Keep in mind they’re sophists so it has to be a well-structured logical argument. I don’t know why I keep arguing with these kinds of people. Disclaimer: I’m pro-LGBT.
Keep in mind they’re sophists so it has to be a well-structured logical argument. I don’t know why I keep arguing with these kinds of people. Disclaimer: I’m pro-LGBT.
Meta answer: Consider what you want to achieve with them. Because a valid response differs depending on what you choose to affect.
Some examples:
A) Do you want to display disagreement but not engage?
B) Do you want to change their mind right here right now in this argument?
C) Do you want them to doubt their stance and maybe change their mind later?
D) Do you want them to feel reluctant to bring that argument up another time?
E) Do you want to display conviction and wit to impress an audience or when retelling the encounter later?
E.g. for A you could say “That’s a misconception” and try to leave it at that.
For D you could rebuke or ridicule. Like “That argument comes from intolerance rather than reality - it makes you sound like a zealot” or “Why do you spend so much effort thinking about penises gliding into anuses”? Or just “Oh my GOD I’m so tired of hearing that old myth. Can you find something better?”
For E, the Twitter approach, something snide and aggressive. This will however just make them double down and feel like they are right and their opponents are glib assholes.
These were just some quick examples to illustrate that your intentions are important - by no means all possible or even the best responses.