Tolerance vs. Endorsement

[Argent]

I stated in that homosexuality thread that disappeared last week that I'm the posterboy for tolerance of homosexuals.

Well, it's true.

I live in Chelsea in NYC, arguably the "gayest" neighborhood in the world. I speak to more gay people in one day than most people do in a year.

I am also a Bible-believing Evangelical Christian who believes that homosexual sex acts are a sin, are outside of God's will for His creation.

Some of the pro-homosexual CFers think that I'm "intolerant", when actually the complete opposite is true. If I were "intolerant" I certainly wouldn't be living in a gay ghetto. I wouldn't eat in gay restaurants down the street, or go to my gym, which is not "gay" but most of the guys working out there are. There are ads on the phonebooths on 8th Ave for gay internet dating sites, and drag queens strutting their stuff down 8th Ave. And don't even mention the goings-on right out on the street during the blackout last year. BJs all up and down 21st Street! If I were "intolerant", I would have hightailed it out of town after seeing that!

I am the poster boy for tolerance of gays. What the pro-homosexual activists mean is that I don't "endorse" homosexual sex acts, and "endorsement" is the whole goal of the gay agenda. If I were "intolerant" I'd be smacking the boys over the head with my Bible and screaming fire and brimstone at them on the corner of 8th and 23rd! I'd be condemning them as they make their bootycalls while they're sitting on the benches at the gym. Or, I'd call the 10th Precint Morals Squad and have them all arrested for the illegal public lewedness in the steamroom.

I am the posterboy for tolerance of gays!

But I will always call sin "sin" and homosexual sex acts are sin.

 

[Spherical Time]

Good for you.

Granted, I don't agree with you at all, but you seem to be getting a kick out of being self-congratulatory, so go for it.

You go girl.

 

[Argent]

Good for you.

Granted, I don't agree with you at all, but you seem to be getting a kick out of being self-congratulatory, so go for it.

You go girl.

Knocked the wind out of your "intolerance" rhetoric, didn't I?

 

[Ananel]

Intolerant:

Not tolerant, especially:

1. <LI type=a>Unwilling to tolerate differences in opinions, practices, or beliefs, especially religious beliefs. <LI type=a>Opposed to the inclusion or participation of those different from oneself, especially those of a different racial, ethnic, or social background.
2. Unable or unwilling to endure or support: intolerant of interruptions; a community intolerant of crime.

Tolerate:

1. To allow without prohibiting or opposing; permit.
2. To recognize and respect (the rights, beliefs, or practices of others).
3. To put up with; endure. See Synonyms at bear[SIZE=-1]1[/SIZE].
4. Medicine. To have tolerance for (a substance or pathogen).

Depending upon how one views the precise definitions of tolerance in this specific case, you are either highly tolerant of other people in choosing to endure and live unhindering in the presence of homosexuals, or possibly highly intolerant, in wishing to prohibit particular viewpoints coming to fruition.

I say possibly, as your views on homosexual rights are not explicitly made clear in your OP. Tolerance is a multifaceted term with a variety of nuances, and multiple interpretations by various groups. You highlight this, though not particularly adroitly.

 

[Spherical Time]

Knocked the wind out of your "intolerance" rhetoric, didn't I?

Not really. But if you need to be told that you aren't a bigot because you live in Chelsea, then I can do that:

You are a sweet and kind soul. A Christian among heathens. A veritable Prince among men.

Obviously your choice to live in a fairly gay section of New York City is proof that you can have no ill will toward homosexuals. Good for you.

 

[beechy]

Argent, why have you chosen to live in Chelsea?

 

[Argent]

Tolerance is a multifaceted term with a variety of nuances, and multiple interpretations by various groups. You highlight this, though not particularly adroitly.

LOL!!

 

[Argent]

Not really. But if you need to be told that you aren't a bigot because you live in Chelsea, then I can do that:

You are a sweet and kind soul. A Christian among heathens. A veritable Prince among men.

Obviously your choice to live in a fairly gay section of New York City is proof that you can have no ill will toward homosexuals. Good for you.

Thank you!

 

[beechy]

LOL!!

Somebody has the giggles again.

 

[Argent]

Argent, why have you chosen to live in Chelsea?

When I moved to Chelsea, there were empty storefronts on each block of 8th Ave. The East Village and SoHo were already gentrified. I knew Chelsea had to be next. I could smell it. It was the only neighborhood not gentrified below 96th St. Who knew it would be gay central in five years? Although it had always been a poor gay subburb of Greenwich Village. It was not a good neighborhood in those days (70s and 80s).

 

[beechy]

Argent, why have you chosen to live in Chelsea?

Also, what do you think it means to be tolerant, and do you see it as a virtue (in general, and with respect to homosexuality)?

 

[Argent]

Somebody has the giggles again.

LOL=Laugh Out Loud. I don't think we have an acronym for "giggles" yet.

 

[beechy]

When I moved to Chelsea, there were empty storefronts on each block of 8th Ave. The East Village and SoHo were already gentrified. I knew Chelsea had to be next. I could smell it. It was the only neighborhood not gentrified below 96th St. Who knew it would be gay central in five years? Although it had always been a poor gay subburb of Greenwich Village. It was not a good neighborhood in those days (70s and 80s).

So you moved there because rents were cheap in this "poor gay suburb" that was not yet "gay central"?

Why do you stay?

 

[beechy]

LOL=Laugh Out Loud. I don't think we have an acronym for "giggles" yet.

You LOL a lot. Seems like you've got the giggles.

 

[loriersea]

There were plenty of racist whites who lived among black people in the South in the 1950s, who enjoyed eating at restaurants where blacks were cooks and who made friendly conversation with their black neighbors, but who vehemently protested those very same people being given the same rights they were. Sure, they were tolerant of blacks, in that they weren't lynching them, and that's a good thing. But, they were still racists, and they still wanted to deny rights that they enjoyed themselves to others.

I certainly hope that we don't become such a compassionless, violent society that we have to applaud people for not physically assaulting people who are different from them. That said, I am glad that you can tolerate gays enough to benefit from living in a neighborhood where they keep the homes looking good and the rents relatively low (I live in an area with a lot of gay people, too, so I know that it is very common for gay couples, who are rejected from other neighborhoods, to move into inner city neighborhoods and really revitalize them, making them safe, friendly places to live). I'm glad you don't physically attack your neighbors or turn them into the police for their private sexual activities. I'm also glad you don't turn your straight neighbors into the police for engaging in sodomy or sleeping with prostitutes. But that doesn't make your desire to deny gay people the rights you enjoy any less bigoted.

 

[kopilo]

Argent, why have you chosen to live in Chelsea?

Because it was too far to move to Kings Cross, Sydney, Australia?

 

[kopilo]

LOL=Laugh Out Loud. I don't think we have an acronym for "giggles" yet.

LOL also = lots of laughs
we also have ROFL = Rolling on the Floor Laughing
ROFLMAOPIMP = Rolling On the Floor Laughing My A** Off Peeing In My Pants
LMAO = Laughing Madly At Others
hehehe is also generally the spelling of the onomatopoeia of giggling
[/off topic]

 

[Argent]

So you moved there because rents were cheap in this "poor gay suburb" that was not yet "gay central"?

Why do you stay?

I own an apartment that is now worth five times what I paid for it.

 

[spinto]

I stated in that homosexuality thread that disappeared last week that I'm the posterboy for tolerance of homosexuals.

Well, it's true.

I live in Chelsea in NYC, arguably the "gayest" neighborhood in the world. I speak to more gay people in one day than most people do in a year.

I am also a Bible-believing Evangelical Christian who believes that homosexual sex acts are a sin, are outside of God's will for His creation.

Some of the pro-homosexual CFers think that I'm "intolerant", when actually the complete opposite is true. If I were "intolerant" I certainly wouldn't be living in a gay ghetto. I wouldn't eat in gay restaurants down the street, or go to my gym, which is not "gay" but most of the guys working out there are. There are ads on the phonebooths on 8th Ave for gay internet dating sites, and drag queens strutting their stuff down 8th Ave. And don't even mention the goings-on right out on the street during the blackout last year. BJs all up and down 21st Street! If I were "intolerant", I would have hightailed it out of town after seeing that!

I am the poster boy for tolerance of gays. What the pro-homosexual activists mean is that I don't "endorse" homosexual sex acts, and "endorsement" is the whole goal of the gay agenda. If I were "intolerant" I'd be smacking the boys over the head with my Bible and screaming fire and brimstone at them on the corner of 8th and 23rd! I'd be condemning them as they make their bootycalls while they're sitting on the benches at the gym. Or, I'd call the 10th Precint Morals Squad and have them all arrested for the illegal public lewedness in the steamroom.

I am the posterboy for tolerance of gays!

But I will always call sin "sin" and homosexual sex acts are sin.

These statements are typical by Christian people who do not look further than what their blinders allow them to see.. All what you are discribing as being "gay" actually has very little to do with being "gay" and whole lot to do with being "OVERTLY SEXUAL". Gay internet dating, "Gay" resturants (whatever that is), BJ's all up and down 21st st (eeewwww), gay parades and drag queens (oh please)... These "things" are not limited to or the defination of a homosexual person... These are sex acts and a subcultures extreme idealism, you are discribing. It is wrong of you to lump those "activites" and "extremes" in a definition of any gay person... And it wrong of you to say you are tolerant of Gay people because you are tollerant of the Ghetto you happen to live in.

I will tell you why what you see is so prominant in your area... The fact is, that for many many years, our society has been so intolerant of gay people<--that is a fact. It is human nature to seek out other people with a comonality<--also a fact. If you find yourself different and disliked because of that difference, It makes intolerance a little less impactful if you surround yourself with a group of people that have a lot in common with you. And for gay people, that commonaltiy is "being attracted to the same gender"... So cells of communites formed (gay ghettos) where there is a dense accumulation of a sub-culture (in your case, gay people). If you observe, many black people, asian people, and jewish people, etc... do the same thing.

What happens next is that a subculture begins to grow and develop it's own kinda "click". You will abserve that many have the same additudes and do the same things. It is all part of the need to be accepted. So, many people (especially gay people) strive so much for acceptance that they are willing to buy into additudes and ideals just to fit in--to fit in SOMEWHERE... And the gay subculture that you are discribing has fallen into that trap. And it is sad because the ideals formed can be hurtful and anti-productive.

And you come in and say your are tollerant of it all.. Well, I am a gay man myself. I consider myself married to my male partner, live in a nice home, and we run a Corporation. I am NOT even tollerant of the gay ghetto ideals that you seem to be. I do not tollerate such a discusting display of overt "public" sexuality (gay or straight). I think internet dating is dangerous and a little heartless. And, my opinon of your stance of "tollerance" is that it is a little misplaced and rediculas. You are tollerant what you don't need to be (Overt public sexuality), and you are intollerant of what is fair to be (rights and equality to gay families everywhere).

The trouble is, that many Christians think these gay ghettos are some sort of defination of what gay people are all obout. And it is just not so. There are so many of us out here, living amungst you, in gay relationships, owning business, working hard, and we are light years away from having anything to do with discusting gay ghettos. So what defines us?? I'll tell you... We are people, and we are your fellow Americans. We want the right to take care of our families. We want equality, and we want to be married. We want normalcy and the justice that no one has the right to DICTATE our rights to OUR families.

And that is something good to endorse. THAT, is tollerance for people. Not defining homosexuals by the standerd of discutiong gay ghettos that are no different than a red light district.

 

[Argent]

There were plenty of racist whites who lived among black people in the South in the 1950s, who enjoyed eating at restaurants where blacks were cooks and who made friendly conversation with their black neighbors, but who vehemently protested those very same people being given the same rights they were.

Again, the racism defence of homosexuality. OK, again, race is not a choice nor is it a sin. Homosexual sex acts are a choice and a sin.

All homosexuals have the same rights as I do. They can marry any the person of the opposite sex as they please.

Sure, they were tolerant of blacks, in that they weren't lynching them, and that's a good thing. But, they were still racists, and they still wanted to deny rights that they enjoyed themselves to others.

The homosexual agenda lobby really needs to stop disparaging black people by equating their struggle for civil rights with the homosexual's pusuit of special rights. It's not the same in any way shape or form.

I certainly hope that we don't become such a compassionless, violent society that we have to applaud people for not physically assaulting people who are different from them.

Poeple should be applauded for making the right choices as God would have them make.

That said, I am glad that you can tolerate gays enough to benefit from living in a neighborhood where they keep the homes looking good and the rents relatively low (I live in an area with a lot of gay people, too, so I know that it is very common for gay couples, who are rejected from other neighborhoods, to move into inner city neighborhoods and really revitalize them, making them safe, friendly places to live).

You don't know Chelsea today. A studio apartment (one room) is $2400/month. And everything else is two to three times as expensive as it was 15 years ago! Gays keeping prices down?!!! You've got to be kidding! What planet do you live on?!!!!

I'm glad you don't physically attack your neighbors or turn them into the police for their private sexual activities.

I said I didn't go to the 10th Precinct Morals Squad even though what they are doing is in a PUBLIC health club. It's quite illegal here, and the steam rooms at almost all gyms in Manhattan have been closed down, at one time or another, by the Dept. of Health for public lewedness. DON'T MISCONSTRUE MY STATEMENTS TO FURTHER YOUR AGENDA.

I'm also glad you don't turn your straight neighbors into the police for engaging in sodomy or sleeping with prostitutes.

Sarcasm is not going to help you defend inappropriate illegal behavior.

But that doesn't make your desire to deny gay people the rights you enjoy any less bigoted.

The ECUSA, of which I assume you are a member by your "Anglican" icon, has strayed very, very, very far from the Gospel. As a Christian brother to Chrisitan sister, I admonish you to stop leading homosexuals into sin. The eternal penalty for you will be even greater than for them.