Thread 17997825

Is there any societal benefit to letting these people practice paraphilia and encourage it?

>>17997825 (OP)
None whatsoever. Leviticus 20:13 needs to become the law of the land.

Even Obama ran on an anti-gay-marriage platform. Doesn't even make sense how it's possible for things to go so far off the rails so fast

>>17997825 (OP)
The benefit is social cohesion.

> let's do in-fighting for retarded reasons! :D
That's how your society turns into the shithole.

>>17997853
Lot better social cohesion before it got allowed

>>17997853
>Letting fags live so they can rape your kids
>Social cohesion
Pick 2 my friend.

Fashion, design, aesthetics, event planners and palace courtiers and the like. It's called the "queer eye for the straight guy." All that aristocratic trad Rococo shit and dances are totally gay and without them the conservatives would still be living in mud huts.
https://youtu.be/vBynw9Isr28

>>17997863
Just ban... rape?
It isn't like heteros don't rape kids.

Also: airline flight attendants

>>17997825 (OP)
Gays and transgenders will fuck each other and take hormones irregardless of if it’s banned or not. Why do you think “down low” men exist?

>>17997863
The vast majority of rapists are white men, mainly Jewish

>>17998016
>pedosexuals will have relationships with children regardless of it its banned or not

>>17997825 (OP)
It improves average IQ by miles. Just look at African countries which hate gays so much. Does they look like a beneficial society to you?

>>17997863
>having sex with cute prime age lolis is bad because Jews and spinsters said so
You're the only faggot here.

>>17997825 (OP)
>Is there any societal benefit to letting these people practice paraphilia
1. freedom, this is America faggot
2. they're good for the economy and state power consooming, being happy with no kids
3. they're docile and permanent second class citizens politically
4. modernity created the modern homo so banning it is passing the buck for society's failure onto the citizen who did nothing wrong

>and encourage it?
no not really. that's an inevitable consequence of dialogue but it should be moderated at every turn.

>>17998069
>but it should be moderated
>FUCK YEAH AMERICAN FREEDOM!
>BUT NO NOT LIKE THAT!

>>17998409
>not just allowing the behavior, but encouraging it is inevitable in a free society even though it's stupid
>NOOOOOOOO YOU CAN'T HAVE A DIFFERENT OPINION AT ALL!!!!

i'm willing to tolerate it as long as it is between consenting adults and is not used as a political weapon

>>17997849
Most people are anti-gay marriage if its the status quo, once the status-quo changes they don't care enough to do anything about it

>>17999165
the Supreme Court has been considering overturning Obergfell anyway, so meh

>>17999168
oh boy I can't wait to slavishly follow the next status quo like I did this one

>>17997825 (OP)
Explain why gays are bad for reasons other than that it gives you the ick?

>>17999774
They aren't bad. They're good and necessary to society. Soldiers and cops are too, it shouldn't be controversial to say I don't want that lifestyle for myself or anyone I care about. It's only controversial because so many are still in the mindset of banning homosexuality, whatever that means. Banning homosexual acts. That whole debate is so stultifying though, do you have any reason why I can't criticize gays except that I'm really trying to ban them?

>>17999774
Morons, the birth rate is below replacement rate and you encourage hedonism

>>17999831
by that logic we should encourage it for dysgenics

>>17999850
Could you please elaborate?

>>17999874
If the important thing is your teeny little eugenic alterations to birth rate and society, it should work exactly like it does now. Chad gets to do whatever he wants, has as many kids as he wants, and the weaker half of society is sold a vision of false equality. It's the humanism of the underclasses. The reason you can't get a girlfriend is because you were born that way, not physically and not because of your parents, but something even more fundamental.

Society is already minmaxed by trial and error. We're not talking about making slight improvements to birth rate, that leaves you ten steps behind major change happening naturally. If you want to argue how society should be, try to argue in broad strokes.

>>17999890
Suddenly suppressing homos is eugenics. Do you understand all those fancy words you're using?

>>17997994
Nah, if a man sleeps with another man he needs to be stoned to death simply because that is the way God commands us to do things and he knows more than anyone else about how life works. He created it himself after all.

>>17999898
I'm the OP and I think you should hate the sin not the sinner, you're just insane

>>17999896
You don't. I said promoting homosexuality is eugenics because it allows men to feel valid at the bottom of the ladder.

>>17999924
When?

Harmful paraphilias are illegal and for good reason. Encouraging them would not be a societal benefit, it would be a societal harm.