Gay Rights

G W Bush.

 

I never said the contrary though. Let me be clear. You can condemn them. But when you hold dear the same book that they use to justify the atrocities that you so harshly condemn? You're being hypocritical, in my eyes. And you provide cover for the extremists, shielding them from legitimate criticism because...

"Not ALL Muslims!

Not ALL Christians believe that!

etc etc"

I have no idea how someone can say that, without being genuinely ignorant of all the damage Christianity has done (and is still doing) to humanity. Willing to cite examples if necessary. Being raised in a Christian household isn't a justification to see it in a positive light. What if someone said...

"Being raised in a radical-Islamic household, I don't mind radical Islam at all."

"Being raised in a racist household, I don't mind racism at all."

etc etc.

Why arn't you convinced? And what are the reasons that keep you 'partly' convinced?

Well, you're looking at him! Haha.

Seriously though, I'm trying to focus on beliefs, more than people. Ideas deserve no default respect. They are just ideas. I have no qualms about despising certain beliefs and and values. People are different. Compassion, empathy, you get the jist. I can hold people accountable for nasty beliefs, but still respect them as people. (Richard Dawkins is a great example, for me. He has no problem with circumcision. I do, BIG time, yet I still love and respect the man.)

 

Because I don't think religion is completely bad. I saw the much more secular side of Christianity. Give to charity when you can and just be nice to others. That's the side of Christianity that I was raised in. I know there's ugly sides to it, but I don't think it's fair to make a generalization that one can't be both religious and condemning of atrocious actions.

Because I just don't know. Agnostic is probably the best word to describe me.

 

This is so painful to debate. Baha

Can we be a tad more careful with the words we use? I feel the goalposts are being moved every other argument or so. Maybe it's just me, but I feel like words are kiiiinda being put in my mouth and I'm constantly having to restate a position that I've already expressed.

Okay. Deep breaths.

You initially claimed that, "I don't mind Christianity at all.".

I do. I mind it, quite a lot. Because Christianity is still responsible for a lot of harm to humanity. "...all the damage Christianity has done (and is still doing) to humanity." Not all harm. And not all of it's influence is entirely bad. I never claimed that. Just that it still does a lot of harm.

Now you say "Because I don't think religion is completely bad", as justification for your indifference/apathy towards Christianity. This doesn't address what I've said though. Christianity is responsible for good and bad. I already acknowledge that. The bad, bothers me. A LOT. And it doesn't stop bothering me just because some other Christians are quite nice people. Or because Christianity can have a positive influence. I want to hold the bad accountable.

Imagine if 'Christianity' was a person. Bob. 6 days a week, Bob is a lovely person. On the weekends, they torture innocent animals for fun. Could you really look me in the eye, and tell me that "I don't mind Bob at all", "Because I don't think Bob is completely bad.".

We only really see these apologetics for one's religion. Bob is still a dxxchebag in my eyes, even though he does some good. Credit him for the good, criticise him for the bad. Simple, right? Why can't we do the same for religion?

Again, I never claimed the contrary. I even went out of my way (all Obama-like) to make sure that I wouldn't be misunderstood!

"Let me be clear. You can condemn them. [atrocious actions]"

But when you defend the ideology that they use to perform their actions? We have a problem. The same ideas, doctrine, religion that is responsible (causal, and I believe I can show this) for a lot of atrocious actions the world over, is being defending like moderates such as yourself.

Why can't you give to charity and be nice to others without the religious baggage? What good religious action do you need religion for? Because I've never heard an answer to that. Not one good, selfless action that requires a religion. That a non-religious person cannot do, for secular means.

Cheeky. We're not talking about what you know, we're talking about what you believe. Why do you believe?

 

I'll just cut it short here and say I didn't use the correct words to describe how I feel about Christianity. Let's put it at that.

Religion is what you make of it. You can take it literally or figuratively. I don't think there is any specific way to follow a religion because I understand that religion is constantly changing. It's hard to believe that any single religion is the "right belief".

As for religion, I see religion having some positive influence if not for extremism. For example, religious people are much more likely to regularly give to charity than non-religious people. This doesn't mean you have to be religious to give to charity. It just shows that religion does have influence that isn't always bad.

I accept that Christianity may not be the right religion. In fact, think it's probably not. However, humans can feel the need to hold onto a belief to find meaning in life and find purpose in doing good for others. I honestly don't see the problem with that aspect of religion.

 

At the end of the day, we all die. That's it. You die, I die, we die. So who gives a crap what happens in others lives. Shut up and let people live the way they want to. Unless you sit there on a PC with no friends, it doesn't effect you so shut up and go outside.
Not everyone has to care about your religion
Not everyone has to care about your gay rights
Not everyone has to care about anything
The things we all DO need to do are the same regardless of religion and sexual preference.

MOVE ON.

 

Anybody can sue, not just lawyers.

Ah

 

Looooooooooool

 

Totally missed what I was actually replying to.

Its not as similar because Christianity has a far bloodier an expansive history than just one person. We're talking many countries and many institutions and even today we see it. I mean the salvation army is still anti gay in modern day. Entire institution against gays in modern times. Previously,we have Salem Witch trials, dark ages, crusades, forced conversion of native Americans by the entirety of Europe. long history of persecution of non believers especially Jews, pogroms, rejected science until science became common enough where they were forced to accept it. Its not one person. Never has been one person. Counties for centuries.

Yes and no. While its true the rise of Hitler and the economic depression of Germany caused by the Treaty of Versailles are related, its not the only cause. The Germans of the time truly did believe that they were superior due to their bloodline and because they were hungry and starving, adopting an ideology where they were believed superior was attractive. Who wouldn't want to be superior? Once they were fed and clothed and no longer hungry, they still believed they were superior, which is why they began taking more and more. So the rise of Nazism, sure, but it was still a belief where they were superior by blood. Its preached inequality just like the bible.

Nazism is attractive to those who believed themselves to be Aryan.

 

It's amazing what a skilled orator can do.

 

It's gotten to the point where as long as you don't express your hate to gays(???) in public, who cares?

 

Some people need religion as a coping mechanism or a way to explain to themselves why things happen the way they do. It's a means for people to sleep easy at night thinking that they have the answers and can die happy. So I don't see it as a bad thing, it's just incredibly outdated and too much is determined by it and forced onto others.
So by saying that it is entirely bad and by getting so upset about the subject makes me think you're taking these arguments waayyy too personally

 

Gay rights. They deserve every single right that we get. Gay people are people, and there is nothing different, nothing wrong about them. They simply choose to like a person who is the same gender as them. Now is that something that should be condemned? In our society it appears to be the heat of debate, and has caused great uproar in the states especially. The belief system of many is interpreted to oppose gay marriage. However, many of these religions emerged during and after Roman times, based off of the Roman culture. However, it has been proven that a large percentage of the Roman population was actually homosexual. One is born with rights, and they can not be taken away. Therefore, gay people should have every right to marry and live the same lives heterosexual people should.

 

Gosh this thread will be the longest thread ever made.

--- Double Post Merged, Dec 7, 2015, Original Post Date: Dec 7, 2015 ---

Best. Reply. Ever. Guys you should listen to him, he's right.

 

Lol. I just want to say this: We get the right to marry someone of the opposite gender.

 

Couldn't have been said better, I'm not for gay but I'm not against it, its just a thing that happens. They don't interfere with my life or friends so I don't interfere with them. It's really sad that some humans just can't comprehend that

 

I'll assume this is a joke, so I won't take it too seriously.

You can pretty much make this argument for almost anything. "Everyone has the right to marry the same race." "Every American can choose any Christian denomination they'd like." "Every woman has the right to not vote."

I mean, it doesn't carry much weight, and it can be used as an argument for a plethora of topics.

 

No one can agree on anything and this proves it i Mean seriously, 70 pages long of this garbage, lol guys, get a life.

--- Double Post Merged, Dec 8, 2015, Original Post Date: Dec 8, 2015 ---

And also this stupid thread is spamming my alerts.

 

I disagree xD.

 

@Skaros123 - I'll just cut it short here and say I didn't use the correct words to describe how I feel about Christianity. Let's put it at that.

So, do you care about the harm done in it's name, for reasons propagated by Christianity?

Religion is what you make of it. You can take it literally or figuratively. I don't think there is any specific way to follow a religion because I understand that religion is constantly changing.

Are you sure you're talking about religion? Religious *doctrine* (by definition) is extremely rigid. It does not conform to the evidence, or change to suit new information.

Granted, the main reasons that Christianity has survived so long are, 'It's ability to suppress contradictory information and persecute dissenters (See 'The Christian Dark Ages')' along with it being dragged kicking and screaming into a more secular society. Christianity has had to give up so much ground on Biblical 'truths'. Where other religions have remained more stubborn, Christianity slowly lags behind society. Just enough to avoid extinction. It 'evolves' to survive. Not out of choice, or acceptance. Do you really think that many Christian authorities, churches and people would be supporting gay/women's/apostates rights if society hadn't led the way?

It's hard to believe that any single religion is the "right belief".

Why do any have to be? They can't all be right, sure. But they can all be wrong. I agree with every Theist in the following sense -- That they reject all other religions because there's insufficient evidence to justify belief. I completely agree. I just go one god further.

As for religion, I see religion having some positive influence if not for extremism.

But... religious extremism comes from religion. Extremism isn't a problem in and of itself anyway. If you want a truly peaceful religion, you have to look no further than Buddhism and Jainism. In fact, the most 'extreme' you become a Buddhist or Jainist, the less we have to worry about you, as a society. Genuinely, the more peaceful you will become. Extremism and fundamentalism is only a problem when the fundamentals of the ideology are bad.

For example, religious people are much more likely to regularly give to charity than non-religious people.

Actually there was a recent study done regarding altruism in atheist v religious children, that implied the contrary. The correlation is pretty low, which is why further study is needed, obviously.

https://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/3rnzi6/religious_kids_are_harsher_and_less_generous_than/

What about the top 8 most Atheistic countries in the world, where they rank 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 15th, 25th, 26th and 28th in Wikipedia's "Where-to-be-born Index" quality of life rating?

Again, can you name a single 'good action' that requires religion? Yet there are countless examples of 'bad actions' that only a religious person would do. I agree that...

This doesn't mean you have to be religious to give to charity. It just shows that religion does have influence that isn't always bad.

But that doesn't mean much, does it? I'm sure that no group is entirely 'evil'. I'm sure you could probably find some examples of nice Nazis if you looked hard enough. Am I equating religious people with Nazis? Hell no. I'm pointing out that, "Oh, look at this nice thing that religion does!" doesn't make religion a force for good. We have to weigh up all the good and bad that is done at the hand of religion, and come to a 'net effect'.

I accept that Christianity may not be the right religion.

Again, who's saying that there is a right one?

In fact, think it's probably not. However, humans can feel the need to hold onto a belief to find meaning in life and find purpose in doing good for others.

Do you need to believe in a religion to "do good for others"? Honestly, I think most people are better than that. Just a quick look at most deconverts is enough proof of that.

I honestly don't see the problem with that aspect of religion.

Why do you need religion for meaning and purpose? The same goes for "doing good to others".

Dat dissonance doe.