Jasmine wrote on Dec 13
th, 2015 at 7:29am:
Phemanderac wrote on Dec 13
th, 2015 at 7:21am:
Jasmine wrote on Dec 13
th, 2015 at 6:52am:
It is interesting that if you disagree that it usually resorts to this silly word. Islamophobe. As if it adds some credence to their stance or argument.
It is much like homophobe if you speak out against the rampant flow of aids through the gay community. You usually cop that one in the face.
The ironic thing about this comment is that it is half correct...
Only half though, because the other half of the comment should have read, it is equally interesting if you disagree with the other perspective you're a Muslim apologist or a terrorist sympathiser... Or, with regard to arguing with homophobes - you are a gay lover, you are gay or a pervert...
Perspective is a funny thing when viewed from a perspective or reality.
Well Islamophobe and Homophobe idicate a fear of them when in reality its not the case. Speak out against or exposing someone is not usually a phobia thats a cop out.
An apologist is usually an apologist.
Regarding gays that same thing, people aren't phobic of gays to speak out against disease and their practices. Then again someone on the other side of the fence may very well be a pervert, gay lover or gay, throw in gay liker and there you have it.
My comment was more revolving around the childish phobia inventions more to the point that we seem to see from these fringe minorities.
I hope that explains it better.
When irrational fear underpins an argument, it is quite reasonable to suggest a phobia.
An apologist is usually an apologist? Well, a phobia sufferer is usually suffering an irrational fear... That's not a great response from you. Sticking a label on it is just sticking a label on it to further your own beliefs... That's what the phobia and/or apologist labels have become...
So speaking out against Homosexuals (regardless of how ill informed, irrational, illogical and devoid of fact) is not fear based, but someone defending MIGHT be a pervert.... What a typical one eyed defense. All you do here is to illustrate my point and then highlight it with bright green fluro...
Your comment, as is typical, reflects a very one sided world view, myopic in the extreme and nothing you said here clarifies anything other than your myopic world view.
Both sides of almost any debate, particularly on a tin pot internet forum stick labels on those who disagree with their perspective in an ill conceived and immature attempt to further their perceived cause.
My comment after all did not detract from your perspective of throwing around the "childish phobia inventions" it simply added to it the childish sympathiser (et al) inventions thrown around by the team targeted often with the alleged phobia inventions...
I hope that explains it better (though I am doubtful any explanation will suffice, because it does not 100% agree...)