LGBT+ in Nebulous

Are you LGBT?

  • Just seeing results

    Votes: 138 67.0%
  • Lesbian

    Votes: 2 1.0%
  • Gay

    Votes: 14 6.8%
  • Bisexual

    Votes: 29 14.1%
  • Trans/non-binary

    Votes: 9 4.4%
  • Asexual

    Votes: 2 1.0%
  • Other

    Votes: 12 5.8%

  • Total voters
    206

PilotBland

community antagonizer
Joined
Jun 26, 2017
Messages
13,051
Nebulae
21,361
bi people would be the upper class because they would be the only people able to reproduce

And who’s to say their kids are gonna be gay?

I mean being homosexual is a natural ordeal, right? These kids wouldn’t become gay unless they had the natural gay in them

Right?
 

Mancom37

Atom
Joined
Apr 26, 2016
Messages
2,450
Nebulae
1,859
They would count on immigration to keep it stable but seeing how LGBT fights nowadays betweeb themselves I wouldn't worry too much about it
 

Tics

Neutrino
Joined
Aug 21, 2017
Messages
39
Nebulae
26
Businesses should be able to discriminate on any grounds. I'm gay and I'd be fine with that. It's important to remember that the thing that kept Jim Crow in the South economically viable was the fact that it was legally mandated. In a world where segregation isn't the law, you don't need anti-discrimination statutes, because people who recognize that there is a lot of money to be made if you serve everyone will out-compete racists, homophobes, etc.

As for conservative hand wringing over Facebook banning them or whatever, they may have a somewhat legitimate legal argument because of Section 230 of Title 47, a result of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 which protects Facebook and other platforms from liability for things posted on their platform (for instance, if someone posts something defamatory on Facebook, Facebook can't be sued for defamation). Conservatives argue, though, that if Facebook edits, removes, blocks, etc. content and then receives coverage for liability by federal law (which it does), this technically means that the government is aiding in the "censorship" of that content, and this would violate the First Amendment. I actually find this to be a compelling argument, but as far as I am aware, the case law in the United States is not in favor of this argument, though I may be wrong. Of course, the Supreme Court is conservative now, so if a case got that far, they may very well rule in favor of just this argument. If such, Facebook would have a choice: don't remove any content or face potential liability for anything anyone posts on the platform.

All of that being said, conservatives could just make their own platform and compete.
 
Reactions: List

aperson

Molecule
Joined
Apr 26, 2016
Messages
5,393
Nebulae
7,315
16eMhJv.jpg

 
Reactions: List