codonaft on Nostr: This is where things got very interesting, thanks. No irony or sarcasm. I hope this ...

This is where things got very interesting, thanks. No irony or sarcasm.

I hope this discussion is not boring to you already, as it might go through the same arguments you possibly encountered before.

So, if I got it right, it seems that from your perspective some kind of psychosis distorts personality, and the distortion is homosexuality itself. And it seems you see it as something degenerating for society because a deluded person affects society negatively. Got quite a lot to say about it, but I'll jump into the main point.

Even though I don't agree, let's say homosexuality is degenerating for an individual. But is it actually degenerating for society as a whole? The society as a whole is more important here.

There's a rational position (supported not just by homosexuals) that we actually have been overdoing the reproduction globally; it started to skyrocket since the 1900s (although locally it declines in certain countries, some nations may disappear soon). It seems like we've been living in an illusion of unlimited growth, and I find it dangerous for the not-that-smart society for various reasons. Planet with its resources is limited, and if we're living like over-reproducing parasites, overusing resources mindlessly, we get what we've got—next generations will probably be dealing with dangerously increased methane, for example.

And even if there are not too many humans already on the planet, we're still not cancer, realistically speaking, taking how our society is structured into account, something should be limited until something catastrophically limit us anyway.

But I guess this goes in conflict with your axiom already? I might have misunderstood it, though; I'm not sure if it applies to a larger scale than an individual for example. Am I supposed to see society as something less chaotic first? In practice it is chaotic, and there's very little we can do about it. We've been governed by self-confident tyrants most of the time as one example, they were factually out of place in this hierarchy for a long time; they are too simplistic for their position.

If limiting population is something realistic compared to other limitations, we're damned to have it. I don't support any kind of genocide, just in case, I support things like... having more people be mindful about their authentic desires for example, whether they actually do or don't want to reproduce or whether it was dictated by somebody else. Homosexuals are included, in both meanings: as those who are possibly dictating something to society and as those who are just being passive, just want to be left alone with their authentic desires.

What's your position on reproduction, what's wrong with it in relation to homosexuality? Are homosexuals that strong at dictating how society has to live life? And if they are, how harmful are they to society globally compared to the possible overpopulation consequences?