Heterophobia?

warning.gifHomophobia is a foolish pejorative (belittling expression) designed to put anyone who dares question the Gay-Lesbian-Bisexual-Transgender lobby on the defensive.  It is a transparently childish put-down, but it actually works to silence many people.

Ironically, as the writer of A Rational Aversion once pointed out, the real homophobes are those who fear the GLBT lobby so much that they cater to all the movement’s demands.  They are the ones with the irrational, paralyzing fear of doing or saying something politically incorrect.  You see it in political, educational, media and church leaders who will do and say almost anything to appease.  It is really quite pathetic.

Those of us who are comfortable discussing the relative merits of secular and Biblical arguments on GLBT issues aren’t afraid.  I get along fine with straights and gays.

On the flip side, there are some who are heterophobes.  I pointed this out in an email thread (excerpts below) and was surprised that the gay gentleman agreed with me. 

G: I don’t need you, or anyone else, to recognize my relationship. And yes, you are homophobic and a bigot. Sorry to have to tell you the truth.

Me: I’m confused. As best I can tell you are begging us and even demanding that we recognize your relationships. If you really don’t need anyone to recognize your relationships then we agree on the matter.

G: I don’t respect or recognize your relationship with your wife because I see heterosexuality as basically immoral and sexist.  

Me: You sure are judgmental and bigoted against heterosexuals. Read your own words.

G: Yes, I don’t particularly like heterosexuals. That’s why I live in San Francisco. I can go an entire day without having to hear from any of them. And yes, gays and lesbians are reproducing. I’ve donated to the local lesbian-owned sperm bank at least 10 times over the last few years.

So who has the phobia?

Advertisements

26 thoughts on “Heterophobia?”

  1. I tend to be homophobic in the sense that I have recurring nightmares that homosexuals will break into my home and redecorate. Fortunately, I wake up and see all is fine, and my windows don’t have drapes. HA! Sorry, I know the joke was a cheap use of a stereotype, but I take ’em where I can get ’em.

    Like

  2. “And yes, gays and lesbians are reproducing. I’ve donated to the local lesbian-owned sperm bank at least 10 times over the last few years.”

    There was something about that which made my stomach turn. No, not donating to a sperm bank. The reason he does it. God help the children of this man’s hateful expression of perversion.
    Unnatural is just unnatural.

    Like

  3. What an interesting “conversation” you had with the fellow! I would definitely say he is the one who is the bigot! I’ve always thought the term “homophobic” is quite ridiculous. I love the way you explained it (specifically the part about the ones supporting it out of fear of what the homosexuals will say and do being the ones in fear) and I agree with you wholeheartedly! Makes perfect sense to me!

    Like

  4. As one friend explained to me when the topic came up, she said she was theophobic. She feared God in a proper sense, and this is why she could never condone the sin of the GLBT’s. I think she hit the nail on the head. It’s God we should fear, not the GLBT’s fo the world. They are so entrenched in their sins that fearing God is the last thing on their minds.

    Like

  5. I love this comment: “And yes, gays and lesbians are reproducing. I’ve donated to the local lesbian-owned sperm bank at least 10 times over the last few years.”

    AS IF he had any choice in the matter of his “offspring” being straight or gay…

    Like

  6. As one friend explained to me when the topic came up, she said she was theophobic. She feared God in a proper sense, and this is why she could never condone the sin of the GLBT’s.

    Priceless! I will definitely add this line to my armamentarium.

    Respectfully,
    Joseph

    Like

  7. I think, to a degree, the perception of “homophobia” is because of the way some of us present our views. Many Christians seem to wage a personal holy war on homosexuals, yet show love to all other “brands” of sinner. I’m not taking the position of “if you’re outspoken about homosexuality, then you’re ignoring other sins,” but I do think the perspective gets distorted by some. I think part of the problem is the extremely polarizing nature of the topic in general. The other part is, I think, some take their personal disgust (I’ve been guilty of this myself before) for the act and garrison themselves behind the Christian viewpoints to support their own displeasure with the act. It is important to remember that a homosexual’s sin is no worse in God’s eyes than yours or mine. Despise the sin, not the sinner.

    More on topic, I certainly agree that “homophobia” is an overused term to ward of any opposition to the act of homosexuality. I find it rather amusing (albeit sad) that someone would think they can create a a sort of “super gay” society by donating to a lesbian friendly sperm bank. Of course, that goes to an entirely different issue of whether or not you believe homosexuals are “born that way.” Good post, Neil…certainly thought provoking.

    Like

  8. PJ writes:
    “It is important to remember that a homosexual’s sin is no worse in God’s eyes than yours or mine. Despise the sin, not the sinner.”

    The problem with homosexuality is that so many try to present it as normal, acceptable, etc. This is what is so repulsive about the entire debate. Most readily agree in the other sins as well, adultery, lust, murder, etc. The reason this one rises to the top is that others try to bring some normalcy to it, when in actuality, it is an abomination to God.

    Your argument also assumes all sins are equal. They are not all equal in their grossness, or… offensiveness towards God. For instance, some sins lead to the hardening of the heart to the point that a person can no longer be redeemed (Pharisees and blasphemy of the Holy Spirit, Pharaoh)…

    Where the equality comes in, is that all sins receive punishment. (Even hell has it’s level of punishments… It is better for Sodom that Capernaum, because they would have repented had Jesus been there). The equality in sins comes in that all who sin need a Savior. But some sins are more wicked than others, and, as I said above, the revulsion comes in the fact that some try to make the sin of homosexuality A-OK.

    Like

  9. “Your argument also assumes all sins are equal.”

    With respect, I’ve made no such argument. I simply stated that we focus on the wrong aspect when dealing with homosexuals. I am directly opposed to homosexuality and obviously see at as a sin and an abomination in the eyes of God (I say obviously, because if it is not clear in this post, I have made it clear in others regarding the topic). What I meant by “no worse in God’s eyes,” is that it is a sin and needs to be repented of…just like any sin you or I commit. I certainly am against someone practicing homosexuality unabashed and claiming the name of Christ unrebuked.

    “But some sins are more wicked than others, and, as I said above, the revulsion comes in the fact that some try to make the sin of homosexuality A-OK.”

    I can agree that this can be the case. My point was how many of our brothers and sisters misrepresent a Biblical view by allowing their PERSONAL revulsion to drive their supposed Christian outreach. That should never be the case. We should be disgusted by the fact that it is in direct opposition to the Word of God, not because we find it to be “gross.” (Not saying this is your stance, Timothy, just a stance many Christians represent)

    Again, this viewpoint is coming from someone who is personally repulsed by the act…even before I accepted Christ. I learned to adapt my view to a Biblical one because my own personal revulsion was not founded in scripture, only personal disgust. That goes back to a statement I made in Neil’s previous post. Many Christians and Churches try to wrap the Bible around PERSONAL doctrine, when it should clearly be the other way around.

    Like

  10. Oh, and for further clarification, when I just said, “we focus on the wrong aspect when dealing with homosexuals,” I wasn’t implying we, as in you and me (or anyone on this blog, for that matter…I don’t know anyone’s viewpoints here well enough to make such assumptions), I was meaning some Christians in general. Thanks…P

    Like

  11. “PJ,
    Let me get back to you… have to go. But I think I just misread you.
    Blessings”

    Not a problem, I hope I clarified my position for you. I think, from some of your other posts, we are on the same page.
    Blessings to you as well…P

    Like

  12. “Thanks for the clarification PJ.
    Good job, both of you. I think you guys agree.”

    I think so too. I’ve seen Timothy post here before, and he seems to always put forth his views thoughtfully and from a Biblical base. That is all I could ask of any brother or sister in Christ.

    Like

  13. “PJ,
    Let me get back to you… have to go. But I think I just misread you.
    Blessings”

    Not a problem, I hope I clarified my position for you. I think, from some of your other posts, we are on the same page.
    Blessings to you as well…P

    Okay, how about a group hug in a completely homophobic way of course! :0
    Just being silly! A lame attempt on my part to inject a bit of levity. I truly admire the way in which you two Christian brothers and gentlemen worked your way through the above. High fives and chest bumps all around!

    Respectfully,
    Joseph

    Like

  14. “Many Christians seem to wage a personal holy war on homosexuals, yet show love to all other “brands” of sinner.”

    Good point, PJ. I try to focus my frustrations on the heterosexuals who give false teachings on sexuality. They are the main problem in my view.

    Like

  15. “Good point, PJ. I try to focus my frustrations on the heterosexuals who give false teachings on sexuality. They are the main problem in my view.”

    Agreed. I think it’s a far more important issue. The false doctrine and deflection from obvious Bibilical truths is why many homosexuals feel as though their behavior is acceptable by God’s standards. How can we expect any sinner to know the error of their ways if we pat them on the back and say, “it’s not so bad,” or “it’s just a misinterpretation by some homophobic fundie.” (My personal fave;) ) The fact is we, as Christians, fail to deliver the right message to the so-called “gay community.” It’s not about “homophobia” or hatred of them, but a rebuke of their sinful nature…founded in scripture and, hopefully, with their eternal best interests in mind. At the same time, at the root of the problem is the delivering of a false doctrine that classifies them as purely “homosexuals” and nothing more (which also ascribes characteristics similar to predetermined traits, such as eye color, or race). It leads to the belief that they are purely victims of their “gay genes” and can’t be saved…which is a pretty good insight to the limitations the ultra-liberal Christians place on God Himself!
    Anyway, I must be tired because I’m beginning to rant. I’m off to bed. Good night and God bless everyone!

    Like

  16. Amen, PJ. I would like to add that we Christians get accused of hatred because we want the homosexual to see their lifestyles in the light of God’s Word and repent, be saved and spend eternity in heaven. We had a couple of lesbians as neighbors and my husband often went over and helped them with problems with their cars, we shared vegetables with them and waved to them when they were outside. I had no problem being a neighbor to them, but it saddened me to think of their lifestyle and they were proud of it as they displayed symbols on their vehicles and house.

    Like

  17. The term homophobia was one of the things that alerted me to how pervasive the argument technique that C. S. Lewis dubbed Bulverism has become. It’s essentially a one-word Bulverism. The consistent use of it to refer to those who disagree with a homosexual lifestyle essentially says “They only disagree with it because they’re irrationally fearful of it – their thinking is tainted and thus can be ignored” – classic Bulverism, condensed into a single word. In a sense, it’s turned Bulverism into something of an art form (not that the left has any monopoly on the use of Bulverism). But given Lewis’s comment that “Until Bulverism is crushed, reason can play no effective part in human affairs”, it’s an art form that we could do without.

    Like

  18. I’ve always simply looked at homosexuality as just another “sin of the flesh” as adultery, fornication, incest, etc. is. As such, it is no worse than any of those. It, like the others, is prohibited by virtue of the fact that it turns one’s thoughts from God to something very self-centered, which is the problem with over indulging in sexual gratification. I say over indulging because it is possible to put sex before God even within a perfectly acceptable HETERO marriage. All sex is really self-gratification first and foremost, as I don’t believe too many would indulge if it didn’t feel so darn good. It isn’t so much how one gratifies one’s self, it’s the fact that one is and usually elevating it to something important. The only importance of sex is in it’s procreative aspects. Sex for pleasure within a HETERO marriage is granted, but not at the expense of God.

    It’s kinda funny, but I tried to explain this concept at the site that banned me. During a discussion regarding homosexual inclusion within the Christian church, I was attempting to explain why I feel homosex rightly belongs with those other sins of the flesh. I spoke of the self-gratification aspect and that sexuality is not Godly, noting that St Paul speaks of not denying one’s spouse, but says the exception is for times of prayer. This says to me that prayer is more important than sex, and that it supports my position that the love spoken of within Scripture does not refer to eroticism.

    Well, this brought about much palpitations by the liberal Christians fawing there over the words of the blog host. Our very own Dan took it to mean that I am a most frigid individual and was thankful that he wasn’t my wife. Acknowledging that one small point wherein we both agreed wholeheartedly, as I am glad he isn’t my wife as well, I assured them that “my wife is quite satisfied, if you don’t mind me blowing my own horn.” Which I followed with, “But then if I COULD blow my own horn, I wouldn’t need a wife.”

    The host feigned shock and deleted my entire comment. I found it a bit disengenuous that in a discussion regarding homosexuality, such a fine joke would so highly raise anyone’s hackles. I wonder if it would have been deleted if I spoke of blowing someone else’s horn. Certainly you can understand my bewilderment.

    Like

  19. I thought it was quite funny! If Dan can talk about you being his wife then why was your comment so offensive? Seems they have no sense of balance. Certainly, they are closed minded on the topic – why even discuss it?

    Like

  20. PJ,
    I think we got it straightened out. Thanks for your patience.

    Marshall, that is hilarious. Although I would say that God has created us as sexual beings, but in our sin, we take what He has done and warp it. Sexuality in the proper context and setting is fine (between one man and woman, properly married). But other than that, excellent comments.
    Blessings

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s