Who are the truly intolerant and bigoted people? Gay activists or those with opposing views?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Holly3278
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
H

Holly3278

Guest
You know, so often we hear gay rights activists calling members of the opposition bigoted and intolerant. But who are really the intolerant and bigoted people? I say it is the gay rights activists. After all, if they were so tolerant then they would tolerate the opposing views. But the opposite is the case the vast majority of the time. Remember when the mayor of Boston and I think of Chicago as well said that they would not allow Chick-Fil-A into their towns because of the company’s views on marriage? They were being intolerant towards the company simply because the company’s views were opposite to their views. So, what do you say? Who are the truly intolerant and bigoted people the vast majority of the time? Please vote in my poll.
 
Both. There are good guys and bad guys as far as ‘tolerance’ on both sides of the fence. Sometimes it seems like its more one or the other, but I really couldn’t say myself. I’m one person that’s against gay marriage but I don’t hate gay people. I would consider myself as one on the side of tolerant people against homosexuality.

Considering how many heterosexuals there are in comparison with homosexuals though, homosexuals + supporters make quite a lot of noise for being a minority. That being said, I would say that gay liberation is more intolerant, based on the concentration and content of their protests.
 
Neildown said:
Both. There are good guys and bad guys as far as ‘tolerance’ on both sides of the fence. Sometimes it seems like its more one or the other, but I really couldn’t say myself. I’m one person that’s against gay marriage but I don’t hate gay people. I would consider myself as one on the side of tolerant people against homosexuality.

Considering how many heterosexuals there are in comparison with homosexuals though, homosexuals + supporters make quite a lot of noise for being a minority. That being said, I would say that gay liberation is more intolerant, based on the concentration and content of their protests.
Click to expand...
I agree, both sides have those who are educated on the subject and those who are ignorant and bigoted. Though I still feel that “pro-choice” people are wrong in their assertions.
 
Both!

What did Catholics talk about before gay people came out of the closet?:confused:
 
Grace & Peace!

Given the context of these forums and what was written in the OP, the question might as well have been:
Who is more bigoted? Us or the bigoted people we think are bigoted against us?
This is just more of the US VERSUS THEM culture war rhetoric which has everything to do with constructing an identity over against someone or something else and has nothing whatsoever to do with the gospel.

Under the Mercy,
Mark

All is Grace and Mercy! Deo Gratias!
 
bzkoss236 said:
I agree, both sides have those who are educated on the subject and those who are ignorant and bigoted. Though I still feel that “pro-choice” people are wrong in their assertions.
Click to expand...
But this thread is not about abortion, its about which side of the whole gay rights movement is the most intolerant and bigoted.
Deo_Volente said:
Grace & Peace!

Given the context of these forums and what was written in the OP, the question might as well have been: Who is more bigoted? Us or the bigoted people we think are bigoted against us?
This is just more of the US VERSUS THEM culture war rhetoric which has everything to do with constructing an identity over against someone or something else and has nothing whatsoever to do with the gospel.

Under the Mercy,
Mark

All is Grace and Mercy! Deo Gratias!
Click to expand...
This thread was not meant to be an “us versus them” thread. It was only meant to figure out who thinks which side is the most intolerant and bigoted.
 
Holly3278 said:
But this thread is not about abortion, its about which side of the whole gay rights movement is the most intolerant and bigoted.
Click to expand...
Oops, I think I misread something somewhere, which is why I said “pro-choice”.
Either way, the same applies.
 
Holly3278 said:
This thread was not meant to be an “us versus them” thread. It was only meant to figure out who thinks which side is the most intolerant and bigoted.
Click to expand...
It is absolutely an us vs them thread. And if this was something that you were serious about exploring you would try to do so in a neutral place with a diversity of thought. You knew exactly what answer you would get when you posted this.

In my experience its the anti gay people who are the most intolerant. I have never seen a gay person try to deligitimize a religious person’s marriage or family. Oh, and my gay best friend does every holiday and special occasion with my family, because his bigoted and intolerant parents didn’t want a gay son around.
 
BlueEyedLady said:
It is absolutely an us vs them thread.
Click to expand...
Only if you’re trying to make it into one, my friend. :cool: Catholic Answers, in comparison with the vast array of other forums, has an astonishingly clean record (based upon my own personal experience) in regards to religious debate. It might get a bit dicey sometimes, but its easy to separate the posters from the trolls, and this isn’t even classified as a debate. You state your opinion, give your thoughts, and that’s it, unless you want to add something important to the topic that isn’t mean-spirited.
.
 
Dearly beloved friends,

Cordial greetings and a very good day.

Homosexual activists are a jolly intolerant crowd because they have a contentious agenda, namely the normalization of sexually deviant conduct and the demonisation of those, especially Christians, who accept the Church and bible’s veto on such conduct. Since the 1970’s the homosexual subculture has been increasingly visible and militant and continues to be so today. There can be no doubt whatsoever that they have acheived much success in changing mens perceptions of homosexual vice, so much so, in fact, that there has been significant shifts in public opinion. Thus, for example, only just over forty years ago homosexual deviant acts between consenting males were illegal in the UK. Now the age of homosexual consent has has been lowered and opposition to homosexual behaviour is now bracketed with racialism, sexism, ageism and just about everything else that is deemed politically incorrect by our irreligious post-Christian world. Moreover, Christian guest house owners cannot now refuse homosexual patrons as that is considered an act of discrimination and evidence of a ‘homophobic’ attitude, notwithstanding that the Christian owners ‘rights’ are violated and brushed aside as unimportant. Homosexual discrimination legislation discriminates against Christian people and if that is not an instance of gross intolerance, then, quite frankly, I do not know what is, dear friends.

Clearly, unless Christians are to be disloyal to their faith and the Church, an obligation is laid upon them to respond to this controversial agenda for change by the homosexual subculture. Needless to say, this has elicited a hostile response from the militant homosexual activists who are quick to brand them homophobic bigots, among other unkind and abusive epithets. However, it is the homosexual controversialists who first initiated their contentious agenda and who sought to normalize homosexual acts and convince the public that sexual perversions are nothing more than alternative variants. Thus the Church had a duty to declare its disapproval of homosexual vice/liasons and state God’s norm for human sexuality, namely heterosexual monogamy - the union of one man with one woman. Sacred Scripture and the teaching of the Church envisages no other kind of union or sexual relations, for God provided no alternative. There is therefore nothing bigoted or intolerant, dear friends, in declaring *God’s truth *and denouncing sexually deviant conduct that is at variance with God’s law and an abomination to Him who is “of purer eyes than to behold evil and cannot look on wrong” (Habakkuk 1: 13).

God bless.

Warmest good wishes,

Portrait

Pax
 
coachdennis said:
Both!

What did Catholics talk about before gay people came out of the closet?:confused:
Click to expand...
Are you joking? I mean, seriously. Before 1973, when homosexuality was removed from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual through the efforts of gay activists, we had the Black Civil Rights Movement led by the Reverend Martin Luther King Jr, we had the Vietnam War, we had the Federal government reminding us on a regular basis that Russian ICBMS armed with nuclear warheads could fry our cities with little warning (about 20-25 minutes). And you know what? We had a great time from the late 1950s to 1968. A great time. We were more fully living out our faith. No, it was not perfect, but it was better than what we have today.

Communism, poverty (see President Johnson’s War on Poverty), our escalating involvement in the Vietnam War, which beginning in 1964 and up to 1968, was showing it’s totally unwinnable, does anybody know why we’re there?, character. We had dropped more bombs in Vietnam, and some on Laos and Cambodia, than all the bombs dropped in Europe during World War II. And we had known jungle warfare before in our war with the Japanese. Our most advanced technology didn’t help, and diplomatic blunders doomed that war.

Peace,
Ed
 
Here is the honest answer:

William F. Buckley, Jr. Quotes. “Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.”

Warning: Some Liberals have abandoned the term and call themselves “Progressives,” which simply means “my narrow idea of progress” and usually also means, “except for anything based on Christian principles.”

Peace,
Ed
 
Here is what is wanted: Sexual Perversity (Diversity) is to be accepted by all. Read the last few lines of the following in particular.

“More diversity is one of several characteristics of the family patterns in many countries
during the last decades. Although small in numbers and far from being accepted in most
countries, legalization of same-sex marriages fits neatly into this development. The
increasing diversity is often regarded as a part of a larger cultural change, implying an
increase in freedom as well as an obligation for individuals to decide how to organize
their lives in an individualized society (Beck and Beck-Gernsheim 1995; Beck 1997).
Another factor that might have paved the way for same-sex marriages is the
increasing separation between reproduction and sexuality, in favor of a more plastic
sexuality in the terminology of Giddens (1992). Sexuality has naturally always been
separated from reproduction in homosexual relations, and this separation is becoming
increasingly dominant also in heterosexual relationships. Thus, the disparity between
homo- and heterosexual relationships is being diminished. The increasing acceptance and legal legitimacy of homosexual practice may be the most important change
regarding sexuality in the last decades, or as Giddens (1992:33) expressed it “… sexual
diversity, although still regarded by many hostile groups as perversion, has moved out of
Freud’s case-history notebooks into the everyday social world”.”

Orgasms are job one regardless of any mix or match combination of persons you can think of, and monogomy is not the goal of many successful gay marriages:

nytimes.com/2010/01/29/us/29sfmetro.html

Peace,
Ed
 
Oh, my. Now this is a biased poll if I ever saw one. :rolleyes:

I shouldn’t even bother humouring this. I don’t see how opposing those who disapprove of gay marriage is necessarily intolerant. Right-wing folk act as if by doing so I would be taking away their religious freedom, but that’s complete and utter nonsense.

Besides, must people who oppose same-sex marriage are intolerant or bigoted. Not because they oppose same-sex marriage, but just with what they say, and their opinions on the subject. I could name some users on this very forum that are intolerant of homosexuals, and not because they oppose same-sex marriage.
 
buffalo said:
MADA: Dan Savage Bullies Middle & High School Christians
Click to expand...
Yeah, but Dan Savage has always been a bit of a knob. He also said some less than flattering things about bisexuals, which got people angry:

Some feminist blog getting rather angry at him

Gay rights blog, this time

More of the same thing

And, I’m sure you get the idea. He claimed bisexuals are good for nothing but one night stands and that most people that end up in relationships with them are hurt, and that any discrimination directed towards them is their own fault as they rarely come out to their spouses. He has made light of rape and rape survivors and dislikes feminists. He has also said some nasty stuff about transsexuals, and they arguably have the biggest beef with him (there’s too much to fit into one link).

So, yeah, don’t act if you’re special because someone who claims to support gay rights is being offensive. He’s offensive to most people aside gays and lesbians, and he’s certainly no representative of the LGBT community as a whole. Possibly just the LG community.
 
Regular_Atheist said:
Oh, my. Now this is a biased poll if I ever saw one. :rolleyes:

I shouldn’t even bother humouring this. I don’t see how opposing those who disapprove of gay marriage is necessarily intolerant. Right-wing folk act as if by doing so I would be taking away their religious freedom, but that’s complete and utter nonsense.

Besides, must people who oppose same-sex marriage are intolerant or bigoted. Not because they oppose same-sex marriage, but just with what they say, and their opinions on the subject. I could name some users on this very forum that are intolerant of homosexuals, and not because they oppose same-sex marriage.
Click to expand...
Not as nonsensical as those who say supporting traditional marriage is restrictig their freedom of speech.

Trying to paint the picture that supoorters of traditional marriage as hateul, bigoted, and racist is undoubtedly intolerant and slandering.
 
CrimsonThorn said:
Not as nonsensical as those who say supporting traditional marriage is restrictig their freedom of speech.

Trying to paint the picture that supoorters of traditional marriage as hateul, bigoted, and racist is undoubtedly intolerant and slandering.
Click to expand...
Sure. And I’ll admit that lots of supporters of gay rights do that. However, many times supporters of “traditional marriage” may be intolerant, despite what they tell themselves. Not because they oppose marriage equality, but simply because many of them happen to be.

However, I will agree that people who oppose marriage equality get called intolerant either for the wrong reasons, or sometimes when they don’t even deserve it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top