Not against homosexuals, just equal rights for homosexuals. Just like the Jew killing charity isn't against Jews, just their human rights. You don't need to hate the Jews to want them to not have equal rights to you.
Marriage is not a fundamental human right. Wait, what? You don't need to hate someone for not wanting them to have equal rights? That makes no sense; "Yeah, I respect you and everything, but you don't deserve to have equal rights, I have absolutely no contempt for you though!" Regardless of that, you said so yourself that it is hateful and anti-homosexual, now you're telling me it's not....
Supporting the ability to deny people marriage because of your beliefs is hateful and anti-homosexual.
Not against homosexuals,
You don't need to hate the Jews to want them to not have equal rights to you.
No, I'm just saying that I will not support people that actively try to bar homosexuals from having equal rights (if within a reasonable amount of difficulty to do so) because that is a position too antithetical to the moral system I try to abide by.
And that is your belief. Not everyone abides by the same moral system, obviously.
Additionally, fuck tradition. Any person with a lick of sense sees "tradition" as the sink hole excuse that it is.
I never justified or tried to validate the tradition argument. I actually agree with you somewhat, that is where we, and the people who oppose gay marriage differ; they value tradition, and we don't. It has nothing to do with hating gay people.
So not only is that argument not a steaming load because its very premise is likely false, but it's also a steaming load because it's tantamount to "we done did it so it's morally good and any alternative should not be allowed."
Again, Never tried to validate or justify the tradition argument. I was only saying that it wasn't all about hatred and anti-homosexuality.
No... it's not. Being against gay marriage does not mean you are against homosexuals. It doesn't mean you hate them.
Not against hom… moreosexuals, just equal rights for homosexuals. Just like the Jew killing charity isn't against Jews, just their human rights. You don't need to hate the Jews to want them to not have equal rights to you.
It's a semantic word game, and it's annoying.
I know it's simple to you folks; "I'd rather not have the traditional sacred bond between a man and a woman be broken." = "I hate gays and they are disgusting."
No, I'm just saying that I will not support people that actively try to bar homosexuals from having equal rights (if within a reasonable amount of difficulty to do so) because that is a position too antithetical to the moral system I try to abide by.
Traditional marriage is reasonably thought to have been very different than the "one man one woman" brought about by the Abrahamic relig… [view original content]
Yeah, it's just one of those pesky "normal rights" that don't really matter that much. There is a difference between the two, and it's exaggerated to make the point easier to grasp.
You don't need to hate someone for not wanting them to have equal rights?
Hey, that's my rhetorical question! You can't take it.
"Yeah, I respect you and everything, but you don't deserve to have equal rights, I have absolutely no contempt for you though!" Regardless of that, you said so yourself that it is hateful and anti-homosexual, now you're telling me it's not....
You missed the sarcasm I used to relate two things that obviously were hateful and anti(" ") using the same rational used to determine that the original was not hateful and anti(" "). Unless you wanted to get into the semantic word play of what definitions of hate and anti are applicable in the given context, etc.
And that is your belief. Not everyone abides by the same moral system, obviously.
Obviously. The amount I (or anyone else) may object to a moral dilemma and the accomplishments that can be reached for or against it will determine how an individual will react to a given proposition, such as eating at an establishment run by religious nutbags that want to take us back a few decades.
I never justified or tried to validate the tradition argument. I actually agree with you somewhat, that is where we, and the people who oppose gay marriage differ; they value tradition, and we don't. It has nothing to do with hating gay people.
Again, Never tried to validate or justify the tradition argument. I was only saying that it wasn't all about hatred and anti-homosexuality.
Then why would you give that argument? If you know it is false, both in tradition not being a means to determine morality of a position, nor of "traditional marriage" being applicable to, exclusively, one man and one woman, then what purpose does it serve to bring it up? You might as well have applied it to the Jew killin' charity and said that they have an argument that, traditionally, Jews have been ostracized from many societies and even targeted for death in many societies so it's only tradition that we off them. As I stated earlier in a sarcastic tone it applies just as logically that killin' a few Jews is necessarily as "hate" oriented as prohibiting homosexuals from marrying (only more extreme).
Not against homosexuals, just equal rights for homosexuals. Just like the Jew killing charity isn't against Jews, just their human rights. Y… moreou don't need to hate the Jews to want them to not have equal rights to you.
Marriage is not a fundamental human right. Wait, what? You don't need to hate someone for not wanting them to have equal rights? That makes no sense; "Yeah, I respect you and everything, but you don't deserve to have equal rights, I have absolutely no contempt for you though!" Regardless of that, you said so yourself that it is hateful and anti-homosexual, now you're telling me it's not....
Supporting the ability to deny people marriage because of your beliefs is hateful and anti-homosexual.
Not against homosexuals,
You don't need to hate the Jews to want them to not have equal rights to you.
No, I'm just saying that I will not support people that actively try to bar homosexuals from having equa… [view original content]
Yeah, it's just one of those pesky "normal rights" that don't really matter that much. There is a difference between the two, and it's exaggerated to make the point easier to grasp.
So what you're saying is that: You compared somebody being opposed to gay people getting married because of their religious beliefs, to the murder of jews... in order to misrepresent what I said, twisting my words to make it sound like I said: you can be against someone's human rights, but not them themselves? First of all, that's absurd. Second of all, marriage still isn't a human right. The right not to have your life taken is.
You missed the sarcasm I used to relate two things that obviously were hateful and anti(" ") using the same rational used to determine that the original was not hateful and anti(" "). Unless you wanted to get into the semantic word play of what definitions of hate and anti are applicable in the given context, etc.
Well the definitions of hate and anti that are applicable in the given context, are the actual definitions of hate and anti...
Then why would you give that argument? If you know it is false, both in tradition not being a means to determine morality of a position, nor of "traditional marriage" being applicable to, exclusively, one man and one woman, then what purpose does it serve to bring it up? You might as well have applied it to the Jew killin' charity and said that they have an argument that, traditionally, Jews have been ostracized from many societies and even targeted for death in many societies so it's only tradition that we off them. As I stated earlier in a sarcastic tone it applies just as logically that killin' a few Jews is necessarily as "hate" oriented as prohibiting homosexuals from marrying (only more extreme).
Because you said that to be against gay marriage is to be hateful and anti-homosexual, to which I replied: No. It's not the same thing, since you're against the practice of gay marriage, not homosexuals themselves. There is a great distinction between the two that seems to always be ignored.
Marriage is not a fundamental human right.
Yeah, it's just one of those pesky "normal rights" that don't really matter that much. Th… moreere is a difference between the two, and it's exaggerated to make the point easier to grasp.
You don't need to hate someone for not wanting them to have equal rights?
Hey, that's my rhetorical question! You can't take it.
"Yeah, I respect you and everything, but you don't deserve to have equal rights, I have absolutely no contempt for you though!" Regardless of that, you said so yourself that it is hateful and anti-homosexual, now you're telling me it's not....
You missed the sarcasm I used to relate two things that obviously were hateful and anti(" ") using the same rational used to determine that the original was not hateful and anti(" "). Unless you wanted to get into the semantic word play of what definitions of hate and anti are applicable in the given context, etc.
… [view original content]
So what you're saying is that: You compared somebody being opposed to gay people getting married because of their religious beliefs, to the murder of jews... in order to misrepresent what I said, twisting my words to make it sound like I said: you can be against someone's human rights, but not them themselves? First of all, that's absurd. Second of all, marriage still isn't a human right. The right not to have your life taken is.
I haven't twisted your words as far as I can tell. Human right or a regular, everyday right, it's still a right. Exaggerated to get the point across, as stated earlier, but still a fine comparison.
Well the definitions of hate and anti that are applicable in the given context, are the actual definitions of hate and anti...
There are any number of ways to use words in a given context. You may argue that one is more applicable than another, or that another term specifically implies a connotation that more accurately portrays a sentiment, but the idea is unchanging.
Because you said that to be against gay marriage is to be hateful and anti-homosexual, to which I replied: No. It's not the same thing, since you're against the practice of gay marriage, not homosexuals themselves. There is a great distinction between the two that seems to always be ignored.
To which I reply, yes, it is the same thing. One directly involves the other and they are inseparable. Just as with the example with the Jew killin' charity. It could be argued that you don't truly need to hate the Jews to want them dead because (enter rational here; tradition, religious inferiority, etc). You're still anti-Jew, and from the perspective of the Jews hate is a completely acceptable term to use, and if it's not, then let's start the semantic word game to find the word that more accurately represents the sentiments displayed by the charity. . . because that distinction is a necessary one?
Yeah, it's just one of those pesky "normal rights" that don't really matter that much. There is a difference between the two, and it's exagg… moreerated to make the point easier to grasp.
So what you're saying is that: You compared somebody being opposed to gay people getting married because of their religious beliefs, to the murder of jews... in order to misrepresent what I said, twisting my words to make it sound like I said: you can be against someone's human rights, but not them themselves? First of all, that's absurd. Second of all, marriage still isn't a human right. The right not to have your life taken is.
You missed the sarcasm I used to relate two things that obviously were hateful and anti(" ") using the same rational used to determine that the original was not hateful and anti(" "). Unless you wanted to get into the semantic word play of what definitions of hate and anti are applicable in the given context, etc.
We… [view original content]
Yeah all 13 of them. There are also atheists who believe the world is flat, that aliens have abducted people, and that a race of reptilian people run the world.
Cool. We somehow managed to take a thread about food and manage to twist it into the religious beliefs of the company's founders. Gotta just love the world we live in.
There are way more than just 13 people. And you know it. More like a million. I would know. Some people just dont like the newer ages and liked the rules they had when they where kids. Meaning Many athiests dont like the newer laws where gay marriage is allowed.
Yeah all 13 of them. There are also atheists who believe the world is flat, that aliens have abducted people, and that a race of reptilian people run the world.
You know whats ironic though? You respect and support gay rights and their ways, yet you dont respect peoples religions. And most religions are harmless. Pretty hypocritical. If you want respect, you need to respect others.
Yeah all 13 of them. There are also atheists who believe the world is flat, that aliens have abducted people, and that a race of reptilian people run the world.
There are way more than just 13 people. And you know it.
Obviously. And obviously I wasn't trying to give a factual statement.
More like a million.
A million?! Lmao, yeah, maybe globally. In the Unites States even estimating that 3% of atheists believe homosexual marriage should be unlawful (a very high estimation I would venture to say) gives us only ~300,000.
Some people just dont like the newer ages and liked the rules they had when they where kids.
Maybe some, but most realize that laws are there to enforce moral principles, not to give us a sense of nostalgia.
Meaning Many athiests dont like the newer laws where gay marriage is allowed.
I guess that depends what you mean by "many".
There is absolutely a correlation (causal I would say) between being religious and being against homosexual marriage.
There are way more than just 13 people. And you know it. More like a million. I would know. Some people just dont like the newer ages and li… moreked the rules they had when they where kids. Meaning Many athiests dont like the newer laws where gay marriage is allowed.
If you disrespect religions than I dont respect you, or your love for gay rights. Why should anyone respect your needs if you dont respect theres? See what Im getting at with this? Just irony. The way you feel when someone hates on gay rights is the same feel others have when you say only (and mostly) religious people are against gay rights, which is actually really false and a bad stereotype. There is no corralation, not sure why you think that. I know plenty of people that are against gay rights and arn't religious, and I know people who ARE religious and are for gay rights, do you just presume anyone who is religious hates gay rights? Once again, false. There are plenty of religious people who are for gay rights, me being one of them.
There are way more than just 13 people. And you know it.
Obviously. And obviously I wasn't trying to give a factual statement.
… more More like a million.
A million?! Lmao, yeah, maybe globally. In the Unites States even estimating that 3% of atheists believe homosexual marriage should be unlawful (a very high estimation I would venture to say) gives us only ~300,000.
Some people just dont like the newer ages and liked the rules they had when they where kids.
Maybe some, but most realize that laws are there to enforce moral principles, not to give us a sense of nostalgia.
Meaning Many athiests dont like the newer laws where gay marriage is allowed.
I guess that depends what you mean by "many".
There is absolutely a correlation (causal I would say) between being religious and being against homosexual marriage.
You know whats ironic though? You respect and support gay rights and their ways, yet you dont respect peoples religions.
How is that ironic? If I support one thing I need to support. . . everything?
And most religions are harmless.
Sure. Norse mythology, the ancient Egyptian religions, Buddhism, most are pretty benign. The Abrahamic religions not so much. This is especially true in the western world.
Pretty hypocritical. If you want respect, you need to respect others.
You know whats ironic though? You respect and support gay rights and their ways, yet you dont respect peoples religions. And most religions are harmless. Pretty hypocritical. If you want respect, you need to respect others.
And you wont earn respect if you dont respect others.
I found it ironic, pretty simple, because you expect people to accept your ways and yet you dont respect theirs. If your rude to someones beliefs, why should they ever be polite to your beliefs? There's no reason for them to be.
You know whats ironic though? You respect and support gay rights and their ways, yet you dont respect peoples religions.
How is that… more ironic? If I support one thing I need to support. . . everything?
And most religions are harmless.
Sure. Norse mythology, the ancient Egyptian religions, Buddhism, most are pretty benign. The Abrahamic religions not so much. This is especially true in the western world.
Pretty hypocritical. If you want respect, you need to respect others.
Respect is earned.
If you disrespect religions than I dont respect you, or your love for gay rights.
K.
Why should anyone respect your needs if you dont respect theres?
I don't need this anymore than I need a law for or against abortion. It affects myself very little.
See what Im getting at with this?
That I should respect ancient dogma if I want people to respect homosexual rights? Well, that's just not genna happen. Fuck religion.
Just irony. The way you feel when someone hates on gay rights is the same feel others have when you say only (and mostly) religious people are against gay rights, which is actually really false and a bad stereotype.
Not ironic. And I don't recall saying only religious people are against gay rights (but mostly is completely acceptable, the majority of people against homosexual rights are religious and it's because they are religious). It's not a false stereotype and it's not a bad stereotype (because it's not false).
There is no corralation, not sure why you think that.
. . . Seriously, bruh?
I know plenty of people that are against gay rights and arn't religious, and I know people who ARE religious and are for gay rights, do you just presume anyone who is religious hates gay rights?
Against and nonreligous? Obviously.
For and religious? Obviously.
Presume anyone who is religious is against homosexual rights? No, not at all.
Once again, false.
Of cours it's false. No one is saying it's true.
There are plenty of religious people who are for gay rights, me being one of them.
Obviously there are, and good for you. It's comforting to know that people can look past the dusty tomes and judge propositions based on our current understanding of reality.
If you disrespect religions than I dont respect you, or your love for gay rights. Why should anyone respect your needs if you dont respect t… moreheres? See what Im getting at with this? Just irony. The way you feel when someone hates on gay rights is the same feel others have when you say only (and mostly) religious people are against gay rights, which is actually really false and a bad stereotype. There is no corralation, not sure why you think that. I know plenty of people that are against gay rights and arn't religious, and I know people who ARE religious and are for gay rights, do you just presume anyone who is religious hates gay rights? Once again, false. There are plenty of religious people who are for gay rights, me being one of them.
What are you doing replying to the older comments? Again as others have said, there really is no correlation. I'm not sure what else you want me to tell you unless you look it up yourself as you've already been told enough. And thanks?
If you disrespect religions than I dont respect you, or your love for gay rights.
K.
Why should anyone respect your needs if y… moreou dont respect theres?
I don't need this anymore than I need a law for or against abortion. It affects myself very little.
See what Im getting at with this?
That I should respect ancient dogma if I want people to respect homosexual rights? Well, that's just not genna happen. Fuck religion.
Just irony. The way you feel when someone hates on gay rights is the same feel others have when you say only (and mostly) religious people are against gay rights, which is actually really false and a bad stereotype.
Not ironic. And I don't recall saying only religious people are against gay rights (but mostly is completely acceptable, the majority of people against homosexual rights are religious and it's because they are religious). It's not a false stereotype and it's not a bad st… [view original content]
What are you doing replying to the older comments? Again as others have said, there really is no correlation. I'm not sure what else you want me to tell you unless you look it up yourself as you've already been told enough. And thanks?
Hey if you don't wan't to listen that's fine by me. I'm sure you can look up the correlation yourself because I don't think its worth the time for me, I gave you my insight you can do the rest.
What are you doing replying to the older comments?
I'm not. At least I don't think I am. I have responded to the two posts you left … moreme just recently.
Again as others have said, there really is no correlation.
That is a laughable position to hold.
I'm not sure what else you want me to tell you unless you look it up yourself as you've already been told enough. And thanks?
I'm fairly confident in my assessment of the correlation. If you have a source that discounts my position I would be ecstatic to take a look.
And you're welcome.
And you wont earn respect if you dont respect others.
I found it ironic, pretty simple, because you expect people to accept your ways and… more yet you dont respect theirs. If your rude to someones beliefs, why should they ever be polite to your beliefs? There's no reason for them to be.
And you wont earn respect if you dont respect others.
Don't care.
I found it ironic, pretty simple, because you expect people … moreto accept your ways and yet you dont respect theirs.
Except I don't expect people to accept my ways.
If your rude to someones beliefs, why should they ever be polite to your beliefs?
They don't need to be. I expect people to critique me. So long as their points are valid I don't care much for how polite they are.
There's no reason for them to be.
Correct.
Hey if you don't wan't to listen that's fine by me. I'm sure you can look up the correlation yourself because I don't think its worth the time for me, I gave you my insight you can do the rest.
Why should I? No matter how many articles I give you, I can already tell your still going to say the same thing as you are. Look it up yourself, Im not doing it for you. My insight is wrong? Are you reading what you are typing and the reaction to it? I thought you "dont care", you've been nothing but stereotypical and rude to anyone outside of your group.
Hey if you don't wan't to listen that's fine by me. I'm sure you can look up the correlation yourself because I don't think its worth the ti… moreme for me,
Give me a source. Seriously, if there is evidence that verifies what you're saying then I will admit it and apologize wholeheartedly.
I gave you my insight you can do the rest.
Your insight is wrong.
And this should tell you enough what your problem is.
I see no problem with not prioritizing being respected. Especially when it comes to being respected by solely respecting someone else (for following ridiculous dogma nonetheless) and not for actually doing or knowing anything. Seems like an empty and pointless respect to me.
I see no problem with not prioritizing being respected
Your whole point was you being triggered that religion is so against gay rights. You want religion to respect gay rights is your whole point. You need to figure out what you are even talking about chap, you seem a bit everywhere its hard to even get your point anymore. Your for gay rights? Ok cool. And yet you think religion is wrong and shouldn't be used, much like how gay rights are said to be? Not cool.
And this should tell you enough what your problem is.
I see no problem with not prioritizing being respected. Especially when it com… morees to being respected by solely respecting someone else (for following ridiculous dogma nonetheless) and not for actually doing or knowing anything. Seems like an empty and pointless respect to me.
Why should I? No matter how many articles I give you, I can already tell your still going to say the same thing as you are.
Because all of your beliefs should be based on fact. And how would you know that? You haven't attempted it in the slightest.
Look it up yourself, Im not doing it for you.
I think that's a fallacy of some sort? Shrug
My insight is wrong? Are you reading what you are typing and the reaction to it?
Not sure what you mean by that. Seems to me you're getting a bit uppity.
I thought you "dont care", you've been nothing but stereotypical and rude to anyone outside of your group.
I don't care about some things, and I care about others. You're going to need to be more specific about what this "care" applies to. You're making little more than emotional smoke at this point.
Why should I? No matter how many articles I give you, I can already tell your still going to say the same thing as you are. Look it up yours… moreelf, Im not doing it for you. My insight is wrong? Are you reading what you are typing and the reaction to it? I thought you "dont care", you've been nothing but stereotypical and rude to anyone outside of your group.
Your point isn't clear. Seems like you have beef with religion, maybe you should get that figured out. I'm not going to be your therapist and help you get over your issues with religion. Notice no one else is bothering to get into this argument? Your being a pain to talk to, and you obviously are not really listening or seeing how ironic you are being with religion and being against its beliefs. I think I'm done if your going to continue with the 'tude as the others are. Figure it out yourself.
Why should I? No matter how many articles I give you, I can already tell your still going to say the same thing as you are.
Because … moreall of your beliefs should be based on fact. And how would you know that? You haven't attempted it in the slightest.
Look it up yourself, Im not doing it for you.
I think that's a fallacy of some sort? Shrug
My insight is wrong? Are you reading what you are typing and the reaction to it?
Not sure what you mean by that. Seems to me you're getting a bit uppity.
I thought you "dont care", you've been nothing but stereotypical and rude to anyone outside of your group.
I don't care about some things, and I care about others. You're going to need to be more specific about what this "care" applies to. You're making little more than emotional smoke at this point.
Your whole point was you being triggered that religion is so against gay rights.
That's a crude way of putting it, leaves a lot to be desired, and could easily be misconstrued to mean something completely different, but I think you understand the basic sentiment, yes.
You want religion to respect gay rights is your whole point.
No more than I want ISIS to stop killing people and sit down and have some lovely tea with me. My point is that I would not support a group that was against homosexual rights (if within a reasonable degree of difficulty) and that the majority of people who are against homosexual rights are religious nuts.
You need to figure out what you are even talking about chap, you seem a bit everywhere its hard to even get your point anymore.
Well, I can follow it easy enough.
Your for gay rights? Ok cool.
Sure am.
And yet you think religion is wrong and shouldn't be used,
It is factually wrong and easily morally corrupting.
much like how gay rights are said to be? Not cool.
Only if one starts from the perspective of following ancient dogma, an eternally inconsistent natural law moral system, or downright insanity (though a handful of other examples may apply).
I see no problem with not prioritizing being respected
Your whole point was you being triggered that religion is so against gay righ… morets. You want religion to respect gay rights is your whole point. You need to figure out what you are even talking about chap, you seem a bit everywhere its hard to even get your point anymore. Your for gay rights? Ok cool. And yet you think religion is wrong and shouldn't be used, much like how gay rights are said to be? Not cool.
Seems like you have beef with religion, maybe you should get that figured out.
I do, and I have figured it out. Fuck religion.
I'm not going to be your therapist and help you get over your issues with religion.
Great. I hope I never lose my animosity towards religion.
Notice no one else is bothering to get into this argument? Your being a pain to talk to, and you obviously are not really listening or seeing how ironic you are being with religion and being against its beliefs.
Don't much care if anyone joins. I was completely content leaving it where it was until you joined in. I don't care if I'm a pain to talk to, I am listening, and I still don't see the irony.
I think I'm done if your going to continue with the 'tude as the others are. Figure it out yourself.
Alright. I'll be waiting on that source you must have to substantiate your wild claim.
Your point isn't clear. Seems like you have beef with religion, maybe you should get that figured out. I'm not going to be your therapist an… mored help you get over your issues with religion. Notice no one else is bothering to get into this argument? Your being a pain to talk to, and you obviously are not really listening or seeing how ironic you are being with religion and being against its beliefs. I think I'm done if your going to continue with the 'tude as the others are. Figure it out yourself.
I told you I am religious and yet I am for gay rights. But you are for gay rights but are against religion. You are being a very bad example is what I'm sayin'. I'm not going to repeat everything for you or write a whole story, there's no point, I sum things up. The religions that are for killing gays (which I am not apart of) I don't agree with, but nothing to do about that is there? There are religions that are for killing Christians just because they are Christians. They go through the same dam trouble that you keep spewing about gay rights yet you don't give them any respect for how they are. Most religions when they are against gay rights are just against it, but many are not against it at all. You can hate on the ones that kill gays for just being gay all you want but its not going to change, not the way your doing it.
Your whole point was you being triggered that religion is so against gay rights.
That's a crude way of putting it, leaves a lot to b… moree desired, and could easily be misconstrued to mean something completely different, but I think you understand the basic sentiment, yes.
You want religion to respect gay rights is your whole point.
No more than I want ISIS to stop killing people and sit down and have some lovely tea with me. My point is that I would not support a group that was against homosexual rights (if within a reasonable degree of difficulty) and that the majority of people who are against homosexual rights are religious nuts.
You need to figure out what you are even talking about chap, you seem a bit everywhere its hard to even get your point anymore.
Well, I can follow it easy enough.
Your for gay rights? Ok cool.
Sure am.
And yet you think religion is wrong and shouldn't be used,
… [view original content]
Poor little baby. I didn't mean to get you triggered with your own irony. Grow up in the real world, hate on religion all you want, even the religions that cause no problem whats so ever, but those people in those religions, they will never be for gay rights if you try and convince them the way your talking to me. If anything, they will be against religion, with you saying fuck them. Friendly religions go through the same oppression that you think gay rights are having, you arn't going to get any sympathy from me and neither will any one else with your crazy statements. Fuck religion= fuck beliefs. Fuck beliefs= the same thing gay rights have. You don't even get your own point anymore. You want religions to join your side and be all for gay rights, in your perfect world? Then maybe dont go saying fuck you to them and fuck their beliefs.
Your point isn't clear.
K.
Seems like you have beef with religion, maybe you should get that figured out.
I do, and I … morehave figured it out. Fuck religion.
I'm not going to be your therapist and help you get over your issues with religion.
Great. I hope I never lose my animosity towards religion.
Notice no one else is bothering to get into this argument? Your being a pain to talk to, and you obviously are not really listening or seeing how ironic you are being with religion and being against its beliefs.
Don't much care if anyone joins. I was completely content leaving it where it was until you joined in. I don't care if I'm a pain to talk to, I am listening, and I still don't see the irony.
I think I'm done if your going to continue with the 'tude as the others are. Figure it out yourself.
Alright. I'll be waiting on that source you must have to substantiate your wild claim.
I told you I am religious and yet I am for gay rights. But you are for gay rights but are against religion. You are being a very bad example is what I'm sayin'.
So because we agree on something I should respect your beliefs? No. If I found someone that supported homosexual marriage but thought women were subhuman should I respect his beliefs? No.
I'm not going to repeat everything for you or write a whole story, there's no point, I sum things up.
K.
The religions that are for killing gays (which I am not apart of) I don't agree with, but nothing to do about that is there?
Interfere.
There are religions that are for killing Christians just because they are Christians.
Gasp Are you generalizing?!? But yeah, you're right.
They go through the same dam trouble that you keep spewing about gay rights yet you don't give them any respect for how they are.
Uhh. . . what?
Most religions when they are against gay rights are just against it, but many are not against it at all.
K.
You can hate on the ones that kill gays for just being gay all you want but its not going to change, not the way your doing it.
Doesn't mean I would eat at a restaurant that sent funds to ISIS.
I told you I am religious and yet I am for gay rights. But you are for gay rights but are against religion. You are being a very bad example… more is what I'm sayin'. I'm not going to repeat everything for you or write a whole story, there's no point, I sum things up. The religions that are for killing gays (which I am not apart of) I don't agree with, but nothing to do about that is there? There are religions that are for killing Christians just because they are Christians. They go through the same dam trouble that you keep spewing about gay rights yet you don't give them any respect for how they are. Most religions when they are against gay rights are just against it, but many are not against it at all. You can hate on the ones that kill gays for just being gay all you want but its not going to change, not the way your doing it.
I told you I am religious and yet I am for gay rights. But you are for gay rights but are against religion. You are being a very bad example… more is what I'm sayin'.
So because we agree on something I should respect your beliefs? No. If I found someone that supported homosexual marriage but thought women were subhuman should I respect his beliefs? No.
I'm not going to repeat everything for you or write a whole story, there's no point, I sum things up.
K.
The religions that are for killing gays (which I am not apart of) I don't agree with, but nothing to do about that is there?
Interfere.
There are religions that are for killing Christians just because they are Christians.
Gasp Are you generalizing?!? But yeah, you're right.
They go through the same dam trouble that you keep spewing about gay rights yet you don't give them any respect for how they are.
Uhh. . . what?
Most religio… [view original content]
Comments
Marriage is not a fundamental human right. Wait, what? You don't need to hate someone for not wanting them to have equal rights? That makes no sense; "Yeah, I respect you and everything, but you don't deserve to have equal rights, I have absolutely no contempt for you though!" Regardless of that, you said so yourself that it is hateful and anti-homosexual, now you're telling me it's not....
And that is your belief. Not everyone abides by the same moral system, obviously.
I never justified or tried to validate the tradition argument. I actually agree with you somewhat, that is where we, and the people who oppose gay marriage differ; they value tradition, and we don't. It has nothing to do with hating gay people.
Again, Never tried to validate or justify the tradition argument. I was only saying that it wasn't all about hatred and anti-homosexuality.
Yeah, it's just one of those pesky "normal rights" that don't really matter that much. There is a difference between the two, and it's exaggerated to make the point easier to grasp.
Hey, that's my rhetorical question! You can't take it.
You missed the sarcasm I used to relate two things that obviously were hateful and anti(" ") using the same rational used to determine that the original was not hateful and anti(" "). Unless you wanted to get into the semantic word play of what definitions of hate and anti are applicable in the given context, etc.
Obviously. The amount I (or anyone else) may object to a moral dilemma and the accomplishments that can be reached for or against it will determine how an individual will react to a given proposition, such as eating at an establishment run by religious nutbags that want to take us back a few decades.
Then why would you give that argument? If you know it is false, both in tradition not being a means to determine morality of a position, nor of "traditional marriage" being applicable to, exclusively, one man and one woman, then what purpose does it serve to bring it up? You might as well have applied it to the Jew killin' charity and said that they have an argument that, traditionally, Jews have been ostracized from many societies and even targeted for death in many societies so it's only tradition that we off them. As I stated earlier in a sarcastic tone it applies just as logically that killin' a few Jews is necessarily as "hate" oriented as prohibiting homosexuals from marrying (only more extreme).
So what you're saying is that: You compared somebody being opposed to gay people getting married because of their religious beliefs, to the murder of jews... in order to misrepresent what I said, twisting my words to make it sound like I said: you can be against someone's human rights, but not them themselves? First of all, that's absurd. Second of all, marriage still isn't a human right. The right not to have your life taken is.
Well the definitions of hate and anti that are applicable in the given context, are the actual definitions of hate and anti...
Because you said that to be against gay marriage is to be hateful and anti-homosexual, to which I replied: No. It's not the same thing, since you're against the practice of gay marriage, not homosexuals themselves. There is a great distinction between the two that seems to always be ignored.
I haven't twisted your words as far as I can tell. Human right or a regular, everyday right, it's still a right. Exaggerated to get the point across, as stated earlier, but still a fine comparison.
There are any number of ways to use words in a given context. You may argue that one is more applicable than another, or that another term specifically implies a connotation that more accurately portrays a sentiment, but the idea is unchanging.
To which I reply, yes, it is the same thing. One directly involves the other and they are inseparable. Just as with the example with the Jew killin' charity. It could be argued that you don't truly need to hate the Jews to want them dead because (enter rational here; tradition, religious inferiority, etc). You're still anti-Jew, and from the perspective of the Jews hate is a completely acceptable term to use, and if it's not, then let's start the semantic word game to find the word that more accurately represents the sentiments displayed by the charity. . . because that distinction is a necessary one?
I might close this thread because of everything above, of course @MetallicaRules has to make this thread not what I wanted
So much for that.
You do know there are athiests who disagree with gay rights, correct?
You can't just close the thread.
You can do anything... if you believe hard enough.
Just like a homophobe running a multi-million dollar fast food joint.
ahahahahahahahahaha. that was actually fucking hilarious. i applaud you for that one.
Questioning whether I should read these comments or nah. >.>
What the fuck is ChickFilA
If you want it closed, just ask.
Yeah all 13 of them. There are also atheists who believe the world is flat, that aliens have abducted people, and that a race of reptilian people run the world.
Cool. We somehow managed to take a thread about food and manage to twist it into the religious beliefs of the company's founders. Gotta just love the world we live in.
There are way more than just 13 people. And you know it. More like a million. I would know. Some people just dont like the newer ages and liked the rules they had when they where kids. Meaning Many athiests dont like the newer laws where gay marriage is allowed.
You know whats ironic though? You respect and support gay rights and their ways, yet you dont respect peoples religions. And most religions are harmless. Pretty hypocritical. If you want respect, you need to respect others.
Obviously. And obviously I wasn't trying to give a factual statement.
A million?! Lmao, yeah, maybe globally. In the Unites States even estimating that 3% of atheists believe homosexual marriage should be unlawful (a very high estimation I would venture to say) gives us only ~300,000.
Maybe some, but most realize that laws are there to enforce moral principles, not to give us a sense of nostalgia.
I guess that depends what you mean by "many".
There is absolutely a correlation (causal I would say) between being religious and being against homosexual marriage.
If you disrespect religions than I dont respect you, or your love for gay rights. Why should anyone respect your needs if you dont respect theres? See what Im getting at with this? Just irony. The way you feel when someone hates on gay rights is the same feel others have when you say only (and mostly) religious people are against gay rights, which is actually really false and a bad stereotype. There is no corralation, not sure why you think that. I know plenty of people that are against gay rights and arn't religious, and I know people who ARE religious and are for gay rights, do you just presume anyone who is religious hates gay rights? Once again, false. There are plenty of religious people who are for gay rights, me being one of them.
How is that ironic? If I support one thing I need to support. . . everything?
Sure. Norse mythology, the ancient Egyptian religions, Buddhism, most are pretty benign. The Abrahamic religions not so much. This is especially true in the western world.
Respect is earned.
And you wont earn respect if you dont respect others.
I found it ironic, pretty simple, because you expect people to accept your ways and yet you dont respect theirs. If your rude to someones beliefs, why should they ever be polite to your beliefs? There's no reason for them to be.
K.
I don't need this anymore than I need a law for or against abortion. It affects myself very little.
That I should respect ancient dogma if I want people to respect homosexual rights? Well, that's just not genna happen. Fuck religion.
Not ironic. And I don't recall saying only religious people are against gay rights (but mostly is completely acceptable, the majority of people against homosexual rights are religious and it's because they are religious). It's not a false stereotype and it's not a bad stereotype (because it's not false).
. . . Seriously, bruh?
Against and nonreligous? Obviously.
For and religious? Obviously.
Presume anyone who is religious is against homosexual rights? No, not at all.
Of cours it's false. No one is saying it's true.
Obviously there are, and good for you. It's comforting to know that people can look past the dusty tomes and judge propositions based on our current understanding of reality.
What are you doing replying to the older comments? Again as others have said, there really is no correlation. I'm not sure what else you want me to tell you unless you look it up yourself as you've already been told enough. And thanks?
I'm not. At least I don't think I am. I have responded to the two posts you left me just recently.
That is a laughable position to hold.
I'm fairly confident in my assessment of the correlation. If you have a source that discounts my position I would be ecstatic to take a look.
And you're welcome.
Hey if you don't wan't to listen that's fine by me. I'm sure you can look up the correlation yourself because I don't think its worth the time for me, I gave you my insight you can do the rest.
Don't care.
Except I don't expect people to accept my ways.
They don't need to be. I expect people to critique me. So long as their points are valid I don't care much for how polite they are.
Correct.
And this should tell you enough what your problem is.
Give me a source. Seriously, if there is evidence that verifies what you're saying then I will admit it and apologize wholeheartedly.
Your insight is wrong.
Why should I? No matter how many articles I give you, I can already tell your still going to say the same thing as you are. Look it up yourself, Im not doing it for you. My insight is wrong? Are you reading what you are typing and the reaction to it? I thought you "dont care", you've been nothing but stereotypical and rude to anyone outside of your group.
I see no problem with not prioritizing being respected. Especially when it comes to being respected by solely respecting someone else (for following ridiculous dogma nonetheless) and not for actually doing or knowing anything. Seems like an empty and pointless respect to me.
Your whole point was you being triggered that religion is so against gay rights. You want religion to respect gay rights is your whole point. You need to figure out what you are even talking about chap, you seem a bit everywhere its hard to even get your point anymore. Your for gay rights? Ok cool. And yet you think religion is wrong and shouldn't be used, much like how gay rights are said to be? Not cool.
Because all of your beliefs should be based on fact. And how would you know that? You haven't attempted it in the slightest.
I think that's a fallacy of some sort? Shrug
Not sure what you mean by that. Seems to me you're getting a bit uppity.
I don't care about some things, and I care about others. You're going to need to be more specific about what this "care" applies to. You're making little more than emotional smoke at this point.
Your point isn't clear. Seems like you have beef with religion, maybe you should get that figured out. I'm not going to be your therapist and help you get over your issues with religion. Notice no one else is bothering to get into this argument? Your being a pain to talk to, and you obviously are not really listening or seeing how ironic you are being with religion and being against its beliefs. I think I'm done if your going to continue with the 'tude as the others are. Figure it out yourself.
That's a crude way of putting it, leaves a lot to be desired, and could easily be misconstrued to mean something completely different, but I think you understand the basic sentiment, yes.
No more than I want ISIS to stop killing people and sit down and have some lovely tea with me. My point is that I would not support a group that was against homosexual rights (if within a reasonable degree of difficulty) and that the majority of people who are against homosexual rights are religious nuts.
Well, I can follow it easy enough.
Sure am.
It is factually wrong and easily morally corrupting.
Only if one starts from the perspective of following ancient dogma, an eternally inconsistent natural law moral system, or downright insanity (though a handful of other examples may apply).
K.
I do, and I have figured it out. Fuck religion.
Great. I hope I never lose my animosity towards religion.
Don't much care if anyone joins. I was completely content leaving it where it was until you joined in. I don't care if I'm a pain to talk to, I am listening, and I still don't see the irony.
Alright. I'll be waiting on that source you must have to substantiate your wild claim.
I told you I am religious and yet I am for gay rights. But you are for gay rights but are against religion. You are being a very bad example is what I'm sayin'. I'm not going to repeat everything for you or write a whole story, there's no point, I sum things up. The religions that are for killing gays (which I am not apart of) I don't agree with, but nothing to do about that is there? There are religions that are for killing Christians just because they are Christians. They go through the same dam trouble that you keep spewing about gay rights yet you don't give them any respect for how they are. Most religions when they are against gay rights are just against it, but many are not against it at all. You can hate on the ones that kill gays for just being gay all you want but its not going to change, not the way your doing it.
Poor little baby. I didn't mean to get you triggered with your own irony. Grow up in the real world, hate on religion all you want, even the religions that cause no problem whats so ever, but those people in those religions, they will never be for gay rights if you try and convince them the way your talking to me. If anything, they will be against religion, with you saying fuck them. Friendly religions go through the same oppression that you think gay rights are having, you arn't going to get any sympathy from me and neither will any one else with your crazy statements. Fuck religion= fuck beliefs. Fuck beliefs= the same thing gay rights have. You don't even get your own point anymore. You want religions to join your side and be all for gay rights, in your perfect world? Then maybe dont go saying fuck you to them and fuck their beliefs.
So because we agree on something I should respect your beliefs? No. If I found someone that supported homosexual marriage but thought women were subhuman should I respect his beliefs? No.
K.
Interfere.
Gasp Are you generalizing?!? But yeah, you're right.
Uhh. . . what?
K.
Doesn't mean I would eat at a restaurant that sent funds to ISIS.
You really don't get the point do you? By this time I can just mark you as a troll ;-)
I suppose not.
Alright.