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.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#3412 Nov 2, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>True, same sex marriage means sex segregation marriage; discrimination based on gender. One man and one woman marriage is sex integration, without prejudice or discrimination, with a perfect 1:1 affirmative action ratio for diversity.
Same sex marriage is unconstitutional because it institutionalizes sex discrimination in marriage.
Sorry Brian. If you get to marry a women, so do I.

You don't get special rights.

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#3413 Nov 2, 2013
River Tam wrote:
Sorry Brian. If you get to marry a women, so do I. You don't get special rights.
Many gays have married under the same laws as everyone else so same sex marriage is the special right to discriminate and voluntarily segregate marriage into male/male or female/female. Before the 21st century, all marriage contained husband and wife; same sex marriage is sex segregation, disunity and separatism; people prefer diversity and integration.

Every gay was born of male/female union.

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#3414 Nov 2, 2013
-Skeptic- wrote:
Creationism is no excuse to be sharing your ignorant halfwitted opinions about gay marriage, Brian. Stop being a coward and admit its why you believe what you do.
The only person discussing creationism on this thread is -Skeptic-; I've never used it to justify keeping marriage one man and one woman.

-Skeptic-, don't you get it? I'm not interested in discussing creationism!

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#3415 Nov 2, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Many gays have married under the same laws as everyone else so same sex marriage is the special right to discriminate and voluntarily segregate marriage into male/male or female/female. Before the 21st century, all marriage contained husband and wife; same sex marriage is sex segregation, disunity and separatism; people prefer diversity and integration.
Every gay was born of male/female union.
Creationism is no excuse to stop gays getting married, Brian. Just accept your 2005 neocon cult has faded into permanent obscurity.

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#3416 Nov 2, 2013
Wolfgang E B wrote:
Protecting it from what?
From sex segregation marriage; integration and diversity is better than separatism even when voluntary.

.
Wolfgang E B wrote:
Your choice of words makes little sense. No one is trying to outlaw mixed-sex marriage.
I never claimed anyone "is trying to outlaw mixed-sex marriage." Wolf wrote that, not me.

What do you think about Christians sued for not supporting and attending same sex wedding ceremonies? Doesn't that prove all the intolerance comes from the left?

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#3417 Nov 2, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>From sex segregation marriage; integration and diversity is better than separatism even when voluntary.
.
<quoted text>I never claimed anyone "is trying to outlaw mixed-sex marriage." Wolf wrote that, not me.
What do you think about Christians sued for not supporting and attending same sex wedding ceremonies? Doesn't that prove all the intolerance comes from the left?
Creationism is no excuse to share your halfwitted theistic opinions about a society you are out of touch with, Brain.

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#3418 Nov 2, 2013
-Skeptic- wrote:
Creationism is no excuse to stop gays getting married, Brian. Just accept your 2005 neocon cult has faded into permanent obscurity.
Can't you read? I wrote gays have always been allowed to marry under the same laws as everyone else. The issue isn't freedom or creationism; the issue is rewriting laws for everyone to establish sex segregated marriage.

BTW, here's what Biden and Obama said in 2007:
http://www.clipsandcomment.com/2008/08/17/ful...
WARREN: There’s a lot more I’d like to ask on that. We have 15 other questions here. Define marriage.
OBAMA: I believe that marriage is the union between a man and a woman. Now, for me as a Christian — for me — for me as a Christian, it is also a sacred union. God’s in the mix. But –
WARREN: Would you support a Constitutional Amendment with that definition?
OBAMA: No, I would not.
WARREN: Why not?
OBAMA: Because historically — because historically, we have not defined marriage in our constitution. It’s been a matter of state law. That has been our tradition. I mean, let’s break it down. The reason that people think there needs to be a constitutional amendment, some people believe, is because of the concern that — about same-sex marriage. I am not somebody who promotes same-sex marriage, but I do believe in civil unions. I do believe that we should not — that for gay partners to want to visit each other in the hospital for the state to say, you know what, that’s all right, I don’t think in any way inhibits my core beliefs about what marriage are. I think my faith is strong enough and my marriage is strong enough that I can afford those civil rights to others, even if I have a different perspective or different view.

http://www.equalitygiving.org/Joe-Biden-on-th...
Joe Biden Quotes on Same Sex Marriage: "I think government should not be able to dictate to religions the definition of marriage, but on a civil side, government has the obligation to strip away every vestige of discrimination as to what individuals are able to do in terms of their personal conduct."
Source: Meet the Press: 2007 "Meet the Candidates" series Apr 29, 2007



http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/02/de...
IFILL: Let's try to avoid nuance, Senator. Do you support gay marriage?

BIDEN: No. Barack Obama nor I support redefining from a civil side what constitutes marriage. We do not support that. That is basically the decision to be able to be able to be left to faiths and people who practice their faiths the determination what you call it.

The bottom line though is, and I'm glad to hear the governor, I take her at her word, obviously, that she think there should be no civil rights distinction, none whatsoever, between a committed gay couple and a committed heterosexual couple. If that's the case, we really don't have a difference.

IFILL: Is that what your said?

PALIN: Your question to him was whether he supported gay marriage and my answer is the same as his and it is that I do not.

IFILL: Wonderful. You agree. On that note, let's move to foreign policy.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#3419 Nov 2, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>I've never used it to justify keeping marriage one man and one woman.
Creationism is your only justification for hating gays Brian, you are fooling nobody.

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#3420 Nov 2, 2013
No-Doubt wrote:
Homosexual is bad...
I disagree, there's nothing wrong with homosexuals or homosexuality.

Many gays defend marriage as one man and one woman, don't let prejudice beat logic.

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#3421 Nov 2, 2013
-Skeptic- wrote:
Creationism is your only justification for hating gays Brian, you are fooling nobody.
The hate comes from -Skeptic-; every gay was born of male/female union. There's nothing wrong with homosexuals or homosexuality; the problem is -Skeptic-'s creationist rants and untruths, not gays.

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#3422 Nov 2, 2013
BTW, I've got a list of reasons to keep marriage one man and one woman, creationism isn't on it. I've made thousands of posts on this subject and none of them use creationism as a justification for keeping marriage male/female.

Same sex marriage creates a new entitlement for same sex dependent beneficiaries. We're already in massive debt, we can't afford more wasteful government spending. Reason six for keeping marriage one man and one woman: entitlement spending.

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#3423 Nov 2, 2013
-Skeptic- wrote:
Creationism is your only justification for hating gays Brian, you are fooling nobody.
Reason Seven for keeping marriage one man and one woman: intrusive government regulations. Same sex marriage creates new laws around marriage causing Christian wedding vendors to be sued for turning down same sex wedding gigs and forces government to see marriage as if husbands and wives are unisex. Same sex marriage regulates marriage to accept sex segregation, separatism, disunity and gender apartheid.

The only person discussing -Creationism- is Skeptic. Note how he ignores the real arguments in favor of his pet strawman argument. I guess, when you can't logically discuss the issue all you can do is distract from the issue.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#3424 Nov 2, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Many gays have married under the same laws as everyone else so same sex marriage is the special right to discriminate and voluntarily segregate marriage into male/male or female/female. Before the 21st century, all marriage contained husband and wife; same sex marriage is sex segregation, disunity and separatism; people prefer diversity and integration.
Every gay was born of male/female union.
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>
Every gay was born of male/female union.
So was every homophobe so don't feel special.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#3425 Nov 2, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
BTW, I've got a list of reasons to keep marriage one man and one woman, creationism isn't on it. I've made thousands of posts on this subject and none of them use creationism as a justification for keeping marriage male/female.
Same sex marriage creates a new entitlement for same sex dependent beneficiaries. We're already in massive debt, we can't afford more wasteful government spending. Reason six for keeping marriage one man and one woman: entitlement spending.
Brian_G wrote:
BTW, I've got a list of reasons to keep marriage one man and one woman, creationism isn't on it. I've made thousands of posts on this subject and none of them use creationism as a justification for keeping marriage male/female.
So far none of them are rational.

Are you going to keep tilting at the windmills?

lides

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#3426 Nov 2, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
BTW, I've got a list of reasons to keep marriage one man and one woman, creationism isn't on it. I've made thousands of posts on this subject and none of them use creationism as a justification for keeping marriage male/female.
Do you know what else is missing from those thousands of posts? A compelling governmental interest served by denying same sex couples equal protection of the law to marry that would render such a restriction constitutional.
Wow, you are dumb.
Brian_G wrote:
Same sex marriage creates a new entitlement for same sex dependent beneficiaries. We're already in massive debt, we can't afford more wasteful government spending. Reason six for keeping marriage one man and one woman: entitlement spending.
No, it simply seeks equal protection of the law.
Wow, you are dumb.

Employing your argument, if marriage is such a debt maker, we should just do away with it all together. Does that seem rational? You are an idiot, Brian. You can't even offer a basic reason to deny equal protection. Can you offer any reason why your argument isn't irrational, bigoted, and stupid?

Since: Apr 09

Location hidden

#3427 Nov 2, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>I disagree, there's nothing wrong with homosexuals or homosexuality.
Many gays defend marriage as one man and one woman, don't let prejudice beat logic.
Oh, poor, sad Brian.

Define "many"

Go.

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

#3428 Nov 2, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Can't you read? I wrote gays have always been allowed to marry under the same laws as everyone else. The issue isn't freedom or creationism; the issue is rewriting laws for everyone to establish sex segregated marriage.
Tell ya what: When same-sex marriage is approved nation-wide -- and it will, eventually -- Heterosexuals can finally marry the person of their dreams, regardless their gender.

You can finally marry the man of your dreams.

Deal?
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>BTW, here's what Biden and Obama said in 2007:
Do you forget what he's said since?

(Hint: He's changed his mind.)

Since: Apr 09

Location hidden

#3429 Nov 2, 2013
Kong_ wrote:
<quoted text>
Tell ya what: When same-sex marriage is approved nation-wide -- and it will, eventually -- Heterosexuals can finally marry the person of their dreams, regardless their gender.
You can finally marry the man of your dreams.
Deal?
<quoted text>
Do you forget what he's said since?
(Hint: He's changed his mind.)
People don't change their minds in Brian's world - that would require thinking.

Brian hates it when people think.

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#3430 Nov 2, 2013
What's to stop them from changing their minds agains, if the political winds shift?

Same sex marriage is like politicians promises.

“From a distance...”

Since: Apr 08

Planet Earth

#3431 Nov 2, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>True, same sex marriage means sex segregation marriage; discrimination based on gender.
Voluntary segregation isn't unconstitutional, Brian.
Brian_G wrote:
One man and one woman marriage is sex integration, without prejudice or discrimination, with a perfect 1:1 affirmative action ratio for diversity.
Except when it's not interracial. And except when it's not interfaith.

So your assertion is we should be thankful you're only prejudiced against sexual orientation and not race or religion. Got it.
Brian_G wrote:
Same sex marriage is unconstitutional because it institutionalizes sex discrimination in marriage.
The state doesn't mandate all marriages participants be s=of the same sex, Brian. It's not unconstitutional when it's a voluntary choice made by individuals freely exercising their fundamental right of marriage. Which is why a marriage consisting of two whites or two blacks or two Christians isn't unconstitutional because the state doesn't mandate it.

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) 27 min Samuel Patre 94,391
News Why Atheist Richard Dawkins Supports Religious ... (Jun '17) 42 min Prince of Darkness 6,001
a prayer of salvation for those who are willing (Oct '17) 1 hr Eagle 12 - 147
News Geoff Robson is wrong about Richard Dawkins, th... 1 hr Eagle 12 - 12
News Christ, Atheism, Quantum Physics, and the Natur... Thu nanoanomaly 1
News Egyptian Parliament considers outlawing atheism May 21 Guest 6
Stephen Hawking, now a believer May 8 superwilly 20