If you call me a "homophobe", then aren't you, in effect, diagnosing me as having some sort of psychosexual abnormality? But I thought that the whole idea of saying that someone has a psychosexual abnormality was off limits!
Therefore, doesn't using the term "homophobe" saw off the very branch you are sitting on?
Update--I'll leave the original wording above, since I've already received some comments. However, I've come up with an alternate way of expressing the idea:
If you accuse me of being a "homophobe", then you are judging me (and calling upon others to judge me) for having a wicked psychosexual abnormality. I had been given to understand that you were against that sort of thing.
Corollary: If judicial tyrants void Prop 8 (ruling, in essence, that some voters do not have the right to amend the constitution), then a whole group of voters has had its civil rights denied, because of its "homophobia". Thereby setting the judicial precedent that it is, in fact, okay, to deny civil rights to a group due to its having a wicked psychosexual abnormality. This is not a precedent that I'd want to set if I were on the other side. As it currently stands, no one has yet had their "equal protection" civil rights denied (since homosexuals have an equal right to marry the opposite sex as anyone else, and the right to marry the same sex is denied to all equally). But if Prop 8 is overturned due to judicial overreach then the precedent will have been set.