Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Well, I don't necessarily agree that religion is any worse than the lack of
religion. I mean, lets take the United States as a reference. How many people
have died in the name of religion in the United States since 1776? Compare that
number to the amount of people who have died for other reasons.
Well, just for starters, about 3,000 in the Twin Tower attacks.
Well, I don't necessarily agree that religion is any worse than the lack of religion. I mean, lets take the United States as a reference. How many people have died in the name of religion in the United States since 1776? Compare that number to the amount of people who have died for other reasons.
The 20th century was one of the bloodiest centuries in human history. How many of the wars in the 20th century was really a result of religion? On the contrary, how many of those wars were in the name of "nationalism" or "socialism"?
In almost all cases where people claim religion was the cause of war. The truth is that, the war would have been fought anyway, regardless of the existence of religion. People want to bring up Christianity's acceptance of slavery as proof of the fallibility of religion. And while that is perfectly fine. The truth is, with or without religion, there still would have been slavery. And one could probably make a very compelling argument that slavery would have lasted much longer in the absence of religion.
Are there hateful religious people? Of course there are, there are hateful secular groups as well. Yes, there is the Westboro baptist church, but on the other hand there are the Amish. The Amish don't believe in any violence whatsoever. And if everyone was Amish, there would be no wars, ever. Not even just no wars, there would be effectively no crime either.
I'm not saying there no good non religious people. However, I don't see them trying to take away rights of other people. That's where line is drawn.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redshadowz
Look, I'm not anti-gay. I just recognize that homosexuality in all ways is inferior to heterosexuality. And there is no reason to believe otherwise. Which is why I stated that regardless of if you have gay friends and you have no resentment towards gay people(and I don't), no one wants their child to be gay. Why in the world would anyone want to be gay? Homosexuality is a curse, and I don't believe that it of itself intended by nature. I think it was a sort of byproduct of other factors. Namely, increased sex-drive.
No, I didn't want to be gay when I found out. But I accepted it and moved on. I don't think any sexuality is inferior to others. I don't necessarily think it's a curse either. There are some pros and cons. But one con of homosexuality could be taken away if people would mind their own business.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redshadowz
I'm fine with the government staying out of peoples' lives. Thats why I advocate getting the government completely out of marriage entirely. I highly doubt you will advocate the same.
If religion cuts crime, how come the majority of prison inmates profess to some religion.
The study on crime wasn't asking whether or not people claimed to believe in god. The study on crime asked whether or not people actually went to church. People who go to church are less likely to commit crime. It could be true that people who claim to be Christians but who never go to church have above-average rates of crime.
Secondly, that statistic on prison religion is not very accurate if you actually look at it.
First, the statistics at the top don't match the statistics at the bottom. Secondly, the freedom of information request clearly states that the documentation they have is only based on those who have self-reported their religious affiliation. As a result, it is very likely that there will be an under-representation of atheists, because you would think atheists and other non-believers would be less likely to self-report their religious affiliation. If they don't self-report, then they would have to be considered either "no preference" or "unknown".
If you add up the entire list, it comes up to 218,167. Based on those number, the total number of people claiming "no preference, unknown, or atheist" is 44,812. Which is about 1/5th of the entire prison population.
But that ignores two more points. First, about a quarter of the federal prison population is made up of foreigners. And when it comes to foreigners, the primary reason they end up in federal prison, is for immigration violations, not crimes. And immigrants are overwhelmingly religious. Secondly, the statistic ignores the fact that rarely do people go to prison and come out atheist. Rather, atheists go to prison and come out religious. So the numbers aren't exactly a good indicator of religious affiliation at the time of the perpetration of a crime. It would be a lot better if it asked people when they were arrested what their religious affiliation was, and basically demanded an answer. Otherwise, these statistics are kind of useless.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Okipower120190
I'm not saying there no good non religious people. However, I don't see them trying to take away rights of other people. That's where line is drawn.
I'm really getting annoyed to hear people calling same-sex marriage a right. First, if it was a right, it would have always been a right. You didn't just wake up a week ago and suddenly same-sex marriage was illegal. Same-sex marriage was illegal in all of Christendom for about 2,000 years. It was illegal in the United States since we were a British colony. It has been illegal in the United States since the Declaration of Independence. And it has been illegal in the United States for about 150 years since the ratification of the 14th amendment. And more importantly, there is no way the people in 1868 who drafted or voted to ratify the 14th amendment thought same-sex marriage was a right. And thus there is no way the 14th amendment would have been ratified had anyone believe that it guaranteed same-sex marriage.
So please, stop calling it a right. It doesn't make any sense.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Okipower120190
No, I didn't want to be gay when I found out. But I accepted it and moved on. I don't think any sexuality is inferior to others. I don't necessarily think it's a curse either. There are some pros and cons. But one con of homosexuality could be taken away if people would mind their own business.
Look, I know you are in denial and you are biased. But seriously, why in the hell would anyone want to be gay? The only way you could argue that there is nothing undesirable about being gay. Is to argue that the average person wouldn't mind if their child turned out gay. I don't even think gay people would be indifferent about their child's sexual orientation.
But really, I think a lot of homosexuals are so traumatized that they live in denial anyway. A friend of mine is gay, he was telling me about "seeding parties" or "conversion parties". Where gay men basically give each other HIV intentionally. My friend says the conversion parties are for gay men to like, really feel like they are actually gay. I guess they feel like, if they get HIV then they are stuck being gay forever and they can stop even wanting to think about being straight ever again.
I'm really getting annoyed to hear people calling same-sex marriage a right. First, if it was a right, it would have always been a right. You didn't just wake up a week ago and suddenly same-sex marriage was illegal. Same-sex marriage was illegal in all of Christendom for about 2,000 years. It was illegal in the United States since we were a British colony. It has been illegal in the United States since the Declaration of Independence. And it has been illegal in the United States for about 150 years since the ratification of the 14th amendment. And more importantly, there is no way the people in 1868 who drafted or voted to ratify the 14th amendment thought same-sex marriage was a right. And thus there is no way the 14th amendment would have been ratified had anyone believe that it guaranteed same-sex marriage.
So please, stop calling it a right. It doesn't make any sense.
You're first point is ridiculous. By your logic women voting isn't a right, interracial marriage isn't a right. I don't know about the state you live in but same sex marriage is still illegal in my state. The 14th amendment applies to everyone gay or straight. Not to a select few people who are "desirable" as you call it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redshadowz
Look, I know you are in denial and you are biased. But seriously, why in the hell would anyone want to be gay? The only way you could argue that there is nothing undesirable about being gay. Is to argue that the average person wouldn't mind if their child turned out gay. I don't even think gay people would be indifferent about their child's sexual orientation.
But really, I think a lot of homosexuals are so traumatized that they live in denial anyway. A friend of mine is gay, he was telling me about "seeding parties" or "conversion parties". Where gay men basically give each other HIV intentionally. My friend says the conversion parties are for gay men to like, really feel like they are actually gay. I guess they feel like, if they get HIV then they are stuck being gay forever and they can stop even wanting to think about being straight ever again.
I just find everything about homosexuality to be sad. And I have hope that someday we will find a way to prevent it.
I'm in denial? Denial of what?! I just said that I DIDNT want to be gay when I found out I have same sex attractions. I accepted it and moved on. I'm not traumatized either. Also I'm really getting annoyed of people stereotyping people based on what people they know. I don't go to the seeding parties, I don't have sex bareback with everyone. Just because your gay friend does it, doesn't mean I do it nor other LGBT people do it. Get out of your small world and realize there are different people in all walks of life. There are promiscuous gays just like there are some promiscuous heterosexuals. Also having HIV is not some prerequisite for being gay. I don't have HIV and others don't either. This post is very offensive, and not only does it prove you don't know anything about the LGBT, it proves you don't know people.
Your article said that some may do it because of depression, loneliness, social stigma, and prejudice. All of this stems from the anti gay people and others saying that gays are inferior. And the article is old.
Last edited by Okipower120190; 01-16-2014 at 08:25 PM..
Just cut the crap, and let two people of the same gender, who are in love, get a marriage license. Life is too short and loaded with hate not to. And save some tax dollars, too. Like Utah's appeal, it could cost Oklahoma up to $2,000,000 to appeal the court ruling. If I'm right, if Oklahoma loses, it has to pay the legal expenses of both parties. Oklahoma Republicans stress they stand for cutting income taxes, waste and making government smaller. They ought to take this opportunity to act like they mean it.
Last edited by StillwaterTownie; 01-16-2014 at 08:48 PM..
I'm really getting annoyed to hear people calling same-sex marriage a right. First, if it was a right, it would have always been a right.
I'm really getting annoyed to hear people calling colonial self-rule a right. First, if it was a right, it would have always been a right.
I'm really getting annoyed to hear people calling the right to vote a right. First, if it was a right, it would have always been a right.
I'm really getting annoyed to hear people calling freedom from slavery a right. First, if it was a right, it would have always been a right.
I'm really getting annoyed to hear people calling women's suffrage a right. First, if it was a right, it would have always been a right.
I'm really getting annoyed to hear people calling equal access to education, no matter one's race, a right. First, if it was a right, it would have always been a right.
I'm really getting annoyed to hear people calling interracial marriage a right. First, if it was a right, it would have always been a right.
Rights aren't eternal. They're hard fought for and won. And sometimes lost.
So as a gay guy who grew up in Iowa confused and feeling inferior because of something I had nothing to do with, what are your thoughts on gays then? What should they be doing? It seems you're one of those reasons I spent much of my teens and early 20's scared, lonely and feeling inferior.
I just wrote this in another thread about people who think gays should convert, which although I know isn't something you're saying, is something I use to hear a lot and of course gets young gays VERY confused and thinking most adults must either be really stupid, ignorant or just have no idea on what "gay" means. It was pretty simple to me.
This is a very complicated question, and it is late right now. I began to draft up an answer to your question, and the explanation. But it is going to be longer than I intended it to be. So I'll have to finish it in the morning.
Because it is extremely relevant. Most of the people preaching hate towards gays in the south today have grandparents that were protesting and fighting to keep black people segregated in poverty.
And what my grandparents might have done (mine didn't, but enjoy your fantasy) has..............what to do with me again?
You're first point is ridiculous. By your logic women voting isn't a right, interracial marriage isn't a right. I don't know about the state you live in but same sex marriage is still illegal in my state. The 14th amendment applies to everyone gay or straight. Not to a select few people who are "desirable" as you call it.
Look, not only is woman voting not a right, neither is voting in general. If you commit a crime, the government can take away your voting privileges. A right cannot be taken away.
In fact, I would argue that a right is something that exists regardless of government. Anytime you have to ask permission from the government to do something, it is not a right. A privilege is anything that must be granted by the whims of someone else.
If you believe the 14th amendment's equal protection clause actually guarantees complete equal application of all laws, regardless of things like gender or race or whatever. Ask yourself, if the 14th guarantees equal protection, and if voting is a right. Then why was the 15th amendment necessary for granting blacks the right to vote? Why was the 19th amendment necessary for granting women the right to vote?
Secondly, if the equal protection clause was intended to guarantee homosexuals a right to marry. Then would the people who voted to ratify the 14th amendment have approved of same-sex marriage? You can't argue that the 14th amendment was intended to protect all people equally, if there is no way in hell that the people who ratified the 14th amendment would have actually ratified the 14th amendment if they knew that same-sex marriage was guaranteed as a result of it.
You can't say they intentionally limited the government through an amendment to the constitution in a way that they absolutely never intended it to be limited. It just makes no sense. It is illogical, it is absurd. You can't give an amendment to the constitution a meaning that the people who made it didn't intend for it to have. That would simply be you "making crap up as you go along".
Quote:
Originally Posted by Okipower120190
Your article said that some may do it because of depression, loneliness, social stigma, and prejudice. All of this stems from the anti gay people and others saying that gays are inferior. And the article is old.
I don't know why they do it. I was just saying that I think its sad. My gay friend told me specifically that they do it to like, prove to themselves that they are actually gay. That, they basically don't feel gay until they have HIV. My friend could be full of crap, I don't know. But he is pretty gay. And he has slept with more people in a single week than most people will sleep with in a lifetime. He used to hang out at the "Habana Inn" and other places around here in Oklahoma City. I've been into a bar called "Angles", and to the reck room. It is in basically in the "gay" part of town.
I never said gays are inferior, I said being gay is inferior. There is a difference. Just like I never said ugly people are inferior, but I would acknowledge that ugliness is inferior.
My feelings toward gay people is one of pity, not hate. Yes, I pity you. And I pity my gay friends. And I pity my deaf friend. Even though he makes $70k a year, and is probably happier than me. And I will argue that deafness is a disability and thus deafness is an inferior trait. It doesn't make my friend inferior. You are taking the entire situation completely out of context.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
