HOMOSEXUALITY IN THE U.S

HOMOSEXUALITY IN THE U.S.

Hi Americans. In this thread, I`m gonna to get straight on how you`re explained why homosexuality is the variation of the norm and why it mustn`t be banned. In addition, how different punishments for hate speech towards gays are justified. For instance, dismissal for hate replica towards gays at work or even fining for hate speech in public.

As far as I understand that is justifed this way. The gays don`t bother or hurt anybody. Plus, homosexuality isn`t a mental desease or illness.
So others should mind their own business. Being a gay is a right and it has to be protected. No one can violate human rights. That`s why everybody who expresses their hate to gays must be blamed, got fired or fined.

Do I catch the logic correctly? I bet I do.

However, the same logic is valid for coprophages and naked people walking in public.

Coprophages don`t bother or hurt anybody too, thereby coprophagy is a private matter of a person. So others should mind their own business. That`s why everybody who expresses their hate to coprophags must be blamed, got fired or fined. The same is valid for naked people in public.

So there`s the question to answer. Do you agree that coprophagy and walking naked in public are ok? I bet, the vast majority of Americans would say "Geez! Of course no!". Moreover, the vast majority of them would agree we have the right to criticize and show disapproval to the mentioned people whatsoever.

Therefore, we have the right to criticize gays at least. No one must be got fired of fined for so-called hate speech.

Try to refute my Coprophagy argument.

Other urls found in this thread:

telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/12/now-boys-can-wear-skirts-to-school---as-new-gender-neutral-unifo/
twitter.com/AnonBabble

man I had a pretty good opinion of Russian posters too

would expect this from a Pole

So you have nothing to say excluding demonsrating you disappointment? You`d better try to disprove my argument.

BUMP

>for hate replica towards gays at work
I meant a hate remark. Not replica.

BUMP

being gay isn't a choice, nor is it a fetish

feel bad that I even fucking replied to this godawful post, i'm very glad we put your country into a recession

>being gay isn't a choice, nor is it a fetish
Really? Don`t you`re tried to prove that one have the right to choose their sexual orientation in America?

> godawful post
Why so?

Fucking this.

Im bi and I didnt choose to be so.

Im also the host of a local pride event this week so if there is any questions about that kind of stuff I might aswell answer.

>inb4 haha sweden gay

How much do they pay in Ediniaya Rossiya to shitpost on Sup Forums?

What the fuck did I just read...

In Russia the common opinion on homosexuality is that thing may be formed during raising, too. So that`s not a genetic programm in all cases. That`s why the propaganda of homosexuality should be banned.

bi just means you're a fag on the fence

you cannot tell a normal person you like to fuck men and not be seen as a fag

Bexause demigender-fluid-helicopter ,,_genders_'' are not real. Homosexuality isn't a choice, but being a fag or gay is. There is a difference.

>In Russia the common opinion on homosexuality is that thing may be formed during raising, too.
>opinion

That migh be your opinion, but the fact is that you are born gay, straight, bi or whatever.

However, it is possible to raise someone into thinking that what they like is wrong and that they must change or repress their sexual orientation. So in one way you are correct.
They will never be compleatly straight but they may consider a heterosexual relationship if a homosexual one is impossible.

I like to fuck men and women. I currently have a gf but before that I had a bf.

I arrange pride events so I really dont care if people see me as a faggot or whatnot.

Any of the LGBT is a mental illness. Homosexuality is a choice. You don't suddenly be attracted to people of your own gender. You were raised that way albeit in a really discrete manner and the parents would usually not even notice that they are doing it. There really isn't any evolutionary advantage for people to be gay in the past and it will certainly have no advantage in the future.

Everybody here needs to read this and realize they're agreeing with fundamentalist Muslims when they're shitting on gay people

Gay people are degenerates user. Stop being deluded.

Once again, everybody reading this needs to realize they're saying the exact same shit as fundamentalist Muslims

Maybe that'll get people to realize how fucking dumb they're being

>There really isn't any evolutionary advantage for people to be gay

There isn't any evolutionary advantage for people to be retarded either, yet here you are.

The world is full of weird stuff that isnt evolutionary perfect (mutations if you will) but that dosnt mean that there is anything wrong with it. You are born with these mutations and they will stick with you for the rest of your life.

It means I like to fuck both girls and boys. Yep, it means I'm still a fag.

For your learnings Coprophagy isn't a word anyone uses or really knows in English

This dude likely doesn't believe in evolution either so "mutation" is always a bad thing to him

You're on Sup Forums, choose your battles, this is literally one of the dumbest, scummiest, socially outcast websites on the Internet

I am the same, but why the pride parades?

So, what you're saying is that being homosexual is the same as being retarded. You mean that we need to avoid being gay like we avoid being retarded. You also mean that gay people should be treated the same way as retarded people. Thank you user. I agree with you wholeheartedly.

I am attracted to feet, I can't help it.

I'm gay and obnoxious fags disgust me. The moment subhuman trannies managed to infiltrate gay community the whole cause went down the toilet.

not really, people come here to post epic new memes and to take part in le anonymoose armee

Can confirm.

I'm gay as fuck.

I never asked for this.

>genders_'' are not real. Homosexuality isn't a choice
So your point it can`t be formed? I hold the opposite view. I don`t kinda support descrimination. However, I`m still not fully positive about the acceptence of gays. That`s because no one haven`t be able to disprove my Coprophagy argumen so far.

*have been able to disprove

Defiling corpses is a crime.

Just to prove that all third world countries are utter shit and utterly regressive. Please go back to your caves.

>So, what you're saying is that being homosexual is the same as being retarded.

Im saying that both effects you in the sense that they make you less evolutionary perfect and that in both cases you are born with it.

>You also mean that gay people should be treated the same way as retarded people.
Yes, it still means that those who are born with it should be allowed a decent life and be supported and respected.

Coprophagy is shit eating mate

coprophagy means lover of shit

lend lease was a mistake.

You think eating your own shit should be illegal? I think it's disgusting but I don't care if it's done in private. Also it's not illegal to say homosexuality is disgusting

No public sex act is legal in most places.

Nah, what you really meant was retarded people = homosexual people. Thanks to you now I know that being gay is still a bad thing. Thank you for that wonderful information user.

It should be tolerated but I still recognise it as defect. By logic, if it's not a choice it's a defect.

Eating shit is vulgar and many European countries do have tolerance for public nudity, to an extent

Is it normal to be gay but hate gay porn?

I dont really see the problem then? Theres records of people eating shit for religious rites since ancient times.

Is it normal to be straight and hate porn?

Yes

>shitposting
>

HETEROSEXUALITY IN THE U.S.

Hi Americans. In this thread, I`m gonna to get straight on how you`re explained why heterosexuality is the variation of the norm and why it mustn`t be banned. In addition, how different punishments for hate speech towards straights are justified. For instance, dismissal for hate replica towards straights at work or even fining for hate speech in public.

As far as I understand that is justifed this way. The straights don`t bother or hurt anybody. Plus, heterosexuality isn`t a mental desease or illness.
So others should mind their own business. Being a straight is a right and it has to be protected. No one can violate human rights. That`s why everybody who expresses their hate to straights must be blamed, got fired or fined.

Do I catch the logic correctly? I bet I do.

However, the same logic is valid for coprophages and naked people walking in public.

Coprophages don`t bother or hurt anybody too, thereby coprophagy is a private matter of a person. So others should mind their own business. That`s why everybody who expresses their hate to coprophags must be blamed, got fired or fined. The same is valid for naked people in public.

So there`s the question to answer. Do you agree that coprophagy and walking naked in public are ok? I bet, the vast majority of Americans would say "Geez! Of course no!". Moreover, the vast majority of them would agree we have the right to criticize and show disapproval to the mentioned people whatsoever.

Therefore, we have the right to criticize straights at least. No one must be got fired of fined for so-called hate speech.

Try to refute my Coprophagy argument.

Right, it's disgusting but there is no problem, it's just insecure Stone Age retards wanting to impose Stone Age values on everybody else

Like the stupid fucking Muslim in this thread

is it though?

>using logic on leftists
it's clear you don't understand them

this is usually more effective:
>every single homosexual is a pedophile and the vast majority are child rapists
this is how the left argues, and anyone who disagrees with you about the above statement is just trying to keep their child rape and snuff film ring going, they are personally murderers and they enjoy killing for its own sake

this is the appropriate level of dialogue to use in US politics

I am nat soc and see gays as much bigger problem then mussies

Make no mistake you freaks will be the first to see the new moon rising

> it's not illegal to say homosexuality is disgusting
Yes that`s not. However, I would have problems if I said at work that being a gay isn`t the norm and I disapprove gay people or something. The same would be if a person state it in public.

That`s how freedom of speech on the U..S. works.

*in the U.S.

>uses typical right-wing statement and argumentation
>this is how left argues
top kek

Yes thats freedom of speech. You are free to say anything you want but you need to remember that it is you who carries all responsibility of what you say.

>only third world countries disapprove of homosexuality

Feels good that I was born in the Netherlands :^)

> I would have problems if I said at work that being a gay isn`t the norm and I disapprove gay people or something. The same would be if a person state it in public.
>dissaprove gay people

Indeed. Just like saying you dissaprove people of some etnicity or religion and that seems resonable to me.

Hahahahaha holy shit you sound like an absolute fucking loser

Humans can't eat feces without making themselves physically ill, however they can have homosexual intercourse in a safe manner.

therefore coprophagy cannot be compared to homosexuality

It's absolutely legal to say this, but don't get butthurt when everybody hates you for it

Freedom of speech is a double edged sword, your stone aged views wouldnt be tolerated in any developed nation and rightfully so

Same here, why do all third worlders have such a hardon for debating homosexuality

>religion
Why can`t I disapprove any ideology such as religion? I mean to criticize it, to state its ideas are wrong and dangerous in some way. I bet I can. That`s democracy, buddy.

What happens if you protest against Orthodox Christianity in Russia?

>Why can`t I disapprove any ideology such as religion?

You can shit on religion as much as you want. There is nothing wrong with that and I do it to. However you can not criticize or be scream shit at someone just because they are religious.

>debating
There's no debate user. Homosexuality is a disease that needs to be cured. A couple of months in a correction camp would do just that.

I'm have no problem with you if you are homosexualist, but please do not force it on schoolboy.

telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/12/now-boys-can-wear-skirts-to-school---as-new-gender-neutral-unifo/

Or I might have sexual emergency right in middle of street and then become homosexualist too.

>but don't get butthurt when everybody hates you for it
That`s where you tolerance ends. In the medieval ages criticizing of religion was the terrible thing prohibited both by the law and bublic opinion. Now we have the same story concerning gays. Ony the sacred object has changed. Lol

Your arguments are flawed.
Walking around naked in public has an objective impact on others; it's unsanitary, exposes oneself to greater risk of injury, and is largely impractical when dealing with weather and the need to carry things on your person. Further, since nudity is a simple state of clothed or unclothed and easily changed, unlike sexual orientation, there is no real obstacle to requiring that any given individual comply to a requirement on the matter. Ultimately, it's entirely reasonable and strictly beneficial to prevent people from being naked in public.
The coprophagy argument is also flawed, because if performed in the privacy of their own home, and if steps are taken to ensure cleanliness after, there is indeed no valid reason to take action against the practice. Certainly it's unhealthy, but so is smoking, drinking, eating fast food, and any number of other common practices. One cannot be protected from one's self; provided it doesn't impact others, everyone has the right to harm themselves as they like. (to head off the inevitable retort, suicide is a different matter than generic self-harm due to the inherent finality of the act; as a permanent solution to a temporary problem is almost never warranted, suicide prevention is a sound and logical goal in almost all cases)

Ultimately, I'm of the opinion that homosexuality is not something worth making a big deal over and is not an innately negative trait, and that gays should be treated the same as any other person and held to the same standards.
It's that last point which presents the problem, because a gay person who holds themselves to normal standards of public decency is, in everyday life, indistinguishable from anybody else. The only way you can tell someone's sexuality at a glance is if they advertise it themselves, and it's THIS practice, not homosexuality, that presents a problem.
In short, gay people are just people who are gay. Fags are people who are gay and nothing else.

Being gay and being religious aren't the same thing

Man I do not like Russians anymore

I don't even get the obsession with hating gays. At least the dudes who are hardcore racists have an internally consistent reason why they hate blacks/jews/arabs/whatever because they believe that those groups are actively working against them or trying to inflict harm on their people.

Gays just want to be left alone to suck dick in peace.

>In Russia the common opinion on homosexuality is that thing may be formed during raising
General concensus is that sexual attraction is innate from birth, but social pressures can discourage or emphasize particular inclinations.
Basically, if your innate attraction is bi, but society frowns on homosexuality, then your attraction to the opposite sex will be encouraged and thus will overshadow the potential attraction to the same sex. If society later becomes more permissive, one's attraction towards the same sex will not longer be suppressed.

However, if one's innate attraction is purely straight, no about of upbringing can create an attraction towards the same sex. Social pressure and instruction can only increase or decrease one's desires and inclinations relative to eachother; it cannot create them from nothing.

Same fucking retarded reasons as racists, "they're out to indoctrinate our kids into gaydom and are all AIDS pedophiles!"

>A couple of months in a correction camp would do just that.

You cant fix what isnt wrong. But you seem very upset about the fact that ~4% of the worlds population wants to live with someone of the same sex. Does this affect your life in any substantial way?

>However you can not criticize or be scream shit at someone just because they are religious
I share the same point. I can`t mock or tease religious people. However, I can criticize their ideas and claim their totally wrong.

Nobody is forcing you to be gay as in the case with religion though.

>now-boys-can-wear-skirts-to-school
>can

>The schools have either dropped references to girls and boys in their dress codes or have rewritten their uniform policy to say that pupils as young as five can dress in the uniform in which they feel most comfortable.

OH MY THEY ARE FORCING US

Thats a stupid argument.
Also it is my right to get as much ill as I want.

I can abuse drugs and it doesn't hurt anyone so it's my own buisness.

Etc. There can be given billions of example how much of a bullshit this is.

Fact is: That a society works only if people contribute to it.

>let me tell you how logically and morally superior my shithole country is to you first worlders and ignore all opposing evidence

t. Russian intellectual

What exactly are you criticising in gays?

Criticizing gays isn't against the law in the US. You can do it all you want. You can run up and down street calling people faggots and shout homophobic slurs on the street outside the Stonewall Inn if you want.

People are just going to talk shit back and not wanna have anything to do with you. It has literally nothing to do with free speech and everything to do with you being an asshole who can't handle the fact that there are consequences for your actions.

just be yourself m8
youre still a fag though

Koreans still make feces wine. I would never touch it but if they like it, why not?

Russian OP doesn't like homosexuals and doesn't want to see it in society as acceptable behaviour.

sure m8 come and get me, I'll be sure to buy a bottle of baby oil

>Criticizing gays isn't against the law in the US. You can do it all you want. You can run up and down street calling people faggots and shout homophobic slurs on the street outside the Stonewall Inn if you want.
You exaggerate. I`m about to say that I have the right to express my opinion on gays without any consequences for myself. For instance, I must have the right to say what people shouldn`t be granted by the right to choose they sexual orientation in public and prove it by some rational arguments. It appears in the U.S. there`s no such right.
Getting people fired for their ideas is totally wrong. I heards this`re excercized in the U.S.

>There really isn't any evolutionary advantage for people to be gay in the past and it will certainly have no advantage in the future.
Objectively false.

Homosexuality allows a population whose resource requirements have begun to exceed supply to maintain a large working population without accelerating population growth. Homosexual individuals continue to work and provide for society's resource needs without greeting further demand in the form of offspring, increasing the resources available to the children of heterosexual individuals.

There is a reason why stable and developed civilizations with longer life expectancy/lower mortality rates become more permissive of homosexuality (and see lower birth rates among heterosexuals), while unstable and undeveloped ones with shorter life expectancy/higher mortality rates are intolerant (and see higher birth rates among heterosexuals).
In the former, cost per child to integrate and maintain an advanced society outstrips the means which the parents alone can support. It takes the work of three or four people to make a place for a new citizen. Since turnover/mortality is low and return on labor is high, demand for raw manpower is low and it's best to produce fewer, better offspring.
In the latter, cost per child to integrate and maintain a place in society is low, because there are few institutions and organizations to maintain in the first place, reducing overhead labor needs. However since turnover is high and return for labor is low, demand for raw manpower is high and producing few offspring risks losing your providers entirely.


Exclusive heterosexuality ultimately results in unchecked population growth and crash, as seen frequently in nature.

If you're actively homophobic at your job, you're interfering with the company's ability to recruit and keep any top-tier talent that happens to be LGBT. You may also be hurting the company's image. In that case, you're a liability to keep around and should be dismissed.

good one Yuri, are they 'useful ee-diots' too?

>hateful things I say should have no consequences! This isn't fair!

>However, the same logic is valid for ... and naked people walking in public.
people walking around naked are exposing themselves to the public. No one who doesn't want to see it ever has to look at gay sex or shit eating

>If you're actively homophobic at your job, you're interfering with the company's ability to recruit and keep any top-tier talent that happens to be LGBT. You may also be hurting the company's image. In that case, you're a liability to keep around and should be dismissed.
Two can play. The same logic may be used for gay`s dismissall in Russia. However, you would call it discrimination. However, you find dismissal for one negative remark about gays at work is reasonable. Double standards`re detected.

That`s obvious I didn`t mean shouting about my opinion on gay issue on daily basis. I assume only one negative remark may be used to fire you in the U.S.

>gay parade

Look, I think you have a bit of a misunderstanding about what freedom of speech entails.
Freedom of Speech is a specific right granted by the First Amendment of the Constitution, which states:
>"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

The key point is "Congress shall make no law."

The First Amendment exclusively protects an individual from being punished for their speech or views by the government. Private citizens are completely free to exact their own punishments (within the confines of actions governed by law) based on their own opinions and reactions to such speech or views. This is because one's actions are in themselves a form of self expression, and to restrict an individual's ability to respond to the actions of others is in itself a violation of their right to express their views.

You have the right to say what you like, and individuals have the right to reply in kind. If people don't like what you say, they won't like you, and people have the right to shun or refuse to associate with people they don't like.

Prode parades, gay awareness education in public schools, now trannies in the wrong bathroom, &c.

If it really were just s bedroom activity between otherwise normsl adults, a whole lot less people, mysrlf included, would care at all. It's this constant push yo psint everything, everyehere, rainbow by lispy flaming fags that makes homosexuality seem like something that needs supressed

they should cover up more than they do imo but they don't actively have sex in the parade

It's lots of nudity, lots of gay actions, lots of very non-child-free costums.
And if you critisize this you can get a fine here in germany. (A friend of mine was charged for this and got a fine of 400€ and had to go to a psychologists for a year)

Of course not all countries try that hard to supress public oppinion as Germany but still, we still have those gay parades here.

...

>You have the right to say what you like, and individuals have the right to reply in kind. If people don't like what you say, they won't like you, and people have the right to shun or refuse to associate with people they don't like
Agreed. I`ve wanted to say all along that you mustn`t be dismissed from work just because you think being a gay isn`t ok. That`s all. You also must be fired for being gay.

>prove it by some rational arguments
For example?

>I assume only one negative remark may be used to fire you in the U.S.
In extreme cases only. Generally speaking the only employees held to that sort of standard are public relations staff and spokespeople, and since their job is to be the face of their employer it's expected that they will reflect what their employer wishes in their actions. When a PR staffer calls someone a fag he's putting words in the CEO's mouth, and the CEO receives as much backlash as the staffer does.

Imagine it's the middle ages, and you're a duke. Would you continue to employ your Herald if, after his duties for the day are complete, he spends his time at the bar talking about what a bunch of shitheels the landed knights are? This guy's supposed to speak with your voice; shouldn't you have a say in what he says?

*mustn`t be fired for being gay

>men kissing and holding hands in public is now equivalent to literally fucking shit and streaking in russia
wew lad

I don't think putting your dick in another man's mouth is on even remotely the same level as eating shit.
And public nudity would be fine if 99% of people didn't look like Lord of The Rings monsters.