Nem writes:
Gay people do exist. So do people who get off by eating feces. Wouldn't call either normalcy though.
See, I don't even know why I bother with you. Out of a myriad things you could compare gay people to like left-handedness and figure skating etc. you have to pick the most vile, most tabooed things you could imagine like murder and rape and bestiality and necrophilia and now eating feces.
If Jesus was really a good man, he would have at least said something about comparing decent people with murderers and rapists and people who commit bestiality and people who eat feces.
I don't know, Nem, it looks like your christian values, which you guys always claim to be a superior moral standard, aren't doing much to help you see what's decent and what's not decent.
Except that it kind of goes against that whole freedom of speech thingy.
Have I ever mentioned that deep down I don't believe in democracy? You know why? Because a human right is a human right. It's not up for debate, it's not up for compromise, and it's certainly not up for people like you to decide to ignore it.
I think you misunderstood my premise. Supposing even Jesus was not an actual historical figure, the "character" or "protagonist" of the gospels was still a concept in some people's minds. Is there anything actually horrible about what Jesus taught, even supposing His words come from a playwrite?
Ok, here's one. He never taught you how to be kind toward other people. He never taught you not to compare decent people with murderers, rapists, bestialiacs (if that's a word?), and people who eat feces. It's like a father who never taught his kids to call not call black people "niggers".
Even many secularists say that Jesus (though he was just a man) was a great moral teacher. Could you come to a similar agreement?
Would a great moral teacher not teach you to not compare decent law abiding citizens to murderers, rapists, bestialiacs, and people who eat feces?
It seems to me like Jesus never had the foresight to help you bigots understand common human decency. I don't know about the great teacher thing.
Actually, by definition, you do. A (negative) theos (God) = there is no God in plain Greek.
Um... no. Nobody is arguing the semantic with you. I don't care where the word originated. I'm telling you, us atheists don't actually claim that there is no god.
It's sort of like the big bang theory. It wasn't actually an explosion. It was more of an expansion. So, you see, looking up the word "big" and then "bang" won't make you anymore of a scientist than if you look up the word "atheist" in greek and thinking you're now an expert on atheism.
You are more than welcome to your thoughts and feelings on the matter.
Is this why you won't stop comparing gay people to murderers, rapists, bestialiacs, and people who eat feces? We're all welcome to our own thoughts and feelings, I guess.
Now, when you say "progress," what exactly are you aspiring towards, that would help me understand what it is exactly that impedes that very progress? In a worldview with no definitive purpose or hope beyond the material, what difference does it all really make?
Child labor laws, abolition of slavery, civil rights, women suffrage, gay rights, etc.
In a worldview with no definitive purpose beyond the physical world, it makes every difference for us to try to make the world a better place. But I'm sure this is beyond your grasp. So, if comparing decent law abiding citizens to murderers, rapists, bestialiacs, and people who eat feces buy you a ticket into heaven after death, by all means continue. I'm more worried about trying to make this world a better place.
No, you've never mentioned that to me. So I guess you are fundamentally against the First Amendment. Cool. Now I know where you stand.
Again, deep down I don't believe in democracy. I used to. But people like you made me doubt the effectiveness of democracy.
What exactly makes you any better than these brainwashed little girls? After all, you clearly want to eradicate religion, as if there couldn't possibly be ANY redeeming qualities in it.
Um, no, I don't want to eradicate religion. There's a difference between wanting to eradicate it and wanting to see it go belly up.
Here is a more obvious example. I'm counting the days til you die of old age. A gay friend of mine once taught me that. About the only thing we can do is wait for you people to die of old age.
There's a big difference between that and actually going out slaughtering you people.
You could make a better argument about how a person or a group is hijacking a religion and manipulating it, rather than coming down on the religion itself. Did you even think about that?
Are you saying you're one of these hijackers or you represent what christianity is really about? If the latter, my original point stands.
What precisely makes your moralizing any greater than anyone else's?
Um... I don't compare decent law abiding citizens to murderers, rapists, bestialiacs, and people who eat feces?
Owing to the deficiency of the English language, I have occasionally used the academic jargon generator to produce phrases that even I don't fully understand. The jargons are not meant to offend anyone or to insult anyone's intelligence!
™ Version 4.2
