"Disagreeing with homosexuality is not homophobic"
Scroll to see replies
Original post by WBZ144
I think she meant people who have the attraction, not necessarily those who have molested children. From what I understand they don't choose to be that way, and it's viewed treated as a mental disorder.
A gay person has the choice to have sex with the opposite sex, a straight person has the choice of having sex with the same sex. Most choose not to because they are not attracted so I am guessing that's why paedophiles choose not to have a relationship with adults.
Though if they act on their attraction to children you cannot compare the two, as they would be harming the children whereas LGBT people aren't harming anyone. I do have feel sorry for those who have not acted on it though, I would be full of self-loathing if I was in their place.
A gay person has the choice to have sex with the opposite sex, a straight person has the choice of having sex with the same sex. Most choose not to because they are not attracted so I am guessing that's why paedophiles choose not to have a relationship with adults.
Though if they act on their attraction to children you cannot compare the two, as they would be harming the children whereas LGBT people aren't harming anyone. I do have feel sorry for those who have not acted on it though, I would be full of self-loathing if I was in their place.
Yeah I completely agree. I don't think pedophila is a choice but acting on their urges is wrong.
Original post by Sternumator
These are personal beliefs though.
Like any belief you can ask your reasons for believing something forever. For example, why do you believe consent is necessary? In the end you can either go round in circles or just accept that you just believe it as a result of your own specific experiences and cultural or religious upbringing.
Some people believe that religious teaching is important just as you believe consent is important. Neither is objectively more valid. There have been cultures in history that didn't believe consent is important.
Of course everybody thinks their beliefs are 'right' but we would get a long better if people can appreciate that everybody has different experiences and thus are viewing the world from a different perspective.
Like any belief you can ask your reasons for believing something forever. For example, why do you believe consent is necessary? In the end you can either go round in circles or just accept that you just believe it as a result of your own specific experiences and cultural or religious upbringing.
Some people believe that religious teaching is important just as you believe consent is important. Neither is objectively more valid. There have been cultures in history that didn't believe consent is important.
Of course everybody thinks their beliefs are 'right' but we would get a long better if people can appreciate that everybody has different experiences and thus are viewing the world from a different perspective.
Consent is necessary because it is the dividing line between a crime and not a crime. Why would you want to have sex with somebody that doesn't want? That's quite clearly disgusting. & As for children, we grow up, we develop, we change. It happens at different times in different people, but most people are physically & mentally developed enough for sex at 18.
You ignored my question - what is wrong with homosexual acts? If both parties are enjoying themselves, they're in a private place (or even holding hands in public...), nobody's in pain... Why do you (or anybody) think this is wrong?
Original post by teenhorrorstory
Not all pedophiles harm children. Pedophilia is a mental condition characterised by attraction to children. Many pedophiles do not act on this attraction.
It is fine if they don't harm them. Definately think that society should change how they see them so they can get some help though.
Original post by 1010marina
Consent is necessary because it is the dividing line between a crime and not a crime. Why would you want to have sex with somebody that doesn't want? That's quite clearly disgusting. & As for children, we grow up, we develop, we change. It happens at different times in different people, but most people are physically & mentally developed enough for sex at 18.
You ignored my question - what is wrong with homosexual acts? If both parties are enjoying themselves, they're in a private place (or even holding hands in public...), nobody's in pain... Why do you (or anybody) think this is wrong?
You ignored my question - what is wrong with homosexual acts? If both parties are enjoying themselves, they're in a private place (or even holding hands in public...), nobody's in pain... Why do you (or anybody) think this is wrong?
Why is it disgusting? People say the same about homosexuality.
I don't believe there is anything wrong with homosexual acts but others do because they believe God disapproves or whatever other reason. You can argue with those people about it forever and you will agree because you don't share the same religious beliefs.
But that is not the point. I'm not arguing about whether various acts are right or wrong. You accepted previously that paedophiles can't help their attraction and you have said that having sex with children is wrong. So you disagree with paedophilia but you are not paedophilephobic.
I'm just saying that it is possible or people to believe homosexual sex is wrong but still accept that gay people are people who can't help who they are.
(edited 7 years ago)
I think 'disagreeing' with it, even without being malicious or insulting, is still homophobic. Take this video for example. Ben Shapiro is very eloquent and could almost convince you that gays shouldn't be able to get married, but he's still being homophobic. Homophobia is a position. Homophobia is not defined in the way it is expressed. Piers quite sharply deduces this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xiNRVMhiejk#t=6m20s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xiNRVMhiejk#t=6m20s
Original post by Sugar_1998
I agree with the statement. Homophobic means hating gay people, to my understanding. disagreement don't equal hate. You may not agree with Christian belief does that equal hate. NO .
Not agreeing with the Christian faith, or any faith, is easy, because it is not proven to even exist. Not 'agreeing' with homosexuality (if agreeing is taken to mean believing in) is ridiculous, because it obviously exists. And if instead by 'not agreeing', you mean 'oppose', then that is the same as being homophobic. How can you 'oppose' homosexuality without being homophobic? To use your example, if I 'opposed' the Christian faith, I would be 'Christian-phobic'.
Original post by Sugar_1998
some people don't like interracial marriage does that mean they are racist. NO . that's just their opinion .
some people don't like interracial marriage does that mean they are racist. NO . that's just their opinion .
No, they're racist. How can they claim to believe that races should not mix in marriage, then claim to not be racist?
Original post by Abstract_Prism
Not agreeing with the Christian faith, or any faith, is easy, because it is not proven to even exist. Not 'agreeing' with homosexuality (if agreeing is taken to mean believing in) is ridiculous, because it obviously exists. And if instead by 'not agreeing', you mean 'oppose', then that is the same as being homophobic. How can you 'oppose' homosexuality without being homophobic? To use your example, if I 'opposed' the Christian faith, I would be 'Christian-phobic'.
No, they're racist. How can they claim to believe that races should not mix in marriage, then claim to not be racist?
No, they're racist. How can they claim to believe that races should not mix in marriage, then claim to not be racist?
Okay your right well done.
Original post by Sternumator
I'm just saying that it is possible or people to believe homosexual sex is wrong but still accept that gay people are people who can't help who they are.
Of course, it is possible to accept that gay people cannot change who they are, and yet still oppose it. A lot of people who are homophobic concede that gay people can't change their sexuality. This doesn't stop them from opposing it though.
What is not possible though, is to oppose homosexuality without being homophobic. Opposing homosexuality makes you homophobic, period.
Original post by Sternumator
Why is it disgusting? People say the same about homosexuality.
I don't believe there is anything wrong with homosexual acts but others do because they believe God disapproves or whatever other reason. You can argue with those people about it forever and you will agree because you don't share the same religious beliefs.
But that is not the point. I'm not arguing about whether various acts are right or wrong. You accepted previously that paedophiles can't help their attraction and you have said that having sex with children is wrong. So you disagree with paedophilia but you are not paedophilephobic.
I'm just saying that it is possible or people to believe homosexual sex is wrong but still accept that gay people are people who can't help who they are.
I don't believe there is anything wrong with homosexual acts but others do because they believe God disapproves or whatever other reason. You can argue with those people about it forever and you will agree because you don't share the same religious beliefs.
But that is not the point. I'm not arguing about whether various acts are right or wrong. You accepted previously that paedophiles can't help their attraction and you have said that having sex with children is wrong. So you disagree with paedophilia but you are not paedophilephobic.
I'm just saying that it is possible or people to believe homosexual sex is wrong but still accept that gay people are people who can't help who they are.
But why does anybody think homosexuality is disgusting? Child abuse is quite disgusting. But if two adults are having sex there's usually no abuse etc. Everyone involved wants to be. Paedophilic actions are abuse - recognised by the law, by the victims. It's clear that being forced to have sex at a young age is bad for the victim - but sex between consenting adults, nah.
If the only reason you can come up with for not liking homosexuality is a holy book then sorry but no.
'I don't mind Christians or Muslims, until they pray to God'. Doesn't have the same ring to it, does it?
Is disagreeing with the concept of being black racist? If not, why the double standards?
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by alevelstresss
Yeah they aren't the same thing, homophobic is where you are actively afraid of or hateful towards gay people, but many people who are straight disagree with gay people without venting their concerns in a hateful manner
Then why the double standards? If you disagree with women having full-time jobs, you are branded a raving sexist even if you aren't "venting [your] concerns in a hateful manner".
Ummm, yes it is...That's like saying I disagree with ethnic minorities...ie...racist.
I'll summarise what TSRians already told and add my opinion.
You can't disagree with homosexuality because it's not an ideology or an act ( in a way it is , if you assume that even the sexual attraction they have is an act ... if you are against their thoughts then yes you are a bigot pretty much by definition).
Practising homosexuality is the act of being an active homosexual .
If you disagree with practising homosexuals then you think they should not practise homosexuality . Disagreeing with practising homosexuality means that you either don't want their rights to be supported and/or perceive homosexuality as immoral (for whatever reason) ( if you are a supporter of gay rights and don't consider them immoral then I don't think you are disagreeing with them).
Some of you asked about paedophilia. If a paedophile is just attracted by children without ever expressing it , then (as in our first case) you can't simply disagree with their inherent attraction to kids (it's a condition they can't even change). If they tend to express it then that's a problem , because it's sensible for our societies to protect our kids from any possible future harm . HARM is the key word.
According to Mill's harm principle (which is well established in western societies) the actions of individuals should only be limited to prevent harm to other individuals. Homosexuals do not pose a threat to any citizen , thus their rights should be protected (they should have the right to express it). Hence , you are not permitted to oppose to their rights .
It doesn't really matter if you think they are immoral based on your values of course ( this alone is not homophobic , it means you can see the contradiction between your ideology (mostly religion) and their actions) however it's homophobic if you don't treat them as equal or don't respect their rights. I believe that religion is immoral , but I would never be against faithfuls . You can talk to each other about your views , but if an act doesn't harm you, it's bigotry to deny their rights to do it.
You can't disagree with homosexuality because it's not an ideology or an act ( in a way it is , if you assume that even the sexual attraction they have is an act ... if you are against their thoughts then yes you are a bigot pretty much by definition).
Practising homosexuality is the act of being an active homosexual .
If you disagree with practising homosexuals then you think they should not practise homosexuality . Disagreeing with practising homosexuality means that you either don't want their rights to be supported and/or perceive homosexuality as immoral (for whatever reason) ( if you are a supporter of gay rights and don't consider them immoral then I don't think you are disagreeing with them).
Some of you asked about paedophilia. If a paedophile is just attracted by children without ever expressing it , then (as in our first case) you can't simply disagree with their inherent attraction to kids (it's a condition they can't even change). If they tend to express it then that's a problem , because it's sensible for our societies to protect our kids from any possible future harm . HARM is the key word.
According to Mill's harm principle (which is well established in western societies) the actions of individuals should only be limited to prevent harm to other individuals. Homosexuals do not pose a threat to any citizen , thus their rights should be protected (they should have the right to express it). Hence , you are not permitted to oppose to their rights .
It doesn't really matter if you think they are immoral based on your values of course ( this alone is not homophobic , it means you can see the contradiction between your ideology (mostly religion) and their actions) however it's homophobic if you don't treat them as equal or don't respect their rights. I believe that religion is immoral , but I would never be against faithfuls . You can talk to each other about your views , but if an act doesn't harm you, it's bigotry to deny their rights to do it.
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by Sternumator
Why is it disgusting? People say the same about homosexuality.
I don't believe there is anything wrong with homosexual acts but others do because they believe God disapproves or whatever other reason. You can argue with those people about it forever and you will agree because you don't share the same religious beliefs.
But that is not the point. I'm not arguing about whether various acts are right or wrong. You accepted previously that paedophiles can't help their attraction and you have said that having sex with children is wrong. So you disagree with paedophilia but you are not paedophilephobic.
I'm just saying that it is possible or people to believe homosexual sex is wrong but still accept that gay people are people who can't help who they are.
I don't believe there is anything wrong with homosexual acts but others do because they believe God disapproves or whatever other reason. You can argue with those people about it forever and you will agree because you don't share the same religious beliefs.
But that is not the point. I'm not arguing about whether various acts are right or wrong. You accepted previously that paedophiles can't help their attraction and you have said that having sex with children is wrong. So you disagree with paedophilia but you are not paedophilephobic.
I'm just saying that it is possible or people to believe homosexual sex is wrong but still accept that gay people are people who can't help who they are.
As a society we actually are paedophilephobic . We fear (phobia) them and don't let them express their sexuality .
But there's nothing wrong with that because they could cause harm in our societies.
Homosexuals don't cause any harm , so it's not the same case at all.
You don't have the right to oppose to their rights .
You could only claim they're immoral based on your beliefs , if you aren't a homophobic.
Original post by 1 8 13 20 42
Saying you disagree with it is such a vague and meaningless position (for one, as already noted, it technically makes no sense). I think people who say this are generally trying to choose their words as nicely as possible, because "I think homosexual sexual activity is morally wrong" sounds a bit more judgemental
PRSOM
The problem is that there is no rational basis on which one could disagree with homosexuality or homosexual behaviour.
Therefore we are forced to conclude that anyone who does must be doing it because they're a homophobe.
The reason it is different with paedophiles is because significant and avoidable harm is caused when they put it into practice - hence there is a rational basis for objection. Even then you shouldn't be paedophilophobic in the sense that anyone with a paedophilic orientation, but no intent to act on it, should be vilified: instead, they should be given help.
A good example the other way around is incest and bestiality. There is no real harm which can come from two close relations or a human and animal having it off, even if it's a widespread trend, assuming they use contraception. Nevertheless I still think it's wrong, but I recognise that I can make no rational argument to defend this and therefore I am an incestuophobe and zoophilophobe.
The OP should if he wants to hold his position present his reasoned and rational argument why homosexuality or homosexual behaviour causes appreciable harm.
Therefore we are forced to conclude that anyone who does must be doing it because they're a homophobe.
The reason it is different with paedophiles is because significant and avoidable harm is caused when they put it into practice - hence there is a rational basis for objection. Even then you shouldn't be paedophilophobic in the sense that anyone with a paedophilic orientation, but no intent to act on it, should be vilified: instead, they should be given help.
A good example the other way around is incest and bestiality. There is no real harm which can come from two close relations or a human and animal having it off, even if it's a widespread trend, assuming they use contraception. Nevertheless I still think it's wrong, but I recognise that I can make no rational argument to defend this and therefore I am an incestuophobe and zoophilophobe.
The OP should if he wants to hold his position present his reasoned and rational argument why homosexuality or homosexual behaviour causes appreciable harm.
Original post by scrotgrot
The problem is that there is no rational basis on which one could disagree with homosexuality or homosexual behaviour.
Therefore we are forced to conclude that anyone who does must be doing it because they're a homophobe.
The reason it is different with paedophiles is because significant and avoidable harm is caused when they put it into practice - hence there is a rational basis for objection. Even then you shouldn't be paedophilophobic in the sense that anyone with a paedophilic orientation, but no intent to act on it, should be vilified: instead, they should be given help.
A good example the other way around is incest and bestiality. There is no real harm which can come from two close relations or a human and animal having it off, even if it's a widespread trend, assuming they use contraception. Nevertheless I still think it's wrong, but I recognise that I can make no rational argument to defend this and therefore I am an incestuophobe and zoophilophobe.
The OP should if he wants to hold his position present his reasoned and rational argument why homosexuality or homosexual behaviour causes appreciable harm.
Therefore we are forced to conclude that anyone who does must be doing it because they're a homophobe.
The reason it is different with paedophiles is because significant and avoidable harm is caused when they put it into practice - hence there is a rational basis for objection. Even then you shouldn't be paedophilophobic in the sense that anyone with a paedophilic orientation, but no intent to act on it, should be vilified: instead, they should be given help.
A good example the other way around is incest and bestiality. There is no real harm which can come from two close relations or a human and animal having it off, even if it's a widespread trend, assuming they use contraception. Nevertheless I still think it's wrong, but I recognise that I can make no rational argument to defend this and therefore I am an incestuophobe and zoophilophobe.
The OP should if he wants to hold his position present his reasoned and rational argument why homosexuality or homosexual behaviour causes appreciable harm.
You can definitely make an argument against bestiality, for one thing what about the animals rights not to be forced into sex with a human.And against incest, there is that whole inbreeding thing.People seem to think that peadophilia is a sexual orientation and I dont think there is evidence for that.According to wiki its regarded as a paraphilia not a sexual orientation which seems to be much more akin to a fetish than anything else.
Original post by scrotgrot
The problem is that there is no rational basis on which one could disagree with homosexuality or homosexual behaviour.
The OP should if he wants to hold his position present his reasoned and rational argument why homosexuality or homosexual behaviour causes appreciable harm.
The OP should if he wants to hold his position present his reasoned and rational argument why homosexuality or homosexual behaviour causes appreciable harm.
From what I gather people find this very difficult, beyond saying "god said..." or "it's just wrong..."
Original post by Sugar_1998
I understand now, all Christian s and other abrahamic religion followers are homophobes. They we go now everybody is happy.
Just all the ones who are against gay marriage or homosexual sexual activity and/or relationships in general
Quick Reply
Latest
Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
