Uber Centrism lgbtq

Social issues 

LBGTQ+

To be paternalistic toward LGBTQ people . To believe other non LGBTQ people should also use their hetero positions to advocate for LGBTQ rights while non LGBTQ politicians should use their position of power go help the LGBTQ community. Like someone who is at the top of a ladder reaching down to pull people stuck on the ladder u

To support some aspects of LGBTQ conservatism

To embrace some left wing pro Queer ideology like:

To support the Max Stirner inspired brand of Queer Anarchism . To support their notion of (and embracing) radical individualism that is influenced by individual philosophers like Max Stirner. In particular to support Queer Anarchists using Max Stirner’s non-systematic approach, radicalism and direct action. To like how queer anarchists organized and played a major role  in the WTO protests and anti-globalization movement. 

Queer paternalism and the Max Stirner inspired brand of Queer Anarchism are the pro Queer rights methods that you got to like because as it seeks positive change for Queer people in the best ways

To Personally have these at heart views on same sex marriage etc

To Legality wise, defer/give priority to the rights/capitulate same sex marriage being legal

To say this:

"My reason to defer/give priority to the rights/capitulate to same sex marriage being legal (and for me not fighting against gay marriage and me not wanting gay marriage to stop being legal) is because in my heart of hearts, I FEEL that it should not matter if commitment is between a man snd woman, man and man or woman and woman. It’s not just about equality but also about commitment. Conservatism (which make up some of my political views) values the ties that bind us, that society is stronger when people make vows to each other and support each other. So in that weird way, gay marriage meshes with Conservatism thus why I have this view."

To be between being against (pragmatic conditionally) all of the conservative moral right/religious freedom laws on Queer issues passed or that were attempted to be passed in various states since same sex marriage was legalized and being against the said law that passed or that were attempted to be passed in various states since same marriage was legalized that by those conservative moral right/religious freedom laws on Queer issues laws not being passed it doesn’t infringe on other peoples’ rights/supporting said laws that passed or that were attempted to passed in various states since same sex marriage was legalized that if those conservative moral right/religious freedom laws on Queer issues’ laws weren’t passed other peoples rights would be infringed upon

To want civic, religious and common law marriage to be abolished for straight couples and gay couples and for Straight Handfasting and Gay Handfasting to be the only legal form of 'marriage' for straight couples and gay couples (ie if Civil Marriage, Common Law Marriage and Religious Marriage are all abolished and Handfasting replaces Civil Marriage, Common Law Marriage and Religious Marriage as the only legal form of 'marriage' for both straight couples and gay couples). The less officialness of the archaic concept of state sanctioned coupling the better

To say this "In the case of future real wedding after an unofficial wedding, unlike in existing Handfasting, Privatized Marriage would serve to be that possible future wedding instead of a Civil Marriage, Common Law Marriage or Religious Marriage. Moreover, the temporary officiated weddings under this Handfasting system would be Civil Unions as opposed to Civil Marriage, Common Law Marriage or Religious Marriage, which are the temporary officiated forms of existing Handfasted weddings. Maybe we should look into making this a reality"

To believe that gays and gay couples should be allowed to become foster parents

To pragmatically believe unmarried heterosexuals and unmarried transgays (transgay to gay is what trans male is to male and trans female is to female it is different than gay and transgender) should be allowed to adopt children  But maybe in the not so distant back to the future also say unmarried gays should also be allowed to adopt children too (i.e to support gay adoption for all gays)

Deep down inside, to make it so that extremely homophobic couples to adopt children now and in the future as hard as it was in Utah and Mississippi in the early to mid 2000s decade. To also agree with Milo when he talked about Mayor Pete's adoption and how negative of an effect that was for him.  

To Personally also support some unique adoption ideas for straight couples and gay couples where  gay couples allowed their closest friend(s), ex partners or spouses who were of the opposite sex of them to have a 'Full House' type relationship with the adopted child(ren) (like the relationship that Aunt Becky had with Danny's daughters on Full House for adopted children of homosexual couples or like the relationship that Uncle Joey and Uncle Jesse had with Danny’s daughters on an alternative history Full House where Danny died in 1987 and Pam raised their three daughters with help from Uncle Joey and Uncle Jesse for adopted children of lesbian couples). and only if straight couples allowed their closest friend(s), ex partners or spouses who were gender fluid, non binary, gender nonconforming, Intersex, Transgender to have a 'Full House' type relationship with their adopted child(ren) (like the relationship that Aunt Becky had with Danny's daughters on Full House, or like the relationship that Uncle Joey and Uncle Jesse had with Danny’s daughters on Full House), Otherwise, personally I am very non endorsive of straight couples and gay couples adopting children

To Legality wise empathize to be not rule out supporting this ancapish view "I am between supporting gay adoption (because I feel the more people willing to adopt children the better ,it is so hard to find parents to adopt children so gay willing to adopt children makes this easier, gay couples and gay single parents are the best parents to deal with children or teens who are gay) and me supporting a Murray Rothbard-Anarcho Capitalism form of state adoption for straight couples and gay couples to replace our current system of adoption (because I have a Murray Rothbard-ANcap streak in me somewhere) "

To be neutral on gay conversion therapy being legal. 

To be against Rick Perry's early 2010s anti gay laws

To say we need non id pol economic policies which indirectly remove workplace hierarchies which will naturally end workplace discrimination of LGBGT people. This means by phasing out Capitalism for non Capitalist socio economic systems etc. Workplace discrimination of LGBTQ people is bad to working class people of all stripes as any discrimination practices between demographic sections of the working class cause a very divisive practice hurting the development of working class consciousness , creating barriers to class unity to take away attention from class exploitation which bolsters the rich 

So by fighting indirectly ending LGBTQ discrimination via ending workplace hierarchies through the above socio economic shift, it can help all workers of all sexual orientations since without the distractions of anti LGBTQ bigotry, their attention would then shift to the evils of the rich corporate crony capitalists which would lead to the overthrow of those rich corporate crony capitalists, leading to the betterment of ALL people (i.e a fully functioning society), not just LGBTQ in all aspects. If you think this is a selfish motive (help LGBTQ) by doing something that appears woke (ending LGBTQ discrimination albeit indirectly), I won’t correct you.   

To be against gay acts being criminalized

To want to try to get God to be liberal on gay rights to make yourself more of an ally of the gay movement

To say if you have relative who was gay that you would love them as much as you do now but that you also would be neutral to lean Christian Democratic on whether you would support them being gay

To have similar views to my views on kids in preschool and k-6 school being taught woke lgbtq things in all my blog spheres combined

To Personally be Eight Political Position lean Liberal Conservative on repealing Section 28 of the Local Government repeal Act 1988

To Legality wise, conditionally support repealing Section 28 of the Local Government repeal Act 1988 because you that is an Anarcho Libertarian/Paternalistic and a pro some aspects of LGBTQ conservatve view this ideology embraces (on the condition that the government doesn’t groom people to be gay)

To be against Heterophobia

To be indifferent to mixed on the Straight Pride movement

To support Matt Walker (former Sea World trainer and friend of Joe Saragusa)'s view on lgbtq issues

To toxically sympathize with Heterosexists

To be against Lesbian Erasure. "It is wrong and Lesphobic for people to try to get Lesbians to transition to males or to become fluid. That is evil. Lesbians need to get more visibility within the LGBTQ movement, and be treated as equal to Homosexuals. There is nothing relatively wrong with women being Lesbians. Due to Lesbian Erasure being pushed by some Transgender activists, I feel the T should be dropped from LGBTQ as punishment for the Lesphobia in the Trans community until they treat Lesbians as equals to homosexuals "

To NOT be an Anti Cissexist 

To Personally and systematically, say your views on Transgender rights match the Conservative Party UK’s views and policies on Transgender rights

To Legality wise, say you want Transgender people to get their rights but via the private sector ideally instead of via the government and for Transgender people and Cisgender people to retain their rights via the private sector instead of via the government .  This means using private institutions instead of the government to give Transgender people their rights and to maintain the rights of Transgender people and Cisgender people and to give official recognition of the desired gender of Cisgender and Transgender people. This way the government stays out of the gender policing business.

To be against banning conversion therapy for transgender people due to Libertarian reasons

To be Liberal Conservative on whether you believe that gender dysphoria is a mental disorder (personality disorder) and should be called Gender Identity Disorder

To ironically and post sarcastically with a 'just kidding' eye wink say "Males have penises , females have breasts and vaginas. Mainstream science confirms this as does common sense. I doubt the evidence I need to change this view exists"

To like how Transgender people stay true to their new genders and to have no issues with them showing the distinctiveness of their new gender even if that rubs some feminists the wrong way. Transgender people are evolving gender distinctiveness, they are not making gender distinctiveness toxic or over the top

To be against feminists weaponizing political correctness against Transgender people

To feel Polyarmy while very bad is less bad for transgender people and as such believe in moderation for legalizing Polyarmy but only for Transgender people. To be fully against Polyarmy being legal except for maybe Transgender people and only moderately

To be against RuPaul's drag race allowing drag queens who had sex change surgery compete in their competitions and similar competitions. To also echo some of RuPaul's older views on transgender people that Peter Thiel would either be neutral on, lean not agree with,  or agree with

To have no issues with the UK banning kids under 16 from being transgender since you have more important things to worry about