Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: November 1, 2026, 2:12 am
Thread Rating:
|
Another reason I agree with Hitchens.
|
|
RE: Another reason I agree with Hitchens.
May 1, 2015 at 10:06 am
(This post was last modified: May 1, 2015 at 10:10 am by robvalue.)
Fucking hell! You insane people! The fact that this guy even thinks this sort of action is OK just shows how much religion has rotted his brain.
And nice try, but the bible never even mentions homosexuality as far as I know. It wouldn't be a concept that would have been understood back then, many people don't even understand it now. Of course in the uneducated mind of a bigot sexual acts and sexuality are the same thing. The verse he refers to mentions sexual acts not sexuality. RE: Another reason I agree with Hitchens.
May 1, 2015 at 10:24 am
(This post was last modified: May 1, 2015 at 10:27 am by Jackie.)
"If a man lies with a man" I do think is in there and homophobia was a widespread social norm in the monotheism of antiquity.
Still does not mater, yes sex acts are different than sexuality, but if you are gay and because of their stupid book and confusing the two, how is an adult gay person going to get to express their sexuality with another consenting adult? The way you put it allows them to say "I don't care if you are gay, but you cant have sex with someone you love" It is also why sodomy between adult heterosexuals those bans got thrown out.
"If" my parents didn't exist I wouldn't have been born. Any reason why your ifs should matter? You can find justifications for homophobia outside religion. My dad is an atheist and he justifies it with biology, procreation and "nature".
Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you
(May 1, 2015 at 10:24 am)Brian37 Wrote: "If a man lies with a man" I do think is in there and homophobia was a widespread social norm in the monotheism of antiquity. Did it ever occur to you that these religions picked up on preexisting prejudices? That's what these religions are all about, if you strip them from their woo. A mirror of society at a particular place at a particular point in time. Homophobia probably originated way back when procreation was an absolute necessity to keep the tribe from dying out. Seriously, not every wayward turd on the street is about religion. RE: Another reason I agree with Hitchens.
May 1, 2015 at 11:35 am
(This post was last modified: May 1, 2015 at 11:37 am by Homeless Nutter.)
(May 1, 2015 at 10:24 am)Brian37 Wrote: "If a man lies with a man" I do think is in there and homophobia was a widespread social norm in the monotheism of antiquity. One could argue - and quite frankly I'm surprised it's not an argument made often - that blowing a guy through a glory-hole in a public bathroom does not technically constitute "lying". ![]() Quote:lie
"The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one." - George Bernard Shaw
(May 1, 2015 at 11:19 am)Dystopia Wrote: "If" my parents didn't exist I wouldn't have been born. Any reason why your ifs should matter? You can find justifications for homophobia outside religion. My dad is an atheist and he justifies it with biology, procreation and "nature". I didn't say you couldn't but religion is a political entity yielding power over governments, and that does have a real impact on minorities. The "if" part of my example isn't about force or erasing the past, it is suggesting people consider that their morality is not coming from that book. Like you said if it can be found outside it, then you prove my point that our species behaviors are in us, not holy books. Take away their pedestal they have nothing they can hide behind. No I don't mean ban religion, I do mean take away their excuses. RE: Another reason I agree with Hitchens.
May 1, 2015 at 11:48 am
(This post was last modified: May 1, 2015 at 11:49 am by robvalue.)
The thing is, even if you know someone is gay, it's not the bigot's business whether or not they are having anal sex. To just assume it, and then apply the death penalty in that assumption is a bit ridiculous even if you accept the ludicrous biblical law.
I mean really, if God wants someone dead because of anal sex, he shouldn't have any trouble doing it himself without pastor crazy having to incite mobs to do it. Why pick on this particular "sin" for the death penalty out of all the things the bible can get you stoned for?
Couldn't help but notice that the offending Pastor's name is Robert Lee. Perhaps there is something inherent in the name that destined him to be on the wrong side of the issue.
(May 1, 2015 at 11:59 am)Cato Wrote: Couldn't help but notice that the offending Pastor's name is Robert Lee. Perhaps there is something inherent in the name that destined him to be on the wrong side of the issue. Hmmm... There might be something to it. Bruce Lee had a brother named Robert. He apparently chose a career in music and subsequently no one ever heard of him, as opposed to his martial arts legend sibling... Well - that's not completely fair, he was briefly successful in Hong Kong. Still, he should have learned kung-fu instead of guitar, perhaps.
"The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one." - George Bernard Shaw
|
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)



