Anti-Christian Gay People

enaidealukal said:

Um... Ok.. What an informative response.

Click to expand...

You assumed a lot without information. I must be sure you wont make another wild misrepresentation of what is said, so brevity seemed to be good for such aim

Pagan_Patriot said:

As if every Christian is like that?

Click to expand...

As if I even said they were?

Me Myself said:

You assumed a lot without information. I must be sure you wont make another wild misrepresentation of what is said, so brevity seemed to be good for such aim

Click to expand...

I didn't make assumptions or misrepresent what you were saying, I was asking you what you meant because it was unclear. Let's try once more.

enaidealukal said:

Who and where are these "anti-Christian homosexuals"?

Click to expand...

Thoughts? Or not going to answer this?

enaidealukal said:

are you trying to say that homosexuals who oppose the more or less official Christian position of bigotry against homosexuals are "anti-Christians" and thus themselves bigots?

Is this like the rhetorical "heterophobe" nonsense we get from the anti-gay/anti-equality crowd? i.e. "poor us, people don't like us for being prejudiced and oppressive"?

Click to expand...

Now, judging by your response the answer to this is "No"- but then again, I don't want to put words in your mouth. But if this is NOT what you meant, then what on earth did you mean?

MysticSang'ha said:

Well you know, if people call queers abominations, sinful, abnormal, and sick, and also are willing to vote against the interests of homosexuals, I find it rather hypocritical that those who do are surprised and offended to be called bigots in return.

Click to expand...

I understand what you are saying there but not all people who are against "gay marriage" call homosexuals abominations, sinful, abnormal, and sick. And yes, I do vote against the interests of "gay rights activists". I am glad that I do and I always will do that.

However, I am not hateful or bigoted in the least and therefore I have every right to be offended when someone calls me hateful or bigoted just because I stand up for the Truth.

The Sum of Awe said:

Aren't anti-Christian or anti-Abrahamic homosexuals just as prejudice as anti-homosexual Christian people?

Isn't it still called prejudiced when it is just the opposite of the old norm?

And don't you know when this prejudice gets just as bad as the other way around when Christians, Republicans, Conservatives are afraid to admit they are Christians, Republicans, Conservatives because of some stereotype going around that all Christians, all Republicans, and all Conservatives a homophobic?

Just a question

Click to expand...

Yes. But intolernace and tolernace is neither good nor bad inherently. Its the context that matters. Intolerance of intolerance can be considered good. Tolerance of intolerance can be considered good. It depends.

Being prejudice against black people has been deemed a bad. Acceptance of that behavior or tolerance of that behavior is considered bad. Intolerance of that behavior is considered bad.

Tolernace for different views such as religion for the most part has been considered good. there are anti-theists that view religion as bad and therefore tolerance of any religion is also bad.

Intolernace of the christian's intolerance of homosexuality is not bad. Intolerance of someone's religion that spans behind the original intolerance of homosexuality in a non-anti-theist situation would be considered wrong.

Wow that is a mess of a response but hopefully you can navigate through it.

ZooGirl02 said:

I understand what you are saying there but not all people who are against "gay marriage" call homosexuals abominations, sinful, abnormal, and sick. And yes, I do vote against the interests of "gay rights activists". I am glad that I do and I always will do that.

However, I am not hateful or bigoted in the least and therefore I have every right to be offended when someone calls me hateful or bigoted just because I stand up for the Truth.

Click to expand...

I would definitely call you bigoted because:

1)Every time you use the words gay marriage you put them in quotation marks, implying that you don't believe a union of two people who love each other to be a legitimate marriage. What makes their devotion to each other any different than a straight couple's?

2)The fact that you vote to deny a group of people the same rights you have and it makes you happy. If somebody said they don't hate black people, but voting against their right to marry made this person happy, would you not call them a bigot?

3)The fact that you call this joyous denial of rights "standing up for the truth"

ZooGirl02 said:

I understand what you are saying there but not all people who are against "gay marriage" call homosexuals abominations, sinful, abnormal, and sick. And yes, I do vote against the interests of "gay rights activists". I am glad that I do and I always will do that.

However, I am not hateful or bigoted in the least and therefore I have every right to be offended when someone calls me hateful or bigoted just because I stand up for the Truth.

Click to expand...

Have your truth. Just not in the government that I pay taxes to as well by denying me and others like me rights that you are entitled to. Your truth is not my truth.

MysticSang'ha said:

Well you know, if people call queers abominations, sinful, abnormal, and sick, and also are willing to vote against the interests of homosexuals, I find it rather hypocritical that those who do are surprised and offended to be called bigots in return.

Click to expand...

A point I have made many times over

I guess it would be hard to imagine why a gay person would be anti christian without walking a mile in their shoes.

I.S.L.A.M617 said:

I would definitely call you bigoted because:

1)Every time you use the words gay marriage you put them in quotation marks, implying that you don't believe a union of two people who love each other to be a legitimate marriage. What makes their devotion to each other any different than a straight couple's?

2)The fact that you vote to deny a group of people the same rights you have and it makes you happy. If somebody said they don't hate black people, but voting against their right to marry made this person happy, would you not call them a bigot?

3)The fact that you call this joyous denial of rights "standing up for the truth"

Click to expand...

I accept the fact that some people are going to call me bigoted and hateful because I stand up for what I know in my hear to be the Truth. I believe with all of my heart that what the Catholic Church teaches via the Magisterium is the Truth and I act in accordance to what I believe to be the Truth. If people want to call me hateful and bigoted for that then so be it. I'm not going to stop believing what I believe and I am not going to stop acting how I act and I am not going to stop voting how I vote just because someone thinks I am hateful and bigoted for it. That's my own opinion.

Also, I do want to call attention to this specific paragraph of the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

Catechism of the Catholic Church said:

2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God's will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.

Click to expand...

Catechism of the Catholic Church - PART 3 SECTION 2 CHAPTER 2 ARTICLE 6

I have underlined the portion which I am emphasizing. The underlining is not present in the original.

So I do accept LGBT people with respect, compassion, and sensitivity and I am also against unjust discrimination. However, in my belief, there is a difference between just and unjust discrimination. In my belief, one example of just discrimination would be prohibiting two men or two women from "marrying" each other. One example of unjust discrimination would be for example a manager at a gas station refusing to hire a person based upon the fact that the person is a gay man and based on that one fact alone. In other words, the manager at the gas station in this example refuses to hire someone solely because they are homosexual. To me, that would be unjust discrimination. But anyway, these are my opinions which I have made in accordance with how I understand the teaching of the Magisterium.

I also want to note that some would say that prohibiting two men or two women from "marrying" each other is not discrimination at all. I am not sure how to explain that belief and to me it seems to be mere semantics but anyway, I just wanted to make note of that.

As always, the above are my opinions and all are free to disagree with me. In my belief, someone who is for the legalization of "gay marriage" is wrong on what I feel to be a moral issue which has been infallibly defined by the Catholic Church's Magisterium. In other words, I believe the Magisterium of the Catholic Church has infallibly defined that marriage is to be between one man and one woman only and that all other forms of "marriage" are to be rejected both in law and in theology. Again, those are my opinions.

MysticSang'ha said:

Have your truth. Just not in the government that I pay taxes to as well by denying me and others like me rights that you are entitled to. Your truth is not my truth.

Click to expand...

Well, in my belief, there is only religion that has 100% of the Truth. That religion is the Catholic Church. All other religions have varying portions of the Truth. If those other religions contradict what the Catholic Church teaches on faith and morals then I believe that what the other religion is teaching which is in contradiction is wrong. That's my own opinion and belief though. Everyone is free to agree or disagree with my beliefs.

dgirl1986 said:

A point I have made many times over

Click to expand...

I dont think I have seen anyone yet that says s/he expects gays not to offend those who call them abomination.

ZooGirl02 said:

In my belief, one example of just discrimination would be prohibiting two men or two women from "marrying" each other. One example of unjust discrimination would be for example a manager at a gas station refusing to hire a person based upon the fact that the person is a gay man and based on that one fact alone.

Click to expand...

How is denying someone a job because they are gay any different, let alone more unjust, than denying someone happiness because they're gay?

I.S.L.A.M617 said:

How is denying someone a job because they are gay any different, let alone more unjust, than denying someone happiness because they're gay?

Click to expand...

Because her belief system says so!! That's why!!

The Sum of Awe said:

Aren't anti-Christian or anti-Abrahamic homosexuals just as prejudice as anti-homosexual Christian people?

Isn't it still called prejudiced when it is just the opposite of the old norm?

And don't you know when this prejudice gets just as bad as the other way around when Christians, Republicans, Conservatives are afraid to admit they are Christians, Republicans, Conservatives because of some stereotype going around that all Christians, all Republicans, and all Conservatives a homophobic?

Just a question

Click to expand...

The question has a connotation. It appears, people in certain societies really act in a way for people, and don't even feel they are doing anything, if people profess devotion to God. It seems, religion doesn't teach charity, or kindness. Feelings are neither good, nor bad, and one should be reticent about expression. What the issue means to me, isn't an issue. The issue is the opposite. It seems, people can be normal with everyone, but aren't, and to some people, this is an issue. I mean, one might like people in a light, but people don't think about each other all the time. Isn't it fair, to be equally interested in everyone, and that interest be moderate?

The Sum of Awe said:

Aren't anti-Christian or anti-Abrahamic homosexuals just as prejudice as anti-homosexual Christian people?

Isn't it still called prejudiced when it is just the opposite of the old norm?

Just a question

Click to expand...

You are correct, for sure - good post.

Intolerance is a two way street, as evidenced by anti-Same Sex Marriage people being falsely labelled 'bigots' , and anti-immigration people 'racists'.

This is clearly not true, and is a case of inverted intolerance.

Volodya said:

You are correct, for sure - good post.

Intolerance is a two way street, as evidenced by anti-Same Sex Marriage people being falsely labelled 'bigots' , and anti-immigration people 'racists'.

This is clearly not true, and is a case of inverted intolerance.

Click to expand...

How are anti-gay marriage people not bigots? They clearly have a problem with gay people getting married for the simple fact that they're gay. No matter the justification, it's bigotry.

The anti-immigration crowd is a little trickier. I wouldn't go so far as to call ALL of them racist, but a good amount of them definitely are.

Some people are fine about homosexuality, but do not agree with the 'administrative' procedure known as SSM, because they believe marriage should be about creating a biological family.

This is not bigotry at all.

Volodya said:

Some people are fine about homosexuality, but do not agree with the 'administrative' procedure known as SSM, because they believe marriage should be about creating a biological family.

This is not bigotry at all.

Click to expand...

That's definitely bigotry. If I owned a Puerto Rican restaurant and didn't let any white people in because I believed Puerto Rican food should only be eaten by Puerto Ricans, would you call me a bigot?

A lot of people believe that marriage is about creating a family so should be reserved for man + woman only, whereas food is of the same 'use' to everyone, the need for sustenance.

So reacting to a change in the definition of marriage does not make one a bigot.

Volodya said:

A lot of people believe that marriage is about creating a family so should be reserved for man + woman only, whereas food is of the same 'use' to everyone, the need for sustenance.

So reacting to a change in the definition of marriage does not make one a bigot.

Click to expand...

So by that logic should heterosexual couples in which one person is infertile not be allowed to get married? Where's the public outcry against infertile marriage?