• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Gays hold lively demonstration in Turkey to protest

kaya'08

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 25, 2008
Messages
6,363
Reaction score
1,318
Location
British Turk
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Roughly one hundred people demonstrated on Istiklal Street in Istanbul on Saturday in a creative and lively protest against recent controversial comments by a government minister that have drawn significant attention in Turkey and abroad.

State Minister in charge of families and children, Selma Aliye Kavaf, angered Turkey’s gay rights alliance Lamda, when she told daily HUrriyet in an interview earlier this month “I believe homosexuality is a biological disorder, a disease.”

“I believe [homosexuality] is something that needs to be treated,” she also told the daily.

In the statement it released at the protest, Lambda countered that it believes that it is not homosexuality but homophobia, transphobia and discrimination more generally that are disease in need of treatment.

Gays hold lively demonstration against comments by Turkish minister - Hurriyet Daily News and Economic Review
 
The Minister's comments were hardly a call for homos to be punished or hounded though, so noisemakers Lambda should get a grip.

I had a bit of sympathy until I saw they were just as intolerant of the Minister's position as she apparently was of theirs. Both sides want to 'treat' the other, so the irony of gay groups calling for 'tolerance' doesn't escape me.
 
Last edited:
The Minister's comments were hardly a call for homos to be punished or hounded though, so noisemakers Lambda should get a grip.

I had a bit of sympathy until I saw they were just as intolerant of the Minister's position as she apparently was of theirs. Both sides want to 'treat' the other, so the irony of gay groups calling for 'tolerance' doesn't escape me.

A predictably hypocritical post. This from a person constantly banging on about Islamic fundamentalism. Here is a demonstration, in favour of gay rights, in a Moslem country. It was organised by a small group of activists to protest against the homophobia of a ruling, moderate Islamist party minister. It passed off peacefully.

I see you are only against the authoritarian, mediaeval aspects of Islam when it's in your country. If it's attacking a liberal cause, or a minority group you don't like, it's fine by you. I suspect you have rather more in common with Anjem Choudary than you'd like to admit.
 
"I see you are only against the authoritarian, mediaeval aspects of Islam when it's in your country." - They can do what they want in their own countries, I just don't want things like hanging homos over here. I don't want to police the world.


I have no problem with homosexuals going unmolested (as it were). Just these gay groups have a tendency to call for things like primary school kids to be dosed up on propaganda, the age of homosexual consent lowered to 14 or the laws on gross indecency to be repealed.


I know full well the difference between ordinary, nice people who happen to be gay wanting to just get on with life, and the professional gays making a big noise and demand about everything. As I say, the Minister only spoke her mind about what she saw as a collapse in morals.
 
Last edited:
I have no problem with homosexuals going unmolested (as it were). Just these gay groups have a tendency to call for things like primary school kids to be dosed up on propaganda, the age of homosexual consent lowered to 14 or the laws on gross indecency to be repealed.

You'd better post some links to websites of groups who advocate "dosing primary schools up on propaganda" and advocating a gay age of consent being set at 14. FYI links to the following will not be accepted as proof: WSJ, Mail, Express, Telegraph or any religious or anti-gay hate group.

I know full well the difference between ordinary, nice people who happen to be gay wanting to just get on with life, and the professional gays making a big noise and demand about everything. As I say, the Minister only spoke her mind about what she saw as a collapse in morals.

She spoke of homosexuality thus:
“I believe homosexuality is a biological disorder, a disease. I believe [homosexuality] is something that needs to be treated. Therefore I do not have a positive opinion of gay marriage.”

Well, that contradicts the internationally-accepted medical opinion as expressed by the WHO. It also flies in the face of EU policy and may have strong repercussions for Turkey's accession talks. Of course, it's her opinion and she's entitled to it, but your attack on those putting their counter-opinion, calling them intolerant, is way wide of the mark. If a British minister or shadow minister said the same thing they would both be condemned by their party leadership for giving a negative image to their party and the country, despite the fact that they have every legal right to express themselves.

Funny how you say she's entitled to her opinion, but when Lambda express their opposition, they are "intolerant". Not that I'm accusing you of double standards...
 
FYI links to the following will not be accepted as proof: WSJ, Mail, Express, Telegraph or any religious or anti-gay hate group.

What by? Your Marxist totalitarian self-censorship of things you don't like the sound of? Let's have the debate flow and finish where it pleases without any false barriers.


First off, here's a smattering of some of the 'freedom' advocates with a taste for some 'normalised' schoolboy action:


Youth groups tell Sente to keep consent age at 14

CONSENT AT 14

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...e-gay-sex-children-young-say-researchers.html


When you go down that road, paedophilia is sure to follow, even amongst heteros:

Paedophiles could get lighter sentences if victim 'gives consent' | Mail Online

http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2006/dec/06121905.html

Harriet Harman also wanted to dilute child porn laws before being forced to backtrack:

Harriet Harman under attack over bid to water down child pornography law - Telegraph

(Labour looks riddled with child sex advocates and practitioners. We can come to that later, though here's a taste: CLAUSE 28 CURBS ON 'GAY' LESSONS TO BE SCRAPPED | News | Local Government Chronicle

Mind, some come out with credit: 'GAY LESSONS' SCHEME FOR SCHOOLS IS REJECTED IN ROTHERHAM | News | Local Government Chronicle )


Further down the road: Jonathan King makes Vile Pervert: The Musical - Telegraph



I'd rather kids learn to to read and write properly, especially at that age:

Gay fairy tales for primary school children - from Pink News - all the latest gay news from the gay community - Pink News

Primary school children given gay assembly with Elton John song - Telegraph

Parents face court action for removing children from gay history lessons | Mail Online

Parents who protested about gay lessons for 5-year-olds 'homophobic'
_____________________________

"Of course, it's her opinion and she's entitled to it, but your attack on those putting their counter-opinion, calling them intolerant, is way wide of the mark."

No it isn't. Looks like both groups are intolerant, though with people on one side wanting children to be able to have sex younger and younger, maybe one is more justified than the other.
 
Last edited:
What by? Your Marxist totalitarian self-censorship of things you don't like the sound of? Let's have the debate flow and finish where it pleases without any false barriers.


First off, here's a smattering of some of the 'freedom' advocates with a taste for some 'normalised' schoolboy action:


Youth groups tell Sente to keep consent age at 14

CONSENT AT 14

Well, firstly, the Canadian link isn't calling for the lowering of the age of consent. That had been 14 there for a century. It's opposing the raising of the AoC for all, not just for gays.

The second article does call for a lowering the age of consent (which I disagree with) but for everyone, across the board, gay or straight. So this doesn't really prove your point that they are camapigning for "the age of homosexual consent lowered to 14". By all means, let's have a discussion on the AoC, but that's not what we are discussing.

When you go down that road, paedophilia is sure to follow, even amongst heteros:
As I say, a different matter unless you are trying to portray gays as paedos.

(Labour looks riddled with child sex advocates and practitioners. We can come to that later, though here's a taste: CLAUSE 28 CURBS ON 'GAY' LESSONS TO BE SCRAPPED | News | Local Government Chronicle

Mind, some come out with credit: 'GAY LESSONS' SCHEME FOR SCHOOLS IS REJECTED IN ROTHERHAM | News | Local Government Chronicle )
Please don't post links that require subscriptions. If you think I'm paying to read your links, you've got another think coming.

Ah, I see, you ARE trying to make the link between gays and paedos.


I'm in favour of kids being taught the value of tolerance and co-existence. No primary school kids are being taught about "gay sex", even your Telegraph article doesn't claim that. They are being taught that the World is made up of different kinds of people, some of whom love people of the opposite sex, some of the same sex. They are also taught that some people have skin of one colour, some of another and that we are all as valuable as one another. The Islamists and fundamental Christians might have a problem with that, but I don't, nor do my friends, neighbours and family with kids of school age. Why do you?

In your Telegraph article it reads:
"In a statement sent out to schools by the council education officer Lynne Miller said: "Young children are exposed at a very early age to homophobic language. Pupils may call each other 'gay' without really understanding what it means, but learn that it means something negative, useless, and not positive."

You got a problem with that?

_____________________________
"Of course, it's her opinion and she's entitled to it, but your attack on those putting their counter-opinion, calling them intolerant, is way wide of the mark."

No it isn't. Looks like both groups are intolerant, though with people on one side wanting children to be able to have sex younger and younger, maybe one is more justified than the other.

One side is saying, "you're diseased", the other is saying, "no we're not, you're prejudiced against us". Seems clear where the intolerance lies.
 
First, I'm not in favour of lowering the age of consent for both gays and straights. Indeed I think it should be raised to at least 18. I put the first link in because it just looked so peculiar for adults to be calling for the continuation of child sex. Especially when using the logic that because (to them) raising the age of consent won't stop all child abuse then you may as well let it all happen. And because the gay group is also making a fuss it can only be assumed that they want the same thing for the youngsters they're interested in.

Yes, people are different as you say. Different colours or sexual orientation, but that's no basis for burying little children under mountains of copies of King & King or telling 14 year olds how to have 'proper' gay sex. Just the following words can decently make up the entire 'inclusiveness' syllabus: Gays exist and they're not evil or anything, so don't make their lives a misery about it.

Gay sex to be described in school textbooks - from Pink News - all the latest gay news from the gay community - Pink News


Out Rage and Stonewall's calling for the age to be lowered to 14, with their interest being in homosexuals, only serves to want to legally mix kids up in something very adult and something obviously more confusing and emotional than heterosexual feelings. As if growing up isn't difficult enough these days. And although I'm not saying that paedophilia and homosexuality are mutual, I can see the door being opened further and further to predatory people in the name of sexual freedom when the likes of Harriet Harman get down to business.

But at the bottom line I can say that I don't like kids being involved with gay issues. It's just not right, especially when they're so catastrophically negligent and emotionally backward when using the hetero stuff. They're far too young to take it all in, especially at primary school, however much it's sugar coated. And to read silly playground language as serious abuse makes no sense at all. Daft kids call each other all sorts of names but that doesn't carry on into adulthood, unless they're retarded or nasty (in which case there already plenty of bullying rules to punish kids under without inventing special gay-friendly ones). It's not nice to hear, but it's not as serious as a kicking.
 
Last edited:
Turkey should not be allowed into the EU until it falls in line with its humanitarian rights.
 
What by? Your Marxist totalitarian self-censorship of things you don't like the sound of? Let's have the debate flow and finish where it pleases without any false barriers.


First off, here's a smattering of some of the 'freedom' advocates with a taste for some 'normalised' schoolboy action:


Youth groups tell Sente to keep consent age at 14

CONSENT AT 14

Teach the pleasure of gay sex to children as young as five, say researchers | Mail Online


When you go down that road, paedophilia is sure to follow, even amongst heteros:

Paedophiles could get lighter sentences if victim 'gives consent' | Mail Online

Age of Consent at 14 Makes Canada Favoured Sex Tourism Destination

Harriet Harman also wanted to dilute child porn laws before being forced to backtrack:

Harriet Harman under attack over bid to water down child pornography law - Telegraph

(Labour looks riddled with child sex advocates and practitioners. We can come to that later, though here's a taste: CLAUSE 28 CURBS ON 'GAY' LESSONS TO BE SCRAPPED | News | Local Government Chronicle

Mind, some come out with credit: 'GAY LESSONS' SCHEME FOR SCHOOLS IS REJECTED IN ROTHERHAM | News | Local Government Chronicle )


Further down the road: Jonathan King makes Vile Pervert: The Musical - Telegraph



I'd rather kids learn to to read and write properly, especially at that age:

Gay fairy tales for primary school children - from Pink News - all the latest gay news from the gay community - Pink News

Primary school children given gay assembly with Elton John song - Telegraph

Parents face court action for removing children from gay history lessons | Mail Online

Parents who protested about gay lessons for 5-year-olds 'homophobic'
_____________________________

"Of course, it's her opinion and she's entitled to it, but your attack on those putting their counter-opinion, calling them intolerant, is way wide of the mark."

No it isn't. Looks like both groups are intolerant, though with people on one side wanting children to be able to have sex younger and younger, maybe one is more justified than the other.

Homosexual male political activists in the U.S. have a long history of promotion and tolerance of pedophile groups participating under the Gay Rights umbrella, and this can verified by homosexual history sites themselves. The main incentive driving their exclusion from participation has come from Lesbian threats of boycotting parades and other activities if groups like NAMBLA were allowed to continue to participate, and also, in 1994, Bill Clinton denied support for international Gay Rights activists being granted NGO status by the UN. Even at that, a significant minority of homosexual males still spoke up in support of allowing pedophile rings to participate, but were voted down due the loss of money and NGO status. The minutes of the 1994 meeting are on the main gay rights group website's history section, so no, it's not 'proganda'. I'll find the link for you if you wish.

Harry Hays himself, the 'founder' of the homosexual rights political activism, wore a 'NAMBLA Walks With Me' button in one march in one parade NAMBLA was banned from; he was just so upset at their banning, and all.
 
Roughly one hundred people demonstrated on Istiklal Street in Istanbul on Saturday in a creative and lively protest against recent controversial comments by a government minister that have drawn significant attention in Turkey and abroad.

So, aren't homosexuals these days hopping around and claiming being gay is 'genetic' and inborn? Now they're protesting a minister who agrees with them that it is indeed a biological condition? They can't make up their minds, obviously, one way or another. Gay Rights groups themselves went down the biological condition route, 'We're born gay!!!', so they really have no complaint here. It was a hopelessly bad propaganda ploy on their part, eh?
 
Last edited:
Homosexual male political activists in the U.S. have a long history of promotion and tolerance of pedophile groups participating under the Gay Rights umbrella, and this can verified by homosexual history sites themselves. The main incentive driving their exclusion from participation has come from Lesbian threats of boycotting parades and other activities if groups like NAMBLA were allowed to continue to participate, and also, in 1994, Bill Clinton denied support for international Gay Rights activists being granted NGO status by the UN. Even at that, a significant minority of homosexual males still spoke up in support of allowing pedophile rings to participate, but were voted down due the loss of money and NGO status. The minutes of the 1994 meeting are on the main gay rights group website's history section, so no, it's not 'proganda'. I'll find the link for you if you wish.

Harry Hays himself, the 'founder' of the homosexual rights political activism, wore a 'NAMBLA Walks With Me' button in one march in one parade NAMBLA was banned from; he was just so upset at their banning, and all.

Not that anything you have said here makes any grammatical or logical sense, but if you struggle through your argument, you are saying that man-boy sex groups have tried to campaign under the gay banner but have been rejected. If that's what you are saying then you are correct.

I'm not sure who Harry Hays is. I have been involved in gay politics and activism for 30 years and I've never heard of him. What campaigns was he involved in? He certainly wasn't involved in the Clause 28 campaign, the gay marriage campaign in any of the countries it was successful, the successful campaign to have ILGA accepted for UN observer status. Who is he again?

You may be trying to link gay rights campaigns with paedophilia, but I think you need to try harder.
 
Homosexual male political activists in the U.S. have a long history of promotion and tolerance of pedophile groups participating under the Gay Rights umbrella, and this can verified by homosexual history sites themselves. The main incentive driving their exclusion from participation has come from Lesbian threats of boycotting parades and other activities if groups like NAMBLA were allowed to continue to participate, and also, in 1994, Bill Clinton denied support for international Gay Rights activists being granted NGO status by the UN. Even at that, a significant minority of homosexual males still spoke up in support of allowing pedophile rings to participate, but were voted down due the loss of money and NGO status. The minutes of the 1994 meeting are on the main gay rights group website's history section, so no, it's not 'proganda'. I'll find the link for you if you wish.

Harry Hays himself, the 'founder' of the homosexual rights political activism, wore a 'NAMBLA Walks With Me' button in one march in one parade NAMBLA was banned from; he was just so upset at their banning, and all.

You know what I just read?

Blah blah politics and the UN, blah blah something about Bill Clinton.

:2wave:
 
Not that anything you have said here makes any grammatical or logical sense, but if you struggle through your argument, you are saying that man-boy sex groups have tried to campaign under the gay banner but have been rejected. If that's what you are saying then you are correct.

Ah, petty insults ... always a sign you have little to hang your hat on here ...

I'm not sure who Harry Hays is. I have been involved in gay politics and activism for 30 years and I've never heard of him. What campaigns was he involved in? He certainly wasn't involved in the Clause 28 campaign, the gay marriage campaign in any of the countries it was successful, the successful campaign to have ILGA accepted for UN observer status. Who is he again?

I don't think anybody has questioned your demonstrated ignorance. If you missed out on Harry Hays, after some claimed '30 years of activism', that explains a lot about your 'activism'.

You may be trying to link gay rights campaigns with paedophilia, but I think you need to try harder.

No, I don't actually; the gay movement's history documents that all by itself.
 
You know what I just read?

Blah blah politics and the UN, blah blah something about Bill Clinton.

:2wave:

I understand perfectly; you have nothing, either.

So, I'll just post a link to an old article that sheds some light on who drove the pedos out; homosexual males generally didn't care about driving them out, as a search through gay history sites will demonstrate.

RAINING ON NAMBLA'S PARADE

I got goose bumps when Melissa Farley told me about what she did at the 1992 Gay Pride Parade, attended by some 500,000 spectators, in San Francisco. It's an excellent example of how we can publicly challenge NAMBLA and other organizations of that ilk. Like some of the best actions, this one was a spur-of-the-moment thing. When she got to the parade, she first searched the length of it to find the NAMBLA contingent. She spoke with many of them, one of whom proudly informed her that he had just been released from two years in jail in Thailand on charges of child trafficking. She then marched, much to their dismay, directly behind their group, carrying two signs that read: "Pedophilia NOT!" (the NOT! in multi-colored glitter, of course), and "The Solution to Teenage Homophobia is not Pedophilia."
It was a brave action because she did not know what to expect, NAMBLA having been an established part of the parade for 15 years, with only pockets of resistance so far. She figured she'd be hissed and booed, but instead it was NAMBLA that the crowd berated. After the parade, a television reporter approached her and said NAMBLA had claimed that 80% of the gay and lesbian community supported them. But, after seeing the crowd's positive response to her signs, he said it was obvious there was "very little support for NAMBLA in the gay community in the Bay Area."
"It feels like the tide has turned," Melissa told me. Indeed, there have recently been rip-tide intense letter exchanges in the gay newspapers in San Francisco, with increasing numbers of people calling for the immediate expulsion of NAMBLA from future parades, not only because of their exploitation of children but also because of NAMBLA's opportunistic leeching onto the lesbian and gay community. One letter said: "They must be politically isolated and allowed to twist in the wind of their own hypocritical rhetoric."
Mike Echols, an imposing activist who had infiltrated the San Francisco Chapter of NAMBLA by posing as a rich homosexual pedophile who wanted to give NAMBLA money, set up an exposé with several Bay Area reporters. NAMBLA was barred from holding public meetings at their usual public library location after their meeting was broadcast by KRON television. I'd have given anything to have been there when Echols and reporters pulled out a hidden video camera and NAMBLA members scrambled for cover like cockroaches when the kitchen light goes on.
Several days later Echols dealt NAMBLA another blow during a brief but memorable television interview when it was revealed that a spokesman for NAMBLA, who claimed that none of the groups' members had ever been arrested in San Francisco, had himself been arrested, convicted, and was currently on probation for solicitation of a 9-year-old boy. Subsequently the man was arrested for violating his probation because of information that came to light as a result of Echol's work. Why can't more people take his initiative?
These stories illustrate how much can be accomplished by people who care about stopping sexual exploitation. Both these activists have had a significant impact on reducing NAMBLA's public image, and are role models for true feminist and pro-feminist activists!

So Much Slime So Little Time: Part II

There is more out there on Lesbian activism in driving the pedos out. Most male homosexuals became concerned largely because of the bad publicity, not any real moral concerns.
 
I don't think anybody has questioned your demonstrated ignorance. If you missed out on Harry Hays, after some claimed '30 years of activism', that explains a lot about your 'activism'.

I've just Wiki'd him. Harry Hay sounds like a great man. I'm afraid he's pretty much unheard of in Europe. When I read his bio, it kind of rang a bell but no, he's not someone who has led or even much informed the LGBT movement this side of the Atlantic. Now had you mentioned Alan Horsfall, Mario Mieli, Chris Smith, Kursad Kahramanoglu, I might have followed your point.

You are clearly in the gay hate camp. I'm not going to debate the ludicrous and offensive thesis that gay people are all paedophiles or paedophile supporters. You can get your homophobe jollies somewhere else.

If you have something to argue about the demonstrations in Istanbul, please feel free to contribute, otherwise start your own thread on your extremist theories somewhere else.
 
So, aren't homosexuals these days hopping around and claiming being gay is 'genetic' and inborn? Now they're protesting a minister who agrees with them that it is indeed a biological condition? They can't make up their minds, obviously, one way or another. Gay Rights groups themselves went down the biological condition route, 'We're born gay!!!', so they really have no complaint here. It was a hopelessly bad propaganda ploy on their part, eh?

Is there a specific reason you chose not to include the whole of the minister's statement?

“I believe homosexuality is a biological disorder, a disease.”

She also said, “It needs to be treated.”


I don't think anyone in the Gay Rights movement has tried to put forward that homosexuality is either a "disease" or "treatable"

The UK went down the treatment and therapy route years ago and failed.
 
I've just Wiki'd him. Harry Hay sounds like a great man.

Yes, we can easily establish that large segments of the homosexual male population admire pedophiles, as Harry did. That's a major reason so many sane people don't want then near children, and rightfully so.

You are clearly in the gay hate camp.

I'm in the 'doing my homework' camp. Providing evidence that goes against Gay activist propaganda doesn't put anybody in the 'gay hate' camp. In fact I've proved that Lesbians have done some really positive things for society, like getting pedo rings tossed out from under the gay rights umbrella. Too bad it was largely a unilateral effort on their part.

I'm not going to debate the ludicrous and offensive thesis that gay people are all paedophiles or paedophile supporters.

That really admirable; if somebody comes along and says all gays are pedophiles or pedophile supporters, I won't debate them, either.

You can get your homophobe jollies somewhere else.

Yes, not being politically correct makes one a 'homophobe'. I forgot ...

If you have something to argue about the demonstrations in Istanbul, please feel free to contribute, otherwise start your own thread on your extremist theories somewhere else.

Feel free to move on if you don't like this thread.
 
Moderator's Warning:
Notice the title of the thread? This thread is not about gay rights... there are plenty of other general threads about that. Stay on the topic, please.
 
Is there a specific reason you chose not to include the whole of the minister's statement?

Is there a specific reason I needed to? As I said, the Gay Rights propagandists went down the 'It's biological' route a long time ago, and now they're getting the results of that.

She also said, “It needs to be treated.”

And she has a right to her opinion.

What's the issue, exactly? That some gay people don't like her opinion, and want to censor her?

I don't think anyone in the Gay Rights movement has tried to put forward that homosexuality is either a "disease" or "treatable"

Nobody said they did.

The UK went down the treatment and therapy route years ago and failed.

Probably because it's a biological defect. There are many genetically caused diseases and illnesses that psychobabble and drugs won't help.

Genetic Diseases: List of Genetic Disorders
 
Gay rights activists in Turkey are exercising their democratic right to criticise a government minister for her homophobic statements. I guess that puts them in the same category as any other peaceful protest movement around the World.

I know a number of the Lambda activists and the issues that they are campaigning on, which go well beyond the scope of this one issue. These are:
  • The fight against institutionalised homophobia in Turkish society
  • the harassment of LGBT businesses, organisations and individuals by the Police and by certain political parties such as the MHP.
  • The treatment of gay men during compulsory military service
  • the fulfillment of the EU accession criteria in relation to non-discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation
  • improving the representation of LGBT people in the Turkish media
  • Combatting violence against LGBT people in traditionalist and rural areas of Turkey
Clearly the homophobia of a government minister has to be challenged in order for work on the over-riding serious issues of combatting anti-gay discrimination in Turkey can continue.
 
Gay rights activists in Turkey are exercising their democratic right to criticise a government minister for her homophobic statements.

Saying homosexuality is a disease and should be treated isn't 'homophobic', in fact it shows a concern for those afflicted with it, in her opinion. Running around throwing out ad hominems that there is no evidence for isn't really a 'right' or even an argument of some kind, it's merely stupid and an attempt to slander.

I know a number of the Lambda activists and the issues that they are campaigning on, which go well beyond the scope of this one issue. These are:

The moderator said this topic isn't about any gay rights.

Clearly the homophobia of a government minister

Clearly your only 'contribution' here is to work 'homophobe' in as many times as is possible, so you have no real argument to make here. There is no evidence at all she's a 'homophobe'. Do you have anything rational to add here, or are you just agenda whoring?
 
Last edited:
Saying homosexuality is a disease and should be treated isn't 'homophobic', in fact it shows a concern for those afflicted with it, in her opinion. Running around throwing out ad hominems that there is no evidence for isn't really a 'right', it's merely stupid and an attempt to slander.

Since it has been proven that homosexuality is NOT a disease, treating it as such is unethical. You are doing nothing but presenting inaccurate information as did this particular minister.
 
Last edited:
Since it has been proven that homosexuality is NOT a disease, treating it as such is unethical. You are doing nothing but presenting inaccurate information as did this particular minister.

There is no conclusive evidence it's not a genetic defect, so it's fair game. The minister is not out of line. How do you know the information is 'inaccurate'? That is just opinion, not fact. There is a difference between fact and opinion and wishful thinking.
 
There is no conclusive evidence it's not a genetic defect, so it's fair game. The minister is not out of line. How do you know the information is 'inaccurate'? That is just opinion, not fact. There is a difference between fact and opinion and wishful thinking.

Sexual orientation is the issue, not homosexuality. Sexual orientation is created, according to researchers, by a combination of genetics, biology, and social issues. One cannot separate the two types of orientations from this description. Her comments ARE out of line because all major medical and psychological organizations have de-classified homosexuality as any sort of disease or disorder, long ago, because of evidence. The genetic argument is as credible as saying that heterosexuality is a genetic defect or blue eyes, or left handedness.
 
Back
Top Bottom