Originally Posted by
domenico
Thank you for actually saying it like it is. The rest of your statement, however, was Clinton talk, meaning it's all incorrect. Homophobia would be an irrational fear or hatred of homosexuals, if it really existed. The current usage of terms like "homophobic" and "homophobe" imply that all opposition to homosexuality is crazy. Actually there are many sociological, psychological and medical reasons that many logically-thinking people oppose homosexuality. People who abuse terms like "homophobia" are implying (whether they know it or not), that it's impossible to "love the sinner and hate the sin". No one talks about opposition to alcoholism in terms of hatred, because groups like Alcoholics Anonymous have popularized the view that drinking alcohol is addictive. The term homophobia, when it is applied to every criticism of homosexuality, implies that all such criticism is irrational.
Commenting on its psychological use, WorldNetDaily managing editor David Kupelian states, "This is how the "marketers of evil" work on all of us. They transform our attitudes by making us feel as though our "super uncomfortable" feelings toward embracing unnatural or corrupt behavior of whatever sort – a discomfort literally put into us by a loving God, for our protection – somehow represent ignorance or bigotry or weakness."
Homophobia is an etymologically incorrect term which most directly denotes "an unreasoning fear of or antipathy toward homosexuals and homosexuality", but it also includes a fear of increased political and social power of homosexuals in advancing their agenda. The term is used regularly by activists to describe several kinds of people, which may or may not match the actual definition of "fear of homosexuals and homosexuality". The recipients of the homophobia label include those who feel uncomfortable around homosexuals, those who reveal that they oppose "gays," and even those who may privately support homosexuality but who fail to publicly support homosexuals when called upon to do so. Conservative Christians and other people who strongly object to homosexuality often take offense at this term, which had led to the use of the term heterophobia to describe those who manifest an antipathy to those who uphold heterosexuality as normative or exclusively valid. While the term phobia is an irrational fear of something, nobody is afraid of homosexuals, and nobody fears contracting homosexuality. That is in contrast to heterophobia, whose existence has been documented.
VIOLENCE against gays, however, is something that I despise. You can respect or disrespect who ever the hell you want, but if you have to hurt them, that is completely immoral, incorrect, and wrong. In 1990, Congress passed the Hate Crime Statistics Act, which required the Attorney General to collect data about crimes that manifest evidence of prejudice based on race, religion, sexual orientation, or ethnicity/national origin. In 1994, lawmakers amended the Hate Crime Statistics Act to include bias against persons with disabilities.
There are many arguments against homosexuality based on religious grounds and on its effects on society which include such matters as the negative health effects of homosexuality and that homosexual couples experience significant higher rates of domestic violence.
In 2003, the Pew Research Center stated that in the United States, religious beliefs underpin opposition to homosexuality according to a study they conducted. Judeo-Christian objections nearly always refer to what the Bible states about homosexuality, which, it is argued, condemns homosexual acts in both Old and New Testaments. For example, Leviticus 18:22 says; "A man shall not lie with man as with a woman, it is abomination". Romans 1:26-28: "For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: 27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was meet. 28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;"
Some liberals argue that historically, condemnation of those sexual acts was simply based on them being unnatural to procreation, and thus contrary to (a definition of) unnatural, inferring that such condemnation is invalid due to ignorance of sexuality.
However, as seen in dealing with Homosexuality and biblical interpretation, the union of man and women in marriage is based upon them being created as uniquely compatible and and complementary, and the sanction of sexual union (via marriage) as only between opposite genders extends beyond procreation, with romantic sexual attraction between married couples being honored outside the context of children in such books as the Song of Solomon, and with marital sexual relations being enjoined in 1 Cor. 7:5 on the basis of heterosexual desire.
Motive can be a moral factor in who to marry among lawful partners, and within marriage, but is never a determinate factor in the Scriptural prohibitions of illicit partners, from fornication between heterosexuals to adultery to homosexual unions to bestiality, while grace is offered for salvation to all who will come to faith in Christ with a repentant heart.
"For God has not given us a spirit of timidity, but of power and love and discipline." -2 Timothy 1:7
Enough already, my hand is going to fall off if I type one more word.
close this thread.
Reply With Quote
