Posted on 08/14/2008 3:41:39 PM PDT by EveningStar
Weigh your attitudes and beliefs about homosexuals on the "Homophobia Scale" and see how you rank.
(Excerpt) Read more at pbs.org ...
I disagree. I scored a 29. I disagreed with gay marriage and special rights. I just don’t agree with gay bashing.
From my admittedly limited experience from taking a few psychology classes, a phobia goes beyond just a "fear" of something but is qualified more as an intense, unrealistic or irrational fear that may interfere with your ability to function in everyday life.
I think that "homophobic" is a bit loaded as a term as it implies, at least to those who would label someone as such that they see the "homophobic" person as the one who is disordered or disturbed.
I guess it makes sense in the topsy-turvy way that the left redefines language to suit their purposes.
If you look at evidence which points to negative consequences of homosexual behavior, for the individual as well as the culture, society and the family, you may reach a level of fear or concern, but it is certainly not irrational or unrealistic.
By the way, I scored a 53. This means that I disagree with homosexual marriage, do not want homosexuals in charge of children, and pity those who are duped into accepting this lifestyle choice. I am also one who has a personal relationship with Jesus Christ, who taught us not to give in to our human weaknesses but to strive to become like him. Judgment in behavior is not equivalent to judgment in salvation, and the ability to judge sin in order to avoid it is essential to a Christian life.
Other than the aforementioned contact with children, I see no need to restrict homosexuals in employment, housing, or any other part of our American society. I do not run in terror when confronted with a homosexual person, although I would not react kindly to an untoward advance. If someone in my family was openly homosexual, I would pray for them while at the same time monitor them as far as their influence with my children during family gatherings.
If I had to make a choice over attending a family reunion and the gushing approval of a homosexual family member’s same sex partner, I would choose not to attend with my children. There is no way to teach children that sin is wrong when in an environment of the celebration of sin. I have already made the choice of eliminating contact of my children with an unmarried live-in couple I am friends with, and they are aware of the restriction and my reasoning behind it.
I expect to be called names by those who insist that I not judge their behavior, but that just highlights their hypocrisy and lack of character (they are judging me). I always have to ask thses hypocrites, “if we are not to judge, then why do we have juries in our courts?”.
Our republic was founded on the principles of freedom, personal responsibility, and the ability of religious belief to control the harmful behaviors that temp all of us. Today, all three of those principles are under attack, and we are seeing gradeschoolers beating classmates to death, Priests molesting children, infidelity defended, rape explained away as “just sex”, lying justified, and terrorists defended. What’s next?
For some reason, my initial reply to you did not come through. Here it is again . . . .
Because I hold to the definition of the word “marriage” as one man joined to one woman does not mean that I am afraid of homosexuals. There were no questions about “personal partnerships” or “civil unions” on the survey.
Because I am aware of the fact that homosexuals, as a group, are more likely to prey on children than heterosexuals (National Man-Boy Love Association), making them unfit for authority positions over children, does not mean that I am afraid of homosexuals. I am simply a responsible parent who is protecting his children in the same fashion as I would not allow my children to ride in a car with an alcoholic driver.
The homosexual “movement” is creating the problem, not the homosexuals themselves. The homosexual “movement” has as its goal the complete devolution of morality in America. All that is good is to be destroyed, and all that is bad is to be defended and lauded. The homosexual “movement” is redefining critical thought as a “phobia” to be treated as a mental disorder and dismissed. Is this way, the “movement” will gain acceptance for a behavior that is proven to cause disease and death, not to mention the mental anguish of those children it has preyed upon.
The American Psychological Association has, for years, been trying to redefine pedophilia out of the category of a mental disorder in order to codify the homosexual “movement” who want to be able to enjoy their behavioral choices without the possibility of incarceration hanging over their heads. Just look at the “progress” we have made is reducing the coarseness of our society since the APA decided to drop homosexuality as a mental disorder in 1973. How many priests would have had the opportunity to abuse boys if the homosexual ones had been diagnosed with a mental disorder?
Any logical and critical analysis of the homosexual lifestyle will come to the conclusion that, for the most part, it is a destructive behavior that ruins lives. To come to any other conclusion requires the abdication of truth. Because I have done the research and examined the evidence does not mean that I am “afraid” of homosexuals. It simply means that I have questioned and researched the real costs and benefits of promoting this lifestyle choice, and have come to the conclusion that, not only does it not benefit society, it actually causes much harm.
If I would apply the same arguments of those of you who see no problem with the homosexual “movement” to the use of mind altering drugs, then you must also believe that there is no problem with doped up people flying our airplanes, driving our busses, and running our nuclear power plants.
The elimination of discriminating thought leads to the acceptance of irrational and destructive behaviors and the devolution of our American society from one of freedom and personal responsibility into one of socialism and anarchy.
In other words: it’s possible to be non-homophobic if you detest gay marriage, the gay lifestyle, gays working with children/adopting children, and the entire gay movement...... as long as being around gay people doesn’t bother you.
Looks that way. I scored a 46.
I got a 57. The questionnaire is ridiculous; it labels you as homophobic if you do anything less than wholeheartedly celebrate and endorse homosexual behavior.
I could easily create a similarly absurd test:
1.) I am uncomfortable when my co-workers describe giving or receiving heterosexual oral sex.
2.) I am offended when a stranger solicits heterosexual oral sex from me.
3.) Organizations that promote the rights of people who enjoy heterosexual oral sex are unnecessary.
Et cetera.
I only got a 96. Where did I go wrong?
I thought the questionnaire was rather fair myself. I got a 39, not homophobic, even though I strongly disapprove of homosexual marriage, and homosexual activity, have doubts about them working with children, and some discomfort if a friend turned out to be homosexual.
When I put strongly disagree to: “When I meet someone I try to find out if he/she is gay.”.. I got a score of 48... non-homophobic.
When I changed that to strongly agree, I got 55 ... homophobic.
So, wanting to know if someone is homosexual makes me homophobic.
errrr... makes sense, of course.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.