U.S. Support for LGBTQ+ Issues Remains Down From Peak
- Thread starter NorthernHawkeye
- Start date
Good. Cities like Asheville NC are probably better suited for you and your partner
I think you're about a few decades behind on any kind of peer-reviewed literature regarding the LGBTQ community if you still think this
And in a few more decades who knows what the “professional literature” will say. It is all pseudo science.
I meant peer-reviewed. It's not psuedo science, it's sociology, biology, anthropology, etc. It would be worth reading a little more outside your tribe if you're going to make as blanket of statements as you have in this thread.
It is pseudo science because it cannot be proven and they just blow with the wind on their theories. In a few years they could be back to saying homosexuality is a mental illness. I took some of those classes in college.
There are no merits and there are no sides, other than yours which is backwards and wrong. Homosexuality as a normalized practice in nature, and specifically humanity, has been debated and argued for decades. It's been decided already, and you're simply wrong. That's why there are no sides.
No one wants to try and "convince" someone who is clearly so far behind the curve and stuck in the early 90's in their view point on the matter.
At the end of the day, you'll revert to your Christianity as your reason why, once your "natural" viewpoints (which again, have been debated and decided for 2 decades) are finally debunked. Your religion is really the only thing you have as a basis for your views, so cling to them. But as someone who has a Masters in that stuff, there is considerable debate in the Christian community about homosexual practice, identity, etc. that you don't hear about in your congregation in South Carolina, so I wouldn't be so sure you're correct there either.
That's like saying why should we be supportive of people with brown hair? I have a book that says people with brown hair are deviant so they should shave their heads or dye it blond because it makes me uncomfortable. It doesn't matter that they can't help they were born with brown hair, we should discourage them from allowing it to grow. Can't they just keep their head shaved for life?
Im going to make a passing effort at this as my good deed for the day. Please read this and actually internalize it.
You have an amazingly small world view. In our short period of interaction you have, multiple times, expressed a "my way or the wrong way" mentality. Then, you take it further by justifying your beliefs with completely made up narratives. You dont engage with anyone past the scripted talking points.
I would bet a fair amount of money you are part of that late twenties early 30s demographic that never actually learned how to interact with people and has zero ability to take criticism.
If you took some courses like that in college that really dates you
The Midwest. I don’t mind religious people in general. I am one (Catholic). I just can’t stand southern evangelicals
Thanks for sharing! I hope it made you feel better, but you missed on just about everything.
Also, by nature being progressive is the opposite of having a small world view.
But keep trying, you'll feel better about yourself soon if you keep posting through it
But, logically, this makes zero sense (shocker). You're telling me, as long as you're married (which isn't biologically necessary ... at all ... in fact, the biological "need"/norm is for a man to spread his seed far and wide), you can buck the biological purpose for sex? You can actually enjoy sex, and have it in all the ways that may not result in pregnancy?!?
In other words, you've just negated the "biological purpose" argument, entirely.
We've created social constructs ... such as monogamy and marriage ... that go against the "biological purpose" of a strong man spreading his seed amongst the females, to reproduce as often as possible ... and allowing paired up males and females (at least) to have any and all kinds of kinky sex, as long as they are, in fact, paired up.
So, since the you've destroyed your own "biological purpose" leg of your argument, now you have to come up with a compelling reason why folks can't have all sorts of sex with ... let's say ... folks of the same sex. And "but god" just doesn't cut it, in the logic crowd. So, what else do ya got?
Yes, but as civilization, and the intelligence and knowledge that it brings, spreads ... there will be fewer of you. Sure, there will be a period of time when knowledge has to battle the abusive brainwashing of children (the lifeblood of ancient superstition) ... but, eventually, knowledge will win out.
He hates gay people and thinks they’re weird/they gross him out so he’s trying to come up with elaborate reasoning to justify it
I'm aware. I'm just walking him through his faulty logical syllogisms, as slowly as possible.
With religious nutters, it always hits a dead end, because they "but god" everything and can't be reasoned with beyond that ... but at least I can expose the invalid and unsound logic they use up until that point.
They know their Santa tales are failing in modern society, as knowledge spreads, so they attempt to use traditional logic to excuse away their ancient superstitions. I'm just making sure they're aware that has no legs. They're stuck being grown people who still believe in a Santa variant, and not only living their lives like this (in fact, they often lead hateful, judgmental lives, rather than even what the fairy tales preach, but I digress), but trying to demand others live their lives by this fairy tales.
I don’t hate gay people. I do know some and they are nice people. I do think some of it is gross. It is just wrong.
My bad, I thought you said you took classes that said gay people are mentally ill
If that is what makes you feel better Moogy. Why wouldn’t all arguments end back at, but God. That is the ultimate authority.
LOL. Because that presupposes the very logical fallacy that is its existence. It's OK ... I've been through this so many times with so many other religious nutters. Your circular "logic" loop contracts until all you have left is "but Santa." You quickly lost your biology leg of your argument ... there isn't much left. You folded quickly.
How did I lose the biology leg? Men having sex men is not what our biological design was meant to do.
As a fellow South Carolinian, I'm embarrassed by you and the other conservative South Carolinians in this thread and it's why I moved away to Atlanta years ago to get away from backwards, narrow-minded people like you. It's stunning to hear people speak the way you do in this day and age - stunning. And it's scary how Trump has made his followers feel so comfortable in their bigotry that they freely share it without a second thought. But we will not allow you turn turn back the clock to some mythical time when you could suppress all the people who weren't exactly like you. Not gonna happen bud.
We are designed to derive pleasure from touch. Sex is one of the "delivery mechanisms" for pleasurable touch. People derive pleasure from sexual activities, including those that don't result in reproduction. Ergo, biologically, men having sex with men is entirely valid.
You have to understand, to the civilized world, you're the 42 year old man who still believes in Santa. What do you think of 42 year old adults who still believe in Santa?
Gay people can't stop being gay no matter how hard you try to suppress them but you could stop being a raging bigot. This is not a bothsides argument.