Why do you refute a charge that you are "homophobe?"

[sassygal1973]

I heard somewhere in Massachustts, in a quiet wealthy neighborhood, the teachers were reading stories about two daddies and two mommies to their students. Do I really need for my child to hear these stories? He’ll hear enough as he gets older. I do feel bad for gay couples though…
This is why the parents need to school their children in Catholic schools where morals are taught and not Godless things. I took my child out of Sociology class in 9th grade because the teacher was talking about being agnostic and such. Also discussed Islam for two months!! Now, I don’t have a hard time touching on each religion, it’s when teachers are putting their own opinions in and not the curriculum. He was happier in Spanish…

 

[Riley259]

I don’t follow your argument… You mention that because God knows if someone will engage in sexaul behavior that is against His teaching and will then that is somehow okay? I’m pretty willing to bet that God knows when someone will commit murder too, but I’d be wrong to say that’s okay…

Sexual acts are ALWAYS a choice and can ALWAYS be avoided, do you disagree?

Although I struggle with the acceptance of homosexual people, it has more to do with the fact that other than their sexual trnasgressions, many of them are very compassionate and loving people. I also don’t want to rule out the possiblity that they will come to understand God and what God truly wants for them. Do I think people chose to be gay or straight? I don’t know, but it’s really not the point; they do choose to engage in sexual activity or not. Is it wrong for me to engage in sexual activity with someone/anyone if it’s not done in the sanctity of marriage? I won’t condemn a sinner, but I will not condone the sin.

SG

Very well put. The term “homophobe” is a form of emotional blackmail. People who use the term know that it will stop about 90% of people in their tracks regardless of whether their argument was sound or not. I think it’s a terrible and very unfair tactic to use.

 

[Ridgerunner]

I guess I’m a retrograde guy. The term “homophobia” isn’t even a word. It’s a contraction of “homosexual phobia”, or fear of homosexuals. If I am confronted by that term, I simply respond that I don’t “fear” homosexuals at all, but I despise homosexuality as inherently narcissistic and repulsive.
I don’t care what animals do. Many animals also eat feces.

 

[dapper]

I guess I’m a retrograde guy. The term “homophobia” isn’t even a word. It’s a contraction of “homosexual phobia”, or fear of homosexuals. If I am confronted by that term, I simply respond that I don’t “fear” homosexuals at all, but I despise homosexuality as inherently narcissistic and repulsive.
I don’t care what animals do. Many animals also eat feces.

Would you elaborate on “homosexuality as inherently narcissistic.” How so?

 

[Sixtus]

species like apes and other animals pointed study to prove that it was common that homosexual or bisexual was common. Yes, all creation on earth is tainted by the sin of Adam

I put God out of the topic Good, it only draws criticism of ‘Church’ as homophobic

They could not refute me much longer, so they charge me as a homophobe. Not surprising, you probably ruffled their feathers., They would know in their heart of hearts that what they are doing is against the natural law

If you were in my shoes, how would you defend yourself when someone call you a homophobe?

I would ask them if they were hetero-phobe

We are ALL sinners, no one better than anyone else. We must not think ill of them or insult them. They are entitled to their views. Please do not take the line of one correspondent who suggests insulting and calling a fellow sinner ‘a filthy sodomite’.

Outa my face you filthy sodomite

. We are called to imitate Christ. I doubt He would have been so insensitive

 

[unworthy]

If you have friends with homosexual tendencies–notice I’m not saying “gay” because it is not who they are but an abnormal condition–then one thing you can choose to say to the people you chatted with is:
“How can I be a homophobe when I have friends with homosexual tendencies whom I love very much regardless of their lifestyle?”

Another thing you can say is that you love all people including those who have homosexual tendencies, so how can you be labelled a homophobe? You are afraid of nothing or no one, and you love fully, so much so that you want the best for them (including helping them realize that their lifestyle choice is ultimately an empty one with no lasting happiness). Such a person who loves, is not a homophobe.
-unworthy

 

[Riley259]

If you have friends with homosexual tendencies–notice I’m not saying “gay” because it is not who they are but an abnormal condition–then one thing you can choose to say to the people you chatted with is:
“How can I be a homophobe when I have friends with homosexual tendencies whom I love very much regardless of their lifestyle?”

Another thing you can say is that you love all people including those who have homosexual tendencies, so how can you be labelled a homophobe? You are afraid of nothing or no one, and you love fully, so much so that you want the best for them (including helping them realize that their lifestyle choice is ultimately an empty one with no lasting happiness). Such a person who loves, is not a homophobe.
-unworthy

Great answer - couldn’t have put it better myself.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Would you elaborate on “homosexuality as inherently narcissistic.” How so?

Recall the Greek myth of Narcissus who was so enamored of himself that he tried to embrace his own reflection in the water, fell in and drowned. A man making love to a man is attempting to make love to himself; a profoundly self-aborbed thing to do.

I didn’t make that up. Homosexuals tend to score very high on the narcissistic scale on the MMPI. It’s one of psychology’s “dirty little secrets”.

 

[JoeyWarren]

We were wrong about Galileo and Copernicus.

We were wrong about orientation, we could as well be wrong about the act as well:

I suggest the following article:

soulforce.org/article/homosexuality-bible-gay-christian

This guy is a gay pastor with a masters in theology secondary degrees in Hebrew and Greek languages.

Read with the same open mind that you would ask of Protestants when directing them toward the Catechism.

 

[Jaypeeto4]

There really is, technically, no such thing as a “homophobe,” because “homophobe” is a non-word. It’s a made up word loaded with political overtones.

It is basically an insult which asserts that people who disapprove of homosexual sex acts are “afraid” of gays and lesbians.
Balderdash. How many on these forums are “afraid” of gays and lesbians??? I’m not. Are you ??

 

[jmcrae]

We were wrong about Galileo and Copernicus.

We were? What, exactly, were we wrong about?

As to the article, he spends a great deal of time obfuscating statistics and stating the obvious - homosexual acts aren’t bad because the Bible condemns them (he’s right - it doesn’t) - homosexual acts are bad because they go contrary to marriage.

The Bible doesn’t need to say anything about homosexuality: everything that it teaches us about marriage tells us that homosexual acts are in no way like marriage - and therefore (since the Bible also teaches us that any kind of sex outside of marriage is mortal sin), they are perversions to be avoided.

I am also offended on behalf of Ghandi and Martin Luther King Junior, both of whom were upstanding family men, that this guy uses their images to promote his perverted cause.

The homosexual agenda is nothing at all like the struggle of India to be free of British colonialism, nor is it anything like the struggle of Black Americans for voting rights in America, since persons of homosexual orientation are free to vote, and free of the oppression of colonial rule. (And if they’re not, it’s not because they’re of homosexual orientation.)

Homosexuals have total freedom - the only things they can’t do are get married and have children - and no law of man will ever overcome those two problems, try though it may.

 

[Mr.Ex_Nihilo]

If you were in my shoes, how would you defend yourself when someone call you a homophobe?

Explain to them that they are right-- you fear for the soul of a homosexual male who engages in sin just like you fear for the soul of a heterosexual male who engages in sin. Then exlain to them that you’re also a heterophobe too-- and don’t let them forget this part.

It is proper to fear for the souls of the people we love. There’s no crime in doing this either.

 

[Mr.Ex_Nihilo]

someone else:

Yes, it does occur in nature! Lots of chimpanzees, the scientifically proven most human animal, are often homosexual or bisexual.

Manny, you could explain to this poster that they are making a natural fallacy.

For example, men tend to me more naturally agressive than women. Statisitically speaking, far more violent crimes are committed by men than women too.

However, just because men tend to be more naturally aggressive than women – even to the point that this has been statisitically and scientifically proven to be true – doesn’t make our aggresive tendencies any more right. It certainly doesn’t justify men being statisitically more likely to commit a violent crime either.

Rather, these statisitics only point out that men have to work much harder than women to control their own agrressive tendencies. It points out that men should not give into their natural urges and strive to rise above them for the greater good of their family.

 

[Mannyfit75]

Manny, you could explain to this poster that they are making a natural fallacy.

For example, men tend to me more naturally agressive than women. Statisitically speaking, far more violent crimes are committed by men than women too.

However, just because men tend to be more naturally agrressive than women – even to the point that this has been statisitically and scientifically proven to be true – doesn’t make our aggresive tendencies any more right. It certainly doesn’t justify men being statisitically more likely to commit a violent crime either.

Rather, these statisitics only point out that men have to work much harder than women to control their own agrressive tendencies. It points out that men should not give into their natural urges and strive to rise above them for the greater good of their family.

I could explain to him but like most liberals or misguided souls, they refuse to listen to the Truth. I think the media has influence today’s society that homosexual activity is acceptable…

I know enough about the fallacies that many of these homosexual supporters have saying that it is normal, but when it fact it isn’t.

 

[Wolseley]

The term “homophobe” is another example of the liberal religion of Political Correctness: “Thou shalt not hold any opinion which anyone else finds ‘offensive’.”

If you do, you can expect them to condemn you; and if you present logical reasons begind your viewpoint (especially reasons that they have trouble refuting), then they will invariably revert to name-calling.

If you’re a supporter of Bush’s foreign policy, you’re a “warmonger”. If you’re against affirmative action, you’re a bigot. If you’re against homosexuality, you’re a “homophobe”.

(shrug) Study them. You can predict how they will react with nearly 100% accuracy after a while.

 

[a_priori]

We were wrong about Galileo and Copernicus.

We were wrong about orientation, we could as well be wrong about the act as well:

I suggest the following article:

soulforce.org/article/homosexuality-bible-gay-christian

This guy is a gay pastor with a masters in theology secondary degrees in Hebrew and Greek languages.

Read with the same open mind that you would ask of Protestants when directing them toward the Catechism.

Rev. White says, among other things, “We must be open to new truth from Scripture.” New truth? I suppose in our postmodern society “new truth” is our philosophical fuel. But it shouldn’t be so. When you leave the hermeneutics of the Church in favor of new revelation, you can get some weirdness. There are many examples of this throughout history.

Rev. White is doing what many people do today, and that is presupposing what he is claiming to prove. His arguments are specious.

Having said that, we should lighten up on homosexuals until we approach heterosexual males, who insist on spreading their DNA all over the countryside, with equal condemnation. They are both engaging in sin.

 

[Riley259]

We were wrong about Galileo and Copernicus.

We were wrong about orientation, we could as well be wrong about the act as well:

I suggest the following article:

soulforce.org/article/homosexuality-bible-gay-christian

This guy is a gay pastor with a masters in theology secondary degrees in Hebrew and Greek languages.

Read with the same open mind that you would ask of Protestants when directing them toward the Catechism.

Nothing new in his liberal interpretation of Scripture. Gay activists have been putting forth similiar arguments for awhile now and they just don’t hold water. The bottom line as a Catholic is this: Please read JPII’s Theology of the Body (or Chris West’s explanation of the Pope’s work) and you’ll see how impossible it is to be engaging in any sexual activity outside of a sacramental marriage and still be in conformity to God’s Will and design for marriage. I’m not afraid of homosexuals but I don’t approve of homosexual acts. Period.

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

I came under a discussion the chat room with the issue of homosexuality. Rather the individuals involve were openingly discussing their lifestyle.

I gave my points and not put God in it, but use nature vs. the unnatural act of nature. They tried to prove that it species like apes and other animals pointed study to prove that it was common that homosexual or bisexual was common. Yet, I refute them that it doesn’t explain the fact that homosexuality as whole does not produce life compared with heterosexual union between a man and woman.

I put God out of the topic because it was not an issue I wanted to prove them wrong, but point out that it is against nature and it is against survival of the species.

They could not refute me much longer, so they charge me as a homophobe. Last time I know I was in the ignore box. I did pointed out that the label is just an excuse to end the discussion because they could not fight back.

That is just your side of the story - they might have a different one to tell; if one may say that ? The trouble with this issue, is that only one side can possibly be discussed - any others there might be, go by default; which does not make for a balanced discussion.​

If you were in my shoes, how would you defend yourself when someone call you a homophobe?

**Some people probably are - those who are, should admit it, if only to themselves. I’m sure Fred Phelps feels very hard done by, & might even deny being a homophobe - but most Christians seem to have little respect for his tactics. The problem with this subject is that people often charge in like Gadarene buffalo, claiming to be acting in love - but often managing to behave remarkably like trolls (& I don’t mean the ones on childrens’ TV, either). **​

**I don’t like the word “homophobe”, because it is a hybrid formation, by someone blessed with great ignorance of Classics. It’s an even worse solecism than attributing gender to human beings (a blunder which no one with the slightest training in the Classics could possibly make). The solution ? Make Latin & Greek compulsory. **

**“Homophobe” is like “liberal” - they are both words used to denote a very broad spectrum of opinions & behaviours. When words are used in such indefinite senses, & not properly defined first, there is no point in discussing such issues. **##

 

[Valke2]

I came under a discussion the chat room with the issue of homosexuality. Rather the individuals involve were openingly discussing their lifestyle.

I gave my points and not put God in it, but use nature vs. the unnatural act of nature. They tried to prove that it species like apes and other animals pointed study to prove that it was common that homosexual or bisexual was common. Yet, I refute them that it doesn’t explain the fact that homosexuality as whole does not produce life compared with heterosexual union between a man and woman.

I put God out of the topic because it was not an issue I wanted to prove them wrong, but point out that it is against nature and it is against survival of the species.

They could not refute me much longer, so they charge me as a homophobe. Last time I know I was in the ignore box. I did pointed out that the label is just an excuse to end the discussion because they could not fight back.

If you were in my shoes, how would you defend yourself when someone call you a homophobe?

If you are really concerned about this, you can try recroding yourself kissing another man. Then when they bring up the topic of being homophobic, just send them the recording. I guaranty they’ll admit they were wrong.

 

[MikeinSD]

Recall the Greek myth of Narcissus who was so enamored of himself that he tried to embrace his own reflection in the water, fell in and drowned. A man making love to a man is attempting to make love to himself; a profoundly self-aborbed thing to do.

I didn’t make that up. Homosexuals tend to score very high on the narcissistic scale on the MMPI. It’s one of psychology’s “dirty little secrets”.

Please cite your sources. Thanks