RE: Being gay is a fetish.
April 23, 2015 at 1:17 pm
(This post was last modified: April 23, 2015 at 1:32 pm by Neo-Scholastic.)
You, pro-gay advocates, are missing the point entirely. I am responding to the charge that opposition to homosexual behavior is akin to bigotry. That gets thrown around a lot, but is completely ignorant as I showed earlier. I advocate natural law, not only with respect to the issue at hand, but for a whole range of moral issues, like adultery and incest. You guys disagree. We both hold sincerely held beliefs. Disagreement over sincerely held beliefs is not bigotry.
In order for an opinion or action to qualify as bigoted it must be unfair. Gender is inherently subjective and involves beliefs about one identity based on desires and feelings. The charge of bigotry does apply when people choose to associate with only with like-minded individuals. It is fair (though not necessarily wise) for a Bible study group to exclude non-believers and it is fair for an Ultimate Frisbee team to oppose someone that vocally insults the game. It is also fair for attendees to a conference on biblical marriage roles to not welcome advocates for BDSM relationships. In contract to this, it is unfair to hold unfavorable opinions about and discriminate against people based simply on outwardly observable biological facts, like skin color or sex.
Likewise it not bigoted to hold unfavorable opinions or discriminate against people because of actions in which they freely engaged and for which they were entirely responsible. It is fair (though not necessarily wise) to exclude remarried coupled from a dinner-club because the other members consider second marriages adulterous. Nor is it bigoted to consider some voluntary behaviors morally wrong or harmful. It is fair for a Christian-based crisis pregnancy center to advise women against having abortions. It is fair (though not necessarily wise) to make and enforce laws prohibiting behavior that is a society considers harmful to self and others. The justification for such laws may be incorrect but they are not prejudiced against people simply because of immutable biological facts over which they have no control. They could in theory observe the law, even if they disagree with it. I have lots of laws with which I disagree, like prohibition against marijuana, but I now, as an adult, comply with that law even though I previously enjoyed and probably still would enjoy getting high.
Nearly everyone on your side take traditional opinions (not all of which are religious) about homosexuality personally. I can understand that because it is an affront to your strongly held beliefs about gender identity and pronounced feelings. In the same way people of faith have strongly held beliefs about their religious identity and inclinations toward certain spiritual experiences and consider gay-positive advocacy offensive. Again, these are differences of opinion. Those opinions may be uninformed, stupid, and even disrespectful, one way or the other, and reasonable people can disagree, but any comparison between opposition to homosexuality and race/sexism is nothing more than ignorant hyperbole.
The earthly conjugal love between a man and a woman corresponds with the spiritual union of the male and female principles.
In order for an opinion or action to qualify as bigoted it must be unfair. Gender is inherently subjective and involves beliefs about one identity based on desires and feelings. The charge of bigotry does apply when people choose to associate with only with like-minded individuals. It is fair (though not necessarily wise) for a Bible study group to exclude non-believers and it is fair for an Ultimate Frisbee team to oppose someone that vocally insults the game. It is also fair for attendees to a conference on biblical marriage roles to not welcome advocates for BDSM relationships. In contract to this, it is unfair to hold unfavorable opinions about and discriminate against people based simply on outwardly observable biological facts, like skin color or sex.
Likewise it not bigoted to hold unfavorable opinions or discriminate against people because of actions in which they freely engaged and for which they were entirely responsible. It is fair (though not necessarily wise) to exclude remarried coupled from a dinner-club because the other members consider second marriages adulterous. Nor is it bigoted to consider some voluntary behaviors morally wrong or harmful. It is fair for a Christian-based crisis pregnancy center to advise women against having abortions. It is fair (though not necessarily wise) to make and enforce laws prohibiting behavior that is a society considers harmful to self and others. The justification for such laws may be incorrect but they are not prejudiced against people simply because of immutable biological facts over which they have no control. They could in theory observe the law, even if they disagree with it. I have lots of laws with which I disagree, like prohibition against marijuana, but I now, as an adult, comply with that law even though I previously enjoyed and probably still would enjoy getting high.
Nearly everyone on your side take traditional opinions (not all of which are religious) about homosexuality personally. I can understand that because it is an affront to your strongly held beliefs about gender identity and pronounced feelings. In the same way people of faith have strongly held beliefs about their religious identity and inclinations toward certain spiritual experiences and consider gay-positive advocacy offensive. Again, these are differences of opinion. Those opinions may be uninformed, stupid, and even disrespectful, one way or the other, and reasonable people can disagree, but any comparison between opposition to homosexuality and race/sexism is nothing more than ignorant hyperbole.
(April 23, 2015 at 1:00 pm)Esquilax Wrote:(April 23, 2015 at 11:37 am)robvalue Wrote: Since I've had a vasectomy, am I in the "gay/worthless" category too?
No cake for me?
It's very important to punish evil misuse of genitals with cake denial.
Oh no, Chad listed "conjugal love" as a natural reason to have sex, it's not that he's against sex for pleasure... he's just arbitrarily deciding that gay sex doesn't count somehow, and is apparently hoping that if he just palms that card and walks by it really quickly, nobody will notice.
Well, either that, or he just doesn't have an actual reason to exclude gay sex from that list...
The earthly conjugal love between a man and a woman corresponds with the spiritual union of the male and female principles.
