First of all define mental illness. Interestingly enough I’m currently working in a research group which tries to understand what is an illness and what is not (because the lines are not as clear cut as many people believe). Let’s say that an illness is something that has immediate negative effects on your body and mind and is sourced in either (though this is obviously just a very rough definition and probably not entirely correct).
In this case homosexuality and yes, even pedophilia don’t fall under mental illness. Neither has direct negative effects the same way schizophrenic paranoia or bipolar disorder would have. And no, illness is not defined as ‘that which is not normal’, meaning moral issues are not relevant here. Same goes for negative effects caused by other people reacting to the trait, so don’t try to use the high suicide rates of LGBT youth as an argument, this is mostly on society and specifically you homophobes.
Now to the moral arguments. Great strawman here, no scientist nor philosopher with any credibility would use the naturalistic fallacy as a way to prove that homosexuality is ‘normal’, we just use it to counter your already fallacious argument that it somehow isn’t. Not that I would expect honesty or self-reflection from homophobes. Also hilarious that you criticise our alleged use of the naturalistic fallacy only to use it in the next fucking sentence you hypocrite (natural use of genitals and all that crap)! Oh yes, I did read at least half of that stupid publication and I wonder who the fuck allowed it to get published. That certain journals will publish anything is actually something that makes me angrier than your homophobia. It doesn’t prove your point though as much as you or the author of this dreck believe.
Robert L. Kinney from what I can tell is a very devout christian and not really interested in giving actual facts here, warping scientific ideas so that they give his theology based moral issues credence. I have seen that before multiple times (there was a paper about how the discovery of actually different brain development in trans- in contrast to cis-people was wrong and that transsexuality was caused by letting boys play with puppets (seriously!), made by… saudi-arabian scientists. Who can’t publish anything going against islamic doctrin.) It does only prove that of all the myriards of papers out there underlining that homosexuality isn’t an illness, you choose to ignore all of them and instead went for the one that you think gives your argument credence. That’s very unscientific.
Homosexuality isn’t an illness. You can have homosexual relationships via informed consent, which is impossible for pedophiles. That’s the difference. In summation:
Your arguments are hypocritical, biased, and simply not evidence-based.
And even if I and other homosexuals had a mental illness that can’t be fixed, what would that mean? It would still not be immediately immoral! A bipolar person doesn’t break moral laws by having an episode! And since we don’t feel the need to be ‘healed’ and don’t hurt anything but the feelings of homophobes with it, trying to change us is in clear violation of our rights. So in the end you have nothing aside from your own precious, uninformed, biased opinions.
Oh and Star Wars made billions, even the sequel trilogy. Wouldn’t call that a proof that going ’woke’ automatically causes it to go broke.
Last but not least, what’s up with that numbering? Your first argument is followed by your first argument?