Society is forced to be accepting of gays & transgenders.

originally posted by: SisterDelirium

originally posted by: kita0dtita
You are the proof that homophobia is not only a masculine thing. Other thing that hit me is, "Does homophobia have anything to do with homosexual tendencies?". Apparently, the answer to this age-old question is an unabashed “yes.” A past study, published by the American Psychological Association, was designed to “investigate whether homophobic men show more sexual arousal to homosexual cues than non-homophobic men.” and it looks to me, women too.
elitedaily.com...
a reply to: celinem

This "study" reminds me of a doting mom telling her social-skill-challenged child that the other kids don't play with them because they're all secretly jealous.

And where is reasoning that seeks valid conclusions, just ode to one's ego. I am sorry i hoped for more, it is interesting subject...

a reply to: kita0dtita

That's the most absurd claim I have read all day... "You disagree with my views, then you must be sexually repressed"... We disagree... Disagreements doesn't make any a hater, nor someone who is repressed... Those who made that kind of argument you just made have no argument at all...

Heck, I am Cuban-American, and imo there is a lot of people int the younger generations of Cubans who have never worked in the United States, but they come here and claim they are entitled to money, and to a house... I completely disagree with that argument. They didn't earn the right to that money, or house... Am I now a Cuban hater because I disagree with their views on entitlement?...

I am from Croatia (central EU), we did not have slaves or colonies and made cuba slave transit island. As part of old central-europian urban society i am liberal, as my grandmother was towards colour or sexual choice. Sexually repressed "hook" is just that, hook for insecure ppl to launch at it. I think that goverment should help the underdog, and give same chance to all, in EU everybody have right to health and social help, even if he is refugee. Best countryes for proper life are nordic countries with strong social help like sweden, norway and finland. They are in so many things in front of you, economicly and health safe, feeling secure and safe. That is why we in EU dont have need to buy guns.
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

originally posted by: 3danimator2014
And posting a rant about this but then saying you dont care if people are blah blah blah is the equivalent of seayiong

"im not racist but..."

You're proof of the statistic most people only comprehend 60% of what they read. The OP has nothing to do with being anti-gay. It has everything to do with reverse discrimination.

a reply to: celinem

"So I'm aware that I am going to receive A LOT of hate for this thread but "

wow. amazing, you must be some kind of psychic!

I do not agree with the lifestyle choices of gay men, gay women, nor transgenders. That is my right and I will always exercise my right of choice. With that being said I equally feel gays and transgenders also have the same right to make their own choices and I will not ridicule them.

The hypocrisy of the LBGT community is this. They recklessly hurl unfair and unwarranted insults at anyone who does not agree with them. Being labeled a biggot because I do not choose to accept their lifestyle show their hateful stupidity. They would be warranted in calling me a biggot if I made decisions to exclude them simply because of their sexual orientation. The very thing they have fought for (equality) is the very thing they take away from me when they make short sighted insults based on absolutely nothing more than uncontrolled emotion. Just because I do not support their lifestyle does not make me a biggot.

It's unbelievably hypocritical when they can sue a small business who refused to make the one gay couple a wedding cake because it went against the religious beliefs of the owners of the small bakery. They put that local shop out of business. What purpose did that serve? They demand everyone accept them yet they are hypocritical in accepting other's choices and beliefs because it differs from their own? That is ignorant and self serving and only hurts the gays goals of being accepted.

Gays have as much right to anything as the rest of society but they need to stop being little cry babies because they don't get decide how the rest of us think and feel about them. I will never pander to the 1% and I'm tired of the spineless politicians who do as well.

And where is reasoning that seeks valid conclusions, just ode to one's ego. I am sorry i hoped for more, it is interesting subject...

I suggest reading up on the study and the tool used therein.

skepdic.com...

There's more than one way to interpret that data. Also, from the above link, the use of this device to predict sexual behaviour is speculative at best.

If you think studies can't be ego serving or manipulated to support agendas...I've got a bridge and some swampland you might also be interested in purchasing

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
a reply to: kita0dtita

That's the most absurd claim I have read all day... "You disagree with my views, then you must be sexually repressed"... We disagree... Disagreements doesn't make any a hater, nor someone who is repressed... Those who made that kind of argument you just made have no argument at all...

Heck, I am Cuban-American, and imo there is a lot of people int the younger generations of Cubans who have never worked in the United States, but they come here and claim they are entitled to money, and to a house... I completely disagree with that argument. They didn't earn the right to that money, or house... Am I now a Cuban hater because I disagree with their views on entitlement?...

The current attitude of the day is to suggest that anyone who disagrees is a) Hitler b) repressed c) psychologically damaged d) intellectually lacking e) all of the above.

In essence, "endorse my life choices and attitudes or you're a bad bad person" and "give me validation or else".

originally posted by: SisterDelirium

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
a reply to: kita0dtita

That's the most absurd claim I have read all day... "You disagree with my views, then you must be sexually repressed"... We disagree... Disagreements doesn't make any a hater, nor someone who is repressed... Those who made that kind of argument you just made have no argument at all...

Heck, I am Cuban-American, and imo there is a lot of people int the younger generations of Cubans who have never worked in the United States, but they come here and claim they are entitled to money, and to a house... I completely disagree with that argument. They didn't earn the right to that money, or house... Am I now a Cuban hater because I disagree with their views on entitlement?...

The current attitude of the day is to suggest that anyone who disagrees is a) Hitler b) repressed c) psychologically damaged d) intellectually lacking e) all of the above.

In essence, "endorse my life choices and attitudes or you're a bad bad person" and "give me validation or else".

Yes. If you don't agree that two people who love each other and who happen to be the same sex should be able to live their lives together freely and openly...then you are not a nice person. Makes sense. If you were nice, you would want everyone to be happy.

originally posted by: 3danimator2014

originally posted by: SisterDelirium

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
a reply to: kita0dtita

That's the most absurd claim I have read all day... "You disagree with my views, then you must be sexually repressed"... We disagree... Disagreements doesn't make any a hater, nor someone who is repressed... Those who made that kind of argument you just made have no argument at all...

Heck, I am Cuban-American, and imo there is a lot of people int the younger generations of Cubans who have never worked in the United States, but they come here and claim they are entitled to money, and to a house... I completely disagree with that argument. They didn't earn the right to that money, or house... Am I now a Cuban hater because I disagree with their views on entitlement?...

The current attitude of the day is to suggest that anyone who disagrees is a) Hitler b) repressed c) psychologically damaged d) intellectually lacking e) all of the above.

In essence, "endorse my life choices and attitudes or you're a bad bad person" and "give me validation or else".

Yes. If you don't agree that two people who love each other and who happen to be the same sex should be able to live their lives together freely and openly...then you are not a nice person. Makes sense. If you were nice, you would want everyone to be happy.

Others within this thread have repeatedly said they don't disagree with people having the freedom do do what they will.

Have you seen what I've listed as other potential freedoms we should open up by getting government out of marriages?

I, like many others here, think gay's should be free.

We just don't want to have to endorse it as a healthy, moral, intrinsically good thing or face social retaliation.

The sticking point is our lack of endorsement.

How am I not a "nice person" for wanting people to be free to choose something I personally disagree with?

Why is legal freedom not enough?

Why must everyone be pushed to give their blessing as well?

a reply to: SisterDelirium

No one asks you to endorse anything. Just to let this be a personal matter that is outside of your control. So basically unless you want to annoy people and create useless drama, just keep your controversial opinions to yourself (same thing that applies to opinions about races. You are free to dislike people of colour but civil people keep such opinions to themselves)

You can express your disagreement but you don't have to convince others that this is morally wrong. Because this is your personal judgement and opinion.

Personally I see nothing morally wrong with same sex unions, and I think it's really annoying when people are trying to tell me that it is.

The activists becoming more pushy do so as a reaction to perceived hostility against their their beliefs. If you are tired by this activism, just stop responding to it.

Easy

originally posted by: SpaceGoatFart
a reply to: SisterDelirium

No one asks you to endorse anything. Just to let this be a personal matter that is outside of your control. So basically unless you want to annoy people and create useless drama, jsut keep your opinions to yourself.

You can express your disagreement but you don't have to convince others that this is morally wrong. Because this is your personal judgement and opinion.

Personally I see nothing morally wrong with same sex unions, and I think it's really annoying when people are trying to tell me that it is.

The reverse is also true, though. People who are constantly being told that it IS moral and that anyone who says otherwise is a bad person feel the same way.

The frustration, for me, enters when there's this constant media drum to endorse it as morally good. I've even encountered social instances at church where the kids really push the adults to cave on this point. I'm not personally going to do that. It's not moral and intrinsically good in my worldview. That's not going to change.

In normal conversation, if someone said "I'm gay and I'm getting married" I wouldn't say anything. If anything at all, I'd say good luck and be neither congratulatory nor condemning. If I was in a position to hire/fire anyone, I'd look at their work performance and conduct--not their sexual activities offsite.

The biggest beef, again, to me, is with people on the other side who won't stop calling people who disagree bigots, haters, ignorant, etc. It's annoying to me for the same reason that my views are annoying to you.

originally posted by: SisterDelirium
The reverse is also true, though. People who are constantly being told that it IS moral and that anyone who says otherwise is a bad person feel the same way.

This is correct. But let's be honest for a minute; that happens much much less than the opposite.

So you probably do feel like this happens too much for your taste (because of your opinion of the opposite), but it doesn't mean you HAVE to do the same thing yourself.

Be a better person than them and just don't do the same.


It's IMHO particularly #ty to try to pretend that this impacts your life more than the gays who are constantly being told that they are disgusting and going to hell (when they are not straight killed in some countries)


Yours is a minor annoyance (and there will ALWAYS be people you disagree with so you better learn to get over it) compared to all the # the gays have to cope with.


Again, you CAN say it's morally wrong but it doesn't mean:

- you are right
- you are not a terrible person for making this a hill to die upon

originally posted by: SisterDelirium
The frustration, for me, enters when there's this constant media drum to endorse it as morally good.

This is a biased perception. It's not that big and you are exaggerating it by calling it "constant"

originally posted by: SisterDelirium
The biggest beef, again, to me, is with people on the other side who won't stop calling people who disagree bigots, haters, ignorant, etc. It's annoying to me for the same reason that my views are annoying to you.

Saying that a preference for the same sex is morally wrong is bigoted and somewhat hateful by definition. This is not something determined by a choice. It's exactly the same as disliking people of color. You have the right to do it, but it's a bad generalization and it concerns something people have no choice over.

You can disagree with them, but it doesn't make you less bigoted to claim it's morally wrong.

I don't know of a single philosopher who ever said same sex love is a moral issue. Only religion does (and I'm saying this as a Christian). So considering that same sex love is morally wrong IS by definition bigoted. It has no existence outside of the realm of religion.



If you want to be fair and judge their morality, judge their actions, not the fact that they are attracted by the same sex.

Can you do that?

Maybe if people weren't trying at all costs to defend their opinions, and learn to let down their shield for a while and learn about the other side of the debate, things wouldn't be as bad as they are in the US now.

But unfortunately it's not in the American culture to try to understand the other side and to compromise. Americans are taught to defend their opinions and fight for them with their life. It's bad and why the US society is so polarized today.


Gays aren't a menace to the American society at all, so really there is no need to make opinions about them a combat worth fighting for.

a reply to: SpaceGoatFart

This is correct. But let's be honest for a minute; that happens much much less than the opposite.

I don't think that really is being honest. There is a marked bias against more conservative lifestyles and worldviews in the media/social media of the present-day West. You could argue, rightly, in the past that there was a great deal of bigotry aimed at minority groups. That doesn't make the current push to "neener neener" the other side more acceptable.

So you probably do feel like this happens too much for your taste (because of your opinion of the opposite), but it doesn't mean you HAVE to do the same thing yourself.

I'd argue that you don't notice it because it's not your team that's getting needled.

Be a better person than them and just don't do the same.

Outside of forums where the topic is up for discussion, I don't say anything. So, in that respect, obviously I'm not doing the same.

It's IMHO particularly #ty to try to pretend that this impacts your life more than the gays who are constantly being told that they are disgusting and going to hell (when they are not straight killed in some countries)

If you look back at what I've said, where have I claimed that it impacts me more? It doesn't. If it makes you feel any better, the Westboro Baptists once protested the church I attend because they are precisely that stupid. But no, it's not especially life-altering, assuming no one tries to dictate the way my church community teaches or how I raise my children. These are two concerns I have with the more rabid activists among the LGBT group. I have my right to my way of being, just as they have a right to theirs. As long as that is understood, we're fine.

Yours is a minor annoyance (and there will ALWAYS be people you disagree with so you better learn to get over it) compared to all the # the gays have to cope with.

I think I already stated it's a minor annoyance in several posts within this thread--it's still an annoyance, though. Although, I'm not really sure how much coping, in the current time, the LGBT crowd really has to do. Gay marriage is legal, nondiscrimination is pretty standard in the workplace, and they can adopt (although it may be more difficult if they try to go to a religiously-based agency). The media thinks they're great and social media has more rainbows than Rainbow Brite. They can be out in the military, the president gave them a landmark... I'm really not seeing where it's so hard to cope. Most people in the US of any gender, race, creed, or orientation have it pretty good right now compared to a great deal of humanity.

Again, you CAN say it's morally wrong but it doesn't mean: - you are right - you are not a terrible person for making this a hill to die upon

If that's really your attitude, that's great. It would be nice to hear more often that not all people who disagree are Hitler, crazy or stupid for disagreeing. For what it's work, just because you think it's morally ok -- same goes for my attitude toward you/anyone who thinks as you do on the topic.

This is a biased perception. It's not that big and you are exaggerating it by calling it "constant"

I disagree, there does appear to be a media preference for all things rainbow coated at the moment and Christians with traditional lifestyles/values are treated with a smirk/groan. It's definitely irksome to someone who falls into that category but harbors no ill-will to anyone.

As an example, it's disheartening to go on social media and see "friends" post things like "Get a Stupid Christian to Unfriend You with This Picture!" and it's two guys kissing. I see something like that and think, "Really? C'mon guys. Enough." I scroll past without comment, but still... blech.

originally posted by: SisterDelirium
Although, I'm not really sure how much coping, in the current time, the LGBT crowd really has to do.

Why don't you ask them instead of assuming until this day? They don't bite. They are usually very kind in fact.


You will learn more by opening yourself to those you disagree with than by standing firm on your position

Just requoting this because it was the most important part of my post, and the one you did not reply to.

You might not like to be called a bigot for saying same sex love is morally wrong.

The problem is that it is by definition a bigoted (based on religious dogma alone) opinion.

originally posted by: SpaceGoatFart
Saying that a preference for the same sex is morally wrong is bigoted and somewhat hateful by definition. This is not something determined by a choice. It's exactly the same as disliking people of color. You have the right to do it, but it's a bad generalization and it concerns something people have no choice over.

You can disagree with them, but it doesn't make you less bigoted to claim it's morally wrong.

I don't know of a single philosopher who ever said same sex love is a moral issue. Only religion does (and I'm saying this as a Christian). So considering that same sex love is morally wrong IS by definition bigoted. It has no existence outside of the realm of religion.



If you want to be fair and judge their morality, judge their actions, not the fact that they are attracted by the same sex.

Finally, no one is saying that it's morally right.

What people are saying is that it's outside of the realm of morality. It doesn't hurt others, it doesn't hurt society. It's not a moral choice.

Morality (from the Latin moralitas "manner, character, proper behavior") is the differentiation of intentions, decisions, and actions between those that are distinguished as proper and those that are improper.

Same sex love is:

- not an intention
- not a decision
- not an action


Therefore it's not in the realm of morality.


I can't make it more simple and more clear than that. People refusing to understand this are by definition bigoted. It's not a judgement from me. It's what the word bigot means in this context.

originally posted by: SpaceGoatFart
Just requoting this because it was the most important part of my post, and the one you did not reply to.

You might not like to be called a bigot for saying same sex love is morally wrong.

The problem is that it is by definition a bigoted (based on religious dogma alone) opinion.

originally posted by: SpaceGoatFart
Saying that a preference for the same sex is morally wrong is bigoted and somewhat hateful by definition. This is not something determined by a choice. It's exactly the same as disliking people of color. You have the right to do it, but it's a bad generalization and it concerns something people have no choice over.

You can disagree with them, but it doesn't make you less bigoted to claim it's morally wrong.

I don't know of a single philosopher who ever said same sex love is a moral issue. Only religion does (and I'm saying this as a Christian). So considering that same sex love is morally wrong IS by definition bigoted. It has no existence outside of the realm of religion.



If you want to be fair and judge their morality, judge their actions, not the fact that they are attracted by the same sex.

Finally, no one is saying that it's morally right.

What people are saying is that it's outside of the realm of morality. It doesn't hurt others, it doesn't hurt society. It's not a moral choice.

Love (as in affection for others) is not morally wrong. Having passions of one kind or another is morally neutral.

The problem comes from acting on those passions. The belief that acting on those passions are inherently moral because those passions exist also serves as problematic. I'm from the school of thought that believes people have to die to themselves (the ego) and their passions to live a spiritually rewarding existence. Also, that the highest forms of love are self-giving (sacrificing selfish interests in service to a greater good) rather than selfish (interested in personal pleasure and ego fulfillment).

big·ot ˈbiɡət/ noun a person who is intolerant toward those holding different opinions.

I am not intolerant toward people holding differing opinions. If I was, I'd run around calling people slurs, denying them care/consideration and telling them they're going to hell--which I'm not. I have no idea who is going to hell and who isn't. For all I know, I'm falling off the Ladder of Divine Ascent, myself.

I am adhering to the moral code I believe in and direct my life by--for myself and within my community. In that moral code is a call to set aside ego and passions and overcome the self. In this case, sexual morality dictates heterosexual, monogamous living, but passions cover a multitude of moral pitfalls related to ego and self from eating/drinking too much, to talking too loudly, etc.

By your same logic, gays are bigoted for thinking Christians who disagree are wrong for holding a contrary world view.

As you've stated, yourself, anyone who disagrees with homosexual relationships is a bigot by default...with no regard for the actions of that person toward actual gay people.

You've contradicted yourself.

a reply to: SpaceGoatFart

I'm not going to canvas the LGBT community to find out what irritates them. It's not really necessary. I hear the litany of complaints on the TV/Internet all of the time about microaggressions, etc. My point is, that everyone in the US has more to be thankful for than not--gay or straight.