Atheism and homosexuality

There are 20 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.

Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#2984 Oct 20, 2013
lides wrote:
"One's right to life, liberty, and property, to free speech, a free press, freedom of worship and assembly, and other fundamental rights may not be submitted to vote
Can you explain the 5/4 VOTE to strike down part 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act then?

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#2985 Oct 20, 2013
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
They are winning in the courts because it's politically correct to yield to the pressure of gay activists and advocates. There is no other reason.
False.

They are winning because of Human Rights.

You ugly True Believers™ are losing your ability to persecute people you do not approve of.

And that is a GOOD thing.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#2986 Oct 20, 2013
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
Can you explain the 5/4 VOTE to strike down part 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act then?
Because ReThuglicans are the party of GREED.

The ReThugs in Washington are all millionaires, and they are all about GREED.

In direct contrast to the teachings of Jesus, who said to FEED the poor, the HEAL the sick, to give SHELTER to the homeless.

But the ReThugs would take all that away-- and more, if they could.

That is why.

The Affordable Care Act is actually trying to follow Jesus commandment to HEAL the sick.

Ironic, ain't it?

“In God we trust”

Since: Dec 12

Cape Town, South Africa

#2987 Oct 20, 2013
Oooooh! Homosexuality topic. Let's see, to start off with my comment, you can't be born with it.

Since: Apr 09

Location hidden

#2988 Oct 20, 2013
Carchar king wrote:
Oooooh! Homosexuality topic. Let's see, to start off with my comment, you can't be born with it.
Actually, its atheism and homosexuality, but I guess everyone focuses on what is important to them...

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#2989 Oct 20, 2013
Quest wrote:
But you want MORE government regulation of marriage,only as long as it agrees with your personal beliefs.
As long as one man and one woman marriage is protected; that's always been the primary form of marriage. Our Constitution has no right to change preexisting marriage law or common practice, that would be ex post facto prohibited by the Constitution.

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#2990 Oct 20, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
As long as one man and one woman marriage is protected; that's always been the primary form of marriage. Our Constitution has no right to change preexisting marriage law or common practice, that would be ex post facto prohibited by the Constitution.
Our constitution requires states to provide equal protection of the laws to all persons within their jurisdiction.

You've yet to offer any state interest served by limiting marriage to opposite sex couples that would render such a restriction constitutional, or for that matter illustrate that you have even marginal intelligence.

The, it's always been that way argument was the same one offered by those who opposed ending slavery, opposed women's right to vote, opposed integration, and opposed interracial marriage.

You see Brian, your argument that it has always been that way, doesn't have a very good track record.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#2991 Oct 20, 2013
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
They are winning in the courts because it's politically correct to yield to the pressure of gay activists and advocates. There is no other reason.
Perhaps your god should intervene. You should email him.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#2992 Oct 20, 2013
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
Can you explain the 5/4 VOTE to strike down part 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act then?
That's simple. There are 5 smart people and 4 fundies.

Any other questions?

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#2993 Oct 20, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>As long as one man and one woman marriage is protected; that's always been the primary form of marriage. Our Constitution has no right to change preexisting marriage law or common practice, that would be ex post facto prohibited by the Constitution.
Let's just take it back to cave man days and go by those laws since those were the first ones made..... Oh wait... They didn't have any!!!!! Should be go back that far and just say screw it??? lol

By the way... laws change and that's a good thing, and your personal decisions to be racist and bigoted does not make that any different.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#2994 Oct 20, 2013
River Tam wrote:
<quoted text>
Perhaps your god should intervene. You should email him.
Silly. Gods do not use e-mail

You have to send a fax. With money attached...

... <grin>

Since: Apr 11

Santa Monica, CA

#2995 Oct 20, 2013
nanoanomaly wrote:
<quoted text>Homosexuality IS in the title of the thread, whackjob.
And you weren't forced to click on the title. You did that because you wanted to read and talk about men having sex with each other.

Since: Apr 11

Santa Monica, CA

#2996 Oct 20, 2013
nanoanomaly wrote:
<quoted text>So you have video access to "most" straight men's sexual encounters?
You make some pretty stupid claims, rosey the riveter.
Stupid, I didn't say anything about what most straight men do for sex.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#2997 Oct 20, 2013
River Tam wrote:
<quoted text>
That's simple. There are 5 smart people and 4 fundies.
Any other questions?
Brilliantly put.

:)

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#2998 Oct 20, 2013
Rose_NoHo wrote:
<quoted text>
And you weren't forced to click on the title. You did that because you wanted to read and talk about men having sex with each other.
Nano is quite jealous of anyone with a real relationship.

It's kinda sad to witness.

Since: Apr 11

Santa Monica, CA

#2999 Oct 20, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Their businesses predate same sex marriage; they never consented to attend a same sex wedding ceremony.
Again, you idiot, attendance isn't the issue. Providing a commercial service is.
Brian_G wrote:
They are discriminating against an event, such as a Jewish photographer turning down a KKK rally gig.
Lame analogy. If for no other reason a Jewish person would have good reason to fear for their lives at a KKK rally.
Personally, I'd LOVE to be the photographer at a KKK rally...
;)
Brian_G wrote:
Those Christians have a right to celebrate marriage as one man and one woman, not same sex marriage.
Yeah, they do idiot, but nobody is paying them to celebrate $$$$. They are being asked to provide a commercial service.
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>That's not what happened here; these Christians were selected and prosecuted without a jury of their peers.
Oh, boo hoo. I believe that's typical for civil charges. Do you think they should have been brought up on criminal charges instead?
Brian_G_is_an_idiot wrote:
<quoted text>There's too much government regulation in the markets. Freedom and tolerance is better than PC codes, fines, litigation and court ordered same sex marriage law.
LOL. Love the way bigots like you misuse the word "tolerance".

Since: Apr 11

Santa Monica, CA

#3000 Oct 20, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
They can't win what they want in legislatures or at the polls so they sue and use courts to overturn legitimate elections.
That's one of the reasons we have courts in the first place.
Brian_G wrote:
In Egypt they use the Army, in the USA the left uses the courts.
There are methods for dealing with corrupt courts. The issue is justice, not revenge.
Equal protection under the law IS justice, you cupid stunt.

Since: Apr 11

Santa Monica, CA

#3001 Oct 20, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Nano is quite jealous of anyone with a real relationship.
It's kinda sad to witness.
Downright pathetic.

Since: Apr 11

Santa Monica, CA

#3002 Oct 20, 2013
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
They are winning in the courts because it's politically correct to yield to the pressure of gay activists and advocates. There is no other reason.
What about the 14th Amendment and equal protection?

Since: Apr 11

Santa Monica, CA

#3003 Oct 20, 2013
Carchar king wrote:
Oooooh! Homosexuality topic. Let's see, to start off with my comment, you can't be born with it.
So, you came to the forum hoping to become homosexual?

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.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 7 min emrenil 18,898
News .com | What hope is there without God? 20 min Cujo 5
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 22 min New Age Spiritual... 238,451
Science Disproves Evolution (Aug '12) 2 hr Thinking 2,104
News Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 3 hr ChristineM 6,713
News Why Atheism Will Replace Religion (Aug '12) 16 hr spellmeout 14,657
News Confessions of a black atheist 20 hr thetruth 478
More from around the web