[QUOTE=POLOPOZOZO;36761789]Yeah I know, I did though.
[editline]13th July 2012[/editline]
Ok you can literally replace it with any other western nation the only difference is they didn't gas gays they just didn't like them whatever.
Eastern Europe is the strongest example because even non-religious people were bigoted.[/QUOTE]
I'm almost positive that gays were executed too.
[QUOTE=DOG-GY;36758065]never heard of a nonreligious person who hates gays, not personally or in the media. the hate for homosexuals seems to come solely from the religious perspective. any examples?
im asking for examples not stating they dont exist[/QUOTE]
Religion in general justifies hate and bigotry,that doesn't mean there aren't any homophobic non-theists though.
I have two friends whom are atheists and they both shun homosexuality in general.
[editline]14th July 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=Lankist;36759997]
Whoever told you Nazi Germany was secular lied to you.[/QUOTE]
Probably Fox ''News''.
[QUOTE=POLOPOZOZO;36761789]Yeah I know, I did though.
[editline]13th July 2012[/editline]
Ok you can literally replace it with any other western nation the only difference is [B]they didn't gas gays [/B]they just didn't like them whatever.
Eastern Europe is the strongest example because even non-religious people were bigoted.[/QUOTE]
Are you shitting me?
Yes, they did.
[URL]http://www.ushmm.org/museum/exhibit/online/hsx/[/URL]
[editline]14th July 2012[/editline]
Alright, I don't see them actually being gassed, but they were still sent to labor camps and were to be executed through work. Same thing, really.
[QUOTE=znk666;36764797]Religion in general justifies hate and bigotry,that doesn't mean there aren't any homophobic non-theists though.
I have two friends whom are atheists and they both shun homosexuality in general.[/QUOTE]
sorry but unlike a religious person,a non religious person just has no reason or anything to base a dislike for homosexuals on so i respect that opinion even less. they're just as bad for being closed minded, even dumber for being like that with no religion. atheism should be about attaining truth and meaning through knowledge.
[QUOTE=Zally13;36764834]Are you shitting me?
Yes, they did.
[URL]http://www.ushmm.org/museum/exhibit/online/hsx/[/URL]
[editline]14th July 2012[/editline]
Alright, I don't see them actually being gassed, but they were still sent to labor camps and were to be executed through work. Same thing, really.[/QUOTE]LOL try reading what I posted again.
[editline]14th July 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=Pierrewithahat;36762894]I'm almost positive that gays were executed too.[/QUOTE]
Any the difference between other western nations and Nazi Germany is.
reading skills people, reading skills
[QUOTE=POLOPOZOZO;36766095]LOL try reading what I posted again.
[editline]14th July 2012[/editline]
Any the difference between other western nations and Nazi Germany is.
reading skills people, reading skills[/QUOTE]
Reading skills? There's a bit of a fucking difference between disliking gays and gassing them, besides ther has been no modern nation in recent times that had state sponsored mass murder of homosexuals apart from Germany, that I am aware of.
I give up.
The persecution of homosexuals has happened throughout the West in the 20th century, a lot of which was not religiously based. I tried to use Germany as one extreme example where shipping gays off to camps and gassing them became public policy. Yes, I realize it is not as secular as I made it out to be but I would say Iran hanging them from cranes in front of everyone seems to be a lot more religiously based and sanctioned by large religious groups there. If the Nazis aren't the best example there was plenty of other hatred to go around for them in the rest of Europe, the only difference is that the rest of Europe just persecuted them and didn't move them all off to camps. Is it really that difficult for you to put yourself into a bigot's shoes and understand why they might hate gays for reasons that go deeper than their religious convictions?
yeah it is difficult to put myself in their shoes because any bigot who doesnt base their bigotry on a religios belief (which is stupid anyways) is even more of a fucking moron because they have 0 reason at all and i cant put myself in a complete idiots state of mind. im just asking for examples of this in the media, so far there's just 1 video of someone who smurfy i guess is saying is nonreligious which seems to suggest that this is a rather small phenomenon.
[QUOTE=POLOPOZOZO;36767268]I give up.
The persecution of homosexuals has happened throughout the West in the 20th century, a lot of which was not religiously based. I tried to use Germany as one extreme example where shipping gays off to camps and gassing them became public policy. Yes, I realize it is not as secular as I made it out to be but I would say Iran hanging them from cranes in front of everyone seems to be a lot more religiously based and sanctioned by large religious groups there. If the Nazis aren't the best example there was plenty of other hatred to go around for them in the rest of Europe, the only difference is that the rest of Europe just persecuted them and didn't move them all off to camps. Is it really that difficult for you to put yourself into a bigot's shoes and understand why they might hate gays for reasons that go deeper than their religious convictions?[/QUOTE]
Just because you can put yourself in their shoes doesn't mean you have to agree or feel empathy for them.
Just a little while ago (in the 60s I think) homosexuality was considered a mental disorder.
[QUOTE=Spooter;36756409]If Gay Marriage gets Federally legalized, the path the states are on to legalizing it will be on the fast track.
It is unfortunate though, that the court can't simply say "Homosexuals are human, therefore they are entitled to the basic human rights that everyone else receives."[/QUOTE]
No, if the fed legalize it, it [b]will[/b] be legal since federal laws trump local ones (of course thats dependent on whether they choose to legalize it or play politics and let the states choose).
[QUOTE=Zally13;36767665]Just because you can put yourself in their shoes doesn't mean you have to agree or feel empathy for them.[/QUOTE]
Why do you think I do? My entire point has been that secular homophbia is a thing and a good portion of the time religiously based homophobia is because of that same general hatred, not because of the actual text in a book.
[QUOTE=POLOPOZOZO;36768682]Why do you think I do? My entire point has been that secular homophbia is a thing and a good portion of the time religiously based homophobia is because of that same general hatred, not because of the actual text in a book.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, I never argued against that. Saying that there's no secular homophobes is idiotic.
I was arguing against you saying that Germany was secular and didn't execute gays.
Sad that basic human rights need to be taken to courts and voted over.
[QUOTE=SpaceGhost;36769200]Sad that basic human rights need to be taken to courts and voted over.[/QUOTE]
I wouldn't call marriage a "basic" human right
A human right, definitely, but I think there are a lot more "basic" ones that are in much greater danger, the right to health care and the right to vote for instance
You should be able to marry whoever the fuck you want if you love them.
[QUOTE=kaine123;36769349]You should be able to marry whoever the fuck you want if you love them.[/QUOTE]
or if you dont love them
really do whatever the fuck you want
[QUOTE=Key_in_skillee;36769316]I wouldn't call marriage a "basic" human right
A human right, definitely, but I think there are a lot more "basic" ones that are in much greater danger, the right to health care and the right to vote for instance[/QUOTE]
There are people in this country that still think free healthcare = untrained doctors and year long waiting lists. It's going to be a long time before we get a solid healthcare system in place, if it ever happens at all.
[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;36769535]There are people in this country that still think free healthcare = untrained doctors and year long waiting lists. It's going to be a long time before we get a solid healthcare system in place, if it ever happens at all.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, it really will be. The thing is, SCOTUS ruling that Obamacare is constitutional will ensure that any future healthcare systems that are better won't be blocked out, and progress will continue more easily.
All we really need is a Congress that has a Democrat majority in order to pass things easier.
[QUOTE=Zally13;36768900]
I was arguing against you saying that Germany was secular and didn't execute gays.[/QUOTE]
Which I never said.
[QUOTE=POLOPOZOZO;36770121]Which I never said.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=POLOPOZOZO;36759344]I mean Nazi Germany was fairly secular[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=POLOPOZOZO;36761789]Ok you can literally replace it with any other western nation the only difference is they didn't gas gays they just didn't like them whatever.[/QUOTE]
?
[QUOTE=Zally13;36770144]?[/QUOTE]
The second one he's saying other countries didn't gas gays, not that germany didn't gas gays
"You can literally replace it (Nazi Germany) with any other western nation (at the time) the only difference is they didn't gas gays (in the other western nations) they just didn't like them (other forms of persecution), whatever."
fuck I feel like I've completely lost any ability to articulate
[QUOTE=POLOPOZOZO;36770912]"You can literally replace it (Nazi Germany) with any other western nation (at the time) the only difference is they didn't gas gays (in the other western nations) they just didn't like them (other forms of persecution), whatever."
fuck I feel like I've completely lost any ability to articulate[/QUOTE]
Ohhhh, sorry for the miscommunication. I thought you were saying Germany did. Sorry for misinterpreting what you said, in that case, I will agree with you that gays were generally looked down upon in most western cultures.
[QUOTE=Key_in_skillee;36768607]Just a little while ago (in the 60s I think) homosexuality was considered a mental disorder.[/QUOTE]
yeah look what happened to [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Turing]alan turing[/url]
[QUOTE=-Get_A_Life-;36756429]I still don't get the logic behind religious fanatics opposing gay marriage. God is supposed to be the only one able to judge men, by that logic we should make it legal and let "them" face God's judgement, right?
Not trying to start anything here, just wondering.[/QUOTE]
That's exactly the correct way of going about it as a Christian. I have no qualms about same-sex marriage, by all means. It says in the Bible that it will happen sooner or later, worldwide even.
Course there are those nuts that make everyone else look bad...
[QUOTE=sHiBaN;36771812]That's exactly the correct way of going about it as a Christian. I have no qualms about same-sex marriage, by all means. [B]It says in the Bible that it will happen sooner or later, worldwide even.[/B]
Course there are those nuts that make everyone else look bad...[/QUOTE]
Whoa, wait, where?
This is the first time I've heard this.
[QUOTE=sHiBaN;36771812]That's exactly the correct way of going about it as a Christian. I have no qualms about same-sex marriage, by all means. [b]It says in the Bible that it will happen sooner or later, worldwide even.[/b]
Course there are those nuts that make everyone else look bad...[/QUOTE]
Just out of curiosity, where? I seem to recall the Bible clearly stating that "marriage is between a man and a woman" and that "thou shalt not love a man as you would a woman".
Also, this brings my friendly counter argument. This past school year, we had a gay marriage debate. I did not offer anything other than sitting on the sidelines laughing at how the class was yelling at each other, but the Catholics in my class offered an interesting point:
What they said was that, personally, they had nothing against homosexuals, but the Bible defines marriage as between a man and a woman, and they feel that it is wrong to force churches to let gays get married in them, because it would basically be telling them that their Holy Scripture is wrong.
So that brings about an interesting point: Should the government squander the Churches religious freedoms for another group?
The pro-church people in my class offered a compromise:
"Let it be for the individual churches to decide, and allow gays to get married in court. After all, there are churches that deny straight couples marriage simply because they are of a different religion."
Everyone, your thoughts?
[QUOTE=Kartoffel;36772082]Just out of curiosity, where? I seem to recall the Bible clearly stating that "marriage is between a man and a woman" and that "thou shalt not love a man as you would a woman".
Also, this brings my friendly counter argument. This past school year, we had a gay marriage debate. I did not offer anything other than sitting on the sidelines laughing at how the class was yelling at each other, but the Catholics in my class offered an interesting point:
What they said was that, personally, they had nothing against homosexuals, but the Bible defines marriage as between a man and a woman, and they feel that it is wrong to force churches to let gays get married in them, because it would basically be telling them that their Holy Scripture is wrong.
So that brings about an interesting point: Should the government squander the Churches religious freedoms for another group?
The pro-church people in my class offered a compromise:
"Let it be for the individual churches to decide, and allow gays to get married in court. After all, there are churches that deny straight couples marriage simply because they are of a different religion."
Everyone, your thoughts?[/QUOTE]
That "compromise" is basically what every pro-gay marriage person wants in the first place. I've never heard anyone argue that churches should be forced to marry gay couples.
Don't assume that the church is the only place to get married.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
