'Pride Month'

Pedophilia is both a 'sexuality' and a mental disorder. Pedophilia is an orientation in the fact that it's the natural, uncontrollable sexual feelings that an individual has. Pedophilia is also a mental illness in that it is a mental state that causes individuals to have uncontrollable desires to commit actions that harm others.

Pedophiles that have never molested children deserve social acceptance not because their 'sexuality' isn't also a mental disorder, but because they've managed to control it and prevent it from taking over their actions.

 

I found a thing that explains my feelings twenty times better than I ever could.
http://imgur.com/gallery/rJaPf
"... No one should be proud of their skin color, because they didn't earn it, they were born with it... But it was never left at 'proud to be black' outside of posters during a peaceful protest. The expression was 'Proud to be a black doctor' or 'proud to be a black officer', because they were proud to overcome segregation and poor opportunities... but 'proud to be black' isn't useful by itself."

EDIT: Replace black with gay/LGBT, btw

Define "most", because, well, movements (very loud ones, at that) like BLM are still going crazy.
The thing is, once something is given to someone, taking it away is suddenly a horrible sin. People are going to cling to this month, and get a superior air about it. They will want stuff like this, not because it helps them feel comfortable and supported, but because they feel entitled to it. It's happens all the time.
If you look in the comments, there's updates on the post i linked above that also clarify this.

There's no need for it. There just isn't. It's not going to help social integration, and EVEN IF it did, it would only make later generations entitled to their "gay pride" and then we'll have BLM all over again >.>

You need to go back and read the thread if you think people are equating it. Comparing =/= equating.

Oh, I get privileges? Please, hold the door for me, yes, because I'm straight. It's stupid to say that I have a privilege if you want to be equal. I treat you like every other person I know, regardless if you're gay or not. Is that my "privilege"? To treat people equally?
If you want to keep making a difference between two types of people go ahead. Tell people that we have to 'check our privilege' because we aren't like you. That sure promotes peace and unity /s.


Additionally, your struggle is nothing in comparison to what's happening to people fighting to survive in another nation, regardless if they're straight or not.

Pride is a feeling or deep pleasure or satisfaction derived from one's own achievements, the achievements of those with whom one is closely associated, or from qualities or possessions that are widely admired.
"the team was bursting with pride after recording a sensational victory"
synonyms: pleasure, joy, delight, gratification, fulfillment, satisfaction, a sense of achievement
"take pride in a good job well done"

Is it an achievement to be gay, or are you born with it? Pride is being happy with something that you've done. You have done nothing but be who you are. How about a human pride month then? I'm straight! I've had it up to my ears with people telling me I'm a bigot or ignorant because I'm Christian. I've had it up to my eyes with people telling me how horrible a person I am because I forgot sometimes to suddenly change the pronouns I've been using since I could start to talk. Is that straight pride? Is that straight privilege?
Let me tell you: those things don't exist, because everyone realizes how dumb they are. It's not dumb to be proud of being a majority, no, that's not it. People just don't realize that it's okay to not be normal, so they have to go and make these special things for themselves, call people being rude out saying "look at this cis/white privilege! These people are bad people! They oppress us!"
That's. People. That's not cis, that's not white, that's (explicit) people. If you (as a general population of whatever minority you are because EVERYONE has SOME sort of minority about them) don't get over the fact that nobody but PEOPLE - no groups - are oppressing you [unless this is a military dictatorship and/or concentration camp, etc. extreme cases], you will never, ever, be equal to anyone, because you, and only you, are making yourself the victim, and pitting yourself, your group, against another.
I don't give a damn if you're gay or not.
A huge population doesn't care - the majority, in fact.
You haven't fought tooth and nail. A few people have died. Meanwhile, extreme genocide goes on in South Africa, but no one bats an eye about that! You've fought in a "social crusade", with very few retaliations in comparison to, say, Civil Rights. Ghandi? He "fought", tooth and nail. Very, very few actions (especially by the government) have been taken against gay rights in comparison to any other major rights movement. Hell, women were force-fed tubes down their throats for hunger-strike protesting during

Do something, and be proud of it.
Be something, and enjoy being it.
Be proud to be different. If people rallied around being different, instead of being the same, no one would have


Apologies for being so harsh about it, but I'm fed up with hearing about this oh-so-wonderful "privilege" of mine.

Also.
Straight people "immediately think that" because to everyone but yourselves, that's exactly what it looks like. Pride is not about unity and love. Being proud to be a Nazi in Germany, was that about love? No, it was to separate yourself from being sent to a concentration camp.
Pride is for unity and love within a group.
Whoever it excludes, it separates.
Like, c'mon. Here's another extreme example:
I'm proud to be a radical Islamist, proud to serve my God by killing unbelievers.
It brings unity and love to my faith, and to me, who gets to go to heaven.
Does it bring love and unity to others? No.

Your definition of pride, frankly, is extremely one-sided.

Correction.
Heterosexuals have definitely been oppressed.
My ancestors were serfs in a French kingdom. They were treated horribly, made to do extreme amounts of labor for little pay. They were tied to the land and had little to no ability to climb the socio-economic ladder.
They were heterosexual. So, no, they have been.

Please refrain from such rude and personal statements in a debate
It was me, by the way. If you'd actually go back and read it, it makes much more sense. Do you have anything valuable to contribute?

 

Okay, I see what you're saying. Perhaps "proud" isn't a good word to use here. I would agree that someone shouldn't be 'proud' of the way that they're born; however, people should be happy with the qualities that they're born with that aren't bad (such as being gay) and if they want a month of celebration with others who are going through the same thing in order to help them feel happy, that's alright.

Considering that I can't give you a number, "most" is too subjective and vague, I'll give you that. Regardless, a lot of LGBT people do face homophobia and feel uncomfortable with their sexualities, neither of which should happen. At this current time, enough LGBT people face enough homophobia to make Gay Pride Month a positive thing; furthermore, I don't normally see any Gay Pride Month participants taking things to far. Sure, Gay Pride Month might last to the point that the people who participate it start making everything into a big deal, bringing way too much attention to themselves, etc., but right now it's not like this and offers mainly positivity. We shouldn't end something good because of what it could eventually become.

 

I think we'll have to agree to disagree here, because it seems to be a matter of strictly opinion and projection. I just think that it shouldn't have happened in the first place, because of the end result - that people will become entitled to it in the way that one becomes entitled to, say, extra computer time for a period. When it's taken away, it feels unfair and mean, though it doesn't serve a purpose any longer.

 

Sure, whether or not it's currently a positive thing or something that's over-the-top and an issue is pretty dependent on opinion. Regardless, I don't think that something that could be good (even for a short time) should be prevented from happening just because it could eventually cause something bad. I could say that, "The internet never should have happened in the first place because the end result might be that technology becomes sentient and wipes out the human race," or if you want an example of something more definite, I could say, "Our births should have never happened in the first place because the end result will be that we all die." Just because something good could eventually cause something bad, that doesn't mean that the could thing never should've existed in the first place.

 

Sure, but relative to time/usefulness, I think the bad outweighs the good.
In the example of the birth thing, the good outweighs the bad. So while I agree with

I don't think that if the harm done outweighs the good it's causing right now - which, in my opinion, this month will - it should exist.

In response to this directly, that's much more of a 'could' than what this month is. Like I said earlier, we see entitlement happening with black pride (I think I actually said BLM, which was my mistake) that's dividing people into white and black, us and them. So it's happened with a similar group before.

 

honestly alot of people are attractive to me

i could take either side

 

Okay, I see what you're saying here. At this point, I think that this part is still something that's too heavily dependent on personal experience and opinion to debate. I might see a lot more good currently coming out of it (enough that it would outweigh the possible eventual bad) than you and there's no way that we can really prove the 'level' of good that there actually is.

Yeah, I just threw in the first phrases that came to mind in order to get my point across that good things shouldn't always be prevented just because of eventual bad (though I agree with you that they should be prevented if the bad outweighs the good); I wasn't trying to come up with a completely accurate comparison. The idea that Gay Pride Month will eventually cause entitlement and separation isn't a confirmed thing, so it's not like the death comparison is a completely accurate one either. I'd say that your hypothesis about the future of Gay Pride Month falls right in the middle of my two comparisons; it's not near as unlikely as technology becoming sentient and wiping out the human race and it's not near as guaranteed as death.

 

Agreed ^_^

 

I love the irony here. I really do. And I hate it at the same time.

--- Double Post Merged, Jul 29, 2016, Original Post Date: Jul 29, 2016 ---

Not as a group though. They weren't oppressed for being heterosexual.

 

THANK YOU FOR THAT LAST COMMENT!! Heterosexuals have never been oppressed for being Heterosexual. Homosexuals have. Why is that so hard for people to understand??

 

Because I was responding to an argument to disprove the premise. Rather than making my own.

Why is it so hard for people to understand that every human being has something that somehow they've been oppressed by, that part of the human experience is being treated terribly, and that the more that people victimize their group/race/sexuality/gender, the more they ostracize themselves?

 

Once again Morgan Freeman puts it perfectly.


Replace the racial aspect of this video and replace it with sexism or anti-gay etc.

 

I agree but we live in a world of "ists" - racist, sexist etc, however we should never forget that what makes us all different, makes us all the same.

 

Although I won't let a point like that pass, from either side, I don't necessarily agree with you. While it's untrue to say that heterosexuals have been oppressed for being heterosexual, it's equally untrue when people say that heterosexuals have never been oppressed. I think that's what @Fangdragon1998 was getting at.

--- Double Post Merged, Aug 6, 2016, Original Post Date: Aug 6, 2016 ---

Wait... What makes us different makes us the same? Different and Same are literally antonyms.
What makes us different makes us different.
What makes us the same is what makes us the same.

Just because two people are different doesn't mean they can't get along.
For example, my best friend.

Differences: He identifies politically as a Fascist. I identify somewhere in between Libertarianism and Classical Liberalism (These ideologies are completely opposed to each other.)

He's half Hispanic. I'm full white.

He isn't athletic at all (except he can run really fast) I'm an athlete (except I'm relatively slow).
He's short. I'm tall.
He's a hell of a lot smarter than I am. I can't quite figure out how smart he is... He can't quite figure out how smart I am (or so he tells me), but I'm not as smart (although I'm not stupid. Most of the time. Sometimes. Occasionally.)
He's a manipulative bastard. I try to be nice to people.
He hates science classes. I enjoy them.

Similarities: We both like military strategy games (like Axis and Allies, Unity of Command, etc.)
We follow baseball.
He's half white. I'm still full white.
We like math.
We find ourselves reacting to our other friends the same way, even saying the same things at the same time.
We share a friend group.

Notice how we have as many differences as similarities, and some of them are pretty big (see 'political ideology', and 'manipulative bastard'), but we can still ignore those things, or get past them, at least, and be friends.


Don't forget that just because you disagree with someone on one or two things, it doesn't mean you have to hate them. But don't take that to mean that differences are inherently good.

 

You clearly didn't understand what that means, and you have gone on a rant because of this, and ironically going against with what you said.

 

If neither of you can figure out how smart the other one is, how do you know that he's a lot smarter than you?

 

If you compare a lake and a pond, can you tell which has more water even without knowing how much each has?

--- Double Post Merged, Aug 13, 2016, Original Post Date: Aug 13, 2016 ---

It wasn't a rant...
But why don't you elaborate? Because as it was stated (

), it seems pretty untrue.

 

Sure, but comparing a lake to a pond is like comparing someone that's brilliant to an idiot. You're not someone that seems to be dumb and I've gotten the impression that you know this, so wouldn't comparing yourself to someone else that's smart be more similar to comparing a lake to another lake?

 

He's pretty damn brilliant...

Ok, fine, a medium sized lake to a big lake .