PDA

View Full Version : Let's here it for the atheists


ladyinred
11-09-2006, 02:10 AM
you all would be so proud of some of the atheists on the copper forums standing up for gay rights.Also note that many of these postings are responses to the religious rights attack.(Watch the dialogue)(Also note many of these people are straight)
Look at what shersher wrote:The people here who support same sex marriage have stated the reasons for their support. Why would you choose to believe that their reasons are something other than what they have said? Do you think they’re all a bunch of liars? Or is it that you just can’t comprehend that not everyone thinks and believes as you do?

It’s unbelievably ignorant of you to say that parents who are accepting of their gay children don’t REALLY love them. If you REALLY love your children, you accept them for who they are - even if they are not exact little replicas of you.

-----------------
Sherry
Henirietta wrote:Civil rights demand equality for all.
To withhold rights from one group that are allowed to all other citizens is the worst form of discrimination.

The more we have discovered about brain chemistry, hormonal influences on behavior and genetics in general, the more we know that people have no choice over what kind of body they inhabit during life. We are born into a physical system that is composed of many elements.
No one was given the choice of whether or not to be born into a female or male body. We do not choose our birth parents, nor our ethnic identity. The composition of a human being is determined by factors that are beyond anyone’s control of choice. Each of must do the best with the physical structure that we inhabit.

Heterosexual people are born to be heterosexual, Homosexual people are born to be homosexual. Bisexual people are born to be bisexual. Transexual people are born to be transexual. The attempt to legislate conditions that are inborn is doomed to failure. Fear and persecution can control and inhibit behavior to a certain degree. But to expect people to change sexual orientation is just as realistic as expecting someone to change their racial identity, or for someone who was born without arms to choose to grow new arms and become the same as everyone else.
Shersher:Exactly what are we supposed to be protecting children from by limiting marriage to heterosexual couples?


12 Reasons (why homosexual marriage is "bad" and why gay people should not be allowed to get married)


Homosexuality is not natural, much like eyeglasses, polyester, and birth control are not natural.
Heterosexual marriages are valid because they produce children. Infertile couples and old people cannot get legally married because the world needs more children.
Obviously, gay parents will raise gay children because straight parents only raise straight children.
Straight marriage will be less meaningful, since Britney Spears’s 55-hour just-for-fun marriage was meaningful.
Heterosexual marriage has been around for a long time, and it hasn’t changed at all: women are property, Blacks can’t marry Whites, and divorce is illegal.
Gay marriage should be decided by the people, not the courts, because the majority-elected legislatures, not courts, have historically protected the rights of minorities.
Gay marriage is not supported by religion. In a theocracy like ours, the values of one religion are always imposed on the entire country. That’s why we only have one religion in America.
Gay marriage will encourage people to be gay, in the same way that hanging around tall people makes you tall.
Legalizing gay marriage will open the door to all kinds of crazy behavior. People may even wish to marry their pets because a dog has legal standing and can sign a marriage license.
Children can never succeed without both male and female role models at home. That’s why single parents are forbidden to raise children.
Gay marriage will change the foundation of society. Heterosexual marriage has been around for a long time, and we could never adapt to new social norms because we haven’t adapted to cars or longer lifespans.
Civil unions, providing most of the same benefits as marriage with a different name are better, because a "separate but equal" institution is always constitutional. Separate schools for African-Americans worked just as well as separate marriages will for gays & lesbians.
"Promoting hatred and bigotry in the name of God is what destroys society, not the marriage of two loving people of the same gender." Raymond Miller

Freethinker,
First, let us make it clear - it is not "gay rights". It is "equal rights for gays". There is a huge difference!
Committed homosexual couples get nothing! Heterosexual (straight) couples who marry get from the federal government: Access to Social Security after spouse’s death, access to health insurance through spouse’s workplace, the right of custody of children after divorce, visitation rights for non-biological children, joint parenting rights, such as access to children’s school records, bereavement leave after death of a spouse, burial determination after the death of a spouse, domestic violence intervention, sick leave to care for spouse or non-biological child, legal validation of a long-term relationship, ability to live in neighborhoods deemed "families only", access to life insurance in spouse’s workplace, access to survivor’s benefits in case of emergency, access to spouse’s crime victims’ recovery benefits, ability to file wrongful death claims, right to shared property, child support, and alimony after divorce, ability to file joint home and auto insurance policies, joint rental leases with automatic renewal rights if spouse dies or leaves, access to adopting children, automatic inheritance of shared assets after spouses death, automatic inheritance of retirement savings tax-free after spouses death, automatic exemption of property tax increases on shared assets gained after spouse’s death, ability to file joint tax returns, access to tax breaks for married couples, veterans discounts based on spouse’s armed forces status, assumption of spouse’s pension after death, ability to file joint bankruptcy, ability to collect unemployment compensation benefits after leaving a job to relocate because of spouse’s job move, ability to transfer property from one spouse to another without transfer tax consequences, access to fostering children, automatic next-of-kin status for emergency medical decisions and hospital visitation status,, immigration and residency priority for spouses from other countries, ability to invoke spousal privilege in a court of law, access to reduced rate memberships at health clubs, social clubs, organizations, prison visitation rights.
All of these rights are reserved solely for unions of one man and one woman. Again, same gender couples get nothing! This is the firm position of corporations and businesses everywhere who do not wish to provide equal benefits to gay couples as they give to straight couples. GET IT?

Flatlandogs:It’s a shame that many don’t have respect for others’ differences. Remember when the targets were black?

Flatlandogs:Well first John, I’m not black, nor am I gay. I’ve been married, I have three grown daughters nine grandchildren and one great-granddaughter. At the moment I’m just seeing what it’s like to be alone for the first time in my entire life. It’s interesting. My remote is my own, but when I lose it I can’t blame anyone else except maybe the cats, but it’s too heavy for them to pick it up with their paws.

My comments were aimed at those who gloat at the judgement. They seem to think that heterosexuals are superior and that only they should have the right to marriage.

The irony is that most marriages end up in divorce so how sacred can it be for the marriages that are one man and one woman?

Marriages are legal partnerships, if you doubt me try going through a divorce sometime.

Shersher: radio, are you serious? I can’t believe you actually attempted to rebut the 12 Reasons! The list is sarcastic. I don’t see how anyone could take the list seriously! It shows how ludicrous the arguments against gay marriage really are, by explicitly stating the arguments... and letting the obvious conclusions from these arguments follow, which are clearly not accurate.




Quote: Originally posted by radioengineer on 06 July 2006
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Its not rights, or superiority, but Morals (or the lack of them.)

In your biased opinion.

Any one has the right to object to unacceptable behavior, when it effects, what we are bombarded with, day and night.

Yes, even people who object to your unacceptable behavior.

The same as the trash shown on TV. I know we can turn it off, but why should we have to consider that.

Why not?


Trashing Morality is just a slippery slope under the guise of liberty. I should have the right to walk down the street, without being barraged by immorality.

Unless you live in the heart of The Castro, I seriously doubt that you are being barraged by overtly gay people demonstrating their affection for each other as you walk down the street.

And shouldn’t they also have the right to walk down the street without being barraged by prejudiced, intolerant people?

But we are getting closer to the Abyss.
What is wrong is now right and what was right is now wrong.
Words like enlightened, or politically correct are pretenses to pervert morality.

It’s irritating when bigotry disguises itself as morality.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Henrietta:Hooray for all your posts Sherry.
That was an excellent example of sarcasm.
Obviously Radio does not understand sarcasm.
For those of us who enjoy that style, you are a winner.

Have you noticed that bigots, in general, always consider themselves to be morally superior to everyone else?

Where does Radio live anyway? I know people who would love to find that street which is being barraged by immorality. That could even be a great tourist attraction.

To all those who do have issues with this concept, please remember:

It takes all kinds of people to make a society, and
Live and Let Live is very good advice if you wish to co-exist with the rest of the people on this planet.

Let the good times roll!
Carpe diem from Henrietta

Shersher:Quote: We were put here to be fruitful. How fruitful is a homo union? It is not, because they do not produce anything. At best, they can only build on what someone else has produced.
-----------------------------------------------------------------

What makes you say we were put here to be fruitful? Does this mean you believe that infertile couples and people who never marry are useless and should not be here? What about people who are childless by choice? Or children who die before puberty? Or people who are mentally or physically disabled and can’t or don’t have children? Why are they here?


Quote: so yes I know there is a legal aspect to marriage, but it is a very minor aspect when a couple truly care for each other.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

ladyinred
11-10-2006, 11:57 PM
I personally don't see an atheist as my enemy,much of what they are saying about civil rights and equality , we share with them,though they may not share our belief of God I still respect these people for their integrity and I think Soulforce would also benefit as well in knowing who our allies are.Many of these people have the courage to speak out on forums that promote the ant-gay agenda...and they abhor the attitudes of those who are fundalmentalists, but in general they seem not to be in conflict with people of faith as long as they show that respect to them. they are standing up for many of the principles we are, remember... I think many are turned off by those who interpret the bible literally, and have used verses in the bible to justify slavery and segregation, subjugation of women and so forth... I don't have anything against them personally and they often support me and back me up.. It is not my place or task to judge these people or their lack of belief in God,I'm sure they have their reasons being turned off by organized relgion and what they quote as hypocritical from the religious right.. They may not be as apt to show tolerance for the intolerant because many often say it really gets under their skin... but I would look at these people from the same light as Christ would as well. Even though they may not share our beliefs or convictions of God, they are still his children as well.:) Also to understand why many have turned from religion and lost faith in God, you might want to check out the website www.losingmyreligion.com It might give you some perspective on their views.

Giancarlo
11-11-2006, 12:45 AM
I am atheist mostly. I respect those who stand up against hatred and intolerance. I may strongly disagree with religion, but I don't think anyone should take it personally. As long as you stand with the cause of equal rights, I won't go after your religion heheh... I stand for secular, equal principle and doctrine. I am unwavering in my standards of democracy.

I often say what makes one religion more right then any other? There are many polytheistic and monotheistic beliefs out there. What makes Christianity more correct then a tribal religion in Africa?

Be free to ask me anything on my atheism. I will not be defensive, but just explain. :)

Jamie McDaniel
11-14-2006, 11:12 PM
Be free to ask me anything on my atheism. I will not be defensive, but just explain. :)
Have you read, and if so do you recommend, Richard Dawkins' book The God Delusion? I recall seeing in the forums somewhere that Daniel was reading it. After seeing segments of Dawkins' documentary The Root of All Evil, I don't particularly care for Dawkins approach, but I liked the questions he intellectually explored and so I wanted to read his book sometime.

It seems that Dawkins, while going after fundamentalism in his documentary, actually views all religion, even the progressive or moderate kind, as being detrimental to humanity. Hence the book title, The God Delusion. Anyway, I am going to watch some more of his videos over at You Tube.

Giancarlo
11-14-2006, 11:18 PM
Have you read, and if so do you recommend, Richard Dawkins' book The God Delusion? I recall seeing in the forums somewhere that Daniel was reading it. After seeing segments of Dawkins' documentary The Root of All Evil, I don't particularly care for Dawkins approach, but I liked the questions he intellectually explored and so I wanted to read his book sometime.

It seems that Dawkins, while going after fundamentalism in his documentary, actually views all religion, even the progressive or moderate kind, as being detrimental to humanity. Hence the book title, The God Delusion. Anyway, I am going to watch some more of his videos over at You Tube.

I have not read it, but will take a look at it. I am interesting in what Dawkins has written as I have heard of him.

I do view religion as detrimental, but I would not go as far to say that progressive or moderate religion is detrimental. If one chooses to believe in a religion and be "live and let live" that's fine by me and I do not believe moderate beliefs of religion are detrimental.

Daniel
11-15-2006, 12:34 AM
Have you read, and if so do you recommend, Richard Dawkins' book The God Delusion? I recall seeing in the forums somewhere that Daniel was reading it. After seeing segments of Dawkins' documentary The Root of All Evil, I don't particularly care for Dawkins approach, but I liked the questions he intellectually explored and so I wanted to read his book sometime.

It seems that Dawkins, while going after fundamentalism in his documentary, actually views all religion, even the progressive or moderate kind, as being detrimental to humanity. Hence the book title, The God Delusion. Anyway, I am going to watch some more of his videos over at You Tube.

Yes. I'm reading it and find his thinking very provocative. On a side note, Dawkins talks to Ted Haggard in the documentary (I happened to watch it a week before all hell broke loose) which is rather telling. Haggard accuses Dawkins of being arrogant when the opposite seems more true. He goes for the putdown: God is the ultimate trump card. Haggard fairly sneers with distain at the man. Why so nasty I wondered?

I would not call myself an atheist by any means, but have found it helpful to stretch my mind in this area, after all, an idea is just that, an idea: it's how we use it that's the issue, is it not?

As I grow older I am less enamoured of the Truth, which, I have to say, was a major preoccupation during my youth. Now that I'm zooming towards 50, I can look back and appreciate that this kind of certainty, or the desire for certainty of belief, lost a good deal of it's allure after I began meditating and developed an interest in Buddhism. To my surprise, I have experienced an interesting by-product: I don't have to have the answers for everything (my cyber persona must surely contradict this statement! :lol:). It is enough to do it for itself. After all, isn't that why we make art, love, climb mountains and sing?

Being can be enough.

Vortex
11-15-2006, 12:39 AM
Have you read, and if so do you recommend, Richard Dawkins' book The God Delusion? I recall seeing in the forums somewhere that Daniel was reading it. After seeing segments of Dawkins' documentary The Root of All Evil, I don't particularly care for Dawkins approach, but I liked the questions he intellectually explored and so I wanted to read his book sometime.

It seems that Dawkins, while going after fundamentalism in his documentary, actually views all religion, even the progressive or moderate kind, as being detrimental to humanity. Hence the book title, The God Delusion. Anyway, I am going to watch some more of his videos over at You Tube.

Hmm, how very interesting. I've been listening to his clips on youtube as well lately. I was interested in him though because he is a famous Biologist (what I'm marjoring in) but did come accross a lot of his views on religion. As an agnostic I tended to agree with most his view points but found myself a little put off by how concrete he is on the existence of God. He does maintain that you can't disapprove anything, but is pretty certain that God doesn't exist. He describes his own beliefs as a sort of Einsteinian spirituality of admiration of the universe.

While I am not quite as certain in my disbelief as he is :rolleyes: , he is a brilliant scientist and rationalist. I do plan to read his books, if for nothing else the science. Science is my religion. :lol:

Vortex

Vortex
11-15-2006, 12:54 AM
As I grow older I am less enamoured of the Truth, which, I have to say, was a major preoccupation during my youth. Now that I'm zooming towards 50, I can look back and appreciate that this kind of certainty, or the desire for certainty of belief, lost a good deal of it's allure after I began meditating and developed an interest in Buddhism. To my surprise, I have experienced an interesting by-product: I don't have to have the answers for everything (my cyber persona must surely contradict this statement! :lol:). It is enough to do it for itself. After all, isn't that why we make art, love, climb mountains and sing?

Being can be enough.

This is where I am now Daniel, as you put it enamoured with truth. It's a bit of an obsession really. I'm glad to hear as you get older it doesn't have to remain this way. It's quite exhausting, I hope to oneday relax and just enjoy life. I've tried meditation but can't seem to quiet my mind enough for it. Anyway when ever someone asks me about my first love, I will no doubt tell them, truth. :lol:


Vortex

1engelbythesea
11-15-2006, 02:38 AM
There are three truths: my truth, your truth, and the truth. -Chinese
proverb
Could not resist playing devil's advocate:rolleyes:

Vocatus at que non vocatus Deus aderit
Bidden or not bidden God is present

Moral certainty is always a sign of cultural inferiority. The more
uncivilized the man, the surer he is that he knows precisely what is right
and what is wrong. All human progress, even in morals, has been the work of
men who have doubted the current moral values, not of men who have whooped
them up and tried to enforce them. The truly civilized man is always
skeptical and tolerant, in this field as in all others. His culture is
based on "I am not too sure." - H.L.Mencken

:love: :dove:

Daniel
11-15-2006, 06:57 AM
I've tried meditation but can't seem to quiet my mind enough for it. Anyway when ever someone asks me about my first love, I will no doubt tell them, truth. :lol:


What, after all, is the point of meditation? The way you put it, one might as well say "I can't do yoga because I'm too stiff." Hello!

I'm not pushing either meditation or yoga here. (Ok....maybe I am a little :p ) Either one loosens things up with practice, that is, if one sticks with it. Of course, the mind never actually turns off, or goes to mush during meditation, any more that the body come apart, limb from limb during yoga. The mind keeps churining out thoughts- one after another. It's just that one begins to experience a great deal more room around those thoughts if one sticks at it. Likewise, the body gets supple after practicing yoga-it really can make one feel young again.

Here's a good article on mediation if you are interested:

http://www.burningturban.com/bt/?page_id=13

And here's a yoga site for gay men:

http://www.hotnudeyoga.com/

Ok....on the yoga place...I haven't been yet, but I'm daring myself to go. I mean, getting naked is no big deal...right? :D (I got into yoga some years ago after injuring my knee.)

I'd like to extend the metaphor here a bit: getting naked, or living without all kinds of stuff plastered over one's mind, can be very invigorating. Liberating actually. (I love the Mencken quote!)

That may be one reason why I've enjoyed, really enjoyed, reading works like Dawkins' book The God Delusion. and Sam Harris' The End of Faith. Both have gotten me to think about things I would have never thought about otherwise. I don't know, maybe after getting a bit of room around those fundi-pentacostal thoughts in my head, I'd like a little more.

marutidas
11-25-2006, 10:16 AM
I have no qualms with atheist, If they choose not believe, then that is their right. They come in handy in a logical debate such as this.

Daniel: Getting naked and doing yoga, It's not a bad thing at all:D
In india there is entire sect of yogis called Baba Nagas, they do not wear clothes, period, something about giving up all material possesions, but thats another story.

---Maruti Das