| Click here to go to the original topic View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Walter Sobcheck
Joined: 23 Sep 2005
Posts: 48
Location: closer than you think
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 23, 2005 6:02 pm Post subject: This seems like a good place to ask: "Homophobia" |
|
|
Will someone please define this strange term to me?
Afraid of man?
Afraid of what?
These canned expressions prevalent on Internet forums seem to be "impact" words derived to some how outweigh another's position.
I cant figure out what or who is afraid of what :ymn: |
|
| Back to top |
|
thefranzkafkafront
Joined: 24 Jul 2005
Posts: 19424
Location: Edinburgh University.
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 23, 2005 6:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Homo means 'same' i belive, and phobia means fear. While this literall means fear of the same. Its of corse used to mean fear of homosexuality. |
|
| Back to top |
|
patrickt
Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Posts: 1700
Location: Oaxaca, Mexico
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 23, 2005 6:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Random House Websters Unabridge Dictionary
ho·mo·pho·bi·a (h$Åmà f$Æb" Ã), n.
unreasoning fear of or antipathy toward homosexuals and homosexuality.
[1955–60; HOMO(SEXUAL) + -PHOBIA]
—hoÅmo·phoÆbic, adj.
In practice it frequently means, "Anyone who disagrees with me over any topic involving homosexuals." |
|
| Back to top |
|
Jank
Joined: 20 Jun 2005
Posts: 653
Location: Santa Clara, CA
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 23, 2005 6:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It's just a word that means gay-hater. Hatred and fear are one and the same.
Here's an interesting essay on homophobia:
http://www.bidstrup.com/phobia.htm |
|
| Back to top |
|
artk
Joined: 27 Feb 2005
Posts: 1031
Location: Portland, Oregon
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 23, 2005 8:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Quote: Hatred and fear are one and the same.
Not true. I can fear something without hating it, and can hate something without fearing it. For example, i hate spinach, but i certainly don't fear it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Snarf
Joined: 10 Jan 2005
Posts: 5288
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 23, 2005 10:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| An irrational fear of homosexuals. That's all. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Phazzle
Joined: 18 Sep 2005
Posts: 84
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 23, 2005 10:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
^^ While it means those things posted above, it's used time and time again as a derogatory term used to anyone who is anti-gay marriage.
Thats actually why I stopped participating in gay marriage debates.
Its a very annoying term that is like the ultra-nuke the pro-gay marriage folks use to bash anti-g.marriage. Then the topic changes from people not wanting to gay marriange, to why they feel that way, and if they are afraid of homosexuals.
This term is the ultimate discussion killer. A nuke everyone pro-gay marriage can carry with them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
callous
Joined: 10 Jul 2005
Posts: 16025
Location: I got winter in my blood
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 23, 2005 10:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Phazzle wrote: ^^ While it means those things posted above, it's used time and time again as a derogatory term used to anyone who is anti-gay marriage.
Thats actually why I stopped participating in gay marriage debates.
Its a very annoying term that is like the ultra-nuke the pro-gay marriage folks use to bash anti-g.marriage. Then the topic changes from people not wanting to gay marriange, to why they feel that way, and if they are afraid of homosexuals.
This term is the ultimate discussion killer. A nuke everyone pro-gay marriage can carry with them.
being anti gay marraige is at minimum an indifference to commonly interpreted civil rights for your fellow americans. |
|
| Back to top |
|
armstrong001
Joined: 11 Mar 2005
Posts: 648
Location: Grand Junction, CO
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 23, 2005 11:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
callous wrote: Phazzle wrote: ^^ While it means those things posted above, it's used time and time again as a derogatory term used to anyone who is anti-gay marriage.
Thats actually why I stopped participating in gay marriage debates.
Its a very annoying term that is like the ultra-nuke the pro-gay marriage folks use to bash anti-g.marriage. Then the topic changes from people not wanting to gay marriange, to why they feel that way, and if they are afraid of homosexuals.
This term is the ultimate discussion killer. A nuke everyone pro-gay marriage can carry with them.
being anti gay marraige is at minimum an indifference to commonly interpreted civil rights for your fellow americans.
What rights are you referring to? |
|
| Back to top |
|
armstrong001
Joined: 11 Mar 2005
Posts: 648
Location: Grand Junction, CO
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 23, 2005 11:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| EDIT: double post |
|
| Back to top |
|
callous
Joined: 10 Jul 2005
Posts: 16025
Location: I got winter in my blood
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 23, 2005 11:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
armstrong001 wrote: callous wrote: Phazzle wrote: ^^ While it means those things posted above, it's used time and time again as a derogatory term used to anyone who is anti-gay marriage.
Thats actually why I stopped participating in gay marriage debates.
Its a very annoying term that is like the ultra-nuke the pro-gay marriage folks use to bash anti-g.marriage. Then the topic changes from people not wanting to gay marriange, to why they feel that way, and if they are afraid of homosexuals.
This term is the ultimate discussion killer. A nuke everyone pro-gay marriage can carry with them.
being anti gay marraige is at minimum an indifference to commonly interpreted civil rights for your fellow americans.
What rights are you referring to?
oh liberty and the persuit of happiness come to mind. Or did you actually want me to interpret the Bill of rights for you.
There is nothing that says it shouldn't be allowed, except religion. And that is absolute destruction of individual liberty. |
|
| Back to top |
|
armstrong001
Joined: 11 Mar 2005
Posts: 648
Location: Grand Junction, CO
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 23, 2005 11:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
callous wrote: armstrong001 wrote: callous wrote: Phazzle wrote: ^^ While it means those things posted above, it's used time and time again as a derogatory term used to anyone who is anti-gay marriage.
Thats actually why I stopped participating in gay marriage debates.
Its a very annoying term that is like the ultra-nuke the pro-gay marriage folks use to bash anti-g.marriage. Then the topic changes from people not wanting to gay marriange, to why they feel that way, and if they are afraid of homosexuals.
This term is the ultimate discussion killer. A nuke everyone pro-gay marriage can carry with them.
being anti gay marraige is at minimum an indifference to commonly interpreted civil rights for your fellow americans.
What rights are you referring to?
oh liberty and the persuit of happiness come to mind. Or did you actually want me to interpret the Bill of rights for you.
There is nothing that says it shouldn't be allowed, except religion. And that is absolute destruction of individual liberty.
Please be more specific. You have the right to the persuit of happiness. You have no right to happiness. What liberties (other than not being able to say that they are married) are they losing? |
|
| Back to top |
|
callous
Joined: 10 Jul 2005
Posts: 16025
Location: I got winter in my blood
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 23, 2005 11:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
armstrong001 wrote: callous wrote: armstrong001 wrote: callous wrote: Phazzle wrote: ^^ While it means those things posted above, it's used time and time again as a derogatory term used to anyone who is anti-gay marriage.
Thats actually why I stopped participating in gay marriage debates.
Its a very annoying term that is like the ultra-nuke the pro-gay marriage folks use to bash anti-g.marriage. Then the topic changes from people not wanting to gay marriange, to why they feel that way, and if they are afraid of homosexuals.
This term is the ultimate discussion killer. A nuke everyone pro-gay marriage can carry with them.
being anti gay marraige is at minimum an indifference to commonly interpreted civil rights for your fellow americans.
What rights are you referring to?
oh liberty and the persuit of happiness come to mind. Or did you actually want me to interpret the Bill of rights for you.
There is nothing that says it shouldn't be allowed, except religion. And that is absolute destruction of individual liberty.
Please be more specific. You have the right to the persuit of happiness. You have no right to happiness. What liberties (other than not being able to say that they are married) are they losing?
you sluff off being able to say your married as if its a detail that they dont need to worry about.
would a married man and woman have something to say about not being able to say they are officially married?
a ban on gay marraige is a blockade to the persuit of happiness. Is there any clearer message that it should be allowed? if an american is promised the persuit of happiness should they be forcefully guided down one particular road? |
|
| Back to top |
|
Melchior
Joined: 02 Oct 2004
Posts: 9351
Location: Palm Beach
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 23, 2005 11:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
armstrong001 wrote: What rights are you referring to?
It really shouldn't concern you, and you can't expect me to not question the intentions of anyone who opposes equality for homosexuals.
But for the record, banning gay marriage is a violation of our unlimited right to contract, (Hale vs Henkel). Marriage SHOULD be one of the most basic rights regardless, the right to associate with whoever we want in any way, as long as we both consent. |
|
| Back to top |
|
armstrong001
Joined: 11 Mar 2005
Posts: 648
Location: Grand Junction, CO
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 23, 2005 11:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hephaestus wrote: armstrong001 wrote: What rights are you referring to?
It really shouldn't concern you, and you can't expect me to not question the intentions of anyone who opposes equality for homosexuals.
But for the record, banning gay marriage is a violation of our unlimited right to contract, (Hale vs Henkel). Marriage SHOULD be one of the most basic rights regardless, the right to associate with whoever we want in any way, as long as we both consent.
I don't oppose equality of homosexuals. I don't think what they do is right, but that's their deal. Question my intentions all you want. But I do oppose gay marriage. Other than just being married, I'd like to know exactly what they are being kept from doing, other than saying that they are legally married?
By using that same argument (unlimited right to contract), what is to stop someone from marrying more than one person? What about marrying a child? What about marrying an animal? By not limiting what it means to be married, the term marriage ceases to have any meaning. |
|
| Back to top |
|
danman2000
Joined: 22 Jun 2005
Posts: 494
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 23, 2005 11:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
armstrong001 wrote: Hephaestus wrote: armstrong001 wrote: What rights are you referring to?
It really shouldn't concern you, and you can't expect me to not question the intentions of anyone who opposes equality for homosexuals.
But for the record, banning gay marriage is a violation of our unlimited right to contract, (Hale vs Henkel). Marriage SHOULD be one of the most basic rights regardless, the right to associate with whoever we want in any way, as long as we both consent.
I don't oppose equality of homosexuals. I don't think what they do is right, but that's their deal. Question my intentions all you want. But I do oppose gay marriage. Other than just being married, I'd like to know exactly what they are being kept from doing, other than saying that they are legally married?
By using that same argument (unlimited right to contract), what is to stop someone from marrying more than one person? What about marrying a child? What about marrying an animal? By not limiting what it means to be married, the term marriage ceases to have any meaning.
Marriage is between two consenting (human) adults. |
|
| Back to top |
|
armstrong001
Joined: 11 Mar 2005
Posts: 648
Location: Grand Junction, CO
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 23, 2005 11:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
callous wrote: armstrong001 wrote: callous wrote: armstrong001 wrote: callous wrote: Phazzle wrote: ^^ While it means those things posted above, it's used time and time again as a derogatory term used to anyone who is anti-gay marriage.
Thats actually why I stopped participating in gay marriage debates.
Its a very annoying term that is like the ultra-nuke the pro-gay marriage folks use to bash anti-g.marriage. Then the topic changes from people not wanting to gay marriange, to why they feel that way, and if they are afraid of homosexuals.
This term is the ultimate discussion killer. A nuke everyone pro-gay marriage can carry with them.
being anti gay marraige is at minimum an indifference to commonly interpreted civil rights for your fellow americans.
What rights are you referring to?
oh liberty and the persuit of happiness come to mind. Or did you actually want me to interpret the Bill of rights for you.
There is nothing that says it shouldn't be allowed, except religion. And that is absolute destruction of individual liberty.
Please be more specific. You have the right to the persuit of happiness. You have no right to happiness. What liberties (other than not being able to say that they are married) are they losing?
you sluff off being able to say your married as if its a detail that they dont need to worry about.
would a married man and woman have something to say about not being able to say they are officially married?
a ban on gay marraige is a blockade to the persuit of happiness. Is there any clearer message that it should be allowed? if an american is promised the persuit of happiness should they be forcefully guided down one particular road?
How is it a blockade to the persuit of happiness? Are homosexuals kept from each other by the law? Are they banned from living together? Are they banned from having sex with each other? I don't see why, if homosexuals have every right that married couples have, except for the right to actually say that they are married, what the big deal is? Or is there something else that is denyed to them? |
|
| Back to top |
|
Snoop
Joined: 07 Sep 2005
Posts: 6626
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 23, 2005 11:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
This is some thing i never have understood.
Could some one please explain to me how a persons marriage choice is the governments business ? |
|
| Back to top |
|
danman2000
Joined: 22 Jun 2005
Posts: 494
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 23, 2005 11:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Snoop wrote: This is some thing i never have understood.
Could some one please explain to me how a persons marriage choice is the governments business ?
It has to do with tax breaks and stuff |
|
| Back to top |
|
Chymical
Joined: 27 Oct 2004
Posts: 3437
Location: The Orrible Bit of London
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 23, 2005 11:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| It has to do with enforcing old religious bullcrap by the back door more like |
|
| Back to top |
|
| Click here to go to the original topic |
