Saying that beinggay is a mental illness is not correct. That is just an absurd opinion. No different than opinions by SJW's.
Half naked man tells everyone, sex with women is awesome. Makes a flag, parades around - ends in a mental hospital. Naked pevert praises sodomy, waves a dildo & a flag, liberals cheer!
So much wrong with that.Why would you assume the first would be put in a mental ward? It would depend on if the first was random, and the second was part of an organized event.
Rob tells doc, he is in wrong body and he is actually Bob. Wants to get out - diagnosed. Rob tells doc, he is Sally in a wrong body. Chops off his dick - Congratulations, proud tranny!
Trans and gay are different things completely. Gender dysmorphia is a psychological issue. Being gay is just a sexual orientation.
no shit Sherlock. Reply, new post ... yawn.
Good, then you agree what you said before made no sense, or at least did not support your argument.
Well how do you know what is correct and what isn't? Since there is no "meaning" to life then literally everything is correct and is incorrect.
There was a time where slavery was perfectly fine, then why did it change? How do you determine what is right or wrong if there is no singular authority saying so?
Right and wrong are irrelevant on this issue. The claim was that it is a mental illness to be gay, not that it is wrong. Gender dysmorphia yes, but being gay, no.
It's not an opinion. It's based on biological facts about reproduction.
And here comes the problems with religions: they try to support their believes with "science".
Bringing religion is off topic and not an argument.
Because your bringing the classical religious bullshit disguised as science. There is overwhelming empirical evidence against homosexuality being an illness.
I'm sorry if you can handle biological facts without your feelings being hurt.
I'm still waiting for scientifical facts.
About how babies are being made?
Lol the nonsense we can read.
Totally convinced, great rebutal, nothing more to say by my part.
Natural selection don't care about individuals as long as the outcome for the specie is positive, which involves more things than just reproduction.
Yes and reproduction of individuals being the most fundamental one.
How do you figure? How do you figure that makes it a psychological issue?
Because psychology is malleable unlike biological precondition.
Being gay is not a choice, or illness though. How are you defining a mental illness?
It is abnormal, it impairs normal functioning of a human being. So it can be classified as a disease.
It doesn't actually impair normal functions though. Not all members of a species specialise in the same thing, and it is okay that some do not specialise in breeding.
I actually think some people are just born wired that way. That behavior is normal for that particular individual. And it's no one else's business.
Exactly. People confuse average behavior with how individuals should behave.
Because it is misaligned with biological functions.
Lots of things are misaligned with biological functions. That does not define a mental illness. It seems like an unrelated reason.
It makes them illness, mental or not.
That does not make it an illness. By that definition everyone in the world is mentally ill.
Nobody's perfect indeed.
Something is not a mental illness unless it prevents them from having normal interactions, or makes it difficult to live their lives in society.
"prevents them from having normal interactions"
Like reproduction?
Reproduction doesn't happen in the streets. Also people are not required to reproduce. So no, reproduction doesn't matter on this issue.
People aren't required to have any interactions on any field if they don't want to. Your argument does not stand in any ways. Human are required to reproduce to perpetuate the race.
Humanity needs reproduction. Individuals do not need to. Also, we do not reproduce in public. So my points stand. As you say, interactions are not required. You have supported my point
No you didn't. You are simply trying to be apologist of biological misalignements AKA illnesses because of your social construct propagated by the MSM media.
I fight against SJW's all the time bud. I think you just dknt understand this issue, or what a mental illness even is. I think you just mean you find it disgusting.
I find it biologically misaligned. Which it is.
Which means everyone is mentally ill, which makes the way you use the term useless. All humans do things that are biologically misaligned.
Yes and an instance where an illness is generalized does not make it less of an illness. It's called an epidemic.
Not really how it works with mental health issues. If everyone shares it then it is just the human condition. Especially since it is not a new issue, and is older than humanity itself.
I strongly disagree this opinion based on nothing tangible.
I am not willing to find links for you, but I am not simply giving opinion. Something is not classified as a mental disorder until it affects one's ability to live in society.
Like reproduction?
One does not have to reproduce to participate in society. Reproduction is irrelevant to the issue.
Families are the fundamental basis of all societies. So reproduction is 110% relevant in this regard.
Are people required to have children? Are people not able to operate in society? Are people expected to have sex in public? It no then reproduction is irrelevant.
Not an argument. It's like saying does blind people can't make a living? Are you required to see to be happy?
Being blind does impare your ability to take part in society. That is why it is a physical impairment. Your example deafeats your own argument.
Being gay does impair your ability to reproduce yourself and ensure the perenity of the society you live in.
By this can I assume you are into forced procreation? At least through social, or possibly medical pressure. Are people who choose not to have kids mentally I'll?
Nope. It's not because you have legs that you are forced to use them. But not having legs still is an handicap.
Hat analogy works in my favour. Having no legs makes it hard to operate in society. Not having kids does not make it hard to operate in society. Your own examples are defeating you.
The perenity of your society depends on those who procreate. If its members can't procreate it's definitely an handicap for the society. I'm not sure why your trying to argue that.
Procreate - and then have that offspring be competent enough to carry the torch for another generation. To my knowledge it's never been done without a solid nuclear family foundation.
I am arguing against saying everyone is required to procreate. Your premise only works if you want enforced procreation. Your point is irrelevant if it isn't required.
Procreaction IS required for ANY and ALL societies to survive. Are you arguing otherwise?
Societies, yes. Individuals, no. I am saying something is not an illness until it imparts your ability to function in society. You say something is an illness when you think it is icky
Would be better is to stop having kids all together and instead have immigrants replace your country's population. All THEIR kids are much easier to indoctrinate with marxist ideology.
That would make LightRider very happy.
