so now the question becomes, which ones hold more merits? we should address a 'should we live as if this x' in this scenario right?

"Why can't we? Because we don't want to make him feel bad about losing an argument?"
&



"The moral of the story is that for every hypothetical proposed, we can propose an equal and opposite hypothetical, so there has to be more to this than just considering a hypothetical."

this would akin to a tu quo fallacy, in concept and his thought experiment would actually not have been invalidated

Thought experiment:
A thought experiment (German: Gedankenexperiment,[1] Gedanken-Experiment,[2] or Gedankenerfahrung,[3]) considers some hypothesis, theory,[4] or principle for the purpose of thinking through its consequences. Given the structure of the experiment, it may not be possible to perform it, and even if it could be performed, there need not be an intention to perform it.

The common goal of a thought experiment is to explore the potential consequences of the principle in question:

so for instance my gay friend obviously told the guy he holds the framework of
1. You obviously want to minimize or reduce your suffering or pain in any way possible AND reasonable

the hypothetical thought experiment would merit true if God came down and do what he is about to do pertaining to gay lifestyle

but I think the question is 'should' we live in a world that God would come down and do such a thing? Although his hypothetical thought experiment is true, the probability of it would still hold little significant weight in determining a pragmatic way of living... but then I can see him using other hypothetical thought experiment on certain principles that changed our way of living without going through such a scenario.. But I think with that kind of retort is that it IS plausible pertaining to reality thus concluding the probability merits a strong causal linkage to reality? .... I don't know but all I know is if we do present out hypothetical it would just avoid his hypothetical and it wouldn't address it not only that a thought experiment isn't to suggest that it has to be possible, but to follow the principles of a framework to its logical conclusion.... sadly all of this is intellectually merited, I don't know if responding with the idea of plausibility is even a refutation unless we're to go against the norm.