Statements of the form "nobody is doing X" are almost universally incorrect. There are 8 billion people on this planet, you can almost certainly find an entire organization dedicated to whatever X you please.

Statements of the form “nobody is doing X” are almost always talking about a very small percentage, and not intended to be a claim about exactly zero people. My statement wasn’t a claim about whether someone exists who wants praise, it was a summary of the purpose of the LGBT issue to counter the parent’s straw-man that summarized LGBT as being a binary harassment vs praise issue. Sure my statement above can technically be interpreted as incorrect if you take the words of my broad generalization extremely literally, but if you want to be that pedantic, why didn’t you call out the parent comment for being much much more wrong? Do you think relative magnitude doesn’t matter?

> you can almost certainly find an entire organization dedicated to whatever X you please.

This is fairly meaningless when you strip it of all magnitude and comparison. Sure you can find some weirdos in numbers that are statistically insignificant. You can’t even make your point without also acknowledging that an organization of ten people is 0.000000125% of the population, which is, statistically speaking, for all intents and purposes, nobody.

> it was a summary of the purpose of the LGBT issue to counter the parent’s straw-man that summarized LGBT as being a binary harassment vs praise issue.

?

You may want to reread what I wrote because the last thing I was trying to do was argue a "strawman that summarized LGBT as being harassment vs praise". In fact, I was arguing exactly the same thing you seem to be arguing here: that this is a false dichotomy being preached by the loud minority, and that taking a balanced middle ground is a fine idea.

However, I do find it funny that you're offended about someone being pedantic with your argument when it seems like that's the exact same thing you did with my original comment.

Okay I am sorry if I misinterpreted, and I’m willing to change my mind. I’ve re-read your comment several times, and I don’t get a different impression this time than I did earlier. You appear to be primarily defending the okayness of your holding discriminatory religious views against LGBT people. Even the line “People who identify as LGBT can be very pleasant people” comes off to me TBH as though you’re suggesting that LGBT people aren’t pleasant by default, or that their pleasantness might somehow be categorically different from anyone else.

> And of course, my religious views don't mean I can go and harass people who disagree with me or anything. But it also doesn't mean I have to go praising them for doing something I don't agree with.

This still sounds like a straw man to me. Again, apologies if I’m misreading you, but you didn’t respond directly to my comment to you that LGBT people aren’t asking for praise by and large, they’re asking for civil rights. Your comment that you don’t need to praise them seems like a straw man because they’re not generally asking for or expecting praise, as a group.

Perhaps to be fair to you, in a way, I don’t personally see how people telling people stories that LGBT people are wrong can avoid leading to harassment. I don’t think it’s possible to take part in that narrative and not produce behavior that comes off to LGBT people as systemic oppression. So yes, if you intended a message of peace and inclusion, I have indeed missed it upon re-read.