take any minority group that has not been accepted by the white christo majority due to factors beyond their control and you find many of the same problems.
Actually, a lot of that is spin to absolve people or communities of any responsibility. Look at the whole "legacy of slavery" fallacy based on the idea of blaming whitey for all the black community's ills, when it can be shown that the vast majority of the black community's problems today are internal and don't stem from slavery.
look at the native populations that were for centuries told their way of life was wrong and were segregated and force fed christian idealism's. many are returning to the older ways and turning their communities around.
What? I haven't seen any native american community turning to "old ways" to turn their communities around. I have seen many communities stop relying on the federal government and be responsible for themselves, which has caused a turn around in those communities. Cite some examples.
so is self destructive behaviour a part of gay life or a symptom of dealing with the negativity and religiously based non-acceptance of them?
You are mischaracterizing it as an either or thing when it is not. It is a combination of factors (as I have been saying). Still, there is a level of personal responsibility that your argument absolves them of.
The gay community is different from other communities (like the native american community) in that someone isn't often born and raised in the gay community. More often they are born into a family with a predisposition to being self-destructive; a broken household, or a single parent, drug use in the house, questionable people around the children, domestic violence, whatever. They become gay as a result of some of those emotionally scaring and/or psychologically traumatizing experiences in that childhood.
Basically, people are not born into the gay community, like they are into the Native American community. So the analogy is fallacious; a
false analogy.
if it's not solely a conscious choice, but subconscious, then it could be something beyond ones control.
So it is "beyond their control"...so what? I am sure that many rapists, serial killers, pedophiles, etc. can make the same claim. Is society supposed to change their standards to allow for their proclivities? NAMBLA would love that!
This answer looks like someone backtracking themselves out of a limited corner after declaring gay is a lifestyle choice. pick a side and stop waffling.
You are now assuming my argument is claiming that the lifestyle choice I am talking about here is an exclusively (or largely) conscious thing, when the opposite has been the case (and you acknowledged as much in the previous sentence). When I first brought up "lifestyle choice" in this thread, I messed up and didn't make that distinction clear. But in every post since (where I expanded on what I meant by "lifestyle choice"), I have been
very clear that it is due to subconscious factors the vast majority of the time. You are ignoring that, to disingenuously set up that straw man mischaracterization of my definition of "lifestyle choice".
More importantly, you are shifting the focus of the debate away from the argument I am making to me personally (ad hominem reasoning), and trying to discredit
me. That says nothing about the credibility of the argument I am making.
