a: Doctrine of Homosexual Infalliblity ~
b: Catholic Church
What:
The idea is that the homos know best about everything and anything. Why is this? Because they are homosexuals. They know best or that at least that is the assumption. This is the tone of the current homo leadership. Now this is not a monolithic entity, but that is certainly the image that is being projected. It is, of course, compete non sense. Wait and see, as the homos become more open, they'll screw things up, just like everyone else.
Useful?
Writer: Lucrezia
LCC:
Where: Reference Link Has Evaporated
Date: Jul 9 2015 10:24 AM
#7912 Email metamia about this
By Rollo on 2018-June-23
Topic:
There are a few things I wanted to comment on:
1) OFFENSIVE TERMS ("Homos")
The term "homos" to describe homosexuals is largely considered offensive. It's considered a form of name-calling. If we want people to take our ideas seriously, we should avoid insulting them, which makes them defensive and therefore less likely to consider what we have to say.
We should ask ourselves 'who am I trying to convince?'. Then avoid insulting them. Imagine if I had written my comment in a similar way, where I call you a name(s) -- it doesn't feel good, right? We should be constructive and considerate so we can avoid talking over and past one another.
1) OFFENSIVE TERMS ("Homos")
The term "homos" to describe homosexuals is largely considered offensive. It's considered a form of name-calling. If we want people to take our ideas seriously, we should avoid insulting them, which makes them defensive and therefore less likely to consider what we have to say.
We should ask ourselves 'who am I trying to convince?'. Then avoid insulting them. Imagine if I had written my comment in a similar way, where I call you a name(s) -- it doesn't feel good, right? We should be constructive and considerate so we can avoid talking over and past one another.
------------------------------------------
By Rollo on 2018-June-23
Topic:
2) "HOMO LEADERSHIP"
I'm curious about who you believe this includes. Like you mentioned, homosexuality "is not a monolithic entity" so who are the leaders? What groups is it comprised of? Because they are not a monolithic entity, there can't really be "doctrines" (as per your title), right?
I've always thought of the push toward greater acceptance of those who are non-heterosexual as a movement, not a group. But it sounds like you're suggesting they are a unified group of sorts. I could be wrong.
I'm curious about who you believe this includes. Like you mentioned, homosexuality "is not a monolithic entity" so who are the leaders? What groups is it comprised of? Because they are not a monolithic entity, there can't really be "doctrines" (as per your title), right?
I've always thought of the push toward greater acceptance of those who are non-heterosexual as a movement, not a group. But it sounds like you're suggesting they are a unified group of sorts. I could be wrong.
------------------------------------------
By Rollo on 2018-June-23
Topic:
3) THEY'LL SCREW THINGS UP
I'd like to know what you meant when you said: "Wait and see, as the homos become more open, they'll screw things up, just like everyone else."
I guess I'm confused because I don't know what you mean when you say "become more open" -- what does that mean to you? What is it that you expect to learn from homosexuals being "more open"? Also, when you say "everyone else" has screwed things up, are you referring to specific groups?
I'd like to know what you meant when you said: "Wait and see, as the homos become more open, they'll screw things up, just like everyone else."
I guess I'm confused because I don't know what you mean when you say "become more open" -- what does that mean to you? What is it that you expect to learn from homosexuals being "more open"? Also, when you say "everyone else" has screwed things up, are you referring to specific groups?
------------------------------------------
By Rollo on 2018-June-23
Topic:
4) MINOR SPELLING CORRECTIONS
It's not a huge deal, but the title and second to the last sentence have typos. The title should be: "The Doctrine Of Homosexual Infallibility" (infallibility was spelled without an i after the b).
The second to last sentence should be written: "It is, of course, complete nonsense." I miss little things like that all the time, so I thought I'd point it out -- one typo-ist to another :)
It's not a huge deal, but the title and second to the last sentence have typos. The title should be: "The Doctrine Of Homosexual Infallibility" (infallibility was spelled without an i after the b).
The second to last sentence should be written: "It is, of course, complete nonsense." I miss little things like that all the time, so I thought I'd point it out -- one typo-ist to another :)
------------------------------------------