Trey Chambers
United States
Houston
Texas
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb

Can you tell a woman you disagree with her being a woman without being sexist? Can you tell a minority you disagree with them being that minority without being racist? So I'm not sure why people get a pass for sexuality. Tradition, religion, and culture I guess, but at some point all of those things were anti-woman and anti-minority too (and some maybe still are?).

My pastor tried to walk this line this Sunday by going off on a tirade against bigots, saying with should love and respect the LGBT community. But then at the end he tacked on "but just because I disagree with their lifestyle because of what the Bible says doesn't mean I'm a hateful bigot".

I thought he did the best job you could do of saying you should respect someone while at the same time not respecting their core values and lifestyle, but I'm not sure it is even possible.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Claire Anderson
msg tools
Avatar
I think the "I just disagree with your lifestyle" form of soft bigotry is more of a threat to the LGBT community overall than the outright bigots at this point.
23 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Sam I am
United States
Portage
Michigan
flag msg tools
designer
What did I tell you...
badge
NO PICKLE!
Avatar
mb
Did you ask him when he stopped stoning his son for being rebellious?
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Josh
United States
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
You can be polite and respectful in societal terms, while not actually respecting someone. It's kind of the crux of civil society.
15 
 Thumb up
0.02
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Marco Schaub
Switzerland
Thun
Bern
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
rcbevco wrote:
Did you ask him when he stopped stoning his son for being rebellious?


After he was dead I guess...

As for the OP: The argument from some religious folk concerning homosexuality is a bit bizarre. They'll say while being homosexual by itself is not a sin (because you didn't choose to be homosexual), commiting homosexual acts is a sin (because you chose to do them).

So there's a difference to women and race. (You are not being a woman or being a certain color.)

I like what the gay bishop Gene Robinson said: "We are all God's children, but some of us are fabulous."
10 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
lotus dweller
Australia
Melbourne
Victoria
flag msg tools
Avatar
"their lifestyle"
This is where I think the bigotry leaks through.

If "their lifestyle" was pointed at "the music they listen to and the proportion of money they put into investments" then yeah "disagree with their lifestyle" all you want.

But when "their lifestyle" is actually code for "members of the same gender finding each-other sexually attractive" then there is no respect for their sexuality, and by extension, their sense of identity and self.

This state of affairs would be OK if they were serial rapists or paedophiles.

But they're doing about as much good and as much harm as your average heterosexual. And any tension that exists between the lives of LGBT people and what is written in the Bible is best resolved by looking at the tensions between a loving God and how the Bible is being interpreted to make LGBT people wrong.
8 
 Thumb up
0.05
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Adrian Hague
United Kingdom
Bristol
Bristol
flag msg tools
badge
RAWKET LAWNCHA!!!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Shampoo4you wrote:
My pastor tried to walk this line this Sunday by going off on a tirade against bigots, saying with should love and respect the LGBT community. But then at the end he tacked on "but just because I disagree with their lifestyle because of what the Bible says doesn't mean I'm a hateful bigot".


One can certainly disagree, there is no problem with that, it's how that disagreement manifests itself that may/ may not be the problem.

For example I hate cherries. I can't understand people who like/ eat them, but I don't go around stating that they should all be deported/ shot/ etc.
3 
 Thumb up
0.01
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Pontifex Maximus
United States
CA
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Clairebot wrote:
I think the "I just disagree with your lifestyle" form of soft bigotry is more of a threat to the LGBT community overall than the outright bigots at this point.


I am reminded of the quote from Martin Luther King Jr.

Quote:
Shallow understanding from people of goodwill is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection."


http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/45a/060.html
16 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Claire Anderson
msg tools
Avatar
Kumitedad wrote:
Clairebot wrote:
I think the "I just disagree with your lifestyle" form of soft bigotry is more of a threat to the LGBT community overall than the outright bigots at this point.


I am reminded of the quote from Martin Luther King Jr.

Quote:
Shallow understanding from people of goodwill is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection."


http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/45a/060.html


Letter from a Birmingham Jail is one of the greatest things ever written. Everyone should read it like 30 times.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
lotus dweller
Australia
Melbourne
Victoria
flag msg tools
Avatar
Kumitedad wrote:


I am reminded of the quote from Martin Luther King Jr.

Quote:
Shallow understanding from people of goodwill is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection."


http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/45a/060.html


Another approach could be, "I'm struggling to reconcile how I've been taught to interpret the Scriptures with 'a God of love'".
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andy Beaton
Canada
Toronto
Ontario
flag msg tools
badge
I have a cunning plan
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Shampoo4you wrote:

Can you tell a woman you disagree with her being a woman without being sexist? Can you tell a minority you disagree with them being that minority without being racist? So I'm not sure why people get a pass for sexuality. Tradition, religion, and culture I guess, but at some point all of those things were anti-woman and anti-minority too (and some maybe still are?).


As far as I can see, people justify their bigotry by claiming that LGBTQ people have made a choice to be the way they are. Which I guess makes it fair game in their eyes.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Matthew Schoell
United States
Rochester
New York
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
AdrianPHague wrote:
Shampoo4you wrote:
My pastor tried to walk this line this Sunday by going off on a tirade against bigots, saying with should love and respect the LGBT community. But then at the end he tacked on "but just because I disagree with their lifestyle because of what the Bible says doesn't mean I'm a hateful bigot".


One can certainly disagree, there is no problem with that, it's how that disagreement manifests itself that may/ may not be the problem.

For example I hate cherries. I can't understand people who like/ eat them, but I don't go around stating that they should all be deported/ shot/ etc.


Yes, this is the core of it. You are free to disagree, you are not free to create institutional structures that actively or passively prevent those you disagree with from living their lives as they see fit.

One part of why so much anti-LGBT perspective is viewed as bigotry revolves around the issue of harm. The conversation shifted from an unspoken understanding to a public conversation about what the actual harms were. And what the actual harms were or are suggested to be has never had a firm foundation. First came the absurd claims, fear for your children, fear for your pets. Then came the, well also the absurd claims, that homosexuality couldn't result in procreation and thus discrimination was valid. It's all so much vapor, invented harms to curry socially conservative votes.

Another part is that, in America, you are entitled to the religious belief that your religion is the supreme law of laws, and that it defines morality. A fairly reasonable extension, if a selfish and unexamined extension, is that by cleaving to religious belief, you live a moral life where being a bigot is simply not possible. It gets a little circular - I'm obeying my religion, and that's moral, so it's not possible for something that doesn't agree with my religion to be moral, so I'm in the clear, and so on and so forth. I personally, believe this latter point is incompatible with "respectful disagreement" and is in fact bigotry. Simply put, it absolves the believer of having to consider the perspectives of others, self-authorizes them to judge others in their own image, and lauds them for disposing of the humility necessary to simply ask "Do my life experiences provide enough information to dictate how everyone else should live?"

But, it seems unresolvable. It comes down to whether humility with regards to your fellow man is a moral behavior or not. The religious anti-LGBT perspective generally argues that humility shown towards religious rules supercedes all else. It's a self righteous interpretation, and not one that I think is inextricably linked to religion, but it is an interpretation that's present in our discussions.

Edit: that was definitely not "Simply put"
7 
 Thumb up
1.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Under the paving stones, the beach
United Kingdom
Huddersfield
West Yorkshire
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Sort of.

If someone's opposition to LGBT people (whether that's religiously motivated or not) stops at personally being against it with no other ramifications, I'm not that fussed. It's still bigoted, but it doesn't really matter. I don't care that much about what's in people's heads.

The moment that crosses the line into real world ramifications of not believing LGBT people should have equal rights, that's when it becomes active bigotry.
8 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steven Woodcock
United States
Unspecified
Unspecified
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Oh yes indeed.

Nothing's absolute--it's the over-heated rhetoric that drives folks to one extreme or the other, usually.


Ferret
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Claire Anderson
msg tools
Avatar
I think the real test of LGBT acceptance is how one would react if one's own child came out as LGBT to them. The high numbers of homeless LGBT youth makes it clear we have a long way to go in that regard.
20 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mc Jarvis
United States
Arlington
Virginia
flag msg tools
I speak to improve upon the cacophony.
badge
This heart is meant to convince you that I feel.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Shampoo4you wrote:

Can you tell a woman you disagree with her being a woman without being sexist? Can you tell a minority you disagree with them being that minority without being racist? So I'm not sure why people get a pass for sexuality. Tradition, religion, and culture I guess, but at some point all of those things were anti-woman and anti-minority too (and some maybe still are?).

My pastor tried to walk this line this Sunday by going off on a tirade against bigots, saying with should love and respect the LGBT community. But then at the end he tacked on "but just because I disagree with their lifestyle because of what the Bible says doesn't mean I'm a hateful bigot".

I thought he did the best job you could do of saying you should respect someone while at the same time not respecting their core values and lifestyle, but I'm not sure it is even possible.


I disagree with the lifestyle of people who enjoy reality TV. I'm pretty sure I'm not a bigot because of that. But, I also don't advocate laws and regulations which actively interfere with the liberties of such people.

Of course, there is a difference between intolerance and disagreement. Many pastors of churches I've attended don't seem to fully grasp that nuance.
8 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Matthew Schoell
United States
Rochester
New York
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Ferretman wrote:
Oh yes indeed.

Nothing's absolute--it's the over-heated rhetoric that drives folks to one extreme or the other, usually.


Ferret


It's probably the court fights and the legislation.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
James Myers
United States
Redmond
WA
flag msg tools
Mandelbrot/Simurgh hybrid etc etc
badge
I made both of these fractals, hurray!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Clairebot wrote:
I think the "I just disagree with your lifestyle" form of soft bigotry is more of a threat to the LGBT community overall than the outright bigots at this point.


Not sure I agree here -- the out and out emboldened hateful bigots have the power to embolden said soft, hiding bigots into actually doing something politically.

I think it's an ~ecosystem.

The analogy that makes me pause is this -- overt racism is considerably more harmful than subtle racism; modern messaging saying the opposite is... bizarre.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
James Myers
United States
Redmond
WA
flag msg tools
Mandelbrot/Simurgh hybrid etc etc
badge
I made both of these fractals, hurray!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Abiezer Coppe wrote:
Sort of.

If someone's opposition to LGBT people (whether that's religiously motivated or not) stops at personally being against it with no other ramifications, I'm not that fussed. It's still bigoted, but it doesn't really matter. I don't care that much about what's in people's heads.

The moment that crosses the line into real world ramifications of not believing LGBT people should have equal rights, that's when it becomes active bigotry.


Hey, glad to see you in RSP.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ken
United States
Crystal Lake
Illinois
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Shampoo4you wrote:
My pastor tried to walk this line this Sunday by going off on a tirade against bigots, saying with should love and respect the LGBT community. But then at the end he tacked on "but just because I disagree with their lifestyle because of what the Bible says doesn't mean I'm a hateful bigot".


Does your pastor:

1. Treat them differently because of their sexual orientation?

2. Advocate for or support legislation that denies them equal access to the rights and privileges because of their sexual orientation?

3. Apply stereotypes to them, probably in a damaging way, as a result of their sexual orientation?

4. Change his behavior towards an individual when he learns that their sexual orientation wasn't what he thought it was?

I think if you aren't doing things like that (and you could probably grow the list), you aren't a bigot. Bigotry is behavior, not belief. I mean, I'm an agnostic and don't agree with lots of things that are core to different religions. Does that make me bigoted against religions because I think they're wrong about something or some group of things?

I think the problem with your formulation is actually the "anti-" bit. It's possible to disagree with beliefs, choices, behaviors, etc. without being "anti-" whatever that is. It's sort of like polls that ask questions but don't ask whether or not the issue is important enough to swing someone's vote or whether that issue is more or less important than others.

Being "anti-LGBTQ" is more than disagreeing with the lifestyle for some reason, if you ask me. It's actually advocating against it in material ways. And I've known priests, deacons, pastors, monks, etc. who certainly did not condone LGBTQ as a lifestyle, but would not advocate against it, particularly in a legal sense. If they're doing that, are they bigoted? Or do they just have different principles that they proceed from?
9 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Trey Chambers
United States
Houston
Texas
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
McJarvis wrote:
Shampoo4you wrote:

Can you tell a woman you disagree with her being a woman without being sexist? Can you tell a minority you disagree with them being that minority without being racist? So I'm not sure why people get a pass for sexuality. Tradition, religion, and culture I guess, but at some point all of those things were anti-woman and anti-minority too (and some maybe still are?).

My pastor tried to walk this line this Sunday by going off on a tirade against bigots, saying with should love and respect the LGBT community. But then at the end he tacked on "but just because I disagree with their lifestyle because of what the Bible says doesn't mean I'm a hateful bigot".

I thought he did the best job you could do of saying you should respect someone while at the same time not respecting their core values and lifestyle, but I'm not sure it is even possible.


I disagree with the lifestyle of people who enjoy reality TV. I'm pretty sure I'm not a bigot because of that. But, I also don't advocate laws and regulations which actively interfere with the liberties of such people.

Of course, there is a difference between intolerance and disagreement. Many pastors of churches I've attended don't seem to fully grasp that nuance.


Ehhhhh watching reality TV is not quite the same thing. Which is why I used the example of the woman and the minority.

Your example of reality TV is perfectly acceptable. But replace it with something more serious and it's very different.

"I disagree with the lifestyle of people who are black. I'm pretty sure I'm not a bigot because of that. But, I also don't advocate laws and regulations which actively interfere with the liberties of such people."

So you'd be saying you're anti-black, but you just wouldn't interfere with them on a legislative level? The best that would get you is "semi-tolerant racist".
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andy Leighton
England
Peterborough
Unspecified
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Terwox wrote:
Clairebot wrote:
I think the "I just disagree with your lifestyle" form of soft bigotry is more of a threat to the LGBT community overall than the outright bigots at this point.


Not sure I agree here -- the out and out emboldened hateful bigots have the power to embolden said soft, hiding bigots into actually doing something politically.

I think it's an ~ecosystem.

Although it is one that works in all kinds of subtle ways. The 'hard bigots' can draw on unspoken support, rightly or wrongly, from the softs. If they see societal disapproval for their targets, or even widespread noisy disapproval from the softs they are emboldened to attack more targets and increase the severity of their attacks. We saw this just after the Brexit referendum when the number of hate crimes went up.
9 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Trey Chambers
United States
Houston
Texas
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
perfalbion wrote:
Shampoo4you wrote:
My pastor tried to walk this line this Sunday by going off on a tirade against bigots, saying with should love and respect the LGBT community. But then at the end he tacked on "but just because I disagree with their lifestyle because of what the Bible says doesn't mean I'm a hateful bigot".


Does your pastor:

1. Treat them differently because of their sexual orientation?

2. Advocate for or support legislation that denies them equal access to the rights and privileges because of their sexual orientation?

3. Apply stereotypes to them, probably in a damaging way, as a result of their sexual orientation?

4. Change his behavior towards an individual when he learns that their sexual orientation wasn't what he thought it was?

I think if you aren't doing things like that (and you could probably grow the list), you aren't a bigot. Bigotry is behavior, not belief. I mean, I'm an agnostic and don't agree with lots of things that are core to different religions. Does that make me bigoted against religions because I think they're wrong about something or some group of things?

I think the problem with your formulation is actually the "anti-" bit. It's possible to disagree with beliefs, choices, behaviors, etc. without being "anti-" whatever that is. It's sort of like polls that ask questions but don't ask whether or not the issue is important enough to swing someone's vote or whether that issue is more or less important than others.

Being "anti-LGBTQ" is more than disagreeing with the lifestyle for some reason, if you ask me. It's actually advocating against it in material ways. And I've known priests, deacons, pastors, monks, etc. who certainly did not condone LGBTQ as a lifestyle, but would not advocate against it, particularly in a legal sense. If they're doing that, are they bigoted? Or do they just have different principles that they proceed from?


Again, I think being LGBT is different from joining a religion or watching reality TV, the main difference is the latter are CHOICES. So you can disagree with someone's choice and still be respectful. I'm not sure you can disagree with WHO SOMEONE IS and not be a bigot.

I know there are some who say being LGBT is a choice, and for them that's their justification. Without that rationalization (which is a lie), I don't see how you justify it.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mc Jarvis
United States
Arlington
Virginia
flag msg tools
I speak to improve upon the cacophony.
badge
This heart is meant to convince you that I feel.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Shampoo4you wrote:
McJarvis wrote:
Shampoo4you wrote:

Can you tell a woman you disagree with her being a woman without being sexist? Can you tell a minority you disagree with them being that minority without being racist? So I'm not sure why people get a pass for sexuality. Tradition, religion, and culture I guess, but at some point all of those things were anti-woman and anti-minority too (and some maybe still are?).

My pastor tried to walk this line this Sunday by going off on a tirade against bigots, saying with should love and respect the LGBT community. But then at the end he tacked on "but just because I disagree with their lifestyle because of what the Bible says doesn't mean I'm a hateful bigot".

I thought he did the best job you could do of saying you should respect someone while at the same time not respecting their core values and lifestyle, but I'm not sure it is even possible.


I disagree with the lifestyle of people who enjoy reality TV. I'm pretty sure I'm not a bigot because of that. But, I also don't advocate laws and regulations which actively interfere with the liberties of such people.

Of course, there is a difference between intolerance and disagreement. Many pastors of churches I've attended don't seem to fully grasp that nuance.


Ehhhhh watching reality TV is not quite the same thing. Which is why I used the example of the woman and the minority.

Your example of reality TV is perfectly acceptable. But replace it with something more serious and it's very different.

"I disagree with the lifestyle of people who are black. I'm pretty sure I'm not a bigot because of that. But, I also don't advocate laws and regulations which actively interfere with the liberties of such people."

So you'd be saying you're anti-black, but you just wouldn't interfere with them on a legislative level? The best that would get you is "semi-tolerant racist".


Because being black isn't a lifestyle, but watching certain kinds of tv is. My original statement is an appropriate one because the religious argument against homosexuality has to do with a specific act(sex), and my argument against reality-tv-watchers is about a specific act (watching vapid television that will erode your mind and soul)

Sure, there is the "Born this way vs lifestyle" argument, but most pastors will hold that being gay is a lifestyle choice. So, the TV comparison is a valid one for their perspective. (and illuminates that they are not in simple disagreement with the "lifestyle choice")

edit->

I realize I may have obscured my point by not being clear. When I talk to other christians about this issue, they tend to come along these lines of reasoning:
reasoning McJarvis hears at church wrote:

* Being attracted to someone of the same sex isn't a sin(but having sex with them is)
* We hate the sinner, not the sin
* Therefore, it's not bigoted to hold a political view opposing it. We're opposing an action(sex in a context) rather than the way someone is born.



My concern with this line of reasoning is there are many activities I disapprove of as a christian (premarital sex, praying to other gods, etc, etc)---- but I also don't advocate discriminatory laws against people who do such things, or laws which interfere with their desire to do such things. So I think there is clearly something different between the way most conservatives treat LGBT issues and other morality issues, and that difference is where the bigotry lies.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Khalid Shabazz
United States
NYC
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
Depends on what "their lifestyle" means.

If it literally means "living as a lesbian, gay, bisexual or transsexual person", then no, you can't disrespect that while at the same time claiming you respect them.

But I assume "their lifestyle" refers to same sex love making, the male kind of which is explicitly forbidden in the old Testament. So yeah, I think you can respect a person without approving of everything they do in the bedroom. But that should really be nobody's concern. (Given consent.)
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5  Next »  [23] | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.