Encouragement or acceptance?

[Marocc]

If one was to take the msm at face value, it would seem that it is no longer the goal to make being gay acceptable, rather the goal seems to be to encourage people to be gay. Is that acceptable? Does it cause issues? Is it bound to cause more harm than good?

[Michael Hardner]

44 minutes ago, Marocc said:

1. If one was to take the msm at face value, it would seem that it is no longer the goal to make being gay acceptable, rather the goal seems to be to encourage people to be gay.
2. Is that acceptable?
3. Does it cause issues?
4. Is it bound to cause more harm than good?

1. Whose goal ?  Do you have an example of the MSM covering this story, maybe where they spell out who has this goal ?
2. Is acceptable to encourage people to be gay ?  I don't see why someone would waste their time, well... maybe I do but... it's someone's free speech anyway.
3. Yes -> you don't like it.
4. No, because you can't 'convert'.  That's why conversion therapy is a bad idea.

[dialamah]

2 hours ago, Marocc said:

1. the goal seems to be to encourage people to be gay. Is that acceptable?

2. Does it cause issues?

3.  Is it bound to cause more harm than good?

I don't think they're trying to persuade people to be gay, because most people, especially people in MSM, understand that being gay isn't a choice.  If anything, they might be trying to make being gay acceptable, so that gay people aren't shunned by family, friends, their religion, beaten and killed.

2.  Does what cause issues?  Encouraging society to accept gay people?  It only causes issues for those who lack understanding of human sexuality, and for thosr who follow religions that tell them to hate gays.

3.  Getting rid of backwards-thinking people who don't accept gay people will be good.

[New World Disorder]

4 hours ago, Marocc said:

If one was to take the msm at face value, it would seem that it is no longer the goal to make being gay acceptable, rather the goal seems to be to encourage people to be gay. Is that acceptable? Does it cause issues? Is it bound to cause more harm than good?

The media's purpose is divide and conquer. And people fall for it all the damn time.

[Marocc]

15 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. Whose goal ?  Do you have an example of the MSM covering this story, maybe where they spell out who has this goal ?

No one in particular. If you need a name, let's say, the msm.

15 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

it's someone's free speech anyway.

Is all "free speech" acceptable to you?

15 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

3. Yes -> you don't like it.

I was thinking of the bigger picture; societies, the world as a whole. It isn't about me liking or not liking it, but God has commanded some things and prohibited others.

15 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

4. No, because you can't 'convert'.  That's why conversion therapy is a bad idea.

That doesn't answer my question properly. I asked, is it bound to cause more harm than good? You say it is not because a homosexual cannot stop being homosexual — if I understand you right. That is like saying: no, it isn't bound to cause more harm than good because it is inevitable.

[Michael Hardner]

2 hours ago, Marocc said:

1. No one in particular. If you need a name, let's say, the msm.

2. Is all "free speech" acceptable to you?

3. "God has commanded some things and prohibited others"

4.  That is like saying: no, it isn't bound to cause more harm than good because it is inevitable.

1. Well you haven't given an example of reporting, and definitely NOT an example of the MSM wanting this result as a goal.  By the MSM, you would mean individual reporters supported by management, or maybe a direct order by management or the CEOs.
2. Yes, unless it fails a test of 'causing harm' - which admittedly is nebulous and inconsistent.  But, yes.
3. Ok, well I (and also the fastest growing group of respondents) would say "there is no God".  You will have to find another way to convince people, I think, if you want to be successful.
4. I am partially saying that it is inevitable.  But I suppose I am assuming that your position is 'homosexuality is bad' and trying to explain to you that such laws will not increase the bad homosexuality you fear.  My own point of view is that whatever people want to do is fine, as long as there is no harm done.  The current level of homosexual activity that is in progress right now in the country is ok with me, be it 100% or 0%.  

I don't remember your posts, but I have this feeling you are new to pluralistic society.  You are free to say whatever you like, just as I am free to say 'there is no God'.  Mostly likely, we will both be ignored as others go about their business.

[OftenWrong]

I know some kids who got very confused. They thought it was only cool to be gay, otherwise you are uncool. They thought they were gay and behaved accordingly. But since this was untrue, over time their unhappiness increased. And as they realized they weren't gay, they became a conflicted self-loathing tattoo and piercing covered lump of sadness.

[Guest]

On 6/16/2020 at 10:26 AM, Marocc said:

If one was to take the msm at face value, it would seem that it is no longer the goal to make being gay acceptable, rather the goal seems to be to encourage people to be gay. Is that acceptable? Does it cause issues? Is it bound to cause more harm than good?

I have never seen any instance of any main stream media trying to encourage anyone to be gay.  The trend these days, both by the msm and by society (ours) in general is certainly towards the acceptance of LGBT lifestyles, which can only be a good thing.  After all, it's nobody's business but their own.

It will cause issues with those who disagree with that, sure, and that can result in harm.  But then, lots of stuff does.

[taxme]

On 6/17/2020 at 4:16 AM, OftenWrong said:

I know some kids who got very confused. They thought it was only cool to be gay, otherwise you are uncool. They thought they were gay and behaved accordingly. But since this was untrue, over time their unhappiness increased. And as they realized they weren't gay, they became a conflicted self-loathing tattoo and piercing covered lump of sadness.

What we need to see more often these days is more about straight pride rather than with seeing the constant promotion of gay pride. I am straight, and I am very proud of it, although these days saying something like that will get one called anti-gay. Straight pride is normal, it's natural, it's worked since the beginning of humanity, and you can make babies. Just saying.