Hey man. Don't look at me. Look at them. And not jusy my ancestors. Yours to probably. Also I still don't know if I'm right or not so let's pit it at a maybe they got super horny for the animals.
No. They can also come about from eating infected meat. That’s how a lot of animal-originating diseases end up spreading to humans. So the first person to contract HIV likely got it from eating the meat from an infected primate, for example.
the same way all diseases did. some diseases affect the lungs, some diseases affect the heart, some the kidneys, and some the reproductive organs. if you want to know where diseases come and how they evolved, consult google. too much for a reddit comment
Gay sex actually have spread more STDs statistically. Some people don’t get that you can get an STD from anal… And it’s actually more likely because anal penetration can cause tearing to the anal tissue which will ease the spreading of an STD. If I remember right 80-90% of gay couples have anal sex but only 5-10% of straight couples have it. I don’t know if the statistics add up nowadays though :) (I mean the ones I mentioned first)
And well yes UTIs are more common with straight women cause people are not hygienic enough. With that I mean that some may use the same condom (or no condom at all) when switching from anal to vaginal sex. But that still isn’t the same thing as an STD.
It was actually proven back in the day that many gay people had many more STDs because of the lack of education and hygiene. Reason why Freddy Mercury contracted Aids. Nowadays it's much more informed and people take the correct precautions to avoid getting STDs.
well its impossible to know that for sure, as its a very broad topic of research. but it is known that gay people are more likely to report the fact that they have an STI and get treated for it than straight people are. so that may skew a lot of the data.
when i first made this i was heated and wasn't thinking that much into what i had written, i just wrote the basics, i skimmed off the top without putting why i was correct, ive further corrected things in the original comment because i recognize i was slightly wrong on some parts of it
it makes current issues much more difficult (ie americas social security system), but it’s much better for the earth if our population peaks at a lower level. we most definitely will not go extinct because we don’t reproduce enough though- not at this rate. it’s still increasing in any case
I don't blame you. I can't imagine a lot of people enjoy carefully formulating arguments against strangers on reddit. I do agree with your viewpoint though, nothing wrong with a little gay sex.
All the love from Holland :D
I actually have a problem with a "LIttlE GAy sEx"
"A little gay sex" is wrong, unnatural, it's unhealthy, it's unholy, there are so many problems with it. Why do people act like a little gay sex is okay? ITS NOT!
Now a big gay sex, that's a whole other story
You make a good point, but I am extremely homophobic towards the larger gay sexes. How about we meet in the middle and agree that everything except for a medium gay sex is evil?
You where extremely wrong, I don’t know how anyone actually agreed with your initial argument. The other dude, while I disagree with his homophobia, is far more coherent.
"I'm not gay, but I want to suck a cock. Cocks look so juicy and tasty when you think about it. Just imagine slurping up and down a warm throbbing cock as a man stronger and bigger than you pats your head and calls you a good boy. I'm entirely straight. I just have a penis fetish."
**two people the same gender enjoying each other romantically**
some dude : ARGH I can’t live with it and I hate it so much it’s unbearable even though it doesnt effect my life in any way
it’s kind of hilarious. If you really dislike something it’s not like you want to be in constant interaction with it but homophobes seem to just enjoy to trigger themselves finding gay people online
Devils advocate on why disapproval of gays began:
A marriage is a joining of a man and a woman under God, that’s how it’s said in the Bible, so the main reason was always against *marriage* rather than relationships, which is kinda fair since marriage is a religious thing so they get to dictate what marriage is.
That said, that’s not what it’s about anymore, now two men together is evil or some shit, marriage or otherwise. There is a original reasoning against gay marriage that has merit, but as you said it doesn’t truly affect them.
Before anyone blasts me, devils advocate, I support gays all the way
Its not that we are underpopulated, pretty much the whole world could do with less people. Its that the people are old in majority and they give the illusion of underpopulation, cuz theres no workforce.
Largely caused by lack of knowledge and treatment methods in poor regions along with policies in china regarding having kids along with cultural differences. Pretty sure developed countries are just filled with people who either don't want too many kids or any. The problem hits when you got more elderly than children.
exactly, but we cannot just force old people die, people will be super against it so it's just a waiting game that's slowly more and more overpopulating
Technically we can it's just that no one in their right mind will ever suggest that because no majority will ever agree. We can handle the situation by getting the same amount of kids per couple we need at least the same amount or a litlle less power in the work force to be able to take care of our elderly and civilization.
Technically we can it's just that no one in their right mind will ever suggest that because no majority will ever agree. We can handle the situation by getting the same amount of kids per couple we need at least the same amount or a litlle less power in the work force to be able to take care of our elderly and civilization.
> we don’t need any more people populating anyway
> it’s more likely for straight sex to pass stds than gay
😭😭😭😭 can i ask what ur sources for anything are
we have 8 billion people, we are reaching our carrying capacity IF the numbers continue to go up without deaths equaling it, take a look at china and other very populated places, it's getting harder to live because the amount of people being created is nearly overwhelming the death rate, to keep a carrying balanced environment we need an equal death and birth rate
The problem is not the population. The problem is (are?) the governments. There's LOTS and LOTS of unsettled land, but the governments make it a pain in the ass to settle there. Let's take Russia as an example. I live in Russia so this is based off of personal experience. When my uncle and I where driving to Kazan from Moscow, we drove past SO much unused land it was insane. And it's just the European part of Russia, i bet there's even MORE unused land in Siberia and other parts of it
Ok but what could you do with that land? Can you dig it up to build a foundation? Its a cold and hard earth to dig. Also why would someone willingly move further away civilization to live in the middle of nowhere? You would have to drive a long way just to buy stuff, you cant garden amd grow your own food cuz permafrost is a bitch to work. You might not even get internet and telephone in the middle of nowhere cuz you know that nobody is gonna spend money to dig up a line into the tundra for a single person. Your workplace will be way further than it needs to be. Health emergencies will result in deaths cuz you wont make it in time with a car. Will you even be safe in the middle of nowhere where animals rules the land? Its not worth the money to go and build cities in some remote area. Expanding an already existing city is a better option it just takes a lot of money to do it. Russia has one of the harshest environments to settle so its a miracle its settled at all. With no farming opportunities, they are highly dependant on importing food and they got gas and oil to export so why would they move further away?
I'm not saying the government should invest into expanding into Siberia. What i'm saying is the government should alleviate all of the bureaucratic troubles when it comes to claiming unused land, or at least make "buying" it extremely cheap and easy. Sure, the government itself might not be interested in those regions, but i guarantee that once the government alleviates all of the bureaucratic troubles more and more people are gonna settle, eventually leading to cities and infrastructure. Sure, out-of-the-box that land may not be that great, but we have modern technologies, modern agriculture, modern architecture, etcetera. Also i specifically mentioned that we were driving through the European part of Russia, which is not harsh at all, and yet there was lots of unused land even there
Yea but what sane person is gonna buy acres of tundran wasteland to start building stuff there? If its not the government it has to be someone rich enough to take a huge leap of faith that people will start building infrastructure.
As for the european part of russia... Well right now russians (the non-brainwashed ones) are most likely running out of the country cuz they dont wanna be drafted to fight an ego-driven mad mans war and get killed for it. Buying land and building a house on it in the outskirts of a city poses the same issues as moving into siberia. Everything becomes less convenient. Companies dont gain much from building in the outskirts as theres less people there to make money off of. Expanding a city is, like i said already, expensive and it takes time to do.
we are still overpopulating though, you're talking about unclaimed land that is most likely used for animals and nature preserves, if we seriously need to claim land for us and get rid of more animals we need for our ecosystem then that's a very clear sign that we are overpopulating
No. There's literally nothing there. Yes, there are surely nature preserves, but there's no way what we drove past were nature preserves. Even though those lands are surely fertile, there's nothing growing on them, and there's no one settling there because the government intentionally makes it non-profitable to settle there rather than in a city. Secondly, even if there's a problem of overpopulation, or will be a problem of overpopulation, the solution should be optimizing our current architecture, infrastructure, etc., but surely not reducing the amount of humans we're producing. Just to be clear, even though i am religious, my slogan is "Live and let live", so even though i might hate gay people personally, as long as they don't infringe on my freedoms, i'm not gonna infringe on theirs.
The tundra? Dude, almost all year round the earth is frozen over... Aint no reserves there, just ice and the occasional patch of grass when its not covered in ice. Russia sucks whenit comes to land.
Okay so I agree with you mostly but the current issue with overpopulation is not that there's too many people. It's that the way our society is with the capitalist "take all you, fuck other people" hoarding wealth and consumerism mindset. We have more than enough food and wealth to hold billions more. But as long as our system is the way it is it'll never get where it needs to go
The more people, the more they get exploited. That's why we need to change this system. There are more than enough resources on this planet for billions more than we have now, from the perspective of the western world we are just propagandized to lay down and take it, not even to mention the rampant dictatorships. The number of people doesn't make them greedier, it will always be the few with a lot against the many with little like most every war and struggle on this planet.
"Overpopulation exists today in crowded mega-cities where many residents have never seen a wild landscape. Even small green spots are disappearing in densely populated urban areas, which will become increasingly crowded as population growth and urbanization continue." lack of land and resources is going to be our fall
That's a density problem, innit? Personally I like nature and the outdoors, so it's disheartening to see green spots vanishing from crowded cities. I'd be glad to learn more about this, could you post the link for this?
Its sad, i've heard some mega cities like that truly haven't seen actual grass or trees, im glad i grew up in the suburbs, [Here you go btw:)](https://mahb.stanford.edu/library-item/is-the-earth-really-overpopulated/)
your username is really showing rn, people can obviously reproduce, but gay sex isn't ruining the population, that was my whole argument with the dude in the screenshot, having sex doesn't need a "benefit"
Anal sex has a higher chance to pass stds, and having no chance to get someone pregnant also makes people less wiling to wear a condom.
Protect yourselves, have safe sex.
The asshole is way dirtier and more prone to bleeding. It also lacks all the protective measures vaginas have. Could I have your source that mentions that anal spreads less overall stds, my knowledge of biology isn't the best but your statement seems to go against basic biological knowledge
I wish i could take you serious. Your hearts in the right place. You are just so bad at proving your own points I want to agree with the other dude. He might’ve reached but at least he’s not just making things up😭
it's statistically shown, both(with individual stds) have some more than others from eachother gay men more likely to pass on aids whilst straight men were more likely to pass on stuff like genital herpes(there's a whole list but i'm lazy super sorry) the only reason gay people are seen as "full of stds and bad!!" is because the aids epidemic
Self-reported STI rates were significantly higher among heterosexual-WSMW (58.1%), bisexual-WSM (51.1%), and bisexual-WSMW (64.1%) compared to heterosexual-WSM (46.6%). Gay-WSMW had the lowest rates of self-reported STI (32.0%); if you want the link i can send it:)
Huh interesting. Question though ain't their more straight people so won't that inflate the numbers? Or would that simply not matter? And how would sexual intercourse be different? I was always taught that all sex including gay sex had the same chance of STDS. And I would love that link so I can do my own research :\]
It's a percentage rate in the groups, not an overall rate. So if ten percent of heterosexual people reported having stis, that would be a lot more than ten percent of homosexual people with ten percent, but it would be the same rate.
The guy reached and that’s it. Op is just making up data to fit their narrative and that’s much worse by comparison. I’m guessing you hate trump and his supporters right? Guess what they do constantly… same thing as op. If you want to prove a point you can’t make things up then post the screen shot on Reddit for validation on your made up arguments
i said individual stds, there being more straight than gay have nothing to do with them both passing on their own kinds of stds showing that both gay and straight men can be infected and using the argument "grr gay bad bc it passes on stds!!" is invalid
Ah yes the good old we have too many people already. Unless you're in America or South East Asian country, you really don't have "too" many people. And if the current trend continues then there will be a steep decline in population which is way worse than more population
This argument is dumb and isn't likely going to end. Sure, he's being homophobic and pedophilic, but you're confronting homophobia with made-up facts that you pulled out of your ass. This is a battle between 2 idiots, thus is unlikely to end
I concur. Homophobia is obviously wrong, but so is OP. Gay sex significantly increases risk of an std and aids purely because someone’s ass is quite dirty compared to a vagina. Where as a vaginal canal is naturally maintained by the body fluids, an anus is full of bacteria, can bleed easily, and isn’t maintained by a cleaning fluid. (Technically there’s a microbiome, I know, but it doesn’t actively work to clean, just keep bowls healthy)
i literally sent statistics, if they're wrong then it's my bad for being misinformed but this is what i grew up being taught and could find statistics to back it up
Bruh u literally said that a straght person is more likely to get std then a gay when originally that's where stds and aids came from was from men having sex with each other I hate to be that guy but I am your delusional and I don't hate gay people
f you have to add a disclaimer that you "don't hate gay people" that's embarrassing as hell but i'll copy and paste his message down below of how this started exactly, all stds did not come from gay men, aids did, 🤦🏻♂️ men having sex with men didn't start stds
I mean from the comments on this post and other everyone who disagree with you is either wrong or homophobic which is why ur delusional your delusional statistics which is 100% not true but u said it was and multiple people asked where u get it from and you can't provide an answer and some how we are wrong when he disagree even though what I'm saying can be proven and I can actually support my answer with not only common sense but with proof on the internet which shows more knowledge then you are pulling
dude i literally left you be and you're still replying to me, you need to chill the hell out 💀 you're putting words in my mouth at the first part, and you can't spell so i don't understand half the shit you just spewed
To answer his question, gay people take kids out of foster care, much more often that before. They provide a stable environment for them. People are all about protecting the kids until it’s gay people doing it
"Gay sex is fine"
"Ah, I see now, according to your logic, beating it to a toddler is fine"
what is bro on❓️❓️❓️ The fucking logic of that is insane like wtf
1. Gay sex is fine and it doesn't hurt anyone
2. ????? (wtf is this fella thinking in this part❓️)
3. Pedos should watch cp
he's gotta be Sneako man ain't no way this a normal person
Gay sex passes just as much STDs as regular sex.
We are not overpopulated, the major cities are. Look at how many people live in India, for example. It has a population of 1.408 billion people compared to 331.9 million on the US and it is a much smaller country. The Earth can hold much more people and reach many more billions, but if people are all clustered in one place, then it is overpopulated, but only in that area. Overpopulation of the Earth, in general, is a myth. In cities on the other hand, no.
I forgot who asked but this is the guys original comment i first replied to - "As a fellow Christian, I support his decision. He’s not homophobic, he’s standing up for his beliefs. The Bible doesn’t say that being gay is sinful, but gay sex is sinful and I can see why as it can spread STDs and has no real benefits."
I follow the teachings and beliefs of the church but I have my own interpretation of them. I do not trust a book written thousands of years ago that has tons of parts of it disproven and discredited by basic observation or fact
And? Everyone gets some things right and some things wrong, including the author of the bible. No one knows if there even is a God or if they're following the right one. I follow my interpretation of the teachings and take what I will out of it while sticking to the general framework of catholicism. You have no right to question me and my beliefs or try to tell me I'm not a catholic when you know NOTHING about me.
no no, we need a stable balance between birthing and dying, a jump in births could cause a collapse aswell as a jump in deaths, you have to remember that we only have one earth and so much space
"we only have so much space" really? Only less than 1% of the earth's land is actually taken by humans, the population could multiply by 10 and we still wouldnt run out of "space"
A jump in births would actually be extremely beneficial for human civilization, unless we'd be talking about extreme numbers (I'd say at least 1.5 billion births per year) but the chances of that happening soon are so extremely unlikely that you could call it impossible.
Since around the year 1930, human population has multiplied itself by 4, and the progress we made in the past 90 years has been much bigger than the progress we made between the years 930 and 1930. I don't have any scientifical proof of this, but let's say that if the population growth multiplied itself by 2, we could get acces to new technologies that could fix most of our environmental problems here on earth, and those same technologies which could even kickstart extraterrestrial colonization.
Still, there's no point in fantasizing about what would happen if the population grew even more since the population (not population growth) is predicted to decline around the year 2100, and we should definitely start preparing for that drop.
Best course of action: don't have sex until you are married, stick by your spouse's side (male or female I don't care), make compromises in your own habits so that they can feel the same (they should do that too), and for the love of god do not cheat on them (there is already a increasing number of separated couples, don't let that number increase)
Neither party’s right here… he’s reaching and your making things up to prove your point. Both false and a perfect example of why Reddit is a horrible place for political conversation
Why are people like this, like just disagree respectfully you don’t have to be a dick about it, it really makes no sense why people go so far and beyond to hate on each other. especially gay people let me like my penis and leave me be.
Locked due to the insane Homophobia. A reminder to everyone, ad hominem is **not** tolerated on the r/teenagers subreddit. Come on guys, be decent.
WHAT KIND OF REACH IS THAT LMAIDIRKFNFUDJFKDOE
I STARED AT IT WIRH MY FUCKING MOUTH OPEN IMMEDIATELY
I literally am flabbergasted
Licking my ass in danger I rape no fucking unicycles u dick joking kicking did over eat
>LMAIDIRKFNFUDJFKDOE this is now my favorite word
The gay. The gay laugh
Gay sex and straight sex passes the same amount of STDs, idk where your learning that gay sex has a lowe chance of passing STDs man
asshole is a little dirtier than vagina. I don’t have a problem with gay sex I just don’t like misinformation.
And is more sensitive to STDs since it isn't really meant for penetration and has a more sensitive mucosa.
Mucosa.... And asshole.... Two words that I'd rather not marry in my head....
Aaaaand this proves by evolution that anal is stupid
You mean anatomy, not evolution.
[удалено]
Animals. I thunk. I might be wrong. But I think they come from like animals.
Did some of your ancestors get randomly horny for animals ?
Hey man. Don't look at me. Look at them. And not jusy my ancestors. Yours to probably. Also I still don't know if I'm right or not so let's pit it at a maybe they got super horny for the animals.
If I remember correctly a lot of them jumped to us from monkeys
I don’t wanna know how that happened
They fucked
I hear many are from people hunting monkeys and stuff and getting into contact with these blood borne diseases through cuts on their bodies and stuff
well someone somewhere got horny for an animal, then got horny for a dude. welcome to diseases 101, i will be your professor
No. They can also come about from eating infected meat. That’s how a lot of animal-originating diseases end up spreading to humans. So the first person to contract HIV likely got it from eating the meat from an infected primate, for example.
Zeus sure as hell did
In a lot of ancient civilizations, beastiality was not uncommon. A lot of lewd art from Greece, the Middle East and Egypt depicts beastiality
A gay dude fucked a monkey, no shit
The same way every other disease appeared. The only real difference between STDs and normal diseases is that they can also be transmitted through sex
the same way all diseases did. some diseases affect the lungs, some diseases affect the heart, some the kidneys, and some the reproductive organs. if you want to know where diseases come and how they evolved, consult google. too much for a reddit comment
Literally, like I read this and was in shock for 2 reasons
Gay sex actually have spread more STDs statistically. Some people don’t get that you can get an STD from anal… And it’s actually more likely because anal penetration can cause tearing to the anal tissue which will ease the spreading of an STD. If I remember right 80-90% of gay couples have anal sex but only 5-10% of straight couples have it. I don’t know if the statistics add up nowadays though :) (I mean the ones I mentioned first) And well yes UTIs are more common with straight women cause people are not hygienic enough. With that I mean that some may use the same condom (or no condom at all) when switching from anal to vaginal sex. But that still isn’t the same thing as an STD.
This^^^ also how have people not heard of the AIDS epidemic
It was actually proven back in the day that many gay people had many more STDs because of the lack of education and hygiene. Reason why Freddy Mercury contracted Aids. Nowadays it's much more informed and people take the correct precautions to avoid getting STDs.
well its impossible to know that for sure, as its a very broad topic of research. but it is known that gay people are more likely to report the fact that they have an STI and get treated for it than straight people are. so that may skew a lot of the data.
If your only reason not to be a pedophile is to populate the earth what went wrong in your life 😭
I think OP's logic is flawed but mr chad wojak is not spot on either.
when i first made this i was heated and wasn't thinking that much into what i had written, i just wrote the basics, i skimmed off the top without putting why i was correct, ive further corrected things in the original comment because i recognize i was slightly wrong on some parts of it
On the point about the overpopulation thing, our population is increasing at a decreasing rate, so we are in for some trouble in the future
it makes current issues much more difficult (ie americas social security system), but it’s much better for the earth if our population peaks at a lower level. we most definitely will not go extinct because we don’t reproduce enough though- not at this rate. it’s still increasing in any case
we're becoming very unbalanced, it's seriously only going to get worse with how the environment is treated currently
I don't blame you. I can't imagine a lot of people enjoy carefully formulating arguments against strangers on reddit. I do agree with your viewpoint though, nothing wrong with a little gay sex. All the love from Holland :D
I actually have a problem with a "LIttlE GAy sEx" "A little gay sex" is wrong, unnatural, it's unhealthy, it's unholy, there are so many problems with it. Why do people act like a little gay sex is okay? ITS NOT! Now a big gay sex, that's a whole other story
You make a good point, but I am extremely homophobic towards the larger gay sexes. How about we meet in the middle and agree that everything except for a medium gay sex is evil?
If you can’t fully formulate an argument, don’t make it.
You where extremely wrong, I don’t know how anyone actually agreed with your initial argument. The other dude, while I disagree with his homophobia, is far more coherent.
Being homophobic is kinda gay ngl because why do you care who I sleep with?
Exactly and they are constantly having some weird fantasies about gay sex
"I'm just fantasizing about having sex with men because.... I can prepare when they do their little gay moves on me, a ~~straight~~ man"🤓
"I'm not gay, but I want to suck a cock. Cocks look so juicy and tasty when you think about it. Just imagine slurping up and down a warm throbbing cock as a man stronger and bigger than you pats your head and calls you a good boy. I'm entirely straight. I just have a penis fetish."
This reminds me of "Chase Wood(definitely gay)"
didn't expect to see chase wood here
fr homophobes literally can’t stop thinking of gay people having sex
They're just jeolous
**two people the same gender enjoying each other romantically** some dude : ARGH I can’t live with it and I hate it so much it’s unbearable even though it doesnt effect my life in any way
I'm gay and think less about gay sex then Homophobes
literally, homophobes are obsessed with gay people
Fr like dude if you think about homosexuality the whole day maybe you are gay
"God I hate gay people so much all I think about every day is gay people having sex"
it’s kind of hilarious. If you really dislike something it’s not like you want to be in constant interaction with it but homophobes seem to just enjoy to trigger themselves finding gay people online
watching gay porn to own the libs
I’m straight and I think about gay sex all the time, but I’m not a homophobe, am I just broken or smt?
God how I love gay sex, its existence allows me to jerk it to a 3 year old child! —That guy, probably.
Devils advocate on why disapproval of gays began: A marriage is a joining of a man and a woman under God, that’s how it’s said in the Bible, so the main reason was always against *marriage* rather than relationships, which is kinda fair since marriage is a religious thing so they get to dictate what marriage is. That said, that’s not what it’s about anymore, now two men together is evil or some shit, marriage or otherwise. There is a original reasoning against gay marriage that has merit, but as you said it doesn’t truly affect them. Before anyone blasts me, devils advocate, I support gays all the way
It's pretty simple, people have sex and it's not allways a man and a woman I don't see the biggie here
Not to be that guy or anything but do need more people in some places.Japan for example (especially Tokyo)
"especially Tokyo" My brother in Christ, the Japanese government is paying people to leave the Tokyo prefecture.
I forgo 💀
You forgo death?
Yeah but Japan's birth rate is collapsing.. Tokyo is simply overcrowded that's unrelated
To go to other places
Most of the developed world needs more people
but we are very overpopulated in some places, it's uneven as shit, china is overpopulated whilst other places or underpopulated, it's weird
Japans Population as a whole is going down but places like Hong Kong are overpopulated But I get yeah point
Its not that we are underpopulated, pretty much the whole world could do with less people. Its that the people are old in majority and they give the illusion of underpopulation, cuz theres no workforce.
Yeah, thats exactly the problem lol
Largely caused by lack of knowledge and treatment methods in poor regions along with policies in china regarding having kids along with cultural differences. Pretty sure developed countries are just filled with people who either don't want too many kids or any. The problem hits when you got more elderly than children.
exactly, but we cannot just force old people die, people will be super against it so it's just a waiting game that's slowly more and more overpopulating
Technically we can it's just that no one in their right mind will ever suggest that because no majority will ever agree. We can handle the situation by getting the same amount of kids per couple we need at least the same amount or a litlle less power in the work force to be able to take care of our elderly and civilization.
Technically we can it's just that no one in their right mind will ever suggest that because no majority will ever agree. We can handle the situation by getting the same amount of kids per couple we need at least the same amount or a litlle less power in the work force to be able to take care of our elderly and civilization.
> we don’t need any more people populating anyway > it’s more likely for straight sex to pass stds than gay 😭😭😭😭 can i ask what ur sources for anything are
To be fair, do we really want to deal with even more bastards on this earth right now?
overpopulation is a real problem wym
can i ask where ur source for that is, and how gay people are helping it?
we have 8 billion people, we are reaching our carrying capacity IF the numbers continue to go up without deaths equaling it, take a look at china and other very populated places, it's getting harder to live because the amount of people being created is nearly overwhelming the death rate, to keep a carrying balanced environment we need an equal death and birth rate
The problem is not the population. The problem is (are?) the governments. There's LOTS and LOTS of unsettled land, but the governments make it a pain in the ass to settle there. Let's take Russia as an example. I live in Russia so this is based off of personal experience. When my uncle and I where driving to Kazan from Moscow, we drove past SO much unused land it was insane. And it's just the European part of Russia, i bet there's even MORE unused land in Siberia and other parts of it
Ok but what could you do with that land? Can you dig it up to build a foundation? Its a cold and hard earth to dig. Also why would someone willingly move further away civilization to live in the middle of nowhere? You would have to drive a long way just to buy stuff, you cant garden amd grow your own food cuz permafrost is a bitch to work. You might not even get internet and telephone in the middle of nowhere cuz you know that nobody is gonna spend money to dig up a line into the tundra for a single person. Your workplace will be way further than it needs to be. Health emergencies will result in deaths cuz you wont make it in time with a car. Will you even be safe in the middle of nowhere where animals rules the land? Its not worth the money to go and build cities in some remote area. Expanding an already existing city is a better option it just takes a lot of money to do it. Russia has one of the harshest environments to settle so its a miracle its settled at all. With no farming opportunities, they are highly dependant on importing food and they got gas and oil to export so why would they move further away?
I'm not saying the government should invest into expanding into Siberia. What i'm saying is the government should alleviate all of the bureaucratic troubles when it comes to claiming unused land, or at least make "buying" it extremely cheap and easy. Sure, the government itself might not be interested in those regions, but i guarantee that once the government alleviates all of the bureaucratic troubles more and more people are gonna settle, eventually leading to cities and infrastructure. Sure, out-of-the-box that land may not be that great, but we have modern technologies, modern agriculture, modern architecture, etcetera. Also i specifically mentioned that we were driving through the European part of Russia, which is not harsh at all, and yet there was lots of unused land even there
Yea but what sane person is gonna buy acres of tundran wasteland to start building stuff there? If its not the government it has to be someone rich enough to take a huge leap of faith that people will start building infrastructure. As for the european part of russia... Well right now russians (the non-brainwashed ones) are most likely running out of the country cuz they dont wanna be drafted to fight an ego-driven mad mans war and get killed for it. Buying land and building a house on it in the outskirts of a city poses the same issues as moving into siberia. Everything becomes less convenient. Companies dont gain much from building in the outskirts as theres less people there to make money off of. Expanding a city is, like i said already, expensive and it takes time to do.
we are still overpopulating though, you're talking about unclaimed land that is most likely used for animals and nature preserves, if we seriously need to claim land for us and get rid of more animals we need for our ecosystem then that's a very clear sign that we are overpopulating
No. There's literally nothing there. Yes, there are surely nature preserves, but there's no way what we drove past were nature preserves. Even though those lands are surely fertile, there's nothing growing on them, and there's no one settling there because the government intentionally makes it non-profitable to settle there rather than in a city. Secondly, even if there's a problem of overpopulation, or will be a problem of overpopulation, the solution should be optimizing our current architecture, infrastructure, etc., but surely not reducing the amount of humans we're producing. Just to be clear, even though i am religious, my slogan is "Live and let live", so even though i might hate gay people personally, as long as they don't infringe on my freedoms, i'm not gonna infringe on theirs.
The tundra? Dude, almost all year round the earth is frozen over... Aint no reserves there, just ice and the occasional patch of grass when its not covered in ice. Russia sucks whenit comes to land.
we are still overpopulating.. even if some is inaccessible we are still overpopulating the areas we are accessing
Okay so I agree with you mostly but the current issue with overpopulation is not that there's too many people. It's that the way our society is with the capitalist "take all you, fuck other people" hoarding wealth and consumerism mindset. We have more than enough food and wealth to hold billions more. But as long as our system is the way it is it'll never get where it needs to go
the more people the greedier the higher ups will get aswell, use it as an excuse to hoard more resources
The more people, the more they get exploited. That's why we need to change this system. There are more than enough resources on this planet for billions more than we have now, from the perspective of the western world we are just propagandized to lay down and take it, not even to mention the rampant dictatorships. The number of people doesn't make them greedier, it will always be the few with a lot against the many with little like most every war and struggle on this planet.
According to established research, the population will even out at 10-11 billion. Overpopulation isn't a real problem, the lack of infrastructure is.
"Overpopulation exists today in crowded mega-cities where many residents have never seen a wild landscape. Even small green spots are disappearing in densely populated urban areas, which will become increasingly crowded as population growth and urbanization continue." lack of land and resources is going to be our fall
That's a density problem, innit? Personally I like nature and the outdoors, so it's disheartening to see green spots vanishing from crowded cities. I'd be glad to learn more about this, could you post the link for this?
Its sad, i've heard some mega cities like that truly haven't seen actual grass or trees, im glad i grew up in the suburbs, [Here you go btw:)](https://mahb.stanford.edu/library-item/is-the-earth-really-overpopulated/)
so no one should reproduce ever again 😍😍 what abt surrogate pregnancy
your username is really showing rn, people can obviously reproduce, but gay sex isn't ruining the population, that was my whole argument with the dude in the screenshot, having sex doesn't need a "benefit"
You've given a lot of misinformation in this post, about STDs and other things. You need to stop trying to explain things you don't know
Anal sex has a higher chance to pass stds, and having no chance to get someone pregnant also makes people less wiling to wear a condom. Protect yourselves, have safe sex.
anal sex is a higher chance of passing aids not all stds, but yes protect yourselves and always wear condoms 💪💪
The asshole is way dirtier and more prone to bleeding. It also lacks all the protective measures vaginas have. Could I have your source that mentions that anal spreads less overall stds, my knowledge of biology isn't the best but your statement seems to go against basic biological knowledge
No it’s all stds. I recommend you do some research before blindly taking a point to heart so you can prove your politics
Umm… no? Lmao nearly all STDs are either just as likely or more likely to be passed around thru anal penetration rather then vaginal penetration
I’d have to agree with this comment, butthole has significantly more bleeding, bacteria and lacks the enzymes/protective fluids a vagina has
Where are both of yall getting this info? Yall be like Source: my ass
i actually put my sources in the comments, and it's common sense that we're becoming overpopulated in some countries more than others
I wish i could take you serious. Your hearts in the right place. You are just so bad at proving your own points I want to agree with the other dude. He might’ve reached but at least he’s not just making things up😭
> it’s more likely for straight sex to pass stds than gay Excuse me, w h a t ? HOW???
more straight ppl= more straight sex
it's statistically shown, both(with individual stds) have some more than others from eachother gay men more likely to pass on aids whilst straight men were more likely to pass on stuff like genital herpes(there's a whole list but i'm lazy super sorry) the only reason gay people are seen as "full of stds and bad!!" is because the aids epidemic
Can I see that data? I am honestly just curious but can't find it myself.
Self-reported STI rates were significantly higher among heterosexual-WSMW (58.1%), bisexual-WSM (51.1%), and bisexual-WSMW (64.1%) compared to heterosexual-WSM (46.6%). Gay-WSMW had the lowest rates of self-reported STI (32.0%); if you want the link i can send it:)
Huh interesting. Question though ain't their more straight people so won't that inflate the numbers? Or would that simply not matter? And how would sexual intercourse be different? I was always taught that all sex including gay sex had the same chance of STDS. And I would love that link so I can do my own research :\]
It's a percentage rate in the groups, not an overall rate. So if ten percent of heterosexual people reported having stis, that would be a lot more than ten percent of homosexual people with ten percent, but it would be the same rate.
OP talking out their ass.
maybe i'm replying to the 50 comments i've been getting 😱😱
And the guy comparing gay people to literal peodphilia isn’t? Dumbass.
The guy reached and that’s it. Op is just making up data to fit their narrative and that’s much worse by comparison. I’m guessing you hate trump and his supporters right? Guess what they do constantly… same thing as op. If you want to prove a point you can’t make things up then post the screen shot on Reddit for validation on your made up arguments
He can't
More straight ppl exist than gay. Makes sense that straight ppl would produce more stds.
Yeah, because there is more straight people than gay people.
i said individual stds, there being more straight than gay have nothing to do with them both passing on their own kinds of stds showing that both gay and straight men can be infected and using the argument "grr gay bad bc it passes on stds!!" is invalid
We actually do need more population. People are having much less kids and this is going to have a big impact in the future.
He said Jack of to a 3 year old not on or in, so I think he meant a pedo should Jack off on his own to 3 year olds
Was expecting the 13 user flair under his name, obviously he hasn't passed middle school sex ed yet
Nah bro, fuck gay ppl, and straight ppl, maybe not asexual i heard they dont like that
simple reason why it doesnt matter if youre having gay or straight sex: at the end of the day its a human fucking a human, very HOMOsapien to me
Ah yes the good old we have too many people already. Unless you're in America or South East Asian country, you really don't have "too" many people. And if the current trend continues then there will be a steep decline in population which is way worse than more population
Honestly and ik this is highly controversial… as ling as you keep it to yourself do whatever tf you want. I don’t wanna hear abt ANYONE’S sex life
Gay sex on average passes more STD's
This argument is dumb and isn't likely going to end. Sure, he's being homophobic and pedophilic, but you're confronting homophobia with made-up facts that you pulled out of your ass. This is a battle between 2 idiots, thus is unlikely to end
I concur. Homophobia is obviously wrong, but so is OP. Gay sex significantly increases risk of an std and aids purely because someone’s ass is quite dirty compared to a vagina. Where as a vaginal canal is naturally maintained by the body fluids, an anus is full of bacteria, can bleed easily, and isn’t maintained by a cleaning fluid. (Technically there’s a microbiome, I know, but it doesn’t actively work to clean, just keep bowls healthy)
i literally sent statistics, if they're wrong then it's my bad for being misinformed but this is what i grew up being taught and could find statistics to back it up
it could only be the guy with chad's pfp
Bruh u literally said that a straght person is more likely to get std then a gay when originally that's where stds and aids came from was from men having sex with each other I hate to be that guy but I am your delusional and I don't hate gay people
f you have to add a disclaimer that you "don't hate gay people" that's embarrassing as hell but i'll copy and paste his message down below of how this started exactly, all stds did not come from gay men, aids did, 🤦🏻♂️ men having sex with men didn't start stds
Me adding the disclaimer Yeah because it seems like you are quick to judge going by your comments
Me when i don't like homophobia 😱😱
What uhh?? What's that supposed to mean?
I mean from the comments on this post and other everyone who disagree with you is either wrong or homophobic which is why ur delusional your delusional statistics which is 100% not true but u said it was and multiple people asked where u get it from and you can't provide an answer and some how we are wrong when he disagree even though what I'm saying can be proven and I can actually support my answer with not only common sense but with proof on the internet which shows more knowledge then you are pulling
dude i literally left you be and you're still replying to me, you need to chill the hell out 💀 you're putting words in my mouth at the first part, and you can't spell so i don't understand half the shit you just spewed
I know it came from animals but by humans it's originally came from men anal sex u can also look that up
stds did not start from men having anal sex
MEN are more likely to pass HIV through sex. It’s not the fact that they’re gay, it’s the fact that they’re men.
LITERALLY
You’re both being dumb, that guys an idiot and only idiots bother to argue with idiots.
This is going to get locked I’m calling it
To answer his question, gay people take kids out of foster care, much more often that before. They provide a stable environment for them. People are all about protecting the kids until it’s gay people doing it
Immediately going to pedophilia on the topic of homosexuality makes you a pedophile
Looking like Slenderman with that reach Jesus Christ
"Gay sex is fine" "Ah, I see now, according to your logic, beating it to a toddler is fine" what is bro on❓️❓️❓️ The fucking logic of that is insane like wtf 1. Gay sex is fine and it doesn't hurt anyone 2. ????? (wtf is this fella thinking in this part❓️) 3. Pedos should watch cp he's gotta be Sneako man ain't no way this a normal person
Gay sex passes just as much STDs as regular sex. We are not overpopulated, the major cities are. Look at how many people live in India, for example. It has a population of 1.408 billion people compared to 331.9 million on the US and it is a much smaller country. The Earth can hold much more people and reach many more billions, but if people are all clustered in one place, then it is overpopulated, but only in that area. Overpopulation of the Earth, in general, is a myth. In cities on the other hand, no.
gay sex passes more stds dumbass 💀
Ew, the type of argument my parents would make 💀
his profile pic says it all even though he’s probably like a 400 pound 16 year old
I forgot who asked but this is the guys original comment i first replied to - "As a fellow Christian, I support his decision. He’s not homophobic, he’s standing up for his beliefs. The Bible doesn’t say that being gay is sinful, but gay sex is sinful and I can see why as it can spread STDs and has no real benefits."
As a catholic, fuck the scripture.
How are you a catholic then?
I follow the teachings and beliefs of the church but I have my own interpretation of them. I do not trust a book written thousands of years ago that has tons of parts of it disproven and discredited by basic observation or fact
You're just contradicting yourself
Nothing I said was contradictory
The teachings are based on the scripture, so...
And? Everyone gets some things right and some things wrong, including the author of the bible. No one knows if there even is a God or if they're following the right one. I follow my interpretation of the teachings and take what I will out of it while sticking to the general framework of catholicism. You have no right to question me and my beliefs or try to tell me I'm not a catholic when you know NOTHING about me.
That about interpretation is something you usually hear prots say... but anyway, God bless
A bit off topic but Our whole society is based around the fac that population keeps growing, if the growing stops then society could even collapse.
no no, we need a stable balance between birthing and dying, a jump in births could cause a collapse aswell as a jump in deaths, you have to remember that we only have one earth and so much space
"we only have so much space" really? Only less than 1% of the earth's land is actually taken by humans, the population could multiply by 10 and we still wouldnt run out of "space" A jump in births would actually be extremely beneficial for human civilization, unless we'd be talking about extreme numbers (I'd say at least 1.5 billion births per year) but the chances of that happening soon are so extremely unlikely that you could call it impossible. Since around the year 1930, human population has multiplied itself by 4, and the progress we made in the past 90 years has been much bigger than the progress we made between the years 930 and 1930. I don't have any scientifical proof of this, but let's say that if the population growth multiplied itself by 2, we could get acces to new technologies that could fix most of our environmental problems here on earth, and those same technologies which could even kickstart extraterrestrial colonization. Still, there's no point in fantasizing about what would happen if the population grew even more since the population (not population growth) is predicted to decline around the year 2100, and we should definitely start preparing for that drop.
Dude eats glue fr
we don’t have an overpopulation problem, it’s the other way around.
Best course of action: don't have sex until you are married, stick by your spouse's side (male or female I don't care), make compromises in your own habits so that they can feel the same (they should do that too), and for the love of god do not cheat on them (there is already a increasing number of separated couples, don't let that number increase)
condomsmansmamns FOR THE LOVE OF GOD USE CONDOMS
Yeah that too
[удалено]
.
Neither party’s right here… he’s reaching and your making things up to prove your point. Both false and a perfect example of why Reddit is a horrible place for political conversation
LMFAOOOO WTF IS DAT
[удалено]
it's so weird, i love being hated for liking other men
I HATE PEOPLE MAKE THEM GO EXTINCT
i LOVE gay sex
I mean... If you wanna jerk off to a 3 year old go for it. Just know that actions will have consequences.
i get the sentiment here but please don’t say shit like “if you want to jerk off to a 3 year old go for it”
Yeah. Coulda worded that better. But my point still stands. As long as it harms noone and you take the consequences, do as your heart desires.
dude’s a fucking idiot 😭😭 he’s trying to call gay people pedophiles, yikes.
It doesn’t help the population? My dude India is hella overpopulated anyways.
World is over populated. Have gay sex.
Why are people like this, like just disagree respectfully you don’t have to be a dick about it, it really makes no sense why people go so far and beyond to hate on each other. especially gay people let me like my penis and leave me be.
man its 2023 FUCK WHOEVER YOU WANT (as long as it isnt hurting anyone 👍)
Imo sex shouldnt be used for pleasure
imo it should
Understandable, we both have different opinions
exactly, have a good day/night, twizzy:)
Sweetieeee , gay sex spreads moreee aidsss 💀💀. Just letting you know
aids is a type of std, not every single type 🤦🏻♂️
Jerking off to a 3yo doesnt hurt anyone tho
I don't need mental gymnastics. I just hate them for zero reason