5 Reasons Why Homosexuals Are Beneficial To Society (Page 3)

[jacquesvol]

Very good take !

[Anonymous]

Yas.

[Anonymous]

Very interesting take!!!

[Revolver_]

Interesting Take

[Guanfei]

Ok, now I'm sure, you're a troll.

[ladsin]

I think he is because he'll write on each side of an issue, but I don't much care because it at least makes me think. Where would you disagree with his points?

[Guanfei]

@ladsin With every of his points. All I read here is "gay people are great, straight are bad".

[ladsin]

Well 1 was just a statement that same sex parents can't have kids (together would be an important caveat.) I'm sure you agree with that one. 2 said that it's good that same sex parents adopt and get kids out of the foster system into a loving home. I would assume you'd agree with that.

The third was an argument that in fact same-sex parents are better than diff-sex, which you could understandably disagree with, but I would think you could present an argument.

4.) was a claim about statistics
5.) a claim about open mindedness.

[Guanfei]

@ladsin 1 is just his opinion, saying that not reproducing is good. Which is certainely not a view i'd share. Unless he asks for human extinction, in which case he could start by himself.

2 is nothing special. Of course they adopt more. They can't reproduce. What other choice do they have?

3 is straight bullshit, because in no way 500 people could represent billions of straight parents, who are in a large majority good parents. It's, again, a way to say that gays are better people than straight people, based on almost nothing.

4 is just saying that gays are paid more than straight people, something that apparently was bad when it was a wage gap between men and women, but sudenly become a good point when it's in favor of gays. Not to mention the stupidity of stating that being paid more is being a better person.

5 is supported by... well nothing else than his own guess, just to add a pseudo-argument to say that gays are better than straight people.

[ladsin]

I think it's important to remember that the topic wasn't Gays are beneficial and heteros aren't. It was simply that gays are/ can be beneficial.
3.) I wrote about, I think he misread the study.
4.) I agree, money doesn't= better parents. But remember that he was talking about society as a whole, the argument being that those who make more are more productive members of society. I don't really agree with this.

1.) The argument being that if everyone reproduced all the time it would be bad, and it's good that homos can have better family planning. (MY assumption at least)
2.) "No other choice" isn't really accurate. They can use a surrogate, en vitro, etc. That said I don't think you've addressed the argument that it's still beneficial that gays adopt at higher rates.

[myTake Owner]

@ladsin you're right. Since they can't reproduce, naturally they decrease human population. Data says we're already overpopulated (or soon will be). Overpopulation will generate lack of resources and hence we'll need to force one child policy upon ourselves just like China did

[Guanfei]

Except overpopulation isn't in western countries, but Africa. If you want to fight it, preach it there.

[myTake Owner]

Are you kidding me? America is said to be already overpopulated and Europe as well

fairus.org/.../united-states-already-overpopulated

[Guanfei]

our population is decreasing, with people having less and less children, and getting older, and soon, deader.
While in Africa, they have a much higher natality, sometimes 7 children per woman on average. We have such a problem with aging population that our governements want to import people from Africa to balance it. Which is a stupid idea for many reasons, but that's another story.

[Anonymous]

kill it like the rest

[InfiniteGray]

Interesting.