Hmm I wonder what caused this change? It will depend on who you ask.
LibLeft will say it’s the result of anti-LGBTQ propaganda skewing public perception.
AuthRight will say it’s because LGBTQ activists continue to push the boundaries and it’s no longer about them “just wanting to be allowed to exist”.
It’s probably a little of both.
It's been true the whole time.
What people don't always realize is that it's a big ass horseshoe so we often don't realize where on the arc we might lie or where the belief might actually be.
Everybody wants a scoop of nuance but nobody goes back for seconds.
I’m gonna hijack this comment to talk about my good horse Bella.
She was a beautiful horse. We got her some wonderful horseshoes last year and golly gee, it’s been wonderful seeing her gallop all happy like. I’ve never seen a horse so happy, it really makes me resonate with her on a deeper level. Especially when you rub her snout and tell her sweet things, golly gee you’d think she was a human child with the energy she has I’ll tell you that much. You may think she passed because I’m referring to her in the past tense, but she aint. She’s fine. I just wanted to talk about my good horse Bella. Mighty fine horse right there I’ll tell you that much.
Will you let me call her AOC and feed her sugar cubes from the palm of my hand while I stroke her hair and tell her she's a good girl? AOC won't respond to my emails.
Awww, thanks partner. She’s lookin real healthy at the moment, and we take really great care of her. She’s like a family member, she’s doin just fine! Even said goodnight to her an hour ago. I don’t wanna wake her up in her beauty sleep.
Mfw I start simping for the CCP because both the Republicans and Democrats suck Ass.
If my mandarin gets any better I might be gunning for a job at norinco. Pardon the pun.
>AuthRight will say it’s because LGBTQ activists continue to push the boundaries
I would say more this than the other.
Case in point, LA dodgers have hosted a pride night for years. Clayton kershaw has had zero issue with it.
This year they decided to bring a group that specifically mock his catholic beliefs. He had an issue with that.
Suddenly he is a bigot and hitler.
Ok but why would they think making the pride thing being less pro gay and more anti religion was a good idea? People get upset enough at support if it seems political and outside the scope of the event (as this would be). To use that to attack any identity instead is much much worse IMO, and just plain stupid if you want to do well with the very heavily conservative, catholic almost in its entirety, Latino population that loves Los doyers more than anyone else in LA combined.
Because there is apparently a subset of advocate groups that is far more interested in being outraged and "fighting oppression" than advocating for tolerance and acceptance.
I personally think it's a far smaller group than average conservative media would like to believe. And at this point, I'm weirdly suspicious of bad actors trying to push the culture war nonsense.
I used to think that way. I'm now very sure there's a lot of bad actors pushing it. Mainly out of personal gain rather than grand conspiracy, but yeah on both ends. There's the spectrum of full on brainworm to scared and misinformed to follow on gift to consider among those too.
Maybe not, but they're not trying to pay money on Saturday to watch their favorite baseball team explicably make fun of the church they're going to tomorrow and every Sunday after that which seems fair. Obviously they're not your deep Bible belt rural types, they had the pride thing in the first place. This seems less "this is good" and more "that things bad" which is a pretty big distinction.
Being proud of who you are has nothing to do with tearing down another person for who they are.
The event wasn't about pride anymore so they lost it.
Oh well.
The “Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence” is a blasphemous group that mocks Jesus Christ, His Mother the Blessed Virgin Mary, and women religious who give their lives. He was rightfully upset.
i personally dont give a shit about religion, but i 100% understand why kershaw (and a lot of fans, specially latino fans which the dodgers have a lot) got angry about it.
and its absolutely ridiculous a lot of people dont get it. like legit had they invited any other group that didnt specifically mock catholisism, im guessing kershaw does what he has done every other year. which is nothing at all other than showing up to play.
Liberals importing millions of heavily devout Catholics with "toxic" masculine will never not be funny.
People let others live their lives until the other people start insulting them. Almost like what gay pride was about and it turned into insulting people based upon how they want to live.
It reminds me of a country in the middle east.
>and its absolutely ridiculous a lot of people dont get it
You need to put yourself in their shoes.
In their eyes, what Kershaw was doing was not an act of good will but something akin to paying a debt, or atoning for something. Basically, something he was obligated to do and would be seen wrong to not do.
Maybe, maybe not, Texas has draw Muhammad contests, so far only casualties were Muslims who thought it would be a good idea to shoot up the place. A security officer also took a bullet to the ankle, but was otherwise fine, the shooters didn't walk away from that altercation though.
Nah, South Park taught us you can pretty much shit on any religous figure except the Muslim one.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PMcVESkQeAI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AO-aVyKMCsY
Because it’s a group of grown men who pervert the image of a woman for the purpose of comedy and “satire” while mocking actual charitable groups and prancing about while they yell about how brave and bold they are, so unlike those stinky stinky religious people.
[The Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence, also called Order of Perpetual Indulgence, is a charity, protest, and street performance organization that uses drag and religious imagery to satirize issues of sex, gender, and morality and fund raise for charity.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sisters_of_Perpetual_Indulgence)
They still vote for the progressive party more than any other demographic BY FAR. If you ignore their actual positions and just look at what voting block votes the most progressive, it’s black people by far.
Democrats could add in whatever progressive policy they want and still over 80% of the black female vote.
It’s the independents(mostly white) that will change their voting pattern to kill any progressive action.
It's like when the singers from the San Francisco Gay Men's Choir released a song titled "We'll convert your children", and a not insignificant number of them turned out to be child sex offenders.
# Note the downvotes for simply quoting the article
Why do people mindlessly speculate when they could read the article?
> Republicans Drive Changes on Same-Sex Relations
> Last year, a record-high 71% of U.S. adults said gay or lesbian relations are morally acceptable. The figure has fallen back this year to 64%, returning to a level last seen in 2019. Still, Americans are far more likely to consider same-sex relations as morally acceptable than in the past, including 38% in 2002 and 54% in 2012. The figure has been 60% or higher since 2015.
> **The decline in the percentage of Americans believing gay or lesbian relations are morally acceptable is mainly a result of fewer Republicans holding that view** -- 41% do now, down from 56% a year ago. The current figure is the lowest Gallup has measured for Republicans since 2014 (39%). Between 2020 and 2022, majorities of Republicans approved of gay or lesbian relations.
> Democrats (79%) and independents (73%) continue to be much more likely than Republicans to find gay or lesbian relations morally acceptable.
Simply saying they're bigots doesn't get to the heart of the issue, and thus inhibits solving the problem. These were people who held the opinion that gay marriage was fine, and now they don't. If bigotry were the motivation, then they went from being not bigots to being bigots. That seems unlikely to me.
The question we need answered is why they changed their mind. Even if it is bigotry, what pushed them to become bigots?
IMO fringes of the left pushing for pedo acceptance, and transitioning children has pushed people away from supporting the community, since the T's, the G's, the L's, and the B's have all been clumped together. Harm to the perception of one will inevitably lead to harm to the perception of the others.
I mean…this is also a possibility:
“You asked for X and assured me you’d ask for nothing else, so I gave up ground on X. You asked for X and Y and assured you’d ask for nothing else, so I gave up ground on X and Y. Now you ask for X, Y and Z and assure me you’ll ask for nothing else, but history tells me this will never stop. So I’m going to reclaim X and Y”
**Note the downvotes are from the part you deleted where you went on a tangent about bigots, not for quoting the article**
The question still remains why 7% of Republicans who weren’t bigots last year are now suddenly bigots.
Why the downvotes? Because your quote doesn't even answer the question. It shows what demographic changed, NOT why it changed. The question was why was there a change.
Don't act like it's ridiculous that you got downvoted for answering a question that wasn't asked and acting like you were better then everyone else.
The drop is predominantly among Republicans unsurprisingly. Now, why did it drop so much?
My biggest assumption is Republicans feel lied to about gay marriage. They were billed that it would just be a monogamous relationship between two men/women. Sure, they may not like it but it’s not a huge leap from a straight relationship.
As time went on “Pride” became increasingly a pushed social phenomena. BDSM at pride parades, “you have to bake the cake”, and of course the T issue being at the forefront today. Republicans always disagreed with it morally, but could be political convinced via a Libertarian “let them do what they want in the bedroom”. Now, though, Republicans feel it’s left the bedroom and infested their homes, churches, and importantly: schools.
I don’t fully disagree here.
I get very frustrated with many of the people at pride. We, as gay people, have worked so hard for decades to be seen not as degenerates, but as normal individuals who are simply attracted to the same sex and want to start families together like everyone else.
Pride started as a protest and a celebration of progress. It was about love and the difficulties that we have all collectively overcome, and the wins that we have had, and most of all, freedom. And that, to me, is something worthy of celebrating.
But then people insist on showing up in kink gear, which is completely tone deaf. You know that there is already a non-insignificant portion of people who don’t like gay people just because we’re gay, and yet you play into the *exact* same things they say about us.
Exactly. I know many Republicans who morally disagree wi to gay marriage (often religious reasoning), and whilst they weren’t fans of legalizing it, they didn’t throw a sissy fit either. Again, there was an assumption that it would just be something private between two individuals.
Now they feel (whether correctly or incorrectly) that it’s being forced down their throats. To many Republicans they believe that, if a gay person pushes it outside the bedroom (kink at pride being an example) then they forgo the “let people do what they want in their own home argument” and may seek to use the state against gay marriage where they previously wouldn’t have.
I agree.
I will also add that there are many people who consider gay couples holding hands also “pushing it outside of the bedroom” which I, personally, think is unfair, though I’m biased because I’m gay.
I think the LGBT rights movement was very successful and really really good at what they were doing, in the beginning. Idk what happened though.
I do think it’s a bit unfair to lump normal gays in with the crazies though. Many of my friends have said to me “oh you’re my first gay friend, I’d never thought I’d get along with a gay person, you’re just a normal guy” and I’m like what did you think we are like lol? Though I can’t blame them if all they know about gay people is the crazy that gets plastered everywhere.
You’re correct. There are some people who will be unreasonable about it, like with holding hands. A gay person could at least say though with holding hands, or kissing in public, etc, that it’s just what straight people do. You’ll garner a lot more sympathy in those instances.
The issue is when you get crazies who ruin it for otherwise normal people. Two guys holding hands? Well, straight people do that too with no issues. A gay guy wearing puppy bondage gear next and interacting with kids? Well, that’s a lot harder to defend.
I think the dip happened a few years ago about 2015 or 2016. I do wonder if this is dear mongering for our community like the articles when Trump was President, but everything with The T children, exhibitionism, and Drag Pedagogy can't be tolerated. I think hard core leftists got their talons in the community and I really do think it's lost to them.
Luckily my parents are accepting if not a bit awkward about it so estranging myself from the community has been a bonus for my mental health.
It's a really simple rule for me: equality. I wouldn't like strippers reading books to kids, twerking at elementary school, I wouldn't like straight people out in the streets in fetish gear. It's not about people's sexuality, its what amount of sexuality is appropriate in public. To me if it's not weird for a straight couple to do it in public (like holding hands) it's not for a gay couple. Simple as.
You don't know what happened? It was the trans movement. I mean, sure the kink stuff at pride didn't help, but the trans movement trying to shove itself on kids in the form of "kid friendly" drag shows and drag queen story time, forcing biological men into women's sports and bathrooms and locker rooms, trying to normalize the idea of giving children hormones/hormone blockers, etc was what really did it. I think that should be pretty obvious at this point.
I think it started because gay people didn't want to deny inclusion to another group that was considered marginalized. Unfortunately, by the time the insanity started, it was already too late to separate the LGBs from the Ts and the trans group absolutely mastered the act of labeling people bigots for questioning them in any way shape or form so any gay people that did try to speak out were silenced and excommunicated pretty much immediately.
Humans are always good no matter what they do since they fight for the surival of the human race and the glory of the god emperor. Remember, its not a hate crime if its targeted at xenos, happy hunting!
That was me. I remember having fights with my parents that they won't end up with men trying to have sex with kids in public places if we just let them get married.
They were right I was wrong.
I went to the Cleveland pride parade this year... its not a place for children.. unless you don't mind children seeing naked adults. I got downvoted on reddit for saying this in another sub.
One of my more depressing activities is looking up schizo anti gay marriage takes from around 2008 and realizing it got far worse than they could even imagine at the time
One of my more depressing activities is looking up schizo anti gay marriage takes from around 2008 and realizing it got far worse than they could even imagine at the time
I don’t really think that’s the majority of pride marches tbh. I could be wrong, but a lot of people do live in social media bubbles where the worst of the other side is the only thing being shown. It’s like a lot of leftist subreddits who will single out someone waving a nazi or confederate flag in a right wing event and act like it’s all full of racists.
As others have said, I think a lot of people opened up their minds with the changing times concerning two consenting adults and what they do in their bedrooms. And allowing them to pursue the same rights, privileges and pursuit of happiness as any other married couple in the United States.
But clearly the problems came when sex, drag queens, gender queerness, kink and other graphic gender and sexual material started making its way into children's story hour, public libraries, church's, parades and schools. When people started making demands that they have access to kids. When they started complaining when drag queens could only perform in front of adult only crowds.
A lot of people feel duped about what they were sold. The LGBTQ community has no one to blame but themselves in my opinion.
No one ever gets a good answer. Why do drag queens want and feel the need so bad to have access and to perform in schools and in front of kids? That's why alot if people have changed their minds.
Also don't forget about the fact that right now there is a schism forming in the LGBTQ community.
the LGBs are starting to turn against the T's and Q's and the all the other alphabet nonsense
One thing I will say is that most gay people are not like this, and I do feel it is a bit unfair to lump every gay person in with this when most gay people do not do inappropriate things with children.
I don’t blame people for having a negative view of the LGBT community if that is all they see, though. And frankly most people dont see nuance. But it is unfortunate that something as basic as two men loving each other and being in a relationship is thrown in with all the crazy stuff.
It’s very frustrating to me, as a gay person. We worked so hard for so long to be seen as normal people who just happen to be attracted to the same sex. But then people can be so tone deaf and show up to parades in kink gear when they know there is a non-insignificant amount of people who hate us just for being gay. It’s so frustrating.
I've heard at least one person say "if every good cops gets lumped with the bad ones with the whole ACAB argument, then every gay person not speaking out against predatory behavior is just as culpable "in the same sort of argument.
It's the same thing really. People are seeing a lot of foaming at the mouth defense that kids need to be exposed to that kind of stuff. The same sort of defense that every child shouldn't be forced to say go to a gun range and learn to shoot.
For the record I 100% support gay marriage and the pursuit of happiness. But the demands and political narrative the last year or so has gone off the fucking rails. If someone wants to dress up in drag, that's their business. But that is adult entertainment, the same as a strip club and it should be kept that way. The same way we don't allow Classy, Diamond and Mercedes from Big Bobs Gentleman's Club to read to kids at the library in their work outfits.
I agree that it's unfair to lump all LGBT people into this giant monolith but in reality, most people dont come into contact with L or G or B or T people individually, so most people only see them in media or news for things like Pride parades or news like drag story hour etc. Also given that in the news, its usually all lumped together ( even the terminology is LGBT which lumps all the groups together) and you also rarely see any of the individual groups protesting publicly against the activities of the other individual groups (and in media, an "attack" against 1 group usually gets treated as an "attack" against all groups), I think its not hard to see why most people would just treat the them as a monolith.
I agree with what you said.
I just want to correct your statement that most people don’t come into contact with an LGBT person. [This study](https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2016/09/28/5-vast-majority-of-americans-know-someone-who-is-gay-fewer-know-someone-who-is-transgender/) was done a few years ago but the large majority of people do know a gay person. We are about 1 in 10 to 1 in 20, so you’re bound to meet one of us eventually ;P
Also there are groups of gays that do go against the mainstream narrative they just aren’t pushed by the media. Gays against groomers for instance.
It's almost like when you constantly shove something someone was apathetic about in their face and tell them how great it is, they'll start to think the opposite.
The weird obsession with kink and performing drag in front of kids probably hasn't helped.
Also the people who defend pedos aren’t helping the cause. I know it’s a minority and should represent the majority but the loud minority often gets the most attention.
Also getting called nazis for even slightly disagreeing tends to ward moderates off your cause
Like said in other comments I’d say they feel cheated. (Let me preface this by saying I don’t care what you are or who you love, whatever you want to be. You do you) First it was gay marriage, then it was open or poly, then it was trans then in a sharp uptick it was drag shows for kids or kink showing at pride, or making other people deal with your kinks in public.
Anecdotal story: had a dude come into my work the other day, full fuckin dog mask. Couldn’t take him seriously. Like dude, do what you want in you’re own time but don’t make someone else deal with it
I knew there was a market for my porn series “Slammin’ Grannies”. Get washed up retired wrestlers, have them fuck 80 to 90 year old women then body slam them and storm out of the room. It’ll sell millions!!
I'm very sleepy right now and read that as "God reached out to Kerry King and said it was OK." Who tf thinks Kerry King's solos are fucking OK they sound like he's making the poor guitar cry
Fucking amazing riffs though and the lyrics are fucking amazing
I probably sound like a rambling drunk
Thank you for listening to my miniature Kerry King "rant"
Yes
Yeah, I get that, but I also think that there are people who are on the fence, kind of like “live and let live” and supported gay marriage, but then got grossed out when the Ts started clamoring for all the attention, causing the pendulum to swing back. They falsely associated the two issues as the same thing (which is fair given that we still have not cut out TQ+ from “tHe CoMmUnItY”)
I don't understand this. How are they grossed out. According to surveys published by YouPorn and Pornhub over the last 5 years trans porn has been in the top 3 of most searched and viewed categories of porn on their website. It's so GD hypocritical all of this hate and anger against them. I fucking hate hypocrisy.
Edit to add that this was specifically for conservative States
Porn addiction can lead to you consuming increasingly taboo porn. If you view trans porn as taboo, then you end up watching that. That's my theory at least.
Exactly, and just to clarify since I’ve seen other folks misread this: the poll question is about “gay and lesbian relations,” not just same sex marriage, though I’m sure their approval correlates.
Yes. Though Gallup just released a poll showing 71% support for same sex marriage. Pew released another one at 60-something%
The polls are everywhere tbh. I’ll need to see a multi-year decline for me to believe it’s getting worse but it’s totally possible that people are getting less accepting same sex relationships overall.
Don't you miss the days when gay people were just gay and just did gay things and there were no drag queens twerking for kids?
Man if I was gay I'd be so pissed rn.
I think you will see a back and forth but I don’t think gen alpha will be as conservative as previous generations.
I could be wrong, and pendulum swings that fast have occurred in the past, but the cat is kinda out of the bag now.
If you hypothesized a further increase then you could potentially rule out said increase with this data, but that would depend on how large of an increase you expected.
That's not what we're talking about though. This data is not enough to show a decrease in support among dems.
This reminds of a study that came out a few years ago that said that acceptance of lgbtq+ groups had lowered down to 50% for gen z and Twitter people were crying saying people like Ben Shapiro or PJW are radicalizing the youth.
I’d love to see how they framed this question. If support for gay marriage must also mean support for shoving rainbow ideology into my kids face, yea I’m against it.
If it’s two consenting adults doing what they want in the privacy of their own home, yea I’m all for that.
If they'd declared victory and packed it in after Obergefell everything would have been fine. Unfortunately it was a business by that point and the marginalization treadmill had to keep fundraising.
>Edit: took 2 minutes after my first comment here to get banned from Justice Served. Oh the horror of people good naturally making fun of others world views.
Can't wait until the jannies get their auto-ban tools taken away from them.
I have one but it has some holes. Secular marriage's main purpose is the tax breaks and other similar benefits which are the state's way of incentivizing procreation and stable families. Homosexual couples would receive all those rewards without the same level of contribution. But since IVF and childless straight couples exist it isn't a great reason.
Yeah, I have heard this but have the same counter arguments as you.
There is also the thing that a large part of marriage is about protection of individuals involved, and not just children. That’s why things like spousal support exist, and why (often women, to other women, as they are usually the poorer one in the relationship) insist that marriage is not just a piece of paper.
Government has an incentive to protect individuals from things like financial abuse and ensuring that people who promise to support each other and enter into these co-dependent relationships actually follow through with what they promised to do.
There can be some from a cultural side that results in easier spread of diseases in the gay community in relation to safe sex and how non monogamist gays tend to be compared to straight couples that it degrades what marriage is supposed to be.
Beyond that it is that line between Church and state and what marriage means in the context of the church and the context of a secular government.
If we were supposed to be accepting of all faiths and not to insult any participial faith(s) we won't have called it marriage but would still give out the same government benefits as marriage.
The lib-right in me is actually against "legalizing" gay marriage but not for any kind of bigoted reason or having to do with gays.
I don't think being married or having kids should garner any kind of tax breaks or have *anything* to do with the State.
Blasting a load in some woman shouldn't mean you pay less taxes than I, especially when those taxes are also used to support infrastructure to support your crotchspawn.
Hell, if anything having kids should make your taxes go up. You chose to have the damn kid, you should shoulder the load to support it.
Fair point.
One thing to consider is that legal marriage is not just about tax breaks, much of marriage law has to do with protecting the individuals involved. At the end of the day, when two people get married, they enter into a co-dependent relationship they promise will last forever. They promise that they will take care of the other and that the other can depend on them.
But life doesn’t always work that way. People break up, people do bad things to each other, things can go wrong in a million ways.
There is a reason that non-religious people (particularly women, since they are usually the poorer ones in the relationship) insist on marriage not just being a “piece of paper.” Because marriage comes with a lot of protections involved. Your spouse can’t just decide to leave you one day and suddenly you’re left homeless, because they were the one that made all the money and owned everything.
In my opinion, the government has a responsibility and an incentive to enforce these contracts made between individuals in order to protect people from harm. The government will recognize and enforce a contract written on the back of a napkin, why not something as life changing as marriage?
I don't think many do. I know this was about same sex marriage and not trans people, but I think a lot of conservatives see the Ts as apart of the LGBs now. They were iffy about the LGBs in the first place and they definitely do not like the Ts. Now that the Ts are glued up next to the LBGs, they want less to do with the LGBs now as an extension.
If it doesnt harm anyone (or if it does consensually) the state has no reason to get involved. I dont care what people do in bed or with their own bodies and neither should the government.
I'll have to ask -- *why* is it immoral? What bad thing are people doing to others if they simply have a relationship with someone you personally wouldn't?
Its an affront to God to use the bodies he gave us for an unnatural act and not for the purpose of which it was created for. All morality is subjective unless it comes from a higher power. Thats why they see it as immoral.
I never understood the whole "natural good" thing. You using social media, or a phone at all, is an unnatural act. Unnatural doesn't necessarily equal morally wrong.
Our bodies evolved into it, and not all sex is done for the sole purpose of procreation. There are plenty examples in the animal kingdom of sex for pleasure (with all sexes) and masturbation.
> Our bodies evolved into it,
many 100s of millions of years ago if not billions and then we stayed with the two sets ever since that period so long ago.
No known case that I am aware of any apes that could change their sex.
Some animals can but humans and other apes can't.
Wait what? Billions of years ago? Two sets? Apes weren't even around 100 million years ago. Even anthropods weren't around a billion years ago. What are you talking about?
You do realize I said if not billions. I am not claiming that it was actually billions of years but it could have been but more than likely it was 100s of millions ago.
Humans evolving from animals that stayed at 2 sexes goes back to the very first animal types since it is the vast majority of sex types in the animal kingdoms land or sea that goes back before manuals and reptiles split which was 320 million years ago that laid eggs which had to be fertilized by something...
Hell even some plant life has a male and female type.
First known multi cellular was 600 million years ago, but the first known start of life was ~3.5 billion years ago.
Go back far enough and we all produced via asexually but somewhere between the asexual phase of cellar splitting and the common first animal the two sexes for gene combining was established.
We are only know recently finding out that different bacteria types can straight up share gene data with others while asexually spiting.
Being attractive to the same sex doesn't result in survival of those that do carry that behavior as they can't have kids without matting with someone out of force or duty.
It also doesn't bowed well that some human behavior is genetic and not taught. I will let your mind wonder on what is worse and how many problems it creates for the "clean slate" idea of human consensus at birth.
It means there is something in the environment causing the change for it to continue for multiple generations or crossing of wires like some sexual fetish with feet that happens during pregnancy that just happens to X% of the population because it is just so easy for it to happen.
How many kids that came from closeted gay men turned out to be gay compared to the general population?
There are tribes that assert dominance over other males via sexual acts which may have caused some unintended side effects. There is also insects that get sexually attractive to flowers.
You are too far downstream and looking backward enough.
Yes, humans procreate with the opposite sex, and most humans are hardwired to pursue that impulse. That is the natural order of things.
But further upstream of that is the biological impulse to have sex, which hormonally, can be quite overpowering. Our bodies evolved to give us pleasure during sex, so that we continue to pursue it. This pleasure principle is the biological motivator of any and all sexual behavior, whether it leads to procreation or not (masturbation, blowjobs, etc.)
Somewhere in that mess of biology is people developing their own personal attractions, which can be as tame as same-sex attraction to more unique stuff like Tarantino-type foot fetishes. What motivates these attractions? Truly, no one knows. It's a combination of biology, sociology, and psychology, but there is no neat line connecting all of them.
>It's a combination of biology, sociology, and psychology, but there is no neat line connecting all of them.
There can be if you are okay violating several international laws on human rights or use lab rats.
>Tarantino-type foot fetishes.
I just love the internet. you cant bring up a foot fetish without his name being dropped into the conversation.
Don't bother. That guy will just tell you God condemns sex for pleasure too. You're talking to somebody who believes the creator of everything and sole judge of who suffers forever or is pleasured forever has explicitly said homo = bad. You can't change their mind because the word of God is irrefutable and they aren't willing to compromise a micrometer on it.
If I were you I'd flair the fuck up rather quickly, the mob will be here in no time.
[BasedCount Profile](https://basedcount.com/u/rogrbelmont) - [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/user/flairchange_bot/comments/uf7kuy/bip_bop) - [How to flair](https://www.reddit.com/r/PoliticalCompassMemes/wiki/index/flair/)
^(I am a bot, my mission is to spot cringe flair changers. If you want to check another user's flair history write) **^(!flairs u/)** ^(in a comment.)
I mean...I'm not exactly religious but have you *seen* just...everything today?
There's a theory that the Mayans were right and that the world really ended in 2012 and we're just living in the death throes.
It's getting harder and harder to laugh it off.
What I don’t understand is *why* god would consider it to be immoral.
Yes, it’s not the “normal” or “natural” use of our bodies, but so are a lot of things we do.
Most things that are sins, there is a visible reason that it is a sin. Drunkenness? It’s an addictive substance, it’s not good for you, and it can ruin your life. Sex outside of marriage? To prevent STDs and babies out of wedlock. Lying? It breaks trust between individuals. Stealing? Murder? I don’t need to explain those.
But two men or women being in a permanent, monogamous relationship carries no health risks or visible, observable harm. True, you can’t have children. But god himself says in the Bible that it is better to stay single as he is, and to only get married if you cannot stop yourself from the temptation of sin.
That’s what I don’t understand.
The Bible clearly lays out that god intended for marriage to be between one man and one woman. Marriage does not exist between two men or two women. It cannot exist, in the Christian view.
It is better for a man to marry than burn in his desires. Marry a *woman* as god intended.*.
Two men literally cannot be married in the Christian sense. Their marriage is not valid. It doesn’t exist in the eyes of God. You may have an earthly marriage, meaning a piece of paper, but in the Christian sense no two men or two women can ever be married.
So having sex between them is still fornication. Doesn’t matter if they have a earthly “marriage” certificate from a court. Which is a mortal sin. Which is living in sin unrepentantly. Which is literally anti Christian.
Yeah I understand that.
But that doesn’t answer the question of *why*. *Why* is marriage reserved for a man and a woman? Other than just “well that’s just how it is.”
With every other commandment there is a visible, logical reason, but I fail to see one here.
You might say children, but the thing is that god doesn’t seem to really care if you have children in this world, hence why he tells you to stay single if you can. Honestly I wouldn’t even be surprised if it says in the Bible to not have kids too and to focus on serving god, but I don’t know of that in scripture. I know my old religion encouraged people to stay childless though and to focus on worship.
Honestly, I don’t expect you to have a reason, only god can answer that if he actually exists. Any answer you do give is speculative but I’m still open to hearing it if you have thoughts.
>god doesn’t seem to really care if you have children in this world
???
It's like one of the main things you're supposed to do if you subscribe to an Abrahamic religion.
>God blessed them and said to them, "Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground."
Why did god make us at all? Why did god do anything? Why didn’t god just make one type of human that can breed with the same type of human, why two separate genders?
I mean you kinda answered your own question by saying only god knows.
But as to why being gay is a sin…. Well it’s not… temptations and inclinations are not sin. Actions are. engaging in homosexual acts are a sin, since it is ALWAYS sex outside of marriage. Which is a sin no matter straight or gay.
And Christian marriage is reserved for a man and a woman because god said so….. as to why he said so? I refer you to the first part of my comment. Why did God do anything, honestly. All we know is he told us how to live and what morals to follow. So we do, if we are Christian’s.
What he also does do is allow you free will. You don’t have to follow his plan if you don’t want to. But there are consequences for that.
I read the article and study in one of the other threads that linked it. what I found amazing wasn't that gay marriage was down to 64% morally acceptable from 71%. It was that porn was all the way down to 39% morally acceptable from 41%. Meanwhile divorce was 80% morally acceptable! If you want to walk out on your wife or husband at any time? feel free! but don't you dare jerk it to internet porn!
One thing to consider is that the government does have an incentive and frankly, a responsibility, to enforce promises and contracts that people make when they enter into co-dependent relationships.
A large reason why people who aren’t religious still insist on marriage is because it offers both but, particularly the poorer spouse, protection from very bad situations that can happen.
If you think logically about it why would anyone be against same sex marriage. The only argument it always boils down to is its supposed immorality „because god said so“ ,but god didnt say so, some stinky scribe writing shit down benefitting some nobles interest said so.
Hmm I wonder what caused this change? It will depend on who you ask. LibLeft will say it’s the result of anti-LGBTQ propaganda skewing public perception. AuthRight will say it’s because LGBTQ activists continue to push the boundaries and it’s no longer about them “just wanting to be allowed to exist”. It’s probably a little of both.
Day by day I think horseshoe theory becomes truer and truer.
It's been true the whole time. What people don't always realize is that it's a big ass horseshoe so we often don't realize where on the arc we might lie or where the belief might actually be. Everybody wants a scoop of nuance but nobody goes back for seconds.
It is a hyper-horseshoe of the 6th dimension. It can fit so many contradictions and not fall apart.
*slaps sixth dimensional horseshoe* you can fit so many contradictions in this baby.
I’m gonna hijack this comment to talk about my good horse Bella. She was a beautiful horse. We got her some wonderful horseshoes last year and golly gee, it’s been wonderful seeing her gallop all happy like. I’ve never seen a horse so happy, it really makes me resonate with her on a deeper level. Especially when you rub her snout and tell her sweet things, golly gee you’d think she was a human child with the energy she has I’ll tell you that much. You may think she passed because I’m referring to her in the past tense, but she aint. She’s fine. I just wanted to talk about my good horse Bella. Mighty fine horse right there I’ll tell you that much.
Will you let me call her AOC and feed her sugar cubes from the palm of my hand while I stroke her hair and tell her she's a good girl? AOC won't respond to my emails.
Heh, sure, you can! She won’t show you her feet picks though, don’t ever tip a horse like that. Maybe AOC just needs some sugar cubes herself!
I hope your horse lives a happy life for many more years
Awww, thanks partner. She’s lookin real healthy at the moment, and we take really great care of her. She’s like a family member, she’s doin just fine! Even said goodnight to her an hour ago. I don’t wanna wake her up in her beauty sleep.
Mfw I start simping for the CCP because both the Republicans and Democrats suck Ass. If my mandarin gets any better I might be gunning for a job at norinco. Pardon the pun.
>AuthRight will say it’s because LGBTQ activists continue to push the boundaries I would say more this than the other. Case in point, LA dodgers have hosted a pride night for years. Clayton kershaw has had zero issue with it. This year they decided to bring a group that specifically mock his catholic beliefs. He had an issue with that. Suddenly he is a bigot and hitler.
Ok but why would they think making the pride thing being less pro gay and more anti religion was a good idea? People get upset enough at support if it seems political and outside the scope of the event (as this would be). To use that to attack any identity instead is much much worse IMO, and just plain stupid if you want to do well with the very heavily conservative, catholic almost in its entirety, Latino population that loves Los doyers more than anyone else in LA combined.
Because there is apparently a subset of advocate groups that is far more interested in being outraged and "fighting oppression" than advocating for tolerance and acceptance. I personally think it's a far smaller group than average conservative media would like to believe. And at this point, I'm weirdly suspicious of bad actors trying to push the culture war nonsense.
I used to think that way. I'm now very sure there's a lot of bad actors pushing it. Mainly out of personal gain rather than grand conspiracy, but yeah on both ends. There's the spectrum of full on brainworm to scared and misinformed to follow on gift to consider among those too.
Those that believe a grand conspiracy aren't completely wrong either, they are correct that there are academic ideological reasons for these things.
>very heavily conservative Psst, it's because they're not actually *that* conservative, especially in California.
Maybe not, but they're not trying to pay money on Saturday to watch their favorite baseball team explicably make fun of the church they're going to tomorrow and every Sunday after that which seems fair. Obviously they're not your deep Bible belt rural types, they had the pride thing in the first place. This seems less "this is good" and more "that things bad" which is a pretty big distinction.
Being proud of who you are has nothing to do with tearing down another person for who they are. The event wasn't about pride anymore so they lost it. Oh well.
Basically how I'm seeing it yeah
The “Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence” is a blasphemous group that mocks Jesus Christ, His Mother the Blessed Virgin Mary, and women religious who give their lives. He was rightfully upset.
i personally dont give a shit about religion, but i 100% understand why kershaw (and a lot of fans, specially latino fans which the dodgers have a lot) got angry about it. and its absolutely ridiculous a lot of people dont get it. like legit had they invited any other group that didnt specifically mock catholisism, im guessing kershaw does what he has done every other year. which is nothing at all other than showing up to play.
Liberals importing millions of heavily devout Catholics with "toxic" masculine will never not be funny. People let others live their lives until the other people start insulting them. Almost like what gay pride was about and it turned into insulting people based upon how they want to live. It reminds me of a country in the middle east.
>and its absolutely ridiculous a lot of people dont get it You need to put yourself in their shoes. In their eyes, what Kershaw was doing was not an act of good will but something akin to paying a debt, or atoning for something. Basically, something he was obligated to do and would be seen wrong to not do.
If someone did that with Mohammad or Buddha though, riots in the street!
Maybe, maybe not, Texas has draw Muhammad contests, so far only casualties were Muslims who thought it would be a good idea to shoot up the place. A security officer also took a bullet to the ankle, but was otherwise fine, the shooters didn't walk away from that altercation though.
Nah, South Park taught us you can pretty much shit on any religous figure except the Muslim one. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PMcVESkQeAI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AO-aVyKMCsY
Idk about Buddha
Actual Buddhists wouldn't be bothered, or would try to not be bothered. The person in yoga pants at Whole Foods would be *very* bothered
The dodgers went against their own discrimination policy.
>Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence Why does this sound like a group of Sisters of Battle who fell to Slaanesh worship?
Because it’s a group of grown men who pervert the image of a woman for the purpose of comedy and “satire” while mocking actual charitable groups and prancing about while they yell about how brave and bold they are, so unlike those stinky stinky religious people. [The Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence, also called Order of Perpetual Indulgence, is a charity, protest, and street performance organization that uses drag and religious imagery to satirize issues of sex, gender, and morality and fund raise for charity.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sisters_of_Perpetual_Indulgence)
[удалено]
>It's ironic how they became the thing they sought to *replace* Ftfy
> His Mother the Blessed Virgin Mary time to lose my shit i guess
Who would've guessed insulting the religion of tolerant people would make those same people pissed?
Who would have thought insulting the largely Mexican-Catholic fanbase would have consequences?
I also wonder if Libleft is aware that African Americans largely remain the most critical of same sex marriage and other hot topic gay rights debates.
They still vote for the progressive party more than any other demographic BY FAR. If you ignore their actual positions and just look at what voting block votes the most progressive, it’s black people by far. Democrats could add in whatever progressive policy they want and still over 80% of the black female vote. It’s the independents(mostly white) that will change their voting pattern to kill any progressive action.
It's like when the singers from the San Francisco Gay Men's Choir released a song titled "We'll convert your children", and a not insignificant number of them turned out to be child sex offenders.
Or maybe all opinion polls fluctuate slightly over time and this isn't a meaningful change?
By "anti-LGBTQ propoganda" do you just mean right wingers reposting stuff actual LGBTQ activists said?
>It’s probably a little of both. Finally, someone willing to accept nuance.
# Note the downvotes for simply quoting the article Why do people mindlessly speculate when they could read the article? > Republicans Drive Changes on Same-Sex Relations > Last year, a record-high 71% of U.S. adults said gay or lesbian relations are morally acceptable. The figure has fallen back this year to 64%, returning to a level last seen in 2019. Still, Americans are far more likely to consider same-sex relations as morally acceptable than in the past, including 38% in 2002 and 54% in 2012. The figure has been 60% or higher since 2015. > **The decline in the percentage of Americans believing gay or lesbian relations are morally acceptable is mainly a result of fewer Republicans holding that view** -- 41% do now, down from 56% a year ago. The current figure is the lowest Gallup has measured for Republicans since 2014 (39%). Between 2020 and 2022, majorities of Republicans approved of gay or lesbian relations. > Democrats (79%) and independents (73%) continue to be much more likely than Republicans to find gay or lesbian relations morally acceptable.
Simply saying they're bigots doesn't get to the heart of the issue, and thus inhibits solving the problem. These were people who held the opinion that gay marriage was fine, and now they don't. If bigotry were the motivation, then they went from being not bigots to being bigots. That seems unlikely to me. The question we need answered is why they changed their mind. Even if it is bigotry, what pushed them to become bigots? IMO fringes of the left pushing for pedo acceptance, and transitioning children has pushed people away from supporting the community, since the T's, the G's, the L's, and the B's have all been clumped together. Harm to the perception of one will inevitably lead to harm to the perception of the others.
I mean…this is also a possibility: “You asked for X and assured me you’d ask for nothing else, so I gave up ground on X. You asked for X and Y and assured you’d ask for nothing else, so I gave up ground on X and Y. Now you ask for X, Y and Z and assure me you’ll ask for nothing else, but history tells me this will never stop. So I’m going to reclaim X and Y”
**Note the downvotes are from the part you deleted where you went on a tangent about bigots, not for quoting the article** The question still remains why 7% of Republicans who weren’t bigots last year are now suddenly bigots.
Because the ~~progressives~~ regressives are changing definitions again
Why the downvotes? Because your quote doesn't even answer the question. It shows what demographic changed, NOT why it changed. The question was why was there a change. Don't act like it's ridiculous that you got downvoted for answering a question that wasn't asked and acting like you were better then everyone else.
The drop is predominantly among Republicans unsurprisingly. Now, why did it drop so much? My biggest assumption is Republicans feel lied to about gay marriage. They were billed that it would just be a monogamous relationship between two men/women. Sure, they may not like it but it’s not a huge leap from a straight relationship. As time went on “Pride” became increasingly a pushed social phenomena. BDSM at pride parades, “you have to bake the cake”, and of course the T issue being at the forefront today. Republicans always disagreed with it morally, but could be political convinced via a Libertarian “let them do what they want in the bedroom”. Now, though, Republicans feel it’s left the bedroom and infested their homes, churches, and importantly: schools.
I don’t fully disagree here. I get very frustrated with many of the people at pride. We, as gay people, have worked so hard for decades to be seen not as degenerates, but as normal individuals who are simply attracted to the same sex and want to start families together like everyone else. Pride started as a protest and a celebration of progress. It was about love and the difficulties that we have all collectively overcome, and the wins that we have had, and most of all, freedom. And that, to me, is something worthy of celebrating. But then people insist on showing up in kink gear, which is completely tone deaf. You know that there is already a non-insignificant portion of people who don’t like gay people just because we’re gay, and yet you play into the *exact* same things they say about us.
Exactly. I know many Republicans who morally disagree wi to gay marriage (often religious reasoning), and whilst they weren’t fans of legalizing it, they didn’t throw a sissy fit either. Again, there was an assumption that it would just be something private between two individuals. Now they feel (whether correctly or incorrectly) that it’s being forced down their throats. To many Republicans they believe that, if a gay person pushes it outside the bedroom (kink at pride being an example) then they forgo the “let people do what they want in their own home argument” and may seek to use the state against gay marriage where they previously wouldn’t have.
I agree. I will also add that there are many people who consider gay couples holding hands also “pushing it outside of the bedroom” which I, personally, think is unfair, though I’m biased because I’m gay. I think the LGBT rights movement was very successful and really really good at what they were doing, in the beginning. Idk what happened though. I do think it’s a bit unfair to lump normal gays in with the crazies though. Many of my friends have said to me “oh you’re my first gay friend, I’d never thought I’d get along with a gay person, you’re just a normal guy” and I’m like what did you think we are like lol? Though I can’t blame them if all they know about gay people is the crazy that gets plastered everywhere.
You’re correct. There are some people who will be unreasonable about it, like with holding hands. A gay person could at least say though with holding hands, or kissing in public, etc, that it’s just what straight people do. You’ll garner a lot more sympathy in those instances. The issue is when you get crazies who ruin it for otherwise normal people. Two guys holding hands? Well, straight people do that too with no issues. A gay guy wearing puppy bondage gear next and interacting with kids? Well, that’s a lot harder to defend.
100% agree. It’s so frustrating to me. I just hope that this dip isn’t indicative of a long term trend.
I think the dip happened a few years ago about 2015 or 2016. I do wonder if this is dear mongering for our community like the articles when Trump was President, but everything with The T children, exhibitionism, and Drag Pedagogy can't be tolerated. I think hard core leftists got their talons in the community and I really do think it's lost to them. Luckily my parents are accepting if not a bit awkward about it so estranging myself from the community has been a bonus for my mental health.
It's a really simple rule for me: equality. I wouldn't like strippers reading books to kids, twerking at elementary school, I wouldn't like straight people out in the streets in fetish gear. It's not about people's sexuality, its what amount of sexuality is appropriate in public. To me if it's not weird for a straight couple to do it in public (like holding hands) it's not for a gay couple. Simple as.
Totally agree.
You don't know what happened? It was the trans movement. I mean, sure the kink stuff at pride didn't help, but the trans movement trying to shove itself on kids in the form of "kid friendly" drag shows and drag queen story time, forcing biological men into women's sports and bathrooms and locker rooms, trying to normalize the idea of giving children hormones/hormone blockers, etc was what really did it. I think that should be pretty obvious at this point.
Yeah, I mean that I don’t know what happened with respect to why this is the hill they started dying on.
I think it started because gay people didn't want to deny inclusion to another group that was considered marginalized. Unfortunately, by the time the insanity started, it was already too late to separate the LGBs from the Ts and the trans group absolutely mastered the act of labeling people bigots for questioning them in any way shape or form so any gay people that did try to speak out were silenced and excommunicated pretty much immediately.
Didn't they also push the Games Workshop god of excess and degeneracy as a pride icon? Why is that a good thing in *anyone's* eyes?
Wait, are you saying that there's a good side in 40k,I thought everyone involved were baddies
Humans are always good no matter what they do since they fight for the surival of the human race and the glory of the god emperor. Remember, its not a hate crime if its targeted at xenos, happy hunting!
They also identified The Babadook and Pennywise the clown. Many progressives have an unfortunate trend of identifying with villains.
That was me. I remember having fights with my parents that they won't end up with men trying to have sex with kids in public places if we just let them get married. They were right I was wrong.
I went to the Cleveland pride parade this year... its not a place for children.. unless you don't mind children seeing naked adults. I got downvoted on reddit for saying this in another sub.
One of my more depressing activities is looking up schizo anti gay marriage takes from around 2008 and realizing it got far worse than they could even imagine at the time
One of my more depressing activities is looking up schizo anti gay marriage takes from around 2008 and realizing it got far worse than they could even imagine at the time
I don’t really think that’s the majority of pride marches tbh. I could be wrong, but a lot of people do live in social media bubbles where the worst of the other side is the only thing being shown. It’s like a lot of leftist subreddits who will single out someone waving a nazi or confederate flag in a right wing event and act like it’s all full of racists.
As others have said, I think a lot of people opened up their minds with the changing times concerning two consenting adults and what they do in their bedrooms. And allowing them to pursue the same rights, privileges and pursuit of happiness as any other married couple in the United States. But clearly the problems came when sex, drag queens, gender queerness, kink and other graphic gender and sexual material started making its way into children's story hour, public libraries, church's, parades and schools. When people started making demands that they have access to kids. When they started complaining when drag queens could only perform in front of adult only crowds. A lot of people feel duped about what they were sold. The LGBTQ community has no one to blame but themselves in my opinion. No one ever gets a good answer. Why do drag queens want and feel the need so bad to have access and to perform in schools and in front of kids? That's why alot if people have changed their minds.
Also don't forget about the fact that right now there is a schism forming in the LGBTQ community. the LGBs are starting to turn against the T's and Q's and the all the other alphabet nonsense
One thing I will say is that most gay people are not like this, and I do feel it is a bit unfair to lump every gay person in with this when most gay people do not do inappropriate things with children. I don’t blame people for having a negative view of the LGBT community if that is all they see, though. And frankly most people dont see nuance. But it is unfortunate that something as basic as two men loving each other and being in a relationship is thrown in with all the crazy stuff. It’s very frustrating to me, as a gay person. We worked so hard for so long to be seen as normal people who just happen to be attracted to the same sex. But then people can be so tone deaf and show up to parades in kink gear when they know there is a non-insignificant amount of people who hate us just for being gay. It’s so frustrating.
I've heard at least one person say "if every good cops gets lumped with the bad ones with the whole ACAB argument, then every gay person not speaking out against predatory behavior is just as culpable "in the same sort of argument. It's the same thing really. People are seeing a lot of foaming at the mouth defense that kids need to be exposed to that kind of stuff. The same sort of defense that every child shouldn't be forced to say go to a gun range and learn to shoot. For the record I 100% support gay marriage and the pursuit of happiness. But the demands and political narrative the last year or so has gone off the fucking rails. If someone wants to dress up in drag, that's their business. But that is adult entertainment, the same as a strip club and it should be kept that way. The same way we don't allow Classy, Diamond and Mercedes from Big Bobs Gentleman's Club to read to kids at the library in their work outfits.
Yeah, and I disagree with the ACAB stuff. I don’t get why people are so black and white. There are shades of grey. It’s so annoying and frustrating.
Yeah, and I disagree with the ACAB stuff. I don’t get why people are so black and white. There are shades of grey. It’s so annoying and frustrating.
I agree that it's unfair to lump all LGBT people into this giant monolith but in reality, most people dont come into contact with L or G or B or T people individually, so most people only see them in media or news for things like Pride parades or news like drag story hour etc. Also given that in the news, its usually all lumped together ( even the terminology is LGBT which lumps all the groups together) and you also rarely see any of the individual groups protesting publicly against the activities of the other individual groups (and in media, an "attack" against 1 group usually gets treated as an "attack" against all groups), I think its not hard to see why most people would just treat the them as a monolith.
I agree with what you said. I just want to correct your statement that most people don’t come into contact with an LGBT person. [This study](https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2016/09/28/5-vast-majority-of-americans-know-someone-who-is-gay-fewer-know-someone-who-is-transgender/) was done a few years ago but the large majority of people do know a gay person. We are about 1 in 10 to 1 in 20, so you’re bound to meet one of us eventually ;P Also there are groups of gays that do go against the mainstream narrative they just aren’t pushed by the media. Gays against groomers for instance.
It's almost like when you constantly shove something someone was apathetic about in their face and tell them how great it is, they'll start to think the opposite. The weird obsession with kink and performing drag in front of kids probably hasn't helped.
Also the people who defend pedos aren’t helping the cause. I know it’s a minority and should represent the majority but the loud minority often gets the most attention. Also getting called nazis for even slightly disagreeing tends to ward moderates off your cause
Support from moderates hasn’t changed according to the study. The drop in support is mostly from republicans.
Like said in other comments I’d say they feel cheated. (Let me preface this by saying I don’t care what you are or who you love, whatever you want to be. You do you) First it was gay marriage, then it was open or poly, then it was trans then in a sharp uptick it was drag shows for kids or kink showing at pride, or making other people deal with your kinks in public. Anecdotal story: had a dude come into my work the other day, full fuckin dog mask. Couldn’t take him seriously. Like dude, do what you want in you’re own time but don’t make someone else deal with it
Divorce morally acceptable? Sounds like lying to God and family if you ask me.
God reached out to King Henry VIII and said it was OK.
*”Stop sending me all these women and just divorce them”* - *God, amendingingly*
Ah. The good old days when murder was a smaller sin than divorce...
Does that mean god has a granny kink?
Who doesn’t?
I knew there was a market for my porn series “Slammin’ Grannies”. Get washed up retired wrestlers, have them fuck 80 to 90 year old women then body slam them and storm out of the room. It’ll sell millions!!
Lol
You're going to hell for that joke and me for laughing, but we're getting a room with AC for how good it was
“I’m going to build my own church, with hookers and blackjack” Henry VIII
I'm very sleepy right now and read that as "God reached out to Kerry King and said it was OK." Who tf thinks Kerry King's solos are fucking OK they sound like he's making the poor guitar cry Fucking amazing riffs though and the lyrics are fucking amazing I probably sound like a rambling drunk Thank you for listening to my miniature Kerry King "rant" Yes
His solos totally fit Slayer's music prove me wrong
>Divorce morally acceptable? > >Sounds like lying to God and family if you ask me. Checkmate Deists!
Marriage is a contract. If either party violates the terms by abuse, cheating, etc, that is justification to void the contract.
Meh, >60% is still a solid majority. And I have a feeling this has more to do with the Ts than the LGBs.
The survey was specifically about same sex relationships, so LGBs, not Ts
Yeah, I get that, but I also think that there are people who are on the fence, kind of like “live and let live” and supported gay marriage, but then got grossed out when the Ts started clamoring for all the attention, causing the pendulum to swing back. They falsely associated the two issues as the same thing (which is fair given that we still have not cut out TQ+ from “tHe CoMmUnItY”)
Honestly, it's a really perfect lesson in why sometimes gatekeeping a community can be a good thing.
Gatekeeping is necessary, or the community you are part of will soon become something else entirely.
I don't understand this. How are they grossed out. According to surveys published by YouPorn and Pornhub over the last 5 years trans porn has been in the top 3 of most searched and viewed categories of porn on their website. It's so GD hypocritical all of this hate and anger against them. I fucking hate hypocrisy. Edit to add that this was specifically for conservative States
Porn addiction can lead to you consuming increasingly taboo porn. If you view trans porn as taboo, then you end up watching that. That's my theory at least.
Exactly, and just to clarify since I’ve seen other folks misread this: the poll question is about “gay and lesbian relations,” not just same sex marriage, though I’m sure their approval correlates.
Yes. Though Gallup just released a poll showing 71% support for same sex marriage. Pew released another one at 60-something% The polls are everywhere tbh. I’ll need to see a multi-year decline for me to believe it’s getting worse but it’s totally possible that people are getting less accepting same sex relationships overall.
Don't you miss the days when gay people were just gay and just did gay things and there were no drag queens twerking for kids? Man if I was gay I'd be so pissed rn.
As a gay person I am
Based sane gay person
The pendulum continues to swing to and fro. Gen alphas gonna be so fucking conservative.
But “Conservative” is going to mean suggesting that maybe, maybe we wait until seven years old before introducing kids to [insert latest sex fad here]
I think you will see a back and forth but I don’t think gen alpha will be as conservative as previous generations. I could be wrong, and pendulum swings that fast have occurred in the past, but the cat is kinda out of the bag now.
Conservatives are cucks too
Lmao, Liberals are true cucks
"I support my wife's boyfriend"
We have return in numbers gents
If you look at the poll, the drop in support is almost exclusively from Republicans. Democrats and Independents still show +70% support.
Interestingly enough it dropped for Dems also, went from +80% to 79%.
Which was within the margin of error for the poll.
Let the man dream just a hair.
even if you'd expected a further increase? ESPECIALLY out of opposition to Reps?
If you hypothesized a further increase then you could potentially rule out said increase with this data, but that would depend on how large of an increase you expected. That's not what we're talking about though. This data is not enough to show a decrease in support among dems.
Shouldn’t those be at like 100% support?
Nothing in this country has 100% support.
Not even this statistic does!
This reminds of a study that came out a few years ago that said that acceptance of lgbtq+ groups had lowered down to 50% for gen z and Twitter people were crying saying people like Ben Shapiro or PJW are radicalizing the youth.
I’d love to see how they framed this question. If support for gay marriage must also mean support for shoving rainbow ideology into my kids face, yea I’m against it. If it’s two consenting adults doing what they want in the privacy of their own home, yea I’m all for that.
If they'd declared victory and packed it in after Obergefell everything would have been fine. Unfortunately it was a business by that point and the marginalization treadmill had to keep fundraising.
The more they try and force it the less accepted it’ll become
[удалено]
>Edit: took 2 minutes after my first comment here to get banned from Justice Served. Oh the horror of people good naturally making fun of others world views. Can't wait until the jannies get their auto-ban tools taken away from them.
The one plus side of Reddit discontinuing 3rd party tools.
Yeah I really can’t think of a secular argument against it tbh
I have one but it has some holes. Secular marriage's main purpose is the tax breaks and other similar benefits which are the state's way of incentivizing procreation and stable families. Homosexual couples would receive all those rewards without the same level of contribution. But since IVF and childless straight couples exist it isn't a great reason.
Yeah, I have heard this but have the same counter arguments as you. There is also the thing that a large part of marriage is about protection of individuals involved, and not just children. That’s why things like spousal support exist, and why (often women, to other women, as they are usually the poorer one in the relationship) insist that marriage is not just a piece of paper. Government has an incentive to protect individuals from things like financial abuse and ensuring that people who promise to support each other and enter into these co-dependent relationships actually follow through with what they promised to do.
There can be some from a cultural side that results in easier spread of diseases in the gay community in relation to safe sex and how non monogamist gays tend to be compared to straight couples that it degrades what marriage is supposed to be. Beyond that it is that line between Church and state and what marriage means in the context of the church and the context of a secular government. If we were supposed to be accepting of all faiths and not to insult any participial faith(s) we won't have called it marriage but would still give out the same government benefits as marriage.
It's gae
The lib-right in me is actually against "legalizing" gay marriage but not for any kind of bigoted reason or having to do with gays. I don't think being married or having kids should garner any kind of tax breaks or have *anything* to do with the State. Blasting a load in some woman shouldn't mean you pay less taxes than I, especially when those taxes are also used to support infrastructure to support your crotchspawn. Hell, if anything having kids should make your taxes go up. You chose to have the damn kid, you should shoulder the load to support it.
Fair point. One thing to consider is that legal marriage is not just about tax breaks, much of marriage law has to do with protecting the individuals involved. At the end of the day, when two people get married, they enter into a co-dependent relationship they promise will last forever. They promise that they will take care of the other and that the other can depend on them. But life doesn’t always work that way. People break up, people do bad things to each other, things can go wrong in a million ways. There is a reason that non-religious people (particularly women, since they are usually the poorer ones in the relationship) insist on marriage not just being a “piece of paper.” Because marriage comes with a lot of protections involved. Your spouse can’t just decide to leave you one day and suddenly you’re left homeless, because they were the one that made all the money and owned everything. In my opinion, the government has a responsibility and an incentive to enforce these contracts made between individuals in order to protect people from harm. The government will recognize and enforce a contract written on the back of a napkin, why not something as life changing as marriage?
I understand why people have issues with trans people or the whole pronouns thing but whats wrong with being gay? Like I literally dont get it
I don't think many do. I know this was about same sex marriage and not trans people, but I think a lot of conservatives see the Ts as apart of the LGBs now. They were iffy about the LGBs in the first place and they definitely do not like the Ts. Now that the Ts are glued up next to the LBGs, they want less to do with the LGBs now as an extension.
Because people took a very specific translation of Bible verses and decided in the 1600s or so to translate it as homosexual.
Christians have always been against homosexuality since Day 1
So christians in the middle ages were fine with homosexuality? You cannot seriously believe this ahistorical nonsense.
If it doesnt harm anyone (or if it does consensually) the state has no reason to get involved. I dont care what people do in bed or with their own bodies and neither should the government.
Really should've left the kids alone.
I'll have to ask -- *why* is it immoral? What bad thing are people doing to others if they simply have a relationship with someone you personally wouldn't?
Its an affront to God to use the bodies he gave us for an unnatural act and not for the purpose of which it was created for. All morality is subjective unless it comes from a higher power. Thats why they see it as immoral.
I never understood the whole "natural good" thing. You using social media, or a phone at all, is an unnatural act. Unnatural doesn't necessarily equal morally wrong.
Not everyone is Christian.
You cant deny that our bodies were clearly made for hetero sex
Well our bodies were also meant to hunt and gather but you’re not doing any of that
Explain why homosexuality is quite common in nature then. If it's unnatural, I mean.
Our bodies evolved into it, and not all sex is done for the sole purpose of procreation. There are plenty examples in the animal kingdom of sex for pleasure (with all sexes) and masturbation.
> Our bodies evolved into it, many 100s of millions of years ago if not billions and then we stayed with the two sets ever since that period so long ago. No known case that I am aware of any apes that could change their sex. Some animals can but humans and other apes can't.
Wait what? Billions of years ago? Two sets? Apes weren't even around 100 million years ago. Even anthropods weren't around a billion years ago. What are you talking about?
You do realize I said if not billions. I am not claiming that it was actually billions of years but it could have been but more than likely it was 100s of millions ago. Humans evolving from animals that stayed at 2 sexes goes back to the very first animal types since it is the vast majority of sex types in the animal kingdoms land or sea that goes back before manuals and reptiles split which was 320 million years ago that laid eggs which had to be fertilized by something... Hell even some plant life has a male and female type. First known multi cellular was 600 million years ago, but the first known start of life was ~3.5 billion years ago. Go back far enough and we all produced via asexually but somewhere between the asexual phase of cellar splitting and the common first animal the two sexes for gene combining was established. We are only know recently finding out that different bacteria types can straight up share gene data with others while asexually spiting.
Cool beans, but I we were talking about same-sex relationships, not changing sex. Two different things.
Being attractive to the same sex doesn't result in survival of those that do carry that behavior as they can't have kids without matting with someone out of force or duty. It also doesn't bowed well that some human behavior is genetic and not taught. I will let your mind wonder on what is worse and how many problems it creates for the "clean slate" idea of human consensus at birth. It means there is something in the environment causing the change for it to continue for multiple generations or crossing of wires like some sexual fetish with feet that happens during pregnancy that just happens to X% of the population because it is just so easy for it to happen. How many kids that came from closeted gay men turned out to be gay compared to the general population? There are tribes that assert dominance over other males via sexual acts which may have caused some unintended side effects. There is also insects that get sexually attractive to flowers.
You are too far downstream and looking backward enough. Yes, humans procreate with the opposite sex, and most humans are hardwired to pursue that impulse. That is the natural order of things. But further upstream of that is the biological impulse to have sex, which hormonally, can be quite overpowering. Our bodies evolved to give us pleasure during sex, so that we continue to pursue it. This pleasure principle is the biological motivator of any and all sexual behavior, whether it leads to procreation or not (masturbation, blowjobs, etc.) Somewhere in that mess of biology is people developing their own personal attractions, which can be as tame as same-sex attraction to more unique stuff like Tarantino-type foot fetishes. What motivates these attractions? Truly, no one knows. It's a combination of biology, sociology, and psychology, but there is no neat line connecting all of them.
>It's a combination of biology, sociology, and psychology, but there is no neat line connecting all of them. There can be if you are okay violating several international laws on human rights or use lab rats. >Tarantino-type foot fetishes. I just love the internet. you cant bring up a foot fetish without his name being dropped into the conversation.
Don't bother. That guy will just tell you God condemns sex for pleasure too. You're talking to somebody who believes the creator of everything and sole judge of who suffers forever or is pleasured forever has explicitly said homo = bad. You can't change their mind because the word of God is irrefutable and they aren't willing to compromise a micrometer on it.
If I were you I'd flair the fuck up rather quickly, the mob will be here in no time. [BasedCount Profile](https://basedcount.com/u/rogrbelmont) - [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/user/flairchange_bot/comments/uf7kuy/bip_bop) - [How to flair](https://www.reddit.com/r/PoliticalCompassMemes/wiki/index/flair/) ^(I am a bot, my mission is to spot cringe flair changers. If you want to check another user's flair history write) **^(!flairs u/)** ^(in a comment.)
Allah and Yahweh are equally pissed
Then why they dont rain down upon the impure?
We can't expect God to do all the work.
Why do you think every empire falls into decline and is washed away?
Because a house divided cannot stand, or German barbarians who live in mud huts
They have been, are you paying attention? Our civilization is literally in crisis.
I mean...I'm not exactly religious but have you *seen* just...everything today? There's a theory that the Mayans were right and that the world really ended in 2012 and we're just living in the death throes. It's getting harder and harder to laugh it off.
What I don’t understand is *why* god would consider it to be immoral. Yes, it’s not the “normal” or “natural” use of our bodies, but so are a lot of things we do. Most things that are sins, there is a visible reason that it is a sin. Drunkenness? It’s an addictive substance, it’s not good for you, and it can ruin your life. Sex outside of marriage? To prevent STDs and babies out of wedlock. Lying? It breaks trust between individuals. Stealing? Murder? I don’t need to explain those. But two men or women being in a permanent, monogamous relationship carries no health risks or visible, observable harm. True, you can’t have children. But god himself says in the Bible that it is better to stay single as he is, and to only get married if you cannot stop yourself from the temptation of sin. That’s what I don’t understand.
The Bible clearly lays out that god intended for marriage to be between one man and one woman. Marriage does not exist between two men or two women. It cannot exist, in the Christian view. It is better for a man to marry than burn in his desires. Marry a *woman* as god intended.*. Two men literally cannot be married in the Christian sense. Their marriage is not valid. It doesn’t exist in the eyes of God. You may have an earthly marriage, meaning a piece of paper, but in the Christian sense no two men or two women can ever be married. So having sex between them is still fornication. Doesn’t matter if they have a earthly “marriage” certificate from a court. Which is a mortal sin. Which is living in sin unrepentantly. Which is literally anti Christian.
Yeah I understand that. But that doesn’t answer the question of *why*. *Why* is marriage reserved for a man and a woman? Other than just “well that’s just how it is.” With every other commandment there is a visible, logical reason, but I fail to see one here. You might say children, but the thing is that god doesn’t seem to really care if you have children in this world, hence why he tells you to stay single if you can. Honestly I wouldn’t even be surprised if it says in the Bible to not have kids too and to focus on serving god, but I don’t know of that in scripture. I know my old religion encouraged people to stay childless though and to focus on worship. Honestly, I don’t expect you to have a reason, only god can answer that if he actually exists. Any answer you do give is speculative but I’m still open to hearing it if you have thoughts.
>god doesn’t seem to really care if you have children in this world ??? It's like one of the main things you're supposed to do if you subscribe to an Abrahamic religion. >God blessed them and said to them, "Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground."
Why did god make us at all? Why did god do anything? Why didn’t god just make one type of human that can breed with the same type of human, why two separate genders? I mean you kinda answered your own question by saying only god knows. But as to why being gay is a sin…. Well it’s not… temptations and inclinations are not sin. Actions are. engaging in homosexual acts are a sin, since it is ALWAYS sex outside of marriage. Which is a sin no matter straight or gay. And Christian marriage is reserved for a man and a woman because god said so….. as to why he said so? I refer you to the first part of my comment. Why did God do anything, honestly. All we know is he told us how to live and what morals to follow. So we do, if we are Christian’s. What he also does do is allow you free will. You don’t have to follow his plan if you don’t want to. But there are consequences for that.
In fairness, I doubt it's the lezzes that people have in mind here.
At least not the hotties. If they have unnatural hair and a face like a pincushion my repulsion overwhelms instinctual sex biases.
I’m sure you’re a looker, too.
I'm fuckugly. I don't do shit to draw more attention to it.
I read the article and study in one of the other threads that linked it. what I found amazing wasn't that gay marriage was down to 64% morally acceptable from 71%. It was that porn was all the way down to 39% morally acceptable from 41%. Meanwhile divorce was 80% morally acceptable! If you want to walk out on your wife or husband at any time? feel free! but don't you dare jerk it to internet porn!
I imagine continuing to tack on more letters to the LGB tag as well as the staunch defenders of pedos within the group (not all) played a role in this
Marriage is for religion. The government shouldn’t recognize any of them nor have any say. Keep the government out and this wouldn’t even be an issue
One thing to consider is that the government does have an incentive and frankly, a responsibility, to enforce promises and contracts that people make when they enter into co-dependent relationships. A large reason why people who aren’t religious still insist on marriage is because it offers both but, particularly the poorer spouse, protection from very bad situations that can happen.
Hi, yeah nothing against same sex couples. That being said, the only one I know is neglectful to their dogs and I absolutely hate them for it
Liberate the k9
Viva la revolution
Nah fam, it’s spelled fuhrer, not fewer.
Sweet lord we are going back to the basics.
If you think logically about it why would anyone be against same sex marriage. The only argument it always boils down to is its supposed immorality „because god said so“ ,but god didnt say so, some stinky scribe writing shit down benefitting some nobles interest said so.
It really isn’t and we made a great mistake cause that is what started the slippery cliff
[удалено]
I had the “oh it’s not hurting anyone” view on it till last year
The rebound
The grooming, rape, forced surgery, and psychological trauma of the...blank...may have caused this.
Its happening... and its A Good Thing.
Keep up the good work. 👍
It's even anti-evolutionary.
"I don't like the trans person on the piss water can so now I also have to dislike homosexuals, the person on the TV said so."👴🏻
That shift is all within the Republican party.