Those Against Homosexuality Are Not Bigots

Just because animals do certain things doesn't mean its normal. If a flock of birds fall dead from the sky is that normal? And I would object to certain birth control methods because it abort the unborn child. And I'm not hysterical.

 

How so?

 

Oh. So you mean you're having a lot of unprotected sex with homosexuals? Otherwise i'm still not clear on how that would affect you

 

This debate is giving me a high school flashback. Rehashing all the basics.

 

By saying faggy things.

It would be more bizarre if they fell up.

 

I hate to bite on the troll thread, but apparently religion is the new gay.

 

Just realized OP is a troll. Gun-on-bible profile pic; I appreciate the attempt to make organized religion look like nonsense, however, it doesn't need any help.

Carry on... (my wayward son) :bandana:

EDIT: Of course, the moment I label this as a troll thread good ol' Michael Phelps swims ahead and beats me to it... Damnit, you champion.

 

If you speak out against an activity, it kind of does mean that you are against it. :dizzy2: Being against something, makes you against something. :O

I may agree with your title though. It is more about the reason they are against it. Most reasons to be against it are either bogus(and easily refuted against), and seem to just want to take away others' rights, or fail to understand what homosexuality is.

For example, a common one is that they can't have children. To this, one might respond with the fact that they can use a surrogate, or a sperm donor. And that it barely works as an argument anyway, since people who don't like kids, or people who are unable to have kids, are allowed to marry. Therefor, there is no reason to refuse two people in love the right to marry.

Another common one is that it's unnatural. This is like saying that what you are feeling is unnatural. People who believe this fail to understand that to be a homosexual means that you have sexual feelings toward the same sex, as a straight person would for someone of the opposite sex. These feelings happen naturally, they are not forced. To be a homosexual does not mean you participate in homosexual activities.

Now, a bigot is a person who is intolerant towards others' views. A failure to understand does not necessarily mean you are a bigot, but what would make you a bigot, is to be against something, just because you don't understand.
If you refuse to listen to someone refute your argument, that is also intolerance. And to take away another person's right without a good reason is intolerance.

Most arguments are bigoted, because homosexuality is not harmful. But some people may have a good reason, but I have yet to hear one.

In short, no, it does not make you a bigot, but it means that you probably are.

Spoiler

What is my life...why'd I bother...

 

Bigot is aterm used by one close minded person to describe another as are the actions of the perceived bigot

To acknowledge lack of understanding is one thing to deny another's perceived reality is to deny yourself

Equal rights do not exist only unequal mentality

Freedom and slavery are illusions concocted by our splintered understanding as an enity in denial of itself

Not to put my own neck out there on the chopping block but I am fairly certain he didn't intend that as support of pedophilia

The currently accepted perception of early human lifestyle is a polyamorous one as such if we still commonly accepted that perception men and or women being with each other wouldn't cause extinction

Our entire reality is an argument against freedom

We create laws on the basis of moral identity which is a separation tactic of the partially unified self identity

 

Homosexuals also sometimes have relations with the opposite gender and therefore spreading it to those outside the community.

 

Up until now that word was a insult to homosexuals to me. Neither you or the video explained what that word meant.

The point is that its not good and needs to be studied upon.

 

LOL........
you funny

 

I vote both

 

That wasn't what I said. I said that those who speak against an activity doesn't mean they speak out against the person or group doing it. For example I'm against rioting, but that doesn't mean I'm against the rioters or even dislike them. So other than that I agree with you.

It kinda does work as an argument because in order to prolong the human species you'll need a third party.

Is millions of species dying off in one day natural?

Actually a bigot according to the dictionary is someone who is intolerant to PEOPLE with a different view than yours. Big difference.

It is harmful to those who practice it.

Until you know me its unfair to judge.

 

wouldn't it just be easier to bump one of the numerous other asinine threads on this topic?
I haven't seen one original thought yet.......*YAWN*

love the OP's profile pic and sig quotes.
at least we know what type of stupidity to expect.

 

and so are certain "flavors" of Christianity.

regarding homosexuality, prove it.
name one harmful thing that is only experienced by homosexuals and not any other people on Earth.

 

I think it depends on the context and what you mean by "speaking out." If we're talking about stating and defending a position on an intellectual discussion forum, I wouldn't say the person who argues against homosexual activity is necessarily bigoted. A bigot is someone who "strongly and unfairly dislikes, hates, or is intolerant of" members of a category of people. There is certainly plenty of that against homosexuals in our society, the Westboro Baptists being an extreme example. If you're just stating an opinion about the merits or demerits of the conduct without the dislike, hatred or intolerance, I wouldn't call it bigoted, although I might entertain doubts about whether or not you're really being honest. If you go farther and actively denounce homosexuals on the street corner or even in private social groups, I'd say you've crossed the line. As for some of the examples you've given, I agree with Karen J. that we can't allow individuals to refuse service to customers on the basis of personal dislikes. If a cake decorator does it and is allowed to get away with it, it won't be long before motel owners,, restaurant owners, and landlords get into the act, and gays will find themselves in the same situation as African-Americans in the fifties. I think that people who go into business to serve the general public in commerce implicitly forego the right to withhold services to categories of people they dislike. That's the way the law works for race and gender discrimination, and I think it should apply to sexual orientation, as well, although so far it doesn't. I do think that people who want to deny gays these services are bigoted.We can certainly try to discourage and restrict promiscuous behavior, although I think it may be futile. Spreading information about sexually transmitted diseases and access to condoms would be helpful. I don't see how denying gays their wedding cake would help, and as a matter of fact gay marriage might reduce the incidence of promiscuous behavior in that population. I go along with my wife that gays should have the right to same sex marriage so that they can enjoy the same kind of stable intimate relationship we enjoy.

 

Over 33% of Russia's population has AIDS, I'm not getting into Africa's population that has AIDS or stds. Do you dislike them do they truly affect you and your life style. The real issue with STDs being spread is people that are uneducated, Or careless. The problem lies in us most who have stds either were to lazy to wrap it, didn't even know the person they were laying down with, or the person they were with didn't care enough to inform them of their little issue. So therefore if you are one of them people I would consider educating yourself. What does evolution have to do with your biggotry? Humans and other animals have been having sexual relations with the same sex since the beginning of creation. Anyway how is it any of your buisness what people do in the bedroom. I mean unless you have a dirty little fetish their sexual acts you will never see. Btw even if everyone did turn homosexual we wouldn't go extinct humans made spankbanks for a reason. And I'm pretty sure most men masturbate at least once a week if not once a day. With as much jiz as they produce I think we will be ok for a while. Btw do you know why marriage was created and is still partaken in wven today? It's not some sacred right marriage is for financial stability other that that it is irrelevant. Do the gays not deserve stability? Other than that it is an archaic concept that doesn't work most modern marriages don't even last one year typically. The only reason it worked back in the day is because women were threatened with death otherwise. It is in our nature to be polyamorous. If we were not like that back in the day we wouldn't have survived.

 

I guess I have only my own experience to go on, which doesn't include polyamory, but I wouldn't count marriage out yet. To me the intimacy of stable pair-bonding is the most satisfying thing I can think of outside of heaven. Sex is certainly part of the picture, but not the central thing. If done right, with mutual respect and love, I can't think of anything that can beat it. When kids come along (we have four) it's no longer about just us. There are lots of challenges, and the relationship takes on a new moral dimension of sacrifice. But well worth it.

 

Unfortunately, I'm in one of those states where landlords can still throw them out. However, I only hear about this happening in small towns, which is one reason why hardly anybody is coming out of the closet in these places. I don't know why they would still want to live in such a place.

We used to have laws against any form of sex that didn't lead to reproduction, because of high death rates. We no longer have a population shortage, so all the restrictions can go away.