Any secular justification for "Defense of Marriage"?

[Fenny the Fox]

And the dubious amount of LGBT which magically tripled in just a few decades, because you know, it's natural and not a choice

First, I would love to see some actual stats on that claim of LGBT numbers somehow tripling over a few decades.

So far as I know, the predicted percentage of LGBT individuals has not really changed in a long time, that being around 3%, or so. I recall reading a paper pointing to a study result that pointed to around 3-5% as far back as 1915 or earlier - author was Edward Carpenter; I can't recall which paper, or what the actual study was, though I recall it being German in origin.

[Not the stupid, but oft quote, 10% hyperbole that gets pointed to so often, since it never did nor does it now have any relevance to actual numbers or studies. It was from Kinsey pointing to 10% ish of men in prison reporting having had a single instance of same-sex behavior at one time in life - it was never meant to claim anything but that.]

Not to mention the bias given by change in societal views also equating to a larger percentage of people that are actually "open" about being LGBT, giving a perceived "increase" in percentage, despite little to no actual change in numbers.

 

[David Brider]

And the dubious amount of LGBT which magically tripled in just a few decades...

Have you any figures to support that statistic?

 

[David Brider]

First, I would love to see some actual stats on that claim of LGBT numbers somehow tripling over a few decades.

So far as I know, the predicted percentage of LGBT individuals has not really changed in a long time, that being around 3%, or so. I recall reading a paper pointing to a study result that pointed to around 3-5% as far back as 1915 or earlier - author was Edward Carpenter; I can't recall which paper, or what the actual study was, though I recall it being German in origin.

[Not the stupid, but oft quote, 10% hyperbole that gets pointed to so often, since it never did nor does it now have any relevance to actual numbers or studies. It was from Kinsey pointing to 10% ish of men in prison reporting having had a single instance of same-sex behavior at one time in life - it was never meant to claim anything but that.]

I'm not sure about that - I suspect that whilst numbers of lesbian and gay people may be around 3 - 5%, if you count all LGBT people - including bisexual and transgender people - it may be nearer 10%. Certainly, a recent survey by the Methodist church gave a figure of, IIRC, about 8% of people identifying as other than heterosexual (which included a non-specific "other" category which could have covered pansexual and asexual people, but didn't include any question on gender identity so lacked any figure for transgender people).

 

[quatona]

But I think I will leave it at this as it is getting a bit long and it is off topic. Perhaps we can pick it up again sometime in another more suited forum. But then you may have had enough. But I do value your opinion and I enjoy the debate.

Steve, to be quite honest: Yes, I am a little tired of this. Don´t take it personally - I´m sure you are good willing and an enjoyable person, and I thank you for the immense time and effort you´ve put in trying to make me understand your lines of thought.
But our conversation doesn´t get us anywhere. I, at least, don´t see any progress; we are not one step further than we were when we started it. That´s regrettable and frustrating for both of us, but sometimes some things just don´t work. It´s particularly regrettable because in many concrete issues you and I have similar concerns and would advocate similar proposals and approaches (while in others we definitely won´t and can´t), but since your ideas seem to be inseparably linked to your ideology/faith it´s hard to cooperate with you for persons who don´t share it. If you want to get any of the things done that you feel need urgently be done, I would humbly recommend you to rethink this attitude. It´s counterproductive in regards to the concrete goals you are pursuing.

 

[Queller]

I am clearly speaking of the perpetrator of the crime being held accountable for their actions. Nothing that I said implies that the victim consents.

If you can be held responsible for committing murder you are also able to consent to non-procreative sex, as the former (murder) is a far more serious matter than the latter (non-procreative sex).

And in this country you can be held accountable for murder at age 10. You don't receive the adult punishment but the punishment is still VERY severe (consider the Jamie Bulger killers).

So when we accept non-procreative consenting sex we must extend that to include ALL who can consent....and that must logically include children who are capable of being held responsible for murder.

Sorry but that does not logically follow. Just because someone can be charged with murder does not mean that can also get a driver's license or vote or drink legally.

Now I kind of hope that you agree that sex with children is a truly disgusting thing, but if we allow non-procreative consenting sex we MUST ALSO allow that to include children over the age of criminal responsibility

There is no logical path you can use to come too that conclusion unless you therefore also believe that at age 10 children can be allowed to do anything that would normally have an age restriction.

and it is only a matter of time before this comes about. The argument for lowering the age of consent is already being made in mainstream venues of media and academia.

What age is being advocated as the new age of consent?. Provide evidence for your claim.

The only defences against this are:
* raise the age of criminal responsibility to match the age of consent
or
* stop considering non-procreative sex to be legitimate

Under this logic, a married heterosexual couple could not have legitimate sex unless they conceived a child every time.

The former of these options would let a LOT of criminals off the hook

So we are left with the latter, and it MUST apply to homosexuality, sterility and contraception use equally.

which would still be illogical and a vast abuse of government power.

I wish that more would see the link. The matter applies equally to all and we should not single out same-sex couples.

Oh I think they see the link, they just recognize how fundamentally stupid the idea is and therefore have to use illogical arguments such as "well infertile couples have the right equipment so theoretically they could get pregnant" tip protect their argument against SSM.

 

[Aldebaran]

But "accepting their identity if they realise they're trans*" isn't the same thing as "letting them do whatever they want," and doesn't mean denying the need for discipline and guidance.

I guess I need to quote what Windstaff said even further then. "the same ideology which has led to juvenile courts being larger then general courts and school shootings something like a season!"

How does being "trans*" lead to juvenile court or school shootings?

 

[David Brider]

How does being "trans*" lead to juvenile court or school shootings?

It doesn't.

 

[WindStaff]

First, I would love to see some actual stats on that claim of LGBT numbers somehow tripling over a few decades.

So far as I know, the predicted percentage of LGBT individuals has not really changed in a long time, that being around 3%, or so. I recall reading a paper pointing to a study result that pointed to around 3-5% as far back as 1915 or earlier - author was Edward Carpenter; I can't recall which paper, or what the actual study was, though I recall it being German in origin.

[Not the stupid, but oft quote, 10% hyperbole that gets pointed to so often, since it never did nor does it now have any relevance to actual numbers or studies. It was from Kinsey pointing to 10% ish of men in prison reporting having had a single instance of same-sex behavior at one time in life - it was never meant to claim anything but that.]

Not to mention the bias given by change in societal views also equating to a larger percentage of people that are actually "open" about being LGBT, giving a perceived "increase" in percentage, despite little to no actual change in numbers.

LGBT went from 1 percent to over 3, something that the liberal statistics safely tuck away under the mat of homosexuals being statistically happier.

That's not progression, that's a brothel.

But I suppose you could just pick whatever statistic fits your bias. I read between the lines- homosexuality has tripled and it's not like there isn't a fantastically perfect reason why.

 

[David Brider]

LGBT went from 1 percent to over 3, something that the liberal statistics safely tuck away under the mat of homosexuals being statistically happier.

Unless you can show where you're getting the "1%" and the "3%" figures from, that's not really terribly meaningful...

 

[Marius27]

LGBT went from 1 percent to over 3, something that the liberal statistics safely tuck away under the mat of homosexuals being statistically happier.

That's not progression, that's a brothel.

But I suppose you could just pick whatever statistic fits your bias. I read between the lines- homosexuality has tripled and it's not like there isn't a fantastically perfect reason why.

Still no evidence for your claims. More people coming out as gay doesn't mean their numbers increased.

 

[Marius27]

The arguments are already being made to lower the age of consent in society.

It is only a matter of time before these people get it reduced to age 10.

You mean like the ages that were more common in Biblical days? Ironic that you oppose that.

 

[quatona]

You mean like the ages that were more common in Biblical days? Ironic that you oppose that.

To be fair, back then their consent wasn´t even required for children/juveniles to get married.

 

[WindStaff]

More people coming out as gay doesn't mean their numbers increased.

Yeah, they were all too afraid right?
Sorry, but the age of being terrified to come out ended in the 60's. Which was well before the sudden 'coming out' as you say. Just in the past decade alone, it has already become a subculture. I don't expect it to remain the same or shrink_

Also, what are you're thoughts about God destroying Sodom and Gomorrah? I bet you have the best excuse ever for that, despite your conviction for gentiles against such sexual deviance.

 

[KitKatMatt]

Sorry, but the age of being terrified to come out ended in the 60's.

I really feel like this is going to fall on deaf ears, but I'll say it anyways:

Gay kids are still kicked out of their homes for coming out to their families. They're still attacked by people because they're gay, they're still KILLED because they're gay.

If you can lose your home, your family, and become a walking target, YOU ARE GOING TO BE TERRIFIED.

My Tumblr feed is full of pleading posts by teenagers who need a place to stay because they either came out to, or were outed to their families and they fear for their safety or they were told to leave. These posts are from all over the USA (and plenty outside the USA, but let's just focus on The Land Of The Free for a moment).

It's not just in the South. It's everywhere. I see tons of posts from California. I see a lot from the New England area. These people are terrified of their own family and friends turning against them and disowning them or HARMING them.

Tell me more about how the age of being terrified ended in the 60's.

 

[Euler]

I really feel like this is going to fall on deaf ears, but I'll say it anyways:

Gay kids are still kicked out of their homes for coming out to their families. They're still attacked by people because they're gay, they're still KILLED because they're gay.

If you can lose your home, your family, and become a walking target, YOU ARE GOING TO BE TERRIFIED.

My Tumblr feed is full of pleading posts by teenagers who need a place to stay because they either came out to, or were outed to their families and they fear for their safety or they were told to leave. These posts are from all over the USA (and plenty outside the USA, but let's just focus on The Land Of The Free for a moment).

It's not just in the South. It's everywhere. I see tons of posts from California. I see a lot from the New England area. These people are terrified of their own family and friends turning against them and disowning them or HARMING them.

Tell me more about how the age of being terrified ended in the 60's.

You're appealling to an impenetrable wall of wilfull ignorance.

 

[KitKatMatt]

You're appealling to an impenetrable wall of wilfull ignorance.

Probably true, but I had to get it out

 

[WindStaff]

Gay kids are still kicked out of their homes for coming out to their families. They're still attacked by people because they're gay, they're still KILLED because they're gay.

And people are kicked because they are druggies, attacked because they are druggies, and killed because they are druggies.

This is what puts 'progression' in the dirt: a thousand years ago, this would have been the case with either/or. In fact, the HIV rate is probably the same, the whoring and loss of family and friends is definitely the same- your case has been heard but reality trumps it.

The only reason they are happier is because society now condones their lifestyle. But you see, their parents are not the rest of society- they are their parents. And they wanted to be grandparents_

 

[quatona]

Yeah, they were all too afraid right?
Sorry, but the age of being terrified to come out ended in the 60's.

No, it didn´t. And even if the age of being *terrified* had ended at that time, the age of being reluctant hadn´t.
But we have already learned that you don´t let facts get in the way of your preconceptions but prefer to read stuff like "increase from 1% to 3%" somewhere "between the lines".

Also, what are you're thoughts about God destroying Sodom and Gomorrah? I bet you have the best excuse ever for that,

No, personally, I can´t find an excuse for God destroying entire cities.

 

[Fenny the Fox]

Windstaff,
To further this:

Tell me more about how the age of being terrified ended in the 60's.

Are we forgetting Matt Shepard? What about Mark Carson (killed in 2013)? How about these two men - Midtown Manhattan Gay Bashing: Two Victims Beaten, Dragged, Stomped On: Gothamist ?

I'm sorry, but "ended in the 1960s"? What world are you living in? Heck, sodomy (not the same thing, no, but related - we can't deny that) was still illegal in most states until the 70s, and was illegal in a few until 2003.

People are still beaten and abused for being even perceived as gay, let alone actually being gay, in many parts of the nation. And worldwide? It is still punishable by death or imprisonment in much of the world!

 

[WindStaff]

Are we forgetting Matt Shepard? What about Mark Carson (killed in 2013)?

I'm sure this will happen for the rest of humanity's existence, like any other reason for murder.

Doesn't mean that homosexuals are being persecuted.