How to accept people who don't accept homosexuality

[RCampbell]

Step 1. Ignore em
Step 2. If they can't deal with it.. Screw em
Step 3. Move On
If People Would ONLY see that we "The LGBT Community" Aren't idiots..

[Buzzer]

This is something that has been on my mind a lot lately. I'm not insecure about my gayness, as in whether it's right or wrong. However I am insecure about people who do not accept homosexuality, or who hold negative views of it. I just have a really tough time accepting that some people, although non-violent, and perhaps even polite about it, are against it.

IDK. Does anyone else struggle with accepting other views? I find it really frustrating and insensitive, but maybe I'm the one being insensitive. pffft lawd IDK.

And I'm not talking about stuff like Hitler, or the Westburo Baptist Church, I'm talking about every day folk who just happen to disapprove or disagree.

It's not really something you can... disagree with, well you can disagree with pursuing your sexuality, but not having it.

IDK. Maybe I'm getting at nothing here, but I feel restless about it. :/

I agree with you. It doesn't make sense when people who are not "rabid homophobes" and do not treat gay people badly still insist on maintaining a stance of "but I don't agree with/approve of it."

Ultimately no matter how eloquently argued -- I was once in a very long debate on facebook with a Christian couple who were insisting that they see it as wrong but that all humans are born with original sin, and the sin of homosexuality is no greater or lesser than the sin into which all humans are born and exist -- this ultimately still always comes down to they are reserving the right to consider you to be immoral, or engaging in immoral behavior, simply by being what you are.

So I consider these people free to not accept it, or approve of it, or "agree with it", and I am free to consider that a form of bigotry too often falsely hidden under the guide of freedom of opinion, thought, or belief, or freedom of religion, or freedom of speech. Because to me it is no different than if I were to say I do not "approve" of them being blue-eyed, heterosexual, into Thai food or lactose intolerant. It is not something they can change about themselves other than through artificial effort and nothing about any of those things can ever negatively impact me, other people, or society in general. So if I were to insist on hanging onto a "belief" that being that way is wrong, I am simply being a judgmental ass.

That's how I see it. I don't make room for these people in my life.

[driftwood]

So I consider these people free to not accept it, or approve of it, or "agree with it", and I am free to consider that a form of bigotry too often falsely hidden under the guide of freedom of opinion, thought, or belief, or freedom of religion, or freedom of speech. Because to me it is no different than if I were to say I do not "approve" of them being blue-eyed, heterosexual, into Thai food or lactose intolerant. It is not something they can change about themselves other than through artificial effort and nothing about any of those things can ever negatively impact me, other people, or society in general. So if I were to insist on hanging onto a "belief" that being that way is wrong, I am simply being a judgmental ass.

Bigotry implies intolerance. If someone treats gay people the same as everyone else, and feels that gay people have the same rights as everyone else, they are being tolerant. If they say that it's immoral, they're referring to the action. Presumably they think that gay people should just abstain. Or maybe force themselves to marry and have sex with someone they don't feel attracted to. Of course there are some (however few) that live that way. And there are also those who yield to their desires, but believe they'll suffer in hell because of it. There's a thread out there under the headline "Is it possible to not follow your sexuality?" that's about this very topic.

Most of us don't find any of that to be acceptable.

People don't have a choice what color their eyes are (analogous to being gay), but if you believed we have a moral obligation to drink milk you might tell them to drink the milk and suffer the consequences (analogous to abstaining from gay sex).

Unreasonable? Yeah, but that's religion.

[Buzzer]

Bigotry implies intolerance. If someone treats gay people the same as everyone else, and feels that gay people have the same rights as everyone else, they are being tolerant. If they say that it's immoral, they're referring to the action. Presumably they think that gay people should just abstain. Or maybe force themselves to marry and have sex with someone they don't feel attracted to. Of course there are some (however few) that live that way. And of course there are also those who yield to their desires, but believe they'll suffer in hell because of it.

Most of us don't find any of that to be acceptable.

People don't have a choice what color their eyes are (analogous to being gay), but if you believed we have a moral obligation to drink milk you might tell them to drink the milk and suffer the consequences (analogous to abstaining from gay sex).

Unreasonable? Yeah, but that's religion.

Someone who "doesn't approve of being gay" is like saying: "I don't agree with your natural craving to drink milk, even if you didn't choose it, and even if you never actually drink milk."

They are not judging you for what you do but for something inherent to yourself that you cannot change or choose.

Also toleration is not mutually exclusive with personal bigotry, I guess unless you believe that after things like the Civil Rights Movement or school integration racism all instantly went away overnight and people were no longer bigoted.

[loserguy]

The answer is you don't!
If you have to communicate then simply pass yourself if not then ignoring someone is the hardest form of punishment and if they want to get on with you ignoring them may think about the consequences of their actions?
Who any person sleeps with is his own business, straight or gay and an individual's persuasion is also his own business. Why, therefore do people feel the need to look down their noses at others because of it? IGNORANCE

[Pix]

Why, therefore do people feel the need to look down their noses at others because of it?

I've noticed that many of the biggest opponents of gays tend to have their own secrets that get exposed, like adultery, masturbation when they think it's a sin, etc. One guy who thought he should be given a pass for manslaughter after he saw 2 women kissing (though they'd been joking) was himself on the sex registry for exposing himself to underage girls (and had a criminal record in other things) and that seems common to me. In short, it makes them feel better about themselves. Of course being gay isn't the same as being an adulterer or child molester but in their own twisted minds (especially when their preferred religious text condemns homosexuality more than adultery--at least in case of males, and even in the case of females Jesus spoke up in defense of one, but never one who took part in gay sex. and Sodom would've been spared had the men gang raped virgin girls instead of trying to rape male angels) homosexuality is worse so they don't feel so bad by comparing themselves to gays and condemning them.

I think a similar psychological process happens when like gay guys talk about how wrong it is to be too feminine or otherwise obvious, it makes them feel less bad about being who they are because they adopted some of the antigay bigotry if even at a subconscious level.