Quantcast

McCarthy is Back!!!

JohnE

filthy rascist
May 13, 2005
13,454
1,983
Front Range, dude...
I like the part about "establish a presidential commission on religious liberty to investigate and document reports of Americans who have been harassed or threatened for exercising key civil rights to organize, to speak, to donate or to vote for marriage and to propose new protections"...does that apply to those who perscute others who want to play the marriage game too, but are denied on account of they sleep with the same sex?
 

jonKranked

Detective Dookie
Nov 10, 2005
86,095
24,631
media blackout
I like the part about "establish a presidential commission on religious liberty to investigate and document reports of Americans who have been harassed or threatened for exercising key civil rights to organize, to speak, to donate or to vote for marriage and to propose new protections"...does that apply to those who perscute others who want to play the marriage game too, but are denied on account of they sleep with the same sex?
isn't this fundamentally the kind of religious persecution that caused the first american settlers to leave england in the first place?
 

Silver

find me a tampon
Jul 20, 2002
10,840
1
Orange County, CA
isn't this fundamentally the kind of religious persecution that caused the first american settlers to leave england in the first place?
That's a gross oversimplification. Some of those same people who left England turned into religious persecutors themselves in the colonies. The Puritans were persecuted in England, came to the colonies and started persecuting others. That led to Rhode Island, if I remember correctly.
 

jonKranked

Detective Dookie
Nov 10, 2005
86,095
24,631
media blackout
That's a gross oversimplification. Some of those same people who left England turned into religious persecutors themselves in the colonies. The Puritans were persecuted in England, came to the colonies and started persecuting others. That led to Rhode Island, if I remember correctly.
so what you're saying is that history is repeating itself again?
 

rockofullr

confused
Jun 11, 2009
7,342
924
East Bay, Cali
Michele Bachmann Meets Young LGBT Activist Elijah At Book Signing (VIDEO)

As seen in the below video, the Republican candidate and Tea Party darling greeted the soft-spoken 8-year-old and his mother at a meet-and-greet event for her new book, "Core of Conviction: My Story," which was released last month.

"My mommy -- Miss Bachmann, my mommy's gay but she doesn't need fixing," Elijah said to Bachmann, after some lighthearted coaxing. A dumbfounded Bachmann then shot the boy's mother an icy look before the pair walked away.
 

Silver

find me a tampon
Jul 20, 2002
10,840
1
Orange County, CA
You've obviously not talked with the right followers................;)
At this point in America, they are about the same in number as righteous men in Sodom and Gomorrah. You're Lot. Make sure no one turns around on the walk out, ok? :D

(And don't let your kids get you drunk, whatever you do!!!)
 

blackohio

Generous jaywalker
Mar 12, 2009
2,773
122
Hellafornia. Formerly stumptown.
I wish god would just take his followers, quite frankly I'm tired of them telling everyone how their story book has all the answers. My girlfriend always says that people will come around, thats great and all but what about all those people who are treated as second class citizens because of some tribal superstitious nonsense.
 

Pesqueeb

bicycle in airplane hangar
Feb 2, 2007
40,395
16,894
Riding the baggage carousel.
I don't care what anyone says, I hate religion, I hate its followers, I hate its rhetoric and I hate it's hypocritical nature.

man sucks.
what is it with the people who believe in wizards being total ****ing cunts.
I wish god would just take his followers, quite frankly I'm tired of them telling everyone how their story book has all the answers. My girlfriend always says that people will come around, thats great and all but what about all those people who are treated as second class citizens because of some tribal superstitious nonsense.
Allow me to play devils advocate. How is your sort of hard and fast rhetoric, absolute unchallengeable belief in teh nothing, and hatred of those who believe otherwise, any different from those you condemn?
 

jonKranked

Detective Dookie
Nov 10, 2005
86,095
24,631
media blackout
Allow me to play devils advocate. How is your sort of hard and fast rhetoric, absolute unchallengeable belief in teh nothing, and hatred of those who believe otherwise, any different from those you condemn?
because it's pure, unadulterated hatred right from his own heart and mind. he's not relying on a 2,000 year old book written by drunks for it.
 

blackohio

Generous jaywalker
Mar 12, 2009
2,773
122
Hellafornia. Formerly stumptown.
Don't get me wrong, I recognize not all followers are idiots, like not all atheists are smart. I said the things I did to be intentionally harsh, not because I hate everyone. Which I might but that goes beyond religion, ethnicity, socio-economic status.

Well i guess this. My belief in nothing, doesn't exclude them from their beliefs, nor does it seek to control them, however the far right seeks to establish a theocratic state that follows the sole rules of their belief system. Like a white mans Sharia Law, without all the muslimy stuff. What I believe in is sort of irrelevant other than me using it as a means to be brash.

If I say, stop telling the LGBT community what they can and cannot do it doesn't strip the religious world of any rights per say, unless being controlling of others fates is a right. But telling so-and-so that they cannot do marry does however.
 

Pesqueeb

bicycle in airplane hangar
Feb 2, 2007
40,395
16,894
Riding the baggage carousel.
Don't get me wrong, I recognize not all followers are idiots, like not all atheists are smart. I said the things I did to be intentionally harsh, not because I hate everyone. Which I might but that goes beyond religion, ethnicity, socio-economic status.

Well i guess this. My belief in nothing, doesn't exclude them from their beliefs, nor does it seek to control them, however the far right seeks to establish a theocratic state that follows the sole rules of their belief system. Like a white mans Sharia Law, without all the muslimy stuff. What I believe in is sort of irrelevant other than me using it as a means to be brash.

If I say, stop telling the LGBT community what they can and cannot do it doesn't strip the religious world of any rights per say, unless being controlling of others fates is a right. But telling so-and-so that they cannot do marry does however.
I concur. :thumb:

My thing has always been that I find the absolute die-hard certainty of certain atheists to be just as unpalatable as the die-hard certainty of hard core religious nut-bags.
 
Last edited:

syadasti

i heart mac
Apr 15, 2002
12,690
290
VT
My thing has always been that I find the absolute die-hard certainty of certain atheists to be just as unpalatable as the die-hard certainty of hard core religious nut-bags.
What is more probable, hundreds of variations on creation myths and belief systems with supreme beings or nothing? Even if you want to believe in something why is the current dominant Western belief system the right one and all the other ones are wrong?
 

Pesqueeb

bicycle in airplane hangar
Feb 2, 2007
40,395
16,894
Riding the baggage carousel.
What is more probable, hundreds of variations on creation myths and belief systems with supreme beings or nothing? Even if you want to believe in something why is the current dominant Western belief system the right one and all the other ones are wrong?
Haven't we done this before? Look, all I'm saying, and I say this as someone who has apostatized from Christianity, is that while the odds are certianly in favor of a scientific explanation of the "Great All", absolute cold hard evangelical certainty in it, seems just as much of a stretch, and just as dangerous, to me.
 

Andyman_1970

Turbo Monkey
Apr 4, 2003
3,105
5
The Natural State
Haven't we done this before? Look, all I'm saying, and I say this as someone who has apostatized from Christianity, is that while the odds are certianly in favor of a scientific explanation of the "Great All", absolute cold hard evangelical certainty in it, seems just as much of a stretch, and just as dangerous, to me.
I would argue, both sides require a measure of faith. It boils down to what are you going to put your faith in.............
 

blackohio

Generous jaywalker
Mar 12, 2009
2,773
122
Hellafornia. Formerly stumptown.
the danger lies not in a belief in either direction, but when the directions seek to diminish the quality of life for those that don't think like them. LGBT rights doesn't diminish anything, the rampant abuse of straight men and women marrying has more than covered that base. One only need to look at divorce rates to know who the problem is. Saying that someone else will ruin it, when that someone hasn't had the chance is a bit ironic.

Myself, Im not atheist, but I don't believe in supreme beings either. I don't even think it's on my shoulders to prove the lack of existence. If someone wants to tell me something is real thats their cross to carry. The obvious issue we all seem to be in agreement over is that you can't use faith or superstition to deny QOL rights to others. No matter how hard you push your hands together and wish to the sky for your desires.

While marriage certainly started as religious ceremonies, it's moved well beyond that as society developed.
 

stevew

resident influencer
Sep 21, 2001
40,622
9,624
"If marriage didn’t exist, would you invent it? Would you go “Baby, this **** we got together? It’s so good we gotta get the government in on this ****. We can’t just share this commitment ‘tweenst us. We need judges and lawyers involved in this ****, baby. It’s hot!"

doug stanhope
 

blackohio

Generous jaywalker
Mar 12, 2009
2,773
122
Hellafornia. Formerly stumptown.
I have the marriage conversation weekly with my gf. Since day one I have said, I don't want to be married, I don't want a wedding. She was cool with it, then one day her lady bits started actin a fool and its been a battle ever since.
 

jimmydean

The Official Meat of Ridemonkey
Sep 10, 2001
41,314
13,430
Portland, OR
I have the marriage conversation weekly with my gf. Since day one I have said, I don't want to be married, I don't want a wedding. She was cool with it, then one day her lady bits started actin a fool and its been a battle ever since.
My wife and I have never been happier since the divorce, true story. It's been 2 years since last October and we've been happier together in the last 2 years than we were the last 6 years we were married. But she has issues with the legal aspect of marriage, so now that is no longer an issue.
 

syadasti

i heart mac
Apr 15, 2002
12,690
290
VT
I would argue, both sides require a measure of faith. It boils down to what are you going to put your faith in.............
You can induce believers with non-religious/non-faith experiences via drugs (still used today by some faiths in various ceremonies and drugs have a very long history in religion via shamans/medicine man/healers/etc), non-religious meditation (again a strong link with many religions), equipment, and other means many of which are adopted by some faiths (exercises like yoga, fasting, flagellation, etc). The same can't be said for others as their brains aren't wired the same. Its an evolutionary adaption and a social phenomenon suited to foster mental well-being, people don't like uncertainty.

How to wire your brain for religious ecstasy. - Slate Magazine

As our forefathers prescribed, these mass delusions have no place in our government so this modern McCarthyism is just Unamerican as the original (to keep on topic).
 
Last edited:

JRogers

talks too much
Mar 19, 2002
3,785
1
Claremont, CA
I would argue, both sides require a measure of faith. It boils down to what are you going to put your faith in.............
I wonder whether it's helpful to view this issue in terms of "sides," as it suggests a degree of incompatibility that can't be helped by a more nuanced position. "Science and religion" is something quite different from "scientism and fideism" or "logical positivism and religious fundamentalism."

After all, I don't know of any (good) theologian that looks for a definitive natural-scientific proof for God. If you do go that route, I think you're barking up the wrong tree and have also decided the question (or its indeterminacy) from the outset.
 

ohio

The Fresno Kid
Nov 26, 2001
6,649
24
SF, CA
someday I would like to meet this black bizarro me. if we shake hands, will the universe implode?