My Challenge.

[oromagi]

THESIS: LGBTQ is an idealogy that goes against science.

P1: An idealogy is a belief system, political philosophy, or worldview.

P2:  LGBTQ is not a belief system, poltical philosophy, or worldview.

C1:  Therefore, LGBTQ is not an idealogy

LGBTQ includes people embracing every possible belief system, political philosophy, and worldview throughout history but does not, can not, represent any particular belief.  Trump's mentor, Roy Cohn devoted his whole carreer trying to destroy LGBTQ people while also desperately, secretly trying to get fucked by every young man in New York.  Roy Cohn did not share any particular belief with the LGBTQ community but nevertheless, Roy Cohn was LGBTQ.

Lesbian, Gay, etc are adjectives used to describe people.

Lesbiansim describes same sex attraction between women- not any belief or philosophy about same sex attraction

To say that LGBTQ is an ideology is to misunderstand the definition of LGBTQ, ideology, or both concepts.  Since LGBTQ is not an idealogy,  YouFound_Lxam's thesis stands disproved.

[YouFound_Lxam] I believe that the LGBT community and ideology is not healthy for society, and must be eradicated (the ideology, not the people). 

Sexual orientation and gender identity are complex and multifaceted, and there is a growing body of scientific evidence that suggests that they are not choices, but rather are deeply ingrained aspects of a person's identity.

Studies show that sexual orientation and gender identity are not a result of any single factor, but rather are influenced by a combination of genetic, hormonal, and environmental factors. Additionally, research has shown that LGBTQ+ individuals are no more likely to experience mental health problems than non-LGBTQ+ individuals, and that attempts to change someone's sexual orientation or gender identity can be harmful and ineffective.

There is no scientific basis for discrimination against individuals based on their sexual orientation or gender identity.

That's my basic belief. 

--> 

@<<<TWS1405_2>>>

Oh, so you are saying 

-> 

@YouFound_Lxam

That's my basic belief. 

We all have mental challenges in life.  We understand your mental issue regarding LBGT and other.

There are professionals who can aid you, and better than average, everyday Josephine. 

--> 

@<<<TWS1405_2>>>

Then what is it? I asked you whether you even believe you are yourself right, to which you responded no.

Going for the ad hominem vs addressing the boy’s argument. Classic intellectual cowardice. 

@<<<TWS1405_2>>>

Going for the ad hominem vs addressing the boy’s argument. Classic intellectual cowardice. 

So if you not one of the three mentally challenged,  ---or all three--, then that only leaves  ' mentally disturbed ' about LBGT and perhaps cultist Trumpeteer troll with some degree of insanity issues. Ok. 

Mentally challenged --check--

Mentally deficit --check--

Mentally handi-capped --check--

Try using your own brain, if you have one, and exercise a little humility and integrity for fucks sake. 🤦🏼‍♂️

 when people say "LGBT ideology" they.... mean "A specific widespread ideology which claims to be focused on protecting the rights, privileges, and respect of LGBT people."

I am a LGBT person (by your definition, I am a sexual outsider in more than one respect), however there is a articulable set of issues which some people claim are for the benefit of LGBT people which I find morally questionable and/or irrational besides.

However, that does not mean eradication is impossible. As you say "a combination of genetic, hormonal, and environmental factors".... It is every measurable element of both nature and nurture.

It does bring a truth about biology to the fore front though, everything has a reason, and unlike say traveling the speed of light or moving a planet out of orbit the energies are small. All we need is knowledge, to define the problem is to see how it could be solved.  Whatever that combination that produces sexual deviants, those factors are controllable. Thus the moment of identification is the moment eradication becomes possible without violating any living person's rights.

If you could have been normal from the start, would you choose to be?

Sexual orientation is "This is what I feel"

Ideology is "This is what I should feel"

Likewise, the ideology your suggest as LGBTQist  was first articulated in the Declaration of Independence and is called the American Civil Rights Movement, founded in the 14th Ammendment to the US Consistitution.

 I do think there is an anti-LGBTQ idelology and it is often easier to find an anti-[group]ism than a [group]ism.

Scientists have documented some degree of same-sex pleasure seeking in every species of charasmatic fauna, particularly in highly social species, particularly in primates. Needless to say, any systematic elimination of of an adaptive trait (language, opposable thumbs, walking upright, etc) necessarily harms the viability of the species.

If you could have been normal from the start, would you choose to be?

• Speaking as someone who has been attacked by skinheads, threatened by police, fired from a job for being gay, I would have answered yes most of my life but the legal, social, political landscape has shifted so dramaticaly over the past 30 years.  I trusted the science the 80's when the science concluded my impulses were abnormal but I also trust the science as biologists today have changed science's mind.
  

Every idealogy expresses an ideal, and therefore a "should" but that "should" is always sociopolitical, and the sociopolitical does not care about feelings.  "All men are created equal" is not a feeling.  "Jews will not replace us" is not a feeling.

Same-sex attraction and (I suppose) gender dymorphism are primal, survival level instincts.  Ideology requires civilization, society, poltical structure and the freedom to philosophize- but LGBTQ needs none of that.

> 

@<<<TWS1405_2>>>

Post 89. ?

-->

@<<<oromagi>>>

Likewise, the ideology your suggest as LGBTQist  was first articulated in the Declaration of Independence and is called the American Civil Rights Movement, founded in the 14th Ammendment to the US Consistitution.

Exposing children to pornography was not articulated in the declaration of independence. Sterilizing mutilation was not articulated in the declaration of independence. Jailing people for not addressing others as they demand to be addressed was not articulated in the declaration of independence.

social movement is quite real.

• Natural selection ceded to human ethics ten thousand years ago. We decide the shape of our future.
  

Small propensity for non-reproductive sex is harmless. Just as with the fecundity, this is easily explained by correlated selection.

it could still be selected for because selecting a good fertile pairing is worth far more than the small amounts of energy lost.

Just so, if we could have fertile women and men who are asexual but take care of near relations that would serve just as much (if not more) function than being strongly homosexual.

...and what if it is discovered that the exact same genes are correlated with pedophilia?

• the mainstream view among researchers and professionals who work in the area of child sexual abuse is that homosexual and bisexual men do not pose any special threat to children. For example, in one review of the scientific literature, noted authority Dr. A. Nicholas Groth wrote:
  
• Are homosexual adults in general sexually attracted to children and are preadolescent children at greater risk of molestation from homosexual adults than from heterosexual adults? There is no reason to believe so. The research to date all points to there being no significant relationship between a homosexual lifestyle and child molestation. There appears to be practically no reportage of sexual molestation of girls by lesbian adults, and the adult male who sexually molests young boys is not likely to be homosexual (Groth & Gary, 1982, p. 147).
  
• In a later literature review, Dr. Nathaniel McConaghy (1998) similarly cautioned against confusing homosexuality with pedophilia. He noted, "The man who offends against prepubertal or immediately postpubertal boys is typically not sexually interested in older men or in women" (p. 259).  This well known lack of a linkage between homosexuality and child molestation accounts for why relatively little research has directly addressed the issue. For example, a 1998 comprehensive review of published empirical research on the sexual abuse of boys reported only one study (the 1994 study by Jenny and colleagues, cited above) that included data about the self-reported sexual orientation of perpetrators (Holmes & Slap, 1998).
  
• Proving something that is already widely known simply isn't a priority for scientists. Indeed, a commentary that accompanied publication of the study by Jenny et al. in Pediatrics noted that debates about gay people as molesters "have little to do with everyday child abuse" and lamented that they distract lawmakers and the public from dealing with the real problem of children's sexual mistreatment (Krugman, 1994).
  

That is not to say you can't have a good life without your preferred sex 

"I should tell prepubescent children I like to fuck men" is not a feeling.

Detrimental mutations tend to rapidly disappear, not promulgate consistently in every socially adept species.

You are making a bad assumption here. Traits can be selected for or selected against.

• I assume nothing.  I am saying that since LGBTQ genes are found in all social animals, the "eradication" of that gene would likely undermine humanity's capacity to compete.
  

You are making a bad assumption here. Traits can be selected for or selected against.

• I assume nothing.  I am saying that since LGBTQ genes are found in all social animals, the "eradication" of that gene would likely undermine humanity's capacity to compete.
  

it could still be selected for because selecting a good fertile pairing is worth far more than the small amounts of energy lost.

• Exactly.  The gay genes allow for increased adult to children ratios, selecting for quality generations over quantity.
  

...and what if it is discovered that the exact same genes are correlated with pedophilia?

• No such correlation has ever been found.
  

The FBI instructs investigators that the correlation between homosexuality and pedophila is less than random.

and the adult male who sexually molests young boys is not likely to be homosexual

The man who offends against prepubertal or immediately postpubertal boys is typically not sexually interested in older men or in women

That is not to say you can't have a good life without your preferred sex 

• Fundamentally misses the point.  Not only do LGBTQ fail to prosper when forced to suppress their natural instinct, they  die and commit suicide at well documented and horrifying rates.
  

social movement is quite real.

• If there is a social movement to expose children to pornography, let's agree that Donald Trump leads it.  None of sexual fantasies of your seems related to LGBTQ.
  

"I should tell prepubescent children I like to fuck men" is not a feeling.

• No it is a criminal libel that Republicans should stop perpetrating to fool the weak-minded into voting for them.
  

Same-sex attraction and (I suppose) gender dymorphism are primal, survival level instincts.  Ideology requires civilization, society, poltical structure and the freedom to philosophize- but LGBTQ needs none of that.

Strange, they say gender is a social construct. How can you socially construct something without a society?

• Precisely.  Why should society assert gender as a bifurcated norm when the genetic reality is far more complex than that?
  

-->

@<<<oromagi>>>

Detrimental mutations tend to rapidly disappear, not promulgate consistently in every socially adept species.

Not mutations, effects. Detrimental effects can be cancelled out by helpful effects from the same mutation.

it could still be selected for because selecting a good fertile pairing is worth far more than the small amounts of energy lost.

• Exactly.  The gay genes allow for increased adult to children ratios, selecting for quality generations over quantity.
  

The genes may be correlated, but they are certainly not sufficient. Nurture remains.

...and what if it is discovered that the exact same genes are correlated with pedophilia?

• No such correlation has ever been found.
  

But did anyone look?

The FBI instructs investigators that the correlation between homosexuality and pedophila is less than random.

That is a mathematically incoherent assertion. Randomness is the least correlation possible. It is zero correlation. You would need anti-correlation, and that certainly doesn't fit with the popular impression of pedophilia as there appear to be nearly as many stories of boys being targeted as girls.  ... that's a dishonest game there. Boys are male. The only consistent classification of a man who is aroused by both boys and women is bisexual.

If there is no social movement to expose children to pornography then the book bans in Florida schools were not bans of pornography.  Just crazy republicans spreading libel.

it could still be selected for because selecting a good fertile pairing is worth far more than the small amounts of energy lost.

• Exactly.  The gay genes allow for increased adult to children ratios, selecting for quality generations over quantity.
  

The genes may be correlated, but they are certainly not sufficient. Nurture remains.

• A) We don't know that yet. 
  

B) If you find a genetic correlation with bravery, than it is reasonable to suspect that bravery is adaptive.

...and what if it is discovered that the exact same genes are correlated with pedophilia?

• No such correlation has ever been found.
  

But did anyone look?

• Yes.  Some small familial and twins studies have found some genetic correlation to pedophilia
  

No correlation between homosexuality and pedophilia has ever been found. 

A pedophile who preys on a pre-pubescent boy is far more likely to be attracted to pre-pubescent girls and adult women then adult men.  Far less even then the normal prevelance of gay men in society.  More plainly, a pre-pubescent boy is statistically safer from rape with a random man who has sex with adult men or identifies as gay then with a random man who has sex with adult women or identifies as straight.

If they go and kill themselves when they can't have the sex they want that is infinitely worse (from a selection point of view) than if they were just caring adults who didn't need to have sex.

• And yet the selection persists.  Clearly, the contribution of homosexuals to social adaptation goes beyond mere procreation.
  

You can find these pages reproduced on Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, Instagram, even with age restrictions turned on.  All those site, like this one, forbid the posting of pornography. (plus a bunch more stuff about how so many people want children to see Gender Queer)

ACLU

A UChicago Harris/AP-NORC survey from March found that only 12 percent of Americans supported schools banning books that concern “divisive topics,”

Put in context of the Supreme Court's definition of obscenity: librarians, teachers, students,  publishers, newpapers, and the majority of Floridians represent the community standard that sees the literary and artistic value of a coming-out graphic novel for teens, does not find the book offensive and therefore the book is not pornography in the legal sense.

More Florida schools kept or acquired Gender Queer after DeSantis' purported "ban" than held the book before DeSantis brought the book to their attention, including 9 out of the 10 best high schools in the state.  In other words, there is no statewide ban- just Republican school districts making a show.

You can tell that DeSantis knows that he's on the wrong side of the First Ammendment  and limited government here because not a single librarian or teacher has been charged with exposing children to pornography, in spite of repeating that claim at every poltical rally for the last two years.  DeSantis knows that if he test his claim that teacher are distributing pornography in court, he will be quickly denied.

As I said before, you might as well call that ideology "the Civil Rights movement" or "Americans who love Freedom" or "People who have read the US Constiitution." 

Protecting our children's access to true and real information is not a particularly LGBTQ issue

So you admit you don't understand how it would contribute to survival, you just assume it does because you believe natural selection would eliminate anything detrimental.

Yes we do, otherwise we could have hard predictions on sexual orientation based on genetic testing.

You are mixing two different contexts. It is not homosexuality that is being selected in that thought experiment, it would be bravery. Since men can be brave if the normal system to focus on human women is disrupted the lesser systems, such as an abstract attraction to bravery may dominate, thus allowing the attraction to another man.

• Yes.  Some small familial and twins studies have found some genetic correlation to pedophilia
  

... which genes?

Which genes were correlated to homosexuality? Surely this wouldn't be impossible to compare ourselves, there are public APIs for the human genome project.

However, without knowing if this claim is true, it in no way disproves the possibility of similar genetic correlations with homosexuality.

have no way to know that.

Asexuals would fill the niche you purport better than suicidal homosexuals.

I said pornography. Not pornography in the legal sense

If you believe the majority of Floridians would see those images, be told they were for the assigned consumption of minors, and not find that offensive you are gravely mistaken. I doubt even a majority of New Yorkers or San Fransicans would say that.

So you admit you don't understand how it would contribute to survival, you just assume it does because you believe natural selection would eliminate anything detrimental.

• More like, as a lover of literature and history and member of the community, I understand LGBTQ's contribution inherently and am waiting for science to provide a genetic explanation.
  

have no way to know that.

• Except the manifest exception contributions of LGBTQ in the community.  When the studies of LGBTQ performance in the workplace are finally done, those contributions will become more apparent to the non-LGBTQ community.  Every large workplace I've ever been has a had a few ultra-competent queers making things happen- usually just under the actual executive ranks.  Look at the first moderators on this site, the top of the leaderboard, and particular the overperformance of LGBTQ on the much larger debate.org in years past.  That's not a coincidence- that is a pattern that open-minded people notice has been repeated over and over since the beginning of civilization.  
  

Asexuals would fill the niche you purport better than suicidal homosexuals.

• No.  LGBTQ contributions to civilization are inherently sexual.  Michelango, Shakespeare, Oscar Wilde, Walt Whitman,Tennessee Williams,  Andy Warhol, Yves St Laurent, Annie Lebowitz gay artists are more interested by sex,  know more about sex, create more about sex than straight artists do. The experience with sex is inherently part of the cultural contribution.
  

So there are three channels to this debate at this point.  3.) The original issue, whether there is a discernible ideology & social movement which has been labeled LGBT ideology.

Taken as a whole it seems these comments indicate a belief in a set of genes that make some people superior to others.

Do you think natural selection has operated on the ability to create more sexualized art than others?