If is Homophobia to be against homosexuality?

Question

I am against homosexuality aka I don't believe homosexual couples should adopt, marry (although I do believe they should be given the same tax and other benefits any other sexually active couple would after living together a certain period of time), and I do not believe it is healthy.

That being said, I have gay friends, including a couple very close friends who happen to by homosexual, but that makes no difference to me. They know my views and I (obviously) know they are gay, but I like them just the same.

So am I homophobic just because I take a stance against homosexuality? Or am I not because I am accepting of the people despite my beliefs?

I personally believe I am not homophobic, I just want to know what other people feel.

To whoever made the statement "If you take a stance against a certain race, doesn't that make you a racist?"... to me that isn't a proper comparison. To me, homosexuality could be compared to something like depression. Yes it can be genetic and obviously not a choice, but I am against depression but not those who have it.

Thank you for the good answers that came with explanations of why you feel I am ignorant, prejudice, homophobic or all/none of the above. I am glad there a folks out there that can say it kindly without screaming at me just because of what I believe.

Answer 1

No, Dearest, you are not a Homophobe, although I wish you would change your view on the adoption policy. To be a "homophobe" you would have to speak your views in such a way as in to hurt others. You are simply stating your beliefs.
A homophobe uses every possible chance to let their words and actions (okay, I am generalizing here, but you get the point) harm others. It would be as if their words were fists and they were punching people in the face indiscriminately.
You are not.
As long as you're tolerant, and I thank you for being so. We get so very few of you who dislike homosexuality but still like us. Blessings, Dearest.

Answer 2

You don't sound homophobic, but you do sound prejudice. Loving relationships are healthy for everyone, regardless of your feelings toward homosexuality. Would do you think would be a "healthy" alternative to homosexuality? Remain celibate? Choose to be heterosexual? Can you change your sexual orientation at will? Or do such questions just not concern you?

Do you want to know what really isn't healthy about being a homosexual? It's the bigotry we experience from anti-gay society. Which as you know, that can sometimes include our "friends". And you say that you don't think we should marry or adopt children, but did you know that homosexuals can and do reproduce and have children of their own? What do you think about that? Should there be laws against us reproducing? Should children be taken away from their parents if their parents happen to be gay?

I suggest you do visit PFLAG.ORG. Then maybe you'll learn how to be a true friend to your "close" gay friends.

Answer 3

You are against depression? Sorry? Thats like me saying I'm against cancer! You can't be against an illness. They happen. Yeah you don't want them to, but how can you be against it?

Anyway, I wouldn't say you are homophobic. To me to be homophobic you can't be in the same room as someone who is gay. But can I ask why you don't think its healthy? Physically, mentally and sexually they are in the same risk as straight couples. Why is it unhealthy if they are happy? I'm sorry that you don't believe that homosexual couples should adopt or marry. I'm just glad you don't run any countries. Why shouldn't homosexual couples have the same rights as a straight couple? Thats just discrimination. Not homophobia.

Answer 4

Being homophobic and prejudiced says more about a person than if someone is homosexual.

I have seen plenty of straight couples treat a child badly and abuse them, so why don't we just stop letting everyone have children or adopt children. If a gay couple passes all the same requirements a straight couple would to adopt a baby then GOOD FOR THEM!! As long as a child is getting the love they need, who cares!! And who cares who marries who? How does it immediately impact YOU? We have no right to tell people how to live their lives and how to be happy no matter who they are!

Answer 5

Yes, those are homophobic sentiments. Saying homosexuality is not healthy is placing a moral judgment on an objectively neutral issue. You don't personally know every homosexual in the world, yet you place limits on each one's civil liberties based on your own opinions about their lifestyle. That's prejudice. I'm not talking down to you or anything, but it is what it is.

EDIT:
"Homophobic is an irrational fear of homosexuality"
Well, yes, that's what a phobia is, but that's not at all what the term 'homophobia' has come to mean. It is generally used to mean prejudiced just against homosexuals. However, I agree that the -phobia part should be replaced with a more precise suffix. No one is opposed to homosexuality based on literal fear of homosexuals.

Answer 6

It is a complex subject and you may have over simplified it. Your opinion has two parts, one includes you and the other part includes other people.

Your view for your self is your discretion. You agree with this, repeated, --that you can decide not to put yourself into a gay or lesbian situation. Now using this principle you have introduced, your right to not be in a homosexual relationship, you may need to admit this principle onto the table.

This principle is a persons right to decide something for them self. If your view prevails it must have higher priority than this principle of self determination. You could argue public health or some metric of metal stability. But with this principle on the table you need to show why you feel this way to not be hypocritical.

If you cannot show why this opinion should prevail over the other principle of freedom of action then there may be a boundary violation. Where you opinion is in violation the free discretion of lawful activity. More importantly your own principle of self determination.

In logical actions I think you should defer to other principles that you subscribe to, otherwise this is the definition of hypocrisy. . I know people who do not have many moral principles but they do not pick and chose principles that suit their arguments so I admire them.

If you are allowing one group, say the majority, to dictate what other people, say the minority can not do then this is taking a lot of power over others. Generally this giving up power to the guff of society can lead to the loss of many discretionary actions in time. There are places, poor places, that do not allow people to lend money at interest. Or do not allow women to vote or hold property. It is a slippery slope.

So all you need to do is to come up with the reasons you feel this way about homosexuality and weigh them against the principle of freedom of action and see which is bigger.

Answer 7

My question to you would be why do you think gay people shouldn't adopt or marry but they should have the same tax benefits that others do? When you say those types of things you come off looking like a hater. Do you really believe people should have selective rights? What if someone told you that you weren't entitled to something that others are?

Answer 8

There will be many types of responses to your question. Many people who have prejudices refer to the fact that they have friends among the people against whom they are prejudice to prove they aren't. I don't think you're homophobic. I do think you have some prejudices against gay people. One of my friends' mechanic is a Lesbian, and she and her partner have a daughter, and they have a healthier family than I ever got to have. I can't think of one reason why they should not raise their daughter. I have worked with a few Lesbians who had children, and they have all the same issues with child-rearing as everybody else, and they were doing a bang-up job of raising their kids last I saw them. Why shouldn't people with different sexual orientations have and raise children?

The Bible says sex outside of marriage is wrong. But it doesn't define marriage the same way we do today. Most of the men mentioned in the Old Testament, maybe all of them, had multiple wives. Polygamy was still common in the time of the New Testament. Paul said men with multiple wives shouldn't be church leaders because they had too much family responsibility to take on being a church leader, as well. It wasn't about morality.

Granted it speaks against same-sex coupling. So don't engage in it. You are only responsible for your own decisions about adult consensual sexual behavior. The Bible also speaks against remarriage after divorce, so I don't remarry, and I haven't been sexually active since leaving my ex-. It sucks not to be married, and it sucks not to have a sexual partner. Most of the divorced Christians I know have remarried. I choose not to as an act of obedience to scripture. But I don't condemn those who do remarry. Nor do I condemn homosexual people in committed relationships. It's not mine to judge. The only part of adult consensual sexuality I can even begin judge is my own decisions and behavior.

Answer 9

Ilogical ?? then you definately might desire to vomit once you study Plato and Socrates calliing it disgusting. And right here, Callicles, i might have you ever think approximately the way you will possibly respond if outcomes are pressed upon you, particularly if in the final hotel you're asked, in spite of the fact that if the existence of a gay isn't undesirable, foul, depressing? Or might you project to declare, that they too are happy, in the event that they simply get adequate of what they desire? CALLICLES: Are you no longer ashamed, Socrates, of introducing such matters into the argument? SOCRATES: properly, my high-quality chum, yet am I the introducer of those matters, or he who says with none qualification that all and sundry who experience exhilaration in in spite of the fact that way are happy, and who admits of no massive difference between reliable and undesirable pleasures? and that i might nonetheless ask, in spite of the fact that in case you're saying that exhilaration and reliable are the comparable, or in spite of the fact that if there is a few exhilaration which isn't a reliable? CALLICLES: properly, then, for the sake of consistency, i visit declare that they are the comparable. SOCRATES: you're breaking the unique contract, Callicles, and could now no longer be a passable better half in the quest after reality, in case you're saying what's opposite on your authentic opinion. CALLICLES: Why, that's what you're doing too, Socrates. SOCRATES: Then we are the two doing incorrect. nonetheless, my costly chum, i might ask you to contemplate in spite of the fact that if exhilaration, from in spite of the fact that source derived, is the reliable; for, if this be authentic, then the gruesome outcomes that have been darkly intimated might desire to persist with, and lots of others.

Answer 10

you're not homo"phobic"...you are just operating under the influence of misinformation... there is nothing at all wrong with being homosexual... any more than there is being heterosexual... it is a truly beautiful thing when two people can find love... based on trust, respect, honesty and a true vision of wanting nothing for your mate but happiness...

... unfortunately... as I'm sure you have seen... many straight relationships...and "marriages" are NOT based on these things... ( it's "time" i got married".... "she's pregnant...i have to do my duty"... "we've been together so long..."...)
those are the things to be "morally opposed" to....

I hope you find some better information... changing the world to make it better starts with YOU...