Christians refuse to tip waiter because ‘homosexual lifestyle is an affront to God’

73

A group of customers refused to tip their 20-year-old server at a Carraba’s Italian restaurant in Overland Park, KS on the grounds that his homosexuality is “an affront to God.” According to KCTV Fox 19, the server went to the table after the group of customers left and found a note explaining their decision.

“Thank you for your service, it was excellent. That being said, we cannot in good conscience tip you, for your homosexual lifestyle is an affront to GOD. Queers do not share in the wealth of GOD, and you will not share in ours,” said the note. “We hope you will see the tip your queer choices made you lose out on, and plan accordingly. It is never too late for GOD’s love, but none shall be spared for queers. May GOD have mercy on you.”

Written By: David Ferguson
continue to source article at rawstory.com

73 COMMENTS

  1. “Thank you for your service, it was excellent. That being said, we cannot in good conscience tip you, for your homosexual lifestyle is an affront to GOD. Queers do not share in the wealth of GOD, and you will not share in ours,” said the note.

    Ah! The meanness of religious bigots.
    Still the waiter will know what quality of service they should be given for the price they are prepared to pay – if they return! I’m sure he has other customers more deserving of priority for his excellent service!

    • In reply to #4 by Markovich:

      “Queers do not share in the wealth of God.” Neither does anyone else, of course.

      Similarly, when someone says, “there is a place called Hell for people like you (non-believers, homosexuals, intellectuals, liberals, etc.)” the only correct response is “oh yeah, well there isn’t a place called Heaven for people like you – because it doesn’t exist!”

      In The Four Horsemen, Dennett/Harris pose the question, how do you tell someone ‘you’ve wasted your life’? You shouldn’t have to, and a reasoned discourse can take place between believers and non-believers alike. WLC is eloquent in his debates without being insulting (even if he is wrong). But when the conversation turns to condemnations, then the gloves are off. Go ahead, tell them…

      “You’re going to Hell.” … “You’re NOT going to Heaven.”

      • In reply to #9 by KrustyG:

        In reply to #4 by Markovich:

        “Queers do not share in the wealth of God.” Neither does anyone else, of course.

        Similarly, when someone says, “there is a place called Hell for people like you (non-believers, homosexuals, intellectuals, liberals, etc.)” the only correct response is “oh yeah, well th…

        Hell is a real place, and it exists, on Earth, in the immediate vicinity of religious bigots, and they inflict it on everyone

    • In reply to #5 by Kim Probable:

      How did they even know?

      Exactly! In my younger waitressing years, I recall two guys mocking a waiter using a lisp and limp wrist. (The waiter was young and probably not even aware that he was homosexual at that point in his life or at least not out.) Curious, I glanced at the plate when they left and noticed that they stiffed him on a tip. To recognize someone as gay, you would need to be aware that most/many gay people are actually different in mannerisms than straight people; some can even be identified by voice or physical appearance. Many people are aware of this even if it is subconscious. To acknowledge these differences, realize it or not, would be to admit that there are biological factors at play or at least realize that sexuality is not a choice. Not sure if the waiter talked about his lover or what in this case….

      My guess is that these Christians were cheap and used their views to justify doing wrong. The best way of doing evil is to paint the other person as evil then you won’t feel bad and will still have your ego intact. What they don’t realize is that they had the same type of mindset as Nazi stealing paintings and money from the Jews.

      • In reply to #18 by QuestioningKat:

        In reply to #5 by Kim Probable:

        How did they even know?

        Exactly! In my younger waitressing years, I recall two guys mocking a waiter using a lisp and limp wrist. (The waiter was young and probably not even aware that he was homosexual at that point in his life or at least not out.) Curious, I glan…

        Christian Gaydar, special Christian gay sussing intuition, fuckwits fairy detector or the waiter didn’t feel it necessary to hide his sxuality in these modern times, just like he shouldn’t…who really knows? That is not the point. They got it right, right in the sense they knew the lad was gay that is, not that their pea brained bigotous attitude was right, ortherwise we wouldn’t be discussing the issue…they are still nasty pieces of work…but we are not allowed to express such distain these days on RD.net because we are playing into the hands of the religious fuckwits according to some handwringers in our midst. That’s all.

        • In reply to #27 by Ignorant Amos:

          …they are still nasty pieces of work…but we are not allowed to express such distain these days on RD.net because we are playing into the hands of the religious fuckwits according to some handwringers in our midst. That’s all.

          Since when has the expressing of disdain for nasty pieces of work, religious or not, been prohibited on this site, Igworth? That hasn’t been my experience of RD.net

          • In reply to #40 by Katy Cordeth:

            In reply to #27 by Ignorant Amos:

            …they are still nasty pieces of work…but we are not allowed to express such distain these days on RD.net because we are playing into the hands of the religious fuckwits according to some handwringers in our midst. That’s all.

            Since when has the expressing of d…

            I didn’t say it was a site rule, I said, or what was inferred in my comment if read in full context, is that the ridicule, mockery and calling of some religious folk as “nasty pieces of work” is frowned upon by some members, the handwringers who think we will never win the “hearts and minds” of religio’s by such remarks, because it plays into the hands of those religious fuckwits that look for any excuse to point the finger at atheists and say, “Ya see, those militant atheists are every bit as intolerant as we are, ha! ha!”

      • In reply to #18 by QuestioningKat:

        In reply to #5 by Kim Probable:

        How did they even know?

        Exactly! In my younger waitressing years, I recall two guys mocking a waiter using a lisp and limp wrist. (The waiter was young and probably not even aware that he was homosexual at that point in his life or at least not out.)

        It brings to mind an episode of Bullshit, where they had a team of gay men and straight men compete doing typical tasks given to Boy Scouts. I like how they completely go against cultural stereotypes in terms of appearance (even while making stereotypical jokes =P).

        Here it is – if it doesn’t link directly to the time, start at 3:15.

        But I wonder, were they just going by his behavior? That doesn’t necessarily mean anything. I guess his dating habits could have come up, but it seems like an odd subject for waitstaff to mention, though I guess it could happen in conversation.

      • ” To recognize someone as gay, you would need to be aware that most/many gay people are actually different in mannerisms than straight people; some can even be identified by voice or physical appearance. Many people are aware of this even if it is subconscious.” Do you have any scientific evidence for this? Two of my best friends are gay. They both came out a few years ago, and they have none of the mannerisms usually associated with the stereotypical gay person. This is of course also just anecdotes. Hence, I ask you whether you have any evidence for you claims or if you are just making stuff up? In reply to #18 by QuestioningKat:

        In reply to #5 by Kim Probable:

        How did they even know?

        Exactly! In my younger waitressing years, I recall two guys mocking a waiter using a lisp and limp wrist. (The waiter was young and probably not even aware that he was homosexual at that point in his life or at least not out.) Curious, I glan…

        • In reply to #60 by Nunbeliever:

          ” To recognize someone as gay, you would need to be aware that most/many gay people are actually different in mannerisms than straight people; some can even be identified by voice or physical appearance. Many people are aware of this even if it is subconscious.

          It also works in reverse. I drink in a number of “Gay Bars” where I live and the patrons can tell I’m heterosexual without my saying it’s so.

          • Nunbeliever said:

            This is of course also just anecdotes. Hence, I ask you whether you have any evidence for you claims or if you are just making stuff up?

            Even though you may not have been able to notice that your friends were gay, someone with keen observation would have been able to pick them out. Yes, gaydar does exist and there is plenty of evidence to back up my claims. I’ve posted several studies here in the past showing that it is a reality UNDENIABLY. Frankly, I don’t get how all people cannot see what is so obvious. At times, a straight individual might have a quality that some might consider gay (example metrosexual male/female athletic), but it is more of a certain balance or blend of characteristics that reveal a person’s sexuality – it is physical in cause.

            Here are a few links after a quick google search “gaydar” “gaydar science” “gaydar research” I would argue that some gay people are as accurate as 90%.
            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaydar
            http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1300/J082v13n04_05#.UojFeo2QnLE
            http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/03/opinion/sunday/the-science-of-gaydar.html

            The Wikipedia article has links to various studies that you can read online.

            If gaydar exists then it is pausible that homosexuality is phsycial/biological in cause. It is easy to identify the difference between male and female; no one asks for scientific studies to disprove anecdote. Homosexuals have observable traits that are subtle that can be overlooked by those with poor observational skills. There are other gays who are so obviously gay that attempts to hide their sexuality behind “straight” attire and attitude leave them looking like Nathan Lane in a scene for the movie, Bird Cage. Yet, a clash of values occurs when someone homophobic feels a person’s sexuality is a choice and then recognizes someone gay from a brief encounter. How did they know when the person did not state their sexuality?

          • In reply to #65 by QuestioningKat:

            If gaydar exists then it is pausible that homosexuality is phsycial/biological in cause

            I agree that gaydar exists and I also agree that it’s possible that homosexuality is a biological trait but I don’t see what one thing has to do with the other. Gaydar refers to a human capability that has been demonstrated in controlled experiments, we are very good at making extremely quick judgements about basic personality types on minimal amounts of data:

            ” Indeed, we learn a lot about others in a surprisingly small period of time. A large body of research in psychology known as “thin slicing” refers to people’s ability to make judgments about others from small amounts of information, usually from observing someone for short periods, usually 30 seconds to 5 minutes. Judgments about any number of traits have been investigated—extroversion, personality, intelligence, etc.— and the basic results are that people are pretty good at it and that 30 seconds is as good as five minutes. Basically, small amounts of information might be better. In a review article on the subject , two prominent researchers in this area said their result “contradicts the commonsense notion that more information leads to greater accuracy; the additional information might be redundant, or even counterproductive,” 26 Kurzban, Robert (2011-01-03). Why Everyone (Else) Is a Hypocrite: Evolution and the Modular Mind (p. 91). Princeton University Press. Kindle Edition.

            There is no requirement that the judgements made in these situations are about traits that are biological in origin. Indeed the personality traits Kurzban is talking about are almost certainly a combination of biological tendencies and environmental learning and I suspect that when we understand the nature of gaynes it will turn out to be the same.

  2. Waiters/waitresses/servers are in a vulnerable position because their jobs can sometimes hang in the balance if their is a conflict with a customer, regardless of how rude the customer. This is a contemptable act of cowardice by bonehead xtian a-holes for this reason. I hate cowardace more then almost anything.

  3. I found, with some surprise, actually, that reading the note turned my stomach. The pettiness and illogic, and the sheer meanness of it (as Alan4discussion said) is sickening.

    Notice that they were happy to receive his “excellent” service, just not to pay for it? This is the lowest kind of bigotry; they haven’t even the courage to address their target directly, or to refuse his service.

  4. “Thank you for your service, it was excellent. That being said, we cannot in good conscience tip you, for your homosexual lifestyle is an affront to GOD. Queers do not share in the wealth of GOD, and you will not share in ours,” said the note.

    Wait a cotton-picking minute! If these numpties don’t want homosexuals to share in their wealth then they shouldn’t even be customers. Who the hell do they think pays the staff’s wages?

    And what about people like me who don’t keep holy the sabbath, covert my neighbour’s Corvette, and take the name of that arsehole of a fictional character “Jehovah” in vain? Do I get to share in their wealth?

  5. What the fuck?! Where the hell do they get off doing something like that? Those people are fucking bigots! Their ignorance is astonishing and I hope the restaurant refuses to serve them again for pulling this on one of their employees.

  6. This makes my Sicilian blood boil.

    “The offers to help pay me back are much appreciated, but not at all needed. I’d prefer to let my work ethic and my service do the talking, nothing else.”

    Fuck that. I want this kid rich just to piss off those feckless bastards. Eh… but I understand where he’s coming from.

    Ooooooo, I’m so pissed.

    • In reply to #16 by This Is Not A Meme:

      This makes my Sicilian blood boil.

      “The offers to help pay me back are much appreciated, but not at all needed. I’d prefer to let my work ethic and my service do the talking, nothing else.”

      Fuck that. I want this kid rich just to piss off those feckless bastards. Eh… but I understand where he’s…

      I was thinking how I wish we knew who the feckless bastards were, so we could have a public campaign to send donations to a worthy cause like PFLAG or something, in their names.

    • In reply to #19 by IDLERACER:

      I saw the word “Kansas” in this article, and immediately thought of Fred Phelps. A quick check over at Wikipedia revealed that Overland Park is nowhere near Witchita, however.

      Actually, WBC is in Topeka – but yeah, maybe it was them shudder.

  7. A couple of interesting things about this story. Firstly, the story is from Kansas, hardly a place I would have thought of as a gay friendly stronghold. Is it the case that homophobia is becoming totally unacceptable across the board? If so, good news. Not to mention about bloody time! On the other hand, when homophobia goes the way of slavery, christians will no doubt lie and claim that they were the one that defeated it. Secondly, and related to my last point, I just don’t understand gay or gay friendly christians, like the former pastor in the video. Don’t get me wrong, I applaud what he and his partner did by going to the restaurant and going out of their way to support the waiter and the restaurant. But surely he must realise that christian doctrine was responsible for the issue in the first place?

  8. Restaurant is located near exit ramps for a major E – W highway. I’d bet money on the bob-tailed nag that these folks were headed to the “Creation Museum”.

    This not sound like what the locals would do. Overland Park is barely west of Kansas City Missouri. Very diverse area.

    • In reply to #22 by Smiley:

      Oh I like how things backfire on bigots – not only do’s the general public support the waiter but are making the restaurant and waiter richer than the average waiter. So who’s now laughing

      Satan?

    • In reply to #25 by Ignorant Amos:

      May I recommend the Clam Chowder on their next visit? Or should that be the Carbonara?

      I don’t get your comment. Are carbonara and clam chowder popular dishes at this restaurant chain, or were you making a Viz-type joke about the special dressing dissatisfied male restaurant employees sometimes bestow as a gratuity of their own according to urban legend on or in the food of patrons who displease them?

      • In reply to #41 by Katy Cordeth:

        In reply to #25 by Ignorant Amos:

        May I recommend the Clam Chowder on their next visit? Or should that be the Carbonara?

        I don’t get your comment.

        And yet the rest of your comment goes on to explain how you did…excellent.

        Perhaps not where it was pulled from…

        Have you not seen “Fight Club”? Tyler will be disappointed.

        Narrator: “Clean food, please.”

        Waiter: “In that case, sir, may I advise against the lady eating clam chowder?”

        Narrator: “No clam chowder, thank you.”

        (This might be funnier if you know that this preceded it by about an hour.)

        Narrator: “He was the guerilla terrorist in the food service industry”

        Tyler Durden: ” Do not watch. I cannot go when you watch.”

        Narrator: “Apart from seasoning the lobster bisque, he farted on the meringue, sneezed on braised endive, and as for the cream of mushroom soup, well…”

        Tyler Durden: ” Go ahead. Tell ‘em.”

        Narrator: “…you get the idea.”

        Are carbonara and clam chowder popular dishes at this restaurant chain,…

        I couldn’t possibly say Katy, I would think Carbonara fairly popular, it is an Italian restaurant after all.

        …or were you making a Viz-type joke.about the special dressing dissatisfied male restaurant employees sometimes bestow as a gratuity of their own according to urban legend on or in the food of patrons who displease them?

        OOOh! Katy, that was so sexiest…unless you think such actions are beneath the principles of a female employee too?
        As for it being an urban myth….ah, nope. It is well documented…“pissing in the food/drink”… and that’s without personal anecdote from my army days and what some did to the food/drink when put on Mess duties.

        I think you overcooked my attempt at jokingly offering a method of revenge…but I’m happy enough to break it down for you…and others who might not have got it.

        • In reply to #55 by Ignorant Amos:

          In reply to #41 by Katy Cordeth:

          In reply to #25 by Ignorant Amos:

          May I recommend the Clam Chowder on their next visit? Or should that be the Carbonara?

          I don’t get your comment.

          And yet the rest of your comment goes on to explain how you did…excellent.

          Perhaps not where it was pulled from…..

          Gottit. As I thought, you were making a joke about restaurant patrons unwittingly being made to ingest human semen or other bodily fluids. Hilarious, Amos. Kudos on this witticism.

          • In reply to #57 by Katy Cordeth:

            Gottit. As I thought, you were making a joke about restaurant patrons unwittingly being made to ingest human semen or other bodily fluids. Hilarious, Amos. Kudos on this witticism.

            Nah…ya didn’t get it at all after the lengthy explanation…and nothing to say about your sexist and erroneous assertions either, ah well…nothing new there then.

          • In reply to #58 by Ignorant Amos:

            In reply to #57 by Katy Cordeth:

            Gottit. As I thought, you were making a joke about restaurant patrons unwittingly being made to ingest human semen or other bodily fluids. Hilarious, Amos. Kudos on this witticism.

            Nah…ya didn’t get it at all after the lengthy explanation…and nothing to say about your sexist and erroneous assertions either, ah well…nothing new there then.

            I admit to being genuinely confused now, Amos. You weren’t making a joke about restaurant patrons being made to consume human bodily fluids unawares?

            What was all that stuff about Fight Club and cream of mushroom soup, this link and your exploits from your days in the armed services about then?

            And what erroneous and sexist assertions am I supposed to have made?

            Hashtag: baffled.

      • In reply to #46 by Shell:

        In reply to #25 by Ignorant Amos:

        May I recommend the Clam Chowder on their next visit? Or should that be the Carbonara?

        I’d suggest some Clam Up Chowder.

        Ah yes…a tone troll…where would the world be without them? Nothing to say directly to the OP?

  9. Did he attempt to give the blow jobs under the table? Even we gays can often make mistakes in who is gay and who is not. I was quite surprised to discover that the current fad is for teenage straight males to shave their legs. In my day only the most nelly gays did that.

    Yet oddly these bigots were happy to be served by this waiter. They went out of their way to cheat him. How Christian!
    Matthew 25:40

  10. I remember having breakfast in a Howard Johnson’s somewhere in the USA. A bigoted man and his son were bullying the two waitresses mercilessly. The waitresses had to be polite no matter what the pair did. They seemed to be taunting them to do something that would make them lose their jobs. I could not not stand it any more. I rose to my full 6″4″ height, lowered my voice an octave, raised my volume to window-shaking and bawled them both out, and bawled the man out for being such a rotten father to teach his son to behave like a boor. When I left two waitresses ran up to me and grabbed my hand and thanked me for doing what they could not.

  11. Christian Gaydar, special Christian gay sussing intuition, fuckwits fairy detector or the waiter didn’t feel it necessary to hide his sxuality in these modern times, just like he shouldn’t…who really knows? That is not the point. They got it right, right in the sense they knew the lad was gay that is, not that their pea brained bigotous attitude was right, ortherwise we wouldn’t be discussing the issue…they are still nasty pieces of work…but we are not allowed to express such distain these days on RD.net because we are playing into the hands of the religious fuckwits according to some handwringers in our midst. That’s all.

    My point is –”CHOSEN sinful lifestyles” should not be able to be identifiable physically. How do you pick out a petty thief in a room full of people? Or, how do you pick out an adulterer amongst your co-workers? How do you pick out people who engage in any act that is considered “sinful?” You really don’t. They appear to be just like anyone else. I just don’t understand how homophobic people can pick someone out who doesn’t announce that they engage in certain behaviors/activities and not realize that they identified a person without witnessing what they consider to be the “sinful act.” Identifying someone who is gay is like identifying someone who is Italian or Scandinavian. When will they wake up? A gay coworker told me how he had his childhood bedroom decorated in rainbows and unicorns amongst many other typical “girly” stuff. He doesn’t understand how it took so long for his parents to get a clue.

    • In reply to #34 by QuestioningKat:

      I’m not disagreeing with you. The point I was making is that to some narrow minded people the most insignificant of tells can be interpreted as a sign of ones sexuality. I like wearing pink, I have been, on more than one occasion, called a fruity bastard. I currently abode in the Old Town of Benidorm where there is a strong Gay scene, while the physical behaviour of some men shouldn’t be taken as an obvious marker for their sexuality, it often is. What I was trying to say is that whatever those narrow minded customers used to aduce the guys sexuality, they got it right, because if they hadn’t, the conversation would be about their erroneous bigotous assertion. But how they knew the waiter was Gay we don’t know, and as far as me personally is concerned, it shouldn’t matter, perhaps the waiter was up front about his sexuality because he was comfortable enough to let it be known…I don’t know…but whether he told the arseholes or the arseholes guessed it correctly, they are still arseholes.

  12. Take away the religion here and what do you have? How is it that “excellent service” is an affront to god? An affront is a deliberate act. To my knowledge, being gay is not a choice. If this carrot and stick approach is an example of the sum total of the wealth of god and gods love, then they can keep it. The truely objectionable thing here is the bigotry. I’m sure many fellow christians will try to distance themselves from this group. Repent while you still can! Apologize in person.
    I once lived within blocks of this restaurant and have enjoyed the meals and fine service there. Overland Park, Kansas is an upscale suburb of the Greater Kansas City Area. Yes! It does have it’s share of self-righteously pious conservatives. Maybe that’s why I moved to Missouri. Go Mizzou!

  13. Christians are supposed to distinguish between gays who have sex and those that do not. However, most of them feel licenced to kill either kind, though of course most express their malice in more petty ways, such as the supercilious note described above.

  14. Love thy neighbour as thyself? Yeah, but not if they’re poofs!

    The dilema is that religion instills fear of sex and in consequence ignorance about it.

    The very thought that choice comes into sexual proclivities is infantile; and anyway the sky fairy created everything including gay people, so if he’s offended he’s brought it on himself.

    No, it’s the self righteous bigots that are offended, and profess to know the mind of their imaginary friend.

  15. I don’t mean to rain on anyone’s outrage fest here, but given the reasonable scepticism standpoint I have come to expect from everyone on here, I’d prefer to see comments starting ‘If it’s true…’
    That said, if it is true then these people are contemptible scumbags and deserve whatever additional additives their food will undoubtedly be spiced with if they visit again.

  16. the thing that annoys me about this is how did they know he was gay? I have a big issue with this because the guy was probably “effeminate” there anti-gays label him gay (when he might not be). I also get annoyed at “pro-gay” people who assume that if someone if effeminate they must be gay and encourage them to live a gay lifestyle. Personally, as a Christian, I think Jesus would have left a good tip.

  17. I know this is free-speech America, but over here in the UK we criminalise deliberate hate speech, and this note comes close. It would, at least, make for an interesting civil action for damages on the grounds that the waiter had been defamed.

    These so-called “Christians” have needlessly inflicted hurt on a human being, for no better reason than to publicly demonstrate what they erroneously perceive to be their status as superior human beings.

    They are utterly shallow, worthless scum. And maybe one day their god will tell them so.

    • In reply to #45 by Stevehill:

      I know this is free-speech America, but over here in the UK we criminalise deliberate hate speech…

      And for me this is our shame not that of the US. Incitement to violence is one thing but hate speech legislation may cause undue silencing without finding and fixing the harm. Yes it may make our lives a little more uncomfortable but we have a duty to face up to the realities of the folk we live with and do something substantial rather than cosmetic to tackle hateful problems at their root.

      Any act of hate speech that a reasonable person would identify as criminal I contend would be one that incites no less than violence.

      The Hitch was right on this.

      • In reply to #47 by phil rimmer:

        In reply to #45 by Stevehill:

        I know this is free-speech America, but over here in the UK we criminalise deliberate hate speech…

        And for me this is our shame not that of the US.

        For what it is worth I agree with you.

  18. Its entirely your choice as a patron to tip waiters or not – If waiters and waitresses were paid decent wages – they wouldn’t be forced to rely on bigoted patrons for grudged tips………
    If his service was good he deserved the tip…. those believers are supremely judgeMental – your work or service should be the only thing being judged….

  19. Well, in a country of free speech they have of course every right to behave that way. And in my book that qualifies them for an extra serving of special sauce next time they eat out. Never mess with the waiter, he’s in charge of your food!

  20. Interesting. They had no problem eating the food or being served. Their religious objection only manifested itself when it came time to tip. I suspect at the heart of this it is more about being hateful and cheap than by a true religious objection.

  21. I agree that gaydar exists and I also agree that it’s possible that homosexuality is a biological trait but I don’t see what one thing has to do with the other.

    Test were done using black and white photos cropped close without hair and shown 40 to 50 milliseconds. It is shown that face shape, eyes and mouth were distinguishable between gay and straight people. Sound clips were shown to be distinguishable. This was shown to be cross cultural. How can face shape be shown to be cultural or environmental? It’s not. Also this is not an just an issue with personality; it is a person’s entire existence and being that effects physicality, emotions, sexuality, personality, preferences in all aspects of life, personal expression, psychology, mannerisms, physical actions, etc. To realize this one must acknowledge that it is not a choice and they could finally get this joke KD Lang, Billie Jean King, and Ellen DeGeneres can be identified as lesbians more than their grooming habits….and let’s face it, many gay men are “attractive.”

    • In reply to #67 by QuestioningKat:

      I agree that gaydar exists and I also agree that it’s possible that homosexuality is a biological trait but I don’t see what one thing has to do with the other.

      Test were done using black and white photos cropped close without hair and shown 40 to 50 milliseconds. It is shown that face shape, eyes…

      Sorry, not convinced. There can be subtle learned behaviors that relate to facial expressions, etc. I agree that one data point supports your case but it’s hardly conclusive.

      I don’t understand why it seems to matter to you anyway. Gay people deserve the same rights whether gayness is 100% biological or 100% learned. I don’t think it’s either but I don’t think it makes any difference in terms of gay rights and I think one of the biggest mistakes the gay community makes is promoting bad science that “it’s not a choice” because it’s biological. We don’t know that and even if we did it wouldn’t matter, even if it’s completely a choice (I know it’s not I’m saying IF) that has no impact on someone’s right to love whom they choose.

      • In reply to #68 by Red Dog:

        In reply to #67 by QuestioningKat:

        I totally agree the gay people deserve 100% respect; I never implied anything less than respect. There are some people stuck on believing that this is a choice and they should be proven otherwise in any way legitimate way possible. If they say their book is fact and we can give hard reason to why it is inaccurate, we do so. Not looking into any science on the matter is like shutting your eyes.

      • In reply to #68 by Red Dog:

        Well, a good sign of a biological cause is usually cross-cultural universality, though it isn’t conclusive by any means. It is interesting on scientific grounds to wonder how a biological origin like that would persist when homosexuality seems to reduce one’s reproductive output, much less how an ability to recognize it could come about. If it’s a biological cause, then pleiotropy might be involved, such that a hypothetical “gay” gene also influences body shape, or it might be due to a systematic quirk in embryological development. It’s harder to argue that post-natal environmental causes systematically target gays to make their faces look different, because that would require people from different climates and social backgrounds to hit on a coincidence.

        Also, that’s a bit harsh. I hardly think QuestioningKat is disputing gay people’s rights just because of some scientific research into gaydar. That’s a naturalistic fallacy, precisely the fallacious mode of thought homophobes use (as in decrying gays as “unnatural” or “biological errors”).

        • In reply to #70 by Zeuglodon:

          In reply to #68 by Red Dog:

          Well, a good sign of a biological cause is usually cross-cultural universality, though it isn’t conclusive by any means. It is interesting on scientific grounds to wonder how a biological origin like that would persist when homosexuality seems to reduce one’s reproductiv…

          I didn’t think Kat was assuming that gay people don’t deserve rights. What I suspected is that I was hearing the argument “discrimination against gays is wrong because people can’t control being gay since it’s determined by biology”. It’s that argument that I object to for two reasons. First, I’m against any argument that places preconditions on science, just because a conclusion may be politically inconvenient doesn’t mean it’s not true. And second because I think (and this is usually the case with a lot of PC arguments) that the reasoning is faulty anyway. I think we concede too much to the anti-gay rights people when we start debating whether being gay is biological or not. IMO the proper response to that is always to say it doesn’t matter. Even if it turned out (which it won’t) that there was absolutely no biological basis to gayness at all that doesn’t mean people have the right to discriminate.

          It’s an accident of US law that it’s easier to argue for gay rights in certain kinds of court cases if you can argue that being gay is “not a choice” and also due to US law the easiest way to argue that it’s “not a choice” is to say it’s determined by biology. I’m fine with people using those arguments when needed in a court case, in court you don’t care about the actual truth but about advocating for your side as convincingly as possible. But outside of court we shouldn’t let legal technicalities get in the way of science.

          • In reply to #71 by Red Dog:

            I didn’t think Kat was assuming that gay people don’t deserve rights. What I suspected is that I was hearing the argument “discrimination against gays is wrong because people can’t control being gay since it’s determined by biology”.

            I can’t presume to speak for QuestioningKat, but I think you were reading too much into her comments. I thought talking about whether homosexuality is caused by genetics or is an acquired habit was just her set-up for trying to explain the surprising phenomenon of gaydar, not an implicit assumption that Christian homophobia would have been justified if it turned out not to be biological. Sometimes, a scientific discussion on to what extent gaydar suggests a biological origin for homosexuality is just that: a scientific discussion.

            Granted, juxtaposing that with the anecdote about the Christians and the waiter didn’t help.

Leave a Reply