(August 20, 2014 at 7:45 pm)Fidel_Castronaut Wrote:Quote: Now you’re committing the fallacy of equivocation, I said I do not understand what “being gay” means, I understand what homosexuality is. The two are not the same though.
When you were using the term “being gay” I assume you were referring to someone’s sexual orientation, some sense of “being” and “who they are”. That is what I am saying is nonsensical. If you were using it to mean someone who has sex with the same gender then I’d be following you. The equivocation occurs when you try and say that we do not approve of same-sex relationships because of who a person is rather than what they do. That’s my point. I tried to get you to define what “being gay” meant and you could not do so.
This issue is really about definitions though, if two straight men wanted to marry one another (I guess it could happen) I still would not support it. Does that mean I hate straight people? Hardly.
