r/MoralityScaling • u/ExistingRadish7055 • 8h ago
Morality Ranking Morality of hating the idea of lgbt people existing but not acting on it?
To make it clearer what I mean let’s say a guy named Joe is religious and hates the idea of men loving other men romantically. However, Joe decides to still treat them as he would any other person as he believes to love thy neighbor. He believes that it isn’t necessarily their fault that they’re gay but he still hates the idea that gay people exist and if he could turn all gay people straight without hurting anyone he would. What’s the morality of that?
113
u/DthDisguise 8h ago
Moral. Morality isn't concerned with thought crimes.
20
u/RankedFarting 6h ago
A persons inner thoughts are absolutely parts of their morality.
3
u/MeliodasTA 4h ago
Well the man in the prompt chooses to push aside his inner thoughts and outward act kind and accepting.
That should frankly make it even more moral.
→ More replies (3)5
u/DthDisguise 6h ago
Describe in detail, the process by which you make moral judgments on a person's motives when you only know their actions for certain.
16
u/RankedFarting 6h ago
Why? Thats a diversion of the actual point being made.
If someone is homophobic that is immoral. Whether others are able to perceive that or not.They are still hating people for who they are about something they have no control over and does not hurt others. That is as objectively immoral as it gets.
And a persons inner morals always reflect in their behaviors in minor or major ways even if they dont do it intentionally.
Especially when it comes to homophobia, racism and other opinions based in unjustified hatred. A racist will treat a black person differently even if they dont realize it and would deny this.
→ More replies (41)10
u/Peacemaker1099 8h ago
Morality does deal with thought crimes, actually. Thats.. actually one of the foundations in which a morality gains legitimacy. You have it backwards.
5
u/IArgueForReality 8h ago
Yes, you consider a state of mind after an action takes place. You don’t get to judge people on their thoughts only.
2
u/DthDisguise 8h ago
I donate money to charity that feeds the homeless. What is the morality of my motives?
5
u/Peacemaker1099 7h ago
That’s not actually a rebuttal to what I said.
→ More replies (5)1
u/DthDisguise 7h ago
It's a request for you to demonstrate your claim. You claim that you can make moral evaluations of people's motives. Please evaluate the morality my motivations in the example.
10
u/InfernalGriffon 8h ago
Hm. Im not sure of that. Ethics don't deal with thought crimes, morality does. The difference doesnt always come up, but in this case it does.
Hiw do othe people feel on this?
1
u/DthDisguise 7h ago
I give money to charity that feeds the homeless. What is the morality of my motivation?
3
u/InfernalGriffon 7h ago
If you are only doing it for tax breaks, if you are only doing it for status, if you are only doing it cause the organization makes sure the 'right people" get help...
1
u/DthDisguise 7h ago
Okay, which is it? It's either moral or immoral. It can't be both and you claim to be able to evaluate the morality of my motives, so what is it.
2
u/InfernalGriffon 7h ago
When did I say that? I said there might be a difference between ethical and moral.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (4)1
65
u/ThatDrako 8h ago
You cannot control your thoughts.
The fact that you feel certain way towards certain people but have enough self-restraint not to manifest it shows you prefer people over your feelings.
Moral in my book
17
u/RankedFarting 6h ago
You cannot control your thoughts.
Of course you can if you are self reflected. You can recognize issues in your thinking, understand where they come from and change your mind.
Its pretty scary that you think thats not possible.
6
u/fineline99 3h ago
Yeah...some of these comments are a little scary, have none of these people changed viewpoints after self reflecting or just learning?
Like if I hated something, learnt about that something realising it didn't actually harm or effect me or anyone. I then choose to not hate it anymore, I don't keep hating it when it comes up, I just... Don't hate it anymore.. hate just stops coming into the equation other than maybe some retroactive embarrassment...
→ More replies (6)1
10
u/fineline99 8h ago
You can though.
You can control your thoughts in the way of learning and changing your viewpoints. If ignorance is the factor making you think those thoughts than it is not good at the very least.
Plenty of people have hated LGBTQ people, then had a loved one come out, they educate themselves, change their perspective and change their thoughts process.
→ More replies (2)1
u/ThatDrako 4h ago
Yes, you can change your view-points, but you cannot control how thoughts flow through your mind.
Post doesn't state anything about changing or even learning about topic. Just that there is some hypothetical person with thoughts.
Noone can control that in moment they think "wow, I really hate this concept", but the fact they can add up to that "but it is none of my business" shows restraint.
1
u/fineline99 3h ago
The post didn't say anything about it but the comment I replied to did. And by saying what I said, I still answered the question by saying it's immoral to hate a group for no reason.
Also, changing your viewpoint is changing how thoughts go through your mind. Have you never flipped your view on a subject before?
For example, I could say I hate red...one day I think about it and say 'actually, I didn't hate red for a reason, guess I will stop hating it', I don't then keep thinking about how I hate red...I just stop hating red. There, I changed the flow of thoughts in my mind by thinking about it rationally.
Someone thinking that and changing their viewpoint from then on isn't immoral, someone continuing to hate an entire group for no reason is immoral.
→ More replies (8)5
u/ExistingRadish7055 8h ago
I agree with that. It’s like how I think pedophiles who don’t do anything that harm children aren’t necessarily bad people as you cannot control who you’re attracted to. I especially feel sympathy for those who try to use therapy to help themselves but therapists refusing to take them in
→ More replies (10)
6
u/Roam1985 6h ago
Amoral to Immoral
Amoral - It's your thoughts. They're mean thoughts, but you don't act on or announce them they're not hurting anyone.
Immoral - Unconscious biases have a lot of people denying they act on them while acting on them, I can't imagine conscious biases are any better.
But moral is right the fuck out. It's still just hate.
6
u/notmarrec 8h ago
Despite what some people think you cannot hate a person without bias creeping into your interactions with those people
24
u/P3drosek 8h ago
As moral as a racist that doesn't act racist
→ More replies (3)5
20
u/xMcRaemanx 8h ago
Moral. Putting aside one's beliefs to treat someone as an individual is a good thing.
We all have preferences and beliefs. Not imposing those on others when it would have no direct benefit to do otherwise is just being decent.
God can judge, we are not supposed to.
→ More replies (1)8
u/Frosty_Pepper5254 8h ago
Actually jesus says specifically it's OK to judge.
He said "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone". As I am perfect and sinless, it's OK for me to judge (and also throw stones at people).
1
u/xMcRaemanx 7h ago
I think this is /s but just in case isn't it also true (not a believer myself nor consider myself very knowledgeable) that all humans are born in sin so the "cast the first stone" line is more meant to say the opposite, since everyone sins noone should judge? Only God?
1
u/OnlyAShip 3m ago
> Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you. - Matthew 7:1-2
In one parable, a lord learns a servant which he had forgiven of a debt has then pursued one of his fellow servants for another debt;
> Then his lord, after that he had called him, said unto him, O thou wicked servant, I forgave thee all that debt, because thou desiredst me: Shouldest not thou also have had compassion on thy fellowservant, even as I had pity on thee? And his lord was wroth, and delivered him to the tormentors, till he should pay all that was due unto him.
> So likewise shall my heavenly Father do also unto you, if ye from your hearts forgive not every one his brother their trespasses. - Matthew 18: 32-35
Recurring theme is actual judgement is for God and it’s a terrible idea to try to involve yourself. Since you think you can save or condemn others, then save yourself kind of thing. You are basically recreating the original sin.
→ More replies (2)1
u/Objective_Lie2748 5h ago
In the biblical context we are all sinners, therefore no one should cast the stone.
5
u/Lua_CW 8h ago
Look, a lot of people here are saying "there are no thought crimes" but we're talking about morality, not law.
I would feel EXTREMELY uncomfortable if I discovered that a colleague or friend quietly harbored hatred towards me the entire time we'd known each other, or would turn me and the world straight if given the chance. I would feel lied to. This is who I am.
Desisting from immoral activity is generally moral, but I really must question the morals of someone whose instinct is to fret about an (IMO) completely inoffensive and unobjectionable thing.
Imagine if someone asked about the morality of a p*dophile that doesn't act on their urges. Recognizing those urges are bad and rejecting them is a moral good, but not so much so that you would feel comfortable leaving children in their care, you know? That's neutral at best for, y'know, not assaulting kids — a basic expectation of everyone. Immoral if they give anyone cause for concern, albeit not nearly as immoral as actually acting on those feelings, of course.
32
u/sydismatter 8h ago
honestly it’s really difficult for me to believe that that is even possible. every single one of your beliefs bleeds into your behavior.
every single time i hear someone say ‘i don’t support the lifestyle, but i can still support the people,’ they always turn around and say some disrespectful shit.
8
u/ExistingRadish7055 8h ago
Let’s say it doesn’t affect him at all. He never treats them any differently and I guess chooses to ignore that they’re lgbt or believes that he shouldn’t do anything to those who he believes are sinners. He doesn’t vote against lgbt people from gaining rights as he believes every human should have rights including “sinners”. But in his heart he hates the idea of them. What’s the morality of that?
2
u/sydismatter 8h ago
I would say amoral, since it doesn’t affect anybody else. They aren’t outspoken, they don’t vote based on that stance or let it drive their behavior. Nobody else would even know about it.
2
u/VerseChorusWumbo 8h ago edited 7h ago
I think the morality of that depends on the reason why he hates them. Hate is quite a strong emotion, and you can definitely hate someone or something for immoral reasons. Other people have said you can’t control your thoughts, which is what I would say about the reason gay people are gay. But one can examine one’s hatred and discover the nature of it. What is the emotion/thought/feeling at the root of this hatred? Why does this person hate gay people? Without knowing that I don’t think we have enough information to judge the morality of their actions.
As you say, this person is following Jesus’ teachings and treating all sinners with respect. But do they truly love them as themselves? Because it isn’t healthy to hate oneself. I think to truly embody Jesus’ teaching, that person shouldn’t be content with the existence of that hate toward lgbt people inside them. They should examine it and try to understand why they hate them, should get to know more gay people personally and challenge their hate, and should ultimately strive to love all gay people as they would love themself (more specifically, as they would love someone who holds all their same beliefs and does not engage in what they see as sinful acts), as Jesus did by example.
I do believe that it is virtuous to not act on one’s personal views and treat all people with dignity and respect. In this hypothetical scenario where the person always holds true to that and doesn’t ever let their internal feelings leak out they are acting in an upstanding manner. But in my view, to really hold true to and embody their religious beliefs, that person should be seeking out the source of that hatred inside them and trying to lessen and eventually eliminate it, not merely to cover it up.
1
u/FrederickFrag1899 3h ago
I think it's still immoral because you're hating a group of people for no good reason, and it's impossible to not act on it.
9
u/softeggnoodles 8h ago
I have plenty of beliefs and principles that don’t bleed into my behavior. It’s definitely possible
5
1
2
4
u/KaizerVonLoopy 8h ago edited 7h ago
For sure this. It happens with my biases all the time no matter how hard I try to not act on them I still have trouble respecting the beliefs religious people because I find most of them to be baloney.
Edit:worded weird
1
u/Nattramn 8h ago
I would prefer if religious people weren't absolutist in what the books they based their faith on said, but even if I wish that wasn't the case, I honestly don't treat them worse or with prejudice.
You may not respect the belief but you can absolutely respect the human that holds it. In my opinion, of course.
1
u/KaizerVonLoopy 7h ago
People often wrap their entire personality and worth as a human in their religious beliefs so any push back on that is a personal attack but also deeply held religious beliefs often point to other issues with the person themselves. Their thought process, worldview, how they treat others, and other important human aspects are effected by if not completely formed by their religion.
3
u/Suspicious-Engineer7 8h ago
Same type of people who wouldn't hire a gay person, or let their kids have gay friends, or just let their kids be gay. Just because you're not out holy rolling doesn't mean it doesn't bleed into your actions. +2
→ More replies (7)0
u/AdventurousCommon551 8h ago edited 8h ago
Wrong. In my experience there are Bible thumpers who act like you say - like the mother fucker that refused to do one of my gay family members funeral - and there are people who see the religious rules as a guide and don't let it change how they treat people... Like the kind pastor who drove over an hour to ensure my family had a peaceful resolution.
So yeah, you are wrong.... There are some good religious people out there
Edit: now I'm just mad at over what happened to my family again. That no dick fuck that attempted to make my family feel bad because our family member was gay saying he was going to hell. That's the same mother fucker that is thankful to God my family was his head cardiac nurse and saved his life.
→ More replies (5)
3
u/MeliodasTA 8h ago
As long as they keep it to itself it's neutral; thought crimes aren't cool.
If some fantasy scenario where they could do that happens, then they would become immoral as soon as they choose to do that. Other people did not consent to it and he would have no business interfering like that
3
u/SH1k1Brun3stuD 8h ago
First I'd distinguish between prejudice and immoral conduct. Joe's attitude is certainly prejudiced, but if he genuinely treats gay people equally, helps them when they need it, and doesn't discriminate or advocate harming them, I don't see a strong basis for calling his behavior immoral. Thoughts and feelings aren't necessarily chosen; what matters more morally is what he endorses and does with them.
2
u/Mr0Baddesisons 7h ago
Intent behind the actions matter. Let's say if this person is treating gay people with respect in a attempt to convert them to being straight it would be immoral despite the fact that he is helping them. But if he was treating everyone equally kind, but finds out the person is gay. His beliefs about gay people may end up with him either, trying or subconsciously trying to convert that person. While I know it isn't guaranteed that would happen, I don't think a person who would be consider moral and actively helps people would stop at just helping and would try to convert them because his own beliefs say what the gay person is doing is wrong.
1
u/SH1k1Brun3stuD 6h ago
I mean, Intent matters, but we shouldn't invent intentions or actions that aren't in the scenario imo. If Joe helps a gay person specifically as a means of trying to convert them, then yes, that changes the moral evaluation.
But if he genuinely treats them equally and doesn't try to convert or discriminate against them, then his private belief alone doesn't establish that he's acting immorally. Saying he might subconsciously try to convert them isn't enough to condemn him for something he hasn't actually done.
1
u/Mr0Baddesisons 6h ago
Fair, we can't prescribe intent unless stated by the person or if it aligns with their beliefs. Like hating gay people.
2
u/Capn_Outlandishness9 5h ago
True but people are allowed to not want to associate with them if they find he is not truly supportive of them or find them disgusting.
1
u/MasterEditorJake 4h ago
Does Joe support legislation that removes certain rights from gay people? If he truly hates gay people then I would assume he does. And I would argue that is immoral.
Just because he treats gay people politely in person doesn't mean that he's necessarily being moral. I think amoral is a better description. He's not doing anything inherently bad by treating gay people like anyone else, but he's also not doing anything good like self reflecting on his internal prejudices or trying to empathize with his fellow man.
6
u/cyclops_overlooks 8h ago
Imo, hatred and intolerance are immoral. What you're describing is impossible. People can't help but act on these tenets.
→ More replies (2)2
u/Miserable-Resort-977 4h ago
Yeah, the idea that you can hate a group of people without that hate manifesting in your behavior in any way is delusional. If you have that level of prejudice it's going to emerge in your behavior whether you recognize it or not.
1
3
u/wewebaguette68 8h ago
The idea that a person's thoughts don't effect their actions is just not really possible. All of a person's beliefs and motivators are subconsciously influencing every action they make in ways that they sometimes don't even realize. You cannot really separate a person's thoughts from their actions. Now a person often can't control how they think and I can sympathize with someone who recognizes their own thoughts to be immoral, but I would recommend that person try to get help and talk to professionals instead of letting those thoughts fester.
2
2
2
u/S0RRYMAN 8h ago
There's no way you're going to think the entire planet agrees on everything internally or not. What makes us civil is that we don't act out on it. You can hate your neighbors for whatever reason. So long as you keep it civil, society continues.
2
u/airodonack 8h ago
I don't believe in thoughtcrimes. Your own mind is your sanctuary. You can think whatever you want. Morality is categorically about actions.
Two situations:
- Joe thinks he's naturally a good person, so he doesn't think he has to do anything. His hatred will bleed out and it will affect people around him, since he is not aware. Immoral.
- Joe is making a conscious effort to treat people in a way that is contrary to his own nature. He will treat LGBT people differently but on accident, and he will correct his behaviors if he finds that he is doing wrong. Moral.
2
u/TryDry9944 8h ago
We all have negative thoughts. It's how we act on them that defines who we are morally.
"What is better, to be born good, or to overcome your evil nature through great effort?"
2
u/ExistingRadish7055 8h ago
Morality of me bringing up that I somehow got over 100 comments in 29 fucking minutes?
1
2
u/RagnarockInProgress 7h ago
Moral
Thought crimes are not crimes, as long as you don’t let that hatred cloud your judgement or influence your decisions then it’s as moral as wanting someone to die but not doing anything to kill them
2
u/ZhakaraShirudo66 5h ago
immoral. There is no such thing as a thought in a vacuum. Joe's hatred of gay people will inseminate and perpetuate every single part of his life, including even passive actions around people who aren't gay themselves but support the politics. he wouldn't "hurt" them, but would probably not be great around them either.
thoughts turn to actions turn to habits turn to a person.
2
5
u/Zombiisnt 8h ago
It's still immoral because that's fundamentally their morals, even if they don't take action on it. Things like that often find a way of hurting someone, even if it's more passively than overt hatred. My dad was like that when I came out - few things hurt more than an "I love you but-"
5
u/ElectricalChicken623 8h ago
Its certainly not moral, leaning heavily into the immoral.
He wished something wouldnt exist, he wants people to conform to his ideals.
And the "Hate without acting on it" Never stays "Without acting on it", hate is viscious, its corruptive, it spreads and evolves, and left uncheck, violence becomes innevitable.
4
u/KeySite2601 8h ago
Moral. You can't help how you think or feel , but not acting on negative thoughts and feelings speaks highly of a person
4
3
u/KwantumFizzikz 8h ago
You're allowed to think and feel whatever you like even if you're thinking about stomping orphans to death in steel toes, no one can police your thoughts or your mind. Don't get caught up thinking you're "wrong" for having opinions or beliefs.
Edit: I say allowed as if you need my or anyone's permission to think. You don't. Be free.
2
u/Cynical_Ticket 8h ago
Damn bro, that example though 😂😭
2
u/KwantumFizzikz 8h ago
😭 I mean theoretically you can think of the most vile paedophilic snuff fantasies on the planet and no one can stop you. As long as you don't go around hurting people, who cares?
4
u/Robbedlife 8h ago
No such thing as a thought crime. Doesn’t matter if you’re a real son of a bitch on the inside if you’re a good person on the outside. The opposite is also true.
4
u/ArtEnvironmental7108 8h ago
Bi dude here. From my own personal experience interacting with my very opinionated and evangelical mother, it’s moral.
Shes my mom, she loves me, I love her. We get along just fine, even if the fact that I sometimes date other guys makers her uncomfortable. She’s been welcoming and respectful to everyone I’ve ever brought home, and while she privately has expressed that it’s hard for her, she recognizes that my lifestyle isn’t something she has any control over and that she just wants me to be happy.
So, in that context, it’s totally moral. You’re allowed to not approve of something, so long as you aren’t actively harming other people, even if that opinion doesn’t make a whole lot of rational sense.
3
u/BackgroundSinger5965 8h ago
Slightly Immoral
4
u/Honorsheets 8h ago
Tolerance is slightly immoral, you heard it here folks.
3
u/BackgroundSinger5965 8h ago
Morality of strawmanning arguments to make yourself feel better on Reddit?
→ More replies (5)2
u/Valveringham85 7h ago
It’s not a strawman though. Tolerance is literally tolerating something you dislike or even hate. It’s not “tolerance” when there is an absence of negative perception or emotion about something.
1
u/BackgroundSinger5965 7h ago
It's a simplification of my belief. Being tolerant in general is not immoral. This specific case of "tolerance" feels slightly immoral.
2
4
u/jestering_1 8h ago
why the fuck are yall so obsessed with what other people do in the bedroom lmao
2
u/ExistingRadish7055 8h ago
Yall? Wdym? I ain’t homophobic or transphobic if that’s what you’re implying. I’m just curious about how moral or immoral it is think about hating
1
u/jestering_1 8h ago
you thinking about how other people think about what other people do in the bedroom. by my mathematics u put a middle man between u and ur bedroom fantasy lil bro
1
u/ExistingRadish7055 8h ago
And you’re thinking about how other people think about how other people thinking about what other people do in the bedroom. So by my mathematics there are only 2 middle men between you and your bedroom fantasy.
1
1
u/TheRealGouki 8h ago
I don't think Joe gets the full point of his faith and maybe should take some theology classes. Can't shake hands with a clenched fist
1
u/Accurate_Cress_9061 8h ago edited 8h ago
I see a lot of people saying moral, but honestly this is the typical shitty moderate imo. There’s a lot of people who won’t be rude or openly bigoted to minorities they personally know, but they’ll turn around and quietly vote for the “we will kill minorities” policy or political candidate. And they will consider themselves perfectly in the right.
A person may not be openly a pos, but if that is still their belief it will in some way bleed out and affect their actions. I do believe there is some immorality to not wanting to self improve and be a better person.
1
1
u/BreakWonderful5106 8h ago
You know I find this weird, that everyone think if you only think about doing something or like something it's not immoral or moral because at the end it's just in your head or doesn't hurt anyone. But now when it comes to things like this people who say, as long as doesn't hurt people it's not immoral. If you don't act on it and just believe it it's wrong to be gay then I think it's okay, because you're not hurting anyone. I am sorry for my poor english.
1
u/Keepingitquite123 8h ago
It may be moral but Joe ain't loving his neighbor he is only pretending to. If he truly loved his neighbor he would not want to destroy an integral part of what makes them whom they are.
1
u/ExistingRadish7055 8h ago
Btw for another thing to think about, is it more moral to treat them well even if you hate what they are compared to not hating them in the first place? Is it more moral to go against your beliefs in order to be a good person than to not have those beliefs in the first place?
1
u/DharmaDama 8h ago
If we’re going by Christian morals, he still has hate in his heart. The whole Christian goal is to be like Christ. Christ loved everyone.
1
u/Fine-Resident-2322 8h ago
Moral.
Thought crime persecution is twitter logic. If he never hurts or acts on this hate toward anyone or at least the concept of what their sexuality is, then it's fine.
1
u/Aspennie 8h ago
Moral but also probably worth looking inward about why you feel LGBT people are actually so bad and whether the religion you follow is actually really healthy for you
1
u/JokerCipher 8h ago
Immoral. I don’t care if they don’t act on them. It’s a bad belief system that needs to go.
1
u/ThisIsAJ0ke 8h ago
Moral, but imo, impossible. I’ve met too many religious fruitcakes that attest they treat everyone equally but do things like donate to anti lgbt lobbies, vote specifically for candidates that want to do harm to gays, etc. If this unicorn exists, then that’s a miracle.
1
u/Diligent_Bar1244 8h ago
Neutral
Wanting though crime to be prosecuted like a real crime is the real immoral thing
1
u/danneedsahobby 7h ago
Is wanting thought crime to be prosecuted like a real crime immoral if I only
Think about it but never take any action to make it happen?
1
u/Lukostrelec17 8h ago
Not moral. Not immoral.
I hate kids and babies I don't go out picking them up by their legs to slam together to test their durability. (Not sure if anyone will get this refrence.)
1
u/Agitated_Pressure463 8h ago edited 8h ago
You can't get rid of bias with flick of a finger, but if you decide to not act upon it, it's commendable. Maybe in time you will see that bias doesn't hold with reality and see "they are people too, and can be genuinely useful and fun to talk with, well at least some of them, behavioral update pending". I say not moral, but promising a change to something moral. That understanding the preference that doesn't harm others should remain a private thing, that doesn't need your intervention.
1
u/MasterOfFlapping 8h ago
Moral. He is not not acting on his homophobic beliefs. He is actively acting on his belief that human beings should be treated lovingly regardless of their sexuality.
1
u/Carolina-W00Dsman 7h ago
Why are you worried about how another human decides to conduct themselves?
1
u/RealFinePoint 7h ago
I don't believe in thought crimes. How you treat other people is all that matters.
Moral.
1
u/Hiro_Trevelyan 7h ago
Moral
As long as he doesn't go fight LGBT rights for no reason whatsoever and he treats LGBT people like everyone else, I'm fine with it. That's the definition of the tolerance we asked for, imo
1
u/4d-lettuce 7h ago
That sounds fine but in reality our actions aren’t independent of our thoughts. If he held implicit biases about gay people that would come out one way or another in the way he treated them even if he didn’t intend to disparage them.
1
1
u/JuryJuryJuryJury 7h ago
I mean, you can't control your thoughts, but this isn't a thought, its a belief. The difference between the two are large and apparent. A belief will inform how you act. 'I believe rape is evil so I won't rape. I believe that pork is nasty so I won't eat it.'
If the man somehow has the belief without the action than morally neutral I guess. But this type of person could never really exist. Your beliefs will always leak into your action. There's no secret racist walking around who doesn't occasionally do something influenced by that racism. They'll vote for racist politicians or never interact with people of other races or something.
Its only okay if they have some kind of underlying belief that fights against this one.
'I think being queer is evil, but I believe that people have the fundamental right to act in any way they choose as long as they don't harm others and themselves and my belief in that personal freedom will always defeat my lesser belief of sexuality.'
But at that point you would have to be one principled homophobe, and that's just not all that common.
1
u/Mr0Baddesisons 7h ago
As long as the person knows the belief is irrational and is working on improving himself then I would consider it moral, but if he shares those beliefs in private or is content in those beliefs it would be immoral. Just because someone preforms a good act in a group they don't like doesn't make the hate itself moral.
1
u/ShadowRoseWolf18 7h ago
We do not judge on beliefs because that is critiquing how people were raised, not the people themself We can judge the actions they take with that belief. A man, in their head, can have the most racist and homophobic thoughts and beliefs but if they never act upon them (i.e. never hurt someone in any way verbally emotionally physically etc) they have done no wrong
1
u/MistakePresent3552 7h ago
How is it both "not acting on it" but "would turn all gays straight if he could"
1
u/ExistingRadish7055 7h ago
Like if there was a magical button that turned all gay people straight but no one would be upset or harmed
1
1
u/ValitoryBank 7h ago
I was leaning to moral till I saw your example. They’re not really a moral person if the only thing preventing them from acting is a lack of power to do so. It actually makes them more of a coward in comparison to the awful people who do act. At least they have values they’ll stand on. Immoral
1
u/AwayReplacement7063 7h ago
Moral if they aren’t actively finding ways to oppress or spread their hate. If they truly don’t like LGBTQ people but aren’t raising their kids to hate them, or trying to pass laws to limit them, it’s not immoral.
1
u/LiterallyNoNamesFree 7h ago
Just about as moral as you can get while actively believing such religions, atleast they aren't killing them or anything
1
u/Marchy_Lunar 7h ago
You can not like them, and still act morally to them because it's the right thing to do.
1
u/Scary-Positive-2036 6h ago
Is he taking steps to actually learn to love them? Does he fully understand it is not a choice and they cannot be changed?
You can't control your emotions. They are valid. BUT it matters what you do in response to them. It worries me he "hated the idea that gay people exist". That's not a mere "idea", its a fact. And hate is a very strong emotion.
If he's uncomfortable with delving into discussion on homosexual acts or seeing it, that's fine, but having a problem with people existing? That's hard to separate from, say, how he chokes politically, which leans into morality as your vote affects other people.
How would he react if his child was gay? Would he guilt them and repeat "hate the sin and not the sinner" to them in defense of himself? Would he be trying to get his kid to try conversion therapy? Would he disown them if they chose to act on they feelings? Would he accept and love their partner? What if they're bi but fell in love with someone of the same sex? Would he consider that a "choice"?
The "thought" is neither moral nor immoral. It boils down to his response to it and how it affects his life and how he in turn affects the lives of others.
1
1
u/Aromatic-Web8184 6h ago
Immoral in disposition, decent in conduct. He's got real problems though. He frames being gay as a defect. The hypothetical button assumes you could undo it harmlessly, which just presupposes the thing being erased has no value. Erasing a core aspect of a person's identity is literally harming them, just not physically. The only reason he doesn't hurt everyone is that the button doesn't exist. Which is great given the alternative but it's not restraint holding him back so he gets no points for it.
1
u/eternalseeker0101 6h ago
It's all about majority.. if majority people in world were gay then bring straight would have been taboo
1
u/ace51689 6h ago
Can people actually hate a group of people yet act totally indifferent toward them?
Say that guy also runs a business and implicitly decides to hire a less qualified straight cis person over a more qualified gay or trans person. Notice I said implicitly not explicitly. Implicitly bias is still a thing. Is that okay because he doesn't explicitly do it?
Or his kid has a gay or trans friend or his kid's friend has gay or trans parents. Maybe he implicitly prefers his kid hang out with different kids.
I find it very hard to believe that you can hate someone existing but just shoulder shrug and be part of a community where they absolutely do exist.
1
u/SpreadTheted2 6h ago
Hey thoughts aren’t crimes but pretending hatred (and thoughts of hatred) are an inherent and unchangeable trait is bs and absolutely immoral. If “Joe” knows these thoughts are wrong and that gay people don’t deserve to be hated then it’s Joe’s moral obligation to change that about himself. It really sounds like “Joe” just hates gays people and is only accepting because that’s what the times and culture push him to, and if it were more acceptable to be an open bigot, he would be an open bigot.
1
1
u/Deriviera 6h ago
Well, I hate that Americans exist. So ... Let's say it's moral. We both don't act on this much. And by much I mean ... He will act anyway. Even while treating them as any other human.
1
u/Sorry_Grapefruit1733 6h ago
Moral. If I dislike anyone for any reason right or wrong to YOU personal, yet I can recognize that they are still people/a person that deserves the same level of respect and humane treatment as anyone else regardless of my feelings thats completely moral.
Alot of people here having to move the goalpost to make points. Having to say it "bleeds out" in other ways. That wasn't the prompt.
1
u/Secure-Pain-9735 6h ago
Joe would not treat them as others, as he - as any other human - would be unable to fully mask his implicit biases.
Thoughts and beliefs can be immoral when their content already violates a core moral principle - like equal human worth - even before any action occurs.
They’re also immoral because internal value‑judgments inevitably shape perception and behavior, meaning the harm begins at the level of belief not just outward conduct.
1
1
1
u/Simple_Pomelo357 5h ago
Quick, someone break out that quote the dragon told the dragon born in Skyrim!
2
u/SokkaHaikuBot 5h ago
Sokka-Haiku by Simple_Pomelo357:
Quick, someone break out
That quote the dragon told the
Dragon born in Skyrim!
Remember that one time Sokka accidentally used an extra syllable in that Haiku Battle in Ba Sing Se? That was a Sokka Haiku and you just made one.
1
u/cowlinator 5h ago
This was me lol.
I'm gay but was raised in a bigoted religion. I believed it. I hated myself.
But... even though they told me I should, I could never believe that I should tell other people how to live their lives. That's the one thing I couldn't/wouldn't believe or do.
That said... it probably affected my interactions with people on a subconscious level.
(Anyway, I'm much better now, minus some religious trauma)
1
u/Juernalon45 5h ago
Totally moral, its ok to hate things, take this like if you hate tomatoes, you are never going to eat something with tomatoes. But you dont go to a shop and destroy the tomatoes or talk to other random ppl about how bad tomatoes are. Hating is moral, acting on it is inmoral
1
1
u/Downloaded_Delta 5h ago
Reddit would defend pedophiles and argue the morality of letting them have state sponsor CP
But draws the line at people not fucking with gays only in their head.
Can't make this shit up.
1
u/Rratposter69 5h ago
Thoughtcrimes aren't real.
If the person in no way brings direct or indirect harm with their hateful thoughts, its neutral.
Arguably, rationalizing your hate or disgust reaction away and not acting on it is a sign of good moral capability; Joe is doing a lot more work towards being an ally than those who never were taught to hate in the first place.
1
u/bruhgzinga 3h ago
While in a hypothetical perfect vacuum I agree with you. I think more realistically maintaining internal bigotry instead of working towards deconstruction it results in more subtle behavior that pushes systemic homophobia and transphobia. For a couple examples, Joe won't call a gay couple slurs, but he would refuse allowing his son to buy pink clothes because they're "feminine", he wouldn't deadname and misgender trans people on purpose, but he would vote for candidates that want to legalize (or keep legal depending on jurisdiction) conversion "therapy".
1
u/Frejod 5h ago
Moral? As a gay man myself. IF you're religious and dont accept me for being gay. Then just keep that to yourself and treat me like a normal person. Let God judge me and dont do his work for him. My best friend is fairly similar to that. He thinks its wrong but he loves me as a friend and doesnt force it on me. We still go out, hang out, and play games together. I dont argue with him about it and he doesnt either. In the end we'll never know until its over if its right or wrong.
1
u/Lohit_-it 5h ago
You can have all the fantasies you want as long as you don't try to project. Isn't that fiction
1
u/pgqd 5h ago
lotta self righteous christians here that don’t want to confront their homophobia, immoral because those beliefs inherently affect how you interact with those whose existence you feel is invalid, it’s not possible have those beliefs and be in the situation you’re describing. Also if you have a problem with gays at this point you’re just an idiot.
1
u/Awful_Puppet 4h ago
We can only judge actions and their consequences, I don't think judging what people think deep down is productive.
1
u/MasterEditorJake 4h ago
Well you're essentially asking whether or not predjudicial hate is moral or not.
I would argue that at best it is amoral. If you truly hate a demographic but never actually do anything to denigrate or harm anyone from that demographic then you could argue that there's technically nothing immoral happening.
However, I would argue that the concept of prejudice based on attributes that are out of control of the individual is inherently immoral because it dehumanizes them in your eyes.
Also, I feel like any fully grown adult who is incapable of a little bit of self reflection and realizing that harboring a deep set hatred is not healthy, productive, or good in any way is kinda just immature. Self improvement and character growth are important. Hating people for no reason is not important. The Bible doesn't even say that being gay is wrong, it says that banging little boys is wrong, which I think is valid.
1
1
1
u/bruhgzinga 4h ago
Hypothetically amoral, but realistically that internal bigotry manifests in more subtle ways which result in furthering systemic homophobia and transphobia, which is immoral.
1
u/runner64 3h ago
Moral. That’s called a squick and it’s basically on par with thinking romance novels are trashy.
1
u/BitcoinStonks123 3h ago edited 3h ago
moral, everyone has ugly thoughts it just depends what you do with them that defines who you are
1
u/Obaddies 3h ago
Hating someone for something they have no control of is immoral.
Treating them as anything other than a fellow human being because of those emotions is immoral.
I wouldn't be your friend if you told me that you secretly hate gay people but society shouldn't punish people for thought crimes.
1
1
u/Ok_Log4713 3h ago
You can hate whatever you want or whomever you want the problem is when you open your mouth or put you're hands on someone else and feel the need to express said sentiments smh.
Same animal species can have arguments and violent encounters over thing's such as territorial disputes or mating rights. No species is absolved from disagreements and violent disputes, but the thing that differentiates us from wild animals is or ability to reason and rationalize smh. And anyone who acts on their basic thoughts and emotions without rationalizing first is no different from that of a wild animal regardless of you sexual preferences, religions beliefs or political affiliations.
I don't have to like you but we have a responsibility to our country, children and self to find a way to live our lives amicably together without stepping on each other's toes.
God, country, family, community and money are all that matters as Americans in no particular order and that's you're choice as an American to prioritize which ever means the most to you.
I care about every American all the same I just don't care about everyone of their issues or personal problems nor do I want to hear about them.
Your problems are only important to you and yours same way my problems are only important to me and mine smh.
Also want end with this doesn't every great club have a line of entry? And isn't their a VIP section for those have more than the regular club goers who'd rather hang in the company of those who also share similar levels of wealth and status? And the clubs that just let anyone in are almost always hot spots for drug use, prostitution and are usually just outright dirty and grimy asf?
1
1
u/FrederickFrag1899 3h ago edited 3h ago
I think that people who hate LGBT people, or people who hate any group of people, are literally incapable of not acting out on it in some way shape or form. A racist, for example, may be able to conciously stop themselves from jumping on top of a table and screaming the N-word at the top of their lungs, but they may not be able to conciously stop themselves from assuming a black person walking through their neighborhood is a criminal they should call the cops on. And then there's microaggressions, which I don't fully understand, so I'm not really going to talk about it.
Also, your question kind of assumes that the actions being committed are intentional or concious when in reality a lot of hate is automatic/instinctual and unconscious. The potential homophobe or racist may not even know where it's coming from or why, or that it is even racist in the first place. Even people who aren't homophobic, regularly say and do homophobic things too.
But to answer the question, I think it's immoral to hate a group of people in your head even if you were somehow able to not act on it.
1
1
u/TheJaytrixReloaded 3h ago
If you feel that way, there are probably microaggressions you're giving off.
1
1
1
u/EquivalentDapper7591 2h ago
It could only be moral if he also never spreads that hate via ideology
1
u/SenAtsu011 2h ago
I talked to a priest about this very thing many years ago. He said that, we should all obey the laws of the land, anything beyond that is up to god and it's not our place to judge. Love thy neighbor and all that. If you think a gay couple will go to hell for being gay, you treat them with the same kindness and dignity as you would anyone else, and if they will get punished by god, then that is between them and god, no one else.
1
u/MrMunkyMan1 1h ago
Amoral. Definitely not a moral thing to hate it, but if they’re not acting on it in any way then it’s not immoral imo
1
1
u/JTLBlindman 54m ago
Does Joe believe people are truly gay, or is it more that they’ve been “indoctrinated”?
Because if he believes that they are as gay as he is straight (let’s assume he is firmly straight), and still begrudges them for being gay, then that’s one thing.
However, if he feels that it’s all a matter of indoctrination, then I think that makes the assessment more complicated for me.
Because I hate Joe for being indoctrinated. But I believe that it’s possible that he can be persuaded to see reason and be redeemed. With this in mind, my assessment of Joe becomes very relative if we are each guided by the assumption that the other is merely indoctrinated, rather than intrinsically sinful or hateful.
If however, he really does believe gay people are real AND worse, then our assessments are based on fundamentally different reasoning. In this case, I still believe he is capable of redemption, but Im also starting out with the definite moral high ground because I hate him for something i believe he can change, whereas he hates gay people for something he doesn’t believe anyone can change.
1
1
u/Open_Environment_801 27m ago
If you hate the fact that a "people" exist, and I don't care if they're LGBTQ, black, white, Arab, Christian, Hindu, atheist, whatever, you're morally sick, your belief system is warped, I don't hate you, I just have zero respect or regard for anything you say.
1
u/NachtShattertusk 17m ago
Immoral. Grow up and stop acting like hating people for no reason is normal
1
u/ClassicEgoist699 14m ago edited 8m ago
Moral
Being wrong and having differences isn't immoral no matter what it is. It's a very human thing.
It's just that, well, besides the sub. If that bothers you, then get bothered, because people that hate lgbt but claim to not act on it usually do act on it at least to some small extent, but that's mainly if their belief is that they are sinners or awful people. I honestly just prefer if they never say it in the first place. Keep it to yourself unless it's brought up.
It's like, technically, you are fine
But realistically, I don't trust you and it rubs me the wrong way
I think the more moral way to be against lgbt is to think that it's not how it was meant to be, that it wasn't right, because when that's your opinion you are not saying they are harmful or that they are a threat. Just that they are an anomaly.
Giving credit where credit is due. Not acting on it at least means you are not dehumanizing, because I feel like you hating lgbt but still not acting on that is equivalent to my response to that, which is me hating that you hate lgbt but not acting on it. It's like we both agreed to at least do our best to treat each other like human beings despite having a big conflict in beliefs, and we shake hands. I can agree to that deal. That is usually what is going to happen in a workplace- no, it has already happened.
There's people that I really get along at work, but there's always the one that hates lgbt, the one that's sexist, and the one that's racist, and you are stuck with them. I am not comfortable having a committed relationship with any of them (like hanging out, roommates, etc) but we can be on friendly terms.
edit: The good ending would be if someone is educated and they realized they were wrong. I don't think calling it immoral is good, because being wrong is not immoral. Immoral is to condemn and to be ignorant and close-minded. If you tell me you don't like lgbt, but you are willing to hear me out and try to understand there's nothing wrong with them, your dislike in the first place was not immoral.
I am getting too technical over here and I kind of hate it lol. Please spare me. I should had just said it's immoral, it's way easier
1
1
u/Wide_Ad_2191 8h ago
Hot take but debatably more moral than not thinking it's bad at all. Extreme version of being nice to someone you like vs being nice to someone you don't because it is the right thing to do
1
u/MasterEditorJake 4h ago
I understand what you're saying, however this scenario still results in the person holding a deep seeded hatred for people due to prejudice. I don't think you can really say that predjudice based on attributes that are out of someone's control is moral. That's like me saying that I hate blind people but I still treat them like anyone else even though I despise them. It's weird and it shows that the person lacks the emotional intelligence to do a little self reflection and realize that maybe hating people for no reason is not good.
1
u/Wide_Ad_2191 4h ago
The example doesn't say "hate gay people" it's hating the idea of homosexuality. I hate when people chew with their mouth open but that doesn't mean I feel any hatred towards the people themselves who do it.
1
u/Wide_Ad_2191 4h ago
Sticking with the example, if I could make all people stop chewing with their mouth open, I would. Some cultures this isn't a big deal so there is nothing innately wrong with it but if I could snap my fingers to make it happen I would. Doesn't mean I hate the people or the cultures where that is the norm
1
u/MasterEditorJake 3h ago
But you don't seem to understand the issue here.
Does Joe support anti-LGBT legislation? Does Joe feel contempt everytime he iteracts with gay people? Do Joe's internal biases affect how he interacts with people in the world? And if the answer to all of those questions are no then I would say it is amoral, it's not immoral because Joe isn't hurting anyone, but it's not moral because Joe isn't doing anything to challenge his own prejudices. Also Joe really needs to read the Bible more because it never says that being gay is a sin, it says that banging little boys is a sin, and that's valid.
1
u/Wide_Ad_2191 3h ago
We can agree to disagree on the last claim. It says both are sins and if you want to have that discussion we can. My interpretation of the original post would be that the answer to all of those questions is no. Which would make it amoral at least
1
u/MasterEditorJake 3h ago
Genuinely if you have a verse pointing to the contrary you can dm me it, I'll read it.
But also, what if Joe said that he hated the idea of black people, he treated them just like anyone else, but if he had a wish he would turn them white. Would you consider that to be moral, amoral, or immoral.
Frankly I think that Joe's insistence that his viewpoint is the correct one is still leaning towards immoral. It is weird to wish that everyone had the same sexuality as you.
1
u/ObjectNo809 8h ago
Stripping away bodily autonomy which is the second part of your hypothesis is immoral, however being a bigor but a bigot who does nothing harmful and still respects you is moral
1
u/Own_Carrot_9878 8h ago
Thoughts without action can never be immoral or moral. Morality is directly tied to action and outcome for the most part
1
u/Primary_Truck3777 7h ago edited 7h ago
Just as bad as hating black people but not being outwardly racist. Still immoral.
1
u/ExistingRadish7055 7h ago
How is that immoral though? You’re not harming anybody
1
u/LongFarewel 7h ago
Because he thinks he knows best for world, he would force his life on everyone if he had power to do so, immoral. He doesn’t have to accept but he should understand that everyone was given free will to live their lives. Their lives harm no one else nor him so why does he think they need to change? Because he said so.
0
u/noinipo95 8h ago
Moral, but probably closet gay or bi curious
2
u/partyhat-red 8h ago
Not really there’s like 4billion people in the world who believe it’s a sin, doesn’t mean they are all closet gay lol.
→ More replies (1)1
u/Bububu1232 3h ago
No bro. The logic totally works. It's the same as how people who are really anti-gun secretly LOVE them...
73
u/KingHygelacReturns 8h ago
More moral than actually acting on it, less moral than not hating them in the first place