Because it’s not, by any definition of the word religion, a religion. You can choose your religion, you can choose to have no religion, your sexuality isn’t something you can choose, it’s wired into you. (Which is something a lot of conservative religious figures don’t seem to get, they preach that being gay is a choice, if so, why don’t you choose to be gay for a day and see how that feels?)
6 Likes
Religion is a personal belief that you have the freedom of choice over. Being gay isn’t something you can control or change, it’s physical.
This lack of basic understanding on that point is exactly why it needs to be taught and talked about in school.
3 Likes
Because it’s not a faith or belief in a higher power, deity, or structure by which one must live their life in order to be “good”. It’s individuals being true to themselves and their own nature and not living in accordance with a belief system that has a mass following - there just so happens to be a large number of people who are naturally aligned with one of the LGBTQ+ categories (for want of a better phrase), but that’s not because someone preached that they should be. Nobody is born religious and nobody is indoctrinated into being LGBTQ+, some are born LGBTQ+ and many who are also consider themselves a follower of one of the major world religions.
Nobody is born religious
…in the same way that nobody is born racist, Republican or Democrat, transphobic or homophobic. These are all learned through social conditioning within our immediate circles and, in modern times, traditional and online media.
Take a look at what happened with RedNote. Whether it’s a suitable platform to be on or problematic in its own way, it’s the first time that hundreds of thousands of Amercans have been able to interact directly with Chinese people and have experienced first hand that they are just people through mostly wholesome interactions.
Well, how many of your views are based on things you’ve been told and heard, from which you formed your opinions and then only hold onto new information or views that reinforce your own? If you were to meet a group of people that you don’t agree with and interact with them as people and individuals and not from a distance as a demographic or topic being described, would you be able to make a different assessment? If “China = bad” has been shown to be “Chinese people = people” has been demonstrated, could the same not happen with changing a view of “LGBTQ+ = bad” to “LGBTQ+ people = people”. And should we not be interested and willing to learn about people?
I’m not religious but am in favour of teaching religion in schools, because teaching =/= preaching. Even in the US I don’t think this contravenes separation of church and state, especially if you teach multiple religions. In the same way, teaching black history in the US (though why stop there? Why not also Indian, Asian, European, Oceanic cultures. It’s important to have a broad understanding of multiple cultures to appreciate and understand cultural differences) and LGBTQ+ topics isn’t by default preaching and brainwashing - “this is a thing that happened…these are people who exist”. In the case of topics relating to race whether CRT in the form it took is the correct way is a different discussion, but how much was opinion on it shaped by what people were told about it through subjective opinion and not through their own experience and knowledge?
This isn’t the place to dwell on those topics and I think the important points have also been made by others, so to move on and bring it back to Trump, subjects such as those above are incredibly concerning for millions of Americans - and many parts of the rest of the world are worried about them too.
Politics in the US, and increasingly so in the UK, has become incredibly polarised and DT is an incredibly polarising person who seems to many to signal a shift even further in a particular direction, sowing even more division. Regardless of how you think the correct way to run the economy is, or the best tactic for managing immigration, should that come at the price of the rights, freedoms, liberties, and safety of huge swathes of a nation’s people? Or come with a bolt-on package of restricting the ability of schoolchildren to learn, experience, and understand people and cultures who are different from them?
Let’s all focus on concerns and hopes without getting into the nitty-gritty of debating the controversial stuff. e.g. we can comment that DT’s actions may be of concern to trans people without debating whether trans people should exist.
3 Likes
What don’t you support and for what reason? Is there anything you do think is positive?
Further to my comments on RedNote above, “The American People” are still people and putting up our own (metaphorical) walls is counter-intuitive to the diversity and inclusivity we espouse. For starters, not all of them voted for DT and not all of those who did are raging extremists, zealots, and bigots. Some may have been misled on aspects they believe in or were naïve to others they don’t.
Closing ourselves off to them only allows the internal propagation of the extreme views we don’t agree with to accelerate. The rest of the world needs to provide examples of how a different way can be successful, how different groups of people and cultures should and can be respected and contribute positively.
In 1881 the Isle of Man allowed women to vote. Gradually this spread to other countries.
Perhaps a better example is that The Bismarck Model of healthcare launched in Germany in 1883 which grew and developed across multiple nations and iterations over decades, including our own in 1911. But the NHS was launched in 1948. If we can take an idea that started in Germany and not say “you’re some bad dudes, we want nothing to do with any of it” and reverse the progress that WE made after being enemies with them through two world wars, then we can continue to coexist, share ideas, learn, and debate with Americans in 2025 despite one election and 4 year term. It is not the right move to backtrack on our values and begin to exclude people.
2 Likes
If that is true get you a good lawyer
uummmm
because they don’t worship a god, Theres no rituals, and there is no debate over wether or not gayness exists (it does)
1 Like
They generally show a swing against the incumbent Govt and if they don’t it is telling suggesting Trump is keeping everyone happy. - and if the “status quo” (ie against the incumbent) remains, how much of a swing pro-Democrats there is…
Reminder that the topic is Donald Trump’s presidency, his policies and beliefs, government officials, and how they may manifest and affect the States and the world.
It’s not the place to finger point and make accusations against individuals who are not a part of that government or the broader US Political system, or stereotype people. We’re not on Reddit or X.
Any more and the thread shuts.
There are plenty of relevant areas to discuss, such as his comments about NATO and specifically the EU recently regarding defence spending and Ukraine, or ditching the Paris Agreement.
1 Like
Equally he is head of DOGE which the current administration are trying to shoehorn as an actual department so 
One of his first acts was to withdraw from WHO - good job they didn’t help anyone last time he was in and we never have to fear worldwide pandemics…
1 Like
So interesting post on Trump reaction to the chagos island deal - pretty much a unifying US response.
Will trump block or buy?
…is not who I was referring to.
An interesting survey. I assume India is so positive as they’re hoping for an increase in H1-B visas?
My first thought is “interesting depiction of internal politics in the countries shown”.
My second thought is “I wonder what the spread is of Russians that think it’s good for Putin, or good because they hope he can be the one that puts an end to Ukraine so they move on and begin some sort of recovery”.
2 Likes
Buy, if he can. Expanding land and influence is a big win on the right wing, doing so through “legitimate” means is clean and less controversial to opponents. I don’t see an opportunist that considers themselves a deal maker turning down an opportunity to strike that deal.
Potentially less upsetting to the UK government compared to blocking, which as much he doesn’t care I don’t think he wouldn’t avoid because that’s more in his favour.
That’s fair, and I see that, also how do I respond to multiple things at once? I don’t understand half of the things about responding on here
Wow, India being 84% positive for Trump?! That’s surprising.
Highlight text, then press quote. Then you can reply to multiple things in one post 
Thank you so much, I was wondering about that 
Oh, in other news, I may be a C/SMSgt soon, if I can pass a review board
4 Likes
Good luck with that!
Thanks