How to counter this argument. need opinions

[LJay]

You seem to be confronting emotion with logic. It doesn't work.

[Virge]

You seem to be confronting emotion with logic. It doesn't work.

Ljay you are right *in most cases*.... around here in this household we have a rule that contradicts it. "There isn't enough room in a household or a relationship for two people to compete to be more irrational and emotional that the other. Please wait your turn. I'm not finished!"

[Bowyn Aerrow]

At 48 years of age, if there is one thing that life has taught me well is that most debates end with no one changing their mind.

Maybe 1% of the people who engage in this sort of discussion will see the light and change their point of view. Maybe.

We are not dealing with facts - look at what most of the arguments are - they are emotional jabs in the dark which flies in the face of sound reason and often in the face of science and what has been documented.

I have personally engaged a shit load of clergy through the decades in 'debate' over biblical passages. I'm not talking self proclaimed 'ministers' I'm talking about letter carrying ministers who went through formal education and training when it comes to the scriptures and doctrine.

Even when faced with education and real knowledge, they will argue the emotional, gut reaction of homosexuality and the Bible knowing full well that what they are teaching arguing is false.

Its about emotions, not logic. Its about feelings not facts.

The whole situation with homophobia, black-phobia, and all of the other biases and BS that humans tend to like to do is not about reasoned, rational thought - it all about feeling the selfish animal part of the brain that wants to be 'better than' everyone else thus clings tightly to any bit of information that paints anyone lower than self.

The more that a person needs to be 'better than' their peers, the harder they will argue stupid in defense of their stupid and oft times wrong belief system.

You can't win against these people.

Sorry.

Now you are more than welcomed to waste your breath, or beat your head against this particular wall....

But you will not win about 99% of the time.

[Aike]

The question about pedophilia is a bit tricky because - if your opponent is particularly well informed and intelligent - he can turn exactly the same arguments you use for accepting homosexuality against you: pedophilia is not a choice and it's been around forever (while being socially accepted in many historic times and societies at that). If your opponent is even more clever, he has some studies to rely on, which actually support the idea that consensual and non-harmful (sexual) relationships between adults and minors are possible (namely the controversial Rind et al. study). In short, even if you were right to oppose it, there is no sense in trying to make a case against pedophilia because there simply are too many variables at play here.

But most likely the people who try to argue against homosexuality by referring to pedophilia are simply using fallacious logic and trying to play rhetorical tricks on you. First, the argument that accepting homosexuality would lead to bestiality and whatnot is a form of fallacy known as slippery slope. Although there may be some legitimate uses for a slippery slope argument, it's usually used in its fallacious form. The slippery slope argument works by making up all sorts of catastrophic consequences that would presumably follow from the implementation of something like gay marriage. The presumed consequences are usually very unrealistic and hyperbolic, which is why the slippery slope argument is commonly known as a fallacious form of argumentation.

Secondly - and relating to the first - pedophilia has a very peculiar status in our collective imagination and public discourse. Whereas in the first half of the 20th century children were thought of sexual beings (the legacy of Freud among others), after the sexual revolution of the late 60's pedophilia has become thought of as something like the incarnation of Satanic evil on earth. The point I'm trying to make here is that it's extremely easy for opponents of homosexuality to refer to pedophilia in their slippery slope arguments because it arouses so powerful negative emotions. But it's just a cheap trick and you shouldn't succumb to that.

[Steve]

Hello dilemma. Welcome. Please ride the roller coaster of a well meaning warped mind with me, would you?

As Virge, Camfer, Bowyn and many others have advised, there is no point wasting breathe attempting to employ reason with people whose minds are stuck in a thimble of concrete crap. I lived in a small town (here it comes, I'm going to say it) back in the day, where it was taboo to talk about "homasexshuls" without comparing them to sloth snot at a booger bash. Unless you're ready to become an activist/advocate for the LGBTQ -M.O.U.S.E. community, remain silent.

If activism is your path, thoroughly educate yourself in school, immerse yourself in gay culture (because no one will scream louder than a tranny in full rage mode if you refer to them incorrectly, such as calling them tranny's), and align yourself with intelligent, like minded gay people: The Bilerico Project

Aike is correct, there are people who consider themselves intelligent who will attempt to refute every study you cite by twisting logic upon itself. A twisted mind is gift wrap for knuckle draggers. These people are not actually intelligent, but rather "faux" Einsteins, able to grasp any straw available to weave a version of the truth, even when what they have woven is less effective than walmart turd tissue: the end product still leaves deuce drop under your fingernails.

I don't know where you live, but since there are far too many countries whose answer to outspoken gay people is to behead them, it is for the best to nod, appear interested, while mentally checking your supply of mary jane. You will need it later to calm yourself enough to laugh hysterically at the reverse portal diarrhea such poseur intellectual apes spew. Now I'm not advocating drug use, I'm simply suggesting the use of naturally occurring herbal remedy to cope with the ills of post modern life, i.e. people with SIB (shit-for-brains) syndrome.

On a separate carnival ride, kudos to Virge for one of the most eloquent analogy's concerning the debate between those proficient in competent reason and the other *50% of fuckwits on Earth who exist in direct violation of the laws of evolution.

*there is no adequate study concerning the percentage of prawn planked putz' on the planet. I freely admit that I pulled this percentage out of my ass knowing beyond doubt that I was being absurdly generous to the willful window lickers populating the world. I was confident in this action knowing that I was smart enough to use strongly designed toilet tissue that wouldn't allow deuce drop under my manicured nails.

Please Exit The Ride To The Far Left.

[Virge]

Like Stevie, I too live in a small conservative town (1500 people) In the past 4 years I won most of them over and have made them friends to gay people. Still there are times I am confronted with someone who is full of hate for gay people. They are mostly all the same type of people. Here's one of my strategies

*they are almost always at least 20 years older than me.
*they are extremely religious
*they think they are right about everything they say because they think they speak for god.

If a man walks in to the crowded cafe I go to in the mornings and says, "if we don't stop the homosexuals they will take over and start demanding that we all be like them."

I look him over, estimate his age then subtract that from what I estimate to be his life expectancy, and then reply something like, "You won't live another 15 years so don't worry about it. When you are buried you'll be in your coffin all alone with your hate. The world will be a better place.."

My remark will cause others in the cafe to begin snickering at the man. He's humiliated by it all. The next time he comes in he keeps his mouth shut.

[dilema]

Thank you everyone for your input and encouraging comments, i didn't expect this thread would receive as much attention as it did, reading your comments helped me feel even more confident about myself, really appreciated.

[Borg69]

My take on it is there's a vast difference between two consenting adults being in a relationship, where as the other examples is non-consenting abuse and coercion. Plain and simple.

[CuriousPhoenix]

Bring up inter-racial marriage into the argument. Many railed against inter-racial marriage and threw out outlandish claims of it destroying society and bringing down civilization as we knew it. They were wrong then and they are wrong now.

[Cuddly]

I too struggle with the pedophilia thing. I believe they truely are born with those desires, as horrible as those are, the key difference is that it isn't consensual.
The same is true for beastiality. I actually think bestiality is legal in Denmark, as long as the animal isn't harmed.

The thing about discussing with over-confident idiots is that they'll never realise that not everybody is like them. Or that the double-standards are so many that you'll never know where they start or end.
If we are to burn in hell, by god's law, then so be it. Let god judge us when the day comes, but it's HIS (or hers, whatever) judgment to cast, not some random biblebloke. Until then, let's all love our neighbours and have women as our servants and drink Jesus' blood and all do nothing on sundays.
I, again, eyerolled so hard I gave myself a headache.