LGBT movement, progressive?

It's due impact in the future concerning: genderless society and cultural refinement in junction to (religious, society) tolerance and perspective. We do not define the given options as Liberally progressive or Conservatively detrimental but to it's conventional impact to both ideologies.

1. What's wrong with the LGBT; why do you support or oppose movement?
2. What impact would it bring to modern and future society?
3. What reasons could you volley on it's progression or inimical upbringing in your nation, your country?

The Secular State of the Philippines has 90% predominantly overzealous conservative Christians. I have yet to understand the variables in play with religious tenacious propaganda sits atop. Personally, in the Philippines most of them are tolerable, majority are disgusting and painstakingly useless to society.

I see no good future.

I do not trust 4chan nor reddit so-if this thread fails, then I have to resort to reddit or survey homos.

Fags....

Escrito por AlBoZzZ, 29.11.2015 at 07:05

Fags....

Please, with your Albanian rationale and impeccable flawless logic. Why?

I am conservative, but I have nothing against homosexuals in my life.
They are just people with sexual disorder what is not allowing me to hate them or to be repressive to them in any area.
Homosexuals are living normal life, same as heterosexuals (straight).
They are being employed, they are working, they are facing life problems and solving them..... Everything identical as heterosexuals.
Also, homosexuals have their friends and society, heterosexuals are having their and nobody gives a fuck about who is homo/hetero.

Croatia is very conservative country.
But you could NEVER hear someone was attacked or killed just because he is homosexual. NEVER.
You are probably asking yourself what is making a problem then?
Answer is: Gay prides


Price of one gay pride in Croatia: 2 000 000 €
Price of police insurance: 400 000 €
Number of ensured police members: 400
Any result: Nothing

Effect: Whole center of city blocked for 2 days so 100 homosexuals can march with provocative transparents under the guise of being afflicted without any rights.

---

It is what made majority of Croatians angry.
Also, it is what makes me angry....
Country is in big crisis and we are throwing money on a handful of people who just want attention, even they are living same normal life as heterosexuals.

It was a reason why first Gay pride in Split (my city) was agressively stopped by tens of thousands people who were not supporting gay prides.
There was big chaos and fight with police. Over 800 people were arrested.
Tear gases, a cannonball struck, firecrackers, torches, potted plants, stones, ashtrays, lighters, coins..........
Police catched extremists with over 30 molotov cocktails before pride...

---

VIDEO SUORCES:

---

This was first and last gay pride where heterosexuals did a wrong move and attacked this frustrated homos.
In further years (since 2011 till today), heterosexuals are organising free coffees and funtime for families in another side of city. Nobody is watching gay pride, nobody.
Just 100 of them (70% of them were from Serbia and Australia) are marching in the blocked center of city with 400 policemen who are covering them from NO ONE.

Very very big absurd.

---

And after that chaos on 1st gay pride, nobody ever again attacked a homosexual.
Every country has an extremists, same with Croatia. But neither they are searhing for them.
Homos wanted an attention and attacks from heterosexuals to proove how they are marginalized and hated by all, but what they got is - CONTRA EFFECT
Nobody gives a fucking shit about them and it is frustrating Croatia is spending 10 million euros per year on meaningless gay prides without any effect.

PS. let me mention that children are not their right and will never be

Personally I have nothing wrong with people who are homosexual but aren't obnoxious about it. I have noticed that with some gays (not all of course) they try to act very special and different and its really infuriating that these people try so hard to blend into society, yet do nothing to blend in at the same time. Personally, I think that the LGBT community is cancer because 1: its turned into a feminist pandering playground and what I mean by that (had no other way to put it) is it breeds these men and women who become feminists and extreme libtards. Feminism in itself isn't really that terrible but 3rd wave feminism is a cancer to society and everybody already knows that blah blah no need to explain. For #2 the LGBT community will only further liberalism, which as it is right now is already too high (in my opinion). Liberalism is getting out of control and needs to be contained, however this isn't happening and the LGBT movement will just further the death of society by love and tolerance (with tons of double standards of course). For #3 (if I understand what you said correctly) it is because, along with other western countries we are getting more liberal and progressive. This has been happening since the late 19th century and it doesn't like it will stop any time soon.

tl;dr the LGBT movement is cancer and will help aid the death of western society

Edit: Also if you don't think that gays try to blend in/try not to blend in at the same time then look at all of the youtube channels and pages for gay people. Look at one of croat's screenshots: "Queer.hr" if i'm correct it seems like it would be some sort of croatian website or youtube channel.

Looking at the anatomy of a man and a woman, it is obvious what Nature's intent is. You don't have to be a Nazi rocket scientist to figure this out.

Our children are being inundated with the false ideas that homosexuality is normal and acceptable. They see it out in the public, in their schools, and on the TV programs they watch. This can only serve to confuse innocent and impressionable minds.
The verdict is still out whether homosexuality is genetic or a choice. If it is genetic, that would make homosexuals sexually handicapped. If it is a choice, it demonstrates the unnatural minds of homosexuals.

I don't hate homosexuals in question, but when they push their agenda on me I have a problem. Especially when they have their make-believe genders.

You are a male, female, hermaphrodite, or degenerate. This isn't reversible. You can't switch genders. I have no problem addressing a transgender person as their actual gender.

You're not an androbygenital gender queer three-split estromale transmono hermaphrofrem, you're just an idiot.

Transgenderism is like a small child insisting that he is a helicopter.

Escrito por Sheba, 29.11.2015 at 13:42

Escrito por Sheba, 29.11.2015 at 13:42

You're not an androbygenital gender queer three-split estromale transmono hermaphrofrem, you're just an idiot.

Transgenderism is like a small child insisting that he is a helicopter.

My opinion is basically that of non-intervention.

There exists homosexuals? Okay, but why should anyone care?
Homosexuals are getting married? Okay, but why would should anyone care?

It's my belief that people shouldn't care.

It's my opinion that human society, at least in wealthy, developed nations, is mature enough and enlightened enough to tolerate these deviations from social norms. All I ask is that homosexuals keep their sexuality private, like the rest of us, instead of going on these stupid parades.

Escrito por Sheba, 29.11.2015 at 13:42

Looking at the anatomy of a man and a woman, it is obvious what Nature's intent is. You don't have to be a Nazi rocket scientist to figure this out.

It is also natural for human societies to have a 60% child mortality rate. It is natural for human societies to always be on the brink of starvation. It is natural for human societies to instinctively reject diversity.

Civilisation is the defiance of nature. It's what makes humans distinct from lesser animals.

Escrito por Croat, 29.11.2015 at 08:16

I am conservative, but I have nothing against homosexuals in my life.
They are just people with sexual disorder what is not allowing me to hate them or to be repressive to them in any area.
Homosexuals are living normal life, same as heterosexuals (straight).
They are being employed, they are working, they are facing life problems and solving them..... Everything identical as heterosexuals.
Also, homosexuals have their friends and society, heterosexuals are having their and nobody gives a fuck about who is homo/hetero.

This. I applaud this so much. I am not a conservative, and I don't believe that homosexuality is a disorder, but I agree with just about everything else here.

You can be against homosexuals (as many conservatives are), or you can support homosexuality (as many radicals are), and the gist of my response is going to be: why do you care? Stop fussing about non-issues, live your life, and let everyone else live theirs - both homosexuals and heterosexuals.

Escrito por Valetorious, 29.11.2015 at 08:46

Personally I have nothing wrong with people who are homosexual but aren't obnoxious about it. I have noticed that with some gays (not all of course) they try to act very special and different and its really infuriating that these people try so hard to blend into society, yet do nothing to blend in at the same time. Personally, I think that the LGBT community is cancer because 1: its turned into a feminist pandering playground and what I mean by that (had no other way to put it) is it breeds these men and women who become feminists and extreme libtards.

This articulates my opinions precisely. Nobody sane brags about their nationality, height, gender, ethnicity, or whatever else in normal conversation. Why the heck would anyone brag about their sexuality? That trend really needs to stop. This "gay pride" movement is really getting absurd.

On the other hand,

Escrito por Valetorious, 29.11.2015 at 08:46

For #2 the LGBT community will only further liberalism, which as it is right now is already too high (in my opinion). Liberalism is getting out of control and needs to be contained, however this isn't happening and the LGBT movement will just further the death of society by love and tolerance (with tons of double standards of course). For #3 (if I understand what you said correctly) it is because, along with other western countries we are getting more liberal and progressive. This has been happening since the late 19th century and it doesn't like it will stop any time soon.

This I cannot agree with. Western society has been growing more tolerant and inclusive since the late 19th century, and I find that to be on the whole a good thing (even if it does produce some crazy radicals like 3rd wave feminists). It's difficult to deny that in most countries (with the exception of perhaps Northwestern Europe), homosexuals are a marginalised demographic. As long as there exists marginalised demographics, there will always be a place for liberal attitudes in politics. Tolerance is a fantastic tool for the progress of societies. After all, terrorism is basically hate crimes based on intolerance.

Naturally, double standards needs to stop. I do agree with that much.

Note that I haven't mentioned transgenders in this entire post. That's mostly because my attitudes towards transgenders is radically different from my attitudes towards homosexuals. Transgenders are, in my view, people who believe that they are what they are not, and that seems to me like the definition of insanity. In terms of homosexuals, their perception (they think they love people of the same gender) corresponds to reality (they do love people of the same gender). In terms of transgenders, however, perception does not correspond to reality, and that is something that I think still should be tolerated, but not approved.

Philippines contemporary to the growing western tolerance over social liberalism issues a social concern over acceptance and integration of LGBT ideology. With Filipinos slowly leaning to left-wing perspective in accordance to the integrity of democracy, ironically tolerates the acclaimed gender yet denies any lawful rights. Adherents and supporters are given the highest regard by the Filipino society and adversaries and those who oppose are given the impression of concealment or denial of their queerness.

TL;DR-hey, you dont like gays? You must be gay inside. People have to resort to accept this ideology to avoid being branded a shy flower who fails to bloom.

Escrito por International, 30.11.2015 at 02:22

My opinion is basically that of non-intervention.

There exists homosexuals? Okay, but why should anyone care?
Homosexuals are getting married? Okay, but why would should anyone care?

It's my belief that people shouldn't care.

It's my opinion that human society, at least in wealthy, developed nations, is mature enough and enlightened enough to tolerate these deviations from social norms. All I ask is that homosexuals keep their sexuality private, like the rest of us, instead of going on these stupid parades.

People ought to care. Were humans after all. It may not affect me but it may affect my children. People care not because they are not affected individually but because they are affected as a society. It's bullshit for you to say why anyone shouldn't care.

If people are stupid enough not to care, then deviations such as satanic worship, cannibalism and terrorism should be ignored because, why bother?

In Philippine slums, homosexuals are rampant distributors of sexual diseases in absence of government intervention, let's face the obvious, were too poor and corrupt for healthcare and shit. The Church takes all the money from the proletariat anyways. Relative example of repercussions of Philippines' tolerance among the poor: these people are an eyesore. Drag queens with protruding inching nipples in see-through shirts, short skirts relative to Nicki Minaj or Miley Cyrus' wardrobe with their balls hanging in exposure, and faces far horrendous than scary movie-clowns.

This is the kind of shit we have to pay. Sure, they do not cover the general genus of gayus faggotritus but homosexuality hails no profit for the society, at least in Philippine Society. I rather live with conservative Catholics than in a city loitering with these-creatures somehow still human.

Escrito por Yeomanry, 30.11.2015 at 04:08

People ought to care. Were humans after all. It may not affect me but it may affect my children. People care not because they are not affected individually but because they are affected as a society. It's bullshit for you to say why anyone shouldn't care.

If people are stupid enough not to care, then deviations such as satanic worship, cannibalism and terrorism should be ignored because, why bother?

The State has no place regulating the private lives of the people. Cannibalism and terrorism both causes direct and indisputable harm to other people's person and property. Naturally these should be banned.

Homosexuality and (certain kinds of) satanic worship, on the other hand, do not. The State therefore should not regulate either of these. Indeed, why bother?

The rights of man should not be suppressed just because they don't conform to social norms. I am a staunch believer in individual liberty on anything except economic issues.

Escrito por International, 30.11.2015 at 04:26

Escrito por Yeomanry, 30.11.2015 at 04:08

People ought to care. Were humans after all. It may not affect me but it may affect my children. People care not because they are not affected individually but because they are affected as a society. It's bullshit for you to say why anyone shouldn't care.

If people are stupid enough not to care, then deviations such as satanic worship, cannibalism and terrorism should be ignored because, why bother?

The State has no place regulating the private lives of the people. Cannibalism and terrorism both causes direct and indisputable harm to other people's person and property. Naturally these should be banned.

Homosexuality and (certain kinds of) satanic worship, on the other hand, do not. The State therefore should not regulate either of these. Indeed, why bother?

The rights of man should not be suppressed just because they don't conform to social norms.

Somehow homosexuality is not? Homosexuals are threatened, their reputation, their job, and worse die due to discrimination.

Indoctrination to homosexuality can be revere as to indoctrination to communism or fascism, Catholicism or Islamic. The state has no say but they have the responsibility of regulation of what is what's not. After all, they are looking for the welfare of the people, not the belief or ideology.

Kids gone gay and having sex as young as 12. Then be too far gone in their adolescence, jobless, drug addict and shit. The State shouldn't care if that what makes them happy. eh.

State cares for the liberty of the people-the collective whole, not for the individual.

Escrito por Yeomanry, 30.11.2015 at 04:34

Indoctrination to homosexuality can be revere as to indoctrination to communism or fascism, Catholicism or Islamic. The state has no say but they have the responsibility of regulation of what is what's not. After all, they are looking for the welfare of the people, not the belief or ideology.

Indoctrination to homosexuality? Specify what you mean. Homosexuality is not a system of belief, and as such nobody can be "indoctrinated" to it.

Escrito por Yeomanry, 30.11.2015 at 04:34

Kids gone gay and having sex as young as 12.

Who else has sex at 12? Oh, right, straight people.

A few anecdotes does not a statistical trend make.

Escrito por Yeomanry, 30.11.2015 at 04:34

Then be too far gone in their adolescence, jobless, drug addict and shit.

See above.

Escrito por Yeomanry, 30.11.2015 at 04:34

The State shouldn't care if that what makes them happy. eh.

Considering how the difference in the level of motivation between homosexuals and heterosexuals are statistically insignificant, that sounds correct.

Escrito por Yeomanry, 30.11.2015 at 04:34

State cares for the liberty of the people-the collective whole, not for the individual.

The liberty of the people is the net sum of the liberty of the individuals. Care about the individual, and you by and large end up caring for the whole.

Escrito por International, 30.11.2015 at 04:26

The State has no place regulating the private lives of the people. Cannibalism and terrorism both causes direct and indisputable harm to other people's person and property. Naturally these should be banned.

Homosexuality and (certain kinds of) satanic worship, on the other hand, do not. The State therefore should not regulate either of these. Indeed, why bother?

you are right, the state shouldn't care what u do on private. Homosexuals are being faggots in public, the state should be able to enforce an appropriate dress-code, don't you think?

Remove kebabs & remove fags

Because having sex with another man will produce children.

Escrito por Skittzophrenic, 30.11.2015 at 16:39

Because having sex with another man will produce children.

Escrito por AlBoZzZ, 30.11.2015 at 07:49

Remove kebabs & remove fags

Can we begin with you?

Escrito por Tundy, 30.11.2015 at 07:39

you are right, the state shouldn't care what u do on private. Homosexuals are being faggots in public, the state should be able to enforce an appropriate dress-code, don't you think?

Depends on what you mean by "appropriate dress-code."

People certainly shouldn't go around naked or wearing nothing but underwear, and if the State regulates this in the name of public decency, that is completely fine, in my opinion.

Escrito por International, 01.12.2015 at 01:02

Escrito por Tundy, 30.11.2015 at 07:39

you are right, the state shouldn't care what u do on private. Homosexuals are being faggots in public, the state should be able to enforce an appropriate dress-code, don't you think?

Depends on what you mean by "appropriate dress-code."

People certainly shouldn't go around naked or wearing nothing but underwear, and if the State regulates this in the name of public decency, that is completely fine, in my opinion.

So you think it's okay having fag neighbors/in our communities? What if they are on opposite side of your childs bedroom wall and every night they stick each other? You think that is acceptable for society?

Escrito por theFuehrer, 01.12.2015 at 01:05

So you think it's okay having fag neighbors/in our communities? What if they are on opposite side of your childs bedroom wall and every night they stick each other? You think that is acceptable for society?

I find nothing wrong with that. If they're being too loud, I will submit a complaint to the local police just like I do with everyone else that's too loud at night.

But otherwise, fine. I have neighbours of different gender, ethnicity, income bracket, age, and nationality. Why would I not tolerate neighbours of different sexuality?

Escrito por International, 01.12.2015 at 01:22

So you see nothing wrong with two men sticking each other?

Escrito por theFuehrer, 01.12.2015 at 02:09

Escrito por International, 01.12.2015 at 01:22

So you see nothing wrong with two men sticking each other?

I find nothing wrong with that, correct.

Escrito por International, 01.12.2015 at 05:45

I find nothing wrong with that, correct.

Can you explain why nothing is wrong with two men sticking each other in the ass?

Will your answer be 'because love wins' ??

Escrito por Pheonixking929, 30.11.2015 at 20:54

Escrito por Skittzophrenic, 30.11.2015 at 16:39

Because having sex with another man will produce children.

This hurts to look at.

Escrito por theFuehrer, 30.11.2015 at 21:22

Escrito por AlBoZzZ, 30.11.2015 at 07:49

Remove kebabs & remove fags

Can we begin with you?

Nice burn

Escrito por Croat, 29.11.2015 at 08:16

dont Quote RTL, its like a german Fox news for retards, just dont quote them, please