|
|
#541 |
|
FFR Player
|
Let me show you guys something: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/homophobia
A few choice definitions: "unreasoning fear of or antipathy toward homosexuals and homosexuality." "Fear of or contempt for lesbians and gay men." "prejudice against (fear or dislike of) homosexual people and homosexuality" "irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuality or homosexuals" So yes, if you don't like homosexuals, you are a homophobe. At least, according to the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, the American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Princeton University, and Merriam-Webster's Medical Dictionary. |
|
|
|
|
#542 |
|
Little Chief Hare
|
Taking the nature argument from a different angle, It's impossible that any human behavior or property isn't natural because human beings are in their entirety a part of nature.
|
|
|
|
|
#543 |
|
Very Grave Indeed
|
Though what of the behaviors that we've adopted that are directly contrary to the usual functioning of nature? Do they become de facto natural simply because we've used them?
|
|
|
|
|
#544 |
|
Little Chief Hare
|
They are de facto nature because there is nothing in existence which is not natural. If something is contrary to the "usual functioning of nature" that means it's novel or rare, but not unnatural. Human beings have big brains because we have an advantage for that. Novelty as benefit. Camels have the ability to store water for the same reason. Things such as Sickle Cell Anemia, on the other hand, also contrary to the usual functioning of nature but this in a way which impedes survival or is non-beneficent.
However, just because something natural behaves atypically doesn't make it unnatural. It just makes it atypical. |
|
|
|
|
#545 | |
|
FFR Player
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 18
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
#546 | ||
|
Very Grave Indeed
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
|
|
|
|
#547 |
|
FFR Player
|
Devonin basically said it.
Homophobia, as the definitions state, is either a fear or a dislike of homosexuality, meaning that as long as at least one of the conditions (fear, dislike) is met, the term applies. No one was saying that homophobia is only a dislike of homosexuality, only that the term applies to both fear and a dislike. Also, where in those definitions does it say that the dislike or aversion is fear-based? Just because they're mentioned in the same sentence doesn't mean one has to cause the other. I may have this wrong, but isn't that an example of "Post hoc, ergo propter hoc?" Though that applies more towards events than the ordering of words in a sentence... |
|
|
|
|
#548 |
|
Very Grave Indeed
|
"Post hoc ergo propter hoc" : "in the Post Hoc fallacy you falsely conclude that because two events happened in sequence, the latter was necessarily caused by the former."
|
|
|
|
|
#549 |
|
FFR Player
|
homosexuality is just normal cuz its because it is ( Smart answer )
|
|
|
|
|
#550 | |
|
FFR Player
|
Quote:
Chances are I'm reading too much into it; I tend to do that. |
|
|
|
|
|
#551 |
|
FFR Player
|
Jeez, you start to wish that God had more room to write on those stone tablets he gave Moses. Hahaha.
|
|
|
|
|
#552 |
|
Very Grave Indeed
|
Why? We do such a horrible job of following the directives he -did- get written down. The last thing we need are christians going tl;dr
|
|
|
|
|
#553 |
|
(The Fat's Sabobah)
|
Here's a question:
Does the Bible have any evidence to prove that Jesus was not gay? I'm curious...seeing as in his 30 years of existence, he never once got busy with one of them foxy stable maids. |
|
|
|
|
#554 |
|
Very Grave Indeed
|
Well, he's only in the bible visibly from 1-12 and 30-33, plenty of vanished teen years to **** around in.
Also, it's theorised that you can explain his lack of visibly being married by the fact that there was a sect of scribes and learned men operating at the time of Jesus (From which comes several of the documents that made their way into the bible) who were celibate. |
|
|
|
|
#555 |
|
FFR Player
|
Thats were Mary of Magdalen comes in.
|
|
|
|
|
#556 |
|
(The Fat's Sabobah)
|
|
|
|
|
|
#557 |
|
FFR Player
|
No I don't recall the New Testament to call her a prostitute. It it said that she was a disciple of Jesus.
|
|
|
|
|
#558 |
|
FFR Player
|
Jesus Christ Superstar taught me wrong, then.
|
|
|
|
|
#559 |
|
FFR Player
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: canada
Posts: 3
|
i think that it should be aloud..because we can not control there lives it is there life and if they want to be a homosexual then who are we to stop them? Anyway that is just my opinion
|
|
|
|
|
#560 | |||
|
Very Grave Indeed
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
|
|
![]() |
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|