Claims of homophobia

[huckleberry]

Where do rights come from?

That is a really good philosophical question. I would love to hear if you have any ideas as to the answer. Though I find it more useful to address the question, “what rights do we agree to grant to each other?”

 

[royal_archer]

Of course I defend anyones right to form any contract they want. This is simple morality. If a person wants to make an agreement with other persons, then none can stand in their way. What are you calling bad? I am calling bad the monstrous attenuation of human rights. If a party agrees to do something that does not involve harm against non-signatories, then none can intervene.

For the purpose of simplification and good order in society it is practical for government to predefine contractual language. For government to define a Will, a Lease, power of attorney, marriage, it allows those entering into a contract to do so with out stacks of paperwork. This is a pragmatic approach and many marriages are based on this standard agreement. The question is does the government have the right to change the nature of the base agreement and significally redefine what a marriage is with out concurence of those who are parties to the contract?

 

[rpp]

Tell them that you were born a homophobe and that you have no choice in the matter, and furthermore that being called a homophobe is offensive to you, and that you feel your rights are being violated by being called one…

all with a serious face as possible.

I love this answer. This is great Penitus!

 

[rpp]

Hmm… I think someone on this thread may have a short career here at CAF.

 

[huckleberry]

For the purpose of simplification and good order in society it is practical for government to predefine contractual language. For government to define a Will, a Lease, power of attorney, marriage, it allows those entering into a contract to do so with out stacks of paperwork. This is a pragmatic approach and many marriages are based on this standard agreement. The question is does the government have the right to change the nature of the base agreement and significally redefine what a marriage is with out concurence of those who are parties to the contract?

I totally concur that for the sake of expediency, contracts can be predefined. But no, the government has no right to tweak the contracts. The INDIVIDUALS who are entering into the contract are the ones with the right to change it. To get technical, governments do not have rights. governments can only protect rights.

 

[fix]

That is a really good philosophical question. I would love to hear if you have any ideas as to the answer.

Philosophical, or not, it is critical to having a proper understanding of the role of government and how we are to conduct oursleves.

Though I find it more useful to address the question, “what rights do we agree to grant to each other?”

Useful? How is it useful to grant something that does not exist?

 

[Nickkname]

What do you do when someone claims the Church is homophobic for telling voters that they cannot vote for a candidate that’s for gay civil unions?

People don’t even know what homophobia is. I should know.

I actually have homophobia. It’s my irrational fear of being around homosexuals. I don’t know why I have it, but I do. I don’t want it, but I must bear this cross patiently. And I certainly don’t hate any gays - they are human beings just like me, and I desire them to go to heaven too. But, like I said, it’s an irrational fear.

Homophobia, in the way some people use it, is meant to instill fear into people - so it’s really ironic. If the Church was actually homophobic, don’t you think they’d ban gays from entering into the Church? Just like certain secret societies we all know do.

 

[Fitswimmer]

People don’t even know what homophobia is. I should know.

I actually have homophobia. It’s my irrational fear of being around homosexuals. I don’t know why I have it, but I do. I don’t want it, but I must bear this cross patiently. And I certainly don’t hate any gays - they are human beings just like me, and I desire them to go to heaven too. But, like I said, it’s an irrational fear.

Homophobia, in the way some people use it, is meant to instill fear into people - so it’s really ironic. If the Church was actually homophobic, don’t you think they’d ban gays from entering into the Church? Just like certain secret societies we all know do.

We don’t wear signs so I find it hard to know how any organization could “ban” us from entering if we wanted to.

 

[Nickkname]

It’s the principal of the matter, Fitswimmer.

 

[Fitswimmer]

It’s the principal of the matter, Fitswimmer.

Meaning what? You could be near me and my friends and you’d never know what our sexual orientation was. That’s something I always find hysterical, actually. People are so uptight about us, and they’ve worked with us, gone to school with us, shopped, seen movies and yes, gone to Mass with us for their entire lives!
I had this woman go on a huge anti-gay rant at the Y one morning and my friend and I were about to die from holding back the laughter-she’d been sharing a locker room with both of us for nearly 10 years! She had NO idea that we were both gay. She would have DIED if she knew!

 

[huckleberry]

Philosophical, or not, it is critical to having a proper understanding of the role of government and how we are to conduct oursleves.

Useful? How is it useful to grant something that does not exist?

What doesn’t exist? I was referring to the usefulness of the discussion of what rights we are willing to grant each other versus the usefulness of discussing the nebulous question of “where do rights come from?”

 

[rpp]

This thread is going off topic.

 

[Julian_Peters]

Thank you to all who have participated. This thread is now closed. Please feel free to start a new thread(s) in the appropriate Forum to discuss non-OP topics.