![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I've never heard any so-called "activist" use homophobe as a synonym for
"not homosexual." I have heard it used to refer to heterosexual people who have a negative reaction to those around them who ARE homosexual or who oppose to the total acceptance of homosexuality as being just as normal, just as valid, just as moral, just as legitmate, as is being straight and I think there is a strong case to be made for that as being the explanation for their emotional reaction to homosexuals. There is a vast sifference between someone saying "I am heterosexual" and saying "Homosexuals and homosexual acts disgust me and I don't want them around me or to have my children exposed to the idea they are normal." All too often, I suspect, opposition to gays in the workplace, gays expressing affection in public, gays in the miltary, gays in schools and scouting, gay marriage, etc stems from a deep set and totally illogical expression of the latter feeling. Why anyone would care what someone else's sex, love, and relationship styles may be is beyond me. We don't morally condemn people for having differing tastes is food, music, art, or hobbies - why should some people should be viewed with even the slightest bit of negativity for having a minority sexual reaction patterns that differ from our own tastes? From any sensible moral and social perspective, the difference between the homosexual and heterosexual lifestyles is on a par with the difference in liking chocolate versus vanilla ice cream and it shouldn't be considered any more of a measure of the person's qualities and character than is that. IMHO, it is a fact that homosexuality or bisexuality is just as moral and valid a life pattern as is heterosexuality in every respect and any opposition to its complete and total acceptance as such by society is prima facie evidence of homophobia on the part of those who reject it. You don't need to be homosexual in order to completely accept the presence and social participation of homosexuals in all aspects of society without reservation. "C J Campbell" wrote in message ... "Peter Duniho" wrote in message ... | "C J Campbell" wrote in message | ... | rec.scouting.usa, for example, has been completely hijacked by | heterophobes | | Heterophobes? Somehow, I doubt that. Sounds like a term made up by | homophobes. | | Heterophobe is intended to be a response to the defamatory and over-used term homophobe. I doubt that there are any homophobes, but too many activists use the term to describe anyone who is not a homosexual. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Stupid Question About Newsgroups | RST Engineering | General Aviation | 1 | January 17th 05 05:59 PM |
Re; What do you think? | Kelsibutt | Naval Aviation | 0 | September 29th 03 06:55 AM |
Newsgroups and Email | Jim Weir | Home Built | 8 | July 8th 03 11:30 PM |
Newsgroups and Email | Jim Weir | Owning | 8 | July 8th 03 11:30 PM |