LGBTQ+ Rights / Similar Discussion

I wonder how many people in this thread has a background in evolutionary psychology, biology, philosophy or have ever read a single study / research paper.

Half the thread is about a fallacious appeal to nature. Some spider species eat their mates. Male ducks rape female ducks. Dogs piss on the ground to mark their territory. Trying to somehow contort this argument into something about why / why not homosexuality is found in nature is beyond retarded. Sex is not sought out (at least in terms of most mammals) for kiddies. For most, if not all mammals it’s sought out for pleasure. This is why we make cum.
It doesn’t matter if homosexuality is found in nature. You’re trying to appeal to the fact that my dog buries their turd in a patch of dirt and arguing that this is ample reason for us to start shitting in my backyard. The same exact thing can be said of religion. Just because in some absurd scripture it is stated that “being x is wrong” has nothing to do with it being morally right or wrong. On a personal basis, yes, it might dictate how you view it, but you’d be laughed at trying to arguing against cutting your beard in today’s age, despite it being forbidden in the Hebrew Bible: “You shall not round off the hair on your temples or mar the edges of your beard.” (Lev 19:27). Basing sociatal norms on a holy book from 1000-3000 years ago is ridiculous. Ever heard of the seperation of church and state?

@billy7oblos could it be that, as society becomes more accepting of deviations from the norm, that opressed and marginalized groupings (e.g. homosexuals) start to emerge from the closet? Do you flaunt your sexuality wherever you go? How can you reasonably expect that the woman on the sidewalk is indeed a woman, and not a man without making an assumption or knowing what’s inbetween their legs? Same goes for sexuality, you have no way to reasonably know whether or not a stranger is homosexual or not, therefore it is ludicrous mock the idea that “5% of society were secretly gay”. On that same note: do you honestly think we have accurate data going back more than half a century on suicide rates? Unless you’ve got some sort of study or paper on the subject, then you’re just pulling numbers and ‘factoids’ out of thin air.
Nobody, not then nor now, have “completely overcome their attraction”. You can supress your sexual identity, which may lead to further disorder, or they could choose to accept their sexuality and thus be subject to being shunned by your family, social circle and society as a whole. That’s not to also mention the copious amount of scrutiny, physical / mental torture or the constant fear of death as a result of said persecution. This is still happening to a lesser extent in Western societies, and in some places you’ll still get killed for your sexuality. I’m sorry, but what you’ve said so far in this thread only displays a plain ignorant reading of history.

Your implication that it’s easy to be homosexual in (Western) society today is also silly. The quote

Quote

if its really a 'sexuality' and they only love the same gender than wouldn't they take freedom at the first chance they got?

is a prime example of this. The underlying assumption here is that we now have the “liberty” to love the same gender. Legally yes, but it's a very naive to think that just because something is (il)legal means that it no longer happens. Killing is illegal yet it still happens.
In the US approximately 30-45% of the country still disapprove of homosexuality in general, not just gay marriage. And 25% of Americans believe that homosexuality should be banned. Legality does not equal cultural acceptance.
https://news.gallup.com/poll/1651/gay-lesbian-rights.aspx

@billy7oblos

Quote

history tells us that is was much less than 5% of society being killed when gays were killed, the number would probably be similar to the number of zoophiles and other deviants being killed

Citation needed.

@billy7oblos

Quote

As for hating themselves, wouldn't they be more prone to commit suicide back when their 'sexuality' was repressed than now?

Yes.

@billy7oblos

Quote

the suicide rate would have been much higher if 5% of society was forced not to have sex with who they loved.

Citation needed.

@billy7oblos

Quote

The clear fact is that the number of homosexuals have increased by a ton, they simply did not exist before.

Citation needed. A correlation does not mean causation. I would certainly contend that the percent of people with homosexual desires have stayed more or less constant, but the percent of people out of the closet has exponentially risen alongside cultural acceptance. My argument requires the least amount of assumptions, so I would very much like to see the stats you have on the subject matter.

@billy7oblos

Quote

you claim they born naturally attracted to the same gender and they cant control it and yet they hide their whole 'sexual identity' just so people don't insult them?

Just so people “don’t insult them” is such a vast oversimplification and ignorant view on the issue. You make it sound like societal shunning is nothing. And your comparison afterwards: “do you think the slaves would have stayd slaves because "people would hate them"” is even more asinine.

@hammelhopfan#11453 Dysphoria describes the anxiety, distress and torment some encounter if their gender doesn’t allign with biological sex. Transmedicalism or truscum is not a majority-held belief in the psychiatric/psychological community. Transgenderism is not a conscious choice, as you don’t choose what gender your brain chemistry has determined you to be. The clear consensus in the psychological communities is that you don’t need dysphoria in order to transition.

@billy7oblos

Quote

with this argument, its ok to have sex with sex dolls fashioned after animals or children; no one gets hurt (so that's a bad argument

Can you make an argument as to why this wouldn't be okay without arguing against seperate aspects of it (e.g. it might lead to harm to real children/animals.)