Converation thread

Really? can two people of the same sex create a family? The essence of that ideology in itself is the destruction of the family. Says a lot that you can’t see that. LGBTQ is ending bloodlines. There’s your destruction!

Yes they can. There's a thing called ADOPTION. Which, you know. IS A BYPRODUCT OF MOSTLY STRAIGHT RELATIONSHIPS. Then there's IVF and surrogacy? And it's not an "Ideology", people don't CHOOSE to be gay. They just are. Denying rights to people is a choice which LGBTQIA+ counters

But somehow natural, nil! By protesting Ghana’s decision to uphold its ideals and family values, you’re propagating that same colonizer mindset that says we don’t have a right to self-determination. Focus on your own backyard, we don’t need your input

I'll proudly deny your right to self-determination if it will reduce suicides. I've just left a **** hole that claims to uphold "family values and ideals". Reality of it though, they're using it to persecute even the straight. But what do I know please, continue on this path

Thank you for admitting to your socialist, Marxist mindset! You think you have a right to decide how we live, but think you have the moral high ground the suicide rates are due to mental illness, that’s what needs to be addressed. Trans kids die even more after transitioning

I'm no Marxist. I don't try to dictate how you should live your life. I merely suggested that you shouldn't toss people in prisons for trying to help those you reject from your society. And this statistic sounds like it hardly slaps the surface of what's going on.

You said you’d PROUDLY deny an entire country’s right to self-determination to suit your agenda. That is the essence of Marxicism. Debased! You’d be surprised to know this law is usually implemented for rapists, etc. Normal people don’t announce what they do in their bedrooms.

How did you manage to fail to understand both the rights of humans AND Marxism itself?!

How is he wrong? In your worldview, there's no Authority higher than government – because you don't believe God exists. Government must determine rights in your worldview. And if government, in Ghana, has said you no longer have a right to engage in this abominable & destructive behaviour, that's final for you! You must except that without reservation – because otherwise, you must necessarily appeal to a god, who grants rights that precede government! If you don't acknowledge the existence God, then you have no right to claim that Ghana is doing something wrong.

No it’s a STRONGLY urged thing to allow by the very UN itself, the council of the most powerful and free nations on earth, and in a thousand different instances, they have both recommended and incentivized allowing gay marriage as its immorality is lacking in a secular world view, though that of issues such as pedophilia isn’t allowed for the obvious reasons of consent laws and lack of a child’s ability to consent. It’s a commonly accepted and stated thing by the more powerful and free nations that it’s no one’s business if two consenting adults marry, and ghat the persecution of gay people (which has risen dramatically since these policies have become mainstream in Ghana) is a disgraceful thing to accept or allow.

The UN, you leftists tend to forget, does not government the world – it is a feeble, far-left elitist organisation no nation is under any obligation to listen to. And, the secular worldview is fundamentally irrational, so I don't give a dang what logically bankrupt belief system says about this issue.

It does however promote certain aspects of politics to maximize the benefit of the most people, and when it makes statements or nations debate one another, these issues gain the attention that almost inevitably leads to pressuring for change, because, generally speaking, it makes the most people’s lives better. The UN itself is, at most, socially progressive, which doesn’t make it leftist by any means, especially in the economic sphere.

It is a government, though it is a weak semi-confederation of governments, it has a level of governmental power in many areas. It’s like a congressional caucus in a way, it has a sort of power, but not much, and with its members, laws are upheld in many areas, including the human rights drafted and recognized by the vast majority of nations, courtesy of First Lady Roosevelt. The government serves as an enforcer of rights, and as its biggest members are representative governments, and the majority of the people in those nations agree with the creation of these rights, the people themselv…  Read morees had indirect creation of these rights, thereby admitting that it was not the government, but the people in the government who were elected by the people. The government enforced them because people believe in them, because these human rights were agreed upon by the public after the Second World War.

It is not a government, and it has explicitly stated that it is not a government, but an international peace keeping association that relies upon the voluntary cooperation of independent states to function.

You just said explicitly "rights are created by people and established by government," – you just renounced your right to complain about Ghana's policies. Under the UN Charter, it ha a right to "self-determination" and independence, so you as an American need to but out and mind your own business.

It is a governing body with many non-binding measures, though it is not a GOVERNMENT or a Supra-state in and of itself, the organization does have some legally binding power for its participants, closely mimicking a semi-governmental parliament/congress in the Security Council, though most of it is debate and speaking, large amounts of its purpose and action is about international connections and enforcement of bare minimum rights that can lead to rebuke and sanctions from participant nations.

First of all, the people are not just the nation, they are all the nations, agreed upon and founded…  Read more by all nations, such as the basic human rights that humanity uses as a guideline and basis of much of international law. These human rights include freedom from violence and oppression, and the laws against LGBTQ+ people in Ghana both promote, quell, and protect discrimination and public violence against gay people. Whenever these laws are kept in place, regardless of their purpose, it leads to targeted violence against those minorities, and often, the government stands by and does nothing, or worse, encourages it. That’s why these laws are troubling, both because the UN’s upper nations abhor these laws themselves, and because of the reactions it sustains and brings. Simple laws that ban gay marriage or penalize gay people for having relationships have led to an extreme amount of violence against those minorities, almost always promoting gay people’s own families attacking them or selling them out. I’d have less of a problem if these laws didn’t stir up hatred, but they do, and protections for gay people are a necessity for them to be protected from hatred and abuse for the mere crime of existence.

If it's not a government, it can't decide on rights

It’s a parliamentary-style governing body, though not a government, it has some power. It can decide on its declaration of rights, but like senators in congress, nations must be pressured to agree by their people, or agree by themselves to recognize it.

If it's not a government, then, I will tell you one last time, it has no right to intervene in Ghana and as an atheist you must accept their decision.

It is a governing body, a platform upon which nations can create resolutions (on the security council) that are binding, and while gay rights tend to be less manageable, public rebukes, sanctions, or talks with Ghana that intervene in some way can be done. All member states are subject to at least hearing what the UN has to say, and Ghana can be pressured that way nonetheless.

But to claim that Ghanans have a "right" to homosexuality is clearly absurd for you to claim as an atheist, as the UN isn't a government, and you've admitted as much. The fact that it can pressure nations to do certain things has nothing to do with this discussion.

They have a right not to be attacked for it, and discriminatory policy expressly banning their ability to have marriage creates attacks every single time, so the bare minimum of tolerance is necessary. Fun fact too, countries Ghana had a lot more of a “live and let live” policy less than a few years ago, though that changed as protests FROM AMERICAN HATE GROUPS created social unrest, we quite literally had far-right groups exporting hate and creating the conditions for large scale violence. I also stated that the UN is a sort of parliament-style governing body, not often making…  Read more binding decisions, but able to create a system of countries pressuring one another in the UN forum, which the larger countries have been doing in an indirectly governing fashion, so in the most technical of ways, there is a government up there, and the big ones enforce human rights, alongside taking action that their citizens agree with, leading to a form of social progress towards making gay marriage a semi-enforced right. It’s a stretch for me to be making these logical arguments, but that’s how I view it.

Where do you think that right "not to be attacked for it" comes from? What authority are you appealing to, that's obviously higher than government?

It came from the agreement of the United Nations, an organization representative of the nations of the world, the vast majority of which hold to a democratic-republic, with these rights being created and agreed upon by people, and enforced by governments, the same way as every human right, constitutional right, and expressed right out there. Human rights states no one should be violently hurt for an immutable aspect of oneself, that includes being gay, and the policies of Ghana are an extremely common, almost concrete, sign that they are willing to allow and accept violence against these mino…  Read morerities, which is a crime against humanity and a violation of human rights. In order to protect these minorities from violence, at the very least, they need to enforce legal protections for those minority groups. Gay marriage being allowed is the optimal method in the eyes of many, as it’s the solidification of their validity and safety in society, and tends to mean they should be treated equally, just as in every nation that has legalized gay marriage.