To consider dropping a friendship over one opinion?

[Hypotenuse]

My religious friends are 'anti-homosexuals'. We've been friends for years and their religion has never caused any issues, just like my atheism hasn't. I just overheard the husband saying something anti-gay to his friends recently, I wasn't even part of the discussion, and now I see them completely differently. I had no idea they felt that way.

I can't seem to get past it. Is it petty to call the friendship off?

Hypotenuse,
I am curious to know what religion it is that preaches a doctrine of being "anti-homosexuals"?
What was it he said that you think was "anti-gay" ?

Mellow jello, the era you mention of Queer Eye, Will & Grace etc and notably Queer as Folk was actually the highest point of acceptance, ever. The disappearance of those shows indicates a far more worrying trend. I can't be the only one to have noticed that, currently, only women are "allowed" to be gay. Especially pretty young ones.

I'd dump then, but explain why. It's one thing having different views on politics or the like- it leads to healthy debate. But holding views that promote persecution and hatred against some one for who they innately are or love is enough for me to cut you out of my life. If someone expressed these views to me i'd have to challenge them, and explain why i could no longer be their friend.

When it comes to facebook i've deleted 'friends' for sharing Britain First posts and more recently those Caitlyn Jenner memes- because it's easy to comment on the validity if someone's courage when you're hiding behind a computer screen.

I would explain to the people why but yes, I could not be friends with homophobic people. That would be an insult to friends and family that I care deeply about and I couldn't allow them to mix with each other. I have disassociated from people for this reason.

There is no reason to not be friends with people who hold different views to you. If you extend this theory to every mildly contentious issue in life then you'd quickly find you had no friends left!

So long as they know that you disagree with them on this particular point and you both agree to disagree then I don't really see the problem.

As an aside, in my life / family religion is all about tolerance and respect for other people. I find people with such views distinctly un-Christian.

I tend to agree with manin - I have a very wide circle of friends and acquaintances and we have very differing points of view of some subjects. Life would be very dull if you just agreed with everything surely?

I often read on Mumsnet that people have difficulty making friends - I do feel that somehow if you list the 'qualities' and 'view points' that a friend must have you are really narrowing the number of people that you will find as 'friends'.

If sex is only for a life time male/female committed relationship, then it must be that it is only for procreation, and should not be undertaken for pleasure.

If it is in fact permissible for pleasure then there is no reason or meaning in the stricture on the respective sex of the two partners, therefore sex between two men must be fine.

Can someone who believes in the biblical 'only for man/woman' interpretation please enlighten me as to why it is not fine between two men?

Although I have no problem with consensual sex between two men, I have been involved in churches where the view that it was wrong was held widely so feel I understand this quite well (I would call myself a Christian, albeit a liberal one).

Unless you're a Catholic where things work a little differently, it all comes down to how you view the Bible:

1. if you believe it is the infallible word of God and needs to be understood literally (unless specifically says it's a poem or a parable) then there are various verses in the Bible which appear to be clear in their view that homosexual behaviour is wrong.... For such people no amount of rationale argument (like the one you made above) will work... God's words in the Bible will always trump a person's words, because God can't be wrong.

2. Some Christians take an alternative approach which still upholds the Bible as infallible, but look more deeply in the text and hold that those which are rolled out by group 1) are actually misunderstood, and they are either talking about male rape (I.e. Sodom and Gommorah), part of the law that New Testament supersedes, or talking about gay prostitution. Such Christians don't hold that homosexual behaviour is wrong in a consensual relationship

3. other Christians such as myself, whilst recognising that the Bible is a foundational document to Christianity and forms the basis of belief recognise that those who wrote, whilst inspired, nonetheless were human, with their fallible humanity still apparent in what they wrote. Belief is a matter of conscience and reason informed and grounded in the Bible rather than dictated by it. It's a bit like a communist view of Marx. Kaptial is the central book and foundation of their belief system, but the Communist would feel obliged to revere every syllable and word unquestioningly.

Unfortunately (for me at least) those in group 1) tend to be sure of themselves and often quite vociferous given the whole of Christianity a bad reputation for being archaic, extreme and intolerant, the opposite of what I believe it actually is.

Sorry I've gone on a bit there...

Communist wouldn't feel obliged to revere every syllable and word unquestioningly.

Fine disagree on the issue - but to drop the whole friendship probably means that you weren't that close anyway.

Reading this thread makes it sound impossible to be friends with people who hold different views on this - which is in itself sounds somewhat ntolerant.

intolerant

if you believe it is the infallible word of God and needs to be understood literally (unless specifically says it's a poem or a parable) then there are various verses in the Bible which appear to be clear in their view that homosexual behaviour is wrong....

And yet oddly, although they rely on Leviticus in order to hate gays, they seem less keen to get exercised about clothes made from mixed fibres. That's because Christians pick and choose from the Bible so that their irrational prejudices are defended, but they can still wear a nice cotton/wool mix cardigan.

Nah disagreeing on most things is fine, we do actually, on almost every topic. Being a homophobe is not a 'disagreement', it's hate speach. Illegal in certain situations. It's abhorant.

If they kicked in some puppies or shoplifted, are they differences in opinions too?

I think it's taking things to extreme to regard somebody's opinion as whether a homosexual couple should be able to adopt as 'hate speech'.

It's an opinion (albeit one you (and I) disagree with, but it's not hatred! To say it is belittles genuine hate crime.

I think its pathetic to expect people to adhere to your views and opinions or you will label them as unworthy of your friendship.

Surely it is this attitude which is reflected in all discrimination and homophobia. Just another side of the same coin.

Surely it is this attitude which is reflected in all discrimination and homophobia.

Yes, that's right. Regarded racism as wrong is just the same as racism. .

It all stems from closed minds whichever way you look at it. I accept that as someone with ASD I do see things differently and may not be able to express my thoughts in a coherent way.

For example, I hate blasphemy against JC. Yet it is everywhere. That is my thing. However I would have to lock myself away to avoid it and it would still exist.

I suppose I am trying to say that people have all sorts of views that I find distasteful but my distaste will change nothing.

OP I think it's quite reasonable to dump a friend because you've seen a side of them that betrays their inner contempt for a group of people that have done nothing to them. You're not just dropping them because they disagree on one issue.

YANBU