on it).

If that is indeed the case, the how many references are there to same sex marriage in the bible?

Answer: zero. Every time Jesus refers to marriage he refers to in in a male/female reference. If marriage itself cleansed the act of homosexuality, wouldnt we see more than a few references to this in the bible? And yet we dont.

So when a homosexual couple gets married, and believes that marriages is a sacrament and lives as if it is so, you have to wonder if the marriage actually was cleansed and is a holy union.

Since there is not a single reference to this in the bible, anywhere, my thought is that its not. In fact, I think the logic train to get you to that point is rather long and winding with more than a bit of squinting, winking and nudge-nudging.

The urge is to deny that it is not, but if it WAS cleansed, how would you know? No one would tell you either way, just like no spirit told you snared rabbits weren't anethema

And yet in that case we at least have a biblical reference saying what goes into a mans mouth isnt what makes him unclean. We dont even have that for gay marriage. All thats being done here is taking a biblical reference and drawing a false conclusion on a completely different issue based upon it.

Humans aren't higher beings. We are animals, we are subject to the same natural laws as everything else. Our intelligence, our reasoning is a byproduct of our instincts.

Well, if you dont believe that human arent higher beings (which they are), and can overcome their instincts via their adapability, then we simply have nothing more to discuss. By your logic, those people predispositioned to be alcoholics are doomed to never better themselves because their instincts prevent it and are subject to those 'natural laws'. Of course, the rest of us know better.

You're not getting it. Everything we have ever invented, everything that we ever do, at its base, is driven by instinct.

Uhm. No. That is simply incorrect.

 

[SG-17]

Well, if you dont believe that human arent higher beings (which they are), and can overcome their instincts via their adapability, then we simply have nothing more to discuss. By your logic, those people predispositioned to be alcoholics are doomed to never better themselves because their instincts prevent it and are subject to those 'natural laws'. Of course, the rest of us know better.

Humans are not higher beings. We are made from the same chemicals, proteins, and acids that every other form of life is. Just arranged differently. We are different, not superior.
We can prioritize our instincts (like should I eat now or have sex?) but we cannot overcome them. We can delude ourselves into thinking that we can, but in reality we cannot.

 

[Perfection]

Actually, black people can have red hair too....just sayin.

That doesn't address my point.

 

[MobBoss]

Humans are not higher beings. We are made from the same chemicals, proteins, and acids that every other form of life is. Just arranged differently. We are different, not superior.
We can prioritize our instincts (like should I eat now or have sex?) but we cannot overcome them. We can delude ourselves into thinking that we can, but in reality we cannot.

I disagree. Of course we are higher beings. Of course we are superior. And of course we can overcome our instincts. People do it every, single, day, and thats is simply reality.

But like I said, if you absolutely refuse to admit humans can overcome their instincts when they can, then we have nothing further to discuss along those lines.

That doesn't address my point.

It proved your point was moot. Again, the references to racism, while similar to the argument at hand, is still not entirely applicable for many reasons. Racism and sexual preference are still quite different in how society views them both.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

No, I mean a sub-set of society (around 3 to 5 percent) that exhibits a behavior that the vast majority (95% or so) doesnt. Said small percentage wants to change the other 95% over to their viewpoint that what they do is 'normal'. Other 95% tend to disagree.

I must see a source for that 95% who disagree.

 

[Perfection]

It proved your point was moot.

Proof.

Again, the references to racism, while similar to the argument at hand, is still not entirely applicable for many reasons.

Tick 'em off

Racism and sexual preference are still quite different in how society views them both.

Sure, but the elements of society who have such views are wrong.

 

[sophie]

i have to admit that i am homophobic.

but, since i legally cant condemn a person for being gay or lesbian, i decide to simply ignore them, and never offer my support for any reason.

So if a homosexual was being beaten up on the street, you'd do nothing for them?