Imagine sexual discrimination reversed – gay is the norm and straight people are threatening the sanctity of marriage. Picture coming of age in a family vehemently against rights for straight couples. They speak at rallies against the dangers of opposite-sex marriage. Social norms are flipped on their ears, and extreme role reversal ensues.
While I understand the goal they are trying to achieve, I am puzzled by the approach taken. Is it possible that in order to present/explain a certain ideological position one has to resort to a preposterous scenario and ask the public to accept an absurd situation? Can't they come up with better arguments and methods and a more realistic/convincing situation?
So, here I ask some questions, for my own clarification, but in the hope that others will get clearer ideas too.
1) With regards to the play, how is it ever physically possible to have a society in which homosexuality is the norm? How would it sustain itself in terms of reproduction? What would a family look like? What does this irrationality say about the argument?
2) Why is opposition to the sanctioning of a homosexual life style seen as a phobia? Why are we expected to accept the fact that we are afraid of something (someone?) simply because we do not accept it? Are vegetarians afraid of meat? By the way, remember that the Catholic Church is all in favour of support and acceptance of people with homosexual tendencies. She only rejects the notion that a homosexual lifestyle is a positive thing. If people do not see the difference between these two concepts, I think that it's because of their faulty thinking: what do you think?
3) Should I become homophobic as I hear of more and more aggressive behaviour by homosexual activists against those who oppose their views? I am not afraid of homosexuals (I have many gay friends), but I am afraid of violent and bullying people. Is that the goal? Making me afraid and hence phobic?
1) I agree. It is physically impossible and irrational. But their propaganda says if you don't agree with their view, then you are a bigot. That ends the conversation since people don't want to be labeled a bigot. That is not rational either, or fair.
ReplyDelete2) I'm not sure why it is seen as a phobia. I'm neither scared nor threatened nor angry. I simply disagree with their lifestyle. Again I think they like to label it a phobia because people hate to be called homophobic or prejudiced...so it's an effective tool for causing mass acceptance. Fear.
What irritates me the most about it is that they get very angry with people who violently or vehmently disagree with them, yet they use the same poor choice of tactics and underhanded behaviour. I don't condone either side; both accomplish nothing.
3) Yeah the whole thing is a gong show. I don't like being bullied into agreeing with abnormal behaviour, just to avoid being viewed as a bigot. Nor will I back down on my opinion through fear tactics. I am a realist. Sometimes the truth isn't nice.
Oh and I too have gay and bisexual friends. I do not discuss my beliefs with them, it is a pointless arguement; plus it's not my problem. I believe their choice is between them and God in the end, no matter how they justify it to me or anyone else.
Personally this whole situation reminds me of Isaiah 5:
20Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!
21Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight!