Is the term "homophobe" subjective?

[psychedelicsoul]

Now... My definition of homophobe is simple and easy... anyone who either wishes to bring harm upon or strip public sector rights away from homosexuals.
This definition is simple and easilly differentiates people who are harmful and people who just believe differently...
Unfortunately, the word "homophobe" is completely subjective... don't even try to argue that it isn't. To some feminists, watching lesbian porn is homophobic,since it "demeans" and "objectifies" them. However, other more reasonable feminists will call that notion out for the horse **** that it is...

But in the end, what you decide to call offensive is subjective. Let me give you some examples

1. I believe in religious freedom, and to force religious people to get involved in LGBT events and weddings violates that freedom. Am I a homophobe for not thinking differently? Does simply not being a liberal make me homophobic? And don't compare this **** to race... it's nothing like that
http://dailysignal.com/2015/07/21/t...or-you-baker-to-his-fellow-gays-and-lesbians/
Is he homophobic? Is he a self-hating gay traitor?
http://www.debate.org/opinions/should-christian-bakers-be-forced-to-bake-cakes-for-gay-weddings
Are all 74% of the people who voted on this homophobes? Even if they're gay, are they still homophobes?
Honestly, I've seen straight people accuse other gay people of homophobia before... it's pretty funny.
2. I'm not some evangelical christian who thinks they'll go to hell, but I don't approve of it religiously. I think they can change and attempts to change them should be legal for those over 18... Does supporting the freedom to do that make me a homophobe? The Dalai Lama had similar feelings towards it as I do... Is the Dalai Lama a homophobe?
3. I think the backlash against supposingly "homophobic media" is childish and stupid. I don't see why gay people care about Phil Robertson and Eminem and other people... Personally I use homophobic slurs... Mostly against people I don't like. But not intended as a slam against gays... plus, eminiem says it, so that makes it cool.
The chick fil a thing was stupid too... why? Becuase Rob Halford of Judas Priest said it was stupid.
http://noisecreep.com/rob-halford-chick-fil-a/
And that settles the debate. Not because he's gay, but because he's ****ing Rob Halford of ****ing Judas Preist. End of debate.

 

[psychedelicsoul]

If you honestly don't believe that two people in a consensual relationship where both are happy shouldn't be together because of their genders you are homophobic.
If you are against gay rights or use terminology demeaning to gay people you are homophobic.

Aren't you being anti-religious for labeling all religious people who disagree with homosexuality bigots? I mean... as long as they support separation of church and state, who cares about their religion? By your logic... Any christian, muslim, jew, or other religion who disagrees with it is automatically a bigot.

Why isn't it not like race? They are a minority persecuted for completely for bigotry of non gays.

Refusing to take part in a ceremony you disagree with is not "persecution"
That's like if a religious woman was denied an anti-abortion poster from a print shop that supports abortion... She's not being discriminated against for being christian, the shop just disagrees with what is being done.
Not catering a gay wedding isn't the same as denying service to gay people for any reason whatsoever. I shouldn't have to be a part of a jewish wedding if it's against my religion.
If I refused to cater a KKK rally, would that be discrimination? Yes, it would actually by definition. However, not against the people, but against the event.

And a lot of gay people agree with me.

If he is pro conversion then yes. Gay people aren't forcing straight people to convert, so straight people shouldn't do the same to them.

Who said anything about force? You're not forced to do something you consent to. As long as a consenting adult agrees, it's nobodies business.

Although I agree the media dwells to much on ******** like eminem, using homophobic slurs is definitely morally wrong because by using them as insults you are being demeaning to the groups that actually are associated to it. Despite whatever your intentions are.
How is this any different from racism?

Being black is a race, being gay is a sexual orientation, being in a gay relationship is a lifestyle choice...
Plus, as much as the N word is used in rap, I don't see why using the word "***" is that offensive. Plus.. All of this can be solved by just having a sense of humor.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

1. I believe in religious freedom, and to force religious people to get involved in LGBT events and weddings violates that freedom. Am I a homophobe for not thinking differently? Does simply not being a liberal make me homophobic? And don't compare this **** to race... it's nothing like that

No one should be able to force them to be involved and participate. However, baking a cake is not getting involved, but offering the general public a service.

http://www.debate.org/opinions/should-christian-bakers-be-forced-to-bake-cakes-for-gay-weddings
Are all 74% of the people who voted on this homophobes? Even if they're gay, are they still homophobes?

Yes, this service is a public service, and discrimination over things like race, even when it's based on religious grounds, has been ruled unconstitutional and illegal.

I think they can change and attempts to change them should be legal for those over 18... Does supporting the freedom to do that make me a homophobe?

Yes. These "therapies" have been shown, time and time again, to not work, cause psychological damage, and leave patients worse off than before they started the "therapy." It has been denounced by every major medical, psychological, and psychiatric organization.

3. I think the backlash against supposingly "homophobic media" is childish and stupid. I don't see why gay people care about Phil Robertson and Eminem and other people... Personally I use homophobic slurs... Mostly against people I don't like. But not intended as a slam against gays... plus, eminiem says it, so that makes it cool.
The chick fil a thing was stupid too... why? Becuase Rob Halford of Judas Priest said it was stupid.
http://noisecreep.com/rob-halford-chick-fil-a/
And that settles the debate. Not because he's gay, but because he's ****ing Rob Halford of ****ing Judas Preist. End of debate.

So what? Rob Halford eating a Chik-fil-A doesn't mean much. But, as for the media, it depends on context. The South Park episode "Big Gay Al's Big Gay Boat Ride," even though portraying a very highly stereotyped homosexual man, and the bombardment of political incorrectness that is a major part of South Park, the episode was widely praised for bringing attention to the struggles and discrimination faced by homosexuals. It just depends on how it's being used and who is using it. But, in general, things that are mean and blatantly offensive are not cool, and calling for/advocating violence isn't cool and there should be restrictions against it.

 

[Draka]

I'm sorry, but if someone owns a business, a business that caters to the general public, and they openly state that they will not provide their services to someone because they are gay then, yes, that does indeed make them a bigot. Now, if the institution you work for happens to be a religious non-profit entity that is centered upon a certain faith then that is a different matter and that is why churches and their ilk are not required to perform services which fall outside of their faith, but it doesn't fly for tax-paying businesses.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Now, if the institution you work for happens to be a religious non-profit entity that is centered upon a certain faith then that is a different matter and that is why churches and their ilk are not required to perform services which fall outside of their faith, but it doesn't fly for tax-paying businesses.

The only real difference is in that situation it is their legal right, however, it does not lessen the bigotry.

 

[psychedelicsoul]

Well, generally people who think a practice is morally incorrect, they place themselves as higher than people who perform that practice.
I stand by my statement

No they don't... not nessasrilly. I think homosexuality is not good spiritually, but I don't hate them or see myself as better than them. And niether do most Christians. So... Are you telling me a christian who has gay friends and supports gay rights is a homophobe just because they agree with Paul's stance in the NT?

I never disagreed with this.

okay... I like Utah... they got it right
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...-discrimination-bill-backed-by-mormon-church/

Right, because people are never forced into conversion therapy by loved ones, right. That would be way too crazy to even consider.

Yea, if you're a kid. When you're an adult, you make your own decisions. I don't support it for kids.

Racism and Homophobia are both discrimination and bigotry over others by factors that people were born with.
Being in a gay relationship is a lifestyle choice, yes, but so is being in a straight relationship.
One does not choose to be gay though, one cannot help what they are attracted too, so it would be quite rude to force them into relationships with the gender they are not attracted to, gay's aren't forcing straight people into gay relationships.

I don't choose to like weed, but smoking it is a choice. But gay people aren't forced to be with the opposite sex. There just happens to be people who disapprove of it.

If you fail to see why the N word and the word "***" are offensive, you should really look up some history. I'd bet if there was a widely used slur against Christians by other religions, you wouldn't seem to have this sense of humor you speak of. I fail to see why having a sense of humor makes it okay to use the N word or the word *** as an insult? That's not funny. Just a pointless insult.

That's totally untrue, I make fun of and insult christians all the time.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

But gay people aren't forced to be with the opposite sex.

So are they then just supposed to not experience the intimacy of love and pleasure of sex just because someone thinks "ewww?"

That's totally untrue, I make fun of and insult christians all the time.

I suspect you make fun of insult many groups.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

******** like eminem

 

[psychedelicsoul]

The only real difference is in that situation it is their legal right, however, it does not lessen the bigotry.

That's not bigotry... Asking a church to marry same sex couples is like asking a mosque to serve pork.
It's utterly ridiculous to claim that christians need to basically ignore their religion for other peoples sake. I mean... Biblical marriage is between a man and woman. Period. Asking churches not to follow that is basically asking them to burn their bibles.

Demanding they do is anti-christian

 

[psychedelicsoul]

So are they then just supposed to not experience the intimacy of love and pleasure of sex just because someone thinks "ewww?"

No... When did I say that? They can do what they want. Nobody's gonna stop them.

I suspect you make fun of insult many groups.

I'm an equal opportunity guy

 

[psychedelicsoul]

I'm sorry, but if someone owns a business, a business that caters to the general public, and they openly state that they will not provide their services to someone because they are gay then, yes, that does indeed make them a bigot. Now, if the institution you work for happens to be a religious non-profit entity that is centered upon a certain faith then that is a different matter and that is why churches and their ilk are not required to perform services which fall outside of their faith, but it doesn't fly for tax-paying businesses.

I think it depends... If I don't serve gays period... I understand. But when it pertains to marriage, we're talking about a tradition that's sacred to religious people. I'm glad that Virginia doesn't have any LGBT discrimination laws in the private sector. However, gay people are given equal rights in the public sector

I think if a satanist wants a cake, he shouldn't be able to force Christians to make a 666 cake. Nor should a KKK member be able to demand a black restaurant owner cater a clan rally.

 

[psychedelicsoul]

No one should be able to force them to be involved and participate. However, baking a cake is not getting involved, but offering the general public a service.

It's forcing a christian to sin against his faith... plus, how is preparing something not "getting involved". I'm glad my state doesn't think like you.
I'll support what you're saying when the Westboro Baptist Church is allowed to force gay bakers to make anti-gay hate themed cakes.

Yes, this service is a public service, and discrimination over things like race, even when it's based on religious grounds, has been ruled unconstitutional and illegal

Yes. These "therapies" have been shown, time and time again, to not work, cause psychological damage, and leave patients worse off than before they started the "therapy." It has been denounced by every major medical, psychological, and psychiatric organization.

So? Ghosts haven't been proven to be real. So let's ban paranormal research.
Either way, supporting a freedom isn't the same as agreeing with it.

But personally, I know you can change sexuality.

So what? Rob Halford eating a Chik-fil-A doesn't mean much. But, as for the media, it depends on context. The South Park episode "Big Gay Al's Big Gay Boat Ride," even though portraying a very highly stereotyped homosexual man, and the bombardment of political incorrectness that is a major part of South Park, the episode was widely praised for bringing attention to the struggles and discrimination faced by homosexuals. It just depends on how it's being used and who is using it. But, in general, things that are mean and blatantly offensive are not cool, and calling for/advocating violence isn't cool and there should be restrictions against it.

Restrictions? As in... **** the first amendment basically?

 

[Draka]

I think it depends... If I don't serve gays period... I understand. But when it pertains to marriage, we're talking about a tradition that's sacred to religious people. I'm glad that Virginia doesn't have any LGBT discrimination laws in the private sector. However, gay people are given equal rights in the public sector

I think if a satanist wants a cake, he shouldn't be able to force Christians to make a 666 cake. Nor should a KKK member be able to demand a black restaurant owner cater a clan rally.

If someone has issues with who they think should and shouldn't get married then they shouldn't be in a business that caters to weddings or marriage in general. Much like that bigoted Kim Davis who took on a position to serve ALL the residents of that county and decided she was going to inflict her religious beliefs on them instead. If you can't perform the duties of a public job due to your religious beliefs then you shouldn't have that job. This is why you don't see JW hematologists, Christian Scientist pharmacists, Amish electricians, and so on. You can't get past your religious beliefs to adequately perform a job without discrimination then you have no business in that job. Period.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Telling a mosque to serve pork is not infringing on any human rights.
A church refusing to marry gays is infringing on their human rights.
That's the difference.

If demanding they do so is anti-christian(which I don't believe is,) I will proudly say that being anti-christian is a moral choice.

Wait, are you saying that churches should be forced to perform gay marriages?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

That's not bigotry... Asking a church to marry same sex couples is like asking a mosque to serve pork.

No one is demanding that churches be forced to perform gay marriages. That would be a violation of the first amendment. However, just because they have the right to refuse them does not mean they aren't homophobic. The Ku Klux Klan is perfectly within their rights to exclude anyone who isn't white, but they are still racist ********.

No... When did I say that? They can do what they want. Nobody's gonna stop them.

Say what? You said that no one forcing homosexuals to be with someone of the same sex, so I asked what you propose.

It's forcing a christian to sin against his faith... plus, how is preparing something not "getting involved". I'm glad my state doesn't think like you.

How is it a sin? You won't find any examples in the Bible of Jesus turning someone away because of a particular sin. Rather, to the contrary, he ministered and accepted all among him.

So? Ghosts haven't been proven to be real. So let's ban paranormal research.

Paranormal research (asides from it dying out) doesn't cause harm to people.

Either way, supporting a freedom isn't the same as agreeing with it.

That is true. However, when you serve the public, you don't get to pick and choose whom you serve.

But personally, I know you can change sexuality.

Research disagrees. It will show it is more fluid than a rigid dichitomy, but you can't turn someone who is heterosexual into a homosexual and vice versa.

Restrictions? As in... **** the first amendment basically?

If someone is calling for violence, yes. And there are already many restrictions against free speech already in existence, such as making threats or shouting "fire" in a crowded theatre.

 

[psychedelicsoul]

If someone has issues with who they think should and shouldn't get married then they shouldn't be in a business that caters to weddings or marriage in general. Much like that bigoted Kim Davis who took on a position to serve ALL the residents of that county and decided she was going to inflict her religious beliefs on them instead. If you can't perform the duties of a public job due to your religious beliefs then you shouldn't have that job. This is why you don't see JW hematologists, Christian Scientist pharmacists, Amish electricians, and so on. You can't get past your religious beliefs to adequately perform a job without discrimination then you have no business in that job. Period.

Kim Davis worked for the public sector. She doesn't count.

 

[psychedelicsoul]

We both know there are going to be many young adults pressured into it by their families if conversion therapies existed. Parental support means a lot.

It doesn't matter... You could say the same hing about anything. The point is that adults should be able to do what they wanna do.

So gay people are spiritually immoral for having any sexual/romantic life just because your book says so? Um...

No, I believe morality is subjective.

Joke=/=Insulting
That is done out of humor.
Calling a dude a *** to insult him, is not a joke.
It is also different when you are mocking a group you belong to

Depends on context

 

[psychedelicsoul]

Telling a mosque to serve pork is not infringing on any human rights.
A church refusing to marry gays is infringing on their human rights.
That's the difference.

If demanding they do so is anti-christian(which I don't believe is,) I will proudly say that being anti-christian is a moral choice.

Going to church isn't a human right for anyone.

The difference is that paranormal research hasn't caused anyone to start experiencing mental issues yet, or infringing on human rights.

You cannot have your rights violated by something you consent to.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I don't think they should be forced,
just pointing out the difference in the comparison.
I would highly support them to though.
Whats your take on it?

Just checking.

I believe in the separation of church and state.

 

[McBell]

Just checking.

I believe in the separation of church and state.

To what extent?