We’ll have to disagree then on what you were trying to convey. Your words, “These are the people who have the power to determine disagree with homosexual behavior means one is a hater in order to silence disagreement cause no one wants to be called a hater,” suggests that “disagreeing with homosexuality” is an innocent or at least neutral activity that puts people in harm’s way of being labeled haters by liberals. The very words “disagreeing with homosexuality” implies that one can simply disagree with homosexuality as a matter of course, as if it’s just a behavior that one can dispute. That’s an ugly sentiment, to me. What else could “disagree with homosexuality” even mean, I wonder? Would people in general ever use that phrase to refer to another group of people based on color of skin, ethnicity, sex, disability, etc.? Let’s try it out: “I disagree with people in wheelchairs!” No, that sounds weird, doesn’t it? How about, “I disagree with Latinos!” That sounds racist. None of these say why either, just as “disagreeing with homosexuality” is thrown out there for no reason. No, I reach the conclusion that “disagreeing with homosexuality” implies that someone believes that homosexuality is a behavior subject to criticism. What else could those words mean?
So, we can move on from that line of thought and agree to disagree. I notice though that you did not address all of the other statements you made about the LGBT community that I posted above and wonder why?
Still not sure also why this subject even appeared in this thread except to inflame, sadly.