Why is homosexuality so threatening to the fundy wingnut faction?

[Jackpine Radical]

Why are they convinced that the gays not only want to “convert” all those little Jesus-freak children to onanism, but in fact have some magic power that will enable them to do so? This is, after all, a rather bizarre belief. I mean, I'm straight, but just don't give a whole lot of thought to other people's sexuality (except maybe, especially when I was younger, trying to make a quick assessment of the potential availability of some attractive female who had swum into my ken). For the most part, I just really don't care. So why are the Falwells, Wildmons, and, yes, Craigs of the world so different? Well, sure, the leaders are maybe pandering to the homophobic masses, but why is the whole business such an issue for them? Especially when so man of them seem to be in the closet themselves?

Somehow, I think that the fact so many are in the closet is our first clue into what is going on. I think a lot of Fundies are in fact prone to same-sex attraction, but they are incredibly repressed people who cannot act on their normal desires. They fear their children may be vulnerable to the blandishments of the gay life because they themselves feel those attractions. The whole anti-gay fervor is a matter of psychological projection; they keep trying to banish what they see as evil temptations, assuming that everyone must feel the same “unnatural” desires that they find, and loathe, in themselves.

If this quick bit of analysis has any merit, then the Fallwells, the Swaggarts, and the Craigs seem to me more pathetic than evil, more tormented by unseen internal battles with their own forbidden desires than simply hypocritical. I guess I am capable of some degree of sympathy for these twisted little souls, while nevertheless wishing they could either work out their problems or endure their self-inflicted anguish without injuring all the other people who never asked to be trapped in their private little Hells.

[Fresh_Start]

1. Lets make is Clear. Craig's homosexuality (if he's gay)

is not the issue. Its his creepy soliciting sex from anonymous men in a public restroom while pretending to be an upholder of 'high moral ethics'

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

20. Yes.

I've been around child molesters, and such creeps, and they give me a very very bad feeling--I can tell immediately that this is someone to avoid. I have to be told by someone that they are gay or lesbian--never pick it up on my radar.

[Olney Blue]

2. It's their ACTIVE campaign to hurt others that bothers me.

[rocktivity]

3. Because it's so ATTRACTIVE to the fundy wingnut faction!

:headbang:
rocknation

[jgraz]

4. Because they are sexually twisted

It's not just homosexuality, though that seems to be the thing that bothers them the most at the moment. It's also fear of women's sexuality, as demonstrated by their rabid hatred of choice, blind emphasis on abstinence and the sick, pedophilic "Purity" ceremonies that are being held in many churches.

These people basically hate sex of all kind. My guess is that this is because their own sexuality is something hateful and evil. They've spent so much time getting their moral code fed to them out of a bronze-age book that they have no internal compass to determine what's right or wrong.

[al bupp]

5. Because they're morans

Not to put too fine a point on it, that is.

[havocmom]

7. best summation ever

:applause:

[KurtNYC]

6. the leaders aren't threatened by it -- they are selling it

Homophobia is just another brand of fear that they sell to the flock: "Liberals, Homos, Ay-rabs, Hell..." They just cash in on fear. What THEY believe, do or are threantened by is another matter.

It certainly was another matter for Ted Haggard -- he sold fear and used the money to pay for gay sex.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Haggard

[Akoto]

8. Because they use homosexuality as a weapon.

Hatred is a very powerful motivator, unfortunately. Combine it with a few verses from a religious text - which many people still fervently believe in - and you've got yourself a quick route to a large base of political supporters.

If gay people were allowed to live without any hatred directed toward them? If they enjoyed equal rights, if they could legally wed? Eventually, people would become accustomed to it, and the Republican meme about gays wanting to "corrupt" and "enforce an agenda" would fade away. Along with that would go the ability for religiously-oriented individuals to whip their followers into a frenzy around election time.

In truth, I think the majority of them know very well that homosexuality does not lead to indoctrination or any other such nonsense.

[On the Road]

9. I Could Never Figure This Out

and I was an evangelical for over a decade in the 70s and 80s. I never had this attitude. And to tell you the truth, the people I knew didn't either. As a taxi driver, I was hit on by maybe half a dozen men and it never bothered me in any way.

I understand the position that homosexuality is considered a sin in the Bible and according to overwhelming history in the church. But there are many other things that do generate this level of condemnation. I do not understand the hysteria at all. The Bible is pretty strict -- there are many commonly accepted things that are prohibited and are not the subject of moral crusades.

I do suspect that a lot of this is overcompensation for repressed homosexual feelings.

[burythehatchet]

10. because they themselves fell under the magical gay spell

and will do anything to suppress it.

[cboy4]

11. I just had a conservative acquaintance just tell me that

"well at least Republicans have a proven track record of getting rid" of their perverts. :eyes:

Naturally, Barney Frank's name came up, as it always does whenever Republicans try to deflect the issue concerning one of their own.

[valerief]

12. It's just another tool in their toolbox to use to divide and conquer. Like abortion. nt

[NashVegas]

13. I Think It Goes Back to the Dominionist Thing

Which involves the getting of heirs to pass that domain onto. A side lover, a queen for a day, is no threat to the traditional male-daddy-female-mommy-buddy-sissy model.

But a boyfriend or a girlfriend, with the possibility of being a future spouse? It steps on everything they've ever known. That almost all of us have ever known. The world is changing, and look how fast! Stonewall was just 40 years ago. I get crap for it, but I'm just as inclined to have some sympathy for those who are afraid of the change (providing they aren't assholes) as I do for those who are forging it.

[pansypoo53219]

14. fear

of being converted, because it wouldn't take much for them to switch sides i guess.

[ourbluenation]

21. yep. fear. pure and simple. of what - I still don't know. n/t

[PBass]

15. It's a masculinity issue. Homosexuality threatens their already fragile

sense of manhood.

If another guy hits on you, you bust his head open.

If a two-bit dictator stands up to you, you invade his country.

Similar principle in action...

Look at all the wingnuts who say we should "nuke Iraq" (substitute: nuke Iran). They felt emasculated by 9/11 (substitute: by Bush's utter failure in Iraq).

[Retrograde]

16. It reminds them there's a whole 'nuther sex that won't date them?

I think it's a power thing: in the West, men were traditionally dominant -at least legally - over women. I suspect it's the same sort of thinking that leads to fear of feminists.

[PBass]

17. Yep, fear of feminists comes from a similar place in the fragile Wingnut psyche.

This is cetainly not my original idea. I was just reading about this, and I already forgot who I read... Doh! Somebody smarter than me...

[Toasterlad]

18. For the Last Couple Days, I've Been Wondering Why It's So Threatening to LIBERALS.

Freakin' Craig overload.

As for the OP, people fear what they don't understand. If your heterosexual, I'd imagine you find the concept of two men having sex unnatural, if not gross. If you're an intelligent person, prone to thinking logically, it's not hard to reason that it is, in fact, natural, if not the norm. You come to realize that it's not a bad thing and that it can't hurt you, or, indeed, affect you in any way. And so you acknowledge it and move on.

If you're NOT prone to thinking logically...indeed, if you're not prone to thinking at all, but rather letting your bible or pastor or what have you tell you what to believe, then you never make the leap that homosexuality is natural, and therefore it's easy to convince you that it's both bad and harmful. Which is TREMENDOUSLY useful to a religion or a government when they need a boogeyman to distract people from asking pesky questions.

[ourbluenation]

22. Friend... I think it's about the hypocrisy, nothing more, nothing less. n/t

[Toasterlad]

24. I Know That's What It's INTENDED to Be About.

But if you'd read what I've read, you'd know that a lot of it is really about tired gay jokes, worn out stereotyping, and horrendously ignorant comparisons of homosexuality to pedophilia.

[ourbluenation]

25. thats a damn shame. a damn shame, indeed.

:cry:

[KurtNYC]

34. I read what you read

pretty disturbing. Some of it reminds me of the comments during the Ted Haggard scandal -- and some here could not conceive of a 40-year-old prostitute because it just didn't fit with these ignorant stereotypes.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

19. I think it is because they are out of touch with their inner feelings

and emotions. Some men, especially, have this quaint notion that it isn't "masculine" to express emotion, and also think it is not right to have feelings of love for another person of the same sex who is not a relative. I think a lot of men get these very normal feelings "mixed up" with their false notion of what it means to be a man, and feel threatened by them. I think it is a bit easier for women in this culture, because it is socially acceptable for women to express their feelings more openly, and even to have strong friendships with another woman--no one looks askance at two unrelated women hugging or even kissing each other on the cheek upon meeting.

[porphyrian]

23. I'm not even convinced it's always personal to them (obviously it is to the victim).

Homosexuals just make a convenient group for scapegoating because there are things in the Bible they can use to justify it. Scapegoats are convenient because a mob in a frenzy of hate against them is distracted from what the scapegoaters are doing, which is usually just stealing the mob's money. Sometimes they are also trying to distract from sexual activities the mob would frown upon (Bakker, Swaggart, etc.), sometimes not, but money is almost always involved.

[FreeState]

26. Madonna summed it up best

Madonna summed it up best:

"Girls can wear jeans
And cut their hair short
Wear shirts and boots
cause its ok to be a boy
But for a boy to look like a girl is degrading
cause you think that being a girl is degrading
But secretly youd love to know what its like
Wouldnt you
What it feels like for a girl"


Keep in mind most if not all homophobic persons see homosexuals as effeminate.

[canetoad]

27. My own personal and private opinion

which I will quietly pass on to you, is that they are not very highly evolved.

We de-sex our animals for a reason. To prevent them from wildly copulating and reproducing, thereby leaving a large number of offspring vulnerable and uncared for.

Similarly, certain members of the human race have no problem wildly copulating and reproducing, with little or no thought to what an evolved consciousness means. My best guess is those who object to homosexuality feel a personal responsibility to propagate the human race and expect everyone else to share it.

Remember, this is private, so don't go spreading on the 'net that I'm a sociopath who would shed no tears if the mutation that we call homo-sapiens became extinct and left the planet to the gentle creatures who really own it. OK?

[goddess40]

31. I think it's because men love their penis's so much

that they are sure any gay man will want it - or they are afraid they might have some homosexual tendencies because of their own penile worship.

I say this only half-joking because I really believe there is a grain of truth in the statement.

[qdemn7]

28. Because of sexual repression

In most of the rest of the modern world women go topless at the beach and there are nude beaches for couples and families. In the America a woman who went topless at most beaches would be arrested. Women AND men would be arrested for going nude. If parents exposed their children to nudity they would be prosecuted for child abuse. There are only a few isolated places for public nudity in America.

Playboy magazine got started in America 50+ years ago by Hugh Hefner and he made millions of dollars, predicated on the simple idea of showing women's bare breasts and buttocks. Numerous imitators followed.

In America strip clubs are everywhere making millions of dollars in taxes and fees for governments. Yet prostitution is illegal, and both prostitute and customers are arrested and prosecuted. The exception is a few counties in Nevada where female prostitution is legal. So the message America gives in it's OK to look and leer, but don't touch, don't actually do anything.

In America sex is used to sell everything in the Media, yet even mild portrayals of real human sexuality in the Media bring harsh reactions.

In America the exposure of a female nipple on broadcast TV is forbidden and can bring national controversy and serious legal consequences for the broadcaster. In most of the rest of the modern world exposed female nipples are seen regularly on broadcast TV.

All this speaks to heterosexuality, why should the reaction to homosexuality been any more enlightened?

We have a repressive belief system, based on an archaic belief system. A system that states that the human body, human sexuality, in fact almost ANYTHING dealing with human physical pleasure, is dirty and filthy and should be hidden or tightly regulated or simply prohibited.

[bliss_eternal]

29. They're evil.

Period.

Evil is as evil does.

[omega minimo]

30. BECAUSE IT UNDERMINES THE MALE DOMINANT PARADIGM

(transmitted via the "traditional" form of marriage)


Thank you for asking. Please tell everyone you know.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

36. yes!

:thumbsup:

[raccoon]

41. Right on! A homosexual man I know said that homosexual marriage is a threat

to a patriarchal society.

In a patriarchal society, in a marriage, the husband is the boss and the wife is the subservient one. If two men, or two women marry, who's going to be the boss and who the subservient one?

[atommom]

42. We can't have people threatening the patriarchy, now can we?

They really do think that changing the male dominant paradigm would lead to the downfall of society. It's tragic, really, that so many innocent people have to suffer because of the fundies' fears.

[HardRocker05]

32. two things: contempt for females and obsession with sex being 'dirty.' nt

[defendandprotect]

33. Homosexual repression came by patriarchy; so it seems obvious --

Everything feminine is to be repressed and that includes homosexuality --
and I think lesbians are by far the bigger threat than male homosexuals -
They almost can't acknowledge it!!

[Odin2005]

40. Being gay has nothing to do with femininity.

[Atman]

35. They're afraid that if they appear to accept it then it will expose their inate gayness

Not that there's anything wrong with being gay...unless you're a fundy, apparently. They won't be able to go back home and bilk their fellow fundies out of more campaign contributions. They'd done the math...if only a few percent of the population is supposedly gay but 90% are religious, they know who's filling their collection plates.

.

[cobalt1999]

37. Have you read that book (the bible) they worship?

Full of homosexual and women hating from cover to cover. No wonder they are warped.

[Odin2005]

38. Because in Western culture gays are thought to be effeminate.

Which is funny, because the most "butch" guy I know is gay and in ancient Greece the elite forces for various city-states were for gays only.

[treestar]

39. It disturbs their sense of order

They have authoritarian personalities and they need for there to be rules for everything. Everyone else has to follow these rules or they feel threatened. If everyone else does not follow the rules, they do not know what to do next.

They can keep order in their world if everyone follows the rules of sex, which are to get married and have children and stay married. This is the most orderly and controllable way; you know what people are going to do and not do if everyone follows the rules. Therefore, you can control your world better.

If it is an open possibility that your parent/spouse/child will do something other than stay in their current marriage; all things are possible and tomorrow everything may change. This is a "threat" the same way it is if people convert from one religion to another or allow foreigners (who may do things differently, by different rules) to come too close.

Also for some people, sex is an strong enough urge to threaten one with loss of control. This is why there can be no nudity, etc., in their world. Anything that inflames that dangerous urge and causes people to do things to break the rules must be suppressed, or disorder could ensue.

[book_worm]

43. becasue some of them are hidden deep in their closets and resent anybody who is open about their

sexuality.

[xchrom]

44. have you considered it's not about fear -- but power?

look -- whether the issue is women and abortion -- or gay folk and bigotry -- it's all about social conservative trying to get a hand on your genitals and control who you fuck.

it's unrealistic -- it is a willfully ignorant approach to fact, history and human behavior -- BUT there is little else to ensure a good way to control someone than to to control their genitals.

if someone has you by your private parts -- you are pretty much going to do what they tell you.

it's very effective.

that doesn't mean people won't fuck willy nilly -- but it will certainly be done in an atmospere of repression, oppression and regression.
more -- they will have the law to back up their threats and fear mongering.

[yardwork]

45. If people are allowed to love freely, they will start thinking freely.

If people start thinking freely, they might start living the way they really want. This is very threatening to the capitalist structure.

[Marnieworld]

46. I have a theory

That it's rooted in sexism. That the concept of a same-sex married couple actually (in their eyes) threatens their concept of marriage. If two equal peers can make a life together without resorting to gender roles and responsibilities, it threatens their old-fashioned concept of head of the household, subservient wife. Marriage without children offends them as well, even from straight couples. Basic homophobia towards men is also based in sexism. Girly-man, pansy, sissy. All referring to feminine qualities. But more importantly I feel that this is why they fight marriage for same-sex partners. It would be a revolution of the concept of marriage to them and the power structure they feel comfortable with.

:D

[formerrepuke]

47. Their instruction manual tells them what to think: "'f'its in th' babble, s'all ah need ta know"...

...but they have no problem cherry-picking what to do (and not to do) from the same manual.

[Desertrose]

48. Because it makes a dandy distraction from all the political crap

they are doing.

Seriously.

Big distraction for the masses...and it works EVERY TIME!



:hi:Jackpine
DR

[KittyWampus]

49. cause Fundies are Submissive to their Authority Figures & allow themselves to be ruled by fear

They are told by their Authority to fear/hate/persecute gays and doing so gives them a warped feeling of power which their submission to said Authority takes from them.

[rucky]

50. Most CONs fear what they don't understand.

and instead of trying to understand it, they try to destroy it.

then there is the self-loathing faction, who have the perfect cover with the haters.

[JitterbugPerfume]

51. they are sexually repressed

I used to know a fundy minister who only had sex with his wife for reasons of procreation.My sister dated his son when we were teens.I only hope that young man finally broke free of his fathers influence

Mrs### looked like a whipped puppy most of the time

[Lethe]

52. because in the Bible God destroyed Sodom and Gamorrah

and everyone inside for being homosexual. The fundies believe in collective punishment....that is, God will punish all of us as a group (or nation) for the sins of individuals. They believe that God is punishing america through disease, hurricanes and terrorism, etc, because of the "immorality" of individuals inside america. (homosexuality, abortion, etc) The draw upon the Old Testament where God punished the Israelites as a whole nation for not following his laws....ex: homosexuality, taking non-israelite wives, following the rituals of other gods, idolatry....

That is the official explanation and what they preach in church. However, I believe like the other posters said that their hatred of homosexuality stems from a repression of their own desires and inability to satisfy them.

[IndianaJones]

53. oh jeez. nt.