This thread was inspired by @PrinceGanaku. He made a legal argument pushing back against the legalization of homophobia, which some like @konkrumah have happily advocated.
I come from an academic background in social and political philosophy. I wanna make a moral argument 1/x.
The attraction btwn man and woman is thought to have been reduced to a material cause in our being so what about gays?
I would encourage anyone to seek this: "what is the cause of heterosexual attraction" and I would confidently tell you that the science is inconclusive
We don't know
We know HOW it happens. That is to say we can explain observable phenomena like hormones and receptors moving but we don't know WHY men like women.
We know why we procreate, for eg. But we can't confuse that with attraction
Heterosexual attraction cannot be answered with the sciences of procreation and sexual release. They are inadequate
There are different religious oppositions but usually they operate under the notion of Divine Command
"Our God says..."
Religious conservatives believe we cannot have morality if we have no idea of a god. False.
Morality is acquired in socialization before the young have a concept of a being out of this world.
That is to say if they are never introduced to this God-concept, it's sensible to argue that it WILL NOT NECESSARILY AFFECT THEIR MORAL PERFORMANCE.
Thus, if the argument is that our humanity and morality begin from beyond us, we are neglecting the importance of human-to-human relationships
Saying that "that's not how God created us" is fairly problematic
How do you know that's not how God created us? How are you more willing to hold on to an out-of-this world claim than respect the reality of another human in this world?
My point about morality has been made.
We lie when we say we can't think of humans doing good without a knowledge of a god.
We know humans before we know a concept out of this world. Respect your primary contact before you move to the man upstairs
What do we mean when we say the majority must have their way in democracy? It means that there's an intrinsic value to pleasing the majority
In that case, authority in a democracy is expected to make a moral choice
Having dealt with the first two opposition arguments, I believe @PrinceGanaku's legal arguments answer the moral question in the majoritarian problem
To destroy the humanity of those who cause you no harm, don't rope in a god or morality. You just seek to do harm.
More from World
Shopkeepers like in this video below say
"Pompeo, we Xinjiang people hate you."

Or everyday working people like Zaynura Namatqari, who speak out against vicious & disgusting US lies and accusations about
BBC's false reporting is hurting real Uygurs.
— Jingjing Li \u674e\u83c1\u83c1 (@Jingjing_Li) February 13, 2021
At a press conference, I saw this Uygur lady, who is a former trainee of a vocational education & training center in #Xinjiang, got emotional & furious at @BBC 's false reporting accusing systematic rape in #China. #Uyghur pic.twitter.com/vdu7KlAWMr
.@qiaocollective have a brilliant thread of everyday proletarian Uyghurs speaking out against the harassment they face from the US and their paid
The family of a retired cadre scorn Pompeo and the American imperialist interests he stands for. They celebrate China's sanctioning of Pompeo as the proper move against U.S. imperialist designs on Xinjiang. pic.twitter.com/vOfExwMfD8
— Qiao Collective (@qiaocollective) February 12, 2021
'Uyghur proletariat' looks like this:

Not like this: (photo from a pro Islamist separatist protest in Turkey in 2017)

You May Also Like
Funny there are those who think these migrant caravans were a FANTASTIC idea that's going to take the immigration issue away from you.
— Brian Cates (@drawandstrike) November 26, 2018
Like several weeks watching a rampaging horde storm the fences & throw rocks at our border patrol agents & getting gassed = great optics!
This media manipulation effort was inspired by the success of the "kids in cages" freakout, a 100% Stalinist propaganda drive that required people to forget about Obama putting migrant children in cells. It worked, so now they want pics of Trump "gassing children on the border."
There's a heavy air of Pallywood around the whole thing as well. If the Palestinians can stage huge theatrical performances of victimhood with the willing cooperation of Western media, why shouldn't the migrant caravan organizers expect the same?
It's business as usual for Anarchy, Inc. - the worldwide shredding of national sovereignty to increase the power of transnational organizations and left-wing ideology. Many in the media are true believers. Others just cannot resist the narrative of "change" and "social justice."
The product sold by Anarchy, Inc. is victimhood. It always boils down to the same formula: once the existing order can be painted as oppressors and children as their victims, chaos wins and order loses. Look at the lefties shrieking in unison about "Trump gassing children" today.
BREAKING: President Donald Trump has submitted his answers to questions from special counsel Robert Mueller
— Ryan Saavedra (@RealSaavedra) November 20, 2018
Mueller's officially end his investigation all on his own and he's gonna say he found no evidence of Trump campaign/Russian collusion during the 2016 election.
Democrats & DNC Media are going to LITERALLY have nothing coherent to say in response to that.
Mueller's team was 100% partisan.
That's why it's brilliant. NOBODY will be able to claim this team of partisan Democrats didn't go the EXTRA 20 MILES looking for ANY evidence they could find of Trump campaign/Russian collusion during the 2016 election
They looked high.
They looked low.
They looked underneath every rock, behind every tree, into every bush.
And they found...NOTHING.
Those saying Mueller will file obstruction charges against Trump: laughable.
What documents did Trump tell the Mueller team it couldn't have? What witnesses were withheld and never interviewed?
THERE WEREN'T ANY.
Mueller got full 100% cooperation as the record will show.