The implication in our imaginary scenario, whether intended or not, is that gay students are compromised by listening to a speaker express disapproval of their lifestyle, and that they are incapable of presenting a counterargument. Most gay people would rather not be patronised in this way. Nor does it help anyone to pretend that the debate is about gay people’s ‘right to exist’. Such histrionic straw men have no place in adult discussion.
what if they bring out god though? contextual
