Hate speech but not hate

Of course our laws are grounded in historical Christian roots. But here's the thing: those laws which really matter tend to be the same across almost all societies, irrespective of religion. Ask yourself why that is - I think it's because having those laws is necessary in order to maintain a functioning society, which is a matter of survival of the species. They are pragmatic, sensible and necessary.

What is ethically and morally 'acceptable' is subjective in nature and largely changes over time.
Absolutely. This is my whole point. So there was a time when it was acceptable to keep slaves, to rape your wife, to beat your children. Now it is not. We have evolved and learned to do better.
So why do we allow religions to remain set in stone on many of these things? Why do they get a pass when the rest of us do not? Why are they allowed to influence policies that affect those of us who are not of the faith?

And I do wonder why religions are so very obsessed by what consenting adults do with each other in bed. I'd respect them more if they focused their attentions on combating poverty, deprivation and exclusion (and yes, I know some do - but they still obsess about sex).

The problem is that man makes God in his own image. And it's not a pretty one - religions need to start holding a mirror up to themselves and asking 'Really?' of some of their tenets. Fortunately we now have denominations which are doing just that.

Flipped round, it's pretty hateful for biological women to continuously have their lived experience diminished. See how it works both ways?

Because it's pretty hateful to trans people to continuously diminish their lived experience. I'm sure plenty would scoff at that sentence but I don't really care, why should people log on to mn and see thread after thread of trans bashing it's awful. If you want to have a genuine debate about gender identification there's a time, place and way of doing it.

But what if three consenting adults in a fully committed relationship wished to get married? There are some people who think that should be legal. Many others think it shouldn't. That's a difference of opinion, it doesn't make anyone hateful or hurtful or anything else.

We have to follow our current laws in our country. If we want to change them, we have to convince enough people to vote for politicians that will make those changes.

Getting dramatic and talking about "wishing people didn't exist" just doesn't make sense to me.

Multiple wives in Mormon marriages are not the same as gay marriage.

Gay marriage is not harming people. It was not created to abuse young girls and women.

Yes the “You’re saying we don’t exist” narrative is tiresome and illogical. People say it about trans people all the time. Of course you exist, you’re standing in front of me. It would be stupid of me to deny that. But you aren’t a woman no matter how much you wear lipstick and a pink beret

Quite dramatic to say that someone who doesn't want same-sex marriage or whatever thinks people shouldn't exist. You can be homophobic without wishing death on people! I'm guessing you mean they wish lgbt people would think and live their lives differently?

Using the same terminology, there are plenty of gay (and straight) people who think homophobic people shouldn't exist. Also many people who think religious fundamentalists shouldn't exist. And re gay marriage, most of the population would be against Mormon style multiple wives etc and think that shouldn't be allowed.

It really is about having very different values and ways of looking at the world. So long as we're all allowed to hold our views, hold free elections and all follow the law, then it works. A religious person quietly going about their lives believing that marriage should be only for 1 man and 1 woman isn't any better or worse than a person quietly going about their lives thinking that marriage should be open to everyone. It's okay to think differently.

And regarding abortions, many pro-life life people truly believe that life begins at conception and that we're killing babies. I always have a lot of sympathy for them, it must be horrible. I am in a way similar in that I am against late-term abortions which are thankfully not allowed in most countries. There are some states in the U.S. that do allow abortions all the way to 9 months (even without medical necessity). For example, Colorado. I find it very upsetting to think of 8 and a half month fetuses being aborted instead of delivered and allowed a chance at life. I wish it weren't legal so late. I guess that makes me a bad person in your eyes, but personally I think I should be able to have my own
opinion. How am I hurting anyone by holding a different view point?

It's your turn of phrase that's bizarre OP. "Not my thing " "chosen their path" and now lifestyle... sounds like a smokescreen for being a homophone.

Well, it can depend.

For lots of people it's a case of "if you don't love what I stand for, you hate what I stand for".

Personally, I don't think there are all that many instances where this is true. But there are some. For example, if you don't love that someone (say) is standing up for anti-fascism, you're at best ok with fascism. Which can indeed be hate speech by definition.

In fairness Roald Dahl was antisemitic as fuck and Jewish people have it hard enough without having to put up with a dead and long reverted children’s author making things worse for them.

I was also pleased to hear that the Wishing Chair fairy’s name had been changed in updated version. We don’t NEED racist name or antisemitic words

We live in the era of the melodramatic.

When you talk about being careful of using “ those words” it’s because those words have been used to keep gay people from having the same rights as straight people.

I still don’t know what you mean by it’s not your thing?

She’s not choosing a path though? She’s a lesbian.

Are you saying you chose to be straight?

What values?

Being gay isn’t a moral or a value. Some people are born gay. End of story.

Ethics and morals hugely overlap with religion for those who are religious. To pretend otherwise is completely disingenuous.

What is ethically and morally 'acceptable' is subjective in nature and largely changes over time.

Our laws in this country aren't really completely secular in nature at the moment as there is a huge bias towards Christianity. Even the very idea that you can have a secular country wouldn't even be a concept in some cultures with a different religious background. Western atheism is still hugely influenced by Christianity.

This is a really interesting conversation, at least where it avoids berating other people for their opinions.

There’s an issue with ‘hate speech’ being used to control what people are allowed to say outside of the legal system. As in, if I say in the pub that I don’t agree with same sex marriage, that isn’t hate speech. It doesn’t meet the legal definition of hate speech, and should not be used to shut people down.

By all means call me a bigot, but don’t accuse me of hate speech.

I’m not enthusiastic about attempts to prevent people talking in ways you don’t like.

There is a huge difference between ethical/moral considerations and religious ones. You cannot assume that everything which is done in the name of religion is automatically ethically and morally acceptable- it manifestly is not, and there are many denominations across all faiths whose religious laws are oppressive, immoral, cruel or all of the above. Laws should be secular. There can be input from faith groups, but ultimately the law must serve everyone, not just those of faith. Abandon that principle and see what happens: Iran, Afghanistan and now swathes of the US.

Personally, I'm militantly pro free speech. People should be as free as possible to say what they like and like who they like. For example, I was in Ireland shortly after Brexit and was called a f-ing English by someone. Doesn't bother me at all. Not everyone likes everyone else. So long as it doesn't escalate to violence, I don't care. I'm English-British. If people hate me for that, fine.

These attempts to control what people can say don't stop. Once you go down that road, there is no end point. It outrages me beyond words that the woke left are now trying to edit, re-write and even ban certain books. The attempt to re-publish Roald Dahl with some of his words re-written made me furious. I fear it's just the beginning. In fact, I've started buying up classic books from charity shops and putting them in storage. It won't be long before the woke left demand that Jane Austen and George Eliot are edited or banned. The literary canon is the next target, mark my words. They'll go through the classics looking for anything 'offensive'. Then they'll scream and shout and do the whole fake outrage thing. The book will pulled from the syllabus or re-written or whatever, and then they'll move onto the next one.

Not necessarily. One of the good things to come out of the Forstarter judgement was that having a belief is protected, but the expression of that belief is not covered by blanket protection if the expression is harassing or derogatory to a person or group. This was made very clear in the judgement.

If being gay or lesbian isn't your think then don't be gay or lesbian. Don't see how it needs to be your 'thing' any more than that.

If, of course you treat someone differently because of their sexual orientation then of course you're a homophobe.

I'm not implying it at all, I'm literally saying that someone's religion should not impact anyone but the person holding those beliefs.

If someone tells me their faith should impact my life in any way then I'm absolutely correct to say it shouldn't.

You're entitled to choose whatever values you want on yourself and you can think what you like, but the moment you try to impose your values onto others you should expect a push back.

No wonder you're finding people abusing you for being straight if you're way of conveying that is "homosexuality just isn't my thing. I don't shares their values or opinions"

But that would be absolutely crazy.

But just to clarify, specifically, what are your opinions on lesbians that your lesbian friends don't share and what are your different values to lesbians.

Is it just that you don't want to sleep with women and they do?

Is "not your thing" just you saying you're straight? And someone has accused you of hate speech for this? I'm sorry, I find your OP quite confusing. What is it that is you think you're not allowed to express?

Being straight is not a "view"