Anonymous wrote:Cites please, or it didn't happen. My casual understanding of the research is that there is a correlation between outspoken homophobia and inate desires.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People who are "against homosexuality" are really just simple thinkers.

They fall lower on the scale of moral development. They can't think past their own experience in deciding what is right/wrong. "I am not gay. I am good. So gay must be bad." Also, even more commonly, they don't think at all. "My preacher/imam/rabbi says gay is bad, so gay is bad."

Not surprisingly, when someone they love/respect comes out as gay, their view changes. "Bob is good. I like Bob. Bob is gay. Gay must be okay."

OP -- do you know/love anyone who is gay?

I used to think this and I am not sure that this is the case. I believe that some people have an innate aversion to the idea (mostly men), and that aversion probably existed before the Bible. However, I think that few people would have fallen into that category. It is no different than people who have a natural aversion to eating meat (from childhood), or those who dislike touchy people.
Also, there are some religious contemplative people who still see homosexuality as morally wrong. They did not go through the simple thought process that you describe.

I think most homophobic people are just scared that if they accept homosexuality, they may have to acknowledge their own repressed sexual fantasies.

That has actually proven to be untrue. I know that it is the thinking in many circles, but some studies have shown that most people who have an aversion to homosexuality are not homosexuals.

Cites please, or it didn't happen. My casual understanding of the research is that there is a correlation between outspoken homophobia and inate desires.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People who are "against homosexuality" are really just simple thinkers.

They fall lower on the scale of moral development. They can't think past their own experience in deciding what is right/wrong. "I am not gay. I am good. So gay must be bad." Also, even more commonly, they don't think at all. "My preacher/imam/rabbi says gay is bad, so gay is bad."

Not surprisingly, when someone they love/respect comes out as gay, their view changes. "Bob is good. I like Bob. Bob is gay. Gay must be okay."

OP -- do you know/love anyone who is gay?

I used to think this and I am not sure that this is the case. I believe that some people have an innate aversion to the idea (mostly men), and that aversion probably existed before the Bible. However, I think that few people would have fallen into that category. It is no different than people who have a natural aversion to eating meat (from childhood), or those who dislike touchy people.
Also, there are some religious contemplative people who still see homosexuality as morally wrong. They did not go through the simple thought process that you describe.

I think most homophobic people are just scared that if they accept homosexuality, they may have to acknowledge their own repressed sexual fantasies.

That has actually proven to be untrue. I know that it is the thinking in many circles, but some studies have shown that most people who have an aversion to homosexuality are not homosexuals.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People who are "against homosexuality" are really just simple thinkers.

They fall lower on the scale of moral development. They can't think past their own experience in deciding what is right/wrong. "I am not gay. I am good. So gay must be bad." Also, even more commonly, they don't think at all. "My preacher/imam/rabbi says gay is bad, so gay is bad."

Not surprisingly, when someone they love/respect comes out as gay, their view changes. "Bob is good. I like Bob. Bob is gay. Gay must be okay."

OP -- do you know/love anyone who is gay?

I used to think this and I am not sure that this is the case. I believe that some people have an innate aversion to the idea (mostly men), and that aversion probably existed before the Bible. However, I think that few people would have fallen into that category. It is no different than people who have a natural aversion to eating meat (from childhood), or those who dislike touchy people.
Also, there are some religious contemplative people who still see homosexuality as morally wrong. They did not go through the simple thought process that you describe.

I think most homophobic people are just scared that if they accept homosexuality, they may have to acknowledge their own repressed sexual fantasies.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People who are "against homosexuality" are really just simple thinkers.

They fall lower on the scale of moral development. They can't think past their own experience in deciding what is right/wrong. "I am not gay. I am good. So gay must be bad." Also, even more commonly, they don't think at all. "My preacher/imam/rabbi says gay is bad, so gay is bad."

Not surprisingly, when someone they love/respect comes out as gay, their view changes. "Bob is good. I like Bob. Bob is gay. Gay must be okay."

OP -- do you know/love anyone who is gay?

I used to think this and I am not sure that this is the case. I believe that some people have an innate aversion to the idea (mostly men), and that aversion probably existed before the Bible. However, I think that few people would have fallen into that category. It is no different than people who have a natural aversion to eating meat (from childhood), or those who dislike touchy people.
Also, there are some religious contemplative people who still see homosexuality as morally wrong. They did not go through the simple thought process that you describe.

Anonymous wrote:People who are "against homosexuality" are really just simple thinkers.

They fall lower on the scale of moral development. They can't think past their own experience in deciding what is right/wrong. "I am not gay. I am good. So gay must be bad." Also, even more commonly, they don't think at all. "My preacher/imam/rabbi says gay is bad, so gay is bad."

Not surprisingly, when someone they love/respect comes out as gay, their view changes. "Bob is good. I like Bob. Bob is gay. Gay must be okay."

OP -- do you know/love anyone who is gay?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ever noticed how nobody in their right mind shouts pro homosexual views when they are on their deathbed? I do. Talk your trash when you are dying and make sure your children bow at the alter of anal sex right before they die,then I will give you props.

Oh well. And just as "genetically wrong" was being so sensibly argued...

It's not an argument, it's a statement. When you die, you are on your own. The opinions of the NY Times and the gay pride parade thong float members no longer hold any weight. Talking b.s. when you feel safe and in control has no meaning. I would like to see a poll taken among terminal adult patients as to their opinion on the santification of gay marriage.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the 'wrong' aspect may stem from the fact that two men or two women do not have genitals that are designed for each other. Obviously they can improvise but the penis and vagina were designed to sexually fit together. Additionally two men or two women can't bear children without the participation of a person of a member of the opposite sex. Therefore the natural design of the body both for pleasure and procreation was for man/woman.

Homosexuality can be awkward for children. DD was in class in elementary school with a girl who was crushing on her. Tried to kiss her, stroke her, said was going to marry her. DD is straight .

Bullshit.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the 'wrong' aspect may stem from the fact that two men or two women do not have genitals that are designed for each other. Obviously they can improvise but the penis and vagina were designed to sexually fit together. Additionally two men or two women can't bear children without the participation of a person of a member of the opposite sex. Therefore the natural design of the body both for pleasure and procreation was for man/woman.

Homosexuality can be awkward for children. DD was in class in elementary school with a girl who was crushing on her. Tried to kiss her, stroke her, said was going to marry her. DD is straight .

Anonymous wrote:I think the 'wrong' aspect may stem from the fact that two men or two women do not have genitals that are designed for each other. Obviously they can improvise but the penis and vagina were designed to sexually fit together. Additionally two men or two women can't bear children without the participation of a person of a member of the opposite sex. Therefore the natural design of the body both for pleasure and procreation was for man/woman.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ever noticed how nobody in their right mind shouts pro homosexual views when they are on their deathbed? I do. Talk your trash when you are dying and make sure your children bow at the alter of anal sex right before they die,then I will give you props.

Oh well. And just as "genetically wrong" was being so sensibly argued...

Anonymous wrote:Ever noticed how nobody in their right mind shouts pro homosexual views when they are on their deathbed? I do. Talk your trash when you are dying and make sure your children bow at the alter of anal sex right before they die,then I will give you props.

Anonymous wrote:Ever noticed how nobody in their right mind shouts pro homosexual views when they are on their deathbed? I do. Talk your trash when you are dying and make sure your children bow at the alter of anal sex right before they die,then I will give you props.