Is Christianity homophobic?

[AgnosticBoy]

Christians are often accused of being homophobic. So then I question why do people call themselves Christians in this day and age. I've searched the internet for a response. Of course, there are those Christians that try to make a case that homosexuality is not condemned by the Bible. But in this thread, I want to focus on those Christians that believe that being homosexual or engaging in same-sex behavior is wrong.

Here's one perspective I've found:

By Oxford Languages’ definition, homophobia can be as simple as a dislike for or as strong as a prejudice toward LGBT+ community members. While the word “phobia” implies a fear, homophobia has been used to describe everything from refusing to make a cake for a homosexual wedding to death penalties for homosexuals.

Christians are often accused of homophobia, often specifically because we stand for God’s holy design of sexual relations: one man and one woman united in marriage. It is never wrong for Christians to make a stand for biblical principle

However, true homophobia––prejudice against or hatred of homosexuals––is also sin. Prejudice is never biblical. We are never called to hatred but to love others as Christ loved us. Christians should not condone the homosexual lifestyle, but they should also not hate, degrade or condescend to those who identify as homosexual.

Source: https://www.collegianonline.com/2021/03 ... omophobic/

If I'm understanding correctly, it seems the author is trying to make a distinction between disagreeing with homosexuality and "prejudice and hatred of homosexuals". In another place, the author also refers to homophobia as a "fear".

For debate:
1. Is the author's distinction correct? Does 'homophobia' involve any type of belief or action (e.g. simply saying that it is wrong) that goes against homosexuality? Or does it just involve "hatred and prejudice"?

2. Is it even possible to believe that homosexuality is wrong but not to hate it or be prejudiced towards it?

[Mae von H]

Christians are often accused of being homophobic. So then I question why do people call themselves Christians in this day and age. I've searched the internet for a response. Of course, there are those Christians that try to make a case that homosexuality is not condemned by the Bible. But in this thread, I want to focus on those Christians that believe that being homosexual or engaging in same-sex behavior is wrong.

Here's one perspective I've found:

By Oxford Languages’ definition, homophobia can be as simple as a dislike for or as strong as a prejudice toward LGBT+ community members. While the word “phobia” implies a fear, homophobia has been used to describe everything from refusing to make a cake for a homosexual wedding to death penalties for homosexuals.

Christians are often accused of homophobia, often specifically because we stand for God’s holy design of sexual relations: one man and one woman united in marriage. It is never wrong for Christians to make a stand for biblical principle

However, true homophobia––prejudice against or hatred of homosexuals––is also sin. Prejudice is never biblical. We are never called to hatred but to love others as Christ loved us. Christians should not condone the homosexual lifestyle, but they should also not hate, degrade or condescend to those who identify as homosexual.

Source: https://www.collegianonline.com/2021/03 ... omophobic/

If I'm understanding correctly, it seems the author is trying to make a distinction between disagreeing with homosexuality and "prejudice and hatred of homosexuals". In another place, the author also refers to homophobia as a "fear".

For debate:
1. Is the author's distinction correct? Does 'homophobia' involve any type of belief or action (e.g. simply saying that it is wrong) that goes against homosexuality? Or does it just involve "hatred and prejudice"?

2. Is it even possible to believe that homosexuality is wrong but not to hate it or be prejudiced towards it?

The accusation of being “phobic” is meant to be an ad hominem insult to a person. That is, one doesn’t have an impersonal position on the topic, one has a psychological defect on the matter. So with this as the only defense of those who support that lifestyle, it seems foolish to try to engage in a rational discussion. It’s either agree with them or you have a phobia. What foolish person is going to enter into that mud slinging event?

[AgnosticBoy]

The accusation of being “phobic” is meant to be an ad hominem insult to a person. That is, one doesn’t have an impersonal position on the topic, one has a psychological defect on the matter. So with this as the only defense of those who support that lifestyle, it seems foolish to try to engage in a rational discussion. It’s either agree with them or you have a phobia. What foolish person is going to enter into that mud slinging event?

I get what you're saying but I've had a different experience. At the beginning of the thread I shared this experience regarding some Christians,

We find a hyperfocus on homosexuality with many of them trying to find anything negative with homosexuality. Why not also look at the positives of it?

I think your point about the "homophobia" card being used only applies in some cases. In other cases, some Christians do seem to have a phobia or they are biased, at the least.

[Diogenes]

The accusation of being “phobic” is meant to be an ad hominem insult to a person. That is, one doesn’t have an impersonal position on the topic, one has a psychological defect on the matter. So with this as the only defense of those who support that lifestyle, it seems foolish to try to engage in a rational discussion. It’s either agree with them or you have a phobia. What foolish person is going to enter into that mud slinging event?

Let us suppose a person is a racist. How much does it matter if it is because of their religious beliefs, or just because of the subculture in which they were raised, or because they've claimed to actually study the 'scientific evidence' and have concluded some 'races' are inferior or dangerous to others?

The words 'phobic' and 'homophobic' are not necessarily used as ad hominems. 'Phobic' literally just means 'fear of.'
How much does it matter whether the reason for the hate, fear, or denial of basic human rights, the denial of true personhood, is out of ignorance, cultural belief or personal animus?

The person denied a basic human right is injured regardless of the underlying motive. I personally know some Christians who, in the 1970s anyway, were very sincere Christians, Bible believers, who truly believed in following the teachings of Jesus. They genuinely believed practicing homosexuality was a 'sin,' but they treated everyone equally and truly loved the 'sinners.'

I make no moral judgment of such people, but I note the ignorance. In fact, this is one of the reasons I do not give authority to the Bible. It is just plain wrong and ignorant, reflecting the bias of the culture of its time. It is too frequently wrong on so many of its moral and factual judgments. Also it has been used, historically as an excuse for hatred, prejudice, discrimination, mutilation and murder.
https://www.badnewsaboutchristianity.co ... lavery.htm

[Mae von H]

The accusation of being “phobic” is meant to be an ad hominem insult to a person. That is, one doesn’t have an impersonal position on the topic, one has a psychological defect on the matter. So with this as the only defense of those who support that lifestyle, it seems foolish to try to engage in a rational discussion. It’s either agree with them or you have a phobia. What foolish person is going to enter into that mud slinging event?

Let us suppose a person is a racist. How much does it matter if it is because of their religious beliefs, or just because of the subculture in which they were raised, or because they've claimed to actually study the 'scientific evidence' and have concluded some 'races' are inferior or dangerous to others?

The words 'phobic' and 'homophobic' are not necessarily used as ad hominems. 'Phobic' literally just means 'fear of.'
How much does it matter whether the reason for the hate, fear, or denial of basic human rights, the denial of true personhood, is out of ignorance, cultural belief or personal animus?

The person denied a basic human right is injured regardless of the underlying motive. I personally know some Christians who, in the 1970s anyway, were very sincere Christians, Bible believers, who truly believed in following the teachings of Jesus. They genuinely believed practicing homosexuality was a 'sin,' but they treated everyone equally and truly loved the 'sinners.'

I make no moral judgment of such people, but I note the ignorance. In fact, this is one of the reasons I do not give authority to the Bible. It is just plain wrong and ignorant, reflecting the bias of the culture of its time. It is too frequently wrong on so many of its moral and factual judgments. Also it has been used, historically as an excuse for hatred, prejudice, discrimination, mutilation and murder.
https://www.badnewsaboutchristianity.co ... lavery.htm

Calling anyone any kind of “phobic” is definitely meant to be an insult. No question. It’s employed as an insult popularly. The only exception is if a trusted clinical psychologist type diagnosis a client in order to help them.

It’s no good telling the recipient of an ad hominem personal slam that it’s not really a personal attack while everyone else around watches giggling to see if they’re stupid enough to take the bate.

[LittleNipper]

Is the LGBTQ community afraid of Christianity?

[Purple Knight]

Calling anyone any kind of “phobic” is definitely meant to be an insult. No question. It’s employed as an insult popularly. The only exception is if a trusted clinical psychologist type diagnosis a client in order to help them.

I think better of the people on this forum, thanks to the moderation of Osteng who is genuinely interested in being fair.