I think we can come to some middle ground. You're looking at the 1% pulling the strings, I'm looking at the gays next door who want to live their lives in peace.
You're right that the 1% wants to push LGBTQXYZ ideology in order to normalize that which healthy people find appalling. I'm with you in that observation.
I'm right that the average gay who observed actual injustices such as the targeting that precipitated the Stonewall riots, the mishandling of the AIDS crisis, the murder of harmless innocents like Matthew Shepard, discrimination in the workplace and in the marketplace, unequal treatment under the law, or any number of other examples which collectively operated to drive gays underground, just wanted to be left alone. Hiding wasn't getting the job done, so the response, understandably, was to say, in effect, "Hey, listen up you cruel fucks, I'm here, I'm your neighbor, and I'm sick of being treated as subhuman." So, pride events started up as a way to peaceably say this, the first being on the one-year anniversary of Stonewall.
Granted, they've gotten well out of hand over the last decade or so, and I'd agree this phenomenon is driven by the agenda of the 1%. But the motivation of the rank and file gay population was not sinister, and still isn't. Those of us awake enough to think are appalled at what is being done in our name.
There was a time when "pride" meant coming out of the shadows, being your authentic self, pursuing happiness, and being treated equally under the law.
That was accomplished around 15 years ago. Since then it's been overreach after overreach by the activists, particularly when cancerous trans ideology took root.
Most of us just want to live our lives in peace and couldn't give two fucks whether or not you think our activities are unnatural or sinful.
Sounds like a dare to me! Even if you didn't have the balls to say it! It's good to see, BTW, that you've acknowledged by your silence that most boys who are sexually abused are victims of straight people. Maybe we're getting somewhere!
There are six passages often cited by people like you, let's knock 'em down:
-
The story of Sodom and Gomorrah - Ezekiel makes clear that the sin of Sodom was cruelty, specifically how they treated the poor. Yet you'll take a single word - "know" - and twist that into homosexuality being the reason for the city's demise. In other words, you make the story mean what you want it to mean, but what you say it means isn't actually in the text and is in fact contradicted elsewhere.
-
Leviticus 18:21 and 20:13 - These are provisions of the Levitical Law. Christians are not bound by the Levitical Law. It is of no effect. If you take these passages seriously, you had better stop eating pork and shellfish too.
That leaves three passages in the New Testament, all found in the Epistles of Paul. Interestingly, in 2 Corinthians, Paul clarifies that every word of God shall be established by two or three witnesses. Yet he's the only NT author that says anything at all about homosexuality. Where are the other witnesses? Where is Jesus weaving that tHe GheYs ArE bAd into the Sermon on the Mount if it matters so much to him? Anyhow, if you're taking Paul seriously then you better make sure your woman doesn't speak up in church.
Anyway, we have:
-
Romans 1:21-31 - When read in context, Paul is not condemning homosexuality. He's condemning Paganism and the accompanying debauchery.
-
1 Corinthians 6:9-10 and 1 Timothy 1:9-10 - These passages originally used the word "arsenokoitais." This is an interesting word because it doesn't really appear in other Greek literature. It appears to have been period slang. So the translators were free to make it say whatever they wanted. They went with a condemnation of homosexuality. But if you actually break the word into its etymology, it translates literally to "man of many beds." This is not an injunction against homosexuality; it is a condemnation of promiscuity. And if Paul wanted to say what you think he said, he was a Roman citizen writing in Greek. He had plenty of words available if he wanted to be clear about his views on homosexuality.
So, yeah, the Bible does not condemn homosexuality. Adultery, fornication, promiscuity? Sure. But there is no applicable passage regarding homosexuality. It's nothing but Christian dogma based off the presumed opinion of a guy named Paul.
"One thing you can be absolutely 100% certain of is that if you asked God what to do about your perverse tendancies, and the answer was, "practice them," IT WAS NOT GOD WHO ANSWERED YOU." And there it is: your insufferable self-righteousness. Never mind that I am chaste as I look for a good man who will share my commitment. Everybody must see God as you do. Everybody must obey him the same way you do. If not then it's "perverse tendencies" all the way down! Makes me wonder what kind of beam is sticking out of your eye, you hypocrite.
Simply put: God made me gay. I assume my soul agreed to it before being born, but God was in charge of the development of my brain structure. What I do with that is between him and me, but I can tell you God isn't going to condemn ME for something HE did.
Reply or not, I don't care and won't read it. You're ignorant but think you're wise. You're as bad as any NPC I've ever met and I'm over it. Take care.
Oh, you think that straight men don't diddle boys? Have you been paying attention at all to the world around you? Pedophiles are opportunistic. Boys are fucked by straight men with alarming frequency, because a prepubescent boy looks a whole lot more like a girl than he does a man.
Ok, let's test your theory with some more math. ~90% of molestation is committed by people who do not identify as gay, simply because there aren't enough gays to make the numbers work otherwise. You say 75% of child molestations are same sex in nature. So that means that 67.5% (0.9 x 0.75) of the molestations are committed by people who identify as straight, but are in fact fucking boys. Since self-identified gays commit ~10% of the molestation, that means there are 7 times as many pedophiles who claim to be straight (but are actually gay because they fuck boys, according to you) as there are openly gay pedophiles. Since self-identified gays are about 3-5% of the population, and assuming the ratio of pedophiles is the same in both groups, that means that around 28% (4 x 7) of the straight population is secretly gay. Which is ridiculous on its face. Your claims, turned into numbers, start to look pretty damn retarded.
I hope you're getting a sense for the degree to which I cannot take you seriously.
I expressed no "self-immolation," whatever you mean by that. What I said was that it wasn't until I got to the point where I asked God directly, rather than trusting Christian tradition, that he told me to accept myself, find a decent man to commit to, and be a good person. Meanwhile, I was living what would be called a good Christian life, complete with service and celibacy. So stop putting words in my mouth as if it's some kind of own, you self-righteous midwit.
By "there is an entire book written on that subject" I'm assuming from context that you are referring to the Bible? Please, oh please, dare me to explain to you exactly how the Bible says exactly nothing in condemnation of homosexuality when it's understood in context and is translated correctly, instead of through the distorted lens of traditional Christianity. Please!
Or not. I'm kinda getting tired of arguing with an idiot.
The vast majority - ~90% - of child molestation is committed by straight people. Let's do some math, with numbers you might find credible: Gays are (according to you, I suspect) 2% of the population. Gays are supposedly 3.5x more likely to molest children. 2 x 3.5 = 7% of the molestation is committed by gays. 100 - 7 = 93. If you're concerned about child abuse, your plan for addressing it better include talking to the straight people who are doing 93% of it instead of obsessing about tHe HomOs.
In a social species, which those of us humans who get out of our basement are, genes are not passed on by "survival of the fittest." They are passed on by "survival of the family group." Anthropologically speaking, a gay man provides resources to the family group without contributing to the number of offspring that must be fed. Therefore, a family group with a smattering of gays in it is more likely to pass on their genetics to the next generation. So there's your evolutionary imperative.
If homosexuality were so self-terminating, why do we keep on showing up? By your logic, the "gene" would have selected out thousands of years ago. So maybe the biology is a tad more complex than you're expecting. That's why I've pointed to the evidence for epigenetics - which as it happens actually has at least as much to do with how we turn out as genetics does. Clearly, there is an evolutionary advantage conferred by having a few gay people around or we wouldn't be having this discussion.
It's also worth pointing out that homosexual behavior is rampant throughout the animal kingdom: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_animals_displaying_homosexual_behavior
As for your "victim" point, I've not engaged in that here so I don't see how it's relevant beyond your desire to kvetch. On the contrary, people like you are vanishingly rare around here. I haven't been "victimized" at all. The vast majority just don't care about the topic, as evidenced by the pathetic number of upvotes this post received.
Please let me know if you come up with more "rational thought" that I can demolish. Before you do, understand that I've been studying this for many years. I know more, and I know your arguments better than you do.
Ok, do YOU have any fact or proof that it's NOT biologically determined? Or just personal feelings?
As for myself, I have a lifetime of experience that convinces me. If that's not enough for you, take a look at the video I linked to. A list of citations to relevant research is in the description.
There's a difference between someone who is born with specific brain wiring and someone who is trying to process trauma.
Some boys who are abused grow up to be men who seek to be dominated sexually by other men. This is the psyche's attempt to process the trauma by "returning to the scene of the crime." These men hate that they have this compulsion, but they don't understand what to do about it. They might call themselves gay in order to justify it, but they want neither intimacy nor relationship with the men who dominate them.
But these are not gay men; they are straight men who need understanding and a good therapist.
Yeah, statistically a boy is 33% more likely to be gay for each older brother his mother has borne. The theory is that the mother develops antibodies in response to carrying a boy, and those antibodies kick in and increase cortisol production in subsequent male pregnancies. The cortisol impacts fetal development.
Another clear statistical signal is if a mother's life is very stressful during gestation. (Again, cortisol. IIRC, ~4% of straight men report this, over 25% of gay men report this.) That theory fits me better.
It's like nature is saying either "I'm in trouble and need a resource provider if my genes are to be passed on" or "Ok, we have enough mouths to feed, time to make more resource providers so that the next generation can survive."
See, you say that gays need to acknowledge the problem, and I agree wholeheartedly. But you also look at people like Gays Against Groomers, who do exactly that, and say that ain't good enough 'cause they don't agree with you on everything. Pick a lane, man!
We can't be trained to be gay. What can, and does unfortunately, happen is a straight boy is sexually abused and traumatized, then as an adult he seeks out sex with men because psychologically he's "returning to the scene of the crime" in an attempt to address the trauma. But that's not a gay man. That's a straight man who needs compassion and a good therapist. I've met a few of these, and they always ask to be dominated because they're trying to process. They don't understand why, and are disgusted with themselves because of the compulsion. They don't want intimacy or a relationship. It's a big tell, and I wish them well and go on my way. But they are by no means a large portion of the population which identifies as gay. Maybe 10% or so, I'd guess.
Genuine homosexuality is about brain wiring that happens before birth. It's immutable. A gay guy can try to fake being straight, but he's not. A horny straight guy can have sexual activity with other guys, and thereby think he's gay, but he's not. Time and perspective resolves both scenarios.
Thanks for coming to my TED talk.
Epigenetics. Check out this roundup of the neuroscience: https://youtu.be/QCX2PJJ-2BA
"You advocate for a society free to 'do what thou will'" No, and don't hit me with that straw man argument. You're insinuating that Satanic influence has led me to my position, and I don't appreciate it. I have done nothing but denounce bad behavior. I think gay men are happiest when they find a good man to commit to and live a peaceful, monogamous life. That's what I advocate, and in my experience that's what the majority of gay men are looking for. So don't feed me that bullshit.
I used to think like you - that there was something wrong with being gay. I tried to be straight for 20 years of my adult life, because that's what I was told God wanted of me. It didn't work; it did a lot of damage. But it also forced me to seek my own relationship with God rather than trust those who claim to know him. For that, it was worth it.
You know what God told me, once I had enough faith to listen? That he doesn't care about homosexuality. He expects us to love one another and to respect each others' agency, and to act in accordance with those values. He also showed me how the traditional Christian view of the Bible is incorrect on the topic, being based off of mistranslations and out-of-context interpretations. We can go into that if you like, and I can show you exactly how each passage cited from scripture is incorrectly applied. Suffice to say, after millennia being passed through the hands of men, both honest and deceitful, the original truths have not survived unscathed in the arbitrary compilation that we today call the Bible. To say that "the Bible has never been wrong" is to read it in an exceedingly selective fashion. God's word has never been wrong, but not everything in the Bible is God's word, and not every Christian tradition and dogma is found in the Bible.
After 20 years of trying to see it your way, I have identified every flaw in your thinking, because they used to be flaws in my thinking.
"Sexual deviancy is the #1 cause of declining birthrates..." Yes, and it ain't because of the gays. Gays are 4-5% of the population and always have been. You have rightly mentioned heterosexual deviancy; if you want to address declining birthrates, you ought to be focusing on that rather than turning gays into the scapegoat for heterosexual misbehavior - it's a really bad argument to say that there aren't enough babies because too many straight people get tricked or led into being gay. It's utterly ridiculous. If you're born straight, you're straight. I wouldn't ever try to persuade you to think otherwise, and I expect the same respect for the fact that I was born gay. I wouldn't have chosen it, believe you me, particularly with my Christian upbringing. My life has been filled with loneliness that I didn't want, and Christian tradition told me that it was because something was wrong with ME, even though I am one of the kindest, most loving, most God-fearing people you're likely to meet in real life.
If I, a gay man, were to fool a woman into being my beard, marry her, and have kids with her, that would be a supreme act of cruelty. What woman deserves to be tied to a man who doesn't really want to touch her and can't truly be her lover? What child deserves to be born to parents who are alienated from each other, just going through the motions because one of them is trying to fulfill societal expectations? By living a lie of being "straight," I would hurt people. Better to let her find a good man who will be able to love her at every level; let their children have parents who truly trust and love each other. Would it be fair to you if a lesbian were to lie to you and get you to marry her? Would you be happy in a marriage where she regards you as physically revolting? Would it be fair to your children for her to harbor such a secret? No, you want a woman who is absolutely enthralled by you. Is it fair of you to expect me to live a different standard?
So the choice your philosophy leaves me with is: 1) Be deceitful and build a life on a lie, resulting in innocents being deeply harmed, or 2) be lonely for the rest of my life (which also does nothing to address your concern of declining birthrates). Are YOU displaying God's love by leaving me trapped in that choice? Or are you choosing your traditional dogmas over God's commandment to love your neighbor?
"A number of gay men report incontinence after repeated encounters, meaning they need diapers because of anal sex." Agreed, it's not healthy. It's also a myth. There is a fetishist subculture, maybe about 5-10% of gays, who just want bigger and bigger stuff shoved into them. These guys damage themselves and can have the problems you mention. Run of the mill anal sex causes no such issues. An erection is smaller than that firm poo you had the other day. If pushing one of those out on a daily basis doesn't cause you permanent damage, then neither will anal sex cause a gay man permanent damage. Find a straight woman who's into anal and ask her if she's incontinent. There's your answer.
"Marriage is the model between Christ and man, played out between man and woman." I absolutely agree, and I have two parents, five siblings, and 14 niblings whom I adore who are all practitioners or products of that model. It's an ideal, one that needs to be the norm if society is to survive. But that's not the path God set me on when he built my brain structure. Your ideal should be the norm, but to say that God expects it as an absolute is Christian dogma, cannot be supported from scripture, and has been utterly refuted in my mind by means of painful personal experience. He expects us to be moral people, but homosexuality isn't a factor in that standard.