LGBT Rights & Issues Thread, V4

[United Marxist Nations]

What is best for human beings is not necessarily moral. Nor is it necessarily best if we take spirituality into account.

Query: Are you actually going to make a post in this thread that doesn't boil down to "this is wrong and must be stopped because my religion says so"?

Will the LGBT community make an assertion that doesn't boil down to "this is fine and should be accepted because we like it"?

[Vassenor]

I'd like to table a new topic for discussion: "heterosexual activity" is immoral, something I will endlessly assert without evidence or reasoning. All heterosexuals should be pressured by society to repress their desires, and it should be an offence to suggest otherwise.

I second this motion.

[Anywhere Else But Here]

Query: Are you actually going to make a post in this thread that doesn't boil down to "this is wrong and must be stopped because my religion says so"?

Will the LGBT community make an assertion that doesn't boil down to "this is fine and should be accepted because we like it"?

Because it is an exercise of liberty, harms no one, and brings great happiness to those who do it, unlike the alternative, which is often mentally damaging? Kind of like what straight people have now.

[Vassenor]

Query: Are you actually going to make a post in this thread that doesn't boil down to "this is wrong and must be stopped because my religion says so"?

Will the LGBT community make an assertion that doesn't boil down to "this is fine and should be accepted because we like it"?

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/tu-quoque

[United Marxist Nations]

Will the LGBT community make an assertion that doesn't boil down to "this is fine and should be accepted because we like it"?

Because it is an exercise of liberty, harms no one, and brings great happiness to those who do it, unlike the alternative, which is often mentally damaging? Kind of like what straight people have now.

And?

As I said, there is no point in continuing to bring it up, because we fundamentally disagree about what is good and what isn't.

[Anywhere Else But Here]

Because it is an exercise of liberty, harms no one, and brings great happiness to those who do it, unlike the alternative, which is often mentally damaging? Kind of like what straight people have now.

And?

As I said, there is no point in continuing to bring it up, because we fundamentally disagree about what is good and what isn't.

Then why do you even come into this thread? We reason, you don't; you just whine that "it's bad, it's bad, it's bad", and when asked to back that up you just ignore the question.

[United Marxist Nations]

And?

As I said, there is no point in continuing to bring it up, because we fundamentally disagree about what is good and what isn't.

Then why do you even come into this thread? We reason, you don't; you just whine that "it's bad, it's bad, it's bad", and when asked to back that up you just ignore the question.s

You all just disregard my reasoning for why it is bad, because you don't accept the premises. I come to the thread to provide a voice of dissent every once in a while, but it typically spirals out of control.

[Lady Scylla]

Then why do you even come into this thread? We reason, you don't; you just whine that "it's bad, it's bad, it's bad", and when asked to back that up you just ignore the question.s

You all just disregard my reasoning for why it is bad, because you don't accept the premises. I come to the thread to provide a voice of dissent every once in a while, but it typically spirals out of control.

Sounds like you're more interested in ruffling feathers.

[United Marxist Nations]

You all just disregard my reasoning for why it is bad, because you don't accept the premises. I come to the thread to provide a voice of dissent every once in a while, but it typically spirals out of control.

Sounds like you're more interested in ruffling feathers.

It only ruffles feathers because the thread has a culture that is hostile to any dissenting opinion, tbh.

[Socialist Nordia]

You all just disregard my reasoning for why it is bad, because you don't accept the premises. I come to the thread to provide a voice of dissent every once in a while, but it typically spirals out of control.

Sounds like you're more interested in ruffling feathers.

He just wants to save people from the wrath of his all-compassionate God, who can't stand the idea of two people of the same sex being in a relationship, so he usually sends them off to burn in hell for eternity.

[Anywhere Else But Here]

Then why do you even come into this thread? We reason, you don't; you just whine that "it's bad, it's bad, it's bad", and when asked to back that up you just ignore the question.s

You all just disregard my reasoning for why it is bad, because you don't accept the premises. I come to the thread to provide a voice of dissent every once in a while, but it typically spirals out of control.

You don't have reasoning. You're premise is literally just : "God", which is obviously a crap premise.

[Socialist Nordia]

Sounds like you're more interested in ruffling feathers.

It only ruffles feathers because the thread has a culture that is hostile to any dissenting opinion, tbh.

If I were to suggest that acting on the teachings of Christianity was sinful, immoral, and wrong, and that the state should actively be teaching people how bad it is and not letting people who worship the Christian God get married, you'd be kinda upset by that.
Especially if my only premise was something I have given you no reason to even believe in.

[Lady Scylla]

Sounds like you're more interested in ruffling feathers.

It only ruffles feathers because the thread has a culture that is hostile to any dissenting opinion, tbh.

It doesn't help that your arguments seem to be generally lazy and half-assed with little, if any, depth. It comes off as sniping, with an intent of ruffling feathers and getting a reaction out of people, instead of actually adding anything productive to the discussion. So, I'm not all that surprised that you're met with hostility, to be frank.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Query: Are you actually going to make a post in this thread that doesn't boil down to "this is wrong and must be stopped because my religion says so"?

Will the LGBT community make an assertion that doesn't boil down to "this is fine and should be accepted because we like it"?

They won't, and to be honest that's all the reason they need in a liberalized society.

Religion has, as a feature, that it is somewhat authoritarian/traditionalist. It tells you what to do and to respect tradition.

Secular liberalism doesn't have that. In a liberal society like in the United States, the whole "my religion says it's wrong" is no argument.

[Elepis]

Will the LGBT community make an assertion that doesn't boil down to "this is fine and should be accepted because we like it"?

They won't, and to be honest that's all the reason they need in a liberalized society.

Religion has, as a feature, that it is somewhat authoritarian/traditionalist. It tells you what to do and to respect tradition.

Secular liberalism doesn't have that. In a liberal society like in the United States, the whole "my religion says it's wrong" is no argument.

and I would say that is a very good thing, why does it matter in the 21st century what a minority of people though in the 1st century?

[United Marxist Nations]

It only ruffles feathers because the thread has a culture that is hostile to any dissenting opinion, tbh.

It doesn't help that your arguments seem to be generally lazy and half-assed with little, if any, depth. It comes off as sniping, with an intent of ruffling feathers and getting a reaction out of people, instead of actually adding anything productive to the discussion. So, I'm not all that surprised that you're met with hostility, to be frank.

If I were to go into too much depth, it would hijack the topic a little bit, but I will elaborate a bit more.

The reasons I think homosexual activity are wrong are:

1) This is the primary reason: it is spiritually harmful, in that it alienates one from divinity, and thus will cause exposure to divinity to result in great harm.
2) I believe that marriage is strictly between a male and female, and that any and all sexual activity outside of marriage are wrong for the reasons specified earlier.
3) It is an activity purely for creating physical pleasure, it serves no higher purpose except debauchery. That is to say, it is selfish and decadent.

[Lady Scylla]

It doesn't help that your arguments seem to be generally lazy and half-assed with little, if any, depth. It comes off as sniping, with an intent of ruffling feathers and getting a reaction out of people, instead of actually adding anything productive to the discussion. So, I'm not all that surprised that you're met with hostility, to be frank.

If I were to go into too much depth, it would hijack the topic a little bit, but I will elaborate a bit more.

Then, perhaps, you should make a thread on the subject.

[Elepis]

It doesn't help that your arguments seem to be generally lazy and half-assed with little, if any, depth. It comes off as sniping, with an intent of ruffling feathers and getting a reaction out of people, instead of actually adding anything productive to the discussion. So, I'm not all that surprised that you're met with hostility, to be frank.

If I were to go into too much depth, it would hijack the topic a little bit, but I will elaborate a bit more.

The reasons I think homosexual activity are wrong are:

1) This is the primary reason: it is spiritually harmful, in that it alienates one from divinity, and thus will cause exposure to divinity to result in great harm.
2) I believe that marriage is strictly between a male and female, and that any and all sexual activity outside of marriage are wrong for the reasons specified earlier.
3) It is an activity purely for creating physical pleasure, it serves no higher purpose except debauchery. That is to say, it is selfish and decadent.

1) Well there is no evidence at all it is spiritually harmful so why should we believe that?
2) I'm very pleased for you, we think the the opposite
3) Soooooo? Is that bad?

[Anywhere Else But Here]

It doesn't help that your arguments seem to be generally lazy and half-assed with little, if any, depth. It comes off as sniping, with an intent of ruffling feathers and getting a reaction out of people, instead of actually adding anything productive to the discussion. So, I'm not all that surprised that you're met with hostility, to be frank.

If I were to go into too much depth, it would hijack the topic a little bit, but I will elaborate a bit more.

The reasons I think homosexual activity are wrong are:

1) This is the primary reason: it is spiritually harmful, in that it alienates one from divinity, and thus will cause exposure to divinity to result in great harm.
2) I believe that marriage is strictly between a male and female, and that any and all sexual activity outside of marriage are wrong for the reasons specified earlier.
3) It is an activity purely for creating physical pleasure, it serves no higher purpose except debauchery. That is to say, it is selfish and decadent.

1) No evidence. I could assert believing in a resurrected carpenter being nailed to a bit of wood is spiritually harmful. That assertion is not sufficient grounds for legislation, or even just being a bitch to Christians.
2) Ditto.
3) Video games and TV and badminton and straight sex with a woman over 50 are just for personal pleasure. Are those activities selfish/decadent (lulwut)/debauched?

[Soldati Senza Confini]

They won't, and to be honest that's all the reason they need in a liberalized society.

Religion has, as a feature, that it is somewhat authoritarian/traditionalist. It tells you what to do and to respect tradition.

Secular liberalism doesn't have that. In a liberal society like in the United States, the whole "my religion says it's wrong" is no argument.

and I would say that is a very good thing, why does it matter in the 21st century what a minority of people though in the 1st century?

Oh I never said it wasn't a good thing. I actually would be the first to say that it is a good thing.

[Argentarino]

It doesn't help that your arguments seem to be generally lazy and half-assed with little, if any, depth. It comes off as sniping, with an intent of ruffling feathers and getting a reaction out of people, instead of actually adding anything productive to the discussion. So, I'm not all that surprised that you're met with hostility, to be frank.

If I were to go into too much depth, it would hijack the topic a little bit, but I will elaborate a bit more.

The reasons I think homosexual activity are wrong are:

1) This is the primary reason: it is spiritually harmful, in that it alienates one from divinity, and thus will cause exposure to divinity to result in great harm.
2) I believe that marriage is strictly between a male and female, and that any and all sexual activity outside of marriage are wrong for the reasons specified earlier.
3) It is an activity purely for creating physical pleasure, it serves no higher purpose except debauchery. That is to say, it is selfish and decadent.

1) I don't know, when I'm with a guy and he bangs me against the headboard, its usually hard enough where I can see God. In that moment, I'm very close to divinity.
2) Your opinion on that does not mean that everyone else needs to live by that opinion. Next.
3) Sexual intercourse involves pleasure, yes, but it also can be an indicator of intimacy and love, which I think would hardly make it selfish and decadent. Also, your argument can be used for heterosexual sexual intercourse in which the participants use protection. Tell me, is that selfish and decadent too? Must we live like monks and nuns?

[United Marxist Nations]

If I were to go into too much depth, it would hijack the topic a little bit, but I will elaborate a bit more.

Then, perhaps, you should make a thread on the subject.

I don't feel strongly enough on homosexuality to do that.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

It doesn't help that your arguments seem to be generally lazy and half-assed with little, if any, depth. It comes off as sniping, with an intent of ruffling feathers and getting a reaction out of people, instead of actually adding anything productive to the discussion. So, I'm not all that surprised that you're met with hostility, to be frank.

If I were to go into too much depth, it would hijack the topic a little bit, but I will elaborate a bit more.

The reasons I think homosexual activity are wrong are:

1) This is the primary reason: it is spiritually harmful, in that it alienates one from divinity, and thus will cause exposure to divinity to result in great harm.
2) I believe that marriage is strictly between a male and female, and that any and all sexual activity outside of marriage are wrong for the reasons specified earlier.
3) It is an activity purely for creating physical pleasure, it serves no higher purpose except debauchery. That is to say, it is selfish and decadent.

1. It's not your salvation. It's not your problem if they choose to live that way. Leave it alone.
2. That's nice, but again not everyone is a Christian. We live in secular societies in the West for the most part.
3. So does drinking, and going out, and traveling, and yet people do it. Should we not travel, drink, or go out with friends simply because these things are selfish and decadent?

[Socialist Nordia]

It doesn't help that your arguments seem to be generally lazy and half-assed with little, if any, depth. It comes off as sniping, with an intent of ruffling feathers and getting a reaction out of people, instead of actually adding anything productive to the discussion. So, I'm not all that surprised that you're met with hostility, to be frank.

If I were to go into too much depth, it would hijack the topic a little bit, but I will elaborate a bit more.

The reasons I think homosexual activity are wrong are:

1) This is the primary reason: it is spiritually harmful, in that it alienates one from divinity, and thus will cause exposure to divinity to result in great harm.
2) I believe that marriage is strictly between a male and female, and that any and all sexual activity outside of marriage are wrong for the reasons specified earlier.
3) It is an activity purely for creating physical pleasure, it serves no higher purpose except debauchery. That is to say, it is selfish and decadent.

So in other words
1) You should all follow my religion which doesn't like gay sex
2)you can't get married because my religion says so
3) It creates pleasure with no higher purpose

My response
1) I don't care about divinity or your religion
2) I don't believe in your religion, try again. Government recognition of marriage shouldn't be based on any one religion
3) Alright let's ban everything without a "higher purpose". Most fun things don't have any higher purpose. If you want every last action that doesn't have a higher purpose to be banned, then you're going to be banning a lot of things.

[The V O I D]

It doesn't help that your arguments seem to be generally lazy and half-assed with little, if any, depth. It comes off as sniping, with an intent of ruffling feathers and getting a reaction out of people, instead of actually adding anything productive to the discussion. So, I'm not all that surprised that you're met with hostility, to be frank.

If I were to go into too much depth, it would hijack the topic a little bit, but I will elaborate a bit more.

The reasons I think homosexual activity are wrong are:

1) This is the primary reason: it is spiritually harmful, in that it alienates one from divinity, and thus will cause exposure to divinity to result in great harm.
2) I believe that marriage is strictly between a male and female, and that any and all sexual activity outside of marriage are wrong for the reasons specified earlier.
3) It is an activity purely for creating physical pleasure, it serves no higher purpose except debauchery. That is to say, it is selfish and decadent.

1. This doesn't matter to a secular, humanistic society; nor to atheists, nor to those who aren't spiritual, nor to those who are in love and want to be with the person they love rather than hurting themselves via repression. Therefor, it only matters to you and people who agree with you; no one else gives a flying fuck about "spiritual harm."

2. Good for you. Doesn't matter what you or the church believes, considering that marriage belongs to the state/government and therefor is defined as whatever a given state/government defines it as. Sometimes that isn't what you "believe" marriage is, and yet, it is just as valid because the state / government is greater than you and the church.

3. And? Recreational sex has existed for about... forever, and procreational sex has also lasted just as long. Really, that hasn't changed. The fact recreational sex between two persons of the same sex isn't an issue. Really, if you're worried of supposed spiritual or metaphysical harm, you have bigger fish to fry than two people of the same sex sleeping with each other. And, it does indeed serve a higher purpose: love. Sex is considered an act of love, is it not? That's the higher purpose it serves. Two people are in love and are showing each other that love. And newsflash: humans are inherently selfish. Have you not considered the fact that you are being selfish by saying "my god, my views, mine mine mine" when it comes to arguing against LGBT rights?