Can Homophobia Be Justified?

[Novokria]

Well the last few years has shown America can change just like that so anything is possible in 2021 America and Biden seems like the sort of person to try and takeover and create a new constitution

Rubbish. The president cannot make law.

Why shouldnt same sex marriage be called as such?

Because intended for Marriage to between a Man and a Woman to create new life and Homosexuals can't create new life so it's against the definition of Marriage

[Caraani]

I don't need to convince people on the ground to support LGBT people. Please check what we were actually talking about.

Ok good luck getting more rights without anybody supporting it

Again, feel free to check what I wrote previously. Is taking things out of context a favourite past-time of people in here or...?

[Caraani]

Tolerance of our existence worldwide has increased. I already saw that article, and I saw the article that discredited said article as well. Nice try though.

But there are large regions of the globe, specifically the Former Soviet Union, the Middle East and North Africa region, and Sub-Saharan Africa in which tolerance has either stagnated or declined.

That is literally wrong. Statistics show, they have increased. I think there's only one or two countries where it diminished. But in most they have increased, if by one or two digits.

[Zul-ar]

Not this argument again.

I mean, I thought that free expression meant I didn’t require justifications, even for views considered “hateful"

You don't require a justification, you chose to participate in this thread. Nobody's attacking you, or forcing you to do anything.

I personally believe that the concept of free speech/expression negates the need for a justification of any kind,

You are correct in that in the USA, you do not need a justification for your opinions in order to express them. This is a fact. Your point? What does this have to do with anything?

However, when Silicon Valley billionaires have a death grip on pretty much all media, free speech is dead.

Private businesses can choose to reject service to whomever they like for whatever reason, whether that be a politician with controversial opinions or a gay couple wanting a wedding cake. You can still say what you like, you just aren't entitled to be able to use that company's services to do it.

Stop pandering to SJWs and cancel culture, and for god sakes don’t feel so offended if someone calls you a name/slur. They’re just words, treat them as such.

Right, so if you call your boss's wife a "fat bitch," I'm sure you expect no repercussions for that, and that your boss will happily continue to employ you? Of course not. Words affect people, and when your words negatively affect them, they're likely not to want you around them anymore. Why keep someone in your company who has no respect for you and makes you miserable? When you're being a jerk and your friends start disappearing, you're just suffering the social consequences for being unlikable. Simple as that.

[Odreria]

Delet

[The Alma Mater]

Rubbish. The president cannot make law.

Why shouldnt same sex marriage be called as such?

Because intended for Marriage to between a Man and a Woman to create new life and Homosexuals can't create new life so it's against the definition of Marriage

If that were true, pregnancy would be a requirement for marriage. The old and infertile would not be allowed to marry.

[Istoreya]

Rubbish. The president cannot make law.

Why shouldnt same sex marriage be called as such?

Because intended for Marriage to between a Man and a Woman to create new life and Homosexuals can't create new life so it's against the definition of Marriage

Then we shall change the definition because words can change meaning. Also, marriage is available to infertile straight couples.

[Punished UMN]

Those two are not separate, the issue the movement has faced is that it is not just representing the goals of the LGBT community or of LGBT rights but also has a bunch of ideological baggage which undermines the legitimacy of the state. A lot of these countries actually had better gay rights and less homophobic attitudes before Western LGBT rights movements started in their countries, so it's not just explainable by homophobia.

No. The issue that the movement has faced is that, because the west has moved forward with this issue, in states that are actively opposing western states, such as the US, with which I don't disagree, since the US has been terrible, especially in the middle east - then said states find an easy scapegoat in the LGBT community and the movement, especially as some of those states are moving towards a more conciliatory tone towards the spawn of satan Israel, and it's right to exist as a country. In short, blaming the jew/israeli can not be moved to blaming the gay. And since Homosexuality isn't actually an ideology, and the west has only recently decided we're actual human beings, no state will take drastic measures to defend us. So we're an easy target. It's not that LGBT issues have taken some political sides, it's that LGBT issues have been politicised by those states in order to score political points and increase stability and the popularity of the regime by targeting us - which is what Russia did after it's economy took a nose dive following Crimea. Russians didn't magically start being homophobic, but the state helped them in their homophobia when it started targetting us and naming us "western agents", galvanising the masses against us and turning them away from the economic disaster that were the sanctions.

LGBT rights organizations in these countries were actively attacking states in these places, including on issues unrelated to LGBT rights, long-before scapegoating started. Many of the organizations aren't just getting rhetorical support from the United States but also administrative and financial support, and many of these groups support sanctions on their government.

[Punished UMN]

But there are large regions of the globe, specifically the Former Soviet Union, the Middle East and North Africa region, and Sub-Saharan Africa in which tolerance has either stagnated or declined.

That is literally wrong. Statistics show, they have increased. I think there's only one or two countries where it diminished. But in most they have increased, if by one or two digits.

Wrong:

[Caraani]

-...If you're from a village in eastern europe. We've also been through communism in Eastern Europe, which saw the complete emancipation of the state from the church, and in some cases its direct subservience. I for one always enjoy the pictures of the patriarch of Romania sucking up to Ceausescu and pre-eminent scientist/illiterate peasant wife.

Tbf, the Patriarch of Romania under Ceausescu was an ally of the Communist Party long-before they took power.

I just checked, and, as common sense dictated, what you said is impossible. There were four patriarchs in Romania during the period of the Socialist Republic. The first one was there before 1945, and remained there for three years, and the fourth one was there for decades after it fell. So, I don't know which patriarch of Romania that was an ally of the Communist Party long before they took power, you're talking about.

[San Lumen]

Rubbish. The president cannot make law.

Why shouldnt same sex marriage be called as such?

Because intended for Marriage to between a Man and a Woman to create new life and Homosexuals can't create new life so it's against the definition of Marriage

Says who?

[Rapperland]

I show no love to homo thugs
How you gonna explain fuckin' a man?

[Punished UMN]

Tbf, the Patriarch of Romania under Ceausescu was an ally of the Communist Party long-before they took power.

I just checked, and, as common sense dictated, what you said is impossible. There were four patriarchs in Romania during the period of the Socialist Republic. The first one was there before 1945, and remained there for three years, and the fourth one was there for decades after it fell. So, I don't know which patriarch of Romania that was an ally of the Communist Party long before they took power, you're talking about.

The one who was in for the longest period, Iustinian.

[Novokria]

Because intended for Marriage to between a Man and a Woman to create new life and Homosexuals can't create new life so it's against the definition of Marriage

Then we shall change the definition because words can change meaning. Also, marriage is available to infertile straight couples.

Well i don't really support infertile straights marrying that is not right they should also just have civil unions

[Esalia]

Rubbish. The president cannot make law.

Why shouldnt same sex marriage be called as such?

Because intended for Marriage to between a Man and a Woman to create new life and Homosexuals can't create new life so it's against the definition of Marriage

Sounds like time to redefine marriage.

[Istoreya]

Then we shall change the definition because words can change meaning. Also, marriage is available to infertile straight couples.

Well i don't really support infertile straights marrying that is not right they should also just have civil unions

Or maybe they could just get married because marriage doesn't have to be about having children.

[Odreria]

Tbf, the Patriarch of Romania under Ceausescu was an ally of the Communist Party long-before they took power.

I just checked, and, as common sense dictated, what you said is impossible. There were four patriarchs in Romania during the period of the Socialist Republic. The first one was there before 1945, and remained there for three years, and the fourth one was there for decades after it fell. So, I don't know which patriarch of Romania that was an ally of the Communist Party long before they took power, you're talking about.

Lmfaooooo “I’m not sure who you mean, therefore it’s impossible”

[Necroghastia]

Rubbish. The president cannot make law.

Why shouldnt same sex marriage be called as such?

Because intended for Marriage

Marriage's intent is for those involved to decide.

to between a Man and a Woman to create new life and Homosexuals can't create new life

1. Not all cishet couples can have children. Should the infertile and elderly be denied the right to marry?
2. Cis/trans gay couples can have biological children.
3. Surrogacy exists.
4. By this logic someone oughta get knocked up before the marriage is made official, shouldn't they?

so it's against the definition of Marriage

What definition are you reading?

[The Universal Hegemony]

Anybody can justify anything they want.

[Wallenburg]

Rubbish. The president cannot make law.

Why shouldnt same sex marriage be called as such?

Because intended for Marriage to between a Man and a Woman to create new life and Homosexuals can't create new life so it's against the definition of Marriage

Incredible. Everything you just said was wrong.

[Caraani]

That is literally wrong. Statistics show, they have increased. I think there's only one or two countries where it diminished. But in most they have increased, if by one or two digits.

Wrong:

2013 - https://www.pewresearch.org/global/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2013/06/2013-Homosexuality-05.png
2019 - https://www.pewresearch.org/global/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2020/06/PG_2020.06.25_Global-Views-Homosexuality_0-04.png?w=398

Only Russia results slightly more homophobic, I will give you that. The rest seem to have increased. As I said, there aren't many countries where it has diminished, but there are some. My point still stands.

[Istoreya]

Anybody can justify anything they want.

While true, that does not mean their justification attempts are valid and should hold any kind of weight in the overall operation of society.

[Novokria]

Because intended for Marriage to between a Man and a Woman to create new life and Homosexuals can't create new life so it's against the definition of Marriage

Says who?

God

[Eirkaunas]

It's simple, the LGBTQ community and their central tenets/lifestyle is perfectly fine. The Lord doesn't make mistakes, so these people are meant to be who they are. There is no bible verse that outlaws homosexuality. The infamous Leviticus verse is a reference to the Canaanite tradition of orgies, these orgies were the same thing that cause the Lord to destroy Sodom with fire and brimstone. The Canaanites were the spiritual and political enemies of the Israelite's, God's people, so what they did became un-Godly.

Now if you want to look at this issue through a secular scope, then let's discuss anthropological and sociological explanations. Modern Sociologists actually think that in order for our society to thrive, there should be heterogeneity in sexual orientation. This is a common occurrence in nature, therefore, it is natural.

Thanks,
Eirkaunas

[San Lumen]

Then we shall change the definition because words can change meaning. Also, marriage is available to infertile straight couples.

Well i don't really support infertile straights marrying that is not right they should also just have civil unions

so unless one intents to or can have children they shouldnt be allowed to marry?