Feed on Posts or Comments 24 October 2014

Christianity Thomas on 23 Jun 2010 12:59 am

When the bigotry and homophobia of Christians reaches the level of insanity

You have to watch this video to believe it – the bigotry and homophobia of the Christians in Texas has reached the point of insanity:

Yes, Texas will try to ban oral sex.

12 Responses to “When the bigotry and homophobia of Christians reaches the level of insanity”

  1. on 23 Jun 2010 at 3:37 pm 1.Anonymous said …

    The Bible tells me so.

  2. on 24 Jun 2010 at 12:36 am 2.GODS HELPER48561 said …

    I think gods great

  3. on 24 Jun 2010 at 6:18 pm 3.Abraham said …

    @ 2 earlier replies” The bible also says you must stone your kids and your dead parents must bury themselves…

  4. on 24 Jun 2010 at 10:07 pm 4.Danielle said …

    So I guess Christina Aguilera’s “Woohoo” would be advocating criminal activity

  5. on 26 Jun 2010 at 7:45 pm 5.Martin said …

    BAN oral sex, then how will the Televangelist EVER get any relief?

  6. on 27 Jun 2010 at 3:05 pm 6.John k said …

    Here are some questions for you….
    1. How did our planet form perfectly to support life?
    2. Look at your body. How did such a perfect life form evolve from nothing?
    3. How do you assume that people 10000 years were not as “smart” as us?
    4. If, as us Christian believe, life is eternal, why should we question god’s word (the bible)? This life is just a blink of the eye in the total plan.
    5. Why do people like Charles Darwin question their anti Christian views when facing death?

    Educated people who discount the possibility of a higher power think that tenured professors have all the answers.

    They don’t and neither do you!

    I’ll pray for your immortal soul.

    John k
    BSBA and a Christian!!!!!

  7. on 27 Jun 2010 at 3:55 pm 7.Martin said …

    John k, I will answer each of your questions in turn.

    1. Let’s use the anthropic principle to explain this one. The mind of the religious sees only ONE possibility for the existence of the earth, but there are alternatives. We know that the probability of life existing is staggering, say a billion to one, but we KNOW that the odds were beaten at least once, on this planet. THis again addresses the use of very large numbers. There are 100 billion galaxies in the Universe, by most agree estimations, now if we look at the probable number of planets in each galaxy, that would be a billion billion planets, and if ONE in a billion predictably supported life, that’s a billion planets in the universe where life has begun. Pretty big numbers even for god, I’d say.

    2. Our bodies, as you explain, are FAR from perfect. Evolution has actually done us no great favors, in fact many of evolutions little twists have actually harmed us. By evolving the ability to walk upright, we become the species with the highest mortality rate in childbirth on this planet. We have one of the weakest eyes of all the higher species, and one of the weakest bodies. Evolution gave us a superior mind, but took away many of the other features we shared with common ancestors. This so called perfect body does not regenerate limbs or teeth, that other species have evolved to do so. So, the argument for the perfectly designed body, is weak at best. If I built a product with as many design flaws as the human body has, I would be out of business.

    3.. People 10,000 years ago were NOT as smart as we are today, at least not in the context I was speaking. Otherwise, surely they would have invented the phone, the car, the computer, the flushing toilet, etc. Now, the capacity for intellect MAY have been there, but the ability to use it certainly was not. Ten thousand years ago, man did not understand that the universe was pretty much infinite, how the human body worked, that the sun did NOT circle the earth, and the list goes on. I am not threatened by the fact that in ten thousand years, I will be thought of as intellectually inferior to mankind alive then.

    4..This question is often central in the debates I have with Christians. The whole why should we seek answers if we truly believe. Then, I say why should we seek the cure for disease, or the use of technology, or any other academic pursuit? Too long god has been exempt from the puruit of knowledge, and why, because theologist are afraid of the answer, that’s why. As one noted theologian said to me once, “IF tomorrow you brought scientific proof that god did not exist, and there was NO doubt of the validity of your proof, I would still chose to believe in god.” It is the “I believe because it comforts me” syndrome. So if you and yours want to live in darkness, content to know nothing, then by all means, please do; but I will continue to argue for intellect and reason, and research.

    5.. This is also a very convenient story used by Christian appologitics, that somehow scientists “question” their beliefs as death nears, and this is mainly hogwash. Darwin’s so called death-bed conversion wasn’t even told until some 34 years AFTER his death, which is pretty consistent with how Christians like to tell their stories, many years AFTER the event (like the writing of the gospels) This so called event was a very convenient tale, don’t you think? To write a story that was published in America, 34 years after his death, by a Christian publication no less. Sorry, but one or two, even if they are reliable, conversions on a deathbed do not make science and reason false.

    Finally, we do not claim to know all the answers, in fact quite the opposite is true, which is why we seek answers. It is religion that seems to have the answers. Can’t understand something in science, don’t worry about it, God can fill that gap. God is the answer to all things that science isn’t able to answer yet, but what happens when there are no more gaps?

    Keep on praying, it doesn’t hurt me at all. Peace.

  8. on 28 Jun 2010 at 12:52 am 8.Horatio said …

    1. “The mind of the religious sees only ONE possibility for the existence of the earth, but there are alternatives.”

    True, just as does the atheist. However the likelihood of a creation as complex as the one we are privileged to be a part of is astronomical. Atheism is actually the least likely.

    2. “Our bodies, as you explain, are FAR from perfect.’

    Only atheist make this false claim. We claim the body is complex and therefore the product of intelligence. A favorite twist of the atheist.

    4. “Too long god has been exempt from the puruit of knowledge, and why, because theologist are afraid of the answer, that’s why.”

    Of course another lie to any student of history. Some of the greatest scientist have been theist. This old and dishonest twist that theist do not seek answers to science is also disingenuous. Just the opposite, it displays the work of God in even more detail.

    5. “Sorry, but one or two, even if they are reliable, conversions on a deathbed do not make science and reason false.”

    No point to this argument. There have obviously been MANY more than 2 or 3 but the argument is pointless. I know of this many personally. Theism goes with science and reason more consistently than atheism. Pure atheism is about 2% of the America population last I read. Also, Darwin was a Christian early in life so there is no reason to disbelieve his faith.

  9. on 28 Jun 2010 at 1:42 pm 9.Martin said …

    1. NOT SO, atheist are open to many possibilities of how the earth was formed, in fact we are even open to the “idea” of a creator, we just want to see the empirical evidence of such a god’s existence. There are almost as many theories of how the earth was formed as there are cosmologists out there.

    2.”How did such a perfect life form evolve from nothing?” This was the DIRECT quote to which I was attempting to answer, Horatio, YOU inserted your own interpretation of my answer to fit YOUR belief system. Stay on subject my man, if you want to debate. The only “evidence” in man is the evidence of Darwin’s evolution. As I stated, if I designed a product so faulty as the human body, I would be out of business very soon, indeed.

    4. Again, you MISQUOTE me for your own use. Today, MOST good Theologians admit that the virgin birth of Jesus and the story of his resurection are both based in MYTH, but to counter this, it is considered “in poor taste” or very 19th century to mention it. No, religion, as Martin Luther stated, is ruined when challenged by reason, science, and education. Further, studies, which I will not repeat here, have shown that among the world’s TOP scientists, belief in a personal god is almost non-existent. It’s about five percent for the belief and 95 against… those are pretty big odds against.

    5. Actually, atheism in America is about 10 percent, and those are the ones who have the courage to admit it. The actual numbers are thought to be somewhere in the range of 45 percent. Think about it, by your numbers, the churches should be filled to capacity each Sunday, if 98 percent of the US believed in god. Christianity will die if people stop going to church, whether they “believe” in a personal god or not. As for Darwin, I know he had a belief early in life, so did I, but I outgrew my kindergarten belief system. Think about it, Children are easily sold that bill of goods, religion, they are taught to accept authority without question, it’s a safety issue for children, so belief in a higher authority is ingrained in us. Some of us outgrow the need for someone to tell us what to do, how to live, and how to hate. Thanks for posting basicaly nothing in response to my post.

  10. on 28 Jun 2010 at 1:51 pm 10.Martin said …

    “Also, Darwin was a Christian early in life so there is no reason to disbelieve his faith.”

    Did you actually read this before you posted it? Have you ever read ANYTHING written by Darwin?

    “But I own that I cannot see as plainly as others do, and I should wish to do, evidence of design and beneficence on all sides of us. There seems to me too much misery in the world. I cannot persuade myself that a beneficent and omnipotent God would have designedly created that a cat should play with mice.”

    I think IF religion took a slightly different stand on god, perhaps if they would say that god created the methodology by which all exists, then perhaps god would be a consideration in science, but as it is a god who could decide how each and every function of the universe works, is just statistically improbable, if not impossible. The complexity of such a being would be virtually impossible.

  11. on 28 Jun 2010 at 8:01 pm 11.Boz said …

    Hor,

    Well played!

  12. on 29 Jun 2010 at 12:46 am 12.Martin said …

    “Hor,

    Well played!”

    Indeed, well played, I have certainly been put in MY place… “Laughs”

Trackback This Post | Subscribe to the comments through RSS Feed

Leave a Reply