U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Is homophobia just as bad as racism?
Yes 93 55.69%
No 68 40.72%
Not sure 6 3.59%
Voters: 167. You may not vote on this poll

 
 
Old 03-16-2011, 05:41 PM
 
10,452 posts, read 10,311,638 times
Reputation: 12496

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by buddy5
They don't want kids.
They like to be alone.
No. No, this is America, you have the right to pursue happiness.
They remind me of my ex-wife.
Shouldn't gays who want to marry (the same sex) be able to pursue happiness too, then?
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-16-2011, 05:41 PM
 
Location: Europe
2,735 posts, read 2,099,728 times
Reputation: 637
Quote:
Originally Posted by buddy5 View Post
They don't want kids.
They like to be alone.
No. No, this is America, you have the right to pursue happiness.
They remind me of my ex-wife.
According to backspace's logic, those people should also be viewed as unnatural.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-16-2011, 05:43 PM
 
3,776 posts, read 3,806,153 times
Reputation: 1388
Quote:
Originally Posted by buddy5 View Post
. . .
No hate anywhere. Why is it the ones who scream hate, are the ones hurling insults, calling names, and being generally rude, because we disagree???
Thank you buddy5 that is what I have been saying.

The posters who are angry, mean-spirited, insulting, judgemental, and quick to anger are not the people who believe homosexuality is wrong (the dreaded "homophobes" ) but the supposedly tolerant all accepting posters who disagree with them, or the homophils, if you will.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-16-2011, 05:45 PM
 
Location: bold new city of the south
5,240 posts, read 4,153,310 times
Reputation: 6198
Quote:
Originally Posted by nimchimpsky View Post
I've never met someone who took the word "phobic" so literally in this context. "Hydrophobic" literally means "afraid of water" but chemists use it to describe substances that chemically repel water. Likewise the "phobic" in "homophobic" isn't meant to denote literal fear, so much as just a negative view or disapproval of homosexuality.

Words are important, if we can't agree on meanings of specific words ,how can we truly communicate.

I say, I don't like homosexual acts, not the person. I am accused of 'hating'.

I may disagree with your reasons, but I don't feel I should call you a liar,
or accuse you of hating. Hate is a really strong word. I don't hate anyone.

BTW, we don't often agree, but you are civil, and try to understand others. I appreciate that.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-16-2011, 05:45 PM
 
Location: Reality
9,958 posts, read 7,380,588 times
Reputation: 3308
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pamky View Post
According to backspace's logic, those people should also be viewed as unnatural.
No, according to your skewed logic they should. According to my logic people can do whatever makes them happy and if that means being in a homosexual relationship then so be it. Homosexuality occurs in many species in the wild, in some types of frogs they are able to change their sex on the fly and even fertilize themselves for reproduction. That is not true in the human species, we are either male or female unless you're talking about a very very very rare case where someone is born with birth defects and have both sets of sex organs but again, that's an anomaly and isn't a justification for claiming that homosexuality is normal or natural.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-16-2011, 05:45 PM
 
Location: Europe
2,735 posts, read 2,099,728 times
Reputation: 637
Quote:
Originally Posted by Backspace View Post
I don't view any of that as unnatural and I see where you're heading but you're wrong. A woman that doesn't want kids is perfectly natural and that's her choice. The female body was designed or evolved to give birth and the male body was designed or evolved to produce sperm which is needed to fertilize a female's egg. Basic biology and science dictates that homosexuality in humans is unnatural. A straight couple who don't want to have kids is no big deal, that's a choice and has nothing to do with biology. I don't care if people want to be in a relationship or not, that has nothing to do with this conversation. People who choose not to have sex also has nothing to do with this conversation.'

Using common sense and the most basic knowledge of biology and physiology it's pretty clear that homosexuality in humans is unnatural.
According to your own logic, these people should be viewed as unnatural. A female that doesnt want to have kids even though her body is designed to have kids, is unnatural.
A man that does not want to spread his sperm around, that has no interest in sex, is also unnatural. (according to your logic)
Of course now you backpaddle because you see your logic is flawed.

If a man that doesnt want to have sex with a female is not unnatural (to you), then why is a male that is attracted to another male unnatural?

If you use biology as your main reference, you can't view these people as not unnatural.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-16-2011, 05:48 PM
 
Location: Europe
2,735 posts, read 2,099,728 times
Reputation: 637
Quote:
Originally Posted by Booya View Post
Thank you buddy5 that is what I have been saying.

The posters who are angry, mean-spirited, insulting, judgemental, and quick to anger are not the people who believe homosexuality is wrong (the dreaded "homophobes" ) but the supposedly tolerant all accepting posters who disagree with them, or the homophils, if you will.
Have I called anyone names? If anyone is mean-spirited here, than it is you. You use most of your post to belittle the liberals in the US.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-16-2011, 05:49 PM
 
Location: Here
1,684 posts, read 1,441,786 times
Reputation: 1313
Quote:
Originally Posted by West of Encino View Post
A lot of people seem to compare homophobia to racism. Explain why some would think so.

Do you think homophobia is bad as racism or worse?
It's kind of a tricky question, and maybe kind of a dumb one too. But here I am, about to write something about it. So I guess that says something about me, huh?

Anyway, are you talking about homophobia nationwide as opposed to racism nationwide, or homophobia on the individual level as opposed to racism on the individual level? See, kind of a tricky question. And are you referring to general gay discrimination or specifically homophobia, that is, a simple fear of gay folks? I think there are people who discriminate against gays who are not in any way homophobic. I'll tell you what, I answer as though you are referring to general discrimination.

In my opinion a "flagrant" gay person would probably have a tougher row to hoe as compared to a black person in a white environment. But a black person would have a tougher row to hoe if the gay were discreet. I mean, you wouldn't know the person were gay, so the gay discrimination would be zero.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-16-2011, 05:49 PM
 
Location: Europe
2,735 posts, read 2,099,728 times
Reputation: 637
Quote:
Originally Posted by buddy5 View Post
Words are important, if we can't agree on meanings of specific words ,how can we truly communicate.

I say, I don't like homosexual acts, not the person. I am accused of 'hating'.

I may disagree with your reasons, but I don't feel I should call you a liar,
or accuse you of hating. Hate is a really strong word. I don't hate anyone.

BTW, we don't often agree, but you are civil, and try to understand others. I appreciate that.
Do you have a problem with two hot lesbians having sex?
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-16-2011, 05:52 PM
 
Location: Reality
9,958 posts, read 7,380,588 times
Reputation: 3308
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pamky View Post
According to your own logic, these people should be viewed as unnatural. A female that doesnt want to have kids even though her body is designed to have kids, is unnatural.
A man that does not want to spread his sperm around, that has no interest in sex, is also unnatural. (according to your logic)
Of course now you backpaddle because you see your logic is flawed.

If a man that doesnt want to have sex with a female is not unnatural (to you), then why is a male that is attracted to another male unnatural?

If you use biology as your main reference, you can't view these people as not unnatural.
You're mixing up a person's personal intentions or desires with basic biological design, unless you can keep these 2 separate in your head we can't talk about this sort of stuff.
Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


 
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:
Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top