Hacker News Reader

Comment by Workaccount2 | Hacker News Reader

>If the local law was to deny all women

Palestine gets widespread support

Queers for Palestine is so hard to wrap my head around.

it's not hard to understand. people simply not liking queers doesn't mean they deserve to be bombed. also there are queers in Palestine and they are getting bombed too by Israel

'not liking' you mean actively hunting down and murdering on a consistent basis.

https://www.queermajority.com/essays-all/queers-for-palestin...

> actively hunting down and murdering on a consistent basis

There's only one man being killed in the article you linked, and his killing is way more complex that the article made it to be.

https://www.npr.org/2024/09/27/g-s1-17637/hebron-west-bank-i...

Pretty sure that's not enough evidence for 'actively hunting down and murdering on a consistent basis'.

On the other hand, Israel had probably killed tens if not hundreds or thousands of queers in Gaza as of now. That surely count for 'murdering on a consistent basis'.

> Israel had probably killed tens if not hundreds or thousands of queers in Gaza as of now

When you pull easily google-able numbers out of thin air, you undermine the credibility of your overall point: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/10/7/two-years-of-israel...

That doesn't undermine their statement at all. They wrote hundreds or thousands, perhaps you misread it as hundreds of thousands? 67,000 killed per your link, assuming only 1% were LGBTQ, means around 670 LGBTQ people killed, which falls well within the standard definition of "hundreds". Even if they only make up 0.5% of the population, it's still hundreds. And to hit "tens" they only need to be about 0.1% of the Gazan population.

There ain’t that many queers in Gaza, genius.

Not anymore...

There aren’t many people out of the closet in repressive regimes, no, but it’s estimated that 5-10% of people will be somewhere on the gay spectrum if allowed (with substantial cultural variation on how they identify themselves and describe their sexuality, of course). It’s exceedingly unlikely that the people in Gaza are freak outliers in this regard, and the population is more than large enough for 5% to mean thousands of people.

I’m not saying gay, specifically queers.

You ignored the "actively hunting down" part for Israel. Killing gays without realizing they're gay doesn't count. It should be obvious to you that the problem with killing gays isn't that they're more deserving of life than straights but that specifically targeting them puts each gay person in greater danger.

> Killing gays without realizing they're gay doesn't count.

One of the more deranged things I've read today. Then again it's unsurprising coming from an extremist that defends hospital bombings: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45211554

> killing people indiscriminately is better than killing people because they are gays

sometimes I really wonder whether people like you actually read what you just post...

Can you respond to it without resorting to insults? You completely misquoted what I said so first step is to understand before responding.

On a broader scale, the marriage of far left and islam are not from some love of shared values. Its from the love of shared enemy, capitalism and western civilization.

Feels more like a psy-op than anything else. Some on the left can't resist protesting war crimes despite understanding the nuance and that is used to call them the "enemy of western civilization."

I think the biggest reason is that leftists favor weak groups. Muslims are poor and relatively powerless globally so leftists see them as oppressed and deserving sympathy. Combine that with Jews being the polar opposite and it's clear why leftists would favor Palestinians in that war. But yes, anti-Westernism is probably a factor too.

I don't understand why leftists are so ravenous about Palestine, but NOT batting any eye about the [actual] genocide of Christians in Nigeria. I think their empathy comes from a good place, at least in their minds, but it's so selective.

I'm not saying, I'm better, I'm pretty apathetic. But I don't get it.

Because Christians are powerful in America, so as a group, they appear to Americans to be privileged, not oppressed. It's groups that matter, not individuals.

It comes from a need to support slaves, or weak powerless people.

Slaves as a term isn't as relevant today as it was centuries ago, but still it captures the idea of a class of "oppressed and powerless" people well.

In an extreme twist of irony however, both Christianity and Judaism are religions born from slaves, hence the emphasis on classic liberal values (love thy neighbor as thyself). Islam however is not a slave religion, and was born from power, on the other end of the spectrum (kill non-believers who don't convert)

Yes, this exactly. And IMO, mainstream liberals have drifted so far left on some issues, that these views are just... commonplace. Saying this as a disaffected registered democrat.

It isn't at all, this is the dumbest "gotcha" ever.

You can absolutely support someone who doesn't support you back. Queers for Palestine isn't saying "Free Palestine so I can move there and live my life", it's saying "Palestinians should be free even if they don't like me, because freedom is imperative"

The ACLU did the same fucking thing with literal nazi marches decades ago and nobody made this kind of dumb claim, and a shocking number of people who make this "gotcha" about queers for Palestine get upset that the ACLU now says they shouldn't support the right of Nazis.

I support the freedom of religion for people who practice religions that say I am the devil or need to be saved or I should be oppressed. I do NOT support those religions enacting such oppression, or modifying my government for stupid things they believe in, but that doesn't mean they should not have the right to practice their own beliefs that don't affect other people.

I want Palestinians to have a country that does not oppress women and outlaw birth control (That's why most of Palestine is children by the way; oppression), and murder random people in the town square, but that still requires they get "freedom" of some kind. I would argue that freedom also requires the Palestinians are made free from Hamas, but there is an awkward chance that Palestinians right now would choose Hamas given a free choice. I don't have a solution for that.

Regardless, the solution to any of that is still not fairly indiscriminate bombing with high accepted collateral casualties.

I'm not saying I don't understand having empathy for any type of civilians in a war zone. But there are plenty of worse massacres over the last 10 years, and the far left folks aren't up in arms over it. They only care about certain power dynamics.

Do you have an objective source about what law in Palestine denying access to all women?

In that case, they're probably the lesser of two evils. Women can't campaign for more rights if they're dead...

That is sort of the way I see it. It's a leap to ask for gay or women's rights before the county has the right to not be bombed.

It's a leap even without being bombed. Asking for gay or women's rights is asking for reform or elimination of Islam. Leftists never seem to want that, I think because they see Muslims as an oppressed group that should be supported, not have their identity taken away from them.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com