I Hate Gays

[Ablity]

If I went about stating that I didn't care for gays, their displays of selfishness or what they were doing to society in the unnecessary trouble and conflict that they are creating then I would be promptly labelled a homophobe by most people that I expressed that opinion to.

So then along would come other people to quickly condemn me for my views and they would probably say they didn't like me, my display of selfishness or what I was doing to society in the unnecessary trouble and conflict that I was creating.

So it just becomes an intolerance of intolerance and a homophobophobia of a homophobia, and it just gets passed down in turn.

It can be said that both sides are just trying to maintain the rights of people to be happy and live their lives in a way that satisfies their basic Human needs.

What is the moral difference between those who dislike someone for their views, and those who dislike those who dislike someone for their views?

I do not believe in morality, meaning, I think all morality is selfish and subjective, thus I agree with you; there is no difference between you hating gays and gays hating you. From a purely rational standpoint I feel hating someone, something is a vast of physical, emotional, and intellectual energy and mental space, thus my question to you is why do you hate gays?

[Misty]

What if I'm a landlord and refuse to rent to gays? What if I'm a shop owner and refuse to serve gays? What if I refuse them based on my wish to have no interaction with them due to some religious or moral system, or for whatever reason? Do I have the right to exclude certain people from my life? Do I have that right or not?

These scenarios are actively discriminatory. Your personal life is another story. You don't have to be friends with them. Spiral Out, do you question everyone you would come into contact with such as in stores, restaurants, etc., to make sure there is no one that offends you before you can use that service? What are you getting at?

[Xris]

(Nested quote removed.)


Nobody has stated such a thing. If you are referring to the topic title then you are prejudicing yourself against something that is not there. Do you actually know that this thread is about?

If you start by stating you hate gays, explain why and then proceed to tell us how that hate may influence your actions, what else should I presume?

[Spiral Out]

...thus my question to you is why do you hate gays?

Shouldn't you first ask if I hate gays before you ask why?

These scenarios are actively discriminatory. Your personal life is another story. You don't have to be friends with them.

You're missing the point.

Should I be forced to rent to skinheads? What if I rent the second floor and I live on the first floor and I fear for the safety of my family and property due to hate crimes being committed against by gays or skinheads living there?

Do I have the right to exclude certain people from my life based on my personal standards of decency or safety?

Spiral Out, do you question everyone you would come into contact with such as in stores, restaurants, etc., to make sure there is no one that offends you before you can use that service? What are you getting at?

This is a philosophy forum, not a confessional. These are hypothetical scenarios and questions to get to the heart of the issue, nothing more. These are just questions.

However, I really don't like being called a homophobe simply because I don't support the gay agenda. That part is genuine.

If you start by stating you hate gays, explain why and then proceed to tell us how that hate may influence your actions, what else should I presume?

You are severely misinterpreting the topic. We've been through this before in another thread. If you cannot understand the fundamental purpose and nature of this thread then please do not post any replies here. Thank you.

[Xris]

How am misinterpreting your posts? How can you claim to hate gays and then attempt to defend your right to hate them.What exactly do you hate or dislike that would influence your treatment of them? You make vague arguments that you would refuse them service or protect your children from them.What exactly is your feelings towards them and how do those feelings manifest themselves? Why should you oppose their legal rights simply because you detest them?

[Misty]

(Nested quote removed.)


You're missing the point.

Should I be forced to rent to skinheads? What if I rent the second floor and I live on the first floor and I fear for the safety of my family and property due to hate crimes being committed against by gays or skinheads living there?

Do I have the right to exclude certain people from my life based on my personal standards of decency or safety?


(Nested quote removed.)


This is a philosophy forum, not a confessional. These are hypothetical scenarios and questions to get to the heart of the issue, nothing more. These are just questions.

However, I really don't like being called a homophobe simply because I don't support the gay agenda. That part is genuine.
(Nested quote removed.)

Spiral Out, You have every right not to support what you call the gay agenda. I did not call you a homophobe, nor would I call you one. I am quite aware this is a philosophy forum, and the point I was making is that one cannot avoid all the people they don't like in all areas of their life, i.e. stores, restaurants and generally any public place. I guess the laws in the area you would be renting out homes, etc., would have to be honored, and may be different from place to place. So,unless one knows the area you are asking about and it's laws one cannot really answer your questions. I think your questions are legitimate and I would like the answer myself.

[Spiral Out]

I did not call you a homophobe, nor would I call you one.

I didn't mean to imply that it was you who called me that. My apologies.

I am quite aware this is a philosophy forum, and the point I was making is that one cannot avoid all the people they don't like in all areas of their life, i.e. stores, restaurants and generally any public place.

Nor was I proposing any such thing.

I guess the laws in the area you would be renting out homes, etc., would have to be honored, and may be different from place to place.

I wasn't speaking of legal rights but Human rights. I don't think that the concept of Human rights only applies to our common understanding of them.

(NOTE TO ALL: I DON'T ACTUALLY HATE GAYS. IT'S JUST A TITLE FOR THE TOPIC!)

[Fanman]

Spiral Out,

What do you consider an "active expression"? If I were to simply ignore any gay person who attempts to interact with me, would that be considered an active expression of my dislike?

Good question. I think that would be an active expression of your dislike, but such an act on your part, I would call a "negative active expression" of dislike; because it doesn't cause any harm to a gay person, but it remains an active expression of dislike, on prejudicial grounds. Abusing gays verbally or physically, I would classify as a "positive active expression" of dislike.

[Newme]

SpiralOut,

You make a good point, although I'd prefer you state you hate the behavior, rather than a group of people labeld for their behavior.

I don't hate people who have developed homosexual fetishes - I just hate the negative consequences that come with practicing homosexual fetishes & demanding special legal rights based on such fetishes, and denying children the right to a mother or father, as if they are no longer needed.

For arguments sake, let's say that I am prejudice against untidy people. .

Inappropriate example.

People who are untidy are not trying to get legal rights based on their sloppiness & pridefully parading their sloppiness, clogging up traffic & harassing anybody who points out negative truths about acting untidy.

[Spiral Out]

Thanks for your thoughts but this topic is actually about the reverse intolerance hypocrisy that comes with the prejudice of knee-jerk reactions to a perceived bias based on insufficient information, which has been thoroughly demonstrated thus far.

[boagie]

"Better for us perhaps, it might appear, were all harmony and virtue here; that never air or ocean felt the wind, that never passions discomposed the mind. But all subsists by elemental strife, and the passions are the elements of life. The general order since the whole began, is kept in nature, and kept in man." Alexander Pope

"Becareful in casting out your demons, that you are not casting out your best parts." Nietzsche

[Newme]

Thanks for your thoughts but this topic is actually about the reverse intolerance hypocrisy that comes with the prejudice of knee-jerk reactions to a perceived bias based on insufficient information, which has been thoroughly demonstrated thus far.

Isn't it nice to have such enthusiastic volunteer examples to support your point?

[Xris]

You can not start a thread stating you hate gays without creating assumptions.Without encouraging those who actively oppose gays legal rights.Inciting others through provocative language has become obvious.

[Dawson]

Spiral Out wrote;

If I went about stating that I didn't care for gays, their displays of selfishness or what they were doing to society in the unnecessary trouble and conflict that they are creating then I would be promptly labelled a homophobe by most people that I expressed that opinion to.

Do you believe others don't have the right to vilify you as a "homophobe' if you display homophobic tendencies? Why wouldn't you accord gays the right to protest their case? Surely, in a democracy anyone who feels they are being discriminated against unfairly has a right to do so.

So then along would come other people to quickly condemn me for my views and they would probably say they didn't like me, my display of selfishness or what I was doing to society in the unnecessary trouble and conflict that I was creating.

Isn't that exactly what you would be saying about gay activists?

So it just becomes an intolerance of intolerance and a homophobophobia of a homophobia, and it just gets passed down in turn.

If you show intolerance to homosexuals why would you be surprised that those who support their rights, or even those who are not particularly interested in gay issues, should show intolerance to you?

It can be said that both sides are just trying to maintain the rights of people to be happy and live their lives in a way that satisfies their basic Human needs.

Gay activists are agitating for the right of people whose sexual orientation doesn't accord with the 'norm' to enjoy exactly the same rights to be happy and live their lives as they see fit, as 'normal' people do. Anyone who militates against this or even harbours an attitude of ill-will towards gays is doing so because of an irrational prejudice.

What is the moral difference between those who dislike someone for their views, and those who dislike those who dislike someone for their views?

If you hate gays you are not disliking them for their views but for being what they are are. Any views they might express are only the expression of their battle against being oppressed by normative values. Normative values generally prohibit acts that are harmful to society. Sometimes the imagined harm is based on outmoded religious attitudes, which renders the normative value in question redundant. What other reason could you have for disapproving of, or even hating gays, than your adherence to some form of outmoded belief. If you don't think the belief is outmoded; if you are a genuine religious fundamentalist or whatever, then fair enough; be proud and stand up for what you believe in. But you will have to accept that in today's society you will be one voice of a minority even smaller than the minority you are vilifying.

If you are simply tired of or bored with their protestations, why not simply ignore them? I can't see what you are trying to get at, or what the 'problem' is.

[Fishing]

I appreciate this thread. I'll say right off the bat that I'm a strong supporter of LGBTQ rights, but I am, as many of you, frustrated by the free speech cap that tends to happen in these discussions. However, that's just the way it goes with these sorts of issues. The "intolerance of intolerance" argument makes sense to me, especially because a lot of this aversion to LGBTQ identities tends to stem from religious devotion, unfortunately. So to be intolerant of one's disapproval of these identities is itself a sort of intolerance toward the other's religious convictions. But what it comes down to is that if one wants to reserve the right to be intolerant toward a minority group, then one also ought to have the right to be intolerant toward that intolerance. It's a bit paradoxical, but it can only work both ways, and this is what I feel allows for progress in human rights to take place. Here is a broad pattern I've observed:

Throughout history there are always patterns of oppression. There is an intolerance toward a minority group (generally fueled by ignorance and fear), the minority group reclaims its identity and fights against intolerance, people become allied with the minority group because of their new visibility, the Intolerance shifts from "intolerance toward a minority group" to "intolerance toward the intolerance of that minority group." This has been quite evident in the gay rights movement so far. While in the 50s, for example, intolerance toward gays and lesbians was very much the norm, with the efforts of Harvey Milk and other gay activists, a unity of identity began to form. These people reclaimed that part of themselves which scared the status quo the most and championed it as something to be proud of. Their new visibility allowed people outside the identity to better understand who they were; peaceful exposure of their lifestyle and ideas allowed the public's ignorance and fears to subside, which in turn, made the general public's "intolerance toward the gay lifestyle" morph into an "intolerance toward intolerance toward the gay lifestyle." This pattern can be observed in any human rights movement, I believe. All it is is a realignment of the power structure. We ought to always reserve the rights to be both (peacefully) intolerant and (peacefully) intolerant toward intolerance, but we must recognize that at any given moment, one side of the spectrum will overpower the other, and the stream tends to always begin at the former and run toward the latter. My two cents.