What would such an argument look like?
I could reply with the various statistics showing that gays and lesbians in the states have become more monogamous in the past thirty years, but since advancedatheist has already assumed all such behavior is "self-destructive", it wouldn't matter much whether they were monogamous or non-monogamous, would it?
We could peruse the literature and determine that the basic template of this one-liner is much in the vein of similar ill-informed remarks made by preachers, politicians, and other pundits over the past thirty years, thereby establishing that in fact, it was "misinformed... moral panic" from the 1980s, but who would really be convinced by such a thing? No one who hadn't lived through decades of it, probably.
Anyway, didn't we do this a couple months ago? If risks like these are "self-destructive behavior", then OP probably shouldn't leave the house too often.
I could reply with the various statistics showing that gays and lesbians in the states have become more monogamous in the past thirty years,
Well, that would actually be on topic, and then advencedatheist or myself could actually look at your statistics to see whether the size of the effect was significant or whether the statistics themselves are BS. I haven't look at the statistics in detail but from what I've seen of society that does not in fact appear to be the case.
...We could peruse the literature and determine that the basic template of this one-l
This Chart Shows The Worst Diseases That Don't Get Enough Research Money
We have already covered this topic several times on LW, but what prompted me to link this was this remark:
[Edit: a former, dumber version of me had asked, "I wonder what criterion the author would prefer," before the correct syntax of the sentence was pointed out to me.]
Opinions?