Poll shows backlash on gay issues

[Volos]

Originally posted by sweetkitty:
And I have no prejudice against homosexuality other than a biblical one.

Merriam Webster Collegiate Dictionary
prej•u•dice
Pronunciation: 'pre-j&-d&s
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Old French, from Latin praejudicium previous judgment, damage, from prae- + judicium judgment
Date: 13th century
1 : injury or damage resulting from some judgment or action of another in disregard of one's rights; especially : detriment to one's legal rights or claims
2 a (1) : preconceived judgment or opinion (2) : an adverse opinion or leaning formed without just grounds or before sufficient knowledge b : an instance of such judgment or opinion c : an irrational attitude of hostility directed against an individual, a group, a race, or their supposed characteristics


The bible has been used for nearly two thousand years to justify prejudice and discrimination against women, against people from color, against non-Christians, against the handicapped and many other minorities.

Simply because a prejudice can be defended biblically does not make it moral, good or right.

 

[Woodsy]

There are many homosexuals (I would venture to say most) who do NONE of the things you discuss here. To describe it as an "entire group" is falling prey to the stereotypes that make up the "gay lifestyle" myth. Many (most) gays just want to live their life, go to work, and simply keep the government and others out of their personal lives.

Read my post. I didn't say "all."
What I said was that the entire group ("Gays" or "Homosexuals") defines itself by its sexual desires. Those sexual desires are the entire basis for these people setting themselves apart.

Do you consider Mardi Gras a legitimate portrayal of the "heterosexual lifestyle"?

Nowhere have I ever seen a Mardi Gras publicised or claimed as a demonstration of "Straight Pride." Mardi Gras was not specifically designed to celebrate what heterosexuals are proud of or to show the world why heterosexuals are valuable.

 

[notto]

When an entire group of people define themselves by what kind of sex they desire, are they not outlining that kind of sex as the major defining component of their lifestyle?

I guess by your own standards that those who argue against homosexuality are "an entire group of people who define themselves by what kind of sex they desire". Are you not "outlining that kind of sex as a major defining component" of your lifestyle?

Gay rights isn't about sex, it is about fighting the denyial of their rights when they are denied because of their sexual preferences. They are not the ones who are defining or separating themselves, it is those who treat them as second class citizens who are defining them as a group. I guess that minorities who fight for civil rights are simply an entire group of people who define themselves by what color they are as a major defining component of their lifestyle.

 

[ocean]

Once again, I was speaking strictly on the subject of marriage which as already stated is biblically incorrect.

It does not matter if it's biblically incorrect, laws should not be based on the bible or any other religious text. There is no reason to outlaw civil unions/gay marriage, it does not harm anyone and it does not infringe on anyone's rights.

 

[Pete Harcoff]

And where the rights of the majority are trampled upon by activist judges and representatives.

Huh? My rights are being trampled on? News to me...

 

[Woodsy]

I guess by your own standards that those who argue against homosexuality are "an entire group of people who define themselves by what kind of sex they desire". Are you not "outlining that kind of sex as a major defining component" of your lifestyle?

Nope. Otherwise I'd call myself a "Straight Parent" or a "Straight Student" or a "Straight Christian." And I'd wear t-shirts that say "Straight Pride" and I'd go on "Straight Cruises."

 

[Woodsy]

Gay rights isn't about sex, it is about fighting the denyial of their rights when they are denied because of their sexual preferences.

Last I heard, marriage wasn't a "right." It entails rules and qualifications.

 

[Volos]

Originally posted by tribe:
When an entire group of people define themselves by what kind of sex they desire, are they not outlining that kind of sex as the major defining component of their lifestyle? When they plaster their cars with flags to make sure everone knows that they are gay (rainbow flag, pink triangle, yellow & blue plus sign), or gay AND into S&M (Black white & blue flag with a red heart), or gay and into older hairy men - aka "bears" (that one's a flag with a bear on it on and stripes of various shades of brown and orange).
I don't define myself as a heterosexual Christian, or a heterosexual parent. My heterosexual friends and family do not fly special flags to let the world know what flavors of sex they prefer. We don't rely upon parades with nudity and public obscene sexual displays to display our "pride" in our sexual orientation. I don't use a special accent as a result of my sexual tastes, as so many gays are recognizable by the way they speak. (That's been true, in my peresonal experince on both coasts, and many places in between.) It kind of seems to me to be a lifestyle for many homosexuals.

First off being gay isn’t about sex, yes sex is very nice but it is not what relationships are built on nor is it what sustains a relationship. It is love that does that.

As for your complaint about decals and flags: War veterans get special license plates for their cars. In this area there are there are as many “Polish and Proud” bumper stickers as there are “my kid is an honor role student” bumper stickers. Are these people flaunting their status in a way that offends you as well?

Bear is a gay term for a tall masculine furry and (usually) slightly chunky gay man. It has nothing to do with age. I am a bear and so is my spouse and I don’t count 37 as old.

When a person of color defines him/herself as an African American does that also offend your sensibilities?

The only parade I have ever been in was when I drove a tractor in the 4th of July parade let me assure you that not only was I fully dressed at the time I did not engage in anything that could be considered obscene while in that parade. (The pie eating contest later that day is however another story)


“I don't use a special accent as a result of my sexual tastes, as so many gays are recognizable by the way they speak.”
I suggest you get a dictionary and look up the words prejudice, stereotype and bigotry.

 

[notto]

Nope. Otherwise I'd call myself a "Straight Parent" or a "Straight Student" or a "Straight Christian." And I'd wear t-shirts that say "Straight Pride" and I'd go on "Straight Cruises."

So are gays who don't do these things respective of their sexual preference not part of the "homosexual lifestyle"? You still haven't told us where those gays who just go through their life and do none of the things you mention as part of the "homosexual lifestyle" fit in. What if it is only a minority of gays who do any of the things you mention? Would that show that the "homosexual lifestyle" is nothing but a myth?

 

[notto]

Last I heard, marriage wasn't a "right." It entails rules and qualifications.

The ability to have a relationship in the privacy of your own home with another consenting adult without it being deemed illegal by a government that is suppose to protect my rights (well, only illegal if some people do it) would be a right in my book.

I would also include as a right the ability to get and retain a job based on qualifications and not being able to be fired because of a sexual preference that is not the same as the sexual preference that my boss uses to define themselves.

 

[Woodsy]

I suggest you get a dictionary and look up the words prejudice, stereotype and bigotry.

I suggest you walk around Seattle for a day or two. If even my Liberal friends can admit this, why can't you?

I didn't say all gays talk that way, but only gays talk that way. Just an observation.

 

[Totally Transformed]

Huh? My rights are being trampled on? News to me...

If you're in the minority of people in Canada who supported their recent decision to legalize same-sex marriage then your rights were not trampled upon. Canadian citizens had already voted that they were not in support of legalizing same-sex marriages, but activist politicians trampled upon the rights of the majority of voters, and then activist judges further trampled upon the majority rights by legalizing same-sex marriages in that country.

 

[Pete Harcoff]

If you're in the minority of people in Canada who supported their recent decision to legalize same-sex marriage then your rights were not trampled upon. Canadian citizens had already voted that they were not in support of legalizing same-sex marriages, but activist politicians trampled upon the rights of the majority of voters, and then activist judges further trampled upon the majority rights by legalizing same-sex marriages in that country.

Where are you getting this from? I can find no information anywhere that "Canadian citizens had already voted that they were not in support of legalizing same-sex marriages". In fact, I found a poll that shows the majority (albeit a slim majority) support gay marriages: http://edmontonplus.workopolis.com/servlet/Content/fasttrack/20030614/UPOLLN?section=Legal

 

[Durango]

It does not matter if it's biblically incorrect.

With an opinion such as this, that pretty much sums the the futility of further discussion on the subject.

 

[kdet]

With an opinion such as this, that pretty much sums the the futility of further discussion on the subject.

This is exactly the way I feel. I came here under the impression this is a Christian forum where as a Christian I could enjoy fellowship and instead I am accused of saying something I didn't even say..accused of hating someone and probably will be blamed for the next earthquake or flood....sheesh. The ones the most intolerant of other's views are usually the ones screaming the loudest for TOLERANCE.

 

[Arthur Dietrich]

Tribe: I've heard straight people talk 'that way'. I think it would be better to say 'effeminate men talk that way'. There are both effeminate gay and straight men.

I have to agree with Volos and the rest. Gays who act in the way you describe are the acception, but they are the ones in the media more...the ones who people pay more attention to/make funnier characters in TV shows. So people think they are the norm of the gay community.

Sweet kitty: Just out of curiousity...if you wanted Christian fellowship...well, there are specific places in the forums for such things. Not that I don't want you to stay and discuss/debate. Whatever makes you happy. (heh-in case you're in a bad mood, that could sound like an attack. Just saying it's not. I know what it's like to be frustrated by some of the board members. But we're all friends here. Or at least, I'd like to think I'm friends with everyone...or at least I have no enemies) And people are accussing you of saying something you didn't say. Rather they are assuming you implied something or you gave them a certain impression. Of course, there is a fine line between this and 'twisting words'.


Way off topic...but I spent all this time on this thread...and now my tea is cold XP

 

[SqueezetheShaman]

I see,so in your book pedophilla,incest and anything else should be legal?
The goverment is in people's bedrooms for a reason...for the common good. I agree that the sodomy law should have struck down but there are good laws on the books concerning sexual acts that we should support in order to protect the innocent.

I am amazed that you really wonder this.
can i get a big fat DUH?

 

[SqueezetheShaman]

This is exactly the way I feel. I came here under the impression this is a Christian forum where as a Christian I could enjoy fellowship and instead I am accused of saying something I didn't even say..accused of hating someone and probably will be blamed for the next earthquake or flood....sheesh. The ones the most intolerant of other's views are usually the ones screaming the loudest for TOLERANCE.

well maybe you should have read where this forum is for "christian and non christian interaction". maybe you should go to the christian only section if you don't want to hear any non chris viewpoints.

 

[Mechanical Bliss]

This is exactly the way I feel. I came here under the impression this is a Christian forum where as a Christian I could enjoy fellowship and instead I am accused of saying something I didn't even say..accused of hating someone and probably will be blamed for the next earthquake or flood....sheesh. The ones the most intolerant of other's views are usually the ones screaming the loudest for TOLERANCE.

Both you and Durango missed the point.

Let's recap what posts lead to the recent comments:

Once again, I was speaking strictly on the subject of marriage which as already stated is biblically incorrect.

It does not matter if it's biblically incorrect, laws should not be based on the bible or any other religious text. There is no reason to outlaw civil unions/gay marriage, it does not harm anyone and it does not infringe on anyone's rights.

With an opinion such as this, that pretty much sums the the futility of further discussion on the subject.

ocean is precisely correct. It doesn't matter whether gay marriage is "Biblically incorrect" or not. The laws in this country cannot be based upon your religious text as per the first amendment. Legislating according to the Bible shows preference by the government for Christianity and establishes the U.S. as a Christian nation when it is in fact a nation run by what is supposed to be a secular government to protect the freedoms of ALL citizens, not just those Christians who want special treatment under the law to have their religious text recognized by law.

After all, it's the Christians who want special treatment under the law here, not the homosexuals, whose potential unions would IN NO WAY infringe on your own individual rights and freedoms.

It's just as irrational as making sweet pickles illegal while dill pickles remain legal. Just because I don't like sweet pickles, would never eat them, and don't understand why people would want to eat them doesn't mean I should want to restrict others' individual rights to eat them. It also doesn't mean that I would even have that right in the first place.

And no, it's not that we are intolerant of your views. We are not suppressing your free speech rights. You are allowed to express your intolerance of homosexuals. That doesn't make it right. We tolerate your view even though it shows no respect for the individual rights of a certain group of people in this country.

 

[kdet]

well maybe you should have read where this forum is for "christian and non christian interaction". maybe you should go to the christian only section if you don't want to hear any non chris viewpoints.

I post on forums all over the internet...I am use to non Christian viewpoints..my point was that I was under the impression that this was a place for Christian fellowship..ovbiously I was wrong and I will take that into account when posting on such threads. I have no problem with ANYONE voicing their opinion, I do have a problem when people lie about what I have posted.