"Name-Calling: The Favored Weapon of Gay Marriage Supporters" (an article in a Catholic magazine)

see www.crisismagazine.com/2012/name-calling-the-favored-weapon-of-gay-marriage-supporters

They resort to name calling once their arguments have been crushed and wrecked. No wonder that I enjoy it when they do that. :slight_smile:

“Most important legacy of Obama’s gay marriage switch was freeing Dems to play the ‘bigot card’.”

This is the tactic used by the supporters of many leftist ideals, not just homosexuality. This is particularly true among young people, my generation.

If you were not a Greek, you were a barbarian. If you don’t lean Democrat, you’re a bigot.

In his case, it was simply because he dared to say that being against same-sex marriage does not mean that one is against people who have a same-sex orientation.

There are plenty of Christians (including many on CAF who need to practice the above and respond with love. I can defend both traditional marriage and family and love people like Jesus did.

My challenge to those of you who are “disgusted” or “sick” or “fed up” with gays to get to know a gay person with compassion and love, who knows maybe you’ll transform their life.

I have had gay friends, some respect your views, some don’t. But the gay movement and the
progressive establishment (both republican and democrat) want to demonize anyone who
will not bow to their agenda.

Most catholcis are “disgusted”, “sick” or “fed up” with the gay agenda, and the act of homosexuality and the constant bombardment of pro-gay media.
As fas as the actual SSA person goes, most catholics have nothing against them.
There is no discrimination against a homosexual, but there is dislike of the act.

Yeah…because only gay people call others names or demand that everyone live according to the beliefs they hold.

That last comment is reflective of any propaganda campaign.

  1. You are the victim or potential victim.

  2. They are the enemy or potential enemy.

In the case of gay activists, the very term “activist” means they have a desired goal, and the best way to rally the troops is to create emotion. Think of any NFL coach before the game - he inspires his team, he reminds them of their accomplishments and puts them in the frame of mind to win. But that’s just a game.

Emotion is more important to propaganda than the truth. After same-sex marriage was voted down in Michigan, one person wrote a letter that was published in one of the two Detroit newspapers. Now, it was well crafted. The wording lent itself to the kinds of slogans some people shout during marches. Referring to the loss, he wrote: “Michigan. The great hate state.”

Of the gay people I’ve known, I never heard a word of conflict. We worked together, did our jobs, and that was that. But gay marriage is an entirely different issue than just having Same-Sex Attraction.

Name-calling does not help either side of the issue, but in this case, supporters can’t afford to have lukewarm troops. They need to be fired up for the win. And sadly, sometimes that includes painting all or most who oppose gay marriage as worthy of name-calling and pleas from emotion. Words matter.


In my defense, I believe in using tough love when it comes to engaging with the homosexualists.

I find that straight people, the same activists who run around looking for approval for all peoples of planet earth, are the ones at the forefront of this.

A lot of GLBTQ folks will respect those who disapprove of so-called “gay marriage” and don’t beat around the bush about it.

Hence me using the term “homosexualist” rather than “gay activist”.

I’m truly saddened by some of the uncharitable responses to my post. We should never name call or use “tough love.”

I didn’t become an abstinent gay man from “tough love.” If anything “tough love” hurt me beyond any of you could imagine. You all are privileged enough to be heterosexual, those who have SSA, and even worse a constitutional homosexual orientation like I do aren’t so lucky.

Do you think I would ever choose this? Do you think I haven’t tried to be heterosexual? I don’t need privileged heterosexuals calling me a “threat.” Because I got to tell you most gay people like me aren’t those activists running naked through the streets. I live a normal life. I don’t do pride, bars, or hookups. I hold a job, I got to school part time, and I have loved ones who care about me.

None of you know what it’s like to be scorned or hated for this. None of you. Maybe you should start loving more, instead of condemning.

You want to know why I became abstinent? It wasn’t because of condemnation or “tough love.” It was from compassion and love, and sensitivity. Something that I find is lacking on threads related to homosexuality.

None of hte posts responding to your were uncharitable. Being uncharitable would be something like saying you’re going to hell for loving gays, or some nonsense like that.

We all of the posts did was affirm the distinction between the people and the act. One of my closest friends in gay, I would trust him with my life. That does not mean that I approve of his decision to engage in homosexual acts, nor does it mean that I think he should be allowed to get “married.”

This is not uncharitable, it is simply the truth.

also… I just read through a lot of the comments on that site… I really need to remember -not- to read the comments on the internet…

Prior to calls for gay marriage, and prior to pride parades, I knew there were homosexuals and various forms of sexual behavior. We all knew. I know my parents had sex or I wouldn’t be here but they never talked about it. There were a lot of things that were appropriately, not talked about. It didn’t matter to me, then or now, that the men or women down the street were gay. We had good relations with most of our neighbors, aside from those who didn’t like kids or engaged in criminal behavior like stealing things, or were just busybodies who loved to gossip. “Oh, did you see Mr. So and So last night? He brought home a pretty young thing.” With the implication that Mr. So and So was doing something wrong. We were taught to stay out of people’s private business unless they were our friends, and even then, you simply didn’t ask about private matters. You respected the other person’s privacy.

Then things changed. What used to be private became public. What used to done behind closed doors ended up in the street. I want to like everybody. Really. And, thank God, I’ve had only only a few bad encounters with people, but none of it was about sexuality.

Now, those gay people who put on the pride parades, the Folsom Street Fair, and put all that stuff on the internet - what are people going to conclude? Even the President of the United States has spoken for a private matter regarding gay people.

I think there would have been zero problems if things continued as they did in the past with people keeping their sexual lives private. In the past, anybody who wanted to do anything did it - and the same today. So what changed? It is now in your face without your consent.


Ditto…thank you for posting it.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.