Where do we draw the line with the term homophobia ?

i am not sure which genius invented the word homophobia... that means fear of homosexuals.
homoantipathy would be more appropriate.

Clearly a fantastic reason to prevent gay people from getting married.

Oh hey wait, we don't base laws on whether one person finds it disgusting.

I do not expect the law to be changed, I was just projecting me opinion

I hate how if your against Gay people then all of a sudden your an outcast and a bad human being who has no morals etc...

End of the day we have a right to our own views and Pro Gays shouldn't force their views on us and call us Homophobic as same as we shouldn't force our views on them.

I have my opinion on this matter and I'm sticking to it. I would kindly appreciate it if Pro Homosexuals give me a lecture on why I'm wrong when I have the free will to choose my own beliefs!

This is the equivalent to saying "I don't support interracial marriage and people of other races repulse me, but if I have to I'll save someone of another race from being murdered. Maybe. But I'm not a racist, right?"

...being repulsed by someone because of who they choose to love and have sex with (which is none of your business anyway) is homophobic.


Posted from TSR Mobile

Read me username then think again whether I'm joking.

Not even remotely comparable analogy.

Ignoring the fact that race and homosexuality are completely different (one you are born with, the other is a matter for debate), your analogy is equivalent to the OP saying he doesn't support gay marriage and gay people repulse him. He didn't say that, he said the thought of two men having sex repulses him, which is understandable, and different.

Also, he said he would step in if a gay person was being beaten to death, not 'Maybe.' You can't ascertain whether the OP is homophobic from his original post because to be homophobic is more than just not supporting gay marriage and being disgusted by two men having sex.

What people choose to do is up to them, nowhere did I say it bothers me. I just don't support it. Similarly to I don't support people who do drugs, I don't care that people do it.

But would you support legislation which prevented say, gay marriage? As you said, what people choose to do is up to them. Do you believe that they should be free to do everything which you can do?

Obviously everybody is entitled to their own opinions, but everybody else is free to criticize senseless bigotry. Moreover, when those opinions are entirely unfounded and can cause hurt to other innocent people, I feel it to be the obligation of others to challenge such notions.

Yes, I would support legislation to prevent it as personally I don't agree with it.

How can you justify limiting the social liberties of someone just because of who they are attracted to? Especially when it neither effects you nor harms anybody. Religious bigotry is no reason to pass laws on who people can marry.

If society made laws based on what a fraction of the proportion didn't support, we would be devoid of many things that you take for granted. Organized religion, for example.

But fortunately that's not how we do things in the UK, and people should be thankful for that.

How can you justify limiting the social liberties of someone just because of who they are attracted to? Especially when it neither effects you nor harms anybody. Religious bigotry is no reason to pass laws on who people can marry.

If society made laws based on what a fraction of the proportion didn't support, we would be devoid of many things that you take for granted. Organized religion, for example.

But fortunately that's not how we do things in the UK, and people should be thankful for that.

The UK runs on democracy and majority vote. If my opinion and views conflict with the dominant ideology, so be it. My views however still stand.

How can you justify limiting the social liberties of someone just because of who they are attracted to? Especially when it neither effects you nor harms anybody. Religious bigotry is no reason to pass laws on who people can marry.

If society made laws based on what a fraction of the proportion didn't support, we would be devoid of many things that you take for granted. Organized religion, for example.

But fortunately that's not how we do things in the UK, and people should be thankful for that.

The UK is a liberal democracy that upholds and respects the rights of the individual. So you can't complain when you hold views that go against that liberal ideology and people challenge you for it.

Everyone already had the same rights to get married, marriage being a union between a man and a woman, so talk of "social liberties" is sophistry. What homosexuals wanted to do was form a different arrangement and gain the right to call this entity a "marriage" and teach in primary schools that it is a "marriage" and insist that everyone else calls their relationship a "marriage".

No they didn't? That was entirely the point.

Everyone was equal under the law and had exactly the same rights to marriage provided certain conditions were met (old enough, the intended partner being of the opposite sex and neither already married or a blood relation).

Of course if you want to redefine the notion of what a marriage is then why stop at opening it up to people of the same sex who want to call their parody a "marriage"? There's plenty of other arrangements that people might want to call a "marriage" which they don't have the right to do.

Straight people could marry the person they wanted to, and gay people couldn't. But please, do continue on the 'everyone already was equal' track.

How exactly is it a parody?