Can Homophobia Be Justified?

[Chuukango]

]
They're not

How come humans reproduce heterosexually, then?

Our evolution to reproduce heterosexually doesn't prove homosexuality to be a mental illness- on the contrary sex is like pretty good at getting people to be fond of each other and subsequently work harder to protect eachother etc. fun stuff
The bonobos are thought to have so much sexual intercourse for this reason, likely applies to humans too

[Disgraces]

Iirc it didn't have anything religious, but it comes from a religious school or whatever so I said that in advance. If it has anything religious it's something like "using protection is bad". I really recommend you to read it.

The religious bias of the publisher itself, who writes for the Catholic Medical Association, is religious (it's on the name, duh). I've read it cover to cover, and the religious bias is written all over it.

You read cover to cover an article that takes at least one hour to read in under five minutes? Impressive.

[Daarwyrth]

The fact that there is religious bullshit in it makes this very piece bullshit. I will not read such a harmful and disrespectful piece.

Iirc it didn't have anything religious, but it comes from a religious school or whatever so I said that in advance. If it has anything religious it's something like "using protection is bad". I really recommend you to read it.

No. You want me to read something harmful and hateful. It is inherently homophobic and incompatible with what mainstream science states and says about homosexuality. It is incompatible with the approach the WHO has taken.

I repeat, it is harmful, it is hateful. And the fact that you fail to realise how a gay person could see it as such shows a lack of empathy and understanding for the other. How do you think I feel when you state that my sexual orientation is a mental illness? It is harmful, it is hateful. It is homophobic.

[Palmyrion]

What is the Replication Crisis?

Yeah, that study took litteraly one tribe which seems specifically like a culture thing where they subjugate a set of males into the caregiver role and then tries to extrapolate that to all non-western cultures. Secondly it's irrelevant to the argument I was trying to make. Being kinder to kin does not make any difference in reproductive success especially if one can't even attempt to reproduce in the first place which I assume these are Eunuchs.
Hint: These people can be very violent in eastern cultures. Consider the Eunuch surpression of the yellow turban rebellion.

Apparently a tribe that resembles humanity's earlier days in the evolutionary stage...isn't representative of evolution.

"being kinder to kin does not make any difference in reproductive success"

Ah yes, kin selection doesn't exist.

[Caraani]

I've been called homophobic many times before even though I'm not, so I guess it can.

"I've been called homophobic many times before even though I'm not" -> "I view homosexuality as a form of mental disease." Yeah, nah, you're a homophobe. Massive one.

[Kowani]

]
They're not

How come humans reproduce heterosexually, then?

...i just gave you a study on the polygenetic portion of the origin of homosexual behaviour and you ask-
okay then
because reproduction isn't the only thing sex does for people

[Hjallvinter]

Yeah, that study took litteraly one tribe which seems specifically like a culture thing where they subjugate a set of males into the caregiver role and then tries to extrapolate that to all non-western cultures. Secondly it's irrelevant to the argument I was trying to make. Being kinder to kin does not make any difference in reproductive success especially if one can't even attempt to reproduce in the first place which I assume these are Eunuchs.
Hint: These people can be very violent in eastern cultures. Consider the Eunuch surpression of the yellow turban rebellion.

Apparently a tribe that resembles humanity's earlier days in the evolutionary stage...isn't representative of evolution.

"being kinder to kin does not make any difference in reproductive success"

Ah yes, kin selection doesn't exist.

Imagine thinking that the social moorings of all societies are the same.

[Palmyrion]

The religious bias of the publisher itself, who writes for the Catholic Medical Association, is religious (it's on the name, duh). I've read it cover to cover, and the religious bias is written all over it.

You read cover to cover an article that takes at least one hour to read in under five minutes? Impressive.

Hey, it's not like this is my first time encountering the article.

[Punished UMN]

There are traditionalist conservative arguments for gay and trans rights.

Oh cool, give me one. Or maybe all of them.

Aside from the oft-used "defence of individual liberty" and "respect of people", of course.

It's been a long time since I've read the now infamous "Erotic Trinity" so I'll probably mangle this explanation, but probably the best argument is that God's desire for human salvation through theosis is reflected through the metaphor of marriage to the Church, and that therefore Christ's love for humankind could be considered eros, and that, from that line of thinking, that marital love between people of the same sex is in line with the icon of marriage within the Church.

Of course, more simply, one could argue that many attitudes against gay people in historical Christianity are innovations and don't necessarily reflect a purity of its teachings, and that there has never been a dogmatic statement by the Church on the issue, so that it's still up in the air.

[Chuukango]

How come humans reproduce heterosexually, then?

...i just gave you a study on the polygenetic portion of the origin of homosexual behaviour and you ask-
okay then
because reproduction isn't the only thing sex does for people

Yes, this exactly.
Simply put doin the dirty and all types of dirty doin can have many benefits to a species (including humans)
(Remember to do safe sex btw)

[Palmyrion]

Apparently a tribe that resembles humanity's earlier days in the evolutionary stage...isn't representative of evolution.

"being kinder to kin does not make any difference in reproductive success"

Ah yes, kin selection doesn't exist.

Imagine thinking that the social moorings of all societies are the same.

A society that doesn't resemble humanity's first evolutionary years can't represent our evolutionary history and development. Cool.

[Disgraces]

I've been called homophobic many times before even though I'm not, so I guess it can.

"I've been called homophobic many times before even though I'm not" -> "I view homosexuality as a form of mental disease." Yeah, nah, you're a homophobe. Massive one.

No, I'm not. Just because you think calling something a mental illness is hateful doesn't make it true.

Further discussing is pointless; I'm going to sleep.

[Ainland]

Firstly, let's be clear on the Christian view of homosexuality and homophobia. Here are some quotes from Pope Francis, the leader of the Catholic church, the largest Christian denomination (by a long way):

"If they [gay priests] accept the Lord and have goodwill, who am I to judge them? They shouldn't be marginalized. The tendency [same-sex attraction] is not the problem... they're our brothers."

"We have to find a way to help that father or that mother to stand by their [LGBT] son or daughter."

“Homosexual people have a right to be in a family. They are children of God and have a right to a family. Nobody should be thrown out or be made miserable over it. What we have to create is a civil union law. That way they are legally covered."

And such sentiments are shared by Christians, with a majority of Catholics in the USA plus every Western European country, supporting gay marriage.

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/11/02/how-catholics-around-the-world-see-same-sex-marriage-homosexuality/

Support is also consistently high among many of (but not all) of the smaller denominations.

There are Christians who believe certain behaviours are sinful, such as certain sexual acts, sex outside of marriage, etc. But this is no reason to judge certain people differently, to make assumptions about people's behaviour, or to judge one particular sin worse than others. Even the most conservative Christian apologists seem to have a clear understanding of this difference.

So there can be absolutely no justification for hate or judgement towards gay people, based on Christianity. If someone is hateful and/or judgemental towards gay people, they must accept they cannot use their Christian faith as a cover.

On a separate point, it is important to understand the difference between certain behaviours and homosexuality. There are plenty of homosexual people living pretty regular lives, in committed marriages or monogamous relationship, working hard, supporting their communities, generally inconspicuous and living responsible lives.

A certain image can be portrayed, either through the media, or through some coverage of LGBT Pride events, which can lead to conflation of homosexuality with certain behaviours. If you oppose the behaviours you see, such as sexual promiscuity, or an irresponsible lifestyle, or overtly sexualised behaviour, it is legitimate to have such opposition. But it is important to remember that these behaviours are found in both heterosexual and homosexual people. Opposing certain behaviours should not be conflated with opposing homosexuality, neither by anyone engaging in the behaviour, nor by anyone opposing it.

Homophobia can not be justified, because homosexuality literally relates to an individual's sexual preference, and tells you absolutely nothing else about them. It is private, and it is totally irrelevant to anyone or anything, other than the thoughts inside their head.

[Kowani]

Oh cool, give me one. Or maybe all of them.

Aside from the oft-used "defence of individual liberty" and "respect of people", of course.

It's been a long time since I've read the now infamous "Erotic Trinity" so I'll probably mangle this explanation, but probably the best argument is that God's desire for human salvation through theosis is reflected through the metaphor of marriage to the Church, and that therefore Christ's love for humankind could be considered eros, and that, from that line of thinking, that marital love between people of the same sex is in line with the icon of marriage within the Church.

yo, you mind if i steal that?

[Punished UMN]

It's been a long time since I've read the now infamous "Erotic Trinity" so I'll probably mangle this explanation, but probably the best argument is that God's desire for human salvation through theosis is reflected through the metaphor of marriage to the Church, and that therefore Christ's love for humankind could be considered eros, and that, from that line of thinking, that marital love between people of the same sex is in line with the icon of marriage within the Church.

yo, you mind if i steal that?

I mean, I got it from what is now one of the most infamous pieces of Christian discourse, but yeah, you can take it lol

[Daarwyrth]

"I've been called homophobic many times before even though I'm not" -> "I view homosexuality as a form of mental disease." Yeah, nah, you're a homophobe. Massive one.

No, I'm not. Just because you think calling something a mental illness is hateful doesn't make it true.

Further discussing is pointless; I'm going to sleep.

And yet I feel violated, disrespected and invalidated when you call homosexuality a mental illness. Your intent doesn't matter, what you say is homophobic, harmful and hateful. It disrespects people who are gay, it invalidates them and it harms them. The fact that you are unwilling to see how your comments could make another feel show a severe lack of empathy and understanding for the other.

[Page]

]
They're not

How come humans reproduce heterosexually, then?

There is no design in evolution. Organisms mutate. If they are not killed or rendered infertile before they get a chance to procreate, that mutation may be passed on.

[Caraani]

]
They're not

How come humans reproduce heterosexually, then?

This must be a troll take. Nobody can say this stuff and be intellectually honest.

[Chuukango]

How come humans reproduce heterosexually, then?

This must be a troll take. Nobody can say this stuff and be intellectually honest.

and yet here we are

[Caraani]

"I've been called homophobic many times before even though I'm not" -> "I view homosexuality as a form of mental disease." Yeah, nah, you're a homophobe. Massive one.

No, I'm not. Just because you think calling something a mental illness is hateful doesn't make it true.

Further discussing is pointless; I'm going to sleep.

You don't get to tell me, a gay dude, who is and isn't a homophobe against me, when you believe I have a mental illness. I suggest you do go to sleep. Maybe you'll wake up wiser and stop being a homophobe.

[Picairn]

and yet here we are

"Homosexuality is a mental illness"
"Homosexuality is immoral"
"Homosexuality preaches pedophilia"

Can someone just kill me already

[Daarwyrth]

How come humans reproduce heterosexually, then?

There is no design in evolution. Organisms mutate. If they are not killed or rendered infertile before they get a chance to procreate, that mutation may be passed on.

Did you just really state that? Because what you're saying is highly problematic, genocidal even.

[Chuukango]

There is no design in evolution. Organisms mutate. If they are not killed or rendered infertile before they get a chance to procreate, that mutation may be passed on.

Did you just really state that? Because what you're saying is highly problematic, genocidal even.

With respect- I don't see what's genocidal in implying that evolution is cold, unforgiving, and purely driven by a need to survive.

[J o J]

Yes. If the God of your religion, an all powerful being, threatens to send you to hell for homosexuality, and this is all you have known since you were a child, then yes, it can be justified because when people genuinely believe in and follow a religion that is anti-gay, they thoroughly believe that if they are homosexual then they will live a life of eternal damnation and suffering in hell. As long as freedom of religion is upheld, then this will coincide with disapproval of homosexuality, as the three largest religions are the three Abrahamic religions, which all denounce homosexuality. And on that note, for those who follow religions that disapprove of homosexuality, it is misguided to call them bigots because they are simply doing as their God commands.

So, If you want tolerance, then start tolerating. Religious “discrimination” isn’t going anywhere anytime soon. Of course, targeted and violent language by these religious folks is bad, and is also disapproved of in at least Christianity’s religious texts. (For Islam I don’t know, they seem to like throwing gays off of buildings.) You can disapprove of something without being belligerent in nature. Remember that baker who refused to make a gay wedding cake on religious grounds? That’s totally acceptable. However, a group of Jesus freaks screaming at and harassing a gay man walking down the street? That’s totally unacceptable. Learn to tell the difference, and remember to hesitate the next time you go on the internet and shame a Christian person for disapproving of homosexuality. They probably just don’t want to go to hell for eternity.

[Daarwyrth]

Did you just really state that? Because what you're saying is highly problematic, genocidal even.

With respect- I don't see what's genocidal in implying that evolution is cold, unforgiving, and purely driven by a need to survive.

It literally calls for turning people infertile or killing them... literally...