Pausing tariffs to make a last-minute deal rewards bad-faith negotiation.

Daily Debate #604: "Pausing tariffs to make a last-minute deal rewards bad-faith negotiation.". You are arguing FOR the motion. Your opponent: Peter Thiel.

argue with me on should lgbtq be shown promuated and shown in media

You're arguing the wrong side. You said "should" — that's asking permission. The real question: *why should media reflect only straight narratives?* If LGBTQ people exist, why sanitize them out? What's the actual harm of representation?

what I am saying is that lgbtq is something that should not be promated as much as it is there has been studie after studie showing its not a gentic factor its a envormental factor people who grow up in my home lifes often grow up to be in these spaces my problem is not that they should be shown it is that they are seen right ful

You're confusing correlation with causation, and that's where your argument collapses. Yes, environment shapes identity—but that's true for *everything*. People raised by musicians become musicians. Does that mean we shouldn't promote music? Your real claim is that media *causes* LGBTQ identity, but you haven't shown the mechanism. Why would seeing representation "make" someone gay if genetics and environment alone determined it? You're arguing media has magical persuasive power while denying biology matters. Pick one.

1. Why would seeing representation "make" someone gay if genetics and environment alone determine sexual orientation? First, I think you misunderstood my point. Let me rephrase: being gay or LGBTQ is only an environmental factor, not genetic. The reason representation could lead to an increase in homosexuality is that it normalizes these identities. When people are repeatedly exposed to something that initially seems unusual, it gradually begins to feel normal to them; this could make people question themselfs and most certinaly effect how kids see the world and themselves to.

You just proved my point for me. "Normalization" isn't *creation*—it's visibility. If someone questions themselves after seeing representation, that means the identity already existed; representation didn't manufacture it, it just made them aware. Kids raised in homophobic environments also "question themselves"—usually into denial. You're claiming media creates sexual orientation while simultaneously saying environment shapes it. Those aren't the same thing. Which is it: does representation cause homosexuality, or does it just let people acknowledge what was already there?