To me, it is like saying: 'I' want vanilla cake - but if 'you' (proverbial) do not like the fact that I want it - then 'you' are not nice. Instead of saying - I respect the fact that you prefer a different life style than 'me' so long as 'we' both agree 'we' are all people and deserve equal treatment under the law.
It's almost like pointing at someone - in my humble opinion - and saying if they dislike apples, then they've a fear of them, and are homophobic. I personally disagree with the idea that everything has to be cut and dry in such a fashion - as a lot of things are so much more complicated than that. What about people, for example, that are homosexual - and have misgivings about their own lifestyle due to societal pressure?
This, however, is not a perfect comparison. There is a fundamental difference between one saying "I dislike apples" and one saying "Apples are biologically wrong" or "Apples are wrong, but I'll tolerate them being around." Furthermore, there is a difference between saying "I dislike apples" and "I dislike an entire group of human beings based on a trait that person has no control over."
But what really confuses me, not about what Haloriel said but what a lot of people are saying, is what agreeing or disagreeing with homosexuality is. Homosexuality is not a thesis or an argument, it is not a position. Do you all mean that you think it is fundamentally wrong? Do you all mean that you yourselves are not homosexuals? These are the only two things that make sense to me. But it is not really clear how one can agree or disagree with homosexuality. It seems as absurd a thing to say as "I disagree with being French" or "I agree with being two meters tall."
Okay - there is a real difference between 'fear and hatred' and mere 'disapproval'.
I agree to an extent. There is a difference between disapproving of an idea and of fearing and hating it. But I feel that when you are dealing with entire categories of human beings, the difference is blurred. Is it alright if one were to say, "I disapprove of being Hispanic"? Is that a racist comment? If it is, can you please explain how that is different from saying "I disapprove of homosexuality"? If not, can you explain why it is not?
Now, I am asking you to explain why they are not racist and homophobic comments respectively, so let me explain why I believe both to be. Both comments instantly place an entire category of human beings on an inferior level to onesself. They do this by implicitly saying "These people are doing something wrong. They are not correctly living a human life." Not only that, but the comments place categories of human beings on an inferior level based on something that is of no choice to the target. I feel that comments, such as "I disagree with Marxists" or "I disagree with Catholocism", are fundamentally different because they show disapproval of a philosophy or theology and not necessarily of the people who hold that view. With "Hispanic" or "homosexuality" the comment targets a part of the person that cannot be separated from their physical being, it is an essential part of them, while the Marxist or Catholicism statements target merely views held by a person. I feel that even if one were to say, "I think all capitalists are terrible people," it is not as bad as saying "I disapprove of homosexuality" because the speaker is targeting a group not based on some essential, unchanging part of their person (a part of that person which does not, necessarily, influence their behavior or actions), but on their views, morality, and philosophical affiliation, that is to say based on their behavior. Now, it could be said that the person who says, "I disapprove of homosexuality" is targeting a group based on behavior as well, but that is simply not true because the speaker is also targeting celebite homosexuals or homosexuals who only have heterosexual sex - the speaker is targeting them for their psychology and physiology.
However, one might say "I disapprove of homosexual sex." That too I feel is different from saying, "I think all capitalists [or Marxists] are terrible people." The difference lies in the fact that there are reasons to disapprove of the capitalist or the Marxist, reasons that are not unreasonable. There is no reason to disapprove of homosexual sex (unless one is arguing against sex in general, at which point the speaker is being homophobic by applying arguments to homosexual sex only) that is reasonable.
Of course, if what people mean by saying "I disagree with homosexuality" or "I disagree with homosexuality on a biological level" is "I don't want to have homosexual sex" (which I doubt), then my arguments are moot and do not apply. But if what they mean is "Homosexuality is wrong" then I feel my statements are accurate. If you think I am wrong, please tell me so.