Homosexuals

Vedderlution_Baby

Why is there still so much hate for homosexuals? I don't understand the thinking of human beings at all. Why can't we accept that people are different than us but that's not a reason to hate them. I suspect that if people would just mind their own business and leave each other alone that this world would be a lot easier to live in.

brain of c

i'm not homosexual........but if there's money in it.......

sponger

As more and more proof is pointing towards genetics as the cause of homosexuality, I think it'll be interesting to see what all of these bible-thumping homophobes will have to say.

vmfury

Vedderlution_Baby! wrote:

Why is there still so much hate for homosexuals? I don't understand the thinking of human beings at all. Why can't we accept that people are different than us but that's not a reason to hate them. I suspect that if people would just mind their own business and leave each other alone that this world would be a lot easier to live in.

Because people are assholes. Plain and simple.

This world will never be easy to live in and people will never mind their own business because the majority are sheep. Hence "society". The only thing to do is try your best to be a good person and treat others the way you want to be treated. A motto EVERYONE should live by.

binauralsounds

Vedderlution_Baby! wrote:

Why is there still so much hate for homosexuals? I don't understand the thinking of human beings at all. Why can't we accept that people are different than us but that's not a reason to hate them. I suspect that if people would just mind their own business and leave each other alone that this world would be a lot easier to live in.

is there a hate problem where you are?? None up here in lousyville

jeffbr

This forum, and PJ fans in general display a decidedly left-leaning orientation. So it has surprised and puzzled me that everytime the issue of homosexuality arises here or on The Porch, there are pretty intolerant and homophobic posts being made by people who generally tend to take the liberal side of issues. That really had me scratching my head until I read about this study:

University Study Suggests Homophobic Men May Be Sexually Repressed Homosexuals
New Study Links Homophobia with Homosexual Arousal
August Press Release
WASHINGTON -- Psychoanalytic theory holds that homophobia -- the fear, anxiety, anger, discomfort and aversion that some ostensibly heterosexual people hold for gay individuals -- is the result of repressed homosexual urges that the person is either unaware of or denies. A study appearing in the August 1996 issue of the Journal of Abnormal Psychology, published by the American Psychological Association (APA), provides new empirical evidence that is consistent with that theory.

Researchers at the University of Georgia conducted an experiment involving 35 homophobic men and 29 nonhomophobic men as measured by the Index of Homophobia scale. All the participants selected for the study described themselves as exclusively heterosexual both in terms of sexual arousal and experience.

Each participant was exposed to sexually explicit erotic stimuli consisting of heterosexual, male homosexual and lesbian videotapes (but not necessarily in that order). Their degree of sexual arousal was measured by penile plethysmography, which precisely measures and records male tumescence.

Men in both groups were aroused by about the same degree by the video depicting heterosexual sexual behavior and by the video showing two women engaged in sexual behavior. The only significant difference in degree of arousal between the two groups occurred when they viewed the video depicting male homosexual sex: 'The homophobic men showed a significant increase in penile circumference to the male homosexual video, but the control [nonhomophobic] men did not.'

Broken down further, the measurements showed that while 66% of the nonhomophobic group showed no significant tumescence while watching the male homosexual video, only 20% of the homophobic men showed little or no evidence of arousal. Similarly, while 24% of the nonhomophobic men showed definite tumescence while watching the homosexual video, 54% of the homophobic men did.

When asked to give their own subjective assessment of the degree to which they were aroused by watching each of the three videos, men in both groups gave answers that tracked fairly closely with the results of the objective physiological measurement, with one exception: the homophobic men significantly underestimated their degree of arousal by the male homosexual video.

Do these findings mean, then, that homophobia in men is a reaction to repressed homosexual urges, as psychoanalysis theorizes? While their findings are consistent with that theory, the authors note that there is another, competing theoretical explanation: anxiety. According to this theory, viewing the male homosexual videotape may have caused negative emotions (such as anxiety) in the homophobic men, but not in the nonhomophobic men. As the authors note, 'anxiety has been shown to enhance arousal and erection,' and so it is also possible that 'a response to homosexual stimuli [in these men] is a function of the threat condition rather than sexual arousal per se. These competing notions can and should be evaluated by future research.'

Article: 'Is Homophobia Associated With Homosexual Arousal?' by Henry E. Adams, Ph.D., Lester W. Wright, Jr., Ph.D. and Bethany A. Lohr, University of Georgia, in Journal of Abnormal Psychology, Vol. 105, No. 3, pp 440-445.

I suppose that explains a lot. People are afraid of what they truely might be.

binauralsounds

jeffbr wrote:

This forum, and PJ fans in general display a decidedly left-leaning orientation. So it has surprised and puzzled me that everytime the issue of homosexuality arises here or on The Porch, there are pretty intolerant and homophobic posts being made by people who generally tend to take the liberal side of issues. That really had me scratching my head until I read about this study:



I suppose that explains a lot. People are afraid of what they truely might be.

I remember hearing about that study not too long ago on a talk show! Well, I'm not afraid, so what does that make me? or dare i ask

also, is this the time where i break out my "i have a few gay friends" card? If not, let me know, and i can use it later

decides2dream

Why is there still so much hate for _______________?


fill in the blank with anyone 'different' from you, and there ya go. seems every 'group' has someone who 'hates' them.



"Compromise, conformity, assimilation, submission
Ignorance, hypocrisy, brutality, the elite
All of which are American dreams"
~Rage

Ahnimus

What a fucking joke.

Ok, so used to be, being gay meant something was wrong with you, now if you don't like gay people there is something wrong with you.

I tend to take a liberal perspective 60% of the time, the rest of the time I'm conservative. But I don't like homosexuality, it's not for me, doesn't mean I'm afraid of gay people, I'd just rather not know any.

There is NO evidence that homosexuality is genetic.

Don't get me going on this...

sonicreducer

jeffbr wrote:

I suppose that explains a lot. People are afraid of what they truely might be.

on a certain level of curiousity, but it doesn't mean homophobes are actually homo themselves -generally speaking.

for some reason i want to state my opinion about homosexuality. what you do with your life is not my business. don't be gay on me and im cool with you. if my brother was gay, i would love him the same.

what im not so cool with is gay people and PDA. maybe im immature, but i don't want to see two dudes or two chicks kissing. what are your opinions on that aspect of homosexuality?

sponger

Ahnimus wrote:

What a fucking joke.

There is NO evidence that homosexuality is genetic.

Right, that was a typo on my part. I meant to say biological factors that are determined at birth. Here is an example:


http://www.webmd.com/content/article/124/115571.htm

decides2dream

Ahnimus wrote:

What a fucking joke.

Ok, so used to be, being gay meant something was wrong with you, now if you don't like gay people there is something wrong with you.

I tend to take a liberal perspective 60% of the time, the rest of the time I'm conservative. But I don't like homosexuality, it's not for me, doesn't mean I'm afraid of gay people, I'd just rather not know any.

There is NO evidence that homosexuality is genetic.

Don't get me going on this...

from the first post of this thread....there was no evidence to suggest what you infer...that one is expected to 'like' homosexuals. more to the point, why hate them? i think that really was the crux of it.....and thus, why hate anyone for something that they 'are'...genetic or not? i think really that is the whole issue at hand, unless i am inferring incorrectly.

so sure, take a live and let live attitude, that's all one can ever ask of anyone.

keeponrockin

sonicreducer wrote:

what im not so cool with is gay people and PDA. maybe im immature, but i don't want to see two dudes or two chicks kissing. what are your opinions on that aspect of homosexuality?

To be honest, I'm uncomfortable when straight people are making out around me, I just look away. I'd probably do the same for gay couples.

jeffbr

sonicreducer wrote:

what im not so cool with is gay people and PDA. maybe im immature, but i don't want to see two dudes or two chicks kissing. what are your opinions on that aspect of homosexuality?

I'm with you on the PDA, but with an extension - I don't like to see heteros swapping spit in the park either. Save that shit for the bedroom or the frat party.

Although I will admit to a certain purient interest in watching two hot women kissing.

sonicreducer

keeponrockin wrote:

To be honest, I'm uncomfortable when straight people are making out around me, I just look away. I'd probably do the same for gay couples.

you know, i didn't think about that. either way, it is not pleasant to see people PDA'ing.

id also like to say that i live in ANDERSON, SOUTH CAROLINA right now. it's close to clemson, where i go to college. i never here people making fun of gays or giving them a hard time and i know a lot of gay people. maybe im being sheltered from this, but i don't think it is as bad as people make it out to be. by the way, anderson is about as redneck as it gets.

Ahnimus

sponger wrote:

Right, that was a typo on my part. I meant to say biological factors that are determined at birth. Here is an example:


http://www.webmd.com/content/article/124/115571.htm

I don't think there is anything biologically determined by the order in which a guy is born. The effects of birth order are psychological and so is homosexuality.

sponger

Ahnimus wrote:

I don't think there is anything biologically determined by the order in which a guy is born. The effects of birth order are psychological and so is homosexuality.

Whatever you say, Dr. Ahnimus.

sonicreducer

ad_rock wrote:

Ditto the above.

I guess the obvious answer is that people fear and therefore hate what they don't understand. Certain people don't understand homosexuality and therefore are against it because anything unfamilier may be seen as, on some level, a threat to what they do understand. Other people might see it as a threat to their values and thus to stability and order. Others are homophobic because they are told to be, but the people who teach them to be so come from one of the first two groups, which are essentially the same, the only difference being a 'rational' and 'irrational' hatered ('rational' at least in the sense that one could see how a person could consciously think that way based on their ideas and beliefs, but not necessarily agree or condone them for it).

I (like the rest of the world) have no idea what determines sexuality. I also have no problem with homosexuality. I don't plan to come back to this discussion too much as there isn't a whole lot to explain that can't be summerised, so I'll play my 'gay friends card' now in an effort to be taken seriously ;-)

that was some deep shit man,...

lukin2006

Vedderlution_Baby! wrote:

Why is there still so much hate for homosexuals? I don't understand the thinking of human beings at all. Why can't we accept that people are different than us but that's not a reason to hate them. I suspect that if people would just mind their own business and leave each other alone that this world would be a lot easier to live in.

It don't bother me if your gay, however, I suspect that a lot of the hatred from the fact that the homosexual community pushes their lifestyle onto others, and by that I mean these gay pride parade and what not, and I truely wonder if one held hetersexual parade how it would be recieved by the homosexual community.

Up here in Canada we now allow Gay marriages, which is fine by me to some extent, my big concern is that church's that refuse to perform the ceremony could be sued as well as banquot halls, but as long their is protection for groups from being sued so be it.

But the institution of marriage is over anyways, has been for a long time. With people choosing to live together and the divorce rate so high, it makes you wonder.

sponger

Gays were the object of homophobic malice way before the parades ever came around. In fact, one can only infer that the parades are, in fact, derived from the need for gays to express their individual rights and sense of pride after so many years of being oppressed and discrminated against.

In other words, they aren't just trying to show the world how much they love to stick it in another dude's tailpipe.

Ahnimus

Bisexuality is the norm among male chimps (check out Jane Goodall's books). Effectively a male chimp forms a long-term partnership with another male (which includes sex at times). WHen the higher-ranking of the pair challenges for leadership of the troupe, the backing of sidekick is essential. If successful, they then become nos 1 and 2 respectively in the pecking order of the troupe for access to the females, as well as food etc. But their closest relationship is with each other.



This *may be one reason why many male humans have gay or bisexual tendencies - inherited over 5 million years ?



National Geographic special, "The New Chimpanzees" which aired September 6, 1995 - "Diverse and frequent hetero- and homosexual contact occurs among the animals. . . . Not only does homosexual behavior exist in nearly every species of every order of animal known to science (a fact demonstrated repeatedly by uncounted studies beginning with Konrad Lorenz, the father of modern zoology) but as one ascends the evolutionary ladder from less sophisticated creatures to hominids, homosexual activity increases in frequency."



Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (June 1995) - Drs. Shang-Ding Zhang and Ward Odenwald of the National Institutes of Health in Bethesda, Maryland, observed that "Reduced levels of the chemical [serotonin] in laboratory animals, such as rats, rabbits, and cats, have been linked to homosexual behaviour." [For your information, serotonin is an important protein found in virtually all higher species and its production is genetically controlled.]



Proceedings of the Society of Neuroscience (November 1994) - J.K. Graham, G.J. Bloch and Richard Mills of Brigham Young University found in studies involving rats, that sexual orientation can be determined biologically, and may even be influenced by behavior of pregnant rats. [For your information, Brigham Young University is not exactly a bastion of gay rights.]



On a less scientific basis, he tour guides at the San Francisco zoo will show you geese, sea gulls, penguins, lions and some hoofed animals in homosexual relationships. The zoo has a pair of female geese that have been happily married for years. [Now you will probably argue that there must be something in the air in San Francisco.]



Perhaps we have more to learn from the "animal kingdom." After all, almost all of what human beings do is "unnatural," which does not automatically equal "immoral." No other creature drinks milk after weaning, drives cars, wears clothes, invokes a God, or writes letters to CompuServe.
http://rainbowallianceopenfaith.homestead.com/Science3.html

Serotonin you say?

Let's check out wikipedia.

wikipedia wrote:

Serotonin (5-hydroxytryptamine, or 5-HT) is a monoamine neurotransmitter synthesized in serotonergic neurons in the central nervous system and enterochromaffin cells in the gastrointestinal tract.

In the CNS, serotonin is believed to play an important role in the regulation of mood, sleep, emesis (vomiting), sexuality and appetite. Serotonin has been thought to play a part in many disorders, notably as part of the biochemistry of depression, migraine, bipolar disorder and anxiety. Recent research suggests that serotonin also plays an important role in liver regeneration and acts as a mitogen (induces cell division) throughout the body.[1]

]

Wikipedia seems to agree, it has something to do with sexuality and mental stability. But is it due to an increase or decrease of seratonin and what does that have to do with genetics?

wikipedia wrote:

The neurons of the Raphe nuclei are the principal source of 5-HT release.[2] These neurons are grouped into about nine pairs, distributed along the entire length of the brainstem. 5-HT is thought to be released from serotonergic varicosities into the extra neuronal space, in other words from swellings (varicosities) along the axon, rather than from synaptic terminal buttons (in the manner of classical neurotransmission). From here it is free to diffuse over a relatively large region of space (>20µm) and activate 5-HT receptors located on the dendrites, cell bodies and presynaptic terminals of adjacent neurons.

Serotonergic action is terminated primarily via uptake of 5-HT from the synapse. This is through the specific monoamine transporter for 5-HT, 5-HT reuptake transporter, on the presynaptic neuron. Various agents can inhibit 5-HT reuptake including MDMA (most commonly known by the street name ecstasy or XTC), cocaine, tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs).

Ok, so psychotropic drugs can inhibit seratonin reuptake, meaning?

wikipedia wrote:

Basic understanding
In the brain, messages are passed between two neurons (nerve cells) via a synapse, a small gap between the cells. The neuron that sends the information releases neurotransmitters (with serotonin among them) into that gap. The neurotransmitters are then recognized by receptors on the surface of the recipient cell, which upon this stimulation, in turn, relays the signal. About 10% of the neurotransmitters are lost in this process, the other 90% are released from the receptors and taken up again by monoamine transporters in the sending cell (a process called reuptake).

Depression has been linked to a lack of stimulation of the recipient neuron at a synapse. To stimulate the recipient cell, SSRIs inhibit the reuptake of serotonin. As a result, the serotonin stays in the synaptic gap longer than it normally would, and has the chance to be recognized again (and again) by the receptors of the recipient cell, which can finally be stimulated fully.

Ok, so taking ACID and Exstacy can fight depression. No link to genetics?

wikipedia wrote:

Antidepressants
The MAOIs prevent the breakdown of monoamine neurotransmitters (including serotonin), and therefore increase concentrations of the neurotransmitter in the brain. MAOI therapy is associated with many adverse drug reactions, and patients are at risk of hypertensive crisis triggered by foods with high tyramine-content and certain drugs.

Some drugs inhibit this re-uptake of serotonin, again making it stay in the synapse longer. The tricyclic antidepressants inhibit the re-uptake of both serotonin and norepinephrine. The newer Selective Serotonin Re-uptake Inhibitors (SSRIs) have fewer (though still numerous) side effects and fewer interactions with other drugs.

Recent research conducted at Rockefeller University shows that in both patients who suffer from depression and in mice that model that disease, levels of the p11 protein are decreased. This protein is related to serotonin transmission within the brain.[4]

Antiemetics
5-HT3 antagonists such as ondansetron, granisetron and tropisetron are important antiemetic agents. They are particularly important in treating the nausea and vomiting that occur during anticancer chemotherapy using cytotoxic drugs. Another application is in treatment of post-operative nausea and vomiting. Applications to the treatment of depression and other mental and psychological conditions have also been investigated with some positive results.

Deficiency
Deficient (and sometimes, excessive) intake of various dietary minerals, drugs, and vitamins can lead to disturbed levels of serotonin via disrupting either the production or reuptake processes.

Well it looks like a lot of things fuck with seratonin levels. Genetics?

Ok, Earlier it mentioned the Ralph Nuclei as the primary source of 5 HT production.

wikipedia wrote:

The raphe nuclei have a vast impact upon the central nervous system. The raphe nuclei can be of particular interest to neurologists and psychologists since many of the neurons in the nuclei (but not the majority) are serotonergic, i.e., contain serotonin - a type of monoamine neurotransmitter. Serotonin, also called 5-HT, seems to be the culprit in many of our modern psycho-pharmaceutical problems, such as anorexia, depression, and sleep disorders. It is not the sole culprit in the aforementioned disorders, but it is the area that the pharmacologists know how to affect in the best manner. It is important to note that pharmacology traditionally affects global serotonin levels, while the actions of the raphe nuclei are dependent on the complex interplay between nuclei.

Genetics?

When do we cross the line from having our brains control us, to us controlling our brains? Do we control our own thoughts or are we slaves to our brains? Are our brains slaves to our thoughts?

"Sow a thought, reap an action,
sow an action, reap a habit,
sow a habit, reap a character."
~Stephen R. Covey

sponger

Ahnimus wrote:

Genetics?

From your own copy/pastes:

For your information, serotonin is an important protein found in virtually all higher species and its production is genetically controlled

'"genetically controlled"

Actually, I had never heard the argument that homosexuality was in any way related to serotonin levels. However, it's almost common knowledge that chemical imbalances in the brain are widely believed to be caused by genetic factors. So, if you want to argue that serotonin imbalances are to blame, then you are in fact arguing for genetics as a root cause of sexuality.

After all, let's look at the causes of personality disorders.

The role of genetics has long been established; the risk of schizophrenia rises from 1 percent with no family history of the illness, to 10 percent if a first degree relative has it, to 50 percent if an identical twin has it.

http://www.nimh.nih.gov/publicat/schizkids.cfm

You mentioned depression:

McGuffin and Katz (47) reviewed 12 family studies of bipolar illness and found the average morbidity risk among first-degree relatives to be 7.8% for bipolar and 11.4% for unipolar illness. This is a substantial increase over the respective population rates of approximately 1% and 3%, cited by the same authors. Probandwise monozygotic twin concordance rates for bipolar illness range from 62 to 72 percent, and an additional 18 to 25 percent have unipolar illness (9, 84). Comparative dizygotic concordance rates range from zero to 8 percent for bipolar illness with an additional unipolar range from zero to 11 percent. The role of genes in bipolar illness is further supported by observations on adoptees. Increased rates of both bipolar and unipolar illness are seen in biological parents but not in adoptive parents of bipolar adoptees, indicating that the family and twin data indeed reflect the action of genes

http://www.acnp.org/G4/GN401000176/CH172.html

Again, if you are arguing for serotonin levels, then you are, in fact, arguing for genetics.

Not to mention, I did later re-word my assessment to "biological factors."

Also, I should apologize because that link I provided earlier about birth order was not discussing what I was looking for. I thought it was discussing something I read in the paper a couple of months ago.

A mother's antibodies may change with each boy, raising chances the next will be homosexual.

Scientists have found other genetic links to sexual orientation. For example, if one identical twin is gay, there is a 52% chance that the other twin -- who has the same DNA -- is gay, according to a 1991 report in the Archives of General Psychiatry. Among fraternal twins, who share about half their DNA, the figure drops to 22%, and for other brothers it is 9%, according to the study.

http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/latimes/access/1066866221.html?dids=1066866221:1066866221&FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:FT&type=current&date=Jun+27%2C+2006&author=Karen+Kaplan&pub=Los+Angeles+Times&edition=&startpage=A.1&desc=THE+NATION


...basically, a combination of biological and genetic factors...

Ahnimus

sponger wrote:

From your own copy/pastes:



'"genetically controlled"

Actually, I had never heard the argument that homosexuality was in any way related to serotonin leves. However, it's almost common knowledge that chemical imbalances in the brain are widely believed to be caused by genetic factors. So, if you want to argue that serotonin imbalances are to blame, then you are in fact arguing for genetics as a root cause of sexuality.

After all, let's look at the causes of personality disorders.


http://www.nimh.nih.gov/publicat/schizkids.cfm

You mentioned depression:


http://www.acnp.org/G4/GN401000176/CH172.html

Again, if you are arguing for serotonin levels, then you are, in fact, arguing for genetics.

Well the first article I cited was claiming seratonin was responsible for gay animals. It was the only thing stating seratonin was genetic and look at the source.

Nothing you posted implies seratonin is genetic either. So, would you say our thoughts are slave to our brains and genetics then? We are all just machines?

sponger

I added another link to the bottom of my post. It was what I was trying to post earlier, but I didn't realize I was actually linking something else.

Here's some more stuff on genetics and serotonin(5-HT):

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=2367601&dopt=Abstract

http://news.mc.duke.edu/news/article.php?id=8332

sliverstain

jeffbr wrote:

swapping spit ??

My, aren't you the romantic one? Some lucky gal's gonna have a bundle of fun with toyuin the future.

jeffbr wrote:

Although I will admit to a certain purient interest in watching two hot women kissing.

Damn. If you aint whining (in a very anally retentive way) at your gal for too much "spit swapping", I guess you'll be badgering the hell out of her for a thressome, eh? Is that what real men do? Maybe your future gal has just had a close shave, and dodged the jeffbr love bullet...

On topic, if you have a problem with what somoebody else chooses to do in the privacy of their own home, or in loving someobody that they want to love, then YOU have the problem.

sponger

nevermind. I was about to post the full version of that article I posted earlier, but it costs money to get access.

Ahnimus

sponger wrote:

I added another link to the bottom of my post. It was what I was trying to post earlier, but I didn't realize I was actually linking something else.

Here's some more stuff on genetics and serotonin(5-HT):

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=2367601&dopt=Abstract

http://news.mc.duke.edu/news/article.php?id=8332

Ok, so if genetics affects seratonin levels, which effects behaviour than that behaviour is a disorder. Such as depression is a disorder, so is homosexuality. Yay we figured it out, I had a feeling the scientific community already knew that though. All the homos should take LSD and Exstacy. Fuck were good.

sponger

Ahnimus wrote:

I had a feeling the scientific community already knew that though.

LOL. You're one of those "I knew it all along" people. There's one in every forum. Personally, I don't think it has much to do with serotonin. For instance, that article about birth orders discusses antibodies produced in the womb that attack male fetuses, thus causing homosexuality for whatever reason.

BackwardsBlues1

keeponrockin wrote:

To be honest, I'm uncomfortable when straight people are making out around me, I just look away. I'd probably do the same for gay couples.

exactly, I don't like watching anyone make out, it doesn't matter to me who they are.

BackwardsBlues1

sonicreducer wrote:

you know, i didn't think about that. either way, it is not pleasant to see people PDA'ing.

id also like to say that i live in ANDERSON, SOUTH CAROLINA right now. it's close to clemson, where i go to college. i never here people making fun of gays or giving them a hard time and i know a lot of gay people. maybe im being sheltered from this, but i don't think it is as bad as people make it out to be. by the way, anderson is about as redneck as it gets.

it's because you're in college. when you're in college, you assume everyone is liberal and open to everything. But it's not outright slander of gays that is the problem, it's like the people who oppose gay marriage. that is hate. they're saying it's great for me to get married but not you because there is something different about you. and trust me, there are PLENTY of people who think like this.

know1

BackwardsBlues1 wrote:

it's because you're in college. when you're in college, you assume everyone is liberal and open to everything. But it's not outright slander of gays that is the problem, it's like the people who oppose gay marriage. that is hate. they're saying it's great for me to get married but not you because there is something different about you. and trust me, there are PLENTY of people who think like this.

I believe it's possible to oppose gay marriage without it being hate. Heck, I oppose straight divorce - is that hate?