• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Slander in Politics

If a person smears a Christian as a "homophobe," should that person returh fire?

  • Yes. If they call you a homophobe you should be able to comment on their morals/etc.

    Votes: 5 18.5%

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

    Votes: 1 3.7%

  • Simply ignore the smears and continue debating.

    Votes: 3 11.1%

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

    Votes: 14 51.9%

  • Don't know/Other

    Votes: 4 14.8%
  • Total voters
    27
Wessexman said:
No, I don't think an irrational fear is a phobia. I think a phobia is more particular than that.
Click to expand...

Close enough. It's not official diagnosis of a disorder and nobody said it was. Everyone understands that too.
 
jamesrage said:
Homophobia is a term invented by the pro-gay marriage crowd to try to shame and slander opponents of gay marriage, much like when they used to falsely call gay marriage opponents closet homosexuals.
Click to expand...

No, homophobia refers to any irrational fear or hatred of gays, and the term existed long before gay marriage was even a big issue in the U.S.
 
Wake said:
I don't oppose gay marriage out of hatred of gays. :shrugg:
Click to expand...

Okay.

Many liberals talk about keeping a tolerant, open mind, yet many are far too inclined to jump to conclusions and call those who are against gay marriage to promarily be "hateful of gays."
Click to expand...

True.

And it's also rich how some people are saying that you can be a Christian AND a homophobe. A true Christian does not hate, or at least tries not to. No Christains are perfect, but they strive to uphold their morals and not sin. Perhaps a Christian can err and hate gays, but it certainly isn't hateful/homophobic to oppose gay marriage. The left needs to open its eyes on this and stop painting all Christians who oppose gay marriage as "homophobes."
Click to expand...

Sure, and it would be nice if Christians who are living up to that requirement, to not hate, would start pointing out those who fail.
 
misterman said:
Close enough. It's not official diagnosis of a disorder and nobody said it was. Everyone understands that too.
Click to expand...
I don't think it is close enough at all. A phobia is very different to simply a misfounded fear. The point is that it is an attempt at an unofficial diagnosis as part of an insult. You can continue you using it and I will continue to take some of the glee out of it by pointing out the flaws and silliness in it.
 
Last edited:
I've decided not to vote for several candidates because they attempted to smear an opponent and did not attempt to apologize or retract the erroneous material when the truth came to light. Why? Candidates that will lie about opponents to get elected will lie to the electorate to fulfill their agenda as well. Case in point: GWB smeared McCain with the black love-child lie just before the 2000 SC primary and swiftboated John Kerry also lied to the electorate about the reliability of evidence on WMD in Iraq and about the tax cuts he put in place not shifting a greater portion of the burden from the wealthy to the middle class.
 
Wessexman said:
I don't think it is close enough at all. A phobia is very different to simply a misfounded fear. .
Click to expand...

No it's not, not in common usage.

People have borrowed the term "phobia" from psychology to mean any irrational fear.

The point is that it is an attempt at an unofficial diagnosis
Click to expand...

That's silly. Nobody is saying homophobes have a psychological disorder. It's just an easier way to say "you have an irrational fear."

It is both a psychological word with a specific definition and a common word with a less specific one.
 
misterman said:
No it's not, not in common usage.

People have borrowed the term "phobia" from psychology to mean any irrational fear.
Click to expand...
No they haven't. Irrational means rationally unsupported. You do not call every such fear a phobia. If I fear walking through the park at night because I might be attacked, and there is only a 1% chance I will then that is irrational, but it is not a phobia. You are basically equating all fears which aren't completely rational with phobias. You have destroyed the meaning of the word phobia.

That's silly. Nobody is saying homophobes have a psychological disorder. It's just an easier way to say "you have an irrational fear."

It is both a psychological word with a specific definition and a common word with a less specific one.
Click to expand...
Or you could just say you are wrong, instead of playing with words. It is a sinister and silly word meant to diagnose one's opponents. Hence it is used towards all those who disagree with the legitimacy of homosexuality, even those who do so in a calm way and use rational argument. If it were only used against the unthinking and totally prejudiced then I might, just agree, but it isn't. It is used against all who do not think homosexuality is moral, which is further proof it is an underhanded and sinister attempt to diagnose one's opponents.
 
Last edited:
Wessexman said:
No they haven't. Irrational means rationally unsupported. You do not call every such fear a phobia. If I fear walking through the park at night because I might be attacked, and there is only a 1% chance I will then that is irrational, but it is not a phobia. You are basically equating all fears which aren't completely rational with phobias. You have destroyed the meaning of the word phobia.
Click to expand...

No, fear of walking in the park is rational, even at 1%.

Or you could just say you are wrong, instead of playing with words. It is a sinister and silly word meant to diagnose one's opponents. Hence it is used towards all those who disagree with the legitimacy of homosexuality, even those who do so in a calm way and use rational argument. If it were only used against the unthinking and totally prejudiced then I might, just agree, but it isn't. It is used against all who do not think homosexuality is moral, which is further proof it is an underhanded and sinister attempt to diagnose one's opponents.
Click to expand...

You're the one trying to abuse words here. You're calling a common word a "diagnosis." Nobody who uses it thinks it is.
 
misterman said:
No, fear of walking in the park is rational, even at 1%.
Click to expand...
Not really, you could say almost anything is a rational fear then unless you draw a proper distinction.


You're the one trying to abuse words here. You're calling a common word a "diagnosis." Nobody who uses it thinks it is.
Click to expand...
They think it is an unofficial diagnosis, they think it is declaring that all those, and it is all and not just the absolute gay bashing bigots, who do not think homosexuality is completely valid are suffering from the same sort of disorder as someone who can't be in the same room with spider.

I do wish you would stop playing with words. You are now trying to redefine all misguided fears as phobias.
 
misterman said:
No, fear of walking in the park is rational, even at 1%.



You're the one trying to abuse words here. You're calling a common word a "diagnosis." Nobody who uses it thinks it is.
Click to expand...
I fear you're banging your head against the brick wall of Wessex's self-regard. He's the authority on lexicography, not that damn Merriam-Webster guy, what does HE know?
 
Andalublue said:
I fear you're banging your head against the brick wall of Wessex's self-regard. He's the authority on lexicography, not that damn Merriam-Webster guy, what does HE know?
Click to expand...
You mean the Oxford English dictionary surely? What does an American English dictionary have to do with us?

You don't use dictionaries to simply settle in depth disputes about terminology, nor how it is used in society or how it should be used. The dictionaries simply say socialists want to have the government control the means of production. Do libertarian socialists simply give up completely when confronted with such in depth refutation from a bloody dictionary? Someone should have told Franco. He could have defeated those pesky anarchists by lobbing dictionaries at them instead of wasting all those men and munitions
 
Last edited:
Both sides do it.

I can honestly say though that the constant irrational accusations of being a bigoted hate fulled homophobe never once impacted my change to supporting SSM, if anything it hindered it. You are never going to change another person's mind or have them even respect your opinion when you hurl insults at those you are debating.
 
Last edited:
Wessexman said:
Not really, you could say almost anything is a rational fear then unless you draw a proper distinction.
Click to expand...

Is fear of walking in the park at night a phobia? It's a fear. If it's not a phobia, what is it?

They think it is an unofficial diagnosis, they think it is declaring that all those, and it is all and not just the absolute gay bashing bigots, who do not think homosexuality is completely valid are suffering from the same sort of disorder as someone who can't be in the same room with spider.
Click to expand...

You can read their minds?

I use the term "homophobe" and I certainly don't mean it that way.

I do wish you would stop playing with words. You are now trying to redefine all misguided fears as phobias.
Click to expand...

No, you are trying to redefine "phobia" as nothing more than a psychological term. It no longer is just that. It can mean just a misguided fear.

But hey, let's stop worrying about a word. Many people who disapprove of homosexuality are acting out of nothing but a misguided fear. Okay?
 
digsbe said:
Both sides do it.

I can honestly say though that the constant irrational accusations of being a bigoted hate fulled homophobe never once impacted my change to supporting SSM, if anything it hindered it. You are never going to change another person's mind or have them even respect your opinion when you hurl insults at those you are debating.
Click to expand...

I don't consider "homophobe" an insult, just an observation.
 
misterman said:
Is fear of walking in the park at night a phobia? It's a fear. If it's not a phobia, what is it?
Click to expand...
It is a fear, a sometimes mildly misguided one, which is not the same thing as a phobia.

You can read their minds?

I use the term "homophobe" and I certainly don't mean it that way.
Click to expand...
I can interpret what they are implying and the connotations of what they say and how they say it.

No, you are trying to redefine "phobia" as nothing more than a psychological term. It no longer is just that. It can mean just a misguided fear.
Click to expand...
No, you are trying to redefine phobia to mean simply any at all misguided fear. This is not what it means. Even the dictionary implies this;

Phobia | Define Phobia at Dictionary.com

pho·bi·a
   [foh-bee-uh] Show IPA
noun
a persistent, irrational fear of a specific object, activity, or situation that leads to a compelling desire to avoid it.

It is vague, but it implies something closer to a phobia of spiders than how you wish to redefine the term. Though of course I do not take the dictionary as gospel for sophisticated, social meaning of such terms.
[
But hey, let's stop worrying about a word. Many people who disapprove of homosexuality are acting out of nothing but a misguided fear. Okay?
Click to expand...
I don't agree. Many are acting more out of rationally unexamined conceptions certainly, though just as many on the pro-homosexual side are so from largely narrow and unexamined prejudice. That I will agree to.
 
Last edited:
Wake said:
"Homophobe" implies irrational fear/contempt/hatred for homosexuals. Christians who view homosexuality as a sin have none of those ill feeling towards homosexuals.

:shrug:
Click to expand...

Yeah. Right.
 
Wessexman said:
I can interpret what they are implying and the connotations of what they say and how they say it.
Click to expand...

So you're claiming the right to do exactly what you're complaining about them doing to you?
 
Wake said:
"Homophobe" implies irrational fear/contempt/hatred for homosexuals. Christians who view homosexuality as a sin have none of those ill feeling towards homosexuals.

:shrug:
Click to expand...

Not quite.

Assuming for a moment that it's possible to simply view homosexuality as a sin without all that other stuff. Plenty of Christians (but not all) view it as a sin AND display an irrational fear/contempt/hatred for homosexuals.
 
misterman said:
So you're claiming the right to do exactly what you're complaining about them doing to you?
Click to expand...
No, I'm claiming that as I can understand the meanings of connotations of words in that instance, I can too in this one.

Assuming for a moment that it's possible to simply view homosexuality as a sin without all that other stuff. Plenty of Christians (but not all) view it as a sin AND display an irrational fear/contempt/hatred for homosexuals.
Click to expand...
In what sense?

Not of course that phobia has much to do with contempt or hatred.
 
Wake said:
"Homophobe" implies irrational fear/contempt/hatred for homosexuals. Christians who view homosexuality as a sin have none of those ill feeling towards homosexuals.
Click to expand...

I don't think anybody cares what rationalizations somebody has going through their heads when they engage in hate speech. Bigotry is bigotry. I'm sure back in slavery times there were tons of slave owners who told themselves that slavery was in the best interests of the slaves. Doesn't make it any more acceptable.
 
teamosil said:
I don't think anybody cares what rationalizations somebody has going through their heads when they engage in hate speech. Bigotry is bigotry. I'm sure back in slavery times there were tons of slave owners who told themselves that slavery was in the best interests of the slaves. Doesn't make it any more acceptable.
Click to expand...
And such rationalisations for question begging doesn't mean you aren't begging the question with this post.
 
Wessexman said:
No, I'm claiming that as I can understand the meanings of connotations of words in that instance, I can too in this one.
Click to expand...

No, it's the same thing. You are claiming you can read their minds and decide what they mean by their words, even when they tell you to your face that's not what they mean.

In what sense?
Click to expand...

I'm just saying it's not either-or. A Christian may believe gay=sin and not hate gays, or just hate gays--or both.

And the irony is that some Christians call homosexuality a mental illness - so much for not using psychological terms like "phobia."
 
Last edited:
Wessexman said:
And such rationalisations for question begging doesn't mean you aren't begging the question with this post.
Click to expand...

What are you talking about? I'm explaining why the "hate the sin, love the sinner" line doesn't hold water.
 
I voted no because they deserve it, but obviously none of the options actually make sense. There is no way to know whether it was a valid critique or not without knowing the exact situation. But, out of the options, that one seems like the best because most often when somebody is called a homophobe it is immediately after some expression of bigotry.

As a side note though, it isn't respectful to tolerate bigotry. Tolerating bigotry is just one small step this side of being a bigot yourself.
 
Last edited:
misterman said:
No, it's the same thing. You are claiming you can read their minds and decide what they mean by their words, even when they tell you to your face that's not what they mean.
Click to expand...
Not exactly. That would be a gross oversimplification of what I'm talking about in terms of the social and individual meaning of words like homophobia.


I'm just saying it's not either-or. A Christian may believe gay=sin and not hate gays, or just hate gays--or both.
Click to expand...
I agree, though hatred is not phobia. However in the cut and thrust of public polemics people sometimes, and not without some legitimacy at times, can be quite censorious in their condemnation. I think there is a balance to maintain, but I certainly do not think you should hate gay people or anyone really.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom