Atheism and homosexuality

Atheism and homosexuality

There are 3861 comments on the Conservapedia story from Dec 5, 2011, titled Atheism and homosexuality. In it, Conservapedia reports that:

Creationist scientists and creationist assert that the theory of evolution cannot account for the origin of gender and sexual reproduction.http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/136http://www.answersingenesis.org/pbs_nova/0928ep5.asp [[Creation Ministries International]] states: "Homosexual acts go against [[God]]'s original [[Intelligent design ... (more)

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Conservapedia.

Jumper The Wise

Morgantown, KY

#3372 Nov 1, 2013
I like this thread.
Its very practical to place gays,Atheists,and African Americans off as a group for comments as they share many common issues as minorities.

Level 5

Since: Apr 11

Los Angeles, CA

#3373 Nov 1, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>I didn't claim "same sex marriage will [] cause the human race to not survive", I claimed sex differences are so important they mean the survival of the human race and racial differences are unimportant.
Do you get it now?
Yeah, we get you are a bigot who doesn't have a rational argument against gay marriage.
The ability to reproduce is irrelevant to this issue.
You don't have to be able to reproduce in order to marry.
If you did have to be able to reproduce in order to marry, it would be an issue, and we could discuss if it should be a requirement. But it's not. So, why bring it up if you have an actual argument against gay marriage?

Level 5

Since: Apr 11

Los Angeles, CA

#3374 Nov 1, 2013
Terra Firma wrote:
<quoted text>
Nie states and the District of Columbia legally recognized same sex marriage as a result of legislative or popular votes, Brian. Why do you ignore that fact?
<quoted text>
Since opposite sex couples can still marry even when same sex marriages are legally recognized, absolutely NOTHING changes for those interested in opposite sex marriage.
<quoted text>
You haven't minded gays subsidizing YOUR benefits for the the entire history of the US, though, have you Brian? Gays are taxpayers too and are entitled to the same legal benefits and privileges as straight people. Deal with it.
<quoted text>
There aren't any differences in those laws in states where same sex marriage is legally recognized.
<quoted text>
Breaking the law has consequences, Brian.
<quoted text>
So that means you're OK with requiring businesses to provide goods and services to secular, civil same sex wedding ceremonies. It's only religious same sex wedding ceremonies that are a problem Got it.
Here's a sprig of mint. You can place it on the platter next to Brian's backside before you hand it to him if you like.

Level 5

Since: Apr 11

Los Angeles, CA

#3375 Nov 1, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>^^^This standard, "a persons right to marry who they want" would allow forced marriage, polygamy, incest marriage and bestial marriage. Don't they have "a persons right to marry who they want"?
Same sex marriage is wrong because of its justifications and consequences.
That makes no sense at all, you idiot.

Tell us what "consequences" there are to gay marriage.
Or STFU.

Level 5

Since: Apr 11

Los Angeles, CA

#3376 Nov 1, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>What do you think of these stories?
Opposed to same-sex marriage, company ends wedding business
Good riddance, their choice.
BTW, stupid, gay marriages performed in OR aren't legally recognized, and that's where this shop was.
So, it's clear a gay couple can have a private, religious wedding ceremony, and sue a bakery for not selling them a cake.
So, what do you want? Want to ban private ceremonies?
Brian_G wrote:
Trolley owner says move made to avoid potential lawsuit
December 25, 2012|By Erin Cox, The Baltimore Sun
OCTOBER 10, 2013
Gay Persecution of Christians: The Latest Evidence
You know what they say about payback.:)

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Level 10

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#3377 Nov 1, 2013
Quest wrote:
Not really, because it's not relevant to the topic.
Sex differences are relevant to the survival of the human race.

.
Quest wrote:
What does that have to do with legal marriage?
That's why I oppose unisex marriage; male and female are different and those differences are important and permeate society.

.
Quest wrote:
Gay folks marrying will have no effect on heterosexuals procreating, and the survival of the human species.
If the fundamental institution of marriage is changed, that will change society too. I'm not claiming extinction due to same sex marriage, but what if only 1% fewer children are born?

.
Quest wrote:
Heterosexuals seem to have no problem procreating both outside and inside of marriage.
That might be how it looks if you have no children, but there are plenty of problems. Out of wedlock birth cause their own economic and social problems.

Reason number one for keeping marriage one man and one woman: Posterity.

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Level 10

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#3378 Nov 1, 2013
Just Think wrote:
Those are businesses, Brian, not people.
Businesses are associations of people. Those where people who paid fines and appeared in court.

.
Just Think wrote:
You stated that Christians would be forced to attend gay weddings.
They were Christian people sued for refusing to provide services and attend same sex wedding rites.

.
Just Think wrote:
You lied. This is not shocking.
Neither is ignorance or defamation from the left. The facts are on the side of one man and one woman marriage.

.
Just Think wrote:
As for the businesses - businesses must follow the law. Businesses are not allowed to break any of the discrimination laws in their state regardless of their religious beliefs.
I oppose PC discrimination laws and same sex marriage law. I favor civil disobedience when an individual is forced to do wrong.

.
Just Think wrote:
I mean, we all know that you have no real arguments to support your homophobia, but you're starting to look a wee bit pathetic.
Many gays defend marriage as one man and one woman, Dolce and Gabbana for two.
http://www.th epublicdi scourse.com/2013/03/9432/

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Level 10

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#3379 Nov 1, 2013
The Dude wrote:
Smiling while holding a knife at someone's throat is not friendly.
^^^See how T.D. defames supporting one man and one woman marriage? Same sex marriage is based on irrationality and lies.

See the post above as proof.

I write my arguments to appeal to everyone, including homosexuals. I oppose inciting violence and inflaming hatred. Not all same sex marriage supporters are like T.D. but so few of them condemn his hate speech, it doesn't matter.

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Level 10

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#3380 Nov 1, 2013
The Dude wrote:
Every post you argue against gay marriage. You don't support equal rights if you're denying them a right others have. If you don't believe in equal rights then it doesn't matter if you support a limited number of rights.
Same sex marriage is the special right to rewrite marriage law for everyone, changing government's relationship with marriage to make it unisex. It brings a new standard of sex segregation to perfectly integrated one man and one woman marriage. It's all about segregation, inequality, separatism and apartheid; not equality. A gay may marry a lesbian in every state. Same sex religious rites are legal in every state, though some don't force Christian wedding vendors to support those ceremonies. There is no orientation test for a marriage license.

.
The Dude wrote:
I may partially agree in principle that perhaps she should have the right to discriminate. The old adage "I disagree with you but will fight to defend your right to say it". In which case private store owners would have the right not to serve blacks. Certainly an iffy can of worms however.
I don't equate attending and supporting a religious same sex wedding ceremony with race; this is where we differ.
I support their freedom; they were never found guilty by a jury of their peers. Same sex marriage is unjust and intolerant, suing Christians or defending those suits.

.
The Dude wrote:
So uh, she DID refuse to sell to a homosexual.
Those Christians never turned away a homosexual, they had sold to them before and after; they just turned away supporting same sex marriage. They would have refused to support heterosexuals who wanted to marry for economic or political reasons too.

.
The Dude wrote:
...hypocrite ... your silly ...I vote to remove all your rights....
^^^I oppose name-calling and bullying.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#3381 Nov 1, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>^^^See how T.D. defames supporting one man and one woman marriage? Same sex marriage is based on irrationality and lies.
See the post above as proof.
I write my arguments to appeal to everyone, including homosexuals. I oppose inciting violence and inflaming hatred. Not all same sex marriage supporters are like T.D. but so few of them condemn his hate speech, it doesn't matter.
sure pal, sure...

your arguments do nothing but promote your prejudices, hatred and fear of others.

they are baseless and put out for no other reason than to denigrate your fellow humans...

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Level 10

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#3382 Nov 1, 2013
Terra Firma wrote:
Advocating discrimination against and infringement of their fundamental rights is hardly an act of love, Brian....
The Supreme Court heard same sex marriage, they didn't see one man and one woman marriage as "[a]dvocating discrimination against and infringement of their fundamental rights". There is no orientation test for a marriage license; the test is sex, not orientation. Before the 21st century, all marriage law has been sex integrated and diverse, not sex segregated, discriminatory, disunited and exclusionary. All men needed a woman to marry and vice versa; same sex marriage isn't as good as perfect affirmative action 1:1 marriage.

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Level 10

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#3383 Nov 1, 2013
Just Think wrote:
You want homosexuals treated as second class citizens.
Not true, I want marriage to be one man and one woman; the issue has nothing to do with homosexuality or any other sexual orientation. The issue is the greatest good for society, not the individual. Marriage is a social institution.

I've always written there is nothing wrong with homosexuals or homosexuality and many gays defend one man and one woman marriage. I'm proud to have their support.

.
Just Think wrote:
You're a homophobe. Deal with it.
Many gays defend one man and one woman marriage:

Oppose Same-Sex Marriage
by Doug Mainwaring
within Marriage
http://www.th epublicdi scourse.com/2013/03/9432/

Dolce & Gabbana: drama that could only be fashioned in Italy
Cristina Odone talks to Dolce and Gabbana on tax evasion, why they love the Duchess of Cambridge and why they don’t believe in gay marriage...

The two men so cherish the idea of the family, had they ever thought of getting married.“What?! Never!” they answer in chorus,“I don’t believe in gay marriage.” Dolce laughs. In Catholic Italy, has their sexuality proved a problem?“No, never,” says Dolce.“The fashion industry is full of gays.”....
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/features/1029...

Xavier Bongibault, a member of a group called Plus Gay Sans Mariage -- More Gay Without Marriage
http://www.homovox.com/

Read more: http://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2013/0...

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#3384 Nov 1, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>The Supreme Court heard same sex marriage, they didn't see one man and one woman marriage as "[a]dvocating discrimination against and infringement of their fundamental rights". There is no orientation test for a marriage license; the test is sex, not orientation. Before the 21st century, all marriage law has been sex integrated and diverse, not sex segregated, discriminatory, disunited and exclusionary. All men needed a woman to marry and vice versa; same sex marriage isn't as good as perfect affirmative action 1:1 marriage.
when did they hear a SSM case?

Level 5

Since: Apr 11

Los Angeles, CA

#3385 Nov 1, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Sex differences are relevant to the survival of the human race. n
<quoted text>That's why I oppose unisex marriage; male and female are different and those differences are important and permeate society.
You oppose gay marriage because you are a bigot.
Any two people are different, even identical twins, so you don't really have a point.
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>If the fundamental institution of marriage is changed, that will change society too.
How, exactly?
Brian_G wrote:
I'm not claiming extinction due to same sex marriage, but what if only 1% fewer children are born?
Well, there would be 1% fewer children born. So what?


Level 5

Since: Apr 11

Los Angeles, CA

#3386 Nov 1, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Businesses are associations of people. Those where people who paid fines and appeared in court.
.
<quoted text>They were Christian people sued for refusing to provide services and attend same sex wedding rites.
Why do you keep lying? They weren't asked to attend. They were asked to bake a cake.

Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Neither is ignorance or defamation from the left. The facts are on the side of one man and one woman marriage.
.
<quoted text>I oppose PC discrimination laws and same sex marriage law. I favor civil disobedience when an individual is forced to do wrong.
.
<quoted text>Many gays defend marriage as one man and one woman, Dolce and Gabbana for two.
http://www.th epublicdi scourse.com/2013/03/9432/
BS. They just don't want to marry each other.

Level 5

Since: Apr 11

Los Angeles, CA

#3387 Nov 1, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Same sex marriage is the special
right to rewrite marriage law for everyone,
Stupid, you can't have it both ways. It's not a special right, straight people could also marry someone of the same sex.
Brian_G wrote:
changing government's relationship with marriage to make it unisex.
Liar. People will be able to marry someone of the opposite sex.
Brian_G wrote:
It brings a new standard of sex segregation to perfectly integrated one man and one woman marriage. It's all about segregation, inequality, separatism and apartheid; not equality.
Are you joking? Is a one race marriage segregation, inequality, separatism and apartheid"? No, stupid, it's not. Neither is allowing a person to CHOOSE to marry a member of the same sex, or NOT.

Brian_G wrote:
A gay may marry a lesbian in every state. Same sex religious rites are legal in every state, though some don't force Christian wedding vendors to support those ceremonies. There is no orientation test for a marriage license.
There's a gender test. What business does the government have peeking into our underwear?
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>I don't equate attending and supporting a religious same sex wedding ceremony with race; this is where we differ.
I support their freedom; they were never found guilty by a jury of their peers. Same sex marriage is unjust and intolerant, suing Christians or defending those suits.
Christians opposed interracial marriage. The only argument given in Loving v VA against interracial marriage was the same one often given against gay marriage, "God against it."
What is it they say about payback? LOL.
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Those Christians never turned away a homosexual, they had sold to them before and after; they just turned away supporting same sex marriage. They would have refused to support heterosexuals who wanted to marry for economic or political reasons too.
They'd ask!?
"So, are you getting married for economic or political reasons"?


Level 5

Since: Apr 11

Los Angeles, CA

#3388 Nov 1, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>The Supreme Court heard same sex marriage, they didn't see one man and one woman marriage as "[a]dvocating discrimination against and infringement of their fundamental rights". There is no orientation test for a marriage license; the test is sex, not orientation. Before the 21st century, all marriage law has been sex integrated and diverse, not sex segregated, discriminatory, disunited and exclusionary. All men needed a woman to marry and vice versa; same sex marriage isn't as good as perfect affirmative action 1:1 marriage.
Well, dummy, it's the 21st Century.

Level 5

Since: Apr 11

Los Angeles, CA

#3389 Nov 1, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Not true, I want marriage to be one man and one woman; the issue has nothing to do with homosexuality or any other sexual orientation.
That's a clear lie.
Brian_G wrote:
The issue is the greatest good for society, not the individual. Marriage is a social institution.
Not allowing gay people to marry their partners doesn't help society at all.

I've always written there is nothing wrong with homosexuals or homosexuality and many gays defend one man and one woman marriage. I'm proud to have their support.
.
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Many gays defend one man and one woman marriage:
Oppose Same-Sex Marriage
by Doug Mainwaring
within Marriage
http://www.th epublicdi scourse.com/2013/03/9432/
Dolce & Gabbana: drama that could only be fashioned in Italy
Cristina Odone talks to Dolce and Gabbana on tax evasion, why they love the Duchess of Cambridge and why they don’t believe in gay marriage...
The two men so cherish the idea of the family, had they ever thought of getting married.“What?! Never!” they answer in chorus,“I don’t believe in gay marriage.” Dolce laughs. In Catholic Italy, has their sexuality proved a problem?“No, never,” says Dolce.“The fashion industry is full of gays.”....
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/features/1029...
Xavier Bongibault, a member of a group called Plus Gay Sans Mariage -- More Gay Without Marriage
http://www.homovox.com/
Read more: http://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2013/0...
Stupid, not wanting get married is not the same as being against gay marriage.
Jumper The Wise

Morgantown, KY

#3390 Nov 1, 2013
I just thought of somthing.
Can a homosexual be an atheist and still be offended and demand the right to attend a strict Christain public church?

Level 1

Since: Apr 09

Location hidden

#3391 Nov 1, 2013
Jumper The Wise wrote:
I just thought of somthing.
Can a homosexual be an atheist and still be offended and demand the right to attend a strict Christain public church?
…you should try thinking of something relevant.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Evolution Debate Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 1 min Endofdays 78,674
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 5 min Science 32,438
News It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 12 min Science 163,006
News Why Atheist Richard Dawkins Supports Religious ... 53 min Eagle 12 - 1,406
Mathematicians PROVED evolution IMPOSSIBLE! 1 hr Science 814
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 12 hr Regolith Based Li... 222,220
News Nonsense of a high order: The confused world of... (Jan '17) Aug 5 yehoshooah adam 4,381
More from around the web