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.
Gays are now the "darlings" of the left. People pat themselves on the back for being open-minded about homosexuality, sometimes condescendingly so. A couple of good examples were when rachel maddow and neil patrick harris appeared on The Colbert Report. I was embarassed for Stephen Colbert.
I'm a straight black male and I think it's just common sense that gays have the same rights and limits as everybody else, including the right to marry.
...But I won't join the celebration just yet, since it's still taboo amongst the overwhelming majority of women in my city to be seen having a cup of coffee with a black guy, even as everyone pats themselves on the back for being so liberal and open-minded.
As a black lesbian, I neither chose my race or my sexual orientation. Why is it most sane Americans acknowledge the pathology of racisms' destructiveness but are then unwilling to acknowledge homophobia is no different?
Both are undesirable and should be handled appropriately. Interestingly though, it also depends on what one defines as homophobia and racism.
Regarding homophobia, I personally don't define it as rational, scientific discourse that offers helpful and necessary advice to glbts. That is, I think their lobby has done a poor job of informing them of the real risks involved with certain lifestyles, and has even promoted it, not to mention misleading them on the causes and possible advantages that therapy may offer, as for sexual addiction. And forcing them to think that born that way means designed or destined to be that way, regardless of the consequences. It's one big mess on the whole glbt issue.
People insulting them for their feelings, blaming them for unfortunate life situations, denying them legal rights...now that I would consider homophobia.
Both are undesirable and should be handled appropriately. Interestingly though, it also depends on what one defines as homophobia and racism.
Regarding homophobia, I personally don't define it as rational, scientific discourse that offers helpful and necessary advice to glbts. That is, I think their lobby has done a poor job of informing them of the real risks involved with certain lifestyles, and has even promoted it, not to mention misleading them on the causes and possible advantages that therapy may offer, as for sexual addiction. And forcing them to think that born that way means designed or destined to be that way, regardless of the consequences. It's one big mess on the whole glbt issue.
People insulting them for their feelings, blaming them for unfortunate life situations, denying them legal rights...now that I would consider homophobia.
Why is it that you only source your prejudiced mis'information' from conservative religious anti-gay sources?
Location: Currently I physically reside on the 3rd planet from the sun
2,220 posts, read 1,878,203 times
Reputation: 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by alexiana
As a black lesbian, I neither chose my race or my sexual orientation. Why is it most sane Americans acknowledge the pathology of racisms' destructiveness but are then unwilling to acknowledge homophobia is no different?
I don't think anybody cares who you sleep with?
I think when you call them homophobes or make it a political issue, thats when you attract negative attention.
I don't think anybody cares who you sleep with?
I think when you call them homophobes or make it a political issue, thats when you attract negative attention.
Sex is a private issue. Making it pubic makes many people uneasy. I don't care what you do in your bedroom or with who you do it (provided both are consenting adults) but I don't want to discuss it as if it's politics when it's really a private issue.
As a black lesbian, I neither chose my race or my sexual orientation. Why is it most sane Americans acknowledge the pathology of racisms' destructiveness but are then unwilling to acknowledge homophobia is no different?
They won't acknowledge it isn't different because it is, in fact, different. The psychology involved in being against someone of a different race and in being against someone of a different sexual orientation are different. The results may be similar, but the pathology is not. Religion is generally against homosexuality but silent on race. A child raised by a black couple still has a mother and a father. A child raised by a homosexual couple does not. So there are different reasons for being against homosexuality.
I don't think anybody cares who you sleep with?
I think when you call them homophobes or make it a political issue, thats when you attract negative attention.
It is a political issue, because gays have been persecuted and mistreated by society on a public level. Plenty of people care who gays sleep with. That's why homosexuality was illegal until 10 years ago. Seeing as discrimination is codified into law, it's clearly political.
Sex is a private issue. Making it pubic makes many people uneasy. I don't care what you do in your bedroom or with who you do it (provided both are consenting adults) but I don't want to discuss it as if it's politics when it's really a private issue.
You do realize being gay involves a lot more than who one sleeps with right? One doesn't even need to be sexually active to be gay (or straight).
Gays are still able to be fired or denied housing in most states just for being gay.
They won't acknowledge it isn't different because it is, in fact, different. The psychology involved in being against someone of a different race and in being against someone of a different sexual orientation are different. The results may be similar, but the pathology is not. Religion is generally against homosexuality but silent on race. A child raised by a black couple still has a mother and a father. A child raised by a homosexual couple does not. So there are different reasons for being against homosexuality.
Religion is not silent on race at all. Religion is the basis for slavery and segregation.
The trial judge in that court presented this argument for banning interracial marriage:
Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix.
Relationships between foreigners and different cultures were forbidden in the Bible. God separated the races and languages and forbid their mixing.
Location: In a Galaxy far, far away called Germany
4,300 posts, read 4,409,483 times
Reputation: 2394
Because who or what you decide to have sex with isn't the same thing as being born with a particular skin color. What good is it being accepted as a gay man if you are black living in Mississippi circa 1930? Contrast that to being a black man nowadays and deciding to come out. There is a logical progression of acceptance that needs to occur. Although both are struggling for equal rights, to say homosexuality and skin-color are the same is just incorrect.
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 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.
Sex is a private issue. Making it pubic makes many people uneasy. I don't care what you do in your bedroom or with who you do it (provided both are consenting adults) but I don't want to discuss it as if it's politics when it's really a private issue.
