The key word, the lynch-pin of phraseology in the homosexual social debate is the word "tolerance." Let's examine tolerance as it is applied to the social dilemma of human sexuality in America.
Society (heterosexual society) is told that a refusal to “embrace” homosexuality and the homosexual lifestyle, openly and without reservation, is in fact manifest “intolerance and bigotry.” People that were from all outward appearances “normal” are suddenly transformed into that horrible "intolerant social class of bigot," if heterosexuals do not unconditionally surrender their individuality and sexual and religious beliefs on the alter of egalitarian propelled tolerance, then they are to be considered intolerant bigots.As you have probably already deduced, I am an odd sort of fellow.
Its not that I am terribly bothered by those that throw around names and social hyperbole, its just that I like to examine the original intended context and definition of these (weapon) words as opposed to the closed context of social egalitarianism where they are deployed.Therefore, examine what these two words mean by a recognized and common definition, before I proceed further.
(Source: Merriam Webster’s on line)
Main Entry: tol·er·ance Pronunciation: 'tä-l&-r&n(t)s, 'täl-r&n(t)sFunction: noun1 : capacity to endure pain or hardship : ENDURANCE, FORTITUDE, STAMINA2 a : sympathy or indulgence for beliefs or practices differing from or conflicting with one's own b : the act of allowing something : TOLERATION3 : the allowable deviation from a standard; Main Entry: big·ot Pronunciation: 'bi-g&tFunction: nounEtymology: Middle French, hypocrite, bigot: a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices - big·ot·ed /-g&-t&d/ adjective- big·ot·ed·ly adverb
It appears then, that by definition, “tolerance” as applied to the homosexual lifestyle requires “sympathy or indulgence for beliefs or (practices) differing from or conflicting with one’s own.” And a bigot therefore, is anyone that is “obstinately or intolerantly devoted” to their own opinions or beliefs. Therefore, it is only fitting, that we also examine the word prejudice in the context of the overall discussion.
"Main Entry: 1prej·u·dice Pronunciation: 'pre-j&-d&sFunction: nounEtymology: Middle English, from Old French, from Latin praejudicium previous judgment, damage, from prae- + judicium judgment -- more at JUDICIAL1 : injury or damage resulting from some judgment or action of another in disregard of one's rights; especially : detriment to one's legal rights or claims2 a (1) : preconceived judgment or opinion (2) : an adverse opinion or leaning formed without just grounds or before sufficient knowledge b : an instance of such judgment or opinion c : an irrational attitude of hostility directed against an individual, a group, a race, or their supposed characteristics"
I am not using these definitions as anything other than what they were originally intended for. A simple premise of understanding.
With that said, it must also be noted that the aforementioned definitions have been revised from their original definitive meanings during the last generation, in an attempt to make their applicability more relevant to the discussion of modern day sexuality, religious preferences and social behaviors.The social issue of homosexuality in my opinion, is not as much an issue of tolerance as it is a not so cleverly cast and portrayed social agenda designed to abolish all morality. Homosexuality in America has become an issue of forced social acceptance of sexual behavior that cannot be (satisfactorily) equalized by any other means than contrived manipulation of language and social pressure.
Based upon the definitions described above, to be truly tolerant, I and any other religious heterosexual must be sympathetic and willing to be indulgent.
( "Indulgent: 1 a : to give free rein to b : to take unrestrained pleasure in : GRATIFY 2 a : to yield to the desire of : HUMOR b : to treat with excessive leniency, generosity, or consideration intransitive senses : to indulge oneself.” in order to avoid or prevent the stigmatization and demonetization of being called or considered a (bigot) by those more socially enlightened and egalitarian.If I am a true (bigot because of my beliefs) then I am “obstinately” and “intolerantly” devoted to my own personal beliefs and opinions, correct? Obstinate defined by the same source reflects: “1 : perversely adhering to an opinion, purpose, or course in spite of reason, arguments, or persuasion 2 : not easily subdued, remedied, or removed.”
Therefore, in my opinion, by any application of definition that one wishes to apply, the true intolerance and bigotry of American sexuality is in reality reflected more accurately from a homosexual perspective towards heterosexuals than a heterosexual perspective towards homosexuals. Homosexuality in America, has become a protected class and the enemies are heterosexuals and all things religious or moral."Perversely adhering to an individual opinion?" In opposition to the combined religious teachings of all traditional and historical religions throughout history, homosexuals demand acceptance and inclusion into institutions and religions that have (or should have) an equally protected right to their own individual belief system or religion.
The refusal to accept the validity and relevancy of religious faith and heterosexuality is a concise description of the homosexual perspective of opinion as it is applied to today's social and religious standards.. "Intolerance?" There is no sympathy or indulgence for the practices or beliefs of anyone outside the homosexual community that does not subscribe to the philosophies and beliefs of homosexuality and those that subscribe to that lifestyle. There is no desire by homosexuals to allow for any deviation from the standards imposed by individual beliefs in homosexuality.
As for bigots? In my opinion, it is homosexuals that reflect more of an obstinate and intolerant adherence to their own opinions and beliefs in homosexuality and lifestyle than any contemporary heterosexual reality reflected through the prism of homosexual perspective.So in the context of understanding my problem with the article (above) describing the current conflict in the school systems of Kentucky and other states and in the context of the social debates and discussions of homosexuality and heterosexuality, I want to make my opinion clear and understood in the context being represented by the social arguments reflected by homosexuals and their egalitarian supporters.
The issue is not intolerance or discrimination or equality of rights, unless and until you examine the entire context and definition of social representations surrounding homosexuality. When you do examine these arguments, the reality is immediately and clearly revealed to be that true discrimination, intolerance and bigotry are practiced daily against heterosexual Americans and their religious beliefs by homosexuals and the egalitarian misrepresentations put forth by those that seek to destroy our faith and principles. © trickworm 2004
No comments:
Post a Comment