Don F., you asked:

"If someone lives in a society that condones slavery and he comes out strongly against a movement toward emancipation, is he merely a "traditionalist?" And should he be excused on that account?"

Good question! Okay, let's take a look at that. In ancient Rome, for instance, slavery was a normal practice, and it was a huge and absolutely necessary part of their economy as they did things at the time. So everyone simply took it for granted...well, everyone except a few radicals like Spartacus who led a gladiator and slave revolt against the power of Rome...and almost won it!

All Roman citizens at the time regarded Spartacus as a dangerous criminal. Many slaves, however, regarded him as a freedom fighter. Who was right?

Looking from our present day perspective, we would say that Spartacus was right. If we were Roman citizens back then, though, I bet that virtually all of us would have said that Spartacus was a dangerous criminal and a threat to society...a terrorist, in fact.

People's views are shaped by what they have grown up with and what is in their own interests of survival. This was certainly true of Southerners who fought for the Confederacy.

I would not characterize the entire population of Roman citizens in 100 B.C. or the entire population of the Confederacy as bigots because they thought it was okay to keep slaves. I would characterize them as conventional people, maintaining the social customs of their own time, and looking toward defending their own survival as a culture.

But ideas change as time goes by...

There comes a time in human affairs where some great philosophical minds may publicly question a former assumption, such as that slavery is a legitimate practice.

When they question it, most people are initially shocked! That stimulates a lot of vigorous debate...accusation...counter-accusation, and so it goes.

Anyway, the crucial matter in the debate, the matter to focus on, is NOT whether so-and-so is a bigot. The crucial matter is the subject of discussion itself (slavery, women's suffrage, same-sex relationships, etc).

What we should be focusing ON here is NOT whether so-and-so is a bigot, but we should be discussing the subject OF gay relationships, gay lifestyle, same-sex marriage, medical considerations, and so on....without sinking to the level of personally attacking other people as "bigots" and trying to prove that they are "bad people" for having the opinion they have about something. Look at the bandwidth that has been consumed here by all these attempts to prove that another poster is a "bad person" (a bigot). And to what useful effect?

Discuss the subject. Drop the personal attacks. That's my suggestion.