Sometimes it is just ignorance. Let us not forget that for many this is the only message that they have ever heard from any source that they thought credible. To believe otherwise would be astonishing.

But when they are presented with evidence to the contrary – and in a way that does not make it impossible for them to accept – if they continue to believe and say such things it is, indeed, bigoted.

A person can be bigoted without realizing it, and maybe we have to realize it for them.

I don’t think I agree. They may be believing bigoted things but I think that being bigoted requires some intent, some desire to have a position regardless of the facts.

Those who hold discriminatory beliefs without any conscious will or awareness are probably better described as prejudiced.

bigoted:
(adj.) Being or characteristic of a bigot.

bigotry (n.)The attitude, state of mind, or behavior characteristic of a bigot. Intolerance.

Now, it’s a descriptive word, however distasteful, it’s got essential meaning. Of course, there are people who throw it around as a means of offense or insult, but there is a big difference between systemic bigotry that is a matter of public and civil policy, and individual bigotry that’s contained to one’s own opinion.

And most of all, personal bigotry can change, and evolve with education and experience.
An individual might remain rigid in their partiality, but civil law cannot.

Most of us who have actually been on the receiving end of both civil AND individual bigotry, recognize it better than those who have not. Naming it, as it’s being expressed isn’t unfair, and to not do so, sometimes is dishonest, depending on the necessary context.

Now, some people can be stung by such description and care about changing their ways.
And others might become more resistant to it.

This issue is extremely difficult to navigate without hurt feelings and offense.
It’s reasonable to point out the liability of bigoted social and civil policy, perhaps rather than the personal bigotry of an individual.
But it is, intellectually dishonest for said individuals to behave as if they are not part of a collective who are willing to throw the weight of their mob rule at us when convenient to that purpose.

It’s not bigoted to point out that homosexuality is strictly about same sex attraction, and that gay people have been discriminated against for centuries.

It IS however, very bigoted to say that homosexuality is an indicator of dangerous behavior and immoral character and gay people are deserving of discrimination.

There are times, it’s very difficult to have a conversation where you’re stating a fact like the former, but the overly sensitive person won’t even allow you to make that statement without taking offense for no reason.

This happens with matters of race too often, and frustratingly so.

A person can be bigoted without realizing it, and maybe we have to realize it for them.
There are gentler, more articulate ways to engage them, of course.

But sometimes, it’s too frustrating to deal with people too dumb to have the appropriate conversation with, no matter the approach or how civil.
Stupid bigots are impossible, and I wish, very few.

Sorry about that. I was thinking MInnesota, not MiNnesota early this morning

I equated you with the uninformed parent.

That wasn’t the point…. i meant that you have to use words that seem real to the person you are talking to. And if they don’t think they are bigots, it’s pointless to call them one.

One is when it is isn’t true:

If I’m speaking to, say, a parent concerned about whether the boys sleepover chaperon should be a gay man, it serves no purpose to start off with “oh, that’s just bigotry”.

It’s like me telling you that you are a “Christ-hater” for not supporting the Salvation Army. It isn’t accurate, it’s not the way you see yourself, it isn’t the issue at hand, and it paints me as an idiot in your mind. And the conversation is over. Done.

So to allow for conversation with the parent, it pointless to scream an epithet at someone who is simply reacting to what they’ve heard or feared. Approach them with facts and you may discover that not only are they not a bigot but having gotten accurate info they become an ally.

Some people with anti-gay positions may just be future allies. Who would ever have thought that Louis Marinelli just needed to see – with his eyes – that what he “knew” about gay people and what he “knew” about NOM were the opposite of the truth. He wasn’t a bigot, just misinformed.

That ain’t these guys. These guys are bigots.

But the other reason for not calling them bigots is two fold: they really really want you to so they can be martyrs and oh so attacked by the intollerant marxist homosexual blah blah blah.

And also there are people out there who don’t know that they are bigots. So when we use the word we sound like name-callers. We are the bad guys and they are just believing their faith, you know.

And here’s the clincher – as much as it may gall us to appeal to those folks who just can’t tell good guys from hate mongers, they are our target market.

They are the 20% or so that went from not supporting us in polls to agreeing that gay people should have marriage rights. And a lot of that change in attitude has been the result of our community biting its tongue while raging loons closed adoption centers and called us horrible names.

So yeah, hate groups are bigots. But as good as it feels, it’s probably smarter not to say so loudly in public.

But I think we can find some common ground: If an anti-gay group becomes a SPLC-certified hate group, aren’t they bigots by definition? How would it be possible for a certified hate group to NOT be bigots? If it is possible, the word should probably be removed from the English language.

This will provide media with a reason for not giving them any news coverage at all. Plus it is GREAT for the kids!!! The kids and their families are 100% vindicated!!!