Why do People Have a Problem with Gay People?

If everyone in society accepted homosexuality, gay people wouldn't feel the need to commit suicide. When people make homophobic remarks, it makes that gay person feel like utter ****. So when people are constantly making those remarks, they feel that there's no point carrying on as things will never get better. It's all very well you sitting at your computer making these comments without even thinking about it, but have you given a second thought about how it makes any gay people that are reading this feel?

Your comment wasn't directed at me, but it's the same issue as I have mentioned elsewhere in this thread.

A person cannot make any comment about a homosexual/gay or they get branded a homophobe.

Gay people/homosexual men in particular (and I don't just mean on here, even in real life) seem to take any negative comments more personally simply because they originate from a hetero, even if they are not homophobic comments. Seems like they need to get themselves some thicker skin and realise the world doesn't owe them anything.

They don't deserve any more special treatment over a hetero, just because they are homosexual.

I don't accept it because of religious beliefs and the pure fact that I don't think its 'natural'.

But if I see two gay people making out or something in person I will feel a bit squeamish because that's the kind of person I am, forget preference I just don't like PDA lol. I do have a problem with gay marriage though, only because some (a guess, not evidence) denominations or individual churches may not believe in gay marriage and forcing their head to bless the marriage if they don't want to isn't right and will just cause conflict. So if there are churches would gladly bless gay marriage, more power to them! Let them do what they want to do, just as others want to do what they want to do. Christianity is such a vast and diverse religion, I know Church of England and the Church of Wales aren't marrying gay people (please educate me if I'm wrong here), but shouldn't other smaller churches that aren't being heard (like my own) follow their own doctrine and not one implemented onto them? Also, to the religious people slandering gay people in this thread, you don't have to get your view across just by being rude. You've said what you want to say, stop arguing about it. Peace and love, guys

Now you can call me arrogant, or a bigot or whatever words are flying around these days but why? When have I ever called you out for what you believe? I've given my opinion and I hope you can respect it regardless of if you agree or disagree.

But if I see two gay people making out or something in person I will feel a bit squeamish because that's the kind of person I am, forget preference I just don't like PDA lol. I do have a problem with gay marriage though..

I do have a problem with gay marriage though, only because some (a guess, not evidence) denominations or individual churches may not believe in gay marriage and forcing their head to bless the marriage if they don't want to isn't right and will just cause conflict. So if there are churches would gladly bless gay marriage, more power to them! Let them do what they want to do, just as others want to do what they want to do. Christianity is such a vast and diverse religion, I know Church of England and the Church of Wales aren't marrying gay people (please educate me if I'm wrong here), but shouldn't other smaller churches that aren't being heard (like my own) follow their own doctrine and not one implemented onto them? Also, to the religious people slandering gay people in this thread, you don't have to get your view across just by being rude. You've said what you want to say, stop arguing about it. Peace and love, guys
.

Sorry for not being so specific if that caused you confusion.

I can assure you that even if I didn't explicitly state it, I was talking specifically about homosexual men.

If I have anything to say about lesbians I will specifically refer to them as lesbian, but when I say gay or homosexual I am meaning homosexual men.

I can repeat an old point again - whether you think this one is correct or not is immaterial to me because I know this one comes down to which side of sexuality you are on - heterosexual or homosexual...

The simple point is this:
If anyone says anything negative about gays/homosexuals, those who make the comments are immediately branded as homophobic.

So trying to prove anything becomes a bit of a joke really as there is no way to do so against people who see every comment you make as homophobic, no matter how simple the comment - simply because they have already decided you are a homophobe anyway.

We have discussed this before quite some time ago - teaching them that liking men is just the first step, teaching about gay sex will follow later after that.

And even though I support gay marriage (and have a gay brother for that matter) I support your right to not perform a same sex marriage. Not my place to tell people what they can and can't do.

I'm not a homophobe - it's preposterous to suggest that I hate gay people. It's a cheap shot. But I am a traditional and conservative Anglican and I am not ever going to allow myself to be bullied into administering what I believe are wrongful sacraments, regardless of the pressures placed on me to do so.

Thank you. That is actually very noble of you to say so.. There does seem to be a general expectation that priests today should unhesitantly bend to the demands of society's latest wishes and woe betide them if they happen to be conservative priests that think otherwise. There seems to be a modern assumption that the church exists merely to serve, humour and even entertain the people, regardless of what they happen to be demanding this week!.

There is a lot of bullying going on at the moment. Society demands gay marriage and as a priest you'd better comply or you're branded a homophobe! Society demands female priests and bishops and you'd better be on the bandwagon too or you will be dismissed as a sexist!

I wish your brother very well. If one day he decides to marry and decides he'd like to do that in a religious service I am sure he will find many ministers in various denominations (as well as some Anglican priests) who will make this a reality. I'm not a homophobe - it's preposterous to suggest that I hate gay people. It's a cheap shot. But I am a traditional and conservative Anglican and I am not ever going to allow myself to be bullied into administering what I believe are wrongful sacraments, regardless of the pressures placed on me to do so.

I think it's important the religious groups control their own rites, and despite some of the rhetoric I think the overwhelming majority of people tend to agree. The Church of England (not the Anglican communion in general) has a slightly odd position as the established church - if it wishes to retain a position of privilege in society then it seems reasonable to expect it to serve society. That's more of an issue with the church-state relationship than anything else.

I think that's a very good point. And one of the reasons that I continue to argue for disestablishment.

I argue for disestablishment on principle. But looking at it pragmatically, if the CofE wants to retain it's established status then it needs to find a better way of balancing society's demands with those of it's faith.

Same-sex marriage is a good example. As the established church, the CofE is obliged to perform a Christian marriage for anyone who wants one - with a few provisos about remarrying people with living ex-spouses. I see no reason why a similar proviso shouldn't protect them from being forced to conduct same-sex marriages; it is a Christian marriage and the CofE understands those to be pre-requisites for such a marriage. But why is that an obstacle to offering after-the-fact services of blessing and commitment - which are not weddings - to same-sex couples just as they frequently do for divorcee couples? Some churches do offer such services, but it's fairly controversial. Perhaps that's not the right balance to strike, but the church seems very reluctant to explore the question of what the right balance is - it just wants to wash it's hands of a group of people.

Actually, I'd be interested to hear what you think about that kind of blessing/commitment service.

per se*

'Would not being exist if you are parent is gay' - it's *your not you're and that sentence makes no sense.

Yes I still would, people being gay won't change the sexuality of either of my parents. They were born heterosexual just like some people are born gay.

If your parents were gay (both of them) and repelled against intercourse with opposite sex, would you being alive now?

I'm not reproducing at this specific moment, does that mean I'm depriving some hypothetical baby of life? Quick, everyone have unprotected sex! We must give birth to all the hypothetical children!

Think of the children! The poor, hypothetical children!

You are only able to make that statement because your alive because you're parent being heterosexual.