View Poll Results: If a person smears a Christian as a "homophobe," should that person returh fire?

Voters
30. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes. If they call you a homophobe you should be able to comment on their morals/etc.

    5 16.67%
  • No, they shouldn't return fire because they deserve it.

    1 3.33%
  • Simply ignore the smears and continue debating.

    3 10.00%
  • How about we show some respect and NOT smear eachother?

    16 53.33%
  • Don't know/Other

    5 16.67%
Page 3 of 23 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 222

Thread: Slander in Politics

  1. #21
    Global Moderator
    Bodhidarma approves bigly
    Andalublue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Granada, España
    Last Seen
    11-29-17 @ 01:21 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    26,111

    Re: Slander in Politics

    Quote Originally Posted by Wake View Post
    "Homophobe" implies irrational fear/contempt/hatred for homosexuals. Christians who view homosexuality as a sin have none of those ill feeling towards homosexuals.
    In my experience some most certainly do. Having said that, I try to be careful not to call someone using homophobic language a 'homophobe', but to point out when an argument, inference or insult is homophobic. Not everyone who makes a homophobic/racist/bigotted comment is, ergo a homophobe/racist/bigot. A problem with this is that those making such comments, on having it pointed out to them, often take that as meaning you are calling them a homophobe etc.

    Should I stop pointing out when hate speech is being used, whether intentionally or, more often, by mistake? I certainly don't intend to.
    "The crisis will end when fear changes sides" - Pablo Iglesias Turrión

    "Austerity is used as a cover to reconfigure society and increase inequality and injustice." - Jeremy Corbyn

  2. #22
    Dorset Patriot
    Wessexman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Sydney, Australia(but my heart is back in Dorset.)
    Last Seen
    10-17-17 @ 04:17 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    8,468

    Re: Slander in Politics

    The term homophobe is a pseudo-psychoanalytical attempt to diagnose one's opponent. It is sinister and silly.
    "It is written in the eternal constitution that men of intemperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge their fetters." - Edmund Burke

  3. #23
    Global Moderator
    Bodhidarma approves bigly
    Andalublue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Granada, España
    Last Seen
    11-29-17 @ 01:21 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    26,111

    Re: Slander in Politics

    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    The term homophobe is a pseudo-psychoanalytical attempt to diagnose one's opponent. It is sinister and silly.
    We've had this out before, and recently. It's a noun deriving from another noun, 'homophobia' and along with the adjective 'homophobic' in modern standard English (American, British or World) means, 'extreme and irrational dislike of homosexuals'. It means that irrespective of its origins. 'Homophobic' I repeat, is an adjective, not a diagnosis. Of course if you'd like to cite dictionary definitions that prove me wrong, be my guest.
    "The crisis will end when fear changes sides" - Pablo Iglesias Turrión

    "Austerity is used as a cover to reconfigure society and increase inequality and injustice." - Jeremy Corbyn

  4. #24
    Dorset Patriot
    Wessexman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Sydney, Australia(but my heart is back in Dorset.)
    Last Seen
    10-17-17 @ 04:17 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    8,468

    Re: Slander in Politics

    That ignores its etymology completely. We don't have to accept neologisms just because they are served up to us.

    It was coined by George Weinburg, a 'psychotherapist';

    http://www.glbtq.com/social-sciences/homophobia.html

    Though I do not think that we would need quite as direct a link as this to see that the term has obvious links to pseudo-psychoanalytical conceptions; claiming a phobia, or psychiatric disorder, as an attempt to diagnose one's opponents.

    You appear to simply be arguing that because the word has become popular we must accept it. I disagree. I will not accept it and will point out its origin and flaws.
    Last edited by Wessexman; 01-20-12 at 09:15 AM.
    "It is written in the eternal constitution that men of intemperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge their fetters." - Edmund Burke

  5. #25
    Noblesse oblige
    Ockham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    New Jersey
    Last Seen
    01-27-17 @ 07:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    23,909
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Slander in Politics

    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    That ignores its etymology completely. We don't have to accept neologisms just because they are served up to us.
    No we do not, but 99% of people don't know what etymology is, or a neologism. They are served because the assumption is the majority of people are ignorant - therefore if there is any way to stir them and get them to move to your side, or conversely to move them away from someone else by using inappropriate and even incorrect language or even styles of language, then it's an effective tactic.
    “I think if Thomas Jefferson were looking down, the author of the Bill of Rights, on what’s being proposed here, he’d agree with it. He would agree that the First Amendment cannot be absolute.” - Chuck Schumer (D). Yet, Madison and Mason wrote the Bill of Rights, according to Sheila Jackson Lee, 400 years ago. Yup, it's a fact.


  6. #26
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    02-06-12 @ 11:11 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    240

    Re: Slander in Politics

    Quote Originally Posted by Wake View Post
    I have a few questions.

    I notice that there are people who are more socially-liberal who, continuously, insult the more socially-conservative for their stances on social issues.

    This is what I ask: If a liberal slanders a Christian by calling him/her a "homophobe/whatever," why should that person not turn around and insult the person's degenerate moral character?

    What do we do about this? Why is it that those more on the left are allowed to smear people with epithets of "racist/homophobe/bigot/etc?"

    Why shouldn't those being smeared with those malicious insults not turn around and at least chastise them on their moral degeneracy?

    Or, better yet, why can't we seem to get people [all people] to stop smearing/insulting eachother?
    It's not Christ-like to return insults. Better to just testify of the Savior and move on.

  7. #27
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Goldsboro,PA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 03:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    5,595
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Slander in Politics

    This "smearing occurs on both sides, and it disgusts me and others.
    The sensationalists media helps not. I am with Newt Gingrich on this one ! That so-called newsman deserved to be chewed out !
    I'd say that many of our people and our media have a lot of growing up to do.

  8. #28
    Global Moderator
    Bodhidarma approves bigly
    Andalublue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Granada, España
    Last Seen
    11-29-17 @ 01:21 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    26,111

    Re: Slander in Politics

    Quote Originally Posted by Ockham View Post
    No we do not, but 99% of people don't know what etymology is, or a neologism. They are served because the assumption is the majority of people are ignorant - therefore if there is any way to stir them and get them to move to your side, or conversely to move them away from someone else by using inappropriate and even incorrect language or even styles of language, then it's an effective tactic.
    I couldn't quite work out whether you agree or disagree with Wessexman's restriction of the use of the word to its original psychoanalytic meaning.

    One can use the word(s) beginning 'homophob-' in its original, psychoanalytical sense, of course. A statement such as: "According to the psychiatric report on the accused, his violent behaviour may be related to his deep seated homophobia. The victim, he says, made sexual advances and he reacted in an inappropriately violent manner." The wider and more common use of the word in the modern vernacular, and attested to by its modern and universal dictionary definitions, suggests that the meaning has changed.
    "The crisis will end when fear changes sides" - Pablo Iglesias Turrión

    "Austerity is used as a cover to reconfigure society and increase inequality and injustice." - Jeremy Corbyn

  9. #29
    Noblesse oblige
    Ockham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    New Jersey
    Last Seen
    01-27-17 @ 07:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    23,909
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Slander in Politics

    Quote Originally Posted by Andalublue View Post
    I couldn't quite work out whether you agree or disagree with Wessexman's restriction of the use of the word to its original psychoanalytic meaning.

    One can use the word(s) beginning 'homophob-' in its original, psychoanalytical sense, of course. A statement such as: "According to the psychiatric report on the accused, his violent behaviour may be related to his deep seated homophobia. The victim, he says, made sexual advances and he reacted in an inappropriately violent manner." The wider and more common use of the word in the modern vernacular, and attested to by its modern and universal dictionary definitions, suggests that the meaning has changed.
    I didn't want to show my agreement or disagreement in this case - but the larger focus isn't about the psychoanalytical meaning - that's a red herring. The majority of people use a modern vernacular colloquially, not via a definition. Rap music, local cultural norms, television, popular culture.... all of these meanings and sub-meaning and slangs have much more to do with how we process language than the actual etymology of words. Even highly educated and professional are ignorant of their own language beyond what they learned in schools. I think we're looking at the issue the wrong way. We should be looking at how these words are used culturally and socially to understand the meaning and not in the modern dictionary definitions.
    “I think if Thomas Jefferson were looking down, the author of the Bill of Rights, on what’s being proposed here, he’d agree with it. He would agree that the First Amendment cannot be absolute.” - Chuck Schumer (D). Yet, Madison and Mason wrote the Bill of Rights, according to Sheila Jackson Lee, 400 years ago. Yup, it's a fact.


  10. #30
    On Vacation
    joko104's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    12-03-17 @ 03:32 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    31,568
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Slander in Politics

    If I am not mistaken, the original typical usage of homophobia was a person who internally feared himself being gay or having desire for gay sex and then lashing out against homosexuality as a self defense/self denial. This then shifted towards people who openly expressed hatred of gays.

Page 3 of 23 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •