Originally Posted by Gorgonzola
Bang bang bang…. That’s how they used to cure gay in USSSR 👍
In the USA they used to incarcerate (jail or asylum), lobotomize, and castrate gays via court. It wasn’t even that long ago.
Like I mentioned before, the reason the USA ultimately made homosexuality legal is because of the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union created a spy operation that either gathered evidence of government workers or elected officials involved in homosexual acts or used men to seduce them in order to blackmail. It turned out, just about everyone the Soviet Union could want to blackmail engaged in or was willing to engage in homosexual acts. It posed a systemic risk to the US having that many people that had to choose between doing the Soviet Union’s bidding or be thrown in jail, lobotomized, etc. after what they thought was a harmless act of promiscuity.
Post legalization of homosexuality, honeypots evolved to blackmailing pedophiles already in place in key positions or blackmailing run of the mill pedophiles to run for office. If the government finds out you’re blackmailed, you become an asset of the intelligence agencies, you are denied your political role in effect if not appearance, until your usefulness is up and then you are sentenced in a way that doesn’t alert other nations that they’ve been foiled.
Obviously, we can’t legalize pedophilia point blank to reduce this risk. Pedophiles seem to be an extreme minority of the population, so maybe more mass surveillance (which we’re getting whether we want it or not) will alleviate the problem. If we can’t get a handle on it soon though, we’ll see the age of consent reduced as much as we as a country can ethically allow. I don’t feel comfortable with even reducing it to 16 because I’m familiar with the scenario of convincing a young girl she is not old enough to make those kinds of decisions.
Thinking ahead, we also have to consider what the next honeypot will be. Because it might be a waste to lower the age of consent if spies can just move on to the next worst thing. The mind boggles at what that would be. Probably eating babies or something.
Or we could just stop globalism. It’s the people and goods going in and out of the country that present all these risks, and really a risk to world peace since nations don’t bear failed take overs well (Iran for example). Sleeper cells don’t seem to last more than 2 generations at most without contact from the sponsor nation, so without globalism the threat of foreign agents will likely disappear. All these things we don’t like, like mass surveillance and a loss of rights, are attempts to maintain a democratic republic in a globalized world. The problem is they are tools that can be abused and there are plenty of people willing to abuse them. Unless we are willing to give up globalism, we either let our country be taken over by foreign agents or we become an authoritarian state because we built in the framework for one.
It’s looking like we’ll be going authoritarian, which isn’t the best option, but it’s also not the worst. Or maybe globalism will end. I like the idea of buying stuff online from Thailand and going on vacation in Baja California, but it’s not worth all the trouble it’s creates.
The USSR is an example of a nation being taken over by hostile foreign agents, we definitely don’t want that.