Super Bowl Coach (hearts) Bigots.

It wasn't just the speech to the Wisconsin legistlature. He also appeared in a newspaper campaign against homosexuality. I only remember because he did it wearing his old uniform, so either the team or the NFL or both stepped in.

 

Maybe the funniest thing ever to appear on this board.

 

I will just reiterate that he was against homosexuality, not against homosexuals.

 

Uhm, how does that logic work? Because while it's great to say "hate sin but love the sinner," when a stance like this is taken, you essentially are hating a part of what this person is about. Maybe it's a fine line, but people still see it as an attack.

That's like saying "love democrats but hate what they believe in." Uhm, those beliefs are what make them democrats.

 

He is against homosexuals having equal rights. Might as well call them sub-human. Or maybe he should be reminded all history's problems in regards to equal rights for blacks. Would he have been in favor of the no "race-mixing" rules? How about the no sharing of water fountains?

Of course he's against those, I'm sure.

 

I remember in public relations class we had MADD as a real-life client. They were very clear that we were not to call them Mothers Against Drunk Drivers, they were Mothers Against Drunk Driving.

It is possible to separate the perceived 'sin' from the sinner. As a Christian, White would say, you detest the sin, not the sinner. You love the sinner with all your might while calling out his/her sin. Christ himself dined with sinners, and when questioned by the Pharisees, said something to the effect that it's not the well that need a doctor, but the sick.

Hate has no place in Christianity, White would argue.

This may come across that I'm agreeing with White and Dungy, but this is not true. I have no problem with offering gay partners the same civil benefits as everyone else. I just think the whole suggestion that anyone against the concept is bigoted and hates gays, and should fuck themselves "and the Colt you rode in on, Tony" is a little myopic.

 

Trouser, here's why "hate the sin" doesn't work.

If you equate homosexuality to drunk driving and homosexuals to drunk drivers, you are saying that the behavior is what you hate, not those who engage in the behavior.

Well, what behavior is that?

Is it anal sex? Can't be that. Heterosexuals engage in it, too.
Is it sucking cock? Can't be that, either. Heterosexuals engage in that.

What behavior is it that you're hating? If you say "two people of the same gender who engage in that behavior" ... well, that's not a behavior. Now you're hating the sinner, not the sin.

There is no way around it. It is impossible to "hate the sin" -- because there is no such thing as homosexual behavior.

There is not one behavioral action that homosexuals engage in that heterosexuals do not. Not one.

 

I am afraid that continuing to discuss this is going to lead to my painting as anti-gay, which as I said before, is far from the case.

But are you saying that two women kissing isn't homosexual behavior? And that a man and a woman kissing can't be categorized as an heterosexual act?

And on another point, imagine a friend of yours who has a behavior or habit that you disagree with. Are you saying that you can't disagree with it without hating the person as a whole?

 

The behavior is simply kissing -- which Webster's defines as "two people touching lips as an expression of affection". That's all. It is not, in and of itself, a heterosexual or homosexual behavior.

The people engaging in that behavior do not make the behavior different. The action itself is kissing. That's it.

There is no such thing as a "heterosexual act." The act(ion) is simply kissing -- it cannot be heterosexual or homosexual.

I'm saying -- there is no such thing as a homosexual behavior. There is no behavioral action that a homosexual person can engage in that a heterosexual person cannot. There is nothing to agree or disagree with.

"Hating the sin" does not apply to this discussion.

 

Not to mention the issue of equating homosexuality with something that is clearly improper behavior like drunk driving.

 

*Sigh*

I wasn't trying to equate the behaviors as being similarly unacceptable, I was trying to explain how some people differentiate their feelings about a behavior they disapprove of from their feelings about the person displaying said behavior.

 

That's fine and well.

What I'm saying is, it doesn't apply to homosexuality. There is no such thing as homosexual behavior.