Conservative DCUM'ers: how far back do you want LGBTQ rights rolled back?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
As long as there’s no special treatment for anybody based on racial, sexual or psychological differences and everything is based on merit I’m good with all of it.

No affirmative action and no bias. That there is homosexual pride MONTH and veterans only get a day is sick.

I was going to ask what you consider special treatment and you gave me an example. How that is special treatment I dont' know
Veteran's Day started as Armistice Day, became Veteran's Day after WWII, was originated by a president (Wilson), and was signed into law as a national holiday by Pres Eisenhower.

Pride Month did not start with a presidential proclamation and has only been recognized as s special month (this is murky because I know Pride Parades occur in different months in different states I know of) by two presidents.
Basically you're repeating a tagline complaint someone came up as if it indicates an actual problem.

I often read on this website, "you're repeating a tagline" or something similar. That isn't a rebuttal. If you hear something often, the logical explanation is that it resonates with people as true. You're welcome to explain why it isn't. But the fact that many people believe it isn't evidence that it is false.

"repeating a tgagline" wasn't my argument, it was an additional observation. I seem to have come across the exact same Pride Month vs Veterans Day line a lot of times in the past maybe 2 weeks, never before. It is clearly being spread (social contagion there). My argument is that Pride Month and Veterans Day are apples and oranges. They are not the same kind of thing. In fact here is the list of "months" proclaimed for June:
June: Gay and Lesbian Pride Month
June: Caribbean-American Heritage Month
June: Great Outdoors Month
June: National Oceans Month
June: African-American Music Appreciation Month

So Pride Month has to share with all these other observations. November 11 can't ever be a different Federal holiday because it is already taken. It is exclusive. So your complaint is not a good example of anyone getting special privileges.

"Resonates as true" and "true" are not the same things.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Genuinely curious what the ultimate objective of the DeSantis wing is regarding LGBTQ people. Are you really a libertarian "I don't care what consenting adults do" as long as it isn't discussed in the school system? Or do you think that the LGBTQ lifestyle itself is detrimental to national identity? Are you in favor of abolishing the right to gay marriage? Or making homosexuality a crime? It does feel that something changed recently and this is the first Pride month since the late 1990's where corporations and local governments seem to be afraid to wave the rainbow flag.

Think this is a poor reading of things. Almost no one is against "the gays." Almost everyone accepts gay marriage, gay relationships, two mommies or two daddies, gay children, rainbow flags, tolerance, non-discrimition etc etc etc. That issue is settled

What people are bothered by is the "trans issue." Human beings have been around for 300,000 years. Gender fluidity is a very novel concept and the vast majority of people don't buy it. While gender dysmorphia has always existed, people are really uncomfortable being told their tomboy girl or their effeminate boy is not a real boy or girl. And they need to transition and take on a lifetime of medical intervention. Most parents don't think this is a healthy way of dealing with the turbulence of adolescence. They think that what it means to be a boy or girl should be very expansive. If you're not a Barbie or a Jock or you're attracted to people of the same gender, it shouldn't be an issue.

But there seems to be a lot of pressure in certain zip codes that if you don't conform to gender stereotypes there's something wrong with you. And now there's an entire industry that will swoop in and take advantage of it - for financial, ideological, or political reasons

That's what bothers people. Its not LGBQ. It's the T.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:When our nation expanded gay rights-- and I was an early adopter to this notion-- it was because I thought it would be good for families. Gay people could have marriages, kids, and normal lives. In the past couple years, this has changed into an overtly "sexual revolution" message that places an emphasis on personal sexual fulfillment rather than emphasizing the importance of family unity. I think this is harmful to society, and while we should certainly tolerate people who choose to live promiscuous, self-indulgent lifestyles (straight or gay), this shouldn't be celebrated and promoted in the form of state sponsored parades with public nudity or otherwise salacious dress, books in public schools for children, and the White House declaring this lifestyle the "bravest and most courageous." We don't celebrate families in this way, and raising a family is both difficult and essential for society. I think using taxpayer money to promote sexual promiscuity is a step too far and too "Brave New World" ("promiscuity is a citizen's duty"-- literal quote from the book). One way to destroy a culture is to weaken personal relationships, and I am highly suspicious of the intent behind the assault on families (again, gay or straight) and the extreme emphasis on individual sexual gratification as the ultimate good. Biden's recent comments about how all kids are everyone's kids is, again, straight out of Brave New World ("everyone belongs to everyone"). Just like when you prioritize everything, nothing is a priority-- when you make everyone belong to everyone, then no one belongs to anyone. As they say, when people show you who they are- believe them. We all saw them disrobe in front of the white house, in a crowd of likeminded revolutionaries, and shake their bare chests on a video.
In front of Biden, the secret service, etc. I believe them; they intend to destroy our culture and our values by debasing what we used to find important (the American dream) and replace it with a new priority of sexuality as the supreme value. In other words, to me, this isn't about being gay or being straight. It's about an insidious attempt to destroy our society from the inside out in order to gain control. So, what limits do I want on gay people? None. What limits do I want on l the government promoting gender confusion, while also baking in parental alienation as an actual policy? Limits on the use of elected positions to promote sexual promiscuity? I want total cessation of this.

You make a valid point, and I love your literary references, but I think you're following a red herring.

Right now the liberal message is to work on loving all peoples, in all their glorious differences. Families are the nucleus of society and I agree that raising kids in stable parental homes requires a lot of thought, care and effort. But I don't think the current sexual identity revolution in the USA will hinder people from forming a family nucleus and raising children. The promiscuity you see on display, which is abhorrent to many (of all orientations and political leanings) is not representative of the movement as a whole. Likewise, some hastily written, virtue signaling books on sex pushed on kids just follows the modern trend of writing drivel for children and passing it off as literature - most contemporary novels for kids aren't exactly well-written, and caters to the lowest denominator of present-verb, non-stop action, with the simplest sentence structure and least rich vocab possible.

I think modern culture is certainly racing to the bottom, and that celebrating promiscuity is just a small part of a disturbing whole that prizes short attention span, lack of critical thinking and tribal echo chambers. Social media is a big perpetrator of these crimes against human intellect.

But passing laws to ban certain groups from certain bathrooms, ban books from libraries (we'd need to ban practically all of them if we're going for poor writing!), or deny medical and surgical care for extremely vulnerable young people who are certain they belong to another gender and may commit suicide if they are forced to live in a body that is not their own... that's just stupid and cruel.

We need to take a giant step back and encourage a love of learning, letters and science. It's the only way to have a society that can recognize bullshit and apply humane ideals.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Genuinely curious what the ultimate objective of the DeSantis wing is regarding LGBTQ people. Are you really a libertarian "I don't care what consenting adults do" as long as it isn't discussed in the school system? Or do you think that the LGBTQ lifestyle itself is detrimental to national identity? Are you in favor of abolishing the right to gay marriage? Or making homosexuality a crime? It does feel that something changed recently and this is the first Pride month since the late 1990's where corporations and local governments seem to be afraid to wave the rainbow flag.

Think this is a poor reading of things. Almost no one is against "the gays." Almost everyone accepts gay marriage, gay relationships, two mommies or two daddies, gay children, rainbow flags, tolerance, non-discrimition etc etc etc. That issue is settled

What people are bothered by is the "trans issue." Human beings have been around for 300,000 years. Gender fluidity is a very novel concept and the vast majority of people don't buy it. While gender dysmorphia has always existed, people are really uncomfortable being told their tomboy girl or their effeminate boy is not a real boy or girl. And they need to transition and take on a lifetime of medical intervention. Most parents don't think this is a healthy way of dealing with the turbulence of adolescence. They think that what it means to be a boy or girl should be very expansive. If you're not a Barbie or a Jock or you're attracted to people of the same gender, it shouldn't be an issue.

But there seems to be a lot of pressure in certain zip codes that if you don't conform to gender stereotypes there's something wrong with you. And now there's an entire industry that will swoop in and take advantage of it - for financial, ideological, or political reasons

That's what bothers people. Its not LGBQ. It's the T.

I think this is well summarized.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Genuinely curious what the ultimate objective of the DeSantis wing is regarding LGBTQ people. Are you really a libertarian "I don't care what consenting adults do" as long as it isn't discussed in the school system? Or do you think that the LGBTQ lifestyle itself is detrimental to national identity? Are you in favor of abolishing the right to gay marriage? Or making homosexuality a crime? It does feel that something changed recently and this is the first Pride month since the late 1990's where corporations and local governments seem to be afraid to wave the rainbow flag.

Think this is a poor reading of things. Almost no one is against "the gays." Almost everyone accepts gay marriage, gay relationships, two mommies or two daddies, gay children, rainbow flags, tolerance, non-discrimition etc etc etc. That issue is settled

What people are bothered by is the "trans issue." Human beings have been around for 300,000 years. Gender fluidity is a very novel concept and the vast majority of people don't buy it. While gender dysmorphia has always existed, people are really uncomfortable being told their tomboy girl or their effeminate boy is not a real boy or girl. And they need to transition and take on a lifetime of medical intervention. Most parents don't think this is a healthy way of dealing with the turbulence of adolescence. They think that what it means to be a boy or girl should be very expansive. If you're not a Barbie or a Jock or you're attracted to people of the same gender, it shouldn't be an issue.

But there seems to be a lot of pressure in certain zip codes that if you don't conform to gender stereotypes there's something wrong with you. And now there's an entire industry that will swoop in and take advantage of it - for financial, ideological, or political reasons

That's what bothers people. It's not LGBQ. It's the T.

That's the same thing in different wrapping paper. I was there when the issue wasn't grown adults living in monogamous gay relationships, it was the CHILDREN. We can't expose the CHILDREN to gay marriage, because it will confuse them/influence them/damage them.

Now it's transgenderism. Which is a thing that exists and has existed through known history. Just like gay people. And somehow you didn't end up gay or trans. Trust your kids to find their way, too. Even if they (gasp!) see a person in a dress using the women's restroom who they think might have a Y chromosome.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m a conservative and have no issue whatsoever with the LGBT community. I have gay family members and friends. It’s just not the big deal some of you seem to want it to be. Frankly, I would simply like to stop talking about it - and I know my gay friends/family feel the same way.

+1 million.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:When our nation expanded gay rights-- and I was an early adopter to this notion-- it was because I thought it would be good for families. Gay people could have marriages, kids, and normal lives. In the past couple years, this has changed into an overtly "sexual revolution" message that places an emphasis on personal sexual fulfillment rather than emphasizing the importance of family unity. I think this is harmful to society, and while we should certainly tolerate people who choose to live promiscuous, self-indulgent lifestyles (straight or gay), this shouldn't be celebrated and promoted in the form of state sponsored parades with public nudity or otherwise salacious dress, books in public schools for children, and the White House declaring this lifestyle the "bravest and most courageous." We don't celebrate families in this way, and raising a family is both difficult and essential for society. I think using taxpayer money to promote sexual promiscuity is a step too far and too "Brave New World" ("promiscuity is a citizen's duty"-- literal quote from the book). One way to destroy a culture is to weaken personal relationships, and I am highly suspicious of the intent behind the assault on families (again, gay or straight) and the extreme emphasis on individual sexual gratification as the ultimate good. Biden's recent comments about how all kids are everyone's kids is, again, straight out of Brave New World ("everyone belongs to everyone"). Just like when you prioritize everything, nothing is a priority-- when you make everyone belong to everyone, then no one belongs to anyone. As they say, when people show you who they are- believe them. We all saw them disrobe in front of the white house, in a crowd of likeminded revolutionaries, and shake their bare chests on a video.
In front of Biden, the secret service, etc. I believe them; they intend to destroy our culture and our values by debasing what we used to find important (the American dream) and replace it with a new priority of sexuality as the supreme value. In other words, to me, this isn't about being gay or being straight. It's about an insidious attempt to destroy our society from the inside out in order to gain control. So, what limits do I want on gay people? None. What limits do I want on l the government promoting gender confusion, while also baking in parental alienation as an actual policy? Limits on the use of elected positions to promote sexual promiscuity? I want total cessation of this.

Well said. I have been thinking about that book a lot lately.

I 100% support equal rights for all people. But like others above said, I think most people are tired of hearing people yap about it all the time. I think sadly for the LGBT community, the extremists in their community are hurting them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:PP, PLEASE

I agree the pendulum has swung into crazy in the right but have you given any thought to how often all these issues are discussed in schools, newspapers, and so on? No one ever voted for that - it was just decided by our betters that enlightenment was called for

This is my point. It never was discussed in schools. It’s never been part of the curriculum. It’s in the newspapers because the conservatives make a big deal about it.

Culturally it is way more accepted, depicted and shown to be perfectly normal. I don’t know any zoomers that would think twice about seeing gay characters on TV but the grandparents are horrified. I’m guessing that the conservative objection is to how being lgbtq is depicted as being normal in entertainment and by younger people while homophobia and bigotry is depicted as being bad. Since the conservatives are bigots they lash out pissing at the wind.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Genuinely curious what the ultimate objective of the DeSantis wing is regarding LGBTQ people. Are you really a libertarian "I don't care what consenting adults do" as long as it isn't discussed in the school system? Or do you think that the LGBTQ lifestyle itself is detrimental to national identity? Are you in favor of abolishing the right to gay marriage? Or making homosexuality a crime? It does feel that something changed recently and this is the first Pride month since the late 1990's where corporations and local governments seem to be afraid to wave the rainbow flag.

Think this is a poor reading of things. Almost no one is against "the gays." Almost everyone accepts gay marriage, gay relationships, two mommies or two daddies, gay children, rainbow flags, tolerance, non-discrimition etc etc etc. That issue is settled

What people are bothered by is the "trans issue." Human beings have been around for 300,000 years. Gender fluidity is a very novel concept and the vast majority of people don't buy it. While gender dysmorphia has always existed, people are really uncomfortable being told their tomboy girl or their effeminate boy is not a real boy or girl. And they need to transition and take on a lifetime of medical intervention. Most parents don't think this is a healthy way of dealing with the turbulence of adolescence. They think that what it means to be a boy or girl should be very expansive. If you're not a Barbie or a Jock or you're attracted to people of the same gender, it shouldn't be an issue.

But there seems to be a lot of pressure in certain zip codes that if you don't conform to gender stereotypes there's something wrong with you. And now there's an entire industry that will swoop in and take advantage of it - for financial, ideological, or political reasons

That's what bothers people. It's not LGBQ. It's the T.

That's the same thing in different wrapping paper. I was there when the issue wasn't grown adults living in monogamous gay relationships, it was the CHILDREN. We can't expose the CHILDREN to gay marriage, because it will confuse them/influence them/damage them.

Now it's transgenderism. Which is a thing that exists and has existed through known history. Just like gay people. And somehow you didn't end up gay or trans. Trust your kids to find their way, too. Even if they (gasp!) see a person in a dress using the women's restroom who they think might have a Y chromosome.

Gen Z had the higher exposure to LGBT in public than earlier generation. Somehow they ended up more gay and trans.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When our nation expanded gay rights-- and I was an early adopter to this notion-- it was because I thought it would be good for families. Gay people could have marriages, kids, and normal lives. In the past couple years, this has changed into an overtly "sexual revolution" message that places an emphasis on personal sexual fulfillment rather than emphasizing the importance of family unity. I think this is harmful to society, and while we should certainly tolerate people who choose to live promiscuous, self-indulgent lifestyles (straight or gay), this shouldn't be celebrated and promoted in the form of state sponsored parades with public nudity or otherwise salacious dress, books in public schools for children, and the White House declaring this lifestyle the "bravest and most courageous." We don't celebrate families in this way, and raising a family is both difficult and essential for society. I think using taxpayer money to promote sexual promiscuity is a step too far and too "Brave New World" ("promiscuity is a citizen's duty"-- literal quote from the book). One way to destroy a culture is to weaken personal relationships, and I am highly suspicious of the intent behind the assault on families (again, gay or straight) and the extreme emphasis on individual sexual gratification as the ultimate good. Biden's recent comments about how all kids are everyone's kids is, again, straight out of Brave New World ("everyone belongs to everyone"). Just like when you prioritize everything, nothing is a priority-- when you make everyone belong to everyone, then no one belongs to anyone. As they say, when people show you who they are- believe them. We all saw them disrobe in front of the white house, in a crowd of likeminded revolutionaries, and shake their bare chests on a video.
In front of Biden, the secret service, etc. I believe them; they intend to destroy our culture and our values by debasing what we used to find important (the American dream) and replace it with a new priority of sexuality as the supreme value. In other words, to me, this isn't about being gay or being straight. It's about an insidious attempt to destroy our society from the inside out in order to gain control. So, what limits do I want on gay people? None. What limits do I want on l the government promoting gender confusion, while also baking in parental alienation as an actual policy? Limits on the use of elected positions to promote sexual promiscuity? I want total cessation of this.

Well said. I have been thinking about that book a lot lately.

I 100% support equal rights for all people. But like others above said, I think most people are tired of hearing people yap about it all the time. I think sadly for the LGBT community, the extremists in their community are hurting them.

Do you know why people are "yapping about it all the time?" Because trans people are dying! A trans acquaintance of mine just had his drink spiked with Fentanyl at a random bar and he is now in the hospital with kidney failure.

"That's an isolated incident. It's not happening on a large scale " Right?

The thing is protections for trans people are being eroded and if we "stop yapping about it" the worse it will get and the freer people will feel to discriminate. We can't be silent because our lives LITERALLY DEPEND ON IT.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:When our nation expanded gay rights-- and I was an early adopter to this notion-- it was because I thought it would be good for families. Gay people could have marriages, kids, and normal lives. In the past couple years, this has changed into an overtly "sexual revolution" message that places an emphasis on personal sexual fulfillment rather than emphasizing the importance of family unity. I think this is harmful to society, and while we should certainly tolerate people who choose to live promiscuous, self-indulgent lifestyles (straight or gay), this shouldn't be celebrated and promoted in the form of state sponsored parades with public nudity or otherwise salacious dress, books in public schools for children, and the White House declaring this lifestyle the "bravest and most courageous." We don't celebrate families in this way, and raising a family is both difficult and essential for society. I think using taxpayer money to promote sexual promiscuity is a step too far and too "Brave New World" ("promiscuity is a citizen's duty"-- literal quote from the book). One way to destroy a culture is to weaken personal relationships, and I am highly suspicious of the intent behind the assault on families (again, gay or straight) and the extreme emphasis on individual sexual gratification as the ultimate good. Biden's recent comments about how all kids are everyone's kids is, again, straight out of Brave New World ("everyone belongs to everyone"). Just like when you prioritize everything, nothing is a priority-- when you make everyone belong to everyone, then no one belongs to anyone. As they say, when people show you who they are- believe them. We all saw them disrobe in front of the white house, in a crowd of likeminded revolutionaries, and shake their bare chests on a video.
In front of Biden, the secret service, etc. I believe them; they intend to destroy our culture and our values by debasing what we used to find important (the American dream) and replace it with a new priority of sexuality as the supreme value. In other words, to me, this isn't about being gay or being straight. It's about an insidious attempt to destroy our society from the inside out in order to gain control. So, what limits do I want on gay people? None. What limits do I want on l the government promoting gender confusion, while also baking in parental alienation as an actual policy? Limits on the use of elected positions to promote sexual promiscuity? I want total cessation of this.

💯

[Anonymous]

Most of what I hear about gay people is conservatives complaining about how much they hear about gay people.

Also, I hear way more about Jesus.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

That's what bothers people. Its not LGBQ. It's the T.

I agree. It is very easy for me to empathize with LGB people. They feel attraction to members of their own sex, just like I feel attraction to members of the opposite sex. Both straight and gay people can feel deep love.

But I can't empathize with transgender people. What does it mean that a man feels like a woman? How does he know what a woman feels like? Is it just because he likes stereotypically women's things? The idea that we must behave stereotypically according to our sex is setting social progress back 100 years. It is fine for men to cry, wear dresses, and like knitting.

Whenever I see the word "trans" I assume that it is short for "transsexual" -- a man who enjoys presenting as a stereotypical female (or vice versa).

[Anonymous]

Your rights end where mine begin. So lesbians don’t need to be down with girl dick, afabs shouldn’t be compelled to shared unclothed spaces with amabs, etc. that’s all I’ve got.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Genuinely curious what the ultimate objective of the DeSantis wing is regarding LGBTQ people. Are you really a libertarian "I don't care what consenting adults do" as long as it isn't discussed in the school system? Or do you think that the LGBTQ lifestyle itself is detrimental to national identity? Are you in favor of abolishing the right to gay marriage? Or making homosexuality a crime? It does feel that something changed recently and this is the first Pride month since the late 1990's where corporations and local governments seem to be afraid to wave the rainbow flag.

Think this is a poor reading of things. Almost no one is against "the gays." Almost everyone accepts gay marriage, gay relationships, two mommies or two daddies, gay children, rainbow flags, tolerance, non-discrimition etc etc etc. That issue is settled

What people are bothered by is the "trans issue." Human beings have been around for 300,000 years. Gender fluidity is a very novel concept and the vast majority of people don't buy it. While gender dysmorphia has always existed, people are really uncomfortable being told their tomboy girl or their effeminate boy is not a real boy or girl. And they need to transition and take on a lifetime of medical intervention. Most parents don't think this is a healthy way of dealing with the turbulence of adolescence. They think that what it means to be a boy or girl should be very expansive. If you're not a Barbie or a Jock or you're attracted to people of the same gender, it shouldn't be an issue.

But there seems to be a lot of pressure in certain zip codes that if you don't conform to gender stereotypes there's something wrong with you. And now there's an entire industry that will swoop in and take advantage of it - for financial, ideological, or political reasons

That's what bothers people. It's not LGBQ. It's the T.

That's the same thing in different wrapping paper. I was there when the issue wasn't grown adults living in monogamous gay relationships, it was the CHILDREN. We can't expose the CHILDREN to gay marriage, because it will confuse them/influence them/damage them.

Now it's transgenderism. Which is a thing that exists and has existed through known history. Just like gay people. And somehow you didn't end up gay or trans. Trust your kids to find their way, too. Even if they (gasp!) see a person in a dress using the women's restroom who they think might have a Y chromosome.

Gen Z had the higher exposure to LGBT in public than earlier generation. Somehow they ended up more gay and trans.

Or previous generations suppressed themselves more.