North Carolina Passes Amendment Banning Same-sex Unions

[PanzerJaeger]

@PJ: I think that's just a narrow focus, there's plenty of terrible non-christian examples of the things you mention. If christian views of evolution would get laughed out of a 5th grade classroom, the average atheists would get laughed out of an 8th grade classroom (or should). You can see it in this thread if you want. And I don't think most religious people in modern societies believe in the literal truth of that stuff you mention. Non christians accept christians because they like them as people true, but also because they don't believe in myths about rational scientific explanations for the human experience.

As far as I know, no one is being hurt by atheism. I do not know of any kids who have killed themselves because they were told that a nonexistent god hates them or that they are going to a nonexistent hell.

My point was that Christianity needs to be challenged not because it is a nonsensical belief system, but because it is a nonsensical belief system that is actively attacking people in real and damaging ways in the public square. Fire with fire, and all that.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

As far as I know, no one is being hurt by atheism. I do not know of any kids who have killed themselves because they were told that a nonexistent god hates them or that they are going to a nonexistent hell.

So this christian pastor tells parents to smack their kid if he wears a dress, and some progressive parents in canada or something talk about how they are raising a "genderless" child. People raise their kids badly sometimes, people kill themselves for all kinds of reasons. No reason to paint with a broad brush.

My point was that Christianity needs to be challenged not because it is a nonsensical belief system, but because it is a nonsensical belief system that is actively attacking people in real and damaging ways in the public square. Fire with fire, and all that.

Yes but play the fiery ball not the fiery man.

People who have the psychology to be devout passionate christians aren't suddenly going to model secularists if christianity dies out. They will turn to cults and political mass movements.

The contradictions of the bible are unimportant, and so is the supernatural thinking. Wrong focus. Plenty of people ditch those and become atheists with no real improvement. I was given history books in high school ( a liberal place generally) that were far worse than any intelligent design. Science has put forth many nonsensical theories. At least christianity is a known quantity with basically good principles. I'll cut it here because I'm kind of rambling.

[Strike For The South]

Exactly.

Having a religon really means nothing in and of itself. Having a high relgiosity does. There are numbers to prove it.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I'm sorry. As I said, I was reacting out of emotion and deliberately using a broad brush.

It just seems to me that religion has become a sanctuary for ignorance and hatred in this country, and it wasn't always that way. Nowhere else would the kind of vile rhetoric that I posted in the OP be openly spoken and accepted. (And I could post pages and pages of Christian leaders saying awful things about gay people.) Nowhere else would intelligent design be given any credibility. Nowhere else would abstinence only education, pro-bully anti-bully legislation, censoring teachers, and all the other base stupidity these people push in the education system get any traction.

The absurdities that Christians believe on face value would be laughed out of any fifth grade science class under any other name. These people believe that some Jew two thousand years ago, born from a woman who was essentially raped by their god, rose from the dead and walked around, based on nothing but a consistently contradictory book that sanctions slavery among other things. And these are the people that have appointed themselves the moral arbiters of our society? These are the people who feel confident in judging the worth of other people's lifestyles? People are being denied a sensible, logical extension of civil liberties based on a book of fairy tales.

Why? Why is Christianity given a special dispensation for idiocy? IMO, it is because most of us who do not accept such notions have family or friends that are Christian and do not want to offend. It is just not polite. I remember when I was being taught in Catholic high school by otherwise sane, rational adults that that nasty little wafer and that cheap wine were the body and blood of Christ, not a representation of them, but actual flesh and blood. It seemed so incredibly batshit crazy and so easily disproven, but I kept my mouth shut because I did not want to make anyone uncomfortable. The problem is that Christians have no problem offending. If they want to hold others up in judgment, they should be taken to task for their own views that make far less sense than people acting on a naturally occurring homosexual orientation.

The Bible is not a "book", it is usually bound up in a single codex but it remains a collection of writings organised into what we call "books", or production units. Pointing out the fact that these books contradict each other in their details is somewhat petty, and certainly not a useful observation given that it has caused litterally no problem for gneration after generation of theologians.

A Christian, or indeed Jewish or Muslim worldview includes more than what can be sensed phyiscally, which includes by intruments, so arguing that these "fairytales" are "unscientific" is also a non starter since they do not claim to be that.

I should like to hear a sensible or logical argument for extending the right to marry to homosexuals - so far all the arguments either boil down to either further restricting the franchise to exclude certain heterosexuals, or to fully liberalising it.

I think it's easy enough to just change it to "marriage between one man/woman and one man/woman". Conceptually it's very easy, and as long as we understand why were are doing it (aka, we don't think it's because "tradition is stupid, religion is stupid" etc) it will just stick like that. Arguing for polygamy would be a totally different logic.

There are Polygamous/Ployamorous groupings in many Western countries, including homosexuals, bisexuals, and heterosexuals. The current proposition, that we should extend it to homosexuals because they form loving and stable relationships. That same argument can be applied to the variety of other relationships consenting adults enter into.

You cannot say that two men can marry, but not three men and one woman. The only reason it is a pairing currently is the same historical reason for it being a man and a woman, procreation. I consider it profoundly unjust, indeed prejudiced, to advocate homosexual marriage and then demand that only couples wed. There is no practical justifcation and it is purely a prejudice inherrited from our forebears that you can onyl love one person at a time. Have I not been lambasted in this very thread merely because people assumed I don't believe Gay people can have loving relationships?

Most atheists I know would have their clocked cleaned if they were to argue with any actual theologian

The idea that finding a contradiciton in a book of allegory somehow gives you some special knoweledge is insane.

The basic humanist princpals that so many one here claim to espouse are just Christianity with sort of a libertine twist brought on by the modern comforts of Western life.

See: HoreTore

I came to this conclusion some time ago, no can who uses words like "good" or "evil" or indeed "should" in anything other than a predictive context can call himself an atheist.

Any arbitary division requires an arbiter. If there is an actual line between good and evil then that is because someone put the line there.

[PanzerJaeger]

The contradictions of the bible are unimportant, and so is the supernatural thinking. Wrong focus. Plenty of people ditch those and become atheists with no real improvement. I was given history books in high school ( a liberal place generally) that were far worse than any intelligent design. Science has put forth many nonsensical theories. At least christianity is a known quantity with basically good principles. I'll cut it here because I'm kind of rambling.

Wrong focus? That is exactly where the focus should be. Christian intolerance of homosexuality stems directly from a few passages in the bible. Any time someone expounds on the immorality of homosexuality or the 'fact' that traditional marriage is the only one sanctioned by god (and that is the rationale behind opposition to gay marriage, whether the opponents choose to cower behind semantics or not), it should be immediately noted that they also believe a myriad of other crazy things. The problem is that Christian teaching receives way too much undeserved credibility. If you begin to view the story of Jesus as a first effort at zombie fan fiction instead of the sacred words of a very random and contradictory god, it becomes much more difficult to take anything in the bible seriously.

Best start working on the Islamist then, I hear that in some parts of the world they kill homosexuals. Where is the hue and cry for justice from the LGBT comunity on the NBC or BBC or FOX news channels for that matter. As I stated earlier the more you push against something ingrained in Western society the more push back you have. To blantantly say "That can't work" for pushing the idea of unions that contain all the elements of"marriage" shows how it isn't about "rights" it's about abolishing judeo-christian "beliefs". Again, I ask where is the uproar over the death of homosxuals in the middle east? Seems marriage can be trival when you have to worry about that?

You do realize that the LGBT community and human rights activists speak out all the time about the persecution of homosexuals in the Middle East, right?

In any event, could this effort in diversion be more obvious? 'Why should American gays complain, at least we don't stone them?' I don't know about you, but I have higher standards for the United States than I do for Saudi Arabia.

The LGBT community has one thing right, if they love their partner then they should have the same rights as what a traditional "marriage" entails. But you need to be fighting it at the legal level not the church level. I would rightly blame the politicians for using this as a stump talk. It should be how to "include" not "exclude". But then the radicals on both sides wouldn't like that would they?

Your understanding couldn't be more twisted. The gay marriage movement has nothing at all to do with the church or changing religious practices. No one is trying to force religious institutions to do... anything. On the other hand, the religious Right preaches anti-gay hatred from the pulpit. They are approaching the issue strictly from the 'church level' and, as usual, cannot seem to comprehend the separation of church and state.

[Jack50]

My point was that you don't hear about these in our daily news cycle. The LGBT movement is so caught up in trying to make what is a legal matter into the bogeyman of Judeo-Christian principles that the bigger picture isn't there. Most true Christians as myself have no problem with the status of union between people. It is the LGBT community that won't step down the Rhetoric and actually work to the betterment of all LGBT's. That was my point about the middle east. You should hold Saudia Arabia to the same standard as you keep decrying religion, religion and it is the Islamic law that states to stone them, won't find it in the bible. You sir are the one who has it twisted. Try to make your arguement on the basis of law and forego the religious element. Then you will find a large middle ground of secular and christian people who have cause with you. If you need to see how it would work in a few yeas rather than the way things are going now, look to Dr. King and how blacks and whites religious and secular came togather to remove a vile stain on america's history.

Those against them shout the same things heard now. We need to tear down the societal fabric of Western civilization because we want our share(meaning the largest share) right now and we get to decide how it will look and function and be. This is why a state like NC doesn't want to see this in their state. I don't agree with the way they went about it but then maybe the LGBT can take some of that blame, seems there is enough to go around. At least this brings out the Christian bashers. Allows me to d othe Lord's work that way

[ICantSpellDawg]

Us Christians believe in a number of crazy things. Most of our religion is predicated on crazy things that require faith. There are enough passages in the bible to suggest that homosexuality is an abomination in the eyes of the Church. You are arguing against the Christian religion to say "do away with the crazy stuff". You are fine with doing that, but don't be surprised when Christians dismiss you as just being anti-Christian. You are by your own admission. God knows that burning bushes and talking through them to people in the wilderness is crazy, but so is a the idea that there is a God who cares about what we do to one another. I like the crazier aspects of my faith, especially the ones about transubstantiation and the Virgin Birth. Or how about the one where Jesus rises from the dead, or tells people that he will come to give them eternal life on the last day, or the one where he tells everyone that he is the son of God and no one will get to heaven except through him. I'm pretty sure that I'm ok with the idea that he may not be in favor of gay marriage. That is one of the least crazy things in the Bible.

You offer emptiness and there is no convincing reason, from a religious or secular perspective, to be in favor of equalizing homosexual relationships with heterosexual marital relationships. But maybe that's just me, or arguably 50% of the population of the United States.

I'm off to bed, to dream of amending state constitutions to ban recognition of same-sex marriages as special relationships, equal to male female marriage and above all other types of relationships.


"An argument made by philosopher Hilary Putnam, among others, states that some forms of relativism make it impossible to believe one is in error. If there is no truth beyond an individual's belief that something is true, then an individual cannot hold their own beliefs to be false or mistaken. A related criticism is that relativizing truth to individuals destroys the distinction between truth and belief."

We come to an impasse, therefore, we settle with a duel and history moves on without one of us.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_Law
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liar_paradox

I love canned wikilosophy

[PanzerJaeger]

I'm pretty sure that I'm ok with the idea that he may not be in favor of gay marriage.

Based on... what? I'm just curious. If it's Leviticus, do you live by all the social codes proscribed in that text? If it is from the writings of Paul, do you also support slavery and the oppression of women?

[Ironside]

And 50% of statistics are made up.

That's a good one. Now, going with the much better divorces/1000 marriages, Sweden is notably more faithful than the US.

My point was that you don't hear about these in our daily news cycle. The LGBT movement is so caught up in trying to make what is a legal matter into the bogeyman of Judeo-Christian principles that the bigger picture isn't there. Most true Christians as myself have no problem with the status of union between people. It is the LGBT community that won't step down the Rhetoric and actually work to the betterment of all LGBT's.

For curiousity, how much of the most aggressive rethoric is actually coming from the LGBT community and not from those "false" Christians?

For example, anyone sing "hen" (a gender neutral personal pronoun) on for example forum posters are feminazis who are trying to destroy all forms of gender and replace all use of han (he) and hon (she) with a single pronoun.
Yet even the most aggressive gender neutral user are keeping this as a secret agenda, since they've never suggested it.

[The Stranger]

As far as I know, no one is being hurt by atheism. I do not know of any kids who have killed themselves because they were told that a nonexistent god hates them or that they are going to a nonexistent hell.

My point was that Christianity needs to be challenged not because it is a nonsensical belief system, but because it is a nonsensical belief system that is actively attacking people in real and damaging ways in the public square. Fire with fire, and all that.

that is such a non argument... the most horrible acts in history of mankind were committed in the secularised 20th century and with no religious motive. yet ofcourse that was politics, or a freak of nature bladiblabla... people have been killed in the name of reason as well as in the name of god.