Let's look at what
dubbing does to your experience of watching a movie: The original actor's voice is replaced with another actor's voice, often from the country where the film is being
distributed. Aside from the obvious facts that this is replacing the original actor's vocal performance with an often
inferior one, and is basically
undermining the whole point of acting (can you imagine dubbing in theater?), it just looks very weird when the lips don't match the
words.
Now, of course, Germany has their own Woody Allen voice-impersonator, Italy has its Harrison Ford, Spain has it's own Sharon Stone (most of France's has the common sense not to dub its films), but generally these country's citizens grew up with these voices matched to these actors and they've gotten used to the strangeness of it all. Thankfully, we are not used to it, nor should we get used to it. The stigma against dubbed films we see here is a natural one. It's like saying you have a stigma against Cheese Whiz. It's artificial and doesn't taste as good. If someone cares about foreign movies so much, how come they're making the Cheese Whiz instead of fostering the Brie?
Interestingly, I recently read in an article in a newspaper that the reason most foreign movies on American TV are dubbed is because the average American's reading speed is slower than the average actor's talking speed. Resultantly, the TV stations find they can attaract a much larger audience for dubbed films than for subtitled, because a lot of people don't read fast enough to read all the subtitles. Some people who are aware of this fact claim to dislike dubbing because it's effectively saying "I accept an inferior experience because I can't read fast enough to simeltaniously watch the images"; People don't want to admit this.
Personally, I prefer subtitles, because I can read fast enough to still enjoy the film, but mostly I watch English films anyway.