Christian organizations are nothing but bullies

Originally posted by Bardiel13
As much as I'd like to say everyone should express themselves openly and all that liberal stuff, I simply can't. Because, realistically speaking, we live in a society where people need to do certain things to get ahead in life. For instance, if you work in an office building, it is protocol that you wear a suit. If you are a man and you come to work one day in a speedo and kabuki make-up, chances are you will get fired. It doesn't matter if you feel most comfortable in a speedo and make-up, it makes more people around you uncomfortable.
I don't care what people do with their private lives. If they like to dress in the opposite sex's clothing, like it in the butt, or have a fetish for poop. Though it may strike me as odd, I'm not going to lynch them for being different.
With gay parades, they enforce the stereotype that gays are freaks who like to dance half naked and try to be as shocking as possible. Right in the street, even! These event are highly sexualized and suggestive. But, in society's eyes, that's alright, because they're gay and gays are naturally sexual devients and freaks, so let them express themsevles. If this were a parade with straight people with women running around topless and men thrusting their groins at the pedestrians, this would not fly.
You say, most homophobes hate gays because they simply like the same sex. That is not true at all. How do I know this? Becuase, me being a non-judging person have homophobic friends. Inevitably, we have little friendly debates about this topic. All of my friends told me what they didn't like most about homosexuals is that they were attention whores that liked to freak people out. They had no sense of romance, instead they go off to their gay orgies (which in fact is one of the reason why HIV is rampant in the gay community) and have meanling hedonistic sex. Of course, I told them this wasn't all true, that many gays have long-term and loving relationships with single individuals. One replied, "I believe you. Unfortuantely those aren't the gays I'm seeing."
Homosexuality, by definition, is the sexual attraction to the same gender. With gay parades, it's less about being homosexual and more about dancing in the street with a painted-on speedo, lip-synching to It's Raining Men. And anyone who is offended by such a sight, is obviously homophobic. Along with those of African descent, gays do a hefty job of reenforcing the stereotype that all homosexuals are screaming queens that like to dance on floats in parades, making suggestive thrusts at the crowd.

You have hit on a lot of reasons why I would personally never identify as "gay" or "bi" or whatever or participate in such parades

but you need to learn how to make a much better argument. You have some substance, but learn how to present it in a way that doesn't make you look ignorant.

Interjection: [Laughter, cruel and mocking.]

Statement: Leonheartmm should blame not the Church for such doings but the government, which is composed of humans (who are inherently selfish).

Statement: To say that the United States government is mostly composed of Christians--especially conservative Christians--is laughable.

Originally posted by FeceMan
Interjection: [Laughter, cruel and mocking.]

Statement: Leonheartmm should blame not the Church for such doings but the government, which is composed of humans (who are inherently selfish).

Statement: To say that the United States government is mostly composed of Christians--especially conservative Christians--is laughable.

church is an organisation created socially by human beings. it has no reality outside the imaginations of the people who believe in it.

officially over 40% of the american government is evangelical adherant. practically the entire right wing is. the current administration is completely. and much of the the left wing are also adherant albeit not the majority{or rather, theyr not CONSERVATIVE adherant}.

think before posting.

Originally posted by Bardiel13
What kind of special treatment?

Originally posted by Creshosk
Are you seriously asking that or is that supposed to be a clever rhetorical question?

Well, from the sound of it, you think I condone giving gays special treatment. What treatments did you have in mind?

Originally posted by Bardiel13
Well, from the sound of it, you think I condone giving gays special treatment. What treatments did you have in mind?

Come on ... a heterosexual parade where people flaunt their heterosexuality?

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
They would get arrested. 😆

Originally posted by Creshosk
Umm I was joking around about the whole thing.

Come on ... a heterosexual parade where people flaunt their heterosexuality?

Ah. I see. Carry on, then.

Originally posted by FeceMan
Statement: Perhaps it is beyond Imperial_Samurai's certainty, but it is not beyond FeceMan's

Yes, many a night I have lay in bed ruing the fact I just can't accept things on what is almost blind faith to the point of certainty.

For all I know, and I see no reason to believe otherwise, Nazi war-criminals died when Nazi war-criminals died. They didn't go on to meet some greater judgement.

And so wait - if I was certain their was nothing beyond their deaths... well what? Would your certainty and my certainty have a fight to the death?

Declaration, Colloquial: Life sucks; shit happens; etc.

Statement: When the believer dies, all his wounds shall be made whole, and he shall inhabit a perfect body where perfect peace, contentment, and comfort are all he knows; pain and death will be things of the past.

Uh huh.

Interjection: [Laughter, mirthless.]

Statement: Indeed FeceMan is referring to such an organization, an organization of hypocrites and wrongdoers who claim their goals as being noble and just.

I guess I could ask you to justify the "hypocrites and wrongdoers" line. But then I remembered I asked you once before the same thing and never got an answer.

Something to the effect of:

"You'll have to point me in the direction of their prejudice and inequality, because when I look at the website I kind of get bogged down in all calls of equal rights for all and well meaning messages."

Originally posted by Badabing
God doesn't "Allow" mass murder. We were given Free Will by Him as a gift. Would you rather be programmed at birth? I could also say the "cop out" is not believing. You have the Free Will to admire and believe as you choose. Without Free Will this would not be possible.

1) The existance of a Christian God poses to many logical paradoxes, as I already explained, as have others, in various threads, look it up, I wil not repeat what I say 100 times over.

2) You beleive in a highly unlikely and non evident myth which contradicts science as well as logic. The Burden of Proof is ON YOU

3) Free Will is not entirely free. There are conditions and consequences which shape your choices such as reward and punishment, such as cause and effect, such as desire and necessity.

Choices are not free, we pay for every choice we make.

Existance of Free Will is not evidense of a Christian god.

Originally posted by Bardiel13
As much as I'd like to say everyone should express themselves openly and all that liberal stuff, I simply can't. Because, realistically speaking, we live in a society where people need to do certain things to get ahead in life. For instance, if you work in an office building, it is protocol that you wear a suit. If you are a man and you come to work one day in a speedo and kabuki make-up, chances are you will get fired. It doesn't matter if you feel most comfortable in a speedo and make-up, it makes more people around you uncomfortable.
I don't care what people do with their private lives. If they like to dress in the opposite sex's clothing, like it in the butt, or have a fetish for poop. Though it may strike me as odd, I'm not going to lynch them for being different.
With gay parades, they enforce the stereotype that gays are freaks who like to dance half naked and try to be as shocking as possible. Right in the street, even! These event are highly sexualized and suggestive. But, in society's eyes, that's alright, because they're gay and gays are naturally sexual devients and freaks, so let them express themsevles. If this were a parade with straight people with women running around topless and men thrusting their groins at the pedestrians, this would not fly.
You say, most homophobes hate gays because they simply like the same sex. That is not true at all. How do I know this? Becuase, me being a non-judging person have homophobic friends. Inevitably, we have little friendly debates about this topic. All of my friends told me what they didn't like most about homosexuals is that they were attention whores that liked to freak people out. They had no sense of romance, instead they go off to their gay orgies (which in fact is one of the reason why HIV is rampant in the gay community) and have meanling hedonistic sex. Of course, I told them this wasn't all true, that many gays have long-term and loving relationships with single individuals. One replied, "I believe you. Unfortuantely those aren't the gays I'm seeing."
Homosexuality, by definition, is the sexual attraction to the same gender. With gay parades, it's less about being homosexual and more about dancing in the street with a painted-on speedo, lip-synching to It's Raining Men. And anyone who is offended by such a sight, is obviously homophobic. Along with those of African descent, gays do a hefty job of reenforcing the stereotype that all homosexuals are screaming queens that like to dance on floats in parades, making suggestive thrusts at the crowd.

So according to you, people at gay parade reinfirce a gay stereotype, which you evidently hate.

Should we all asume that at Italian Heritage Parade, Italians reinforce stereotypes and thats why some people are hated.
Should we also assume that Irish-American parade is also where people of Irish origin create stereotype of themselves that everyone hates.

How about African-American day parade? Do a lot of black people walk about making stereotypes of themselves so racist hate them?

Parades are held in celebrations of something. So it appears everyone else can celebrate being something - apart from gays. Because thats what makes people hate them.

Convincing.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
So according to you, people at gay parade reinfirce a gay stereotype, which you evidently hate.

Should we all asume that at Italian Heritage Parade, Italians reinforce stereotypes and thats why some people are hated.
Should we also assume that Irish-American parade is also where people of Irish origin create stereotype of themselves that everyone hates.

How about African-American day parade? Do a lot of black people walk about making stereotypes of themselves so racist hate them?

Parades are held in celebrations of something. So it appears everyone else can celebrate being something - apart from gays. Because thats what makes people hate them.

Convincing.

I've never seen an Italian Heritage Parade or any other heritage parade. What kind of content is common in such parades, since you seem to know more about them? What kind of people would find it offensive? Is it as offensive as a half naken man thrusting his groin at you?

Originally posted by Badabing
Same could be said by every advocate group under the Sun. Zealots are present everywhere. Law, politics, religion, race, animal rights, environmentalists, etc.... What's makes your belief in nothing more credible than those of us who believe in God? Have you disproved the existence of God?

God doesn't "Allow" mass murder. We were given Free Will by Him as a gift. Would you rather be programmed at birth? I could also say the "cop out" is not believing. You have the Free Will to admire and believe as you choose. Without Free Will this would not be possible.

Originally posted by Goddess Kali
1) The existance of a Christian God poses to many logical paradoxes, as I already explained, as have others, in various threads, look it up, I wil not repeat what I say 100 times over.

2) You beleive in a highly unlikely and non evident myth which contradicts science as well as logic. [b]The Burden of Proof is ON YOU

3) Free Will is not entirely free. There are conditions and consequences which shape your choices such as reward and punishment, such as cause and effect, such as desire and necessity.

Choices are not free, we pay for every choice we make.

Existance of Free Will is not evidense of a Christian god. [/B]

The burden of proof isn't on me. You're the person who seems to have absolute Faith in the non-existance of God. All I asked if you could prove it or is this just your Belief? It's ironic how your Faith and Beliefs in no God are just as unprovable as my Faith and Beliefs in God. I do know Jesus, the Apostles and Moses existed. 😊

I never said choices were free, I said we have the Free Will to make our own choices.

I never said Free Will was "evidence" of God, I said it was one of His gifts.

If you are going to talk at least be honest and/or comprehend what I'm saying. 😄

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Should we all asume that at Italian Heritage Parade, Italians reinforce stereotypes and thats why some people are hated.

Originally posted by Badabing
...The burden of proof isn't on me. You're the person who seems to have absolute [b]Faith in the non-existance of God. All I asked if you could prove it or is this just your Belief? It's ironic how your Faith and Beliefs in no God are just as unprovable as my Faith and Beliefs in God. I do know Jesus, the Apostles and Moses existed. 😊...[/B]

That is not true at all: I will explain why in an example.

The teapot analogy

If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes. But if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is an intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense. If, however, the existence of such a teapot were affirmed in ancient books, taught as the sacred truth every Sunday, and instilled into the minds of children at school, hesitation to believe in its existence would become a mark of eccentricity and entitle the doubter to the attentions of the psychiatrist in an enlightened age or of the Inquisitor in an earlier time.

Bertrand Russell (1872-1970),

The reason organized religion merits outright hostility is that, unlike belief in Russell's teapot, religion is powerful, influential, tax-exempt and systematically passed on to children too young to defend themselves. Children are not compelled to spend their formative years memorizing loony books about teapots. Government-subsidized schools don't exclude children whose parents prefer the wrong shape of teapot. Teapot-believers don't stone teapot-unbelievers, teapot-apostates, teapot-heretics and teapot-blasphemers to death. Mothers don't warn their sons off marrying teapot-shiksas whose parents believe in three teapots rather than one. People who put the milk in first don't kneecap those who put the tea in first.

Richard Dawkins

You are claiming that there is a teapot floating in space (something that cannot be proved like god), and then you say the burden of proof is not yours. No one can prove that something that does not exist, does not exist. You must provide proof that your god does exist if you wish other people to believe also. You may believe in a teapot in space (god), but to claim that other people must prove you wrong is silly.

I knew it God is short and stout 😛

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
That is not true at all: I will explain why in an example.

The teapot analogy

You are claiming that there is a teapot floating in space (something that cannot be proved like god), and then you say the burden of proof is not yours. No one can prove that something that does not exist, does not exist. You must provide proof that your god does exist if you wish other people to believe also. You may believe in a teapot in space (god), but to claim that other people must prove you wrong is silly.

It seems Faith in God is a very touchy subject on a Religion Forum. 😂

Originally posted by Badabing
The problem is that I never claimed proof. The only claim I made is my Faith. I'm not silly, read my initial post. I asked Kali if he had proof that God doesn't exist. So, your post and analogy aren't relevant to anything I've posted. 😊

It seems Faith in God is a very touchy subject on a Religion Forum. 😂

You cannot ask someone if they have proof unless you have proof. What is your proof? 😆

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
You cannot ask someone if they have proof unless you have proof. What is your proof? 😆

Reading comprehension FTW! duryes

Originally posted by Badabing
*sigh* I never claimed proof, only Faith. I ASKED Kali if there was proof of God's nonexistence which I didn't know about since he claimed God is a myth. 😊

Reading comprehension FTW! duryes

Why would you ask Kali for proof? You don't have proof, why would you think Kali needs proof? Maybe he has faith that god does not exist.

Originally posted by Bardiel13
Along with those of African descent, gays do a hefty job of reenforcing the stereotype that all homosexuals are screaming queens that like to dance on floats in parades, making suggestive thrusts at the crowd.

I don't follow the "African descent" and gay connection.

Originally posted by Imperial_Samura

And so wait - if I was certain their was nothing beyond their deaths... well what? Would your certainty and my certainty have a fight to the death?

I guess I could ask you to justify the "hypocrites and wrongdoers" line. But then I remembered I asked you once before the same thing and never got an answer.

Something to the effect of:

"You'll have to point me in the direction of their prejudice and inequality, because when I look at the website I kind of get bogged down in all calls of equal rights for all and well meaning messages."