What to call someone who hates gays?

Earlier this week, in a wee-small-hours dust-up with rapper will.i.am outside a downtown club, celebrity-gossip blogger Perez Hilton reached for the worst insult he could think of – and summoned up “******.”

When the proverbial hit the fan, the openly gay Hilton quickly recanted.

“I was in an out-of-the-ordinary situation and used a word that I would not utter under normal circumstances,” he said in a statement. “Clearly, I am not homophobic.”

Amazingly, Hilton had managed – at the very start of Toronto’s Gay Pride Week, yet – to employ two explosively provocative words in one go.

thestar.com/news/insight/article/656807

IT seems that anyone who disagree with homosexuals is labeled a homophobic which according to the Toronto Star Article is a desease !!!

“homophobic,” an all-purpose label for those who disapprove of gay sexuality, didn’t enter the language until the early 1970s. It was coined by New York clinical psychologist George Weinberg, who defined it as “the irrational fear, hatred and intolerance” of homosexuals. He believed it was a medical disorder.

Weinberg had been trained to regard homosexuality as a pathology. But he turned the tables to argue that the “sickness” lay elsewhere.

For the fledgling gay-liberation movement, the new term was a potent boost, an enormously effective weapon in its fight against discrimination.

“The term stood a central assumption of heterosexual society on its head by locating the `problem’ of homosexuality not in homosexuals, but in heterosexuals who were intolerant of it,” says Gregory Herek, a University of California (Davis) psychologist and leading gay-rights researcher.

Many activists took the concept a step further, promoting the idea that homophobic attitudes and behaviour were linked to a person’s fear and loathing of his own repressed homosexual feelings. There were unsuccessful attempts to get homophobia placed into the official compendium of psychiatric conditions as an “intolerant personality disorder.”

In quick time, however, calling someone homophobic had gained the same silencing power as calling them racist.

Yeah, the whole label thing is getting waaay out of hand. It’s so wrong to call someone “homophobic,” when there is clearly no fear involved. I think they’re just mad because we remind them of the sinful nature of their action while they’re trying to justify it. They try to make us look foolish by calling us names. That might work on earth, but I’m pretty sure God’s not impressed - and His is the only opinion that matters.

What upsets me about this is that last week the civil servant union in toronto went on strike, basically no garbage collection no swiming pools for the kids etc… and they decided to cancell all celebration relating to Canada Day which is July 1st. However they found a way to keep the Pride parade on track for this week-end They are expecting 1 million people to attend the parade . I am wondering about all the garbage that is going to pile up and who is going to clean it up. :mad:

Wow! That is a really strange situation. Maybe they’re afraid of an angry mob of gay people storming City Hall or something. It’s just amazing how backwards the world is getting. Governments will eliminate all kinds of meaningful activities that are enjoyed by the majority, yet they’ll practically bend over backwards to hold gay events. It just doesn’t make sense. Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!:mad:

:confused:

Okay, I am not in Canada and am not familiar with the news, but it seems the strike has nothing to do with Gay pride parades.

One of the striking workers, Michelle Hamilton-Paige, who works in the city’s public health department, said most Torontonians aren’t supporting the union, but they’re not understanding the issues.

“We get a lot of abuse from people that we’re overpaid and that we should be happy that we have our jobs. And there’s a lack of understanding that we are happy that we have our jobs, we’re very committed to working for the [public] service. We’re public servants.… And we feel that we deserve support whether we’re on strike or not,” she said.

cbc.ca/canada/toronto/story/2009/06/24/cupe-strike.html

As far was what to call someone who hates gays, how about simply calling them a hater? The Catholic Church doesn’t condemn anyone for being homosexual, so there is no religious basis for disliking homosexuals. What is considered sinful is homosexual activity, which is different from simply being homosexual.

For the most part, “homophobia” tends to be a made up word that active homosexuals use to attack those who disapprove of their behavior and to explain away their personal problems.

I have done some considerable informal research on the psychological development of homosexuality, and I have come to the conclusion that most homosexuals develop samesex attractions (or homosexual attraction) as a result of either psychological or social problems earlier in life that were not their fault.

Although I think that “homophobia” tends to be used as a excuse, I do think that many people tend to have a certain uneasiness around people who they know are homosexual which causes them to distance themselves from, and reject, those homosexuals.

I know this from experience because I am a student at a catholic university in Ohio (Franciscan University) who is homosexual in orientation (but celibate in practice, according with the Church’s teachings). I did not chose or want to be homosexual, but after doing some research I have identified things in my past which have contributed to my overall psychological development. I did not want anyone to know about my samesex attractions because that would hurt my reputation and influence how people view me. However, several students in my dorm last year began to speculate that I was homosexual, and those speculations became rumors about me that spread behind my back and hurt my reputation. Some of those student seemed noticeably uncomfortable around me in the hall and kept their distance from me.

I guess my point is that “homophobia”, the way it tends to be used, is a made up excuse. However, Many people seem to be too uncomfortable to be willing to be good friends with people who have samesex attractions, which makes it hard for people like me with unwanted samesex attractions. If you are going to take the position of “hate the sin, but love the sinner” with people who are homosexuals (whether they act on them, or like me chose not to), you have to actually love the sinner.

I Agree with you totally to " hate the Sin and Love the Sinner". I have many friends who are openly homesexuals. What i Detest though is being labeled as a Homophobic just because I disagree with someone sexual orientation.

God Bless

Love is not tolerance

BISHOP FULTON J. SHEEN****Christian love bears evil, but it does not tolerate it.

http://www.catholiceducation.org/images/authos/Sheen8.JPG  [LEFT]*Christian love bears evil, but  it does not tolerate it. * 

It does penance for the sins of others, but it is not broadminded about sin.
*The cry for tolerance never induces it to quench its hatred of the evil philosophies that have entered into contest with the Truth. *
It forgives the sinner, and it hates the sin; it is unmerciful to the error in his mind.
*The sinner it will always take back into the bosom of the Mystical Body;
but his lie will never be taken into the treasury of His Wisdom. *
*Real love involves real hatred:
whoever has lost the power of moral indignation and the urge to drive the buyers and sellers from the temples
has also lost a living, fervent love of Truth. *
*Charity, then, is not a mild philosophy of “live and let live”;
it is not a species of sloppy sentiment. * [/LEFT]
Charity is the infusion of the Spirit of God,
which makes us love the beautiful and hate the morally ugly.

You’re absolutely right, BobObob. It is the sin that should be despised, but we should always welcome the sinner. After all, who among us is without sin? Homosexual feelings are usually beyond a person’s control, but the action itself is a conscious decision to reject the Lord’s Word. There is a distinct difference, and like you said, many people do not recognize it. I agree; the term “homophobic” is used too loosely (especially since there is no phobia involved). It’s great that you are dedicated to resisting the tendency. It takes tremendous strength to bear a cross like that, and the fact that you have triumphed thusfar is very admirable. I pray that the Lord will make you a shining example of courage for all those who struggle similarly.

And that has been a problem here at CAF, too. Several persons who have expressed being in a position such as yours, and who are trying to follow Catholic teaching, have been ill-received.

I respect your walk of faith. But many Catholics, especially those who consider themselves orthodox, have a hard time supporting persons in your position. I don’t know what to say about this other than I will pray for you, and pray that Catholics become more supportive of the position of their Church.

Is there such a word as Christophobic? Someone that fears genuine Christians and genuine Christian morality? How about Christobigot? A hatred of Christians with genuine Christian values?

Yeah, I wonder. It works both ways, ya know. :smiley:

You might add “sexist.” And maybe nativist" will make a comeback. ,

Why is it necessary to give someone who “hates gays” a label?:shrug:

I always understood the word homophobia to originally mean s person reacted strongly against homosexuals because he was deep down afraid to admit hsi own deep seated homosexual attraction to men.

It was a form of overcompensation. His hatred of gays was not based on fear of them, but an almost hysteric fearful denial of his own homosexual feelings by projecting them onto others and then verbally or physically assaulting them.

The meaning has changed since then to mean anyone who opposes gay marriage.

That was my understanding of the word too. Since its coinage in 1969, it seems to have become debased, with it being tossed out willy-nilly whenever someone wants to accuse someone else of being an anti-homosexual bigot. I think this is unfortunate, since the word in its original sense had value. I don’t think the word has much value now.

Bobobob,

Great post and welcome to CAF.

I think you’ll find things get better when your peers get older and more sure of their own sexuality. In such a sexually screwed up culture, young people trying to live the faith as a counter-culture face natural uncertainties and genuinely don’t know what they haven’t experienced. A place like FUS is going to have a much higher percentage of virgins (male and female) than the rest of society and that lack of experience combined with the sick culture we live in probably makes for some insecurity on their part.

Do your best to forgive them - they’ll grow up eventually. In the meantime, hang in there and stick close to Jesus. You’ve got some awesome resources for doing so close at hand!

Dale:

That’s why, in California, we’re hearing the word “BIGOT” a LOT! If you oppose anything the Gay Lobby demands, you’re a “BIGGOT”! If you defend Traditional Marriage or Morality, you’re a “BIGGOT”!

The INTOLERANCE of those who teach tolerance…

In Christ, Michael

Hi Michael,

I don’t live in California anymore (:(), but I think I understand what you mean. On the web I see the word “bigot”, as well as other words, being commonly used to accuse political opponents of being inspired by hate. This is very unfortunate, and I think it is related to the general coarsening of political conversations over the past 15 years or so. But, yes, that word is overused, too.

It seems sad to me that anyone would want to come up with a term for people who hate anyone. :frowning:

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.