“Actually, I think private businesses can still refuse service to anyone they want to. It’s just public institutions that can’t discriminate on race, gender, etc.”
Actually no, this was decided decades ago when people were using their businesses to continue segregation. It was decided that they cannot refuse service to people just because they are black or female and recently, gay. This is at least a three decades old policy, I’m surprised you haven’t read about it in that time.
June 27, 2013 at 1:01pm
I don’t think you know the difference between “tolerance” and “letting them govern me.” I tolerate Christians and open expressions of their faith. I don’t let their faith decide what I can and cannot do.
June 27, 2013 at 12:54pm
I thought those Leviticus laws don’t apply anymore, because “Jesus said so” in a hallucination. Have your slaves read up on that for you.
June 15, 2013 at 12:56am
Interracial marriage was defended by the same logic. The law punished both spouses in a interracial marriage equally, so it wasn’t discrimination. Except that in the case of same-sex marriage, even if the law technically prohibits heterosexuals and homosexuals from marrying of the same-sex, it obviously is a much larger burden on homosexuals. Even greater than in the case of interracial marriage. And in order to that be ok, according to the law, there has to be a legitimate reason for the law to treat one group differently. Religion isn’t a legitimate reason, and I’m glad it isn’t.
The law does not treat one group differently than the other. As a male, I can marry any women that would have me. Every gay male has the exact same right to marry any woman that would have him. What you are talking about is not marriage, so why the need to hijack that term?
May 9, 2013 at 10:32pm
How is this a surprise? Psychologists have a technique called Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, that, in it’s most simplistic description, is getting the person to think better thoughts. Focus more on the good and less on the bad. Since there’s nothing showing that the prayer actually changed the behavior of the other person, that’s basically what’s happening here, only the person praying is expecting a difference from God and then see’s what they expect (by focusing on the good and less on the bad).
Not only that, but most psychologists who practice CBT would be called leftists on this site, since they tend to have more liberal social views. Especially that gays are fine the way they are.
April 30, 2013 at 12:56am
“I had read that in (I believe) the Netherlands, since homosexual couples were allowed to marry, straight couple marriages have declined because marriage now carries a stigma of being for gays.
Think about what they have done to the rainbow. Same thing will happen to marriage. It will become less appealing, then even distasteful.”
Actually, what was happening was that the straight couples were forgoing marriage in order to utilize the domestic partnership system that was set up for gays. So if they were forgoing marriage because marriage was for gays, why would they use the domestic partnerships that were set up for gays? What was really happening was that domestic partnerships were easier to enter into and easier to separate from. It was seen as a preferable alternative to marriage. In nations where domestic partnerships or civil unions were abandoned once gays were given the right to marry, no such anomaly occurred.
March 29, 2013 at 8:51am
Can’t beat that logic.
March 29, 2013 at 8:41am
Wow, I’ve never seen a more deluded Christian. Exodus 21:7 is not a warning against slavery. Ephesians 6:5 is not a warning against slavery. A warning against slavery would consist of: “Thou shalt not own another human.” Which doesn’t exist in any form whatsoever in the Bible. At least have the sense to use the (still wrong) “context” excuse, it doesn’t make you look as ignorant about your own religion.
Exodus 21:7 – “If a man sells his daughter as a servant, she is not to go free as male servants do.”
Ephesians 6:5 – “Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ”
March 29, 2013 at 8:25am
“Many people who oppose gay marriage have “no animosity” towards gay people at all but want to preserve their values, Limbaugh explained.”
Look at all these comments. Leave it up to “TheBlaze” to prove Rush Limbaugh wrong.
March 1, 2013 at 5:22pm
Please supply data confirming your views, from an independent source that doesn’t financially gain from anti-gay or pro-gay groups.
March 1, 2013 at 5:15pm
They teach the Bible in Texas. It’s legal to teach the Bible in school, as long as there is no assertion that the Bible is correct and it is taught from a secular point of view. Except when these schools were examined on whether they follow the law or not, half or so broke the law and abused the system to evangelize students. If the schools could be trusted to follow the law, it’d be one thing, but a very large portion don’t. So either all schools shouldn’t teach the bible, or at least the ones that have abused their authority in the past.
March 1, 2013 at 5:09pm
What is wrong with you?
February 27, 2013 at 1:35pm
How do you define “facts?”
…If you mean, “something that is proven to be true,” then we agree on the definition of facts and disagree on your use of the word, since evolution is supported by facts.
If you mean, “something that issupported by the bible,” then we disagree on the definition of facts.
Either way, you are wrong.
February 27, 2013 at 1:31pm
“Much in the same way heterosexuals who abuse the government funded healthcare to treat diseases they had through their escapades.”
Here’s two scenarios. First is a poor girl in a rough neighborhood. She is currently on medicaid. Her doctor prescribes her birth control because she is being pressured by her boyfriend to become sexually active. Since she’s on medicaid, the government is paying for her birth control. This birth control is however a good investment for the government. Since she was easily prevented from having a child before graduating high school, she is now much more likely to make more from her job once she is an adult, either by going to college or being able to work more hours. That means more taxable income. The same applies to the father.
The second scenario is the same girl, now an adult. She never got pregnant, except she got HPV from her boyfriend. As happens much too often, she never got regular pap smears. She went to the doctor for irregular bleeding and pain in her pelvis. She later finds out that the cause is cervical cancer. Now, Christian morals might have taught you that this was a cause of her sexual sins, so she somewhat deserves it, but the medical field isn’t so callous. When it comes to treatment, it doesn’t matter how she got sick, all that matters is that she is sick. It does matter when it comes to prevention, which is why we now have vaccines for HPV, which I remember the Right was against.
February 27, 2013 at 1:15pm
If saying you are gay or lesbian means talking “about what your[sic] doing for sex,” then if you have children, I really really hope you never mention them to anyone ever. Because unless they are adopted, I already know more than I want to know about your sex life. For example, if you give me their birthday, I can probably guess within a month span of when you had sex with your sex partner. Sorry, but I do not find you interesting enough to want to know anything about your sex life. Please keep any details about what you’re doing for sex out of our eyes and the ears of your family and acquaintances.
February 27, 2013 at 1:04pm
I was just reading about article about the Jesus SNL skit that Christians were all angry about. As long as jokes like this one keep getting told, then isn’t it hypocritical for that same person to get angry at a skit making fun of Christianity?
February 27, 2013 at 12:57am
That’s a bit psychopathic, isn’t it? Especially JDC0101.
“EAT OR GET EATEN”?
January 19, 2013 at 3:11am
“If then the bible is really that bad please enlighten me as to atheist teachings on the same subjects.”
The Bible: Killing of the entire population, including children, except for virgins is acceptable when conquering a land. (Deuteronomy 3, Joshua 6, Judges 21, etc.)
Atheists: Killing children is never ok, except in self-defense.
The Bible: It’s ok for an invading army to force the virgins to marry the invading soldiers. When there isn’t enough women, it’s better to kidnap women from other tribes than to break an arbitrary and rather stupid law. (Judges 21)
Atheists: Kidnapping women and forcing them into marriage is never ok.
The Bible: It’s not only ok to have slaves, it’s ok for a father to sell his daughter as a slave. (Exodus 21)
Atheists: Slavery is always wrong, as is selling your daughter.
The Bible: “The people of Samaria must bear the consequences of their guilt because they rebelled against their God. They will be killed by an invading army, their little ones dashed to death against the ground, their pregnant women ripped open by swords.” (Hosea 13:16)
Atheists: See above about killing children. Include pregnant women.
The Bible: Babylon is so bad that their babies should be bashed in by rocks. (Psalm 137)
Atheists: See above about killing children.
December 15, 2012 at 12:39am
There is something to your gay statement though. I know of no gay school shooters, most depressed gay kids just kill themselves. Many of the kids that go to kill other classmates were bullying for being perceived as gay but were likely straight. (Read: “Adolescent Masculinity,
Homophobia, and Violence”, M. S. KIMMEL, M. MAHLER) It’s very possible bullies teased this kid for being gay. Although I haven’t been able to find anything to support that. And by no means does that excuse his or their behavior in any way. Many kids face that bullying, it takes an evil mind to take it that far. But I’d like to see what happens when homophobic bullying goes down in schools. Say 1 in every million kids that faces this bullying shoots their classmates. I made that statistic up. But maybe if we reduce the pool of bullying victims, we’d reduce the number of kids who have the combination of being bullied, having extremely violent thoughts, have access to dangerous weapons, and have mental issues that make them completely disregard their future.
December 15, 2012 at 12:33am
I have never accused a tea party member of going on a shooting spree. I don’t think they’re stupid, they might love having guns, and even love using guns, but I don’t think they will do things that will obviously turn the public against the second amendment. I really don’t like guns myself, but until the second amendment is revoked it’s a fairly fundamental right in this country to own guns and I am a HUGE fan of any fundamental and/or constitutionally granted rights. It’s what separates America from Russia, which I hear is a pretty sucky place to live.
I’m sure the Tea Party has had a lot of blame, but you can fight fire with fire or fight fire with extinguisher. People blame the Tea Party? Call them out on it, show that there’s absolutely nothing to base that blame on. Going on to do the same thing doesn’t help.