LGBT Rights & Issues Thread, V4

[Anywhere Else But Here]

See, I could detonate an atomic bomb in a city centre and claim I don't want to vaporise a million people - I just want to set off an atomic bomb, but that doesn't change the fact that what I want to do is going to vaporise a million people.

What serious harm would I be doing to homosexuals?

I've already explained that, and that's one time more than I should have to.

[Minzerland II]

That's down right cruel.

Also, just out of curiosity, why is there a lubricant dispenser?

Use your imagination

:^)

[United Marxist Nations]

What serious harm would I be doing to homosexuals?

I've already explained that, and that's one time more than I should have to.

I don't agree that such a plan would result in homophobic bullying, since we would educate against that too.

[The V O I D]

Again, why can't you just let people be happy and live their lives? It doesn't concern you, your body, or your bedroom, so it isn't your business.

[United Marxist Nations]

Again, why can't you just let people be happy and live their lives? It doesn't concern you, your body, or your bedroom, so it isn't your business.

They can, I just want to educate them against it, and for society not to support it.

[Anywhere Else But Here]

Again, why can't you just let people be happy and live their lives? It doesn't concern you, your body, or your bedroom, so it isn't your business.

They can, I just want to educate them against it, and for society not to support it.

"Jews can practise, I just want to educate them against it, and for society not to support it."
Are you really going to tell me that's not anti-Semitic? (For bonus points, try replacing "Jews" with "Orthodox Christians" and think about how you'd feel in any theocracy that wasn't of your own faith.)

[United Marxist Nations]

They can, I just want to educate them against it, and for society not to support it.

"Jews can practise, I just want to educate them against it, and for society not to support it."
Are you really going to tell me that's not anti-Semitic? (For bonus points, try replacing "Jews" with "Orthodox Christians" and think about how you'd feel in any theocracy that wasn't of your own faith.)

As I said, there would be religious exemptions, I don't know why you're obsessed with making this about restricting religion.

[The V O I D]

Again, why can't you just let people be happy and live their lives? It doesn't concern you, your body, or your bedroom, so it isn't your business.

They can, I just want to educate them against it, and for society not to support it.

Yeah, but newsflash: they want to be married, too. They want to freely, openly love, too.

An unsupportive, de-educated society isn't going to be very hospitable.

[United Marxist Nations]

They can, I just want to educate them against it, and for society not to support it.

Yeah, but newsflash: they want to be married, too. They want to freely, openly love, too.

An unsupportive, de-educated society isn't going to be very hospitable.

If they don't harm others, I am fine with it, but a society where I would have my way wouldn't recognize it as legitimate.

[Anywhere Else But Here]

"Jews can practise, I just want to educate them against it, and for society not to support it."
Are you really going to tell me that's not anti-Semitic? (For bonus points, try replacing "Jews" with "Orthodox Christians" and think about how you'd feel in any theocracy that wasn't of your own faith.)

As I said, there would be religious exemptions, I don't know why you're obsessed with making this about restricting religion.

Again, you miss the point; it's not about religion (the stuff in brackets was an aside to encourage you to maybe get a glimpse of the total awfulness of your philosophy, which is obvious to everyone but you). The statement above is anti-Semitic. The one you made was homophobic. This one's racist:
"Blacks and whites can marry each other, I just want to educate them against it, and for society not to support it."

No matter how pseudo-well-intentioned you are, your position is homophobic.

[New confederate ramenia]

"Jews can practise, I just want to educate them against it, and for society not to support it."
Are you really going to tell me that's not anti-Semitic? (For bonus points, try replacing "Jews" with "Orthodox Christians" and think about how you'd feel in any theocracy that wasn't of your own faith.)

As I said, there would be religious exemptions, I don't know why you're obsessed with making this about restricting religion.

What would "religious exemptions" be?

[United Marxist Nations]

As I said, there would be religious exemptions, I don't know why you're obsessed with making this about restricting religion.

Again, you miss the point; it's not about religion (the stuff in brackets was an aside to encourage you to maybe get a glimpse of the total awfulness of your philosophy, which is obvious to everyone but you). The statement above is anti-Semitic. The one you made was homophobic. This one's racist:
"Blacks and whites can marry each other, I just want to educate them against it, and for society not to support it."

No matter how pseudo-well-intentioned you are, your position is homophobic.

Fine them, I suppose I am, what of it?

[United Marxist Nations]

As I said, there would be religious exemptions, I don't know why you're obsessed with making this about restricting religion.

What would "religious exemptions" be?

Communities and individuals would be free to practice their own faiths as long as it were to not breach public morality (e.g. atheists wouldn't be allowed to commit usury just because their lack of faith allows it).

[New confederate ramenia]

What would "religious exemptions" be?

Communities and individuals would be free to practice their own faiths as long as it were to not breach public morality (e.g. atheists wouldn't be allowed to commit usury just because their lack of faith allows it).

How does this fit in with discouraging homosex?

[United Marxist Nations]

Communities and individuals would be free to practice their own faiths as long as it were to not breach public morality (e.g. atheists wouldn't be allowed to commit usury just because their lack of faith allows it).

How does this fit in with discouraging homosex?

People of different religious backgrounds could instead take classes at their local mosque, synagogue, etc.

[Anywhere Else But Here]

How does this fit in with discouraging homosex?

People of different religious backgrounds could instead take classes at their local mosque, synagogue, etc.

What if their local synagogue wants to teach that homosex is fine and embracing oneself healthy?

[The Flutterlands]

What would "religious exemptions" be?

Communities and individuals would be free to practice their own faiths as long as it were to not breach public morality (e.g. atheists wouldn't be allowed to commit usury just because their lack of faith allows it).

But why should atheists be made to conform to your concept of morality and not their own?

[New confederate ramenia]

People of different religious backgrounds could instead take classes at their local mosque, synagogue, etc.

What if their local synagogue wants to teach that homosex is fine and embracing oneself healthy?

Of course a synagogue would teach that. Anyway, I can't speak for UMN, but I'd probably let them do that.

[United Marxist Nations]

People of different religious backgrounds could instead take classes at their local mosque, synagogue, etc.

What if their local synagogue wants to teach that homosex is fine and embracing oneself healthy?

I think they should embrace themselves, because denying part of their life won't work, I just think they should be helped to repress their urges like everyone should.

Teaching that homosexual activity is fine, on the other hand, would probably be a breach of public morality.

[The Flutterlands]

What if their local synagogue wants to teach that homosex is fine and embracing oneself healthy?

I think they should embrace themselves, because denying part of their life won't work, I just think they should be helped to repress their urges like everyone should.

Teaching that homosexual activity is fine, on the other hand, would probably be a breach of public morality.

Well, fuck public morality then, theocrat.

*Teaches everyone that gay sex is fine*

[United Marxist Nations]

Communities and individuals would be free to practice their own faiths as long as it were to not breach public morality (e.g. atheists wouldn't be allowed to commit usury just because their lack of faith allows it).

But why should atheists be made to conform to your concept of morality and not their own?

Because individualist morality is dumb. Society needs to embrace some kind of moral standard, or nothing would get done.

[New confederate ramenia]

Communities and individuals would be free to practice their own faiths as long as it were to not breach public morality (e.g. atheists wouldn't be allowed to commit usury just because their lack of faith allows it).

But why should atheists be made to conform to your concept of morality and not their own?

That's how people work with morality. We want others to conform to our morality because it's our morality. It's not "forcing your beliefs on others" it's just how people naturally are.

[Anywhere Else But Here]

What if their local synagogue wants to teach that homosex is fine and embracing oneself healthy?

1. I think they should embrace themselves, because denying part of their life won't work, 2. I just think they should be helped to repress their urges like everyone should.

3. Teaching that homosexual activity is fine, on the other hand, would probably be a breach of public morality.

1. We have very different definitions of "embracing oneself". What you want leads to self-loathing and mental illness.
2. Not like everyone else, though, is it?
3. Surprise, surprise.

[United Marxist Nations]

1. I think they should embrace themselves, because denying part of their life won't work, 2. I just think they should be helped to repress their urges like everyone should.

3. Teaching that homosexual activity is fine, on the other hand, would probably be a breach of public morality.

1. We have very different definitions of "embracing oneself". What you want leads to self-loathing and mental illness.
2. Not like everyone else, though, is it?
3. Surprise, surprise.

1) Not necessarily.
2) Yes, like everyone else.

[New confederate ramenia]

1. I think they should embrace themselves, because denying part of their life won't work, 2. I just think they should be helped to repress their urges like everyone should.

3. Teaching that homosexual activity is fine, on the other hand, would probably be a breach of public morality.

1. We have very different definitions of "embracing oneself". What you want leads to self-loathing and mental illness.
2. Not like everyone else, though, is it?
3. Surprise, surprise.

1. Can't speak for UMN here, but I'm bisexual and personally trying to do what UMN wants (no sex outside marriage). I'm not mentally ill and I don't loath myself
2. Pretty similar tbh