The point of that cliche is to illustrate the fact that engaging in the same behavior as someone makes you essentially the same as that person.You've heard the only saying about not wallowing in the mud with a pig, right? The pig likes it, but you both get dirty?
For it to be analogous in this circumstance, those who are involved in the pile-on would have to be engaging in incompetent dishonesty as well. A more analogous example would be if the person is not wallowing in the mud with the pig, but instead attempting to capture said pig in order to humanely slaughter it so that they can provide a ham dinner for the less fortunate.
The pig wrangler will still get dirty, but for the right reasons.
Normal - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary1: perpendicular; especially : perpendicular to a tangent at a point of tangency
2 a : according with, constituting, or not deviating from a norm, rule, or principle b : conforming to a type, standard, or regular pattern
3 : occurring naturally <normal immunity>
4 a : of, relating to, or characterized by average intelligence or development b : free from mental disorder : sane
5 of a solution : having a concentration of one gram equivalent of solute per liter b : containing neither basic hydroxyl nor acid hydrogen <normal silver phosphate> c : not associated <normal molecules> d : having a straight-chain structure <normal butyl alcohol>
6 of a subgroup : having the property that every coset produced by operating on the left by a given element is equal to the coset produced by operating on the right by the same element
7 : relating to, involving, or being a normal curve or normal distribution <normal approximation to the binomial distribution>
8 of a matrix : having the property of commutativity under multiplication by the transpose of the matrix each of whose elements is a conjugate complex number with respect to the corresponding element of the given matrix
Of those, only 2 and 3 can realistically be used in the context of your question.
If one uses definition 2, homosexuality is not normal, but neither is high intellect.
If one uses definition 3, then it is normal since it does occur naturally (unless all gay people are secretly robots, of course.).
It's a very simple question.
The problem with the "homosexuality is/is not normal" debate is that only an idiot assumes normal = good, abnormal = bad.
But since it is undeniably normal to be an idiot (using both of the aforementioned definitions), lots of people think that way. Which is something I would argue is bad, thus giving a very pointed example of the veracity of the argument that normal =/= good.
Questions on a loop require answers on a loop
I for one am tired of looping answers
My final loop will be, "count me out".
When a crime is ignored ~ it becomes flagrant;
When a crime is rewarded ~ it becomes epidemic:
No Amnesty No Exception
I have to do it.. it just fits so well here.
Law Enforcement Against Prohibition
Drugs are bad, prohibition is worse