After Boston’s Archbishop Seán Patrick O’Malley back in May stepped in to prevent Catholic schools from kicking out gay kids, or rather the kids of gay parents, the Archdiocese of Boston has released a new policy that promises admissions officers won’t discriminate based on sexuality orientation. There is a small loophole in the policy, which allows for decisions to also be made in “the best interest of the child,” whatever that means. Moreover, the new rules will not, however, let gay parents off the hook entirely; they must still “must accept and understand that the teachings of the Catholic Church are an essential and required part of the curriculum.” Which means gay parents who send their kids to Catholic schools volunteer to have their children taught that when the school bus drops them off at home that afternoon, they’ll be returning to a den of sin. Win for everyone?
Jeffree
Why would any gay parents send their kid to a Catholic school? It’s not just the way those schools teach homophobia, but also the blatant sexism & conformism. Catholic views on human sexuality can ‘t be healthy for any kid, LGBT or str8.
I realize that the public schools in some areas of the US are in bad shape, but unless the Catholic school is *really* the only option, I wouldn’t send my kid there.
Not to mention that the tuition is helping to support a church with a terrible track record on human rights….
Franky
I don’t understand why any gay parents would ever ever ever ever (and one more time for good measure) EVER send their kids to a catholic school. You’re basically sending your kids where they’re guaranteed to be taught to hate you. At best it’ll be a confusing experience for the child to be taught to radically different things at home and at school. On top of that you’re helping to fund some of the biggest opponents of equal rights for homosexuals. I fail to see a silver lining in putting your kids in catholic schools.
--
Neither of you is an educator or tuned in to issues related to education, I take it.
Catholic schools consistently outperform their peer systems, using less money to do so.
Your comments reveal little more than your tired anti-Catholic bigotry.
GetBalance
@#3 Better education, less cash, for the gaurentee of a sexually twisted mind. I’d say your priorities are quite jaded.
Jack
I want #3 to actually prove his/her case. Just because you say it, doesn’t make it true.
randy
My sister explored Catholic schools for her son, who tested off the charts. He was accepted to every school he applied, actually, except the catholic school. They found that he wasn’t “at their level,” which my sister found very strange. But when she visited the classrooms, it dawned on her that they selected only students who would sit quietly, not ask questions, do what their were told and be very obedient. My nephew is NOT the type to accept things without questioning.
So she figured that the reason why catholic schools have such good obedient students is that that is how they select them! She is very thankful now that they didn’t go there, or else he would have had a lot of problems.
ewe
@–: Tired anti catholic bigotry you say? It certainly exists. I am tired of you and your avoidance issues. Having said that i do believe any gay parent should reevaluate why they want to support a catholic school whose leadership promotes discrimination.
justiceontherocks
@Ewe – you’re being too nice. Bigotry is prejudice not based on facts. The facts about the Catholic church are that it is the most reprehensible criminal organization on the face of the earth today. Any parent, gay straight or otherwise, who entrusts their young children to a catholic school risks physical and psychological abuse of the child. And that is a proven fact.
GetBalance
@Justice/Ewe
Penn and Teller pretty much nailed it:
“after thorough investigation we found organized religion to be the most insidious hoax ever played on mankind.”
I agree.
Needless to say Catholicism leads the pack.
kayla
Wow, I can’t believe the anti-Catholic bigotry and generalizations!! There are liberal Catholics…Well, thank God I’m Anglican….hopefully, I can avoid such hateful comments…Or is only Atheism/Agnosticism acceptable around these parts?
justiceontherocks
@ the comments about the Roman church aren’t “hateful.” They are in fact a criminal enterprise engaged in covering up crimes against young boys to retain property. In understand people clinging to the “faith of their fathers” but the catholics just should not be allowed to run schools any more than NAMBLA should. Priests shouldn’t be allowed within 500 yards of a school.
The accusations of child abuse aren’t generalizations, they are facts.
GetBalance
God Heaven Hell Sin, those are hoaxes played on hoodwinked people, even the Clergy that pushes it are buying the farm. That observation has nothing to do with hate, but more fact based reality by intelligent humans with clear discernment. There, w Justices comment I think we’ve covered the infrastructure. The details however, are endless.
I will be glad to debate you any time on who’s hating who, tho you would not prevail. Minus the sugar coated film of deception, it becomes quite obvious any argument to the opposite is sand sifting through fingers..
GetBalance
PS and not an athiest or agnostic. I am a total Jesus dude via A Course in Miracles, the only accurate accounting by him I follow. Unfortunately he was wrapped in a fold of lies in the Jewish Bible, which he had nothing to do with. He is our brother and our teacher, to call him a savior sent by his father with the fathers intent to murder his own son is so delusional only a monster would create such lies in God’s name.
Nate
Does anyone know what could have been meant by ” the best interest of the child” could possibly mean?
@justiceontherocks: I totally agree, but I believe schools should only be run by the state, not the church. Then we wouldent have to worry about anti-homosexual religion being shoved down our throats due to the separation of church and state, yet I am for saying the pledge of allegiance before school in it’s entirety.
kayla
@Nate: These are private institutions…the state cannot dictate what church can or cannot open schools, at least not in the United States of America…what kind of government are you advocating?
Nate
@kayla:
I just don’t think churches should be able to run schools that can give a student credits for learning about how homosexuality will get you damned to he’ll, I’m not advocating any kind of government, I haven’t even made up my mind on political views yet, which I don’t feel I need to seeing as how I am only 16 years old 😉
Cassandra
I see Queerty is back to it’s usual high level of atheism fueled anti-Christian hate mongering. Atheists are no different from ex-gays, both are denying God-given aspects of their whole being. Only in the case of atheism it is much worse , as they are denying the truth of their spiritual natures, something that will sentence them to an eternity of separation from their creator.
Atheism like homophobia is a prejudice
“Bigotry is prejudice not based on facts.”
Not really, but don’t let accuracy get in your way, justiceontherocks. Bigotry is often based on some facts, or the facts about some people, or interpretation of facts, or even all of the facts about everyone in the group without recognizing that those facts apply to everyone outside the group as well. For example, homophobes use the fact of buttsex, which they find icky, to condemn homosexuals – using their interpretation of the fact while ignoring that said fact also applies to heterosexuals.
The dictionary definition doesn’t even consider the issue of facts:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/bigotry
big·ot·ry
? ?/?b?g?tri/ Show Spelled[big-uh-tree] Show IPA
–noun, plural -ries.
1.
stubborn and complete intolerance of any creed, belief, or opinion that differs from one’s own.
2.
the actions, beliefs, prejudices, etc., of a bigot.
the attitudes, behaviour, or way of thinking of a bigot; prejudice; intolerance
bigot (?b???t) [Click for IPA pronunciation guide]
— n
a person who is intolerant of any ideas other than his or her own, esp on religion, politics, or race
In practice, bigotry is recognized by certain symptoms, like judging all members of a group by the misdeeds,flaws, of some.
For example, reviling all Catholics because of the sex predators/cover up scandal, is like reviling all GLBTQ people because of the actions of Renato Seabra, or men who get caught having sex in public. It isn’t rational or reasonable when homophobes use the wrongs committed by some GLBTQ people to brand all of us as evil, and it isn’t rational to do the same to Catholics, or people of faith in general.
“but the catholics just should not be allowed to run schools any more than NAMBLA should.”
Of course, homophobes make the same argument, that homosexuals should not be allowed to run schools, or teach, or be around children, any more NAMBLA should. Equating one’s enemies with pedophiles is a pretty standard tactic for all kinds of bigots.
Essentially, you’ve branded all Catholics as pedophiles, the way homophobes brand all GLBTQ people as pedophiles. It is wrong when homophobes do it to us, it is wrong when you do it to Catholics.
Some Catholic clergy are sexual predators, most are not. Some people in every demographic (other than one defined as ‘not a sexual predator) – race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, age, class, political ideology, are sexual predators. And in hierarchical structures, covering up scandal is commonplace – in science, business, education, and again, is committed by people of every race, ethnicity, political background, ideology, and sexual orientation.
No matter what subset of humanity you chose, there are people in that group who do terrible things, including the subset “GLBTQ”. Judge everyone in the subset by the behavior of the bad apples, and you’re engaged in prejudice.
Blaming all Catholics for the sexual predation/cover up is not only prejudice and hate, it is gives homophobes license to do the same in return to GLBTQ people, and, it redirects attention away from the real problem – sexual predation, abuse of power and deception, which can occur in among any group of people, to fixate on something that was not causative or even correlative.
In other words, blaming Catholics in general, rather than the particular individual offenders and those who conspired to aid them/cover up their crimes, is as helpful as blaming gay men for AIDS.
The only people who are helped by such games, are the bigots who play them.
GetBalance
@Cassandra
Athiests are never cut off from their true creator which is only love. You can think you are separate but it’s not true. As long as someone loves they are emulating their creator and being the God they were created from. In religion, where the false God of war and punishment steps in and rules by popular demand and subterfuge ( a Zeus knockoff) that is where people get cut off from creator. Who wants to snuggle up to a serial killer? And who can blame them? As w any church, it happens all the time. If people only knew how that programming disorients them even if they think it hasn’t, they’d run and run fast.
Otis Criblecoblis
So…”you must accept the [bizarre] Catholic teachings”.
Fuck the Boston Catholic Church…until it admits that it is a criminal organization, and apologizes for its strange anti-gay, anti-human behavior…no mercy for you religious freaks!
Max
As w all fast food religions, it’s best to check the ingredients prior to purchase.
Goodnight Moon
you’re goddamn right i’m anti-catholic. and 13 years of parochial schooling earned me every molecule of resentment.
ewe
@kayla: The hateful comments you speak of are coming out of the Vatican. Please don’t try to belittle anyone who replies in kind.
ewe
@Cassandra: Atheists are no different from ex-gays, both are denying God-given aspects of their whole being.
Read more: http://www.queerty.com/bostons-catholic-schools-wont-block-gay-parents-kids-from-daily-brainwashing-20110114/#ixzz1BF27bqk3
Cassandra: Even if what you say is true, you conveniently forget to mention that your belief system is only a theory as well. Practice what you preach Deary.
ewe
@Goodnight Moon: lmao. Sorry i don’t mean to laugh. I hope you can find solace in knowing you are not alone in your experience.
GetBalance
@Atheism like homophobia is a prejudice
I agree that as a culture we somtimes get hung up making sweeping statements which you are bringing into light. But then again, aren’t you breaking your golden rule, which I agree with, in your very handle? I agree homophobia is a prejudice and is a sweeping true statement, but Atheism? That can hold no fear for the observing scientist that has no belief in religion or God. There is no phobia, no prejudice, just factual data. Would it not be a more correct statement if your handle read ‘Religion like Homophobia is a Prejudice’? That is a factual statement, your handle would seem otherwise.
Nate
@GetBalance:
What do you mean religion like homophobia is a prejudice? Excuse my arrogance, but is there no religion that does not hate homosexuality, or in better words, ban and/or extremely dislike homosexuality?
And I am still curious weather or not you are a professional author, please enlighten me?
GetBalance
@Nate
Yes most if not all religions hate homosexuality, and that is their prejudice, i.e. just like homophobia is a prejudice. My apologies if it didn’t come out right in my previous comment. I’m not a professional author as in, Im not published. But who knows, there is always tomorrow. Why do you ask if I am a professional author?
ewe
@kayla: These are private institutions…the state cannot dictate what church can or cannot open schools, at least not in the United States of America…what kind of government are you advocating?
Read more: http://www.queerty.com/bostons-catholic-schools-wont-block-gay-parents-kids-from-daily-brainwashing-20110114/#ixzz1BGIgsSGO
why not? they have to be accredited in the same way as public schools to promote children forward. I advocate no subsidies AT ALL. No bus rides and no lunches either. That’s the kind of government we need. I doubt if even half the kids enrolled in city catholic schools are even catholic.
ewe
@Nate: You are only 16 years old? holy moly ravioli. Disregard my comments if you have ever read them as i do tend to have a foul mouth. Now i have to censor myself.
Atheism like homophobia is a prejudice
GetBalance
You wrote:
“But then again, aren’t you breaking your golden rule, which I agree with, in your very handle?”
No. Since you didn’t bother to explain, but simply made an unsupported accusation, a simple no suffices.
I agree homophobia is a prejudice and is a sweeping true statement, but Atheism? That can hold no fear for the observing scientist that has no belief in religion or God.”
Prejudice is not contingent on fear or phobia. Further, your premise that atheists have no fear is an unfounded assumption. Given the abusiveness of atheists here online, and the general imperfection of all humans, including atheists, it is safe to say that atheist fear being accountable for their imperfections. They respond to this fear by asserting that the one who will ultimately hold them accountable, does not exist.
“There is no phobia, no prejudice, just factual data.”
There is no factual data in atheism. Atheism is based entirely on the absence of data. Atheism is not science, it is not derived from science.
“Would it not be a more correct statement if your handle read ‘Religion like Homophobia is a Prejudice’? That is a factual statement, your handle would seem otherwise.”
No, that would be dishonest and deceitful. Religion is not a prejudice, it does not fit the definition of prejudice. Generally, religions teach that all humans are imperfect, the core criticisms in religion are universal. Christianity teaches ‘For all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God’. But atheism says “all people of faith are wrong about their own experiences” while everyone else is right based on their lack of experience.
I wish you had made a genuine effort to address the material I had actually presented, instead of trying to be clever.
“Yes most if not all religions hate homosexuality,”
That is a false statement. Even within Christianity, there is tremendous diversity of opinion about homosexuality, and, when the relevant texts are translated accurately, and evaluated within context, they do not articulate bias against homosexuality. Ironically though, the Bible has hundreds of rebukes directly explicitly and specifically at heterosexuality, and the very first judgment/curse in the Bible, directed at humans, specifically targets the standard consequence of heterosexual sexual intimacy.
Within the other major religions, including Islam, there is also considerable varieties of opinion regarding homosexuality. You are making the mistake of judging all of religion by fundamentalists. Fundamentalism is not religion, is a distortion of religion that also infects science, politics, philosophy, even the arts.
There are native American faiths that do not condemn homosexuality, other indigenous or re-created indigenous religions that do not, and many ancient religions that did not condemn homosexuality. Some even celebrated it as equal to or superior to heterosexuality.
“and that is their prejudice,”
But the fact that some people read their own prejudices into a religion does not make the religion itself a prejudice. Prejudice infects science, there is a whole subset of homophobes who argue from science that homosexuality is wrong, bad, etc. Just like religion based homophobes, the science based ones distort and rape science to defend their prejudice against GLBTQ people, but, the fact that they use science to justify their prejudice doesn’t mean that science is a prejudice, and the fact that religious homophobes use religion to justify their prejudice does not mean that religion is a prejudice.
I am not sure if you simply do not understand the words and concepts you are bandying about, or if you are deliberately trying to deceive, but in either case, the result is the same: your claims are false.
kayla
@ewe: Wow, and where should those children go to school? You are willing to sacrifice children to satisfy your hatred of religion…The majority of Catholic school kids’ parents would not be able to afford to transfer their children to a comparable secular private school. It’s lower middle class to middle class parents, who want to give their kids a shot in life, who send their children to Catholic schools… you are a very hateful person…When the non-religious set up an education system comparable to Catholic schools, then they can talk!!!But how do you get people to sacrifice material wealth and devote themselves to educating children like the nuns and priest who do it everyday, sans religious devotion?? When you figure that out you’ll be able to build a comparable system…
Soupy
Cassandra, why are you using two identities? Are you okay?
Nate
@GetBalance:
Thanks you for clarifying that, and I ask About you being an author because on the sham less thread someone said you should write story’s and then you said ” like this ” and continued to write a short segment from a possibly longer story, and it was good, so I just wanted to know if you were a professional, which I believe you should be, now I sound like a stalker… Anyways I think I might take a religion class in high school because this has got me thinking.
@ewe:
Don’t worry about it, I live with probably the most foul mouthed father in the world, it’s okay. & I don’t think you would need to censor what you say, because I am pretty sure I am the only minor activly reading queerty.
Atheism like homophobia is a prejudice
Kayla,
Ewe and her friends are advocating a government that oppresses religion and treats people of faith as second-class citizens.
You know, the very thing that homophobes would inflict on GLBTQ people.
Nate
@Atheism like homophobia is a prejudice:
I could be a complete idiot…but I am pretty sure ewe is a guy, because I had a neighbor when I was in Germany and his name was ewe but was pronounced (ooh-va)
Sorry to be off topic
But back to the topic…
I do believe however the bible IS bias against homosexuality, and as far as god bashing the consequences of heterosexuality, yes that is true, yet he still by far would prefer someone to be a heterosexual rather than a homosexual…at least from what I have heard about him…which sucks.
You should probably ignore this thought because I doubt I would be able to hold my ground in an argument with you, because you seem to be a hell of alot more intelligent than I am.
🙂
GetBalance
@ Atheism like Homophobia is Prejudice
When I say “religion is prejudice” I am referring to passages in their RELIGIOUS TEXTS that promote produce and incite prejudice, which is defined as an UNREASONABLE dislike for other persons or groups of persons besides themselves.
Islam and Christianity have such passages on MANY subjects in their texts that cause human suffering via prejudice, and they are the two most prevalent and largest religions (over 50%) in the world. So I am not making my statements via how people interpret these texts, but on what the texts actually say, in writing. Both of these religions have very specific phrases that condemns to death, homosexuals. They are dripping with hate and an “unreasonable dislike” for gays, prejudice ala mode. If you think you have an interpretation that would fail such prejudice, by all means, feel free to articulate.
Atheism on the other hand, is simply a statement that says deities, Gods etc, do not exist, because there is no proof. That is a fact. That is the truth. If that is wrong in your mind, go ahead and prove Abraham’s God, Zeus, Osiris, Isis and on and on, actually existed, and is not prose from common law and conjecture about ancient times put forward by men. By all means, the floor is all yours.
Atheists do not get mad at religion because of the beliefs, they get mad because religous advocates push it down the worlds throat, and condemns those that do not partake, another RELIGIOUS prejudice i.e. “join our club or burn in hell”.
Atheists and non religious people not wanting suspicious gibberish shoved down their throats is not an “unreasonable dislike” (prejudice)towards pushy religious people. Just as it is not an “unreasonable dislike” to swat an annoying bee off your shoulder. It is therefore not prejudice. So I hold that Atheism does not hold to the definition of prejudice, but simply stands it’s ground against religiots who are pushy judgmental and yes, prejudice, with deities that are vastly unprovable and made completely out of thin air. The best these religiouts have in the end, is to “HOPE” they and their books were right. Atheists and the non religious simply do not base their lives on future religious belief via “hope” causing pain that breaks hearts and burns souls. Here-Here to that.
Regarding accountability, religions are responsible to hold their own feet to the fire, not atheists or anyone elses for that matter, though you may “hope” differently. The irony is that religiots are so deluded, that we who are not so stupid as to become hypnotized by religious infected belief, actually have to hold religiots feet to the fire . . . FOR THEM . . . i.e. priestly pedophiles and homophobes. They are the most high maintenance group on the planet. Just look at the dollars being spent on the marriage issue, or any other issue where religiots were totally out to lunch in deluded prejudice belief. Talk about LACK OF accountABILITY. We that are not religious are not worried about how some mythical God will judge us in the afterlife while burning homos in his name. We are concerned with the here and now, where reality stands. We are into protecting the homes of our hearts against the fire of misinformed religiots, NOW. In present time.
Gotta love that.
So I hope my stance is clear to you now. I do not deceive. However, I do bust systems that do. Organized religion is bereft with just such infectious bustable and combustable dalliances producing great deception prejudice and hardship upon the masses. Look at the current cultural war on homosexuality. It is bad. It should not be happening. But it is happening, and religions and their credibility are going down via the younger generation because of it, and they should. Why? Because. They. Are. Prejudice.
So yes, the main religions of the world hold an “unreasonable dislike” for others via it’s texts, promoting and operating through prejudice. Atheists via definition, do not hold an “unreasonable dislike” towards those that incite them, and therefore are not prejudice.
As my 7 year old niece would say “easy peasy”.
Atheism like homophobia is a prejudice
“I do believe however the bible IS bias against homosexuality,”
Some people do interpret it that way, largely by taking verses out of context and using inaccurate translations. Do you think that is an acceptable basis for judging someone’s life?
However, the Bible teaches certain core principles, like the Law of Love, which requires that anyone treat everyone else in the same way he/she wants to be treated. In other words, as an equal. Those who read a condemnation of homosexuality into the Bible, are not treating homosexuals as they want to be treated, which means that their belief – that homosexuality is sin – is itself sin. Since it is sin, it cannot come from God.
Another principle is a test that Christ gave for determining right or accurate teaching “good trees bear good fruit, evil trees bear evil fruit”. All of the fruit of anti-gay theology – the consequences or product or end results – are destructive and harmful. Therefore, by Christ’s own test, anti-gay theology is an “evil tree” – it does not come from God.
Another relevant point is that justice, perfect justice, is an innate trait of God, in fact, it is one of the traits that God can recognized by apart from false gods. Since homosexuality is innate, and is no more likely to violate ‘love your neighbor as yourself’ than heterosexuality is, to demand celibacy of homosexuals is intrinsically unjust, and so anti-gay theology is unjust and does not come from God.
And returning to the law of love, Christ is clear that sin is anything that violates either “love God with your entire self” and “love your neighbor as yourself”. But homosexuality, and lovemaking between two people of the same gender, does not intrinsically violate either clause, so it does not fit the definition of sin that Christ provided.
“and as far as god bashing the consequences of heterosexuality, yes that is true,”
One of the key arguments of anti-gay theology is the notion that heterosexuality is superior, it is God’s only approved form of sexuality. Yet, God curses the product of heterosexual unions, and heterosexuality is not the dominant or even most common form of sexuality on earth. By number of species, number of individuals, or sheer mass, the majority of life reproduces asexually, and hermaphrodism is more common than heterosexuality. This disproves the notion that God somehow favors heterosexuality as the only approved means of reproduction/sexual expression.
“yet he still by far would prefer someone to be a heterosexual rather than a homosexual…at least from what I have heard about him…which sucks.”
You’re are relying on what people with an emotional stake in denigrating GLBTQ people have told you. Is that really a sensible thing to do? People who are doing, or what to do something that harms others, are remarkably adapt at twisting anything and everything to excuse their destructive behavior.
“You should probably ignore this thought because I doubt I would be able to hold my ground in an argument with you, because you seem to be a hell of alot more intelligent than I am.”
You are a human being, you deserve to have your concerns taken seriously, just like anyone else.
Atheism like homophobia is a prejudice
GetBalance
You wrote:
“When I say “religion is prejudice” I am referring to passages in their RELIGIOUS TEXTS that promote produce and incite prejudice, which is defined as an UNREASONABLE dislike for other persons or groups of persons besides themselves.”
So, you recognize that you are wrong.
It is not accurate to define an entire system of beliefs, by one belief.
“Islam and Christianity have such passages on MANY subjects in their texts that cause human suffering via prejudice,”
No. They have passages that some people use to justify and excuse prejudice, just as science has processes and data that some people use to justify prejudice.
“So I am not making my statements via how people interpret these texts, but on what the texts actually say, in writing.”
Actually, you are making your statements based on how some people interpret these texts. Any time you read any text, interpretation occurs.
“Both of these religions have very specific phrases that condemns to death, homosexuals.”
No. They have phrases that some people interpret in that particular way. Sticking specifically with the Bible, because I have researched more, being a Christian, the passages you are referring to, from Leviticus, were not written in English. The English translations used by homophobes, and you, are inaccurate. The actual Hebrew is quite different, it expresses a condemnation of a husband having sex with a priest in his wife’s bed. The “as with a woman” – which is nonsensical to apply to homosexuals anyways, is actually “in his wife’s bed”.
“They are dripping with hate and an “unreasonable dislike” for gays, prejudice ala mode.”
No, they are not. Even taking the most homophobic interpretations, the handful of verses used to construct anti-gay theology represents less than 0.01% of the Bible.
“Atheism on the other hand, is simply a statement that says deities, Gods etc, do not exist, because there is no proof.”
Ah, the simplistic approach. The problem is that your simple statement is not simple when it intersects with human lives. What you dismiss as ‘no proof’ is the testimony of the experiences of millions of human beings for as long as humans have left records of any kind. Atheism, without any proof of its own claim, summarily dismisses all of that proof, that experiential data, out of hand.
“That is a fact. That is the truth.”
No, your claim was neither.
“If that is wrong in your mind, go ahead and prove Abraham’s God, Zeus, Osiris, Isis and on and on, actually existed,”
Prove that God, by any name, symbol set, or understanding, does not exist.
You cannot. To do so, you would have to know absolutely everything about the entire universal, at every conceivable scale. And, because by most definitions of God, God’s existence transcends the physical universe as well as permeates it completely, you would also have to know what does or does not exist in a level of existence you cannot access with any of the tools of science.
“Atheists do not get mad at religion because of the beliefs, they get mad because religous advocates push it down the worlds throat, and condemns those that do not partake, another RELIGIOUS prejudice i.e. “join our club or burn in hell”.”
Thank you for paraphrasing the standard anti-gay argument – you know, the one where homophobes are only mad because gays are pushing it down their throats.
“Atheists and non religious people not wanting suspicious gibberish shoved down their throats is not an “unreasonable dislike” (prejudice)towards pushy religious people.”
Sure it is, because your own statement is loaded with unreasonable, pejorative, and false, assumptions.
“Just as it is not an “unreasonable dislike” to swat an annoying bee off your shoulder.”
Homophobes routinely equate homosexuality with insects and vermin.
“It is therefore not prejudice.”
And yet, it is a derogatory, unreasonable assumption about millions of human beings based solely on a shared trait they have. It is indeed a prejudice.
“So I hold that Atheism does not hold to the definition of prejudice,”
People hold all kinds of false ideas. Homophobes routinely claim that their beliefs about GLBTQ people is not prejudice.
“but simply stands it’s ground against religiots who are pushy judgmental and yes, prejudice,”
And yet, by declaring that all religious people are idiots, pushy and judgmental, you have demonstrated prejudice.
“with deities that are vastly unprovable”
But they are not unprovable to everyone. Only about 1% of people are not convinced by the personal testimony of their peers that God exists. Really, you do not accept the proof, the evidence. But that does not mean much.
“and made completely out of thin air.”
Prove it. You cannot meet your own standard of proof, which would mean that atheism is itself “made completely out of thin air”. And in a way it is, because atheism comes from the lack of personal experience coupled with the baseless denial of other people’s experiences.
“The best these religiouts have in the end, is to “HOPE” they and their books were right.”
No. Your derogatory term “religiots” demonstrates bias – prejudice, on your part. It shows that you cannot even talk about most of humanity in a respectful way, as people equal to you in dignity and merit.
The best that religious people experience is direct experience of the presence of God. You may not experience it, but that does not mean God does not exist. It simply means you have not experienced God, or are in denial.
“Atheists and the non religious simply do not base their lives on future religious belief via “hope” causing pain that breaks hearts and burns souls.”
Neither do people of faith, generally. People of faith base their lives on their experiences of the Divine, coupled with principles of justice, compassion, equity, mercy, grace, and so forth. Atheism is devoid of all of these principles.
“Regarding accountability, religions are responsible to hold their own feet to the fire, not atheists or anyone elses for that matter,”
So you and your peers here have, according you, no business criticizing people of faith or religion. And yet, here you are, badmouthing most of humanity.
“The irony is that religiots are so deluded, that we who are not so stupid as to become hypnotized by religious infected belief,”
Ah, more evidence of prejudice.
“actually have to hold religiots feet to the fire . . . ”
And the derogatory and abusive assertions, the evidence of prejudice, are used as an excuse for what – abusive and oppressive behavior.
“priestly pedophiles and homophobes.”
Judging all members of a group because of the wrongdoing of some is classic prejudice.
“They are the most high maintenance group on the planet.”
And your evidence for this is what? Think about how outlandish your claim is. Religious people are more high maintenance than infants? More high maintenance than people in coma’s, or the elderly?
Are you really this uninformed, or just being purposefully deceitful? If you are being purposefully deceitful, doesn’t this indicate that your atheism has deprived you of the ability to behave in an ethical/moral way?
“Just look at the dollars being spent on the marriage issue,”
Would that be the millions spent by people of faith, gay and straight, to support same-sex marriage?
“or any other issue where religiots”
And more evidence of prejudice in the form of a derogatory slur.
“We are concerned with the here and now, where reality stands.”
So, atheists do not have savings accounts, do not stock up on groceries that are on sale, never reminisce, never look forward to anything?
“We are into protecting the homes of our hearts against the fire of misinformed religiots, NOW. In present time.”
No, mostly atheists are into vilifying most of humanity. Their contributions to civil equality, for anyone, have been minimal at best.
“So I hope my stance is clear to you now.”
Sure – overt prejudice coupled with falsehoods.
“I do not deceive.”
Here’s the thing. You have, repeatedly, made deceptive, false claims, so your statement above, is itself a deceptive and false claim.
“However, I do bust systems that do.”
So you say, and yet, you have established a pattern here of trying to deceive people.
“Organized religion is bereft with just such infectious bustable and combustable dalliances producing great deception prejudice and hardship upon the masses.”
Bereft means ‘deprived’ or ‘grieving’, and “dalliances” refers to small moments of inconsequential time. Maybe you used a something to English translator, but the sentence above is almost gobbledegook. What sense is in it, is an unfavorable opinion or feeling formed beforehand or without knowledge, thought, or reason – i.e., a prejudice.
“Look at the current cultural war on homosexuality. It is bad. It should not be happening. But it is happening, and religions and their credibility are going down via the younger generation because of it, and they should. Why? Because. They. Are. Prejudice.”
I’m sorry, but again, you are engaged in prejudice. You are defining all of religion by the beliefs of some religious people, which are based, in the case of Christianity, on a tiny fraction of the Bible. By defining Christianity and religions by homophobia, you are actually supporting homophobia and anti-gay theology.
Meanwhile, the overwhelming majority of all work done to end anti-gay theology and homophobia, is done by people of faith. Not by atheists. The largest GLBTQ organization in the world, is the Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches, who strongly oppose anti-gay theology and strongly support civil equality for GLBTQ people. There is no comparable atheist organization working for civil equality for GLBTQ people.
No, even with the theatrical, ungrammatical flourish of sticking a period after every word, religion is not prejudice. But atheism actually is.
“So yes, the main religions of the world hold an “unreasonable dislike” for others via it’s texts, promoting and operating through prejudice.”
So, no, that isn’t true either. The main religions apply their criticism of humanity to all humans, while atheism only criticizes people of faith.
“Atheists via definition, do not hold an “unreasonable dislike” towards those that incite them, and therefore are not prejudice.”
People of faith, via definition, do not hold an unreasonable dislike to anyone. But atheists essentially hate 99% of humanity.
“As my 7 year old niece would say “easy peasy”.”
Well, if that is your high water mark for insight, education and accuracy, it explains a great deal. It is easy to be wrong, as you have shown. It is easy to make false claims, to employ generalizations so broad they are worthless. It is easy to rely on slurs.
But easy is rarely the road to accurate. You took the easy way out, and failed. Next time, work harder, don’t settle for the cheap shot, the lie, the “easy answer”. You might do better.
Atheism like homophobia is a prejudice
GetBalance
In addition to all of the above, the best evidence that atheism is a prejudice is the way it is consistently expressed – with derogatory and abusive assertions about people of faith.
Even though you tried to present a reasoned rebuttal, you could not resist calling people of faith by a slur that attacked their intelligence.
That indicates that you assume that all people of faith are intrinsically mentally inferior to yourself – for no reason other than they believe something you do not.
What is the definition of prejudice again: “an unfavorable opinion or feeling formed beforehand or without knowledge, thought, or reason.”
You do not know, you cannot know, the intelligence level of all people of faith who ever have lived, yet you dismiss them all as idiots.
Your assertion “not so stupid as to become hypnotized by religious infected belief,” again demonstrates an opinion about millions of people formed without knowledge, and frankly, one that contradicts the testimony of people of faith.
The ironic part is that since I am a person of faith, a Christian, you are of course, taking pot shots at me. And yet, you were unable to refute any point I made. You had to rely on insults and false claims.
I at least, know better than to insult the intelligence of people I am arguing with, in case they present a better argument. I know better than to rely on false assertions, particularly when talking to someone about something they experience, but you, apparently, do not.
Perhaps you should avoid calling religious people idiots, at least until you can actually present a better, more cogent and fact-based position, than religious people like myself can present.
Particularly, you might want to avoid calling religious people by any pejorative or slur when you are trying to convince people that atheism is not a prejudice.
GetBalance
@Atheist like . . .
“Another relevant point is that justice, perfect justice, is an innate trait of God”.
Unfortunately that statement is perfectly false. No God is in “perfect justice” when he sends his only begotten son to earth having fully planned to murder him, causing instability and mayhem throughout earth for eons. Look at current world conditions if you doubt me.
Nor was it perfect justice when he kicked Adam and Eve out of the Garden of Eden, their home, to suffer forever, flooded killing countless when parting the Red Sea, annihilating Sodom and Gammorah due to lack of friendliness, or called homosexuals abominations to be put to death. This is a God of fear, which does not even exist. But tell that to the masses.
I think the problem you project here is, who are you going to believe? Jesus or God, as to what “perfect justice” is. And when they speak such different notes, you have pure confusion, lack of alignment and yes, chaos in the masses trying to figure out who the heck is “right”, Jesus or God? A total short circuit. Confusion breeds confusion, hence a full on gay cultural war built on confusion as to Jesus’s law of love, or God’s law of control and fear. I know who I vote for, and so do you it would seem. But you have not flushed out your hypothesis, as you have not said what you would do with all those God phrases that condemn. Where do they go in your thinking? Do you just ignore them, say they are not God speaking, or forbid the Bible is just plain wrong.
I’m really glad you are taking the Jesus high road as many are, as am I. But those of you that are in religions and are doing so, need to yell at those that are stuck in wrongful protest and petition for removal of such drama from scripture. It hurts us all and needs some strong moderates to stand up to the higher ups and take a stand. It’s time that the sheep get out the wolf for “perfect justice” cuz bottom line, Jesus is not here to do it for you. And wishing he were, or will be, isn’t saving the lives of suicidal teens today.
GetBalance
@Atheist
you said,
“In addition to all of the above, the best evidence that atheism is a prejudice is the way it is consistently expressed – with derogatory and abusive assertions about people of faith.”
Atheists calling people of “faith” on their unbased beliefs, does not present prejudice, because it is not in your definition: “an unfavorable opinion or feeling formed beforehand or without knowledge, thought, or reason.”
Atheists and non religious people have watched you, totally thought it through, with reason, and find religious belief unprovable and bogus. That is not prejudice, that is discernment. Don’t confuse the two. They form an unfavorable opinion of you because you attack those that don’t believe as you do. That is not prejudice either, that is forming an opinion about an attackful group that merits that opinion. Christians are always complaining, “we are so persecuted”. That’s because it’s what you do best, persecute others. You just hate tasting your own medicine.
Now you go on to say how hurt you are at being called a religiot, completely sidestepping the chance to make your religious beliefs believable for me, a typical trait of Christians when they get backed into a corner, become fidgity and just can’t bare to say they cannot back up one bit of their beliefs with factual grounded reasonable data. I see your segwey, it is very very clear.
So with that being said, Atheists that choose to swat you away like hovering hornets ready to sting have every right to do so, out of protection and discernment for their safety and not prejudice against religious belief. They are perfectly reasonably grounded in their belief to swat you away like the plague. You however, have no grounded believable reason to to it to those who don’t believe like you.
Now if you would like to take a shot at why your religious beliefs should rule the roost of this world to include government, again, you have the floor. But please, bring something tangable that relates reasonably and far beyond, “the Bible tells me so”.
We’re waiting.
GetBalance
PS I have never seen or used the word “religiots” until now, so please accept my definition as to what the word implies from me, for this conversation. It is a person who has strong religious beliefs that pushes them strongly on others.
I do not hold that it calls anyone an idiot, that was and is not my intention. Sorry if you took it that way maybe seeing the word used in another location with different meaning.
Please note, when i ask you to prove your religions beliefs, God etc, this is not an I’ll show you mine if you show me yours, do ya dare contest. However, I do have an answer for you, but i ask that you go first, since you were asked first.
Jeffree
@GetBalance:
Interesting how you can tell when someone has run out of arguments FOR their position or pro.duct (e.g. “Atheism like Homophobia) because instead of telling you how great/wonderful their idea/item is, all they can do is knock the competition.
So far what I’m learning from “Don’t be atheist” is that the only reason to be Christian is because the alternatives are bad. And those alternatives make that person very very angry.
Not too convincing, eh what?
justiceontherocks
@Getbalance and Jeffree – You’d be better off watching Maury Povich than having a discussion with Atheism/Cassandra. She is a christian, Hitler was an atheist, all atheists are amoral (or immoral) and you are being mean to her. Hit send, retype, repeat.
I don’t think any parent would send their child to a school run by NAMBLA. The Roman church has about the same record on “handling” children as NAMBLA. Neither group she be allowed to operate a school.
GetBalance
@Jeffree, as with any product in the market place, it’s the greed of competition that makes people knock other products so theirs will sell better. Christianity is the template for it. They knock everything that moves if it doesn’t hold their Logo, a bloody dead man on two sticks, stamped on it. Impressive. blood curdling. Morbid. Now don’t get me wrong, I love Christians, (as Nate is well aware from the Shameless page 😉 but they are truly misguided. Strange to hear from a total Jesus fan like myself I know, but hey, we are all a bit deluded eh? I just dropped the false Nazi God part and it all seemed to fall together quite nicely.
I must say the Priest/Wife/Homosex explanation is a first for me. I had heard that the Bible was referring to pedophilia with the man/boy NAMBLA of it’s times in Leviticus Bible verse, but actually, Atheists like Homophobe’s version is more juicy.
Here is a link you might find quite enlightening about Christianity and Idols, Gods religions etc in general. Some Christians get pretty upset when they see it, others have physically lost their lunch over it, and many have quickly deserted religions after watching it. It’s really quite startling and took me a long time to really digest it being drenched in Christianity as a kid.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BNf-P_5u_Hw&feature=related
@Justice If I’m not mistaken, Cassandra is a drive by shooter. Probably won’t hear from her again.
@Nate Hey, I haven’t forgotten about you man! I just now saw the two recent comments on the Shameless with Older Men etc page. For some reason I didn’t get the notifications. I am constructing a very deserving response for you and will get it out to you today. I love sunny Colorado. I’d love anywhere but drippy dank Seattle, but I won’t bore the discussion by talking about the weather. But I will say, Denver rules. 😉
GetBalance
PS. I insert that SOME Christians I love and SOME “knock everything that moves . . . “
Nate
@GetBalance:
I’m glad queerty finally decided to post my response.
Sorry for the misspelled words in it too, as I just realized it said chortles break, but I meant to write christmas break….I don’t even know what a chortles is…
No rush on the response though.
I do agree Denver is amazing…as soon as Graduate I’m leaving for there and never looking back 😀
Thank you for not forgetting about me, it’s much appreciated for I am extremely bored and now have a fever 😉
Nate
@GetBalance:
I watched that video and soon will watch part 2 & part 3
Wow…how did you come across this? It’s amazing.
Atheism does not condemn rape
GetBalance wrote”
“Unfortunately that statement is perfectly false.”
The statement I presented it standard, traditional Christian theology, and worded slightly differently, appears in many other faith tradition as well.
“No God is in “perfect justice” when he sends his only begotten son to earth having fully planned to murder him,”
Ah, but you are misrepresenting Christian theology. Jesus is not just God’s son, but God as well, and in Christ, God sacrificed himself for the imperfections of humanity. Someone had to pay the cost of all of the terrible things human do to each other, but only one someone could pay that cost and survive.
“causing instability and mayhem throughout earth for eons.”
Christ’s crucifixion and resurrection did not cause instability and mayhem throughout earth for eons.
“Look at current world conditions if you doubt me.”
Current world conditions – the general inhumanity of humans, has existed from the (nearly) the beginning. Neither it, nor your lying, is caused by Christianity.
One of the problems of atheists in general is that they try to blame all of their faults on religion, the world, rather than owning their own mistakes.
“Nor was it perfect justice when he kicked Adam and Eve out of the Garden of Eden, their home, to suffer forever,”
Maybe you do not understand justice. Adam and Eve were kicked out of the Garden of Eden by their own actions.
You seem to think that perfect justice means “the justice that GetBalance” approves of. That is not true.
“or called homosexuals abominations to be put to death.”
God does not call homosexuals abominations, fallible, imperfect, sinful human beings do.
“This is a God of fear, which does not even exist. But tell that to the masses.”
Your god of fear is a reflection of you, GetBalance, and in that sense, the God you rage against, isn’t real. But there is a God, most of humanity experiences it, and that God is perfect.
You though, are not.
“I think the problem you project here is,”
I haven’t projected any problem here. You are creating one of your lack of information about Christianity. This returns us to the definition of prejudice: “an unfavorable opinion or feeling formed beforehand or without knowledge, thought, or reason.”
“who are you going to believe? Jesus or God, as to what “perfect justice” is. And when they speak such different notes,”
You do not know what you are talking about, Jesus and God do not “speak such different notes”. You are arguing from ignorance.
“you have pure confusion, lack of alignment and yes, chaos”
You made be confused, lack alignment and be caught in chaos, I am not.
“Confusion breeds confusion, hence a full on gay cultural war built on confusion as to Jesus’s law of love, or God’s law of control and fear.”
Again, you are in error. The bias against homosexuals does not arise from some confusion on the part of Christians about Jesus’s law of love vs God’s Law. The concept ‘love your neighbor as yourself’ appears in the OT, long before Christ affirmed it. The Law has certainly been used by some people as a weapon of control and fear, as has science, and money, and everything else people get their hands on.
“I know who I vote for,”
By being an atheist, you vote for yourself.
“But you have not flushed out your hypothesis, as you have not said what you would do with all those God phrases that condemn.”
You mean, “fleshed out”. And I have been very clear, here on Queerty and in other online forums and in public, that those phrases that people claim condemn homosexuality, are cases of false translation and biased interpretation.
You are doing the same thing homophobes do – defining God to support injustice, when God’s innate nature rejects injustice.
“Where do they go in your thinking? Do you just ignore them, say they are not God speaking, or forbid the Bible is just plain wrong.”
If you had any integrity, you would not make derogatory guesses.
“I’m really glad you are taking the Jesus high road as many are, as am I.”
But you are not, clearly. You’ve lied, you’ve engaged in abusive behavior, you’ve sinned against God by calling Him unjust and worse.
“But those of you that are in religions and are doing so, need to yell at those that are stuck in wrongful protest and petition for removal of such drama from scripture.”
GetBalance, people like me have been working to repudiate and disprove anti-gay theology for decades. We are slowly but surely changing congregations and denominations. What are you doing? Making false claims on the internet.
“Atheists calling people of “faith” on their unbased beliefs, does not present prejudice,”
Sure it does, because those beliefs are not ‘unbased’ – they are based on people experiences. The moment you declared their beliefs to be ‘unbased’ – you make a derogatory, negative judgment about them as persons. That is prejudice.
Homophobes do the same thing you are doing – dismiss the testimony of GLBTQ people to “prove” that that maligning millions of people is not prejudice.
“because it is not in your definition: “an unfavorable opinion or feeling formed beforehand or without knowledge, thought, or reason.”
But it is right there. Atheists malign people of faith without knowledge, thought or reason, employing a unfavorable opinion or feeling formed beforehand.
A person of faith, a stranger to the atheist says “I experienced God working in my life”, and the atheists any of the following:
“No you didn’t, there is no God” – that is an unfavorable opinion, in the form of rejecting someone’s testimony as false, based on lack of knowledge, because the atheist cannot know what the other person has or has not experienced.
Or the atheist replies: “you are delusional” – again, without knowledge, thought or reason, a unfavorable opinion formed in advance is at play.
“Atheists and non religious people have watched you, totally thought it through, with reason, and find religious belief unprovable and bogus.”
That’s a nice fantasy, but it has nearly no relationship to reality. The truth is that atheists have looked at the actions of some people of faith, and judged all people of faith, and religion, accordingly.
When someone does that to GLBTQ people, say by looking at leatherfolk, or Renato Seabra, and say all GLBTQ are out of control, sex addicts, etc., we all recognize that as prejudice in action. When someone looks at race in relatinship to the incidence of crime, and concludes that people of color are all criminals, that is prejudice. And when you and your peers here do it to people of faith, it is prejudice as well. The principles to any group of people, or to none. If you simply chose to only apply the principle to people of faith, that itself is prejudice.
“That is not prejudice, that is discernment.”
No, not at all. Judging all members of a group, any group, by the failings of some, is not discernment at all, it indicates a lack of discernment, actually.
Discernment recognizes that the actions of an individual reflect on the individual, the flaws in a particular belief or idea reflect on it, not on everything associated it with.
You’ve raised this false premise before, and I offered a parallel that you have simply ignored.
Science is a huge, complex and nuanced accumulation of knowledge, just like religion. Many horrific things have been done to humans, and the world, in the name of science. Recently, the researchers who reported that vaccinations cause autism, were found to have committed deliberate fraud. They didn’t just make mistakes, they altered their own data to advance a lie that they hoped to make money from.
In doing so, they endangered millions of people. In the middle of the swine flu epidemic, they told people not to vaccinate their children. With other severe diseases going about, some fatal, some crippling, they told people not to get vaccinated. Why? Because they planned to make money from it.
By your argument – the wrongs of some people in a group condemn the entire group – this means that science and scientists are all guilty of the frauds committed by a few.
And science has a long history of such frauds, and mistakes, and abuses. Many of science’s advances came from the pursuit of ways to kill people – looking for better weapons, better bombs, better poisons.
“Don’t confuse the two.”
I am not.
“They form an unfavorable opinion of you because you attack those that don’t believe as you do.”
And yet, that is not true at all. Atheists form an unfavorable opinion about all people of faith because they find fault with some.
One of the leading homophobes of the last generation – he’s either dead now or nearly retired, use to tell a story about how he was approached, inappropriately, by another man on a plane, and because of this, he persecuted and harassed GLBTQ for decades.
Atheists do the exact same thing. And they conveniently forget that nearly all of the work that has been done to create civil equality for anyone – women, people of color, GLBTQ people, the handicapped, etc – has been done by people of faith.
“That is not prejudice either, that is forming an opinion about an attackful group that merits that opinion.”
When you apply it to all Christians, it is prejudice.
What you are missing here is a concept called specificity. Atheists, atheism, attacks and condemns all people of faith and all religious beliefs, and that makes it a prejudice.
If you were specific, targeting the specific individuals who inflict harm – priest x, pastor y, cardinal z, as long as you were talking about that specific person and the specific actions of that person that caused harm, it would not be prejudice.
But, the moment you apply it to all people of faith, to anyone other than the specific people who harm others, it becomes prejudice.
The same is true of religion, or any other aggregate of knowledge. When one is specific, repudiating specific religious beliefs, or studies in science, or positions in politics,that harm people, it is simply critique, and not only appropriate, necessary.
But the moment you apply that criticism to all of religion, or all of science, or all of, well, anything, it becomes prejudice. Evolutionists like to claim that science is completely a fraud and a lie, and defend that by pointing out specific frauds in science, like the piltdown man hoax. Criticizing and refuting that hoax is not prejudice, it continues to be a valuable lesson to scientists and people, like myself, who treasure it – do due diligence. But when anti-science people say “the piltdown man hoax proves that science is all lies” – that’s prejudice.
“Christians are always complaining, “we are so persecuted”.”
No, you are being deceitful again. Some Christians complain that they are persecute when they are not, some complain when they are being persecuted, some do not complain regardless of what is going on. Just like, well, everyone else. There are people of color who see racism and persecution in everything bad that happens to them, and people of color who rarely encounter anything that is directly caused by racism. There are GLBTQ people who see homophobia in everything bad that happens, and GLBTQ people who rarely encounter anything directly caused by homophobia. In both groups, the majority seem to be able to tell quite well when something bad happens just because, and when it is because of prejudice. The same is true of Christians.
But your derogatory generalization is prejudice. Time and time again, you defeat your own premise by modeling prejudice in your post.
“That’s because it’s what you do best, persecute others. You just hate tasting your own medicine.”
Nice example of hate speech and personal attack. Because I am a Christian, though you know nothing else about me, you lie about me.
“Now you go on to say how hurt you are at being called a religiot,”
I said nothing about being hurt. Why must you lie to make your case?
“completely sidestepping the chance to make your religious beliefs believable for me,”
Ah, but my religious beliefs are predicated on a notion of justice, one that includes repudiating all forms of hate speech and prejudice. I’m not sidestepping anything here, I am actually articulating key principles of my religious beliefs – principles about civility, about the equality of all humans, about moral and ethical behavior.
“a typical trait of Christians when they get backed into a corner,”
More prejudicial speech; once again, you model the very thing you claim atheism is not – prejudice.
“become fidgity and just can’t bare to say they cannot back up one bit of their beliefs with factual grounded reasonable data.”
Again, you are dismissing the testimony of most of humanity as not factual, not grounded, not reasonable. Why do you dismiss their experiences, their data? Because of who they are.
That is prejudice.
Remember, you cannot prove that God does not exist, you have no factual data to substantiate that claim, nor is it possible to have such data. You have no grounded or reasonable data for that claim as well.
In fact, the standard reasonable includes the concept – preponderance of evidence – and the preponderance of evidence, the majority of all testimony is that God exists and people experience God.
“So with that being said, Atheists that choose to swat you away like hovering hornets ready to sting have every right to do so, out of protection and discernment for their safety and not prejudice against religious belief.”
So people have a right to abuse anyone who has anything in common with someone else who might be a threat? Heterosexuals have a right to abuse homosexuals, racists have a right to abuse people of color, misogynists have a right to abuse women?
You are making a case for prejudice – for abusing all people of a group simple because some of them may be a threat to you. Can you see how terrible that is? I have no doubt that others here can.
“They are perfectly reasonably grounded in their belief to swat you away like the plague.”
And another slur that bigots use – demonizing millions of people by equating them with disease and pestilence. By using the language of bigotry and prejudice, you affirm that atheism is a prejudice.
“You however, have no grounded believable reason to to it to those who don’t believe like you.”
Actually, if I accepted your premise, I have every reason to behave as you advocate, to anyone. Atheists, for example, slaughtered and persecuted Christians under Stalin, so you must be a threat too, by your argument.
But really, what you meant is that people of faith are not entitled to the same rights, or the same civility, that you demand for yourself.
“Now if you would like to take a shot at why your religious beliefs should rule the roost of this world”
Why should I waste time on your straw man argument? Again, your words betray prejudice, because you assume that because I am a Christian, I want to force religion on everyone.
But here’s the irony – time and time again, atheists here, and elsewhere on the net, articulate their desire to oppress people of faith, to eradicate religion, to make a world free of religion. Your question about ruling the “roost” of this world reveals how own desires, not mine.
“I have never seen or used the word “religiots” until now, so please accept my definition as to what the word implies from me, for this conversation. It is a person who has strong religious beliefs that pushes them strongly on others.”
However, you did not predefine your term before you used, nor did you use in contexts that implied or communicated any level of specificity.
As a constructed word, it does not contain anything to even hint at the specificity you now apply after the fact. And, GetBalance, there already exist terms to express what you now claim to have meant.
You could have used ‘fundamentalist religionists’, or ‘dominationist religionists’ or even “right wing religionists” or less fully accurate ‘conservative religionists’. Of course, if you had, you’d be acknowledging that your accusations only apply to some people, and that these traits – fundamentalism, dominationism, etc – occur outside of religion.
The real issue is not religion, but with what these words – fundamentalism, dominationism, etc point us to: the use and abuse of power over others to subjugate and oppress.
But looking at that would draw people’s attention to the oppressive message in atheism as well.
“I do not hold that it calls anyone an idiot, that was and is not my intention. Sorry if you took it that way maybe seeing the word used in another location with different meaning.”
You used it all inclusively. Nothing in your sentence structure indicates anything other than a universal application. Shouldn’t you be sorry that you used a universal term when you only meant to bash some people? No, you are sorry that I took your word at face value.
“Please note, when i ask you to prove your religions beliefs, God etc, this is not an I’ll show you mine if you show me yours, do ya dare contest.”
I see. So you demand something of me that you will not do in return. That is unreasonable at the very mildest.
You’ve got a test for religion that you refuse to submit yourself to, and on the basis of this test, you malign most of humanity.
“However, I do have an answer for you, but i ask that you go first, since you were asked first.”
Ah, but as the accuser, you have the burden of proving that your own premise can itself meet the test you require of me.
You are dodging, because you cannot prove that God does not exist. You hope to avoid having to even attempt it, by foisting your responsibility of demonstrating that your test is reasonable, on to me.
Is this just an ethical lapse on your part?
You demand proof of God – then you must first prove your own case. Failing to do so, or even attempting again to wiggle out of it, just means that your test was a fraud.
Atheism does not condemn rape
GetBalance wrote
“Unfortunately that statement is perfectly false.”
The statement I presented it standard, traditional Christian theology, and worded slightly differently, appears in many other faith tradition as well.
“No God is in “perfect justice” when he sends his only begotten son to earth having fully planned to murder him,”
Ah, but you are misrepresenting Christian theology. Jesus is not just God’s son, but God as well, and in Christ, God sacrificed himself for the imperfections of humanity. Someone had to pay the cost of all of the terrible things human do to each other, but only one someone could pay that cost and survive.
“causing instability and mayhem throughout earth for eons.”
Christ’s crucifixion and resurrection did not cause instability and mayhem throughout earth for eons.
“Look at current world conditions if you doubt me.”
Current world conditions – the general inhumanity of humans, has existed from the (nearly) the beginning. Neither it, nor your lying, is caused by Christianity.
One of the problems of atheists in general is that they try to blame all of their faults on religion, the world, rather than owning their own mistakes.
“Nor was it perfect justice when he kicked Adam and Eve out of the Garden of Eden, their home, to suffer forever,”
Maybe you do not understand justice. Adam and Eve were kicked out of the Garden of Eden by their own actions.
You seem to think that perfect justice means “the justice that GetBalance” approves of. That is not true.
“or called homosexuals abominations to be put to death.”
God does not call homosexuals abominations, fallible, imperfect, sinful human beings do.
“This is a God of fear, which does not even exist. But tell that to the masses.”
Your god of fear is a reflection of you, GetBalance, and in that sense, the God you rage against, isn’t real. But there is a God, most of humanity experiences it, and that God is perfect.
You though, are not.
“I think the problem you project here is,”
I haven’t projected any problem here. You are creating one of your lack of information about Christianity. This returns us to the definition of prejudice: “an unfavorable opinion or feeling formed beforehand or without knowledge, thought, or reason.”
“who are you going to believe? Jesus or God, as to what “perfect justice” is. And when they speak such different notes,”
You do not know what you are talking about, Jesus and God do not “speak such different notes”. You are arguing from ignorance.
“you have pure confusion, lack of alignment and yes, chaos”
You made be confused, lack alignment and be caught in chaos, I am not.
“Confusion breeds confusion, hence a full on gay cultural war built on confusion as to Jesus’s law of love, or God’s law of control and fear.”
Again, you are in error. The bias against homosexuals does not arise from some confusion on the part of Christians about Jesus’s law of love vs God’s Law. The concept ‘love your neighbor as yourself’ appears in the OT, long before Christ affirmed it. The Law has certainly been used by some people as a weapon of control and fear, as has science, and money, and everything else people get their hands on.
“I know who I vote for,”
By being an atheist, you vote for yourself.
“But you have not flushed out your hypothesis, as you have not said what you would do with all those God phrases that condemn.”
You mean, “fleshed out”. And I have been very clear, here on Queerty and in other online forums and in public, that those phrases that people claim condemn homosexuality, are cases of false translation and biased interpretation.
You are doing the same thing homophobes do – defining God to support injustice, when God’s innate nature rejects injustice.
“Where do they go in your thinking? Do you just ignore them, say they are not God speaking, or forbid the Bible is just plain wrong.”
If you had any integrity, you would not make derogatory guesses.
“I’m really glad you are taking the Jesus high road as many are, as am I.”
But you are not, clearly. You’ve lied, you’ve engaged in abusive behavior, you’ve sinned against God by calling Him unjust and worse.
“But those of you that are in religions and are doing so, need to yell at those that are stuck in wrongful protest and petition for removal of such drama from scripture.”
GetBalance, people like me have been working to repudiate and disprove anti-gay theology for decades. We are slowly but surely changing congregations and denominations. What are you doing? Making false claims on the internet.
Soupy
Jesus was a master of brevity. You, not so much.
GetBalance
@ Atheists do not condemn rape
Now you have changed your handle. Man you are hard to pin down! LoL Maury Povich here I come.
Anyway Atheist, you seem to think I’m an atheist, which is not true. Consider me a clean version of Jesus’s true message, and forget the Christian God, that is what I do. Not because it’s convenient, as I know how many Christians LOVE to think suffering is a way “closer to God”, but because Christianities definition of God in my opinion, is pure nonsense.
Now you may think that is prejudice, but it really is a mere decision to not believe something that is crazy making. As with store bought food, I check the ingredients before buying. Same with religion, I check the ingredients before investing.
Christianity is full of toxic ingredients, of which you have had to battle in your religion now for a long time with your trek in helping Christians get over those nasty ingredients called lies and deception, and yes textual prejudice, about gays.
I don’t think the Pope shares your same view of Leviticus, or would not he be correcting the entire flock? Well he isn’t, which makes your job much more difficult. Wouldn’t it be more productive to simply sign up for a religion that has less toxicity? I know Twinkies are good, but too many and they will kill you. They certainly lower your energy level which I’m sure you have experienced with all the prejudice you have encountered about your sexuality.
Now Atheists were on the planet first, religion is second, so it is your job to prove your beliefs if you want compatibility and win them over, which you cannot, because many Christian beliefs are so corrupt. That is my observation. That is not prejudice, whether you want to believe that or not. I know that God is only love and that can be proven if you sit still long enough to feel your heart and soul in prayer and meditation. There are no lightening bolts, there are no directions to go kill people, there are no sins hell and judgment that God purposes. Just love. The negs are machinations of mens mental minds interfering with the love they are, because that’s is all God creates, is love. No wars, no kick outs, just love. If you don’t believe my God is real, go sit for a long while till you experience pure peace. And when your mind starts to wander into fear and trouble, know your Christian false God of mischief if afoot. Yes he is a fraud. Now go stammer and steam, till you get it. It would be better than waiting for a judgment day that will never come, because yes that too, is a fraud.
So Kiddo, the best I can say is that your Christian God is at best, possibly a very imbalanced ET from another planet, which is talked about in Ezekiel, that planted bogus info. (I’m sure you are going to wanna race with that one). So this God you adore is a physical being, which the guy in the sky with a beard many of you think of, would truly fit. He has a split mind of war and peace, duality, which is unresolvable due to its nature of opposites with built in endless conflict. So you believe in a conflicted jealous vengeful God who can wake up happy one day and delirious the next. Go for it if it brings you peace. Many in-the-know simply know it’s just a play on a father figure out to keep the planetary kids in line through daddy fear. As long as that strange unprovable and attackful DaddyGod is the CEO, the world according to Christianity, is completely unredeemable. Unless one only follows Jesus’s message of only love, which is what his “father”, the true God, truly and only is.
Jesus didn’t get his own book in the Bible, he wasn’t even alive 100 years later when it started to be written. Men manipulate. That should give you a big clue. But it won’t, because you are too saturated to see it. But time will bring you around, even if it takes you lifetimes.
Now just keep loving. That is the most important thing. And thank you for transforming Biblically misinformed Christians about gays. There is a long list of other topics you can start on when you are finished with that one.
And for God’s sakes, have a nice day.
@Justice —- What channel is Maury on?
@Nate —– I can’t remember what friend recommended the online ZeitGeist The Movie ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BNf-P_5u_Hw&feature=related )to me, but yeh, it is truly awesome. There is good reason why it refers to Christianity as The Greatest Story Ever Sold.
There are a few other subjects covered also so Google away that name and have fun discovering. You can also google Bible and Koran verses on homosexuality and find good info.
And thanks for the compliment on my writing! It’s always good to hear support and draw inspiration from it as many have been pushing me to do it professionally. But do we ever listen? “Yeh Yeh I’ll do it someday”. 😉
ewe
@kayla: No Kayla. I am not sacrificing schools. If you want to support parochial schools then do the ENTIRE thing on your own damn dime. It is not hateful of me to demand public schools be better operated. You are the one implying that my tax dollars have to go to private schools that push hate against me. That is not me being hateful honey, that is you supporting discrimination. The “non-religious” ARE talking or have you not noticed? The “non religious” is supposed to be the state that represents ALL the people. Your thinking is daft. You ask me to figure out how to educate children like the nuns and priest do? First of all, nuns went around smacking the nuckles of small children with rulers as far back as the early 1900s from personal stories directly told to me girlfriend and we all know that many pedophile priests were abusing thousands and thousands of children during the same time. I do not think it takes much for anyone to figure out that we do not support exploiting the genitals of children in ANY school system. So much for me or anyone figuring out that silly comment of yours. Get real.
ewe
@Nate: I think it’s great you are reading and participating and i think i would have done the same thing when i was your age if it was available. Nevertheless, it is fantastic that you are confident about who you are.
ewe
@Atheism like homophobia is a prejudice:
Ewe and her friends are advocating a government that oppresses religion and treats people of faith as second-class citizens.
Read more: http://www.queerty.com/bostons-catholic-schools-wont-block-gay-parents-kids-from-daily-brainwashing-20110114/#ixzz1BKz6jvRS
What you just wrote is YOUR interpretation. I advocate a government that stays out of religion and that means not funding anything that is related to any faith. Don’t even try to compare the civil rights of LGBTQ people to your fantasy about religious people who do not get government funding are somehow suffering second class status of any kind. That is rediculous. Keep your damn faith in your temple and away from me. I am not interested and you do not have the right to take anyones taxes for your religious purposes. It sounds like that is exactly what you are supporting. GONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Atheism does not condemn murder
Jeffree writes:
“Interesting how you can tell when someone has run out of arguments FOR their position or pro.duct (e.g. “Atheism like Homophobia) because instead of telling you how great/wonderful their idea/item is, all they can do is knock the competition.”
Which is ironic, because all Jeffree is doing above is knocking the competition, while I continue to explain, carefully and fully, my position, and address any rebuttal. All atheism is entirely about knocking the competition.
“So far what I’m learning from “Don’t be atheist” ”
Are you imagining participants?
“is that the only reason to be Christian is because the alternatives are bad.”
That is not an argument that has been made here.
“And those alternatives make that person very very angry.”
Projecting is not a very effective rebuttal. Why are you and your peers so mad that they’ve used obscenities, insults, attacks on my intelligence and mental health, slurs directed at all people of faith, lies, and other uncivil and abusive ways of expressing themselves?
Such behavior is not too convincing.
Atheism does not condemn murder
GetBalance writes:
“Now don’t get me wrong, I love Christians, (as Nate is well aware from the Shameless page 😉 but they are truly misguided.”
Boy does that look familiar. Doesn’t just about every homophobe say the same thing “Don’t get me wrong, I love homosexuals, but they are truly misguided.”
“Strange to hear from a total Jesus fan like myself” Yet if you are a “Total Jesus fan” – which is doubtful judging by your posts, then you would be a Christian, which would make you misguided. Oh, I know, you denounce God, failing to realize that God is inseparable from Jesus. So you are not a total Jesus fan, you are conditional Jesus fan, at best.
John 1:
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning. 3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4 In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind. 5 The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome[a] it.
6 There was a man sent from God whose name was John. 7 He came as a witness to testify concerning that light, so that through him all might believe. 8 He himself was not the light; he came only as a witness to the light.
9 The true light that gives light to everyone was coming into the world. 10 He was in the world, and though the world was made through him, the world did not recognize him. 11 He came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him. 12 Yet to all who did receive him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God— 13 children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God.
14 The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.
15 (John testified concerning him. He cried out, saying, “This is the one I spoke about when I said, ‘He who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me.’”) 16 Out of his fullness we have all received grace in place of grace already given. 17 For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. 18 No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is himself God and[b] is in closest relationship with the Father, has made him known.
and
ohn 14:8-10 (New International Version, ©2010)
8 Philip said, “Lord, show us the Father and that will be enough for us.”
9 Jesus answered: “Don’t you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’? 10 Don’t you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me? The words I say to you I do not speak on my own authority. Rather, it is the Father, living in me, who is doing his work.”
ewe
@Atheism like homophobia is a prejudice: People like you are the first ones to scream about denying religious liberty if it is not your own that is the direct beneficiary.
ewe
Cassandra et al: FYI: Being gay is not a religion.
Ogre Magi
I think I have figured out what Atheism does not condemn murder (i.e.Cassandra)’s problem is
http://io9.com/5736055/is-this-the-greatest-pulp-novel-title-in-human-history/gallery/
That is why she is so upset all the time 🙂
Atheism does not condemn deceit
GetBalance
“Now you have changed your handle. Man you are hard to pin down! LoL Maury Povich here I come.”
Because one or more very immature people have begun spoofing my id, I am changing it randomly. What is interesting is that rather than address the point it makes – that atheism does not condemn rape, or murder, or deception, you try to make an ad hominem out of it.
“Anyway Atheist,”
Have the decency to use the whole thing, rather than call me by an term I have proven to be a form of prejudice.
“you seem to think I’m an atheist, which is not true.”
So you say, and yet, your words send a different message:
“We that are not religious”
” Consider me a clean version of Jesus’s true message,”
Oh, someone has a messiah complex.
“and forget the Christian God, that is what I do.”
Jesus’s own words bear repeating:
John 14:8-10 (New International Version, ©2010)
8 Philip said, “Lord, show us the Father and that will be enough for us.”
9 Jesus answered: “Don’t you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’? 10 Don’t you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me? The words I say to you I do not speak on my own authority. Rather, it is the Father, living in me, who is doing his work.”
“Now you may think that is prejudice,”
Actually, I think it is the sin of rebellion and ego.
“Christianity is full of toxic ingredients,”
No, people are. The Bible, among its many roles, is a mirror, anyone who looks into sees themselves – their best and their worst, reflected at them. Someone who sees “toxic ingredients” is seeing their reflection.
“I don’t think the Pope shares your same view . . .”
The Pope is not Christ, just as you are not, nor am I.
“which makes your job much more difficult.”
Not really. All humans are fallible.
“Wouldn’t it be more productive to simply sign up for a religion that has less toxicity?”
So you are inviting me to reject the God I know, to follow you instead.
That’s not going to happen. I’ve seen your abusiveness and dishonest, as well as your ego.
“They certainly lower your energy level which I’m sure you have experienced with all the prejudice you have encountered about your sexuality.”
Please have the decency not to invent lies and fantasies about my life.
“Now Atheists were on the planet first,”
Really? Were you there? The oldest evidence found to date of human culture, is religious in nature.
But you know, heterosexuals, they claim, were on the planet first.
“so it is your job to prove your beliefs”
And there it is, your refusal to even attempt the test you demand of people of faith. Your test is a fraud.
“That is my observation. That is not prejudice,”
The observation of a fallible human being who has presented himself as the new Christ, yet engaged in malicious behavior, and presented a near constant stream of deception.
“I know that God is only love and that can be proven if you sit still long enough to feel your heart and soul in prayer and meditation.”
But you reject God, as you yourself wrote:
“Christian God is at best, possibly a very imbalanced ET”
“There are no lightening bolts,”
Lightning does in fact exist.
“there are no sins hell and judgment that God purposes.”
While the mainstream vision of hell does not derive from Christ’s teaching, Jesus Christ taught that sin is real and that God does indeed judge sin. You are rejecting core teachings from Jesus.
“If you don’t believe my God”
The one you’ve constructed for yourself.
“is real, go sit for a long while till you experience pure peace. And when your mind starts to wander into fear and trouble, know your Christian false God of mischief if afoot.”
You may find your mind wandering into fear and trouble when you sit for a long while, I do not. But then, I am constantly in experiencing the God of love and grace that you reject, the God Christ articulated through his teachings, the God voiced in the Old Testament as well, the Christian God.
“Yes he is a fraud.”
As Jesus said in John 14:8-10 (New International Version, ©2010)
8 Philip said, “Lord, show us the Father and that will be enough for us.”
9 Jesus answered: “Don’t you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’? 10 Don’t you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me? The words I say to you I do not speak on my own authority. Rather, it is the Father, living in me, who is doing his work.”
“Now go stammer and steam, till you get it.”
More disparaging assumptions, in an attempt to invoke negative emotions.
“It would be better than waiting for a judgment day that will never come, because yes that too, is a fraud.”
So, you really do not follow Jesus either.
“So Kiddo,”
And a disrespectful diminutive used to portray me as subordinate to yourself. What a display of ego. You do know that ego is what brought sin into the world, don’t you? Whether history or metaphor, the message from the Garden of Eden is clear – ego leads people to reject God, to want to be God in God’s place.
“Jesus didn’t get his own book in the Bible, he wasn’t even alive 100 years later when it started to be written.”
So?
“Men manipulate.”
And you are human, you to are “men”, mankind, human kind, regardless of your gender.
“That should give you a big clue.”
Since you are human too, and manipulate, your own remarks here are suspect.
“But it won’t, because you are too saturated to see it.”
And the abusive personal attack confirms that suspicion.
“Now just keep loving.”
Perhaps, someday, you will experience that emotion and then learn to practice the advice you give.
Atheism does not condemn pedophilia
GetBalance
One interesting thing I have noticed is that you, pretty consistently, fail to actually address any of what I have presented, particularly my rebuttal to your false claims.
Instead, each post of yours either moves to a new subject, or simply ignores that your false claims have been challenged.
Your constantly moving target game is less than honorable. Your refusal to validate your own test – by proving that God does not exist, is less than honorable. Your use of slurs to malign most of humanity – apparently for not believing in you as the new messiah, is unhealthy as well as less than honorable.
The theology you have articulated is, of course, religious belief, and though you included yourself in “We that are not religious” while also characterizing yourself as “a clean version of Jesus’s true message”.
There is incredible cognitive dissonance at work there, as well as enormous ego and a propensity to malign and vilify other human beings that is anything but loving.
justiceontherocks
@GetBalance – didn’t I tell you you’d be better off watching Maury?? Cassandra is a paranoid religious zealot who supports pedophilia. He/she/it has no life and desperately wants attention. And it’s all so boring.
Nate
@GetBalance:
Well get your ass in gear and do it already 😀
I’m not sure how somone would go about becoming an author, but I’m sure you do.
I will watch part 2 and part 3 of “the greatest story ever told” soon, it depends if I get sucked into watching either weeds, the next episode of shameless or maybe enjoying the video styles of mr.Parker Williams.
I do look forward to your post on the shameless thread 😉
I will look into more about homosexuality vs religion (sad that it can’t be & rather than vs) but this thread has definitely made me question my religious beliefs, all of my friends on facebook are all wondering why I am questioning my stance on Jesus and god. Hah, if only they knew (:
I also look forward to reading more of your works, so get to it kid :p
@ewe:
Well thank you, I try to keep up with all of you on this subject and many others on queerty, but I’m not going to lie…I have no idea what half of the words mean you guys are using, my vocabulary needs to be extended which reading this has helped alot.
I do feel bad for you more “mature” gay men who did not have the resources I have today to help me with my problems.
I am confterble with who I am as a peson, yes…but as far as sexuality goes if my parents and family knew I was gay, Jesus wouldent be the only one getting nailed onto a cross, however I did tell my lesbian friend that I was gay today. She was pretty exited, but I told her online, now that I have moved away from her, I would never have the balls to tell anyone in person…have you ever told anyone you were gay in person? Are you out yet? How did it turn out? Any black eyes? I am quite quirous on this subject for it may help me in my future endevers. .>
GetBalance
@Justice —- yes OMG you were soooo right!
My momma always said, “Watch out for flying fundamentalist Christians. Their broomsticks are sharp as a Roman soldier’s spear. Even the monkeys won’t fly with them”.
Could Athiest possibly be Christine O’Donnel in disguise? Possibly in full nervous breakdown mode over her bewitched masturbatory failed political legacy? Such an intense girl that one is.
Well thx for trying J, I must be more observant next time!
Nate
Waitwaitwait…
Is casandra also atheism?
Please excuse my arrogance, if so…this thread would be alot less confusing
Soupy
yes she is. It can get a little confusing on here.
justiceontherocks
@Nate: Nate, I also read your long post. I thought it was great and I admire you for writing it. Let me give you two bits of encouragement; 1) Don’t give up on your family. Gay people “coming out” often find support in unlikely places. Many times your family has “suspected” for a long time and they’ll be more ready than you’d think to hear the news. I hope that is true in your case. And remember, it’s taken you a long time to be comfortable with who you are, don’t expect them to get it right away. 2) Never lie about who you are. Close to 100% of people wold rather hear a truth that makes them uncomfortable than be lied to.
I wish I’d learned both these things much earlier in life.
All the best to you.
Nate
@justiceontherocks:
Tanks you so much for the advice, I won’t give up on them.
I just have very fond thoughts of putting them into a woodchipper (joking)
But in all seriousness, I doubt they suspect me being gay, and if they do I resent them even more because then what would be the point of the numerous gay jokes? To make me hate being gay? I at least hope they don’t dislike me that much, however I do get what your saying and hopefully they will be cool with it.
And I will make sure to no longer lie to people, because it is wrong and I guess I would rather make somone feel uncomfterble than have them know a me, that is not me.
I’m sorry you had to be born in a generation where there weren’t cool people that could give you advice online 🙁
And thank you, all the best to you too
GetBalance
@Nate. Thx for the friendly fire under my ass. Could not have come at a better time.
GetBalance
@Nate. Its Bible verses as in phrases, tho the way you interpreted it is actually correct. The second Shameless has a really good bath/bed scene that is totally wacked in the last 10 minutes. You will roar with laughter, at least I did. Totally freak totally unexpected. No gay stuff in the entire show, lots of ff.
ewe
@Nate: Oh i wish you the best. As a matter of fact since you asked, i am one of those gay people that never had a closet to come out of cause i was always gay and me and everyone else knew it. Like you, i have never had an issue with myself. All the struggles are from outside and over the years i have realized how fortunate i am since so many others have a much harder time. Of course although it may not be necessary i did move to San Franciso after high school for 20 years so that definitely helped me too. It is not a prerequisite though which is what i see from other people who chose to live their authentic selves in small towns as well. I think the most important thing i needed to learn at your age was that sex did not always mean intimacy. So be smart and keep yourself number one.