What is your opinion on LGBT+ marriage?

[Totaler Krieg Division]

It furthered a long running moralistic decline in western society. I'm also old enough to remember how gay marriage advocates in the early-mid 2000's insisted all they wanted was gay marriage and how they would never go further than that and how they would proudly exclaim "No! I'll never support those trannies and how dare you think I would!" if you brought up the prospect of it not ending there. If only more of us had the foresight to shut down the slippery slope before it started.

Lmao, you are talking complete nonsense here in literally every way.

Not really, no. Practically nobody before the mid 2010's was pushing for trans rights or even knew it was a thing, even among the most ardent supporters of gay rights and marriage. Most of those who did know of the T reacted negatively to being associated with them. This is all rather well documented, even liberal outlets during the Bush presidency warned that trying to push for trans rights could sink the whole ship.

[The Grims]

How? Why?

It furthered a long running moralistic decline in western society. I'm also old enough to remember how gay marriage advocates in the early-mid 2000's insisted all they wanted was gay marriage and how they would never go further than that and how they would proudly exclaim "No! I'll never support those trannies and how dare you think I would!" if you brought up the prospect of it not ending there. If only more of us had the foresight to shut down the slippery slope before it started.

Oddly enough I am also old enough and never heard those words. Do you have an example speech from back then ?

[Highever]

Lmao, you are talking complete nonsense here in literally every way.

Not really, no. Practically nobody before the mid 2010's was pushing for trans rights or even knew it was a thing, even among the most ardent supporters of gay rights and marriage. Most of those who did know of the T reacted negatively to being associated with them. This is all rather well documented, even liberal outlets during the Bush presidency warned that trying to push for trans rights could sink the whole ship.

None of this was a thing. What the hell are you talking about?

Even if it were true, you're basically mad that gay marriage opened the door for advocation of other rights?

[Neutraligon]

It furthered a long running moralistic decline in western society. I'm also old enough to remember how gay marriage advocates in the early-mid 2000's insisted all they wanted was gay marriage and how they would never go further than that and how they would proudly exclaim "No! I'll never support those trannies and how dare you think I would!" if you brought up the prospect of it not ending there. If only more of us had the foresight to shut down the slippery slope before it started.

Oddly enough I am also old enough and never heard those words. Do you have an example speech from back then ?

Sadly one of the incidents that essentially kicked off the lg rights stuff, the stonewall riots, where pushed for originally by trans individuals, who where then shot from behind by lgb people.

[Cekoviu]

Not really, no. Practically nobody before the mid 2010's was pushing for trans rights or even knew it was a thing, even among the most ardent supporters of gay rights and marriage. Most of those who did know of the T reacted negatively to being associated with them. This is all rather well documented, even liberal outlets during the Bush presidency warned that trying to push for trans rights could sink the whole ship.

None of this was a thing. What the hell are you talking about?

Even if it were true, you're basically mad that gay marriage opened the door for advocation of other rights?

Obviously, trans rights are a threat to cis people.

[The Rich Port]

Oddly enough I am also old enough and never heard those words. Do you have an example speech from back then ?

Sadly one of the incidents that essentially kicked off the lg rights stuff, the stonewall riots, where pushed for originally by trans individuals, who where then shot from behind by lgb people.

I think it's safe to say, considering that nobody calls it the LGB movement anymore, and it has been that way since before the Gay Marriage court decision, that that's a pretty stupid post either way.

While that doesn't mean that there aren't trans-excluding movements, that doesn't apply to the entirety of the LGBT movement.

It isn't the LGBT movement pushing for bathroom bills, nor are they advocating for bills forcibly defining gender and/or biological sex along religious lines.

[Neutraligon]

Sadly one of the incidents that essentially kicked off the lg rights stuff, the stonewall riots, where pushed for originally by trans individuals, who where then shot from behind by lgb people.

I think it's safe to say, considering that nobody calls it the LGB movement anymore, and it has been that way since before the Gay Marriage court decision, that that's a pretty stupid post either way.

While that doesn't mean that there aren't trans-excluding movements, that doesn't apply to the entirety of the LGBT movement.

It isn't the LGBT movement pushing for bathroom bills, nor are they advocating for bills forcibly defining gender and/or biological sex along religious lines.

True, but at least in history there are examples of this happening.

[The Rich Port]

I think it's safe to say, considering that nobody calls it the LGB movement anymore, and it has been that way since before the Gay Marriage court decision, that that's a pretty stupid post either way.

While that doesn't mean that there aren't trans-excluding movements, that doesn't apply to the entirety of the LGBT movement.

It isn't the LGBT movement pushing for bathroom bills, nor are they advocating for bills forcibly defining gender and/or biological sex along religious lines.

True, but at least in history there are examples of this happening.

Sure, and that's a pretty ignorant way of approaching it, considering that the trans-gendered are usually lumped in with the LGB part, along with pedophiles and sex offenders in general by people who disagree with them.

As a genderfluid person, we're stuck with the trans-gendered. They're adult human beings too, after all.

[Totaler Krieg Division]

It furthered a long running moralistic decline in western society. I'm also old enough to remember how gay marriage advocates in the early-mid 2000's insisted all they wanted was gay marriage and how they would never go further than that and how they would proudly exclaim "No! I'll never support those trannies and how dare you think I would!" if you brought up the prospect of it not ending there. If only more of us had the foresight to shut down the slippery slope before it started.

Oddly enough I am also old enough and never heard those words. Do you have an example speech from back then ?

Once I have a bit more time (at work right now) to sit down and scroll through a bunch of stuff from a decade or two back I will post some stuff yes. In the meantime however I do have this link which talks about how the T part of LGBT has oftentimes just been included as token representation and until recently was largely forgotten or actively disliked by the rest of the movement.

[Neutraligon]

True, but at least in history there are examples of this happening.

Sure, and that's a pretty ignorant way of approaching it, considering that the trans-gendered are usually lumped in with the LGB part, along with pedophiles and sex offenders in general by people who disagree with them.

As a genderfluid person, we're stuck with the trans-gendered. They're adult human beings too, after all.

I am not disagreeing that the post was pretty terrible, only that there is some minor truth to it in that trans people have been excluded in the past by LGB people. It is great that this is basically not the case now.

[The Rich Port]

Oddly enough I am also old enough and never heard those words. Do you have an example speech from back then ?

Once I have a bit more time (at work right now) to sit down and scroll through a bunch of stuff from a decade or two back I will post some stuff yes. In the meantime however I do have this link which talks about how the T part of LGBT has oftentimes just been included as token representation and until recently was largely forgotten or actively disliked by the rest of the movement.

Yeah hey thanks, well fucking aware.

How nice to get told something we already know via you making an ignorant post about marriage being somehow only for people of their natural genders and that being a sign of "declining morality".

[Othelos]

How? Why?

It furthered a long running moralistic decline in western society.

Nope. Banning marriage for certain groups doesn't get rid of people who want to be together, whether they're the same gender or different races.

[New Legland]

Because he is homophobic.

That's a lie. Homophobia is the fear of homosexuals and homosexuality. Rather,

Why are my nation and religion strictly against homosexuality? To quote a book*

In the West today, homosexuality and lesbianism have come to be seen as an alternative lifestyle subject to personal preference. It is no longer considered an abnormality that requires restraint and treatment and is being actively promoted by its adherents and their sympathizers as a legitimate way of life. Arguments in favor of tolerance toward same-sex relationships are based on the assumption that homosexual behavior is biologically based and not merely learned from society.

Islam considers homosexuality to be the result of human choice. Human beings are not robots that do only what they are programmed to do. They choose how to behave, and God holds them responsible for their choices. It is inconceivable that God would have made some people homosexuals then declared it a punishable crime(God has created everything in due proportion. He established the means for populating the earth and maintaining life by the creation of male and female, not only in man but among almost all living things. Islam considers deliberate efforts to change this nature as a rebellion against the creator). To accept such a proposition is to suggest that God is unjust.

Inclinations can exist within humans toward a variety of natural acts and unnatural ones such as rape, pedophilia, or bestiality. These inclinations may arise from media influence or direct contact, but it does not mean that free reign should be given to them. Muslims(and everyone) are under obligation to control such inclinations in obedience to God.

It should be noted that Islam did not introduce anti-gay legislature to the world. The texts of the Torah are replete with a clear condemnation of such practices. But among the things foretold by the Prophet of Islam is this: "Immorality will not appear among a people to the extent that they publicize it but that painful diseases will spread among them which were not known to their predecessors(Narrated by Ibn Majah and al-Hakim)."

Sexually transmitted diseases are steeply on the rise in permissive societies-in particular, HIV/AIDS, which causes loss of acquired immunity and usually leads to death. The early spread of AIDS was first observed among homosexual communities. Later, it entered the heterosexual community through so-called bisexuals as well as blood transfusions and intravenous drug usage, and now it continues to spread among promiscuous heterosexuals. AIDS remains incurable, and infections continue to increase in gay and bisexual men, who accounted for more than half of HIV infections in 2006.

*ISLAM: Top 50 Questions Answered, by Saheeh International

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UuID-GS--k0

Oh my god, I can't say I've seen anything quite like this before. I am in utter disbelief that people with the same "thought" process as you exist. So many people have tried to get through to you, but the apparent indoctrination that baffles me so has proven too thick for even that to have any effect.

You make the claim that homosexuality is a choice, even though countless studies have shown that to be untrue. In fact, two studies were linked in this very fucking thread just a few comments before this one, but I guess you were either too lazy to read them or thought that your fallacious book written by the ignorant minds of old was a much better source for medical knowledge. And homosexuality is a choice because we have free will? Why don't you go outside, eat a worm and enjoy it? After all, your taste is a choice—we have free will!

As for your AIDS argument, you acknowledge that it can be transmitted through blood transfusions and needles, yet you still believe that every single person infected with AIDS has been either a homosexual or an adulterer. It's insane. And that genius of yours, Dr. Naik? I looked him up. He doesn't have a Ph.D, he has bachelor's degrees in medicine and surgery and denies evolution. He is by no means a genius and he definitely does not know what the hell he's talking about.

I'd love to know how homosexuality, or anything for that matter, is automatically immoral because animals exhibit it? Heterosexuality, compassion, etc. etc. etc., are all seen in animals. You then go on to say that homosexuality and necrophilia are similar because they are animalistic, which implies that they are both more common among animals than they are in humans. Uhh, no, they fucking aren't. It's called Google search.

Your statement that Saudi Arabia was the most progressive nation in terms of homosexuality policy actually hurt me. It actually disgusts me how damn wet you get over gay people being bludgeoned to death, and I'm repulsed even further when you start spewing out that "hate the sin, love the sinner" spiel.

It is a fact that God made clear that execution is what shall happen to all who make love to one of the same gender.

Remember that the punishment for murder, warranted by God, is to give the victim's family a choice on how to deal with the murderer.

1. Have him executed
2. Have him forgiven
3. Have him pay blood money

And know that homosexuality is a crime and it does affect other people, but none more so than the one who does it.

I am very sorry that the gay "friend" you have even has a relationship with someone who thinks a backwards country with a plethora of backwards policies including the brutal killing of people who were born the way he was is doing the right thing.

Holy shit, you didn't just say that "the Qur'an agrees with science in every aspect," did you? I'd ask for your source for that claim, but I am 110% sure you'd give me the terrifying response, "the Qur'an." The studies linked in this very thread alone are enough to prove that this couldn't be further from the truth, let alone the hundreds of scientific inaccuracies that ancient book contains. Your constant reiteration of this statement and those of Dr. Naik being a genius and Islam being "perfecrt [sic] and without flaw" (even though common sense alone will tell you otherwise) really lead me to believe that the exact same thing was done to you in your impressionable youth.

You may (very fortunately) be in the extreme minority, but the fact that you will make, believe, and repeat these outrageous and easily falsifiable claims without any evidence at all is extremely unsettling to me.

(Yes, I know I'm just a b i i i t late, but this was shocking)

[The Alma Mater]

How? Why?

It furthered a long running moralistic decline in western society

You are confusing homosexuality with christians who stopped focusing on the "do not judge" and "there is nothing wrong with making a mistake and being honest about it". That is what is causing the decline.

[Nakena]

Once I have a bit more time (at work right now) to sit down and scroll through a bunch of stuff from a decade or two back I will post some stuff yes. In the meantime however I do have this link which talks about how the T part of LGBT has oftentimes just been included as token representation and until recently was largely forgotten or actively disliked by the rest of the movement.

Yeah hey thanks, well fucking aware.

How nice to get told something we already know via you making an ignorant post about marriage being somehow only for people of their natural genders and that being a sign of "declining morality".

To be fair, the LGBT topic didn appeared in a political context until the late 2000s, early 2010s. At least in Europe.

And the term itself, I haven't seen in old publications. In fact I looked some up myself, and there was much talk about the gay community, but the LGBT term was absent or not yet widespread introduced.

[The Alma Mater]

Yeah hey thanks, well fucking aware.

How nice to get told something we already know via you making an ignorant post about marriage being somehow only for people of their natural genders and that being a sign of "declining morality".

To be fair, the LGBT topic didn appeared in a political context until the late 2000s, early 2010s. At least in Europe.

And the term itself, I haven't seen in old publications. In fact I looked some up myself, and there was much talk about the gay community, but the LGBT term was absent or not yet widespread introduced.

This is true. There was a lot of talk about gays; but only gays.
Of course, as someone said, that only means that gay marriage opened up the door to more liberty. Like interracial marriage did earlier. Huzzah.

[Nakena]

To be fair, the LGBT topic didn appeared in a political context until the late 2000s, early 2010s. At least in Europe.

And the term itself, I haven't seen in old publications. In fact I looked some up myself, and there was much talk about the gay community, but the LGBT term was absent or not yet widespread introduced.

This is true. There was a lot of talk about gays; but only gays.
Of course, as someone said, that only means that gay marriage opened up the door to more liberty. Like interracial marriage did earlier. Huzzah.

I still believe the, by now extreme, politicization of LGBT is endangering, as the whole matter becomes something to be aggressively pushed around on the political landscape, and utilized by political forces for their agenda in one way or another.

Right into the most heavily contested battlefields of the ongoing metapolitical culture wars inside the west.

This is not a good place to be.

[The Rich Port]

This is true. There was a lot of talk about gays; but only gays.
Of course, as someone said, that only means that gay marriage opened up the door to more liberty. Like interracial marriage did earlier. Huzzah.

I still believe the, by now extreme, politicization of LGBT is endangering, as the whole matter becomes something to be aggressively pushed around on the political landscape, and utilized by political forces for their agenda in one way or another.

Right into the most heavily contested battlefields of the ongoing metapolitical culture wars inside the west. This is not a good place to be.

That's kind of inevitable... And one would even argue that the LGBT movement has always been a political movement, especially if we're talking about 50 or 60 years ago.

[Nakena]

That's kind of inevitable...

I am cautious about inevitable development. I should add however that the first time the issue came to my attention was when it was brought up by elements of the right-wing. Specifically the debate around french same-sex marriage, and then this incident.

And until much later I kept considering it a non-issue.

And one would even argue that the LGBT movement has always been a political movement, especially if we're talking about 50 or 60 years ago.

At least in Europe it wasnt really. I always considered it to be more a private matter and lifestyle (I've have some personal experiences as well...), perhaps something like a subculture. But political? Never. Then again, we didn had Stonewall riots or so.

[Genivaria]

The same as hetero marriage, let people do it if they want.

[The Black Forrest]

The same as hetero marriage, let people do it if they want.

Indeed. How are people hurt by it?

[Elwher]

The same as hetero marriage, let people do it if they want.

Indeed. How are people hurt by it?

No one is hurt by it, which is why I support the right of any two or more consenting adults to marry. Where the harm comes into place is when private citizens who find it morally offensive are forced, by legislation and judicial fiat, to participate in the ceremonies.

[Kowani]

Indeed. How are people hurt by it?

No one is hurt by it, which is why I support the right of any two or more consenting adults to marry. Where the harm comes into place is when private citizens who find it morally offensive are forced, by legislation and judicial fiat, to participate in the ceremonies.

And this happens…where?

[Elwher]

No one is hurt by it, which is why I support the right of any two or more consenting adults to marry. Where the harm comes into place is when private citizens who find it morally offensive are forced, by legislation and judicial fiat, to participate in the ceremonies.

And this happens…where?

When those who find it offensive to their personal morality are enjoined to create cakes, arrange flowers, or artistically photograph said ceremonies.

[Kowani]

And this happens…where?

When those who find it offensive to their personal morality are enjoined to create cakes, arrange flowers, or artistically photograph said ceremonies.

The baker won his case, and I’m gonna need citations for the other two.