Homophobe *should* be applied to those who do not wish to associate with
homosexuals - why else would one make a blanket rejection of such an
otherwise diverse group of people as being unworthy of association, based
solely on their sexual behavior, except because of a deep-seated fear or
hatred for that behavior? And I have never heard anyone ever advocate extra
rights for gays, only for those rights and protections that will shield them
from the negative effects of other's prejudicial reactions to them. You may
not personally wish to have a black person as the scoutmaster of the local
scout troop, your opposition based solely on his race, but the law prevents
that irrational prejudice from impacting on the selection of the
scoutmaster. Homosexuals are only asking for (and rightfully deserve) the
same legal protections against the consequences of similar irrational
prejudices against their sexuality.


"Tom S." wrote in message
...

"Gary L. Drescher" wrote in message
news:FjM%a.167464$Ho3.19211@sccrnsc03...
"C J Campbell" wrote in
What a ludicrous accusation. Please cite a single documented instance
anywhere of an activist using the term "homophobe" to describe "anyone
who
is not a homosexual" (as opposed to describing those with an explicitly
anti-gay agenda--that is, an agenda that denies gay people a variety of
rights that are taken for granted by straight people).

You better extend it to people that do not wish to associate with
homosexuals, as well as anyone not willing to grant that EXTRA rights, as
well as other ambiguous terms that fall in when persuasion runs into
coercion.