IT is all semantics R2. I put it as plainly as I could. I think men and women are meant to be different, not less than or more than, but different from each other.

Does that make me sexist? Depends upon whose perception we use. Does sexist have to man a feeling of superiority or hatred? Then no. Does sexist include anything that discerns difference between male and female? Then yes.

I feel people have differences, I don't feel different from has to mean the same as less than or more than, regardless of the boxes modern culture seems to insist upon.

I can give a few more examples of this.

I do not feel people should smoke. I do not think less of people for choosing to smoke. I do not feel people should stuff themselves with junk food. I do not think less of people for making the choice to stuff themselves with junk food. I do not feel smokers or junk food eaters are any better or worse than I am BECAUSE I MAKE POOR CHOICES in my own life, because I am human, as are they.


I relate to the poor choices others make as making them the SAME as me, not less than or different than, saving those choices to take human life unnecessarily or intentionally cause unnecessary pain to others. I feel those people are more 'lost' than most.

I am still not understanding. I did admit that IF disagreeing with what people do is a 'prejudice' than I am prejudice along with the rest of the human race.

Any action is a choice we ALL have, from kissing or having sex. The option to not do any of them is also an option.

In this culture, No one 'has' to have sex or to not have sex, and no one has to kiss or to not kiss.

And you are correct, offensive or not, just like we hope pedophiles do not act on their attraction, or family members suffering GSA do not act on their attractions, there ARE some attractions I do not feel should be acted upon. I also feel like 'attractions' can develop on many levels beside beginning with physical, and it is a choice to be open to that possibility or not.

And no, your comparison to race continues to miss the mark. I am not disapproving of anything but what people DO. I do not disapprove of people being attacted to whomever. And there is nothing that is associated with the ancestral fact of being black that has to do with what ACTION one chooses, unlike how what one FEELS may have to do with the actions they choose.

copping out of what?

How we feel and what we do ARE different things, or what would be the point of having a brain and making choices?

I cannot argue or be against what people FEEL, feelings are our own, and a much deeper and more sub-concious 'choice' that is not something we direct for ourselves very often.

All I can support or deter is what people DO, actions are our choice and something we can direct much more easily.

Yes. I am very close. My brother and child and work colleague/friend, all same sex attracted. I love them all without having to agree with or approve of all their lifestyle or other choices.

I do not define them by or relate to them as "homosexuals". I define them and relate to them as human beings with their own choice of sexual activity and activity partners because they are adults, same as I am. They likewise do not relate to me as a 'Christian' but as a human being with my own ideas for right and wrong, because I too am an adult. I wish there were some easier way to explain it and spread the word so that the idea of hatefulness or bigotry can stop being associated with it.


There are indeed hateful and bigoted people who do not like homosexuals. There are also non hateful and non bigoted people who do not agree with homosexual lifestyle. The two are not mutually inclusive.

with all due respect, I refer to homosexuality as a behavior and activities, unlike race, or nationality or anything like that


I have explained that if thinking certain behaviors are wrong makes one prejudice, I am prejudice along with the rest of the human race who has opinions about right and wrong when it comes to behaviors.

I can relate. I do have an 'understanding' of the human need to feel loved, and to feel a sense of belonging, and the tendency for sex and sexual attraction to be intertwined in all of those things.

no more than my dislike of lying or theft or murder, I cannot remember a time before or AFTER reading a Bible that I felt any of these things were the 'right' thing.

I do. It is. I do like many people in such relationships however, because their relationship does not impact me and does not define them (in my eyes).

I think it's in the implementation more so than simply the legalization...


From https://www.npr.org/2019/08/23/753791322/california-says-its-cannabis-revenue-has-fallen-short-of-estimates-despite-gains




The result was a departure from the spikes seen in states such as Colorado, Washington and Oregon after those states legalized recreational markets.

"What had happened was that those markets typically doubled in the first year," says Tom Adams, of the cannabis industry research firm BDS Analytics. In those three states, he adds, they "posted 50 to 90 percent compound annual growth for three years straight."



Confronted with high taxes in the legal market and new requirements for getting an annual medical marijuana card, many cannabis users in California have turned to the illegal market. The number of medicinal customers has shrunk drastically in the past year, Adams notes. And he says the state's rules about keeping inventories separate for recreational and medicinal sales have either increased costs or prompted some retailers to abandon the medical market altogether.

Truly, my point was that is 'overused' to the point where the actual original meaning is lost, as in:

phobic:
having or involving an extreme or irrational fear of or aversion to something.

I meant nothing below the belt, I meant only to share my perception of how our modern cultural 'values' manifest.


Also, I was trying to suggest that disagreeing with another's choices is not necessarily the same as having prejudice against them as a person, precisely because we are human and complex, and rarely agree with EVERYTHING another person(even loved ones) might say or do. If disagreement is prejudice, we probably are 'prejudiced' against even those we love.


The Bible (and indeed man's own laws) have a whole plethora of things that are not acceptable (or legal) or whatever. We do not however add the suffix 'phobic' to those activities. We just accept that, within some culture or community, they are deterred, or at least not promoted.

For example, I personally do not like swearing, smoking, drinking or lying. I prefer not to do it and I do not encourage others to. However, I no doubt know and love people who have done these things. It is not about disliking the who, only the what. And people being people, at the risk of being repetitive, will all have things about them that we are not exactly gaga about, even when we love them, which is why not being gaga about something, or even flat out disagreeing with it, is not the same as being hateful or prejudice or 'phobic' about someone.

interesting interpretation of what I actually posted, kind of Trump supporter style ...lol

Dicatator Trump does not 'have to' do anything. That is the problem.

The vote was only Thursday. The sky is not falling.

Who knows? Maybe because that is approximately the date he delivered it THIS year?

Well, I do not live in Texas, so although this is the United STATES of America, and I am an American, I guess, by this logic, should just shut up and not have an opinion be counted for anything. I do have a couple general questions though. Would all those 'passing through' and not living there 10 years, still be PAYING state taxes and property taxes TO Texas?

And would politicians have to be robots who agree with EVERY detail of a party
plank' to win? And if so, how would there be a way to ascertain any difference amongst candidates who are running?

if that were true, there are courts that would handle those cases where 'law abiding'citizens are wrongfully killed/executed, just as there would be for speech that incited harm to others.

I did not hear her mention a mandate for conditions. All she said was they were not going to announce ON THE DAY of the vote, what management choices they were making. They were going to determine that once they got the guidelines being used for the proceedings. I Know educated decisions are scandalous in this day and age to many people, but to me, it is only responsible and mature.

you have to 'justify' speaking if it incites actions that are harmful to others. Rights are not absolutes, just saying.

where you have more than one person, they will agree on some things and not others

when you have a number of people who agree on certain values, standards, etc, they call that a community, a culture, a 'religion'. IT is part of being a human being. It is more acceptable to embrace 'culture' than 'religion' these days, but it's all really semantics for the same basic human reality.

I feel phobic implies fear, where actually it is often only disagreement. But modern 'culture' has agreed that disagreeing with anything other than murder, violence, theft, and sometimes illegal immigration, is not acceptable.

Christianity, to my understanding, does teach that the purpose for sex is between a man and woman in marriage. It is as homo'phobic' as it is adultero 'phobic', beasitalo 'phobic', or incesto'phobic'.

Thank you for the concise explanation.

Are you really suggesting people kill each over over this POTUS?