Ain't no homo gonna make it to heaven

[Jeremy Meadows]

*facepalm* why did this have to happen in my state? Great way to make us all look like shit hateful "Christans". I'm really ashamed by this. I feel worse for the kid that obviously doesn't know any better as well.

 

[3quency]

If there was no religion, morons would find some other following to get behind to voice their bigoted views.

In theory if there was no religion, then people would just put one together anyway.

Even atheism is a religion of a sort, though one propped by a common disbelief.

...I really need to stop pulling all nighters, it makes me all philosophical.

By it's very definition, atheism is the absence of faith, so ergo not a religion. Find me five atheists that agree with each other and I'll tell you to stop cloning Richard Dawkins.


captcha: exercise more. Damnit, now even the internet is on my case!


OT: That video kinda weirds me out. But hey, if that's how the midget was raised then what are you gonna do?
Educate them I guess.

 

[BartyMae]

I see where you're coming from, but I'll explain why that isn't right. Religions make claims. Christianity for example, claims there is one god that created everything. If a religious person wants to justify his or her belief scientifically (which is obviously missing the point of faith, but plenty choose to do it anyway) he or she has to provide evidence to support the claim. The person who makes the claim has to provide the evidence. That's called the burden of proof.

You say that atheists have no evidence to support their non-belief and you're completely right. It's also completely irrelevant. Atheists don't have the burden of proof because they make no claims. Not believing is the default position. Atheists do not belief the claims made by religious people. That's it. As such, it is not a ''religion'' in any way, shape or form.

On agnosticism: You can be theist or atheist and an agnostic. Being agnostic only means that you belief the existence of god cannot possibly be proven. You can belief in a god, and still belief the existence cannot be proven. You can also be an atheist agnostic.

True. Another thing I never understood about religious people - especially Christians - who try to empirically prove whatever deity they believe in exists. I think, sadly, it's quite hard for religious people to try and see the other side of an issue, (though, in reality, it's everyone, not just religious people), because doing so would be like admitting that they could be wrong...which would compromise their entire belief system. Very unfortunate.

I didn't know of that about Agnosticism. I suppose that's because Agnostic-Christians and Agnostic-Atheists are generally referred to as either Christians or Atheists...as the Agnostic part is sort of just a side thing. Makes sense, though, and I'm actually a little glad there's enough of those people that are more reasonable about it that they have their own sub-noun.

 

[Saulkar]

Snip

The whole 'homosexuals are sinners thus they'll go to heck' is not true in the least.

Even though the bible does state "No man shall sleep with another man." it also adds "and no man shall sleep with another woman until wed." So to me, God isn't against gays. He just doesn't want everyone sleeping together unless they're married. But, I know certainly not everyone believes in God and I am perfectly fine with that- but I must say Christians or particular religions got to stop taking a verse and tweaking it so dramatically.

Besides, the bible also states "Treat thy neighbor as you treat thyself." So no one has a right to shun or judge anyone regardless if you disapprove or disagree with one's beliefs. Murder or actions are different, those are bad you can question people on but interests like same sex or into particular hobbies like video games... you shouldn't make nothing out of that in a negative manner.

Seeing this video, it did shock me to hear. Then again the child doesn't mean it, he's just singing what is running in his head- not fully aware what the words mean or the depth of it. His parents are probably going to regret that in the long run, but for now we just have an offensive video. Don't take to much heart to it, the song is no factor on homosexual's fate whatsoever.

I know all this. I put at the bottom of the OP that the video had me really mad (more for the children's sake and the reaction of the adults) and thus I was on the non-sensical side.

 

[Greni]

Holy literal shit! Religious homo-hating cunts are hating homos and teaching their offsprings to follow their gay-bashing example!? I am shocked and appalled! Though kinda, not really. If I would be shocked at this they would get a medal, if nobody would be shocked then they wouldn't be doing their jobs at all.

Besides someone needs to continue doing stunts like these, otherwise we would begin to believe that religion maybe has a place in modern society.

 

[bat32391]

Really?! I mean... fucking really?!

People are calling this child abuse, indoctrination, vile, I call it fucking retarded. Seriously, in the age old question when did anyone ever know what God's opinion on homosexuals is? Who are they to judge?

No disrespect to peaceful people of faith but it is shit like this experienced in real life that made me reject organised religion. Especially what they are doing to this kid? I am hoping this kid does not understand what he is say because I sure as hell would have at that age. Now I kept this in the off topic section to avoid making this a (flaming argument) strictly religious debate (which it will unfortunately become without a doubt) so what do you gals and guys have to say about this?

First of all, greatest picture ever.

Second of all. WHAT THE JESUS HELL JUST HAPPENED?

Third. Of course we know that a four year old can think for itself and make judgements on people because of what a 2000 year old book written by desert people thought.

I didn't know Ice Cream and Cake people wrote the bible! You learn something new everyday.

 

[TheTechnomancer]

I think theres a lot of generalizations and assumptions going on here. Firstly, disagreeing with homosexuality doesn't instantly make you a homophobe. I'm a Christian and, while i disagree with homosexuality morally i don't condemn anyone who is and certainly don't have an irrational fear of them. Throughout my life I've had friends who are gay even though i disagree with it, I still consider them to be a decent person and a good friend.
Secondly, I disagree with the song itself. I think some homosexuals will be in heaven, just like some liars, thieves and murderers will. The bible teaches that all have sinned so no one deserves heaven. People only get there by accepting gods forgiveness. It's not what we do, it's what god does for us. A gay person is no worse than I am.
I personally don't know any Christian who would hate or condemn someone just for being gay, certainly none who would want to remove there rights. Yet most people assume we all hate homosexuals and wish they were dead just because some churches teach that. Just like lots of people assume all Muslims are terrorists just because some Islamic leaders teach that, or all atheists are enlightened and rational because some "Atheist leaders" such as Richard Dawkins are well respected scientists.

 

[Therumancer]

Backlash. The very usage of terms like "homophobe" explains exactly why your seeing some major responses from the other direction.

Homophobia:

1. Fear of or contempt for lesbians and gay men.
2. Behavior based on such a feeling.

Well, from where I and the dictionary are standing it seems to be a case of calling it like they see it. Apologies if you are displeased with the label that identifies your bigotry. >.>

Basically it's an issue that has the US divided roughly 50-50, for a lot of differant reasons.

Can I hasz source? Last I had seen the opinion was 53/47 in favour of gay marriage; the opposition to which doesn't necessarily denote an anti-gay disposition. I mean even 35% of Texans [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_in_Texas#Public_opinion] of all people in spite of being entrenched within the dreaded bible belt support gay civil unions, with 59% supporting legal recognition; the figures become substantially higher in any state once the issue has been brought outside the purview of marriage and support in general increases when going further north. So this leads me to believe you're either equating opposition to gay marriage with an anti-gay mentality to make your argument look stronger or you simply pulled that figure out of your ass.

The pro-gay movement has been increasingly offensive, belligerant, and unwilling to even consider the anti-gay side of things.

Firstly, again, sorry if our sense of decorum was lost somewhere along the line while you were trying to encroach on our civil rights, I mean sorry if we are offending you. I mean sure, one side may be trying to suppress the freedoms of the other, but that's no excuse for rudeness right? Such audacity! Secondly, when the opposite side is largely composed of religious evangelics (or simply the illogical and insecure among secular homophobes) and runs counter to the opinions held by the vast majority of the scientific and phychiatric community and who are trying to dictate what consenting adults can and can't do with their own bodies, the other side isn't really worth considering.

I'm pretty much at the center of the issue, whether anuyone wants to accept that or not, being in the middle between anti-gay and pro-gay.

I think you revoke the right to identify as a neutral party when you start labelling yourself 'anti-gay man' as you have done in previous posts and it's not even a case of passively disagreeing, from what I've seen you wish to put people on some kind of tracking register based on their sexuality, you are a proponent of active discrimination; ergo, you do not fit the description of a neutral party. This is not a difficult concept, it isn't a case of me not accepting your position as a centrist on this issue, it's a case of you not accepting the definition of a centrist.

Being seperated from both sides (and disliked by both sides) it gives me a pretty clear perception of how things are moving. The left wing/pro gay side has had a lot of intertia, but intertia ultimatly fades, and your seeing the other side having rallied and it's likely to start pushing back big time. It may or may not happen, but I kind of figure you'll see the pro-gay movement gradually losing steam, and then things to start swinging back in a very anti-gay direction for a while. This will continue until all of the all or nothing "we will not negotiate on this issue" guys on both sides knock it off and meet somewhere in the middle, which will leave nobody really happey, but will throw a bucket of ice on the conflict.

You're basing this hypothesis on what exactly? Western society (and to a more gradual extent the US) has been shown to be a taking an increasingly progressive stance towards the matter within the space of a few decades; Britain, France, Germany, Holland, the collective nations of Scandinavia, Spain, Portugal, Argentina, Brazil, Australia, Canada etc. you get the idea, have all become increasingly pro-gay in legislation and public opinion and there doesn't seem to be any reason for that course to be curtailed.

OT: Very classy parenting there. >.>

I said "roughly" for a reason, people report the numbers as differant within a few percentage points. I could produce alternative sources, but what is the point? If I showed a differant number, by definition it would be from a site saying "look, most people are anti-gay" and thus by definition receive scorn as being "not reliable" simply for being anti-gay and presumably right wing. To be honest I've been down that road one way or another so many times that I'm not going to play the game, especially when it's off topic to the statements I made.

Likewise, however you want to define "Homophobia" it's an offensive term, that by definition is intended to support one side of the debate.

Don't be surprised when you do this stuff that there is eventually going ot be organized backlash. That is the sum total of my point in response to the guy who said he noticed more from the anti-gay position recently. It's a statement, and not something I'm going to argue.

My advice is to learn context, this is the second discussion in recent memory people have tried to derail by dragging it into things that have nothing to do with the initial statements.

 

[Therumancer]

I could slew around a few quotes, like Napoleon's "Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich," but I don't think it would fit the given context. Plus, people get mad.

Whyyyyy the sudden influx of homophobes though? I swear it wasn't this bad a few years ago.

Backlash. The very usage of terms like "homophobe" explains exactly why your seeing some major responses from the other direction. Basically it's an issue that has the US divided roughly 50-50, for a lot of differant reasons. The pro-gay movement has been increasingly offensive, belligerant, and unwilling to even consider the anti-gay side of things.

I'd be interested to know what kind of people you consider 'pro-gay' exactly...

There certainly are some nutjob gay-activists who want more than equal rights, but the same could be said about any issue, and the nutjobs aren't really representative of the movement.

What I want, is equal rights, and that no-one is persecuted for being gay, bi, or straight.
Why should I even consider that someone should be?

Such a discussion will derail the thread so I'm not going to say much more about it. The thing is that your position by it's nature is all or nothing, don't be surprised when facing a counter point that is exactly the same way from the other direction, and treats all of your sources and your very position with the same degree of scorn that things continue endlessly and keep moving back and forth with relative levels of opposition.

Neither side wants a middle ground, to the pro-gay movement and anti-gay movement it's anathema, however I believe that like with most issues that's where an eventual resolution lies.

As I know from experience, if I was to bother to present such a middle ground, I'd have all the liberals on this site attack me as some kind of bigot. If I went to a site with a more conservative prescence and said the same thing I'd be attacked as some kind of new age hippy who is probably a closeted gay, so I increasingly don't bother. The uncompromising exteremists on both sides can fight back and forth until they begin to realize it's pointless. Neither side is going to win in any meaningful fashion as things stand now.

 

[Legendairy314]

Hypocrites who don't realize that hating another man/woman for a sin is just as much of a sin in of itself. It disturbs me as to how many people can visibly seethe within a church when homosexuality is mentioned. Being surrounded by such hatred is just depressing. Whatever happened to "love thy neighbor?" Laughing at the blatant lie that no homosexuals will be going to heaven isn't going to be doing them any good later on either.

Anyways, I'm honestly just sick and tired of this whole debate. I just wish separation of church and state was still a thing and we didn't have to worry about this. Then we could get back to churches doing some REAL good and not trying to stop a change we'll all feel embarrassed about 20 years from now.

 

[HigherTomorrow]

This is absolutely awful.

I hope and believe there is a Heaven, only so these kinds of people can not go there.

Take me and others as an example, and not these horrible, hateful people: You can believe in God and be pro-gay.

 

[Woodsey]

Ain't no one going to heaven, so the homos won't have to worry about that.

I mean really, how does it give comfort to anyone if what they believe is that some vindictive **** lives up in the sky? There is zero evidence to support to the existence of gods, get over it, stop being a bunch of dicks, concern yourself with only other human beings.

I think theres a lot of generalizations and assumptions going on here. Firstly, disagreeing with homosexuality doesn't instantly make you a homophobe. I'm a Christian and, while i disagree with homosexuality morally i don't condemn anyone who is and certainly don't have an irrational fear of them. Throughout my life I've had friends who are gay even though i disagree with it, I still consider them to be a decent person and a good friend.

That's always something that interests me. Partly because 'morally disagreeing' with something which has no actual ramifications, harms no one, and is an inherent part of a person is rather difficult, but also because I wonder how much you say it just because you're told to.

 

[HigherTomorrow]

I didn't know Ice Cream and Cake people wrote the bible! You learn something new everyday.

Desert: A dry, barren area of land, esp. one covered with sand.
Dessert: The sweet course eaten at the end of a meal.

Remember, dessert has two s's because it's sweeter than a desert

 

[jackpackage200]

I quote Billy Joel.

"I would rather laugh with the sinners than cry with the saints, the sinners are much more fun."

Why can we not just live and let live?

 

[Therumancer]

I could slew around a few quotes, like Napoleon's "Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich," but I don't think it would fit the given context. Plus, people get mad.

Whyyyyy the sudden influx of homophobes though? I swear it wasn't this bad a few years ago.

Backlash. The very usage of terms like "homophobe" explains exactly why your seeing some major responses from the other direction. Basically it's an issue that has the US divided roughly 50-50, for a lot of differant reasons. The pro-gay movement has been increasingly offensive, belligerant, and unwilling to even consider the anti-gay side of things. Left wing media control helped maintain that and present the illusion that the anti-gay side of things was some tiny, fringe, majority, but as that was never the case your starting to see that side rallying and becoming increasingly vocal.

I'm pretty much at the center of the issue, whether anuyone wants to accept that or not, being in the middle between anti-gay and pro-gay. Being seperated from both sides (and disliked by both sides) it gives me a pretty clear perception of how things are moving. The left wing/pro gay side has had a lot of intertia, but intertia ultimatly fades, and your seeing the other side having rallied and it's likely to start pushing back big time. It may or may not happen, but I kind of figure you'll see the pro-gay movement gradually losing steam, and then things to start swinging back in a very anti-gay direction for a while. This will continue until all of the all or nothing "we will not negotiate on this issue" guys on both sides knock it off and meet somewhere in the middle, which will leave nobody really happey, but will throw a bucket of ice on the conflict.

Here's the thing though; the pro-gay side isn't taking away anything from the anti-gay side. That can't be said about the reverse though.

If you don't accept homosexuality as a fact of life, then you have every right to just simply disassociate with gay people. That way nobody is harmed, held back, or even having their rights taken away from them. The pro-gay movement isn't asking the anti-gay movement to abandon their ideals 100% and to convert to their ideals, rather to just live and let live.

 

[targren]

Even atheism is a religion of a sort, though one propped by a common disbelief.

Atheism is a religion in the same way that not collecting stamps is a hobby.

 

[ElPatron]

Quick, someone make a joke about how choir boys are gay or maybe about pedophile priests molesting boys!

I think some homosexuals will be in heaven, just like some liars, thieves and murderers will.

Edit that because it seems like you're comparing being gay to being a murderer.

And I would like to know how can you "morally" disagree with something when it's amoral to not let people do whatever they want.

 

[Therumancer]

Don't be surprised when you do this stuff that there is eventually going ot be organized backlash. That is the sum total of my point in response to the guy who said he noticed more from the anti-gay position recently. It's a statement, and not something I'm going to argue.

That exact same logic would apply to calling people out on their racism and sexism. Really no reason to stop. You see how attitudes have gone towards the more blatant sexists and racists. Only a matter of time before it applies to homophobes just as well.

Not really, and the fact that you see it that way, is exactly why the conflict continues to exist, why things are continually deadlocked, and why things go through cycles of backlash from one side or the other.

See, your very perspective in syaing "it's no differant than racism or sexism" or as another guy put it "it's just about acceprance of something there is nothing wrong with!" is something you believe, but all of the millions upon millions of people on the other side do not agree with you on. The fact that your not willing to accept the other side's points at all (and really I've tried, the subject of many headaches) kind of shows the problem. Your just as convinced of the absolute truth of your position as they are of theirs.

Again, you don't see it, and that's fine, but that's the entire problem, NEITHER side sees it. I do, but only because I'm standing in the middle looking at either end.