Are all homophobics evil?

[el ايمان]

To be fair to gays, we have to examine semantics [which I really hate doing, but I'll go out of my comfort zone here]. It's not as if gays are getting upset at people who think "Statistically gays are not normal because they constitute 2% of the population". The normalcy we're talking about here lies closer to terms like unnatural, strange, gross, deviant, etc., which are all horrible things to say or think about a group of people.

[tishe]

I doubt homosexuals would be as annoying if they weren't pushing for marriage rights and.... and for whatever else they're pushing for. What are they pushing for? Is it just marriage rights?

Anyways, I wish we'd resolve the gay issues quickly.

That will not happen "quickly." It is an issue, in our face. Why can't people out there, say what they are afraid of? Gay guys are "butt buddies." pure and simple. This is what freaks people out. Yes or no? Religion is a stupid excuse. Homosexuals have been there, done it! (history is a wonderful tool.) Lesbians are more accepted? Accept all of them! If we do not, we will burn in some HELL. somewhere? (we are already there) These humans have nothing to do with it. May we talk about, what we are we really afraid of? Nothing!

[flowers]

Basically, to shove their acceptance down everyone's throat and chastise people for having any different opinions of homosexuality.

&Feminist agenda: to shove equality down society's throat and basically chastising anyone thinking or doing differently as sexist and/or discriminatory.

Is that so bad? I admit, some gays do expect you to accept them straight away, and they don't think to give time for understanding. But what's wrong with shoving acceptance down everyone's throat? What's wrong with fighting for what is right? Heterosexuals don't get cussed at, don't get beaten up for being heterosexual. Gay people do. It's a fight for them. They need acceptance. Go back into the 60's and complain about the black civil rights movement trying to shove equality down everybody's throat, why don't you?

Gay guys are "butt buddies." pure and simple.

...Gay guys are only purely and simply "butt buddies" if heterosexual couples are purely and simply a "vaginal penetration co-operative". I think that's the problem with a lot of homophobic/anti-gay people. They highly sexualize/take note of overtly the sexual aspect of homosexuality.

[Dieval]

&Feminist agenda: to shove equality down society's throat and basically chastising anyone thinking or doing differently as sexist and/or discriminatory.

Nice try, but it's a different story with women. Women are ~50% of the population and are needed to continue the civilization. Woman's fight for equality ≠ the gay agenda.

Is that so bad?

Is it so good?

I admit, some gays do expect you to accept them straight away, and they don't think to give time for understanding. But what's wrong with shoving acceptance down everyone's throat?

Why do we have to be told what to accept and what to reject? Why does +/- 2% of the population get to dictate what's acceptable to the other 98%?

What's wrong with fighting for what is right?

Nothing, as long as it is right.

Heterosexuals don't get cussed at

Wrong.

, don't get beaten up for being heterosexual.

..and gays shouldn't either..does that mean that people aren't entitled to their own beliefs on the subject?

Gay people do. It's a fight for them. They need acceptance. Go back into the 60's and complain about the black civil rights movement trying to shove equality down everybody's throat, why don't you?

I've already stated my opinion on comparing gay rights to racism...they're not the same.

[Dieval]

...Gay guys are only purely and simply "butt buddies" if heterosexual couples are purely and simply a "vaginal penetration co-operative". I think that's the problem with a lot of homophobic/anti-gay people. They highly sexualize/take note of overtly the sexual aspect of homosexuality.

O.o

Ummm..isn't it the sexual aspect that makes someone gay??

[flowers]

O.o

Ummm..isn't it the sexual aspect that makes someone gay??

Since you asked, this may be very ground breaking: No.

What makes you a "heterosexual"? Just because you sleep with a woman of the opposite sex? Accordingly, does that mean you aren't a heterosexual until you also engage in the sexual aspects of being heterosexual? If you've always loved someone of the same sex, but have never engaged in any homosexual sexual activity, do you think that makes them straight? Or not gay?

I'm pretty sure some people know they are heterosexual without engaging in sex, it is hardly different for gays.

Thus, sexual orientation is more cognitive then it is ever defined by physical action. It's primarily the loving someone of the same gender aspect that makes you gay.

And some gay men have slept with woman before: but that doesn't mean they're heterosexual.

[Dieval]

Since you asked, this may be very ground breaking: No.

What makes you a "heterosexual"? Just because you sleep with a woman of the opposite sex? Accordingly, does that mean you aren't a heterosexual until you also engage in the sexual aspects of being heterosexual? If you've always loved someone of the same sex, but have never engaged in any homosexual sexual activity, do you think that makes them straight? Or not gay?

I'm pretty sure some people know they are heterosexual without engaging in sex, it is hardly different for gays.

Thus, sexual orientation is more cognitive then it is ever defined by physical action. It's primarily the loving someone of the same gender aspect that makes you gay.

And some gay men have slept with woman before: but that doesn't mean they're heterosexual.

Medical Dictionary

1 ho·mo·sex·u·al definition
Pronunciation: /ˌhō-mə-ˈseksh-(ə-)wəl, -ˈsek-shəl/
Function: adj
1 : of, relating to, or characterized by a tendency to direct sexual desire toward individuals of one's own sex compare HETEROSEXUAL 1a ,
2 : of, relating to, or involving sexual intercourse between individuals of the same sex compare HETEROSEXUAL 1b ,
ho·mo·sex·u·al·ly Pronunciation: /-ē/
Function: adv
Homosexual | Define Homosexual at Dictionary.com

Sounds like a sexual aspect to me..

Spin it all you want, but the sexual aspect is what separates heterosexuals from homosexuals.

[SoylentGreen]

Sounds like a sexual aspect to me..

Spin it all you want, but the sexual aspect is what separates heterosexuals from homosexuals.

I think the point is do you define yourself only by the fact that you have sex with the opposite sex? Do you feel the need to explain which sexuality you are so as to clear the air between strangers?
Being gay is only one aspect of a persons life and it is the anti gay crowd that tend to focus on the sex part and ignore the fact that their life like yours is so much more than just having sex.

[flowers]

Sounds like a sexual aspect to me..

Spin it all you want, but the sexual aspect is what separates heterosexuals from homosexuals.

well;

(Good old) Wikipedia:

Homosexuality is romantic and/or sexual attraction or behavior between members of the same sex or gender. As a sexual orientation, homosexuality refers to "an enduring pattern of or disposition to experience sexual, affectional, or romantic attractions" primarily or exclusively to people of the same sex...

Sounds like sexual aspect is not definitive at all to me...

Spin it all you want, but the being in love with someone of the same sex is what separates heterosexuals from homosexuals.

You have not answered any of my questions, or really thought on their implications which implies false conclusions about what defines being gay on your behalf.

And have you ever heard of gay asexuals? Since they exist....

[flowers]

oops, i didn't realize you did a reply to my older post.

Nice try, but it's a different story with women.

Not too different. Same book, different chapter. If you go to the index and look up the words "Social equality", they will direct you to "womans rights" and "gay rights", i'm pretty sure.

Women are ~50% of the population and are needed to continue the civilization. Woman's fight for equality ≠ the gay agenda.

So you are implying it is different for gays because they are a minority and furthermore they are reproductively redundant for civilization, and therefore this implies lesser access or legitimacy to rights?

Is it so good?

I think so. Parochial minds < open minds

Nothing, as long as it is right.

Why did i even quote the above if you said this....

Wrong.

sorry, i guess, so. All humans are commonly cussed at.
I mean, heterosexuals are not a target for beatings and bullying to the extent gays/LGBT are simply for their sexual orientation and such.

..and gays shouldn't either..does that mean that people aren't entitled to their own beliefs on the subject?

Yeah, if they really believe they shouldn't get beaten up for being gay, that usually implies the person is at least accepting of gays or understanding. Of course you are entitled to it; i'm just saying it's not so bad that they are trying to change your opinion. Who does bad opinion harm? Only them, really.

I've already stated my opinion on comparing gay rights to racism...they're not the same.

You're right. Racism and gay rights are not the same. But i'm not talking about racism per se. I'm referring to how it was a civil rights movement. I was referring to its fight for acceptance and social equality. They are connected simply by that gays and African american suffer discrimination, what they were discriminated against are different- but discriminated for certain attributes all the same.

[Grogybear]

Nice try, but it's a different story with women. Women are ~50% of the population and are needed to continue the civilization. Woman's fight for equality ≠ the gay agenda.

Is the level of equality a person deserves dependent on the size of a group they belong to? Do blacks deserve less equality than women then?
So the only reason you accept equality for women is because there are lots of them and we need them to make babies so we need to keep them happy?

Do you know what the biggest % of the population is (and therefore, by your own logic, most deserving of equality)? Its people. They make up 100% of the population.

Pretending your viewpoint isn't similar to racism is laughable.
How is discriminating against people who have sex differently any less stupid then discriminating against people with a different melanin content in their skin?

All these varied forms of intolerance stem from the ignorant tendency by some to group people together based on arbitrary bullshit.

[grandpa]

Is the level of equality a person deserves dependent on
the size of a group they belong to?
Do blacks deserve less equality than women then?

It should be based on common sense standards of justice. I wouldn't say that everyone and everything is absolutely of equal quality (not all people are likable, not all books have readability, etc.), but standards should be as generalized as possible. For example: I would portray Dieval's post in less than glowing terms, but I personally recognize his right to post.

Grandpa h.