Atheism and homosexuality

Dec 5, 2011 Full story: Conservapedia 3,862

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)

Full Story

“What can I do to get the Topix”

Since: Jan 11

cops upset?

#949 Jul 27, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
Google Chrome lets me backspace and my words are still there. Sometimes, if it's a large or important post, I'll also copy the entire thing, just to make sure.
Copying to Word was my backup until I switched to Google Chrome. It was shortly after switching from Explorer that I realized how unstable it is compared to Chrome. Since then I haven't seen a similar problem except once when a post I was proofing posted while I was making changes. That could have been operator error since I had entered the captcha numbers in prior to proofing.

Anyway it has been much better since switching. Plus it doesn't lock up like IE did.

“What can I do to get the Topix”

Since: Jan 11

cops upset?

#950 Jul 27, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Posts that cut it close to the character limit often don't appear for a while, then look like they are re-instated later. Can be quite worrying though if you've spent a while typing up a response.
Even more frustrating in work as we have shite computers with shite internet connection.
I have experienced that too. It may be an instability in IE, but I don't know for certain except to say I haven't seen it yet with Chrome.

My computer needs upgraded, but I now have a much better internet connection. Still the chain is only as strong as the weakest link or some new thing will come along because someone "fixed" something.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#951 Jul 27, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Divorce, it maintains consent after marriage.
.
<quoted text>One at a time.
So, theoretically, you could marry all the women in the world, couldn't you?

As long as you marry them one at a time, it's legal, right?

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#952 Jul 27, 2013
Thinking wrote:
We can certainly assume an upper limit of say 70 billion, to allow for multiple remarriages.
<quoted text>
I'm sayin.

:-)

“Why does my ignorance”

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#953 Jul 27, 2013
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>Copying to Word was my backup until I switched to Google Chrome. It was shortly after switching from Explorer that I realized how unstable it is compared to Chrome. Since then I haven't seen a similar problem except once when a post I was proofing posted while I was making changes. That could have been operator error since I had entered the captcha numbers in prior to proofing.
Anyway it has been much better since switching. Plus it doesn't lock up like IE did.
IE is yuk. It's useless and poopy.

“Why does my ignorance”

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#954 Jul 27, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
But you **can** use advanced search in Google, and put in the as the domain, the top-level forum you wish to search.
It works pretty well.
That's true.

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#955 Jul 28, 2013
CH2O2 wrote:
...This is a fundamental question to which I would like to have your answer. How does it affect you?....
Same sex marriage laws affect everyone, not just me. In Massachusetts, D.C. and Illinois, laws addressing the same agenda as same sex marriage have forced Catholic Charities out of the adoption service market. In Washington state and Colorado, those laws have led to suits against business people who don't want to provide services for same sex weddings. It creates wasteful government spending on a new class of same sex dependent beneficiaries, new intrusive government regulations and higher taxes for everyone.

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#956 Jul 28, 2013
River Tam wrote:
So, theoretically, you could marry all the women in the world, couldn't you? As long as you marry them one at a time, it's legal, right?
Are you for real?

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#957 Jul 28, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Are you for real?
Are you?

“Why does my ignorance”

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#958 Jul 28, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Same sex marriage laws affect everyone, not just me. In Massachusetts, D.C. and Illinois, laws addressing the same agenda as same sex marriage have forced Catholic Charities out of the adoption service market. In Washington state and Colorado, those laws have led to suits against business people who don't want to provide services for same sex weddings. It creates wasteful government spending on a new class of same sex dependent beneficiaries, new intrusive government regulations and higher taxes for everyone.
By your reasoning above, money spent on opposite sex dependent beneficiaries, old intrusive gov't regulations and higher taxes for everyone is wasteful and should be abolished.

Same sex marriages don't affect you. You just don't like them. That's pretty obvious.

And you don't really understand capitalism, since you're failing to see that marriages are economic units. Promoting them increases the economy. What gay couples save b/c of marriage, they spend into the economy, just like straight couples do.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#959 Jul 28, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
By your reasoning above, money spent on opposite sex dependent beneficiaries, old intrusive gov't regulations and higher taxes for everyone is wasteful and should be abolished.
Same sex marriages don't affect you. You just don't like them. That's pretty obvious.
And you don't really understand capitalism, since you're failing to see that marriages are economic units. Promoting them increases the economy. What gay couples save b/c of marriage, they spend into the economy, just like straight couples do.
Homo

Since: Jul 13

Lisbon, Portugal

#960 Jul 28, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
Same sex marriage laws affect everyone...
OK. Lets think about that.
Brian_G wrote:
Same sex marriage laws affect (...) not just me.
You are dodging the question. I asked HOW does same sex marriage affect you. So, how does it affect you?
Brian_G wrote:
In Massachusetts, D.C. and Illinois, laws addressing the same agenda as same sex marriage have forced Catholic Charities out of the adoption service market.
The fundamental issue about adoption is not the parents right to adopt, but the child's right to have a familly. If any adoption service is shown not to be acting in the child's best interest, it should be given the chance to change or be put out of business. A child, unlike an adult, is not capable of consent. A child can't choose for him/herself which adoption service will serve his/her best interests. That is why we have law, to give us the best protection possible. The law must put in first place the rights of the individual before the rights of any organization.
Brian_G wrote:
In Washington state and Colorado, those laws have led to suits against business people who don't want to provide services for same sex weddings.
Should a business be allowed to deny services for blacks? Should a business be allowed to deny services to down sindrome individuals? Should a business be allowed to deny services to divorced people?
These are not rethorical questions. I would really like to have your reply.
Brian_G wrote:
It creates wasteful government spending on a new class of same sex dependent beneficiaries
Really? Let's stop for a moment and think this trough. Heterosexuals pay taxes so that their dependent benefefiaries have the benefits. You seem to be fine with that. Same sex couples pay taxes too but they are denied the benefits. So, what you are really proposing is that same sex couples keep paying taxes for the exclusive benefit of heterosexuals. Do you get the problem yet?
Brian_G wrote:
new intrusive government regulations
Bullshit, pardon my french. Show me one single valid example.
Brian_G wrote:
and higher taxes for everyone.
Bulshit x 2.
Show me one single state or country (I live in one of those countries, by the way) where same sex marriage led to increased taxes.

“Why does my ignorance”

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#961 Jul 28, 2013
River Tam wrote:
<quoted text>
Homo
Homo-ette.

“What can I do to get the Topix”

Since: Jan 11

cops upset?

#962 Jul 28, 2013
River Tam wrote:
<quoted text>
So, theoretically, you could marry all the women in the world, couldn't you?
As long as you marry them one at a time, it's legal, right?
Whoa! Brian G and the rest of the fundamentalists want everyone to be heterosexual, but not TOO heterosexual.

“What can I do to get the Topix”

Since: Jan 11

cops upset?

#963 Jul 28, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Same sex marriage laws affect everyone, not just me. In Massachusetts, D.C. and Illinois, laws addressing the same agenda as same sex marriage have forced Catholic Charities out of the adoption service market. In Washington state and Colorado, those laws have led to suits against business people who don't want to provide services for same sex weddings. It creates wasteful government spending on a new class of same sex dependent beneficiaries, new intrusive government regulations and higher taxes for everyone.
Yes, the Civil War was wasteful government spending as well and the abolishing of slavery forced many businesses to seek new models and some even collapsed. We should probably vote to reinstate it and this time not make it so exclusive. Economic speculation is always a good reason to exclude people that scare us out of the rights they are being withheld. Right. Gotcha.

This is always where your argument leads. You are afraid the little gods living in your wallet are going to be offended. It is always your last stop on the "I want the world to be like me" train ride.

“What can I do to get the Topix”

Since: Jan 11

cops upset?

#964 Jul 28, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
IE is yuk. It's useless and poopy.
I have used similar words to describe it, yes.

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#965 Jul 28, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
By your reasoning above, money spent on opposite sex dependent beneficiaries, old intrusive gov't regulations and higher taxes for everyone is wasteful and should be abolished.
We can discuss entitlement reform if you like, then let's compromise on civil unions; everybody's happy.

.
Hidingfromyou wrote:
Same sex marriages don't affect you. You just don't like them. That's pretty obvious.
The issue isn't emotion, like and dislike; the issue is the greater good. Same sex marriage forces government to see husband and wife as if unisex, affecting all of society. Same sex marriage laws affect divorce, property and child custody laws; it's a fundamental change to the sex integration and affirmative action male/female marriage provides society.

Same sex marriage law affected , Barronelle Stutzman of Arlene’s Flowers, in Richland, Washington when she was sued by the State's AG. Same sex marriage supporters in the IRS leaked the National Organization for Marriage's 2008 Schedule B donors list to their political enemies, the HRC.

How does same sex marriage not affect everyone?

.
Hidingfromyou wrote:
And you don't really understand capitalism, since you're failing to see that marriages are economic units. Promoting them increases the economy. What gay couples save b/c of marriage, they spend into the economy, just like straight couples do.
Changing the nomenclature doesn't create wealth. You can call something a 'marriage' but that doesn't make it so.

“What can I do to get the Topix”

Since: Jan 11

cops upset?

#966 Jul 28, 2013
River Tam wrote:
<quoted text>
So, theoretically, you could marry all the women in the world, couldn't you?
As long as you marry them one at a time, it's legal, right?
You realize that just saying this causes thousands of divorce lawyers to salivate uncontrollably.

“What can I do to get the Topix”

Since: Jan 11

cops upset?

#967 Jul 28, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
By your reasoning above, money spent on opposite sex dependent beneficiaries, old intrusive gov't regulations and higher taxes for everyone is wasteful and should be abolished.
Same sex marriages don't affect you. You just don't like them. That's pretty obvious.
And you don't really understand capitalism, since you're failing to see that marriages are economic units. Promoting them increases the economy. What gay couples save b/c of marriage, they spend into the economy, just like straight couples do.
That pretty much sums up his position in my opinion. BG always lands on money and his fear that somehow he is footing the bill for the entire world. Fundamentalists have switched from the worship of God to that of the Bible and money. These issues trample all over his religious beliefs. Against a contradictory anthology of allegories and may cost him money.

Gay couples may even strengthen the institution of marriage. Look at the commitment expressed just to be allowed to exercise their own rights under fire from the opposition to do so.

“Why does my ignorance”

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#968 Jul 28, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>We can discuss entitlement reform if you like, then let's compromise on civil unions; everybody's happy.
If everyone is having civil unions, hetero's, homo's and bis, ok, no worries. It's silly, immoral and immature to classify one sexuality's civil union as marriage and not another's.
The issue isn't emotion, like and dislike; the issue is the greater good.
Yeah, I don't believe you.
Same sex marriage forces government to see husband and wife as if unisex, affecting all of society. Same sex marriage laws affect divorce, property and child custody laws; it's a fundamental change to the sex integration and affirmative action male/female marriage provides society.
No worries, allowing same sex marriage would boost the economy.
Same sex marriage law affected , Barronelle Stutzman of Arlene’s Flowers, in Richland, Washington when she was sued by the State's AG. Same sex marriage supporters in the IRS leaked the National Organization for Marriage's 2008 Schedule B donors list to their political enemies, the HRC.
How does same sex marriage not affect everyone?
No idea, not familiar with the case or why it's relevant. Lots of heteros get divorced, sue each other, have dependents, whatever. Marriage itself still increases the economy.
Changing the nomenclature doesn't create wealth. You can call something a 'marriage' but that doesn't make it so.
This is why, for you, it's an emotional thing. You, against all reason, believe that marriage is relegated to only opposite sex couples. You're mistaken.

I'm an anthropologist - my discipline is all about human culture. The definition of marriage, in anthropology, is inclusive. Cross culturally, as a human universal, marriage is defined by one or more of these six cateogries:

1. Establishes (Est.) the legal father of a woman’s children and the legal mother of a man’s
2. Give either or both spouses (GEOBS) a monopoly on the sexuality of the other
3. GEOBS rights to the labor of the other
4. GEOBS rights over the other’s property
5. Est. a joint fund of property – a partnership – for the benefit of the children
6. Est. a socially significant “relationship of affinity” between spouses and their relatives

Worldwide, cultures allow for the marriage of same sex couples in all kinds of different situations - some b/c genders are defined differently (males can be 'manly women,' females can be 'womanly men' in addition to the usual man/women), some as surrogates for the opposite sex husband/wife, some just as is - men-men, women-women.

So you can only be getting your definition of marriage from a culturally bound, probably specific religious view. Sorry, but that's not a human universal. Marriage isn't defined by your particular religion or your particular culture; marriage is a universal among human cultures.

If you believe your culture to be an enlightened one, then you have to move beyond societal prejudice. If you cannot do that, you're simply spouting yet another culturally bound discriminatory ideal, aimed at producing a "normal" majority though shared, imagined ideas of legitimacy based on marginalizing and restricting the lives the few.

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.

Gay/Lesbian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
What Makes a Man Want a Pen!s Up His Ass? 4 min NE Jade 8
Sex education 'failing millions' 5 min david traversa 11
Homosexuality and the Bible (Aug '11) 5 min Cali Girl 2014 29,118
Martin Luther King Jr. Would Have Opposed Gay M... 6 min fedupwiththemess 52
Is Polygamy the Next Gay Marriage? 7 min Reverend Alan 4,893
Judge Roy Moore Speaks About Alabama Gay Marriage 7 min TomInElPaso 39
Fox's 'Empire' Addresses LGBT Issues In The Bla... 8 min Bruce 2
Man takes legal action after Denver baker refus... 9 min Reverend Alan 543
Gay marriage (Mar '13) 12 min gjest 57,166
Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake (Jun '13) 18 min Rick in Kansas 8,557
Victim testifies at Boy Scout sex trial about m... 2 hr Freedom Rings 87
The gay cafe for GLBT, friends and family (Oct '09) 10 hr Cali Girl 2014 68,730
More from around the web