reply to post by Wonderer2012
Let me firstly say as a gay person that I appreciate your style, and the manner in which you posed your concerns.
I think the reduction of children is also seen as a problem in a racial and religious sense.
It is not simply a matter of people having less children, it is also who is having less children, and who is having more.
Just this afternoon again I heard from certain people I had drinks with that the "white race" will soon be a minority in their historic majority
countries, and once a minority (gulp) we might be treated just as badly by the new majority as we treated others in history (karma - the big fear).
I think the focus here on the gay or bisexual minorities is totally misplaced.
I have a straight family member who has been living with his female partner for almost two decades, and they choose not to marry or have kids.
There are many such Western couples today, and they have no excuse (although I respect the choice).
Stop pointing the finger at gays if straight people cannot uniformly lead by example.
Surely if things are crumbling one should first focus on the majority of heterosexuals, and why they are so anti-family.
I'm yet to see a single thread on this, unless it is anti-feminist or has misogynistic leanings.
What's wrong with so many heterosexual men, specifically white heterosexual men?
Always blaming somebody else is easy, I guess.
Religious sects and movements can give themselves all kinds of fancy acronyms including "the family" (so did Charles Manson), but it doesn't mean
squat as long as they don't include all varieties of families, and how they can be role-models and community support to all families.
Many gay and bisexual people have had children, and want to have children.
Yet, when they do, others come and say it is not our right, and science should not help us, like it helps infertile straight couples or couples
affected by HIV.
There are options nowadays.
I think it is downright hypocritical for some governments to use immigration as a pool of labor and to make up for the lack of procreation by local
heterosexuals, when indigenous gay couples are denied scientific help to procreate.
I saw gay culture twenty years ago, and many people did accept it.
I'd say in some respects homophobia is worse today.
Some older gay men actually look back fondly to previous decades, where hanky-panky between men was much more common, and the gay identity was less
Sure there are valuable legal rights, but culturally it's not so great.
But heck, in previous decades many countries (and several US states) also didn't allow mixed-race marriages, and some places still allowed girls to
get married at 13, and they had conscripted wars resulting in baby boomers, so are we really going to set a standard in the past?
I don't find many screen representations of homosexuality at all, and we're still stuck with Will and Grace
or the very problematic bisexual
Yeah, there is a problem of over-sexualized characters, especially in reality TV, where a gay friend may be referred to once or twice.
Otherwise I just see heterosexualists pointing fingers at an outsider group to distract the focus from their own failings at keeping the family
Maybe some of them are just lazy?
If heterosexuality is so religious, where is Mrs. God, and where does Jesus get married and raise kids?
Why did God curse the Biblical Adam and Eve, when the male God was quite content with Adam alone?
If it is unnatural, then why do many species have gay sex and (arguably) relationships?
I think that local gay couples should be encouraged to reproduce and raise kids in some manner.
There are options.
Stop hating on them, and encourage procreation.
Maybe gay people are not enough people to really make a difference, but I suppose every bit helps if certain communities want to keep their culture,
language, music and democratic values.
One can either force homosexuality underground and force gays to marry opposite sex partners and have kids (like many cultures still do).
Or one can encourage them to be open and include them in the community.
The amount of resulting kids will probably be the same, but giving anything an underground position or status (unless really necessary to prevent
victimization) is not a recipe for health and social cohesion.
So yes, increase the population by encouraging both homosexuals and heterosexuals to get married and raise families.
I'd also say the West should allow polygamy and look for Biblical support for the custom, because the other cultures outnumbering the West also allow
that, and that makes a significant numerical impact.
There's no reason why polygamous marriages cannot be egalitarian as an adult choice, just as violent patriarchy is also found in monogamous marriages.
edit on 30-6-2013 by halfoldman because: (no reason given)