Responding To a Comment About “Heterophobic Tyrants”

We are smack in the middle of our Leadership conference but I wanted to try and get this post done before turning in for the evening.

David mentioned the following as the concluding paragraph of his comment:

Imagine the intolerance and bigotry that will manifest if these people gain more and more control of the seats of power. They will be like they are, tyrants ranting and raving about what blithering idiots we all are because we dont’t want this dictatorial heterophobie bunch ruling us.

Emily asked if I agreed with David’s thoughts. He has more to his comment than that paragraph and they are his personal opinion. I don’t feel compelled to chime in on those but as I have thought about that last paragraph I did decide to offer a couple of cents worth of feedback.

First of all David, thank you for coming forward and offering your opinion. I am going to disagree with you on some things but it is all offered as just simple opinion.

The use of the words “these people” is an automatic buzzword that causes immediate shutdown of dialog. It just sounds condescending. I am not saying that was your intent, but it is easy to take that away from reading it on a screen. The generalization of “they will be like they are, tyrants ranting and raving about what …” I would agree with you only in the context of the very rare gay activist. Even most gay activists aren’t like that. Most gay identified people I meet or know aren’t even activists and do not rant and rave. I even think that most of the gay community might believe we are wrong but I don’t think they would consider us “blithering idiots.” Some definitely do but even though they are loud…they are simply a vocal minority… a small part of the whole community.

The part about you claiming we do not want “dictatorial heterophobic bunch” ruling over us … The post I wrote that spun off this conversation was about what I believe to be the misappropriation of Civil Rights language on gay ideological/social issues. I *think* what you might be alluding to is the theory that gay “rights” come at the expense of religious liberty. I wasn’t addressing that issue in my post though. I am not sure that is what is going on in your head but if it was I wanted to just clarify that was not where I was going with that particular post. Does that make any sense at all?

Orlando has a lesbian identified city council member and she can’t stand what we at Exodus do. However, when we went to go testify on an issue, we got to say our mind in front of her and she didn’t cut us off. She might have rolled her eyes and crossed her arms but she didn’t try to stop us from testifying. On a couple of other issues I have seen her “rule” on… I actually agreed with her (just city business stuff … not a lot … but a couple of things.) Plus, she has never been “heterophobic” and honestly I don’t know any gay identified people who are (past and present.) Could other phobias be present? Sure… but *phobic is also another buzzword that has lost its true meaning in it’s use as a slur against people who challenge gay ideology. Turnabout in this situation doesn’t work in my opinion.

I think I might have used that word heterophobic once or twice but then realized it just didn’t describe reality. People may hate that I was once gay and now not but that doesn’t mean they are irrationally afraid of heterosexuals :).

David, and everyone, I can be very directive but I never intend to be prideful or arrogant. I only offer my opinions. I don’t want to leave an impression that I am trying to correct you. I appreciate your and everyone’s comments.

Related posts (automatically generated)

• Reflections on July 4th 2008 - Apparently I am Progressive

• World Magazine Reports Mainstreaming of Homosexuality is Helping Others Find Freedom From It

• Why I Read Gay Blogs