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.

Buck Crick

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#3615 Nov 6, 2013
Rose_NoHo wrote:
<quoted text>
Persons.
Woman walks up to JP, "Can I marry a man?"
JP, "Yes".
Man walks up to the same JP, "Can I marry a man?"
JP, "No".
Were the woman and man treated equally?
Please take your time.
Yes.

The law considers men and women equal.

If you wish to argue a case to a court that men and women should not be considered equal, knock yourself out, Blowhole.

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

#3616 Nov 6, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Show us where the Supreme Court says there is a fundamental right to marriage.
Then cite the clause in the Constitution.
Specifically to marriage? Not that I could find. But there is this:

"By striking down Section 3 of DOMA, the court cleared the way for legally married couples to claim more than 1,100 federal benefits, rights and burdens linked to marriage status.

Kennedy wrote for the majority that the federal law, as passed by Congress, violated the U.S. Constitution's guarantee of equal protection. "The federal statute [DOMA] is invalid, for no legitimate purpose overcomes the purpose and effect to disparage and to injure those whom the state, by its marriage laws, sought to protect in personhood and dignity," Kennedy wrote.

The law imposed "a stigma upon all who enter into same-sex marriages made lawful by the unquestioned authority of the states," he said."

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/06/26/us-...

Buck Crick

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#3617 Nov 6, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you think your rights are only those that you find in the Constitution?
The only rights protected by the United States government are those in the Constitution.

So if that is what you are asking, Yes.

What other constitutional rights do you think you have other than those in the Constitution?

Where did you find them - in the shorts of one of those fat lesbian justices Obamasama appointed?

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#3618 Nov 6, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
The only rights protected by the United States government are those in the Constitution.
So if that is what you are asking, Yes.
What other constitutional rights do you think you have other than those in the Constitution?
Where did you find them - in the shorts of one of those fat lesbian justices Obamasama appointed?
Thanks for dodging the question.

That is as good as an admission that you were wrong.

Buck Crick

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#3619 Nov 6, 2013
Kong_ wrote:
<quoted text>
Specifically to marriage? Not that I could find. But there is this:
"By striking down Section 3 of DOMA, the court cleared the way for legally married couples to claim more than 1,100 federal benefits, rights and burdens linked to marriage status.
Kennedy wrote for the majority that the federal law, as passed by Congress, violated the U.S. Constitution's guarantee of equal protection. "The federal statute [DOMA] is invalid, for no legitimate purpose overcomes the purpose and effect to disparage and to injure those whom the state, by its marriage laws, sought to protect in personhood and dignity," Kennedy wrote.
The law imposed "a stigma upon all who enter into same-sex marriages made lawful by the unquestioned authority of the states," he said."
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/06/26/us-...
That opinion by Kennedy was the dumbest ever written in our lifetimes.

Still, as dumb and dishonest as Kennedy is, he did not claim a "fundamental right to marriage".

I guess we could say he claimed a fundamental right not to be stigmatized.

He must have been relying on the Stigmatization Amendment to the Constitution.

I'm sure we've all seen that one.

Since: Apr 11

Panorama City, CA

#3620 Nov 6, 2013
Lucas wrote:
<quoted text>
How's it hanging big d!ck?
For those who don't know, "Lucas" is a sorry loser who follows me from forum to forum, posting the same thing. He changes names and proxy servers, sometimes several times an hour. And he's so stupid, he thinks that if I were a man, I'd consider "You're well hung" to be an insult. Perhaps one day he'll really twist the knife with, "And you're rich and good looking!" He should have our sympathy.

Since: Apr 11

Panorama City, CA

#3621 Nov 6, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Show us where the Supreme Court says there is a fundamental right to marriage.
Then cite the clause in the Constitution.
Loving v VA.
The Supreme Court's word is law.
And just as important, the Constitution says we should have equal protection under the law. And that includes marriage laws.

Since: Apr 11

Panorama City, CA

#3622 Nov 6, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Wrong, Blowhole.
Equal protection under the law and equal protection of the law are not the same thing. One implies laws that protect, the other implies a system of laws which are applied equally.
You just made that up.
Buck Crick wrote:
The 14th is an amendment arising to address the aftermath of slavery, and designed to protect rights of freed slaves in various states. No contemplation of anything like homosexuality and marriage was contained, and if it had been, it would not have passed the ratification process.
Zzzz...
oh, oh,
Here's what it actually says:
"nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

I'm guessing that means no state is allowed to deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Buck Crick wrote:
Prohibiting same-sex marriage is consistent with equal protection. Gays can't do it; straights can't do it.
Men and women aren't treated equally. A man can marry a woman, but a woman can't.
A woman can marry a man, but a man can't.
Buck Crick wrote:
Your objection to the equality of the current situation by use of the "a woman can't marry a woman, a man can, so not equal" is equally stupid now as it was when Dude said it. To repeat, your case is defeated by equality itself - men and women being equal under the law, the law recognizes no advantage to marrying one or the other. I will not address this stupid objection again.
Stupid, there is a big advantage to marrying one or the other if you are attracted to one, but not the other.
Of course you won't address this again.
You're wrong.

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

#3623 Nov 6, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
That opinion by Kennedy was the dumbest ever written in our lifetimes.
Still, as dumb and dishonest as Kennedy is, he did not claim a "fundamental right to marriage".
I guess we could say he claimed a fundamental right not to be stigmatized.
He must have been relying on the Stigmatization Amendment to the Constitution.
I'm sure we've all seen that one.
Well, that would be your profoundly ignorant opinion now, wouldn't it?

My PERSONAL opinion for the stupidest SCOTUS ruling is the "Corporations are people" ruling.

But again, that's just MY opinion -- hopefully that SCOTUS decision will be overturned soon.

Since: Apr 11

Panorama City, CA

#3624 Nov 6, 2013
Still, not one rational argument against gay marriage.
Jumper The Wise

Morgantown, KY

#3625 Nov 6, 2013
Rose_NoHo wrote:
<quoted text>
How can an adult believe in hell?
Hey, show us some evidence hell exists...
Try signing up for Obama care!

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#3626 Nov 6, 2013
Rose_NoHo wrote:
Still, not one rational argument against gay marriage.
How about if gay people get married they will have gay babies.

Just like when old people get married. We are so lucky that babies look old anyway.

Hmm, I wonder if babies look gay anyway?

“Do not bend, fold, staple or”

Since: Jan 11

mutilate. Point down range.

#3627 Nov 6, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Show us where the Supreme Court says there is a fundamental right to marriage.
Then cite the clause in the Constitution.
Show me where the Constitution and the Supreme Court say we can have an Air Force.

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#3628 Nov 6, 2013
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>Show me where the Constitution and the Supreme Court say we can have an Air Force.
Seriously that is covered by section 8.

One thing that I find a bit strange is that conservatives usually like it when the Supreme Court increases the freedoms that we have. Here is one case where many of them are opposed to increased freedom. Perhaps a bit of hypocrisy there. By the way, I am fairly conservative. Except lately it seems the Republican Party has abandoned me. I have not abandoned the party, yet.
Julie

United States

#3629 Nov 6, 2013
Jumper The Wise wrote:
If all 'queers?' are in hell,then would not it be a heaven of sorts to them?
Straight to hEll phaGG, continue to make excuses for your crude & deviant behavior.

Since: Apr 11

Panorama City, CA

#3630 Nov 6, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:

Show us where the Supreme Court says there is a fundamental right to marriage.
Then cite the clause in the Constitution.
Show us where in the Constitution it says we have a "right to own a gun". And remember, just like with the "right to privacy", only exact words count.
Julie

United States

#3631 Nov 6, 2013
PhAGGs experience difficulty holding their own stool after years of disgusting male on male action. Too much drilling. Gross.

Since: Apr 11

Panorama City, CA

#3632 Nov 6, 2013
Julie wrote:
PhAGGs experience difficulty holding their own stool after years of disgusting male on male action. Too much drilling. Gross.
Most people into anal sex are straight.
Pierre

France

#3633 Nov 6, 2013
Julie wrote:
PhAGGs experience difficulty holding their own stool after years of disgusting male on male action. Too much drilling. Gross.
They have to wear butt plugs to keep their sh!t from leaking out.

Homosexuality is disgusting.
Pierre

France

#3634 Nov 6, 2013
Julie wrote:
PhAGGs experience difficulty holding their own stool after years of disgusting male on male action. Too much drilling. Gross.
Many [email protected] asses get so stretched out from getting d!cked that eventually they can't even feel a d!ck so they need to get fisted to get any kind of thrill out of it. Sick, nasty ass freaks.

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) 4 min Dogen 81,599
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 45 min Eagle 12 - 33,012
News Why Atheist Richard Dawkins Supports Religious ... 4 hr Eagle 12 - 2,191
Science Disproves Evolution (Aug '12) Wed Eagle 12 - 3,978
News Atheist inmate wins right to practice his faith... (Aug '15) Oct 11 old_moose 233
News People's forum - Get off the fence of religious... (May '10) Oct 10 blacklagoon 3 94
Deconversion (Feb '17) Oct 10 Eagle 12 - 145
More from around the web