|
Post by amyghost on Feb 20, 2023 16:39:21 GMT
Population is certainly beneficial for warfare, at most times and places in history. But it's also important for political power which is gained by controlling population. That's why the Catholics forbid birth control and abortion. War is a social activity, the competition for territory/resources. If men just wanted to kill other men, we would all be psychopaths. Those with militant mindsets and those that are running the military are. Excellent point. Much of military training has to do with instilling psychopathic mindsets into trainees, as a means of breaking down the normal societal and cultural proscriptions (that are likely at least partially innate) against maiming or killing another being who has done you no personal harm.
|
|
|
Post by amyghost on Feb 20, 2023 16:44:40 GMT
I’m guessing you’re a homosexual, Faustus… Nope, totally straight. I just happen to be a decent human being, something people like you would never understand. But note the knee-jerk "you must be the thing you're defending" reponse, which is purest boilerplate for a certain type of 'Christian'. And of course, the thing you're defending must perforce be a bad thing, as bad people (i.e. those who disagree with the 'Christian') are the only ones who'd defend something so abhorrent to the good people (i.e. those 'Christians'--who are the only ones qualified to make fine distinctions such as these).
|
|
djorno
Sophomore
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_yellow.png)
@djorno
Posts: 322
Likes: 81
|
Post by djorno on Feb 20, 2023 16:50:06 GMT
Nope, totally straight. I just happen to be a decent human being, something people like you would never understand. But note the knee-jerk "you must be the thing you're defending" reponse, which is purest boilerplate for a certain type of 'Christian'. And of course, the thing you're defending must perforce be a bad thing, as bad people (i.e. those who disagree with the 'Christian') are the only ones who'd defend something so abhorrent to the good people (i.e. those 'Christians'--who are the only ones qualified to make fine distinctions such as these). Well homosexuality is a demonstrably unhealthy practice.
|
|
|
Post by faustus5 on Feb 20, 2023 16:56:52 GMT
But note the knee-jerk "you must be the thing you're defending" reponse, which is purest boilerplate for a certain type of 'Christian'. And of course, the thing you're defending must perforce be a bad thing, as bad people (i.e. those who disagree with the 'Christian') are the only ones who'd defend something so abhorrent to the good people (i.e. those 'Christians'--who are the only ones qualified to make fine distinctions such as these). Well homosexuality is a demonstrably unhealthy practice. No it isn't. Your entire belief system is bullshit.
|
|
djorno
Sophomore
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_yellow.png)
@djorno
Posts: 322
Likes: 81
|
Post by djorno on Feb 20, 2023 16:57:31 GMT
It’s gone way beyond merely campaigning for tolerance to actual indoctrination at this point. Yes, I suppose that to someone like you who has been indoctrinated into an absurd cult of hate, that when rational, good persons succeed in persuading a majority of society that your side is evil and wrong, it must look like indoctrination to you. That's how you losers manage to live with yourselves. “It’s OK when we do it”.
|
|
|
Post by amyghost on Feb 20, 2023 16:59:32 GMT
But note the knee-jerk "you must be the thing you're defending" reponse, which is purest boilerplate for a certain type of 'Christian'. And of course, the thing you're defending must perforce be a bad thing, as bad people (i.e. those who disagree with the 'Christian') are the only ones who'd defend something so abhorrent to the good people (i.e. those 'Christians'--who are the only ones qualified to make fine distinctions such as these). Well homosexuality is a demonstrably unhealthy practice. Unhealthy to whom? Yourself, because it disturbs you? As a sexual act (and as Gore Vidal sanely and sensibly pointed out some years ago, there are no homosexual people, just homosexual acts; and yes I'm aware not everyone will agree with that, but I profoundly do) it is no more 'healthy' or 'unhealthy' than any heterosexual act, physically. You of course, are attempting to assign it the status of psychologically unhealthy act because your god kinda sorta says it is. And as far as I'm concerned, people who put an inordinate level of stock in what invisible sky fairies tell them is 'healthy' or 'unhealthy' are displaying a demonstrably unhealthy practice, as you are doing at this moment. See how that works?
|
|
djorno
Sophomore
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_yellow.png)
@djorno
Posts: 322
Likes: 81
|
Post by djorno on Feb 20, 2023 17:04:51 GMT
Well homosexuality is a demonstrably unhealthy practice. No it isn't. Your entire belief system is bullshit. Oh it most certainly is. In fact any form of sex outside the confines of marriage between a man and a woman is unhealthy. The reason you don’t see this is because you have partly deluded yourself and partly been indoctrinated into thinking that there is no such thing as sin and accountability. You think defending sin makes you a “decent person”, when what you’re inadvertently doing is hindering those people from getting healed, not helping them.
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on Feb 20, 2023 17:06:52 GMT
Not when you verbally abuse those that follow person of said religion it isn't. If the religion is evil and teaches harmful things that cause division and suffering, then I reserve the right to take any and all means necessary to expose that. Sometimes that requires language which religious people like you might find uncomfortable. If you or myself ever said that you or I hated Judaism, & Jewish person accused you or myself of bigotry, & we responded "no, we hate the religion, not the person, I can assure you that the person would not accept it. Do you know why? Because Judaism is in their bones. Regardless if the person is Reform or Orthodox, the religion is the air they breathe. Okay two things here: 1) This dialogue is totally irrelevant, as we are not talking about Judaism, you are NOT Jewish, I never said anything about Judaism here, and I don't care what a Jewish person might think if I did. I'm part Jewish myself (by ethnicity). You don't have the right (or the insight) to tell me what a Jewish person would or wouldn't accept. Do you know why? Because I'm Jewish and you're not! And I'm telling the religion is NOT in my bones. It's nothing more than a tradition of tribalism based on superstition which I do not conform to nor follow. Okay. 2) I do hate Judaism! But not for the same reasons as I hate Christianity. Judaism is also harmful (in a different way) and I'd be happy to have that discussion with to any other person (Jewish or not) if it ever became relevant. But it's not relevant here because Christianity is the religion that we're talking about and the one that harms more people in the society that we live in. Jewish Americans tend to be more liberal and progressive in their ideology. They're not out there trying to actively force their religion on everyone else through legislature. Jews generally speaking keep their religion to themselves. If Christians acted like Jews in this way, we wouldn't have many of the problems we have. So too, is it with Christianity (& frankly, practically all world religions). For us it is our way of life, no matter where we are from. It's a way of life that I reject as ignorant and harmful. It does not promote rational ideas or reasonable attitudes. Yes, I realize that people can change their nationality. That is why I said "much like one's own nationality is both choice or something that one is born into." Okay, well then I agree with that. But how does THAT help your defense of religion? If the religion causes harm or teaches unreasonable ideas and you choose to remain part of it, then you are to blame for the harm that you promote. Religions don't exist in a vacuum; they exist because people take part in them and practice them. So the blame is with the people (e.g. Christians)! Have you or have you not ever said "love the sinner, hate the sin?" (referring specifically to homosexuals) Just because I do not agree with something does not mean I wish any harm on the people. And I never claimed that it "meant" you wished harm on people. That is a straw man argument! My position is that you CAUSE harm with your rhetoric, whether you mean it or not. When you express your unsolicited opinions about how much you disagree with homosexuality, you are causing harm my dear! When Christians hold up signs that say "God hates fags", they would say they don't with harm on anyone either. On the contrary, they usually follow that up with "Jesus Saves" as though they have a homosexual's best interest in mind. What you do is no different from what they do! You're just using nicer language to spew the same hateful garbage! You and djorno are just as guilty as they are, you're just not as loud or flagrant about it. As Sarge already told you, "People aren't obligated to like you or approve of your life. They are only obligated to not discriminate based on protected statuses." You hate me only because I do not support the homosexual lifestyle. Doesn't mean I hate Gay or Lesbian people. Actually, it does mean that! And that's one of your main problems. You have a very distorted view of what constitutes "love and hate" because you get your morals from the Bible (which also has a perverted view of love and hate). You usage of those terms is not consistent with the attitude that you display towards people, nor is it consistent with how those words are used in a non-religious context. Like I said: "There ain't no hate like Christian love!" Just that there is a reason why there are only 2 genders, no matter what the leftist agenda try to promote. Well there's a reason why you are WRONG. It's called science! There are in fact more than two genders, there are many. Because gender is a social construct and not tied to biology. What you probably meant was that there are only two SEXES. But that is also WRONG! Sex is about combinations and how they express themselves physically. And just because the two most common expressions are what most people recognizes as "male" and "female", that doesn't erase all of the other sexes that manifest. And if you studied biology (specifically related to genetics and chromosomal expression) you'd understand that. And if you'd studied gender psychology, you'd understand why sex and gender are two different things. But haven't; you've studied the Bible, which says that wizards performed magic, animals spoke, a man survived in the stomach of a fish for 3 days, and people came back to life after being dead. You believe in a bunch of unscientific nonsense written by ignorant men thousands of years ago. People had less education than the average 12 year old today! And that's why you have such a one-dimensional and erroneous understand of sex and biology, and why you use this ignorance to justify your HATEFUL attitude towards the LGBTQ community (which you call love). It isn't a "leftist" agenda that you're fighting - it's SCIENCE. Science that you don't understand and don't care to investigate. And that's the problem with religion - it keeps people trapped in these stagnant, harmful ideas that should have no place in modern society. Do you remember Knight in Black Leather from the original IMDB message forums? He was Gay, yet, he accepted Church teaching regarding homosexual acts, & chose chastity. There are also Jewish NAZIS, and black WHITE SUPREMACISTS too. So what? There are self-hating people in every minority demographic. That's not a new or unusual phenomenon! He respected me on these forums, & I in turn, respected his, without ever getting into any kind of heated confrontation or condemnation of one or the other. Okay, he's entitled to respect you and you're entitled to respect him. I don't respect EITHER of you - and as you just got finished pointing out, I'm not obligated to. Neither of you has ever given me a reason to respect your positions, beliefs, ideas, or arguments. So I don't. Respect is something that is EARNED, and you haven't earned and therefore don't deserve it. There are a lot of reasons people become Gay, Lesbian Bi, etc. And you have absolutely no idea what those reasons are because you haven't studied gender psychology or any related field and you have no expertise on the subject. So stop trying to "explain" things that you're not qualified to explain. Abuse is only just one factor. You don't know that! You have no evidence to support that idea; it's just a belief that you have. The Catholic Church - & most other Christian Churches - do not teach that just being Gay, or Lesbian, etc. is in & of itself, evil. Actually most Christian churches in the United States DO teach that. Evangelical Baptists churches still teach that homosexuality is purely a choice and many of them believe in the pseudoscientific harmful practice of "deconversion" (which is rejected by all mainstream science). They actively teach that you can "pray the gay away" and that such attractions are caused when people let the devil into their hearts. So don't give me any of this bullshit about Christian acceptance of sexual orientation. Yes, I'm aware that the Catholic Church no longer teaches that, but while yours represents the largest denomination, the Protestants and Mormons collectively outnumber you nationwide, which means their influence has net larger negative impact. There is even a patron saint of gay men. It teaches that the very sexual acts are sinful, but, they also teach the exact same thing when Straight people do these things too, including living together without first being married, etc. Yeah, but that's not a solution to the problem. It actually makes it much worse! Teaching people that because of their sexual identity that they are fundamentally broken, and that acting on what is natural to them is "sinful" against an invisible God who deems it sinful for no rational reason whatsoever CAUSES harm. There is nothing wrong with homosexual behavior that anyone can demonstrate. People who do that are NOT broken, and they're harming no one. The only person who is theoretically harmed by this action is your imaginary sky daddy, who is apparently so weak, fragile, and pathetic that whenever he's spying on two people having sex in a way that he doesn't like, it offends him (for reasons). And then to gaslight those people by telling them that something is wrong with them - what a weak ass god you have! The Catholic Church rejects sexual psychology and rationalism, because they've canonized these writings BEFORE having any proper understanding of their implication. They've created both the problem AND a solution to the problem of their creation. And that's how they're able to trap gay people into a cycle of dependency in what is essentially a miserable life of servitude and sycophancy to an organization which has robbed people blind of their humanity and innocence. What the Church has actually done was BREAK the person mentally and emotionally so that they can sell them a magic cure of snake oil (salvation), as long as they resist the person they are and follow the Church's ideology. It's the classic cult mentality "follow us so that we can save you from yourself". People do not need saving and they don't need irrational rules about who they can love or make love to. That is psychological manipulation designed to control the masses. Catholicism hates individuality and freedom! What they want are SHEEP, and that's proved over and over again in the writings that you venerate. No, it is not inappropriate to make the comparison of sexual orientation to mental illness or disability. Yes, it is! Because ASD including Aspergers' Syndrome are diagnosable developmental disabilities. Homosexual orientation is not! One can be treated; the other cannot. One causes difficulties negotiating life when untreated BECAUSE of the condition; the other does not. So you're comparing unlike things in what's called a false equivalency. In many ways, we suffer because of stereotypes bigotry, bullying , & discrimination placed on us from society as well. Yes, you do. But that does not justify a comparison of the conditions; only of the behaviors that people express towards those who have have the conditions. But the conditions themselves are not equivalent (as one is a disorder and the other is not). Speaking personally, I really wish I didn't have Aspergers' based how much it impacted my life; everything from school to work, & overall treatment from my peers etc. That is why I doubt people would actually want to be Gay or Lesbian, based on how they were ostracized in the past. I believe you. But it took having a developmental order and living with the consequences of that (including being ostracized by society) in order for you to be able to understand what LGBTQ people experience. You have a perspective that gives you insight that many of your fellow Christians do not have. Which means that you are able to empathize with the LGBTQ community in spite of your religion, not because of it! The problem is, you've also been indoctrinated into (and psychologically dependent on) the ideas imparted onto you from this religion. And that includes this notion of "sin" and "salvation" (generally) and "sexual sins" specifically. And it's trapped you in a state of cognitive dissonance whereby you subconsciously recognize the problem that homophobia causes (and probably that much of it can be linked to your religion), while simultaneously justifying the homophobic attitudes with your acceptance of Catholic dogma. You probably don't want to be homophobic because you recognize the harm that homophobia has on people. And yet you are, because you have deeply held homophobic convictions that your psychological dependency on your religion will not allow you to deconstruct logically. So you're literally trapped in this in-between state of both condemning homophobia while practicing it. And you take solace in ridiculous and non-helpful expressions like "love the sinner, hate the sin". Well, I'm sorry but that's not a thing! You don't get to assert that someone has a "sinful nature" (which you hate) and then also claim to love them despite that. That's called kettle logic and in it's indicative of cognitive dissonance. It does nothing for the LGBTQ community and only justifies the homophobia of those who harm them. And I know people who were atheist, or at the very least, not at all religious, who also were homophobic towards Gays, or Lesbians, etc. Yeah, I have too. But that's hardly relevant. Atheists are not guided by some unifying principle that suggests that we ought to behave one way or the other towards people, nor does atheism claim to be a source of moral inspiration to anyone. Atheism is simply the position of not believing that a god exists. There's no doctrine or tenets of atheism that make any condemning statements about homosexual behavior. It is very good that you help those in the developing world. That said, where in my post did I say that Christians in the USA suffer persecution. You didn't. I just wanted to make sure (for anyone who was reading) that it was clear that I was not endorsing that common Christian trope.
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on Feb 20, 2023 17:09:42 GMT
How about a simple yes or no then? Was that a correct characterization of your argument? Nah, I'm already bored of chatting with you. Cool, that makes two of us!
|
|
djorno
Sophomore
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_yellow.png)
@djorno
Posts: 322
Likes: 81
|
Post by djorno on Feb 20, 2023 17:09:45 GMT
Well homosexuality is a demonstrably unhealthy practice. Unhealthy to whom? Yourself, because it disturbs you? As a sexual act (and as Gore Vidal sanely and sensibly pointed out some years ago, there are no homosexual people, just homosexual acts; and yes I'm aware not everyone will agree with that, but I profoundly do) it is no more 'healthy' or 'unhealthy' than any heterosexual act, physically. You of course, are attempting to assign it the status of psychologically unhealthy act because your god kinda sorta says it is. And as far as I'm concerned, people who put an inordinate level of stock in what invisible sky fairies tell them is 'healthy' or 'unhealthy' are displaying a demonstrably unhealthy practice, as you are doing at this moment. See how that works? I actually agree with you and whoever this Gore Vidal person is. But homosexuality is unhealthy both physically and psychologically.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 20, 2023 17:15:54 GMT
Unhealthy to whom? Yourself, because it disturbs you? As a sexual act (and as Gore Vidal sanely and sensibly pointed out some years ago, there are no homosexual people, just homosexual acts; and yes I'm aware not everyone will agree with that, but I profoundly do) it is no more 'healthy' or 'unhealthy' than any heterosexual act, physically. You of course, are attempting to assign it the status of psychologically unhealthy act because your god kinda sorta says it is. And as far as I'm concerned, people who put an inordinate level of stock in what invisible sky fairies tell them is 'healthy' or 'unhealthy' are displaying a demonstrably unhealthy practice, as you are doing at this moment. See how that works? I actually agree with you and whoever this Gore Vidal person is. But homosexuality is unhealthy both physically and psychologically. Your obsession with how consenting adults love and express love is certainly psychologically unhealthy... You need to give your head a wobble mate.
|
|
|
Post by amyghost on Feb 20, 2023 17:17:59 GMT
Unhealthy to whom? Yourself, because it disturbs you? As a sexual act (and as Gore Vidal sanely and sensibly pointed out some years ago, there are no homosexual people, just homosexual acts; and yes I'm aware not everyone will agree with that, but I profoundly do) it is no more 'healthy' or 'unhealthy' than any heterosexual act, physically. You of course, are attempting to assign it the status of psychologically unhealthy act because your god kinda sorta says it is. And as far as I'm concerned, people who put an inordinate level of stock in what invisible sky fairies tell them is 'healthy' or 'unhealthy' are displaying a demonstrably unhealthy practice, as you are doing at this moment. See how that works? I actually agree with you and whoever this Gore Vidal person is. But homosexuality is unhealthy both physically and psychologically. I'd like to see A.) your documented and peer-reviewed reasons for asserting this; and B.) your personal credentials and qualifications in the fields of mental and physical health that allow you to make this otherwise unqualified assertion. If, as I suspect. you can bring neither A or B to the table, stop wasting my time with another one of those personal opinions that bear a striking resemblance to assholes.
|
|
|
Post by lowtacks86 on Feb 20, 2023 17:24:14 GMT
Nope, totally straight. I just happen to be a decent human being, something people like you would never understand. Ok. So I’m an indecent human being for posting a video that goes over the possible reasons why homosexuals end up with that sexual orientation? Gotcha. Would I be equally indecent if I did the same thing regarding alcoholics, gamblers and drug addicts? "So I’m an indecent human being for posting a video that goes over the possible reasons why homosexuals end up with that sexual orientation? Gotcha." You're an indecent human for posting a video that is very misleading (again the video misconflates correlation with causation) and clearly is just trying to push a bigoted agenda rather than reach any real truthful conclusions. Imagine if someone posted a video on why black people commit more crime and it all it did was cite misleading pseudo science on genetics and race and IQ. By your own reasoning that's not bigoted, right? They're just posting a video and not push a hatefilled agenda, right? "Would I be equally indecent if I did the same thing regarding alcoholics, gamblers and drug addicts?" The big difference is those are considered mental disorders by pshyclogists, homosexuality isn't (the DSM doesn't label it as such). If you're going to pretend to care about science, than you would have to at least acknowledge that (you're not going to because you don't actually care about science)
|
|
djorno
Sophomore
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_yellow.png)
@djorno
Posts: 322
Likes: 81
|
Post by djorno on Feb 20, 2023 17:27:30 GMT
Ok. So I’m an indecent human being for posting a video that goes over the possible reasons why homosexuals end up with that sexual orientation? Gotcha. Would I be equally indecent if I did the same thing regarding alcoholics, gamblers and drug addicts? "So I’m an indecent human being for posting a video that goes over the possible reasons why homosexuals end up with that sexual orientation? Gotcha." You're an indecent human for posting a video that is very misleading (again the video misconflates correlation with causation) and clearly is just trying to push a bigoted agenda rather than reach any real truthful conclusions. Imagine if someone posted a video on why black people commit more crime and it all it did was cite misleading pseudo genetics and race and IQ. By your own reasoning that's bigoted, right? The video doesn’t claim there’s an outright causation. It merely suggests that based on data there seems to be a connection.
|
|
|
Post by lowtacks86 on Feb 20, 2023 17:33:47 GMT
"So I’m an indecent human being for posting a video that goes over the possible reasons why homosexuals end up with that sexual orientation? Gotcha." You're an indecent human for posting a video that is very misleading (again the video misconflates correlation with causation) and clearly is just trying to push a bigoted agenda rather than reach any real truthful conclusions. Imagine if someone posted a video on why black people commit more crime and it all it did was cite misleading pseudo genetics and race and IQ. By your own reasoning that's bigoted, right? The video doesn’t claim there’s an outright causation. It merely suggests that based on data there seems to be a connection. "The video doesn’t claim there’s an outright causation" That's because the person that made the video is at least smart enough to know they can't actually say there's direct causation, (again there's no actual scientific evidence). Instead what they do is hint at it and point people in that direction and then when called it out it they can just "Well I never said there was direct causation, I'm just reporting information!". It's essentially their way of pushing lies while maintaining plausible deniability. It's actually the same tactic Holocaust deniers like to use ("Well I'm not saying 6 million jews didn't die, but do we really have all the information!") "It merely suggests that based on data there seems to be a connection" Yeah, it's called correlation, not causation, I've already addressed this several times. Again, ice cream sales go up when crime increases, that's a correlation, not a direct causation.
|
|
|
Post by amyghost on Feb 20, 2023 17:38:08 GMT
"So I’m an indecent human being for posting a video that goes over the possible reasons why homosexuals end up with that sexual orientation? Gotcha." You're an indecent human for posting a video that is very misleading (again the video misconflates correlation with causation) and clearly is just trying to push a bigoted agenda rather than reach any real truthful conclusions. Imagine if someone posted a video on why black people commit more crime and it all it did was cite misleading pseudo genetics and race and IQ. By your own reasoning that's bigoted, right? The video doesn’t claim there’s an outright causation. It merely suggests that based on data there seems to be a connection. Sort of like the way the 'data' you feed into your head suggests that homosexual activity is physically and mentally unhealthy, even though you can present no evidence that actually substantiates this claim, beyond the laughably tenuous 'connections' presented in the video.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 20, 2023 17:40:49 GMT
"So I’m an indecent human being for posting a video that goes over the possible reasons why homosexuals end up with that sexual orientation? Gotcha." You're an indecent human for posting a video that is very misleading (again the video misconflates correlation with causation) and clearly is just trying to push a bigoted agenda rather than reach any real truthful conclusions. Imagine if someone posted a video on why black people commit more crime and it all it did was cite misleading pseudo genetics and race and IQ. By your own reasoning that's bigoted, right? The video doesn’t claim there’s an outright causation. It merely suggests that based on data there seems to be a connection. The video is posted by an arsehole, aimed at eejits like yourself to reinforce your mentalism... Don't forget to send the clown your financial donation to his 'ministry' so he can live in luxury, and buy a new BMW or private jet.
|
|
|
Post by faustus5 on Feb 20, 2023 18:14:58 GMT
In fact any form of sex outside the confines of marriage between a man and a woman is unhealthy. Just more mindless bullshit. You really have no grasp of objective reality, do you?
|
|
djorno
Sophomore
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_yellow.png)
@djorno
Posts: 322
Likes: 81
|
Post by djorno on Feb 20, 2023 18:24:07 GMT
The video doesn’t claim there’s an outright causation. It merely suggests that based on data there seems to be a connection. "The video doesn’t claim there’s an outright causation" That's because the person that made the video is at least smart enough to know they can't actually say there's direct causation, (again there's no actual scientific evidence). Instead what they do is hint at it and point people in that direction and then when called it out it they can just "Well I never said there was direct causation, I'm just reporting information!". It's essentially their way of pushing lies while maintaining plausible deniability. It's actually the same tactic Holocaust deniers like to use ("Well I'm not saying 6 million jews didn't die, but do we really have all the information!") "It merely suggests that based on data there seems to be a connection" Yeah, it's called correlation, not causation, I've already addressed this several times. Again, ice cream sales go up when crime increases, that's a correlation, not a direct causation. Well the numbers don’t lie. Data shows a disproportionately high number of gay men were sexually abused during childhood. This suggests that it had some sort of contribution to their sexual and emotional development. This is supported by a 2009 report which revealed that 74% of bisexuals had were sexually abused as kids. A 2001 article in the British journal of psychology revealed that children who are abused as children are much more likely than the average population to abuse other children in adulthood. “Among 747 males the risk of being a perpetrator was positively correlated with reported sexual abuse victim experiences … A high percentage of male subjects abused in childhood by a female relative became perpetrators. Having been a victim was a strong predictor of becoming a perpetrator, as was an index of parental loss in childhood.”- Journal of Psychology Here’s a quote from a prominent lesbian feminist and academic Camille Paglia: ”“Every single gay person I know has some sort of drama going on, back in childhood. Something was happening that we’re not allowed to ask about anymore.”She was referring to both bad relationships with parents as well as sexual abuse or other factors.
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on Feb 20, 2023 18:37:03 GMT
There are no LGBTQ campaigns out there trying to recruit and proselytize to make more LGBTQ people!It’s literally all over advertisements, commercials, social media, billboards etc. No, it's literally NOT. See, I can do that too. Anything which can be asserted without evidence can also be DISMISSED without evidence. It’s even crept into movies, tv programmes and Disney shows and even some ultra liberal churches. You're confused. What you've done was conflate an honest attempt to promote tolerance and acceptance of other people with trying to turn people gay. And the reason you've conflated that is because you're an idiot who actually thinks that people can "turn" gay. But they can't, and that's not anyone's goal. What gay rights activists are doing is not equivalent to what Christians are doing. One group is spreading LOVE on billboards, your group is spreading HATE on billboards. But the group that's actively trying to take the rights away from the other is YOURS. There's no campaign to take your Christian rights (to hate) away. You're free to hate anyone you want and call it love. That's your right! But what you don't have the right to do is tell other people who they can love, or what gender they can identify as, or whether they can get married or not. Their agenda is one of tolerance and acceptance; your agenda is one of intolerance and division. And the main reason for it is an attempt to silence Christians and all opposition to it. No, that's not the REASON for it; it's the goal! The reason for it is because Christian opposition is harmful to LGBTQ people. You are the aggressor my friend, not them! Christians are the aggressors who like to play the victim because they have a persecution complex. The only people doing the persecuting are people like you! It’s about sanitising and normalising the sin of sexual immorality, affirming it as a good and natural thing for society. No it isn't because there is no such thing as "sin" and there's nothing immoral about homosexuality. There is nothing harmful about it! You are harmful to society, not homosexuals.
|
|