Chris Broussard is for lack of a better word a bigot

[dude1394]

Originally Posted by jthig32

Also, citing Levitical law to uphold your opinion is a waste of time and breath, unless you're also down with owning slaves and punishing people for sleeping with their wives while they're on their period.

If you're going to denounce homosexuality, at least use the verses in the New Testament, it makes for a far more interesting debate.

Most Christians I talk to believe that the New Testament is the "new covenant" so I would agree here. Especially with respect to the ancient Jewish religious laws that were probably just common sense at the time meant to teach folks a healthy way to live.

[dude1394]

Most of the bigotry I see in this thread is the bigotry towards Christians.

[SeanL]

Originally Posted by dude1394

Most of the bigotry I see in this thread is the bigotry towards Christians.

LOL. If Christians don't like be called a bigot they should stop saying bigoted hateful things about gay people.

[jthig32]

Originally Posted by SeanL

LOL. If Christians don't like be called a bigot they should stop saying bigoted hateful things about gay people.

I hate to keep beating a dead horse here, but I just want to reiterate:

There's no doubt that tons of Christians express hate towards homosexuals, which is tragic needs to change, very soon. But in this specific instance, unless I missed something, Broussard simply stated that in his opinion, it is a sin. He also mentioned heterosexuals that have sex outside of wedlock and lumped them in the same bucket.

Stating that you believe something is wrong is NOT the same as being hateful. It can be accompanied with hate, and often is, but is not always.

[SeanL]

Originally Posted by jthig32

I hate to keep beating a dead horse here, but I just want to reiterate:

There's no doubt that tons of Christians express hate towards homosexuals, which is tragic needs to change, very soon. But in this specific instance, unless I missed something, Broussard simply stated that in his opinion, it is a sin. He also mentioned heterosexuals that have sex outside of wedlock and lumped them in the same bucket.

Stating that you believe something is wrong is NOT the same as being hateful. It can be accompanied with hate, and often is, but is not always.

Calling someone's existence a sin is pretty negative. In fact I would say it is rather bigoted.

[jthig32]

Originally Posted by SeanL

Calling someone's existence a sin is pretty negative. In fact I would say it is rather bigoted.

That doesn't really make any sense. I would think most people would be pretty offended at the idea that their sexuality defines them to the point that someone believing it's wrong believes that their entire life is wrong.

Anyone calling for homosexuals to die is obviously a bigot, no argument there. I don't believe I saw Broussard make those comments.

For the record, I'm not a fan at all of the the timing of Broussard's comments, or the people that setup the debate in the first place. I think it was out of place and an attempt to sensationalize a news topic that was rightly met with resounding support and positivity. I feel the need to say that since I find myself defending someone's right to speak a belief without being labeled a beacon of hatred, despite my not agreeing with the timing or content of what he said.

[MavsFTR]

Really? Pointing out stupid verses in the Bible is bigotry?

[dude1394]

Originally Posted by MavsFTR

Really? Pointing out stupid verses in the Bible is bigotry?

Not necessarily, but there is more underlying bigotry towards Christians in this thread than I saw with Broussard's comments.

[MavsFTR]

You do realize that most people here have relatives and/or friends who are Christians, right? Do you know bigotry means? No one here is trying to deny Christians any rights.

[Some Guy]

Originally Posted by MavsFTR

You do realize that most people here have relatives and/or friends who are Christians, right? Do you know bigotry means? No one here is trying to deny Christians any rights.

You think it is only bigotry when someone is denying rights?
I think that sounds like a way to be a bigot and still pretend like you aren't one. Then someone can 'regard or treat members of a group with hatred and intolerance' but still feel good about himself because he isn't "trying to deny Christians any rights".

Here is how merriam-webster.com defines bigot -

": a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance "



Question: What is the difference between these things -
1. Someone saying that homosexuality is wrong.
2. Someone saying that 'saying homosexuality is wrong' is wrong.

[MavsFTR]

No, I'm not saying bigotry only occurs when people are denied rights. But do you know what this sounds like? It sounds like a Nazi bitching that people are bigoted against him and his ideology. It may be true, but it sure is something incredibly stupid to complain about.

[MavsFTR]

And anyway, we're not bigoted. We're not against all Christians. Just the ones who tout their religion in an effort to deny others their rights.

[Some Guy]

Originally Posted by MavsFTR

And anyway, we're not bigoted. We're not against all Christians. Just the ones who tout their religion in an effort to deny others their rights.

So, it is or is not about denying rights?

I didn't watch the interview - was Broussard making an effort to deny someone their rights?

From what I can tell in this thread, you (the group) are against Christians who believe that homosexuality is wrong. When you "regard or treat the members of a group with hatred and intolerance", then you are being a bigot.


If saying "what 'you' are doing is wrong" makes someone a bigot, then saying "what 'fundamentalist christians' are doing is wrong" makes someone a bigot.
Being bigoted against a bigot is still bigotry.

[MavsFTR]

Originally Posted by Some Guy

So, it is or is not about denying rights?

I didn't watch the interview - was Broussard making an effort to deny someone their rights?

From what I can tell in this thread, you (the group) are against Christians who believe that homosexuality is wrong. When you "regard or treat the members of a group with hatred and intolerance", then you are being a bigot.


If saying "what 'you' are doing is wrong" makes someone a bigot, then saying "what 'fundamentalist christians' are doing is wrong" makes someone a bigot.
Being bigoted against a bigot is still bigotry.

Smh. I can't even dignify this with a proper response. You realize what you're essentially saying is we're intolerant of intolerance, right? If that's what you want to go with, fine by me.

[Underdog]

Originally Posted by MavsFTR

We're not against all Christians.

I would never hate an entire group of people, but some Christians are total assholes:

- Christian Bale hit his mother.
- Christian Dior designed clothes for the Nazis.
- Christian Slater tried to make a career out of impersonating Jack Nicholson.
- Christian Laettner was given a roster spot on the Original Dream Team over Isiah Thomas.

[dirt_dobber]

Originally Posted by Underdog

I would never hate an entire group of people, but some Christians are total assholes:

- Christian Bale hit his mother.
- Christian Dior designed clothes for the Nazis.
- Christian Slater tried to make a career out of impersonating Jack Nicholson.
- Christian Laettner was given a roster spot on the Original Dream Team over Isiah Thomas.

genius!

wiki definition:
A genius is a person who displays exceptional intellectual ability, creativity, or originality.

[FreshJive]

Originally Posted by Underdog

I would never hate an entire group of people, but some Christians are total assholes:

- Christian Bale hit his mother.
- Christian Dior designed clothes for the Nazis.
- Christian Slater tried to make a career out of impersonating Jack Nicholson.
- Christian Laettner was given a roster spot on the Original Dream Team over Isiah Thomas.

Lol. Jack Nickolson was too old for Heathers.

[Murphy3]

What a load of hogwash from Shapiro.

[twelli]

Winning a rational argument against a bigot is as hopeless as trying to cure a gay person. There is no point in even trying cause religion is never rational and homosexuality is not a disease.

End of thread.

[dude1394]

I'm just calling it like I see it. I don't care bout being called a bigot, that crap gets thrown around like candy.

The biggest bigotry being shown is not being shown by Broussard.

[Jack.Kerr]

Originally Posted by dude1394

I'm just calling it like I see it. I don't care bout being called a bigot, that crap gets thrown around like candy.

Candy, huh. In your case, Dude, I'd say it's 'sweets for the sweet'. [/quote]

Originally Posted by dude1394

The biggest bigotry being shown is not being shown by Broussard.

It's hilarious to me to see fundamentalists put on their victim cap (and matching panties) when people stand up to them and point out their bigotry and hypocrisy.

It's almost as funny as seeing religiionists (of all stripes) start fighting among themselves. Like Pat Robertson's recent comments that Satan was trying to destroy Israel, but that Jews didn't understand this because they didn't believe in Jesus.

Robertson's comment was recent, but it brings to mind the comments of a former head of the Southern Baptist Convention, Bailey Smith (circa 1980), who said that God doesn't hear the prayer of a Jew. Just a couple of years later, fundamenatlist Muslim minister Louis Farrakhan referred to Judaism as a "gutter religion".

And then you have Mormons, secretly baptizing lists of long-dead Jews, Christians and other non-Mormons into the faith posthumously, despite objections from the dead people's families, and demands that they stop the practice.

Jews and Judaism have of course been the targets of abuse and annihilation, but that didn't stop Iranian President Ahmadinejad from alleging that the holocaust was a myth, designed to create sympathy for Jews and a pretext for the state of Israel. (Ahmadinejad also took time out from Jew-bashing to opine that homosexuality was evil, and to declare that there were no homosexuals in all of Iran.)

Obviously, cross-religious slurs are not limited to Judaism-- just about a year and a half ago, Dallas' own fundamentalist Baptist preacher Robert Jeffress (presumably in support of Rick Perry) offered his own particular Christian perspective that Mormonism was a cult, and that Mitt Romney wasn't a Christian.

And not to be left out of the fray, we have the Catholic Pope Benedict (and admitted former Nazi no less) saying that Catholicism was the one "true" church and the only true path to salvation, and that other churches and denominations were defective. He also quoted a 14th century Persian scholar saying that Mohammed's contributions to Islam were evil and inhuman, and the spreading of religion by violence. (And then Ratzinger/Benedict quits the poping gig early to go live with his younger male (platonic?) companion.)

*Updating this to point out that, just yesterday, in the true spirit of Christian love, the Archbishop of Rhode Island wrote in response to recently passed marriage equality legistlation in his state to remind his faithful that "...homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered", and to urge Catholics to think twice before attending a same-sex marriage ceremony.

And of course, there's Westboro Baptist, who hates everybody all the time for everything.

It's all sweetness and light in the name of ....Jesus, Moroni, Mohammed......whoever.

[dude1394]

If you are not in lockstep with libs, you'd best get used to being called racist, bigot, etc. it's what they do.

All the while being some of the bigger bigots around.

[SeanL]

Originally Posted by dude1394

If you are not in lockstep with libs, you'd best get used to being called racist, bigot, etc. it's what they do.

All the while being some of the bigger bigots around.

No. Just that you shouldn't deny a whole group of people their rights or call their existence a sin, or use some other pejorative when referring to them. If you don't do that then you won't be called a bigot. I don't think that is so unreasonable.

[dude1394]

Originally Posted by SeanL

No. Just that you shouldn't deny a whole group of people their rights or call their existence a sin, or use some other pejorative when referring to them. If you don't do that then you won't be called a bigot. I don't think that is so unreasonable.

Brousard isn't advocating denying anyone their rights.. He doesn't call his "exisitence" a sin, but his action a sin. A sin just like any other sin, theft, adultery, dishonoring your mother/father, etc.

I cannot believe anyone saying that adultery is a sin is a bigot. But you would I suppose.

[SeanL]

Originally Posted by dude1394

Brousard isn't advocating denying anyone their rights.. He doesn't call his "exisitence" a sin, but his action a sin. A sin just like any other sin, theft, adultery, dishonoring your mother/father, etc.

I cannot believe anyone saying that adultery is a sin is a bigot. But you would I suppose.

Nobody is born an adulterer but people a born gay. Broussard is in fact saying their entire existence is a sin whether you want to believe it or not.

Saying someone is a sinner for acting the way they were born is disgusting.

[dude1394]

Originally Posted by SeanL

Nobody is born an adulterer but people a born gay. Broussard is in fact saying their entire existence is a sin whether you want to believe it or not.

Saying someone is a sinner for acting the way they were born is disgusting.

Why not, about as easily believed as being born gay. It just doesn't have a voting bloc yet.

[Underdog]

Originally Posted by SeanL

Nobody is born an adulterer but people a born gay.

Nobody is born gay - sexuality is all about personal experience and opportunity... I'd say bisexuals pretty much kill the "gay gene" theory.

I have a friend who was genuinely attracted to the opposite sex earlier in life. They weren't closeted, they weren't confused - they were straight... Then, later in life, they developed a strong friendship with someone of the same sex and started having sexual feelings for this person. Those feelings were reciprocated. A switch was flipped in their psyche... They became gay.

Sexuality is no different than any other preference in life. I used to hate rap music when I was younger, but then I heard A Tribe Called Quest when I was in college. A switch was flipped in my psyche and I started to seek out similar bands... I became a hip hop fan.

Don't get me wrong - some people are gay from the moment they discover sexuality (young children have no concept either way outside of social programming)... But it seems to me that the primary reason for the "born gay" agenda is to remove any sort of blame for their choices. So I ask, is being gay something that deserves blame in the first place? It's a choice... If you don't like being gay, then don't be gay. But don't judge others for the choices they make, especially when those choices don't really affect you.

In my opinion, homosexuals don't owe Christians any sort of apology for their choices... Especially since the vague passages in the Bible that condemn homosexuality are in the Old Testament, which really only applies to the Jews (and newsflash: modern Jews have no problem with homosexuals). Christians need to start behaving like Christians and follow Jesus' Commandment:

"Love your neighbor as yourself." --Matthew 22:39

Personally, I've rarely encountered any sort of problems in life when I follow that philosophy... It seems like common sense, but it's a lot harder to do than to say. In the end, I think protesting and lobbying to restrict the fairly benign actions of your fellow man is a far greater "sin" than homosexuality. Plus, everybody's sh!t stinks:

“Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye?" --Matthew 7:3-4

[mcsluggo]

the arguments against the O.P. were going quite fine without pulling out the "christians are soo persecuted" card

[dude1394]

Brick

[Thespiralgoeson]

Chris Broussard can suck my d*ck.

[Dirkadirkastan]

I thought the Christian doctrine was that everyone was a sinner. So although heterosexual relationships are not categorically forbidden in the same sense homosexual ones are, such lifestyles only served to put homosexuals in the same boat as everyone else, rather than make them inferior. Of course, the bottom line shows historically they have not been treated as such.

Heck, it would even make sense for one to support gay rights even if one believed homosexuality was wrong, to retain the spirit of free will which we are all supposedly endowed. But for some reason the fundamentalists don't seem to get that either.

Whatever. I find the religious angle to be pretty useless anyway, and moreover a dying breed. This is just another one of those growing pains that will eventually lead us into a more enlightened, accepting society.

[SeanL]

Originally Posted by Dirkadirkastan

I thought the Christian doctrine was that everyone was a sinner. So although heterosexual relationships are not categorically forbidden in the same sense homosexual ones are, such lifestyles only served to put homosexuals in the same boat as everyone else, rather than make them inferior. Of course, the bottom line shows historically they have not been treated as such.

Heck, it would even make sense for one to support gay rights even if one believed homosexuality was wrong, to retain the spirit of free will which we are all supposedly endowed. But for some reason the fundamentalists don't seem to get that either.

Whatever. I find the religious angle to be pretty useless anyway, and moreover a dying breed. This is just another one of those growing pains that will eventually lead us into a more enlightened, accepting society.

Not all sins are created equal though. Some sins are mortal sins, such as homosexuality.

[Dirkadirkastan]

Originally Posted by SeanL

Not all sins are created equal though. Some sins are mortal sins, such as homosexuality.

I thought they were all like that though. So once little Johnny lies about who knocked over the Lego tower, he's doomed to a punishment of hellfire and damnation for all eternity. Unless he fills up his soul with some Jesus, of course.

As if that wasn't comprehensive enough, they go on to say we were all born sinners before we even have the capacity to do anything. So to say homosexuals are the exception because they were born in sin... well, I don't think I need to point out the cognitive dissonance here.

This is probably looking at it from the wrong angle though. The part about everyone being born sinners probably stems from the religion's own goal to convince everyone they just have to have it, and the part about homosexuals being condemned probably stems from the fact they just don't like them very much. The mental gymnastics required to justify both positions simultaneously can be entertaining to watch one attempt.

[Thespiralgoeson]

My irreverence and twisted sense of humor aside, I'd like to give serious kudos to jack.kerr for everything he's said on this thread.

Thank you for being the voice of reason and good, and articulating everything I feel better than I ever could. Thanks for having the superhuman patience to thoughtfully engage in a debate that I normally stay away from because it makes my head explode. The world needs more people like you.

[dalmations202]

After reading through this - all I can say is what an enlightened Roman way of thinking. Good Luck

[Dirkadirkastan]

There are lots of stupid ideas out there, and lots of communities that buy into said stupid ideas.

But if you organize enough and gain enough political power, you can avoid criticism by labeling anyone who points out your stupid ideas as a bigot.

Got it.

[DirkFTW]

Originally Posted by Dirkadirkastan

There are lots of stupid ideas out there, and lots of communities that buy into said stupid ideas.

But if you organize enough and gain enough political power, you can avoid criticism by labeling anyone who points out your stupid ideas as a bigot.

Got it.

I think both sides of every contentious political issue (like this one) could levy those charges against their opponents. That's the problem with bigotry/intolerance accusations... they invariably cut both ways because pure tolerance must tolerate intolerance. Otherwise, we're just dealing with differently-bigoted worldviews.

But really, your concerns of 'avoiding criticism' don't really reach fruition until you try to ban/silence what you deem to be bigotry, whether through shaming, intimidation, or force (legal or otherwise). Without that aspect to the equation, you'd just have competing interests in the political realm. Perhaps censorship is the true evil we can agree to avoid.

[Dirkadirkastan]

Originally Posted by DirkFTW

I think both sides of every contentious political issue (like this one) could levy those charges against their opponents. That's the problem with bigotry/intolerance accusations... they invariably cut both ways because pure tolerance must tolerate intolerance. Otherwise, we're just dealing with differently-bigoted worldviews.

I see what you're trying to do, but it doesn't hold water. Pointing out the inherently violent and dangerous teachings of Islam is not akin to claiming homosexuals are perverts.

Do you denounce the KKK? If so, does that make you a bigot?

But really, your concerns of 'avoiding criticism' don't really reach fruition until you try to ban/silence what you deem to be bigotry, whether through shaming, intimidation, or force (legal or otherwise). Without that aspect to the equation, you'd just have competing interests in the political realm. Perhaps censorship is the true evil we can agree to avoid.

No one's trying to censor anything. What led you to that conclusion? Here's what Sean said early on:

Originally Posted by SeanL

Freedom of speech is not freedom from criticism. He can say whatever bigoted hateful things he wants to, but I have a first amendment right to call him out on his bigotry.

I still have the impression that the word "bigot" has simply been thrown back at the original accuser in a meager effort to divert attention and criticism. But it's not a comparable situation.

[DirkFTW]

Originally Posted by Dirkadirkastan

I see what you're trying to do, but it doesn't hold water. Pointing out the inherently violent and dangerous teachings of Islam is not akin to claiming homosexuals are perverts.

Don't you see how this could just as easily be phrased by someone else as "taking statements in religious texts in isolation and out of context in order to paint a billion people as dangerous fanatics is not akin to explaining that someone's conduct has placed them at odds with the God of the universe?"

Originally Posted by Dirkadirkastan

No one's trying to censor anything. What led you to that conclusion?

That seems quite naive given that many have publicly been calling for Broussard to be fired. Your own comment in an earlier post was "if you organize enough and gain enough political power, you can avoid criticism by labeling anyone who points out your stupid ideas as a bigot." How can you avoid criticism without censorship--i.e., bigoted statements are not permitted?

Originally Posted by Dirkadirkastan

I still have the impression that the word "bigot" has simply been thrown back at the original accuser in a meager effort to divert attention and criticism. But it's not a comparable situation.

So whether something is bigotry or not depends on subjective impressions? The other side feels the same way that bigotry accusations are being used to divert attention and criticism from attacks on their constitutionally protected right to hold and practice religious beliefs.

[Dirkadirkastan]

Originally Posted by DirkFTW

Don't you see how this could just as easily be phrased by someone else as "taking statements in religious texts in isolation and out of context in order to paint a billion people as dangerous fanatics is not akin to explaining that someone's conduct has placed them at odds with the God of the universe?"

Do you understand the difference between "your belief is stupid" and "you are stupid because you hold that belief?" Only the former is present here, but your quote here is trying to twist it into the latter.

No one has a right to have their ideas go unchallenged.

That seems quite naive given that many have publicly been calling for Broussard to be fired. Your own comment in an earlier post was "if you organize enough and gain enough political power, you can avoid criticism by labeling anyone who points out your stupid ideas as a bigot." How can you avoid criticism without censorship--i.e., bigoted statements are not permitted?

I'm not sure you understood what I meant when I said that. Let me try again:

If I believe that it is my destiny to rule over my own planetary system one day, you might feel justified in calling me an idiot.

If I also believe that black people are cursed with their dark skin due to their neutrality in the battle between good and evil, you might feel justified in calling me a bigot.

If I believe all this because Joseph Smith successfully organized a large enough religion, then suddenly you are the bigot instead because you spoke ill of Mormonism.

See how that works? Why am I suddenly able to turn around and point the finger at you? Just because enough people believe the same thing I do?

So whether something is bigotry or not depends on subjective impressions? The other side feels the same way that bigotry accusations are being used to divert attention and criticism from attacks on their constitutionally protected right to hold and practice religious beliefs.

I'm talking about what specifically happened in this thread. The real issue to discuss is why speaking out against homosexuality itself is bigotry, and people are trying to divert attention away from that by pretending calling out questionable religious beliefs is somehow the same thing. It's a lame tactic and it doesn't work.