Homosexual marriage: a ruse to persecute Christians?

Perhaps you thought that homosexuals want to get married because they love each other. No, no, no, says Chuck Colson, that can’t be right. Really they’re doing it because they hate Christians and want to persecute them:

It is all about equal rights, the gay “marriage” lobby keeps telling us. We just want the right to marry, like everyone else. 

That is what they are telling us. But that is not what they mean.

If same-sex “marriage” becomes the law of the land, we can expect massive persecution of the Church….

The coming persecution of Christians is one more reason why we need to get involved with efforts to pass laws at the state and federal level defining marriage as a legal relationship between one man and one woman.

When will Christians see they are the ones doing the persecution?

(via Evangelical Realism)

  • andrew

    pisses me off…so sad.

  • Roger

    Yeah…how dare the government tell these organizations that they CAN’T discriminate against people based on their sexual orientation! It’s…it’s…it’s like telling them that they can’t discriminate on the basis of race! After all, didn’t Gawd separate the races for a reason?

    Morons.

  • http://blog.chungyc.org/ Yoo

    I wonder how they think they’re going to be persecuted. Do they seriously think that everyone is going to be forced into gay marriage? If not, I can’t imagine what kind of persecution they’re thinking of. (Persecution by preventing persecution?)

    • stephen vanscoik

      They say that “pride is the deadliest sin” but these self righteous idiots are so full of themselves they are blinded by their pride to only see themselves as right. I don’t want or need anyone to tell me what is right for me. Marry who ever loves you back. I find it surprising that anyone could love one of these “people”.

  • http://thinkingforfree.blogspot.com/ Eamon Knight

    I wonder how they think they’re going to be persecuted.

    I haven’t read the Colson article, but I would guess he’s afraid that churches will be forced to perform gay weddings, or face legal penalties. I have yet to hear (though I will admit I may not hang out in the right places) any gay-marriage advocate make such a demand, and I would be strongly opposed to it. As it stands, churches have the right to choose whom they marry (eg. only members, or only if you take their marriage prep course, etc.) and I think as it should be. Gays can either go to a gay-friendly church, or City Hall.

    But Colson & Co. have to spin everything into a persecution story.

    • Robert Hillier

      To Eamon Knight:

      So what if churches interpreted the bible such that black people could not marry each other in their church and that they would need to go to their own “black” churches.

      Oh right, stuff like this tried to happen in the past. We called it “segregation”.
      This is the same thing!

      All of these “cultural Christians” are starting to get on my nerves. They are using their religion to defend their fears and traditions and it’s starting to get ridiculous.

      So much for the golden rule, hey?

      • Elemenope

        The significant difference is that racism is not an explicit tenant of Christianity, whereas homophobia has a more direct basis in the faith. To be Christian is, in part, to treat the Bible as the Word of God; it take intellectual contortions to turn biblical Christianity into a racist ideology, but honestly it takes equivalent contortions to make biblical Christianity *not* a homophobic one.

        Since we (with good reason) have embedded rather strong protections for the free exercise of religion into Western societies, especially the US, it is likely that churches will continue (and I would hazard, should be able to continue, however odious it may be) to be hateful jerks on the issue of sexual orientation. You can’t make people be better people against their will, generally speaking, and suasion is almost always more effective over the long term than direct force. Some churches have already come around on their own, and they will slowly continue to do so (until, I predict, the Southern Baptists are all alone in their cold, dark cul-de-sac of pitiless hate; I think even the RCC will come around before them). In the meantime, the civil legal issue of *state* recognition of same-sex marriage should remain a secular matter in all aspects.

        • Robert Hillier

          Slavery was an explicit tenant of Christianity.

          It’s how they justified racism.

          Then racism became the tenant as it was blacks who were put in that position and then people defended the tradition in the name of religion.

          Things become explicit tenants of a religion solely through interpretation.

          Most Christians that say it’s their religion don’t really get their religion.
          They’re just cultural Christians.

          Cultural Christianity is the religion used to control the masses.

          • Hayl

            Okay, bottom line here in general is this:

            It doesn’t matter what religion you are. What sexuality. What race.
            We’re people. We have rights.

            Churches use their religion to defend things that mess with peoples’ rights. And that’s obviously wrong. The end.

          • kholdom0790

            *tenet where you use “tenant”. Lol.

  • Baka

    Yoo, you got it right. For people like this, to be disallowed from persecuting others is persecution against themselves. You see, it’s their calling in life to persecute, so by preventing that, we’re denying them their very purpose. If that’s not persecution, I don’t know what is.

    Also, don’t forget, these people thrive on a diet of constant self-delusion that, despite the fact that they are the most influential segment of the population, it’s really they who are the set upon minority. They have to invent scenarios whereby they can feel oppressed so that they can feel like martyrs.

    In the end, not one of their churches or ministers will ever be required by law to perform (or even recognize) a homosexual marriage. They will be free to be as bigoted and loathsome as they desire, and no one will force them to stop. But, of course, the fact that they will no longer be able to force others from exercising their freedom is a slight of monumental proportions.

    Someone should get Chuck Colson a footstool to help him get up onto his cross.

  • Roger

    The article (such as it is) attempts to say that opening the door to same-sex marriage will lead to the government “punishing” the poor, benighted Christians by telling them they have to do stuff like a) allow gays to adopt or b) yanking their cherished tax-exempt status if they push their religious nuttery into the public sphere.

    From the article:

    “Promoters of same-sex “marriage” seem to go out of their way to target Christian businesses and churches. Their goal, it seems, is not the right to “marry,” but to punish anyone who disagrees with them.

    Clearly, there is a spiritual battle going on here: Christians are under attack because they are a public witness to the fact that a holy God created us male and female, and we will always put obedience to Him and His laws above obedience to any earthly demand for loyalty. ”

    Really? Does Colson have ANY evidence to show that “promoters of same-sex marriage” are going out of their way to target Jeebus businesses and churches? Last I checked, when a bunch of Californian gays got married, they did so…at the courthouse. Of course, whenever Jeebus freaks are flat-out in the wrong, they claim a “spiritual battle”–it’s the religious equivalent of “In My Honest Opinion”–unjustifiable self-deluded bigotry cloaked in religious fervor.

  • http://cranialhyperossification.com GDad

    Christians have been feeling persecuted since the time of the Romans. It’s a very old song, and everyone knows the refrain. I think they need some new material.

  • http://livinginreply.blogspot.com Josh Lanning

    I am a christian and I say that yes christians have been doing the persecuting. We suck and most aren’t sorry but I am.

  • http://frogarchy.blogspot.com Ian

    I think the psychological term for what Mr. Colson is doing is “projection”.

  • Joel

    It’s amazing how a group of people can get so riled up about an ancient text, writted by a bunch of ignorant, bronze age goat herders. Oh well, that’s Christianity for you. This is just another typical example of abject bigotry and hatred masquerading as righteousness. I’m going to go induce vomiting.

  • Edman

    I think a part of the problem is that most homophobes have this odd belief that homosexuality is contagious, and that if they allow it to become widespread, they might catch The Gay.

    …or it could be a case of “methinks thou doth protest too much.”

  • Joel

    @ Edman

    Good point! I’m a teacher in NC. When a gay collaegue of mine left my school to further his education, another one of my co-workers told me that she was glad he wasn’t working around such “impressionable young men” anymore. I should have called her out for bigotted remark, but I chickened out and just shrugged my shoulders. Maybe it’s b/c she’s old enough to be my mother. My parents (regrettably) are the same way.

    • Thomas Ferranti

      If they dont think they are born that way and she believes its nurture, then why not round up all the straight parents of gays so we can studt them and find out what they did differently then those with straight kids, and quarantine them so that they aren’t “around such impressionable young” people anymore to badly influence them?

      haha

      Why doesnt anyone ever give em enough rope in that department?

      btw – i just believe it’s too simple for anyone at all to grasp for a very very long time; that every adult should have the right to marry any other adult they choose. (I never hear that anywhere, either).

      • Janet Greene

        The anti-gay movement uses the slippery slope argument. If we “permit” gays to marry, then people are going to want equal rights for polygamists and pedophiles. The difference, people, is this: Two people of the same gender are CONSENTING ADULTS in an EQUAL RELATIONSHIP. It has absolutely nothing in common with power-over relationships where one or more parties are exploited.

  • http://thinkingforfree.blogspot.com/ Eamon Knight

    I just got around to following the links above. For those who haven’t, I recommend:

    1) Go read Colson’s column, and the cases he cites, and you may begin to think he has a point.

    2) Now go read the post at Evangelical Realism — and see just how badly Colson lied about them.

    Colson was a liar when he worked for Nixon. Now he’s working for Jeeezuzzzz — and he’s still a lying scumbag.

  • http://www.wazzasworthlesswitterings.blogspot.com wazza

    I sometimes think anyone who cries “persecution!” should be actually persecuted, for a month or two, so they can see what it’s really like.

    Barring that, a prescription of Perspectivex Oral Daily might do it… “A pill a day takes your exaggerations away”*

    Eamon, do you think he might be working for Jesus because no one else will hire him?

    *Active ingredient Reality 500mg. May cause rationality, feelings of shame and diarrhoea.

  • http://www.sellingmyself428.blogspot.com Selling Myself

    Hmmm…that is exactly what I think too. Especially when I talk to my gay friends who just want to lead a normal life like the rest of us. I have never discerned a conspiracy theory or an intent to persecute anyone. Where do Christians fundies come up with this shit? Of course, Chuck Colson made it big in the conservative movement thanks to Focus on the Family. That explains a lot.

  • http://metroblog.blogspot.com Metro

    Writing from Canada, where equal marriage was made the law of the land, I can tell you Colson, for once in his loony, deluded, life, has it right!

    As of last year, Christianity was banned. Rabbis were being forced to marry gay folk dressed as Nazis, and hamsters are now sold only in brown paper bags out of the “adult” sections of local pet shops.

    In what I’m sure is a totally unrelated development, an enormous volcano opened under our Paliament buildings and a gigantic Beast leapt out of it, demanding a sacrifice of a thousand virgins and insisting that we all get a tattoo.

    [/snark]

  • VorJack

    Metro -
    That’s absurd. Everyone knows that a hamster would chew through a brown paper bag in half a second.

  • Cecilia

    I’m sorry that Prop 8 was passed. =( Isn’t it grand that marriage is in need of protection, when not all people even have equal protections and are still waiting for inclusion in “liberty and justice for ALL”.

    Some Christians confuse morales with individual rights, and think that Christians should have the right to impose their morale beliefs onto others. If they aren’t given that right (at the expense to the rights of everybody else), then they feel they are being persecuted against.

    We are all supposed to love Christians and love their oppression, hatred, sense of supremecy and pretend like their sh*t doesn’t stink to high heaven. After all, they are Gods gift to the planet and the only ones going to heaven and they are so sure they’ve earned their way that instead of worrying about their own sins and morality, they have nothing better to do than worry about everyone elses and impose the beliefs that they don’t follow onto everyone else.

    Of course, they don’t get it that people simply get fed up with their lack of respect of others, resentments fester and whoa when the oppressed try to get included in the individual rights deal – they are being persecuted against!. It’s as simple as the concept of “your rights end where the rights of another begin” or their own “Do unto others as you’d have them do unto you”. Or maybe some Christians really want all the various “heathens” knocking on their doors to preach to them about their personal beliefs and have their beliefs actually imposed upon them?

    This doesn’t apply to all Christians, just some of them – the ones who wouldn’t have the slightest clue.

  • Janet Greene

    I’m tempted to laugh at this, but there’s too much truth to this. This is really what many christians think! How arrogant, how narcissistic. It’s all about them. Christians have murdered more people in 2000 years than almost any religion in history. All for a good cause, though – conversion to christianity. The witch trials, the inquisition, the murder of african americans and first nations – all these people were killed to save their eternal souls I guess. Today, you have to say you’re a christian to get elected in the US. A former president of the US (the first Bush) says that atheists shouldn’t even be citizens, let alone run for public office. And they’re the ones being persecuted?

  • SayBlade

    I find it strange that a man from a Godless country like the USA has the gall to criticise Canada, a nation that recognises the supremecy of God in its constitution and values faith and the cross in its national anthem. Colson picks a specific situation or a single personal encounter and twists it to his own ends. Same-sex marriage is recognised and affirmed in Canada, but it does not force Christian churches to do anything differently than they have before with regard to marriage. Missing from Colson’s assertions that Christian churches will be persecuted is whether Muslim, Jewish or any other faith groups will be persecuted because they do not affirm same-sex marriage. Colson’s brand of Christianity has more in common with ultra conservative Islam and ultra conservative Judaism than he will admit.

  • amanda

    ….are you serious. I StumbledUpon this. I’m atheist and gay. I hope I burn in whatever hell you believe in so I don’t have to spend eternity with people this idiotic and biased.

    • Elemenope

      Reading comprehension FAIL.

      (>’-’)>
      ^(‘-’)^
      <('-'<)
      v('-')v

      Kirby happy dance.

  • Baz

    Speaking as a Christian,

    I don’t believe slamming gay people with laws will change the heart. Jesus changes the heart.

    But I am concerned with the threat of career blacklisting, thought and speech policing, threatening a Christian student’s grades, using the classroom to corner people (happened to me), politically trying to undermine the values and education that many parents want for their children, perpetuating judgement, lies and generalizing an entire group of people.

    That and using that laughable term “homophobia” on anyone who disagrees with you. Some people ARE homophobic in that they are afraid (phobia means fear). I was shocked and disgusted at first, (MY natural reactions and ironically, LGBT is bashing me for my natural emotions) but I got over it and sought to understand WHY people would even live like this. People still call me homophobe but trust me, I am far from afraid of LGBT.

    A lot of people are sincerely shocked and perplexed by these behaviours/mentalities. I still don’t agree but I am no longer confused or shocked. It’s not in my nature to mistreat people so I retreated to sort myself out on the matter. Now I will treat you with respect and civility like anyone else because you are still made by God in my eyes.

    But LGBT treats it like a resolved issue when it’s not. This mentality also used to be listed under paraphilia (attraction to things outside of normal bounds) before they took it off the list of disorders in the 70s for no other reason but political.

    You cannot compare gay to ethnicity. It is just not the same and I am not buying it. The Abolition of Slavery and the Civil Rights movement actually drew STRONGLY from Christianity and I believe the power of God made them succeed. But LGBT is a God-hating, anti-religious (occasionally childish) movement so it can’t call on the same God that helped these ethnic movements. It will create its own gods and religious systems to suit themselves.

    It also shows you don’t have a good argument to support your position if you have to use fear and intimidation through the Supreme Court. And churches have responded badly to this issue as well with hate and judgement. It also doesn’t help that very few US churches are actually spiritual anymore. (And believe it or not, some people like to frame the church by acting like they are affiliated with a church when they hold up those awful picket signs).

    Legally, I believe in the protection of the church from the state as found in Constitutional documents. State-run institutions can perform whatever civil unions they want, but you CANNOT force a church to turn on its beliefs because you are tampering with freedom of religion and expression. Marriage is very central to Christian faith and you are just being a jerk when you force people to trash their faith.

    I’m sure many gay people can identify with persecution, but two wrongs don’t make a right and persecuting churches will make you just as heinous. Everyone will put up their claws in defense and everyone will just lose. You should be able to go to your job, serve in the military like everyone else but boy, don’t expect the issue of adoption and marriage to go away any time soon.

    At the same time, I do not believe gay people should live and lie and hide themselves suffering alone. They should be able to admit it without fear of retribution but in what light? Is it something to be proud of or something to get help and counseling with? I think that is the big difference and I have seen gay people take each of these routs. Let their testimonies speak for themselves.

    As a Christian, and from personal experience, Jesus Christ has the transforming power to redefine, heal, and reshape a human being. It’s just that a person has to actually WANT his help. I’m not saying “pray the gay away” It is not that simple. But it depends on if you are going to let some political organization tell you who you are or your own Maker. With the fall of man, things went wrong in our physical bodies AND our heart and minds. And there is an evil, a devil that will torture you and goad it along because the mind and heart are battlefields.

    I have had lesbian attraction before. I was shocked at how random and powerful it was, but I had to stop, analyze this feeling then submit it to God. But instead of sitting there trying to rationalize my crazy emotions, I wanted what HE has for me. I will not allow myself to be controlled by my roller coaster emotions. Very few people are willing to surrender every aspect of their life, including their sexuality to God in an open and honest manner. I realized that God is not about a list of don’ts but accepting the BETTER things he has for me. I look back on that lust and it is just garbage compared to TREASURES he has.

    We’re all in the same boat as far as Jesus Christ is concerned. Jesus bore the suffering and confusion of the gay man/woman on the cross. Just watch out for some big organizations that use mental tactics and abuse in the name of God. If you disagree with God on the matter, go ahead, you’re free to do that. But don’t go trying to warp the Bible to fit your fancies. That is just dishonest lying.

    • http://theskippyreview.wordpress.com Skippy

      As a Christian, and from personal experience, Jesus Christ has the transforming power to redefine, heal, and reshape a human being. It’s just that a person has to actually WANT his help. I’m not saying “pray the gay away” It is not that simple. But it depends on if you are going to let some political organization tell you who you are or your own Maker. With the fall of man, things went wrong in our physical bodies AND our heart and minds. And there is an evil, a devil that will torture you and goad it along because the mind and heart are battlefields

      You do know that this is an atheist’sblog and speaking about “personal experience” with a guy who–if he even existed–died two thousand years ago and claiming that this dead person can get rid of The Gay is…problematic at best. Further, you claim that, due to two stupid humans eating a nondescript fruit that the deity callously put in “paradise,” all humans are “imperfect” and then you subsume homosexuality under that notion of human imperfection and “fallenness.” It’s the religious equivalent of calling it a disorder and ignores all the scientific understandings of human sexuality as fluid and existing along a continuum.

      I have had lesbian attraction before. I was shocked at how random and powerful it was, but I had to stop, analyze this feeling then submit it to God. But instead of sitting there trying to rationalize my crazy emotions, I wanted what HE has for me. I will not allow myself to be controlled by my roller coaster emotions. Very few people are willing to surrender every aspect of their life, including their sexuality to God in an open and honest manner. I realized that God is not about a list of don’ts but accepting the BETTER things he has for me. I look back on that lust and it is just garbage compared to TREASURES he has.

      To correct you, you had a same-sex attraction. That doesn’t mean that you were a lesbian. It’s entirely possible you are bisexual. As far as “wanting what he wants” for you, you’re operating with confirmation bias. In other words, this “god” of yours conforms to the expectations that you’ve already set forth (I’d bet good money that your views regarding homosexuality have been shaped by a community that engages in circular reasoning).

      Baz, I’ve been there, done that. I spouted the same religious drivel that you’re spouting now in order to get rid of the gay. I characterized my sexual orientation as “lust”—think about that for a minute. Heterosexuals get to characterize their emotional and erotic attractions in language that is fully approving. However, gays, lesbians and bisexuals are always subjected to the language of shame. That language preceded your “lesbian attraction” and informs how you perceive that attraction. “God” is simply a crutch upon which religious zealots punish gays based upon their agreed distates.

    • trj

      State-run institutions can perform whatever civil unions they want, but you CANNOT force a church to turn on its beliefs because you are tampering with freedom of religion and expression.

      Churches have the freedom to be narrow-minded. I think it would suit them to adopt to modern times and actually practice the compassion they preach rather than relying on dogma, but it’s their choice to stay in the past. To my knowledge there is no “tampering” going on that forces churches to perform a wedding ceremony for a gay couple if they choose not to.

      Marriage is very central to Christian faith and you are just being a jerk when you force people to trash their faith.

      Exactly in what way does it “trash your faith” to know that there are gays that are getting married in churches? Does it somehow diminish your own marriage (hypothetical or real) to know that there are non-hetero married couples out there?

    • Sunny Day

      But don’t go trying to warp the Bible to fit your fancies. That is just dishonest lying.

      LOL.

      HA HA HA HA HA HA AH HA!

      What a Moroon.

    • Robert Hilier

      You do realize that heterosexuality is a sexual orientation, right?

      I don’t care what you choose to believe, your objectively learned belief in Christ should not give you carte blanche to pseudointellectually propagate hate.

      Christians do not have a logical leg to stand on.
      Public policy needs to be made in the interest of public health, based on evidence, facts and logic. Unfortunately, religion, by definition, is not based on evidence, fact nor logic.

      I do not wish to attack Christians. The LGBT movement is not anti-religion. We are anti-hate. If you, using your pop-culture Christian views, decide that you can justify hatred in the name of Christianity, it is YOU who is staging an attack on Christianity. I thought Christ was all about love and non-judgment? I thought it was God’s job to judge us for our sins.

      Quite frankly, I do not believe in any of those beliefs and so I certainly should not be allowed to be pushed around by a bunch of subjectively decided bullies.

      As a social worker, I would like to discuss “homophobia” in terms of “fear”.
      Fear is an innate human emotion, like anger, happiness and sadness.
      Fear is the innate human response to change, difference, or the unknown.

      The reason we use homophobia is because we assume that anti-LGBT persons are not hateful people, they are merely not informed, or have such strong reaction formations that their mental processes do not allow them reconsider their cognitively distorted beliefs.

      I believe that if you are “avoiding” all consideration of LGBT as a valid, worthwhile, natural human condition, then you, and others who avoid, are afraid.

      Fear is a broad term and is manifest in many of our actions. Perhaps you need to get in touch with your emotions a little more.

      But maybe you’re going through the traumatic process of being in the closet, considering you displaced your “lesbian moment”. Did you know that being in the closet produces mental health symptoms similar to major life trauma?

      The reason homosexuality is no longer in the DSM-IV-TR, I think, is based on the fact that the mental disorders associated with being homosexua are more linked to the forced intrapsychic and societal oppression that those in the closet experience.

      You clearly lack education. And I think it is because you’re avoiding the issue. And I think that’s because you’re afraid.

      Homophobia is a hard demon to carry. To be afraid of another human being, or even oneself, based on no rational basis, can do a number on one’s spiritual self.

      I wish you love, healing and I will pray for you.

  • Baz

    I’ve said what I said, bro. It may not be what you want to hear, but someone else may hear something from my post.

    Peace

    • Sunny Day

      Drive by poster, drives by.

      • http://theskippyreview.wordpress.com Skippy

        And drives-by stupidly.

    • http://theskippyreview.wordpress.com Skippy

      Yes, you’ve said…something. Now, was your purpose to come to an atheist’s blog and try to proselytize? Furthermore, your comments about homosexuality are as ill-informed as they are easily refuted. Yep…you’re speaking as a Christian…a very ill-informed one.

  • John Monett

    I used to be a homosexual. I chose that lifestyle. I chose to sin against God. When I became a Jesus follower, I had to stop being a homosexual. God hates the sin, not the sinner.

    • Bill

      It’s the sinner he tortures in a lake of fire for all eternity though.

      It seems kind of weird that this “god of love” guy seems to hate so much.

      • Azel

        Don’t you know God talks newspeak ?

      • http://fugodeus.com Nox

        I’ve got good news for you John. Your church lied to you. You can be a Jesus follower and a homosexual. There is literally nowhere in the bible that Jesus mentions homosexuality even once.

        Don’t let anyone make you feel ashamed about who you are.

        • http://themikewrites.blogspot.com JohnMWhite

          While it is certainly true there’s no reason to be ashamed of being homosexual, it’s not really true that Jesus has no problem with it. He may not have mentioned homosexuality, but he did say that not one iota of the old law may be changed until heaven and earth have passed away. That old law happily condemns homosexuals to death. And Jesus not calling out a specific thing by name doesn’t really prove he was ok with it either.

        • John Monett

          Jesus is God. He made the rules. As followers of Christ, we must obey Him. It is sin to be a homosexual. Within the Church we can hold each other accountable to God’s law. Outside of the Church we should not expect unbelievers to behave like believers.

          • Custador

            For hating yourself so much that you’ve joined a cult of people who hate what you are, I truly pity you. I hope one day that you can come to terms with being gay, and that you realise that there is no reason to be constrained by bronze-age superstition. You could be happy. You could be yourself. Instead, you choose to repress your nature, which is both natural and harmless. I can think of no greater tragedy than actively choosing to spend the one and only life you have in denial and misery.

            • John Monett

              Perhaps you didn’t hear me or you are simply mocking me. I am NO LONGER gay. The Lord has transformed me! I will never again be comfortable with sin. Maybe you are. I pity you for that.

          • http://themikewrites.blogspot.com JohnMWhite

            See, that response does not even make sense. Somebody just said to you “Jesus said nothing about homosexuality so I don’t see why a follower of him would have such a problem with it”. Your response was “Jesus made the rules”. That does not answer the proposition to which you are replying. It’s just a meaningless, unprovable and unrelated statement thrown out there. I’m concerned you wouldn’t pass a Turing Test.

    • Azel

      Do not take my word as gospel truth, for I am neither a biologist nor of a field related to such studies, but if my Google-fu doesn’t fail me homosexuality is held to be at least partially caused by biological causes (hormones, genes, biological environment…).
      And given sexual orientation is at least a continuous line, it is possible that you are bisexual and that upon your conversion you strove to find women who were to your taste…which in your case was possible but wouldn’t be for a homosexual.

      • John Monett

        no. i am straight, again. i made a choice.

        • Bill

          You’re at most bi-sexual.

          But if a lifetime of repression and guilt is what you’re after, be my guest. Just keep your fucked up views on the topic out of the law and we will get along fine.

        • Sunny Day

          I love lines like that. You made a choice. You are choosing your sexuality.

          You want us to think you are “normal”. I’ve got news for you, The greatest bulk of humanity doesn’t choose their sexuality. The fact that you have to in order to fit into your fucked up belief system is just sad.

  • John Monett

    I was homosexual. I was never a bisexual. Jesus transformed me.

    • Nzo

      After hearing that from more than a few pedophile PRIESTS, (ya know, the guys who are supposed to be closer to Jesus than you are,) I can’t seem to shake this feeling that you’d be more interested in a ZJ than you’d like anyone to think.

  • John Monett

    I have no more guilt or shame. Jesus forgave me. I have no more reason to feel guilt or shame.

    • Ty

      I admit, I read all of your posts in a robot voice. You sound heavily programmed.

      • Custador

        I really wanted to tear into this guy when I read his first post, but now I’ve read all of them I can’t decide whether to pity him or to assume he’s role-playing for Jeeebus.

        • http://fugodeus.com Nox

          He is a victim of the same hateful ignorant bullsh*t that he is forwarding here. It’s hard not to feel a little sorry for anyone who doesn’t get to be who they are.

    • Sunny Day

      Shure you feel guilt and shame, you are choosing your sexuality in contradiction to your natural preferences. Why else would you choose to be something different if you are already forgiven?

    • Jabster

      “I have no more reason to feel guilt or shame.”

      erm, yes you do. You’re a sinner according to your religion; it’s part of your nature. God may forgive you for it but you’re still a dirty, evil, awful, worthless sinner by your very nature.

      • John Monett

        I disagree. Jesus calls us His followers saints, not sinners. Now, Christ followers are not perfect either. But, when we sin and ask Jesus for forgiveness, He forgives us and wipes our record clean. So, if we still feel guilty, it is Satan or ourselves that keep us in bondage.

        I pity those of you who hate Jesus and His followers. In doing so, you prove Jesus correct when He says that the world will hate the Christian, because the world hated Jesus first.

        • Custador

          So, what you’re saying is: You might as well enjoy as much cock as you want, then just say sorry to Jesus afterwards?

          I can see why your religion sells.

          • John Monett

            Homosexuality is a choice and sin. If we do not stop living in sin, we will be condemned to Hell.

            • Custador

              Then why don’t you explain to me the unknown thousands of gay people who kill themselves every year, and those who are murdered by their own governments because they cannot “choose” to be straight.

              Yeah.

              That’s what I thought.

            • Sunny Day

              You keep going on about the “choice” people are making.

              Only hateful bigots and people who are suppressing themselves refer to sexuality as a choice.

              “Normal” people don’t make a choice, they just follow their natural preferences for companionship.

            • Francesco

              Being homosex is not a choice, is a state of being. Can you choose your voice, you ears, your hairs? Nope. Exactly like homosexuality.

        • Azel

          Always this accusation of hating Jesus’s followers as we hate him…
          First, many if not most people here do not believe in God. Thus, it would be stupid of them to hate God, that would be like hating leprechauns: why bother, they don’t exist ?
          Second, what makes you believe we hate you ? Because we disagree ? Because we mock ? Sorry to burst your bubble, but for my part I don’t hate you. I pity you, you are trapped in bonds of your own making, to abide by a probably inexistent being decrees (and don’t say the Bible is proof of existence of Jesus or God) and because of that, you hate what you were and probably still are.

          • Sunny Day

            Agreed +1
            I feel sorry for you John Monett.

            You seem to be hung up on Sin. Have you asked yourself where did sin come from?

        • Jabster

          You can disagree as much as you want but the fact is that the religion that you follow says you’re a sinner and there’s nothing you can do about it.

        • Sunny Day

          What happens if you perform a sinful action or have a sinful thought and then die before you can ask forgiveness again? Will you be forgiven anyway and go to heaven?

          How is it different from getting forgiveness after the fact?

  • John Monett

    If God does not exist, why do you care if I choose to believe in God or not?

    • Mogg

      There are no comments indicating any care about whether you believe in God. I think most people reading your comments will feel sorry for you that your belief in a god and desire to be accepted by other believers has led you to something so unnatural as denial of your own sexuality, with all the deprivation and mental pain that can bring. Nobody likes to see someone do that to themselves, even at such a remove as over the internet.

      • John Monett

        It is interesting how you think I have mental pain. You do not know me and I do not know you. I will not judge you.

        • Mogg

          Either your reading comprehension is below par or you are being deliberately obtuse. What I said indicated that you are displaying, right now, on the intertubes for us all to see, behaviour that indicates that you are at high risk of suffering mental pain and deprivation at some point, either now or later. It had nothing to do with my personal opinion of your current mental state, of which, as you so rightly point out, I do not have enough information to make an assessment.

    • Jabster

      If Allah doesn’t exist why do you care if someone believes in Allah or not?

    • Azel

      We don’t…and frankly, even if a deity does exist, I don’t quite care if you choose to believe in it or not.
      However I like debating. Alas, you offer no arguments for your statement about the “sin” of homosexuality, nor for the ones about Jesus’s supposed power to forgive you for something which is arguably not a fault. And what a shame that you are wildly off the mark about our reasons for disagreeing with you.
      To conclude, if I don’t quite care if you believe, I care about why do you believe: it may make a good debate and make us both reflect on why do we hold our positions.

    • Kodie

      I don’t care if you believe in god, but I do care if you call my gay friends sinners and tell them they’re going to hell. That’s a terrible thing to believe, even if it’s not true, it’s not a nice thing to say to anyone. Just because you think it’s a sin and you feel that you’ve “corrected” it doesn’t make you any sort of example that others should follow or any sort of data point that proves Jesus is real. YOU didn’t feel clean, YOU believe it’s true, it affected YOUR life, now YOU say you’re ok, and whether or not you stay that way don’t bother me no never mind. It’s when you post your anecdotal story that you assert that this should mean anything to anyone else.

      As per the article you posted to, your post is somewhat irrelevant. “Getting over” your homosexuality and becoming heterosexual, by choice, doesn’t affect anyone else, shouldn’t affect anyone else. Christians try to make it affect everyone else. So what’s it to me? Christians especially try to oppress civilization by opposing gay marriage. Tell us how gay marriage affects Christian heterosexual marriage (whether or not they are ex-homosexuals doesn’t matter). Let them be, let them “sin,” let them end up in hell, if that’s what you believe, we let you be, that doesn’t bother anyone until you speak up and bother them. Let them get married. Just stay out of it.

      • John Monett

        We cannot do that. We would not be loving others if we allowed them to go to Hell. The Lord created the rules against homosexuality and all other sins. He has commanded His followers to spread His gospel. So, if you have a problem with this, then you should take it up with the Lord. We are only His instruments.

        • Yoav

          You can try and save us but once you do that you forfeit your right to whine when we ridicule your pathetic arguments. I appreciate your concern as to the sate of my non existing soul and I Herby officially release you from having to worry about it, I heard the so called good news and I wasn’t impressed, I found your god to be lacking in every possible aspect, if he exists than he’s a murderous bigot and I would proudly jump into the lake of fire rather then kowtow to that monster.

        • Sunny Day

          So it’s not “loving” to allow people to go to hell.
          What does it say about your god that sends people there?

          • John Monett

            God does not send people to hell. People choose to go to heaven or hell. God does not allow people to go to hell. God will never leave or forsake us. People choose to forsake God. We have chosen to sin against the Lord, but God has given us salvation through Jesus!

            For God so loved the world, that He gave is only Son. That whosoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have everlasting life.

            John 3:16

            • Sunny Day

              Well then, I don’t choose to go to hell and your god can fuck right off then. Apparently he’s already granted his forgiveness and there’s no reason to keep pestering him about it.

              That was pretty simple. You had me worried there with all the talk about sin and what not.

              Turns out he forgave me before I was even born. Sucks to be all those people who died before Jesus arrived. But hey, now I got my free ticket and it doesn’t matter what happens now.

              Thanks for sharing the good news.

            • Len

              Your mental faculties must be really fit, with all the gymnastics they go through.

            • Bill

              Who created this heaven and hell you speak of?

        • Bill

          ” So, if you have a problem with this, then you should take it up with the Lord. ”

          Great idea! Please have him present himself at my house for an in person discussion. (I assume he knows where I live.)

          I spent years asking him for evidence of his existence but he always ignored me. I assume a devout bi-sexaul follower like you will be able to get him to appear no problem though.

        • dmantis

          Please provide notation in the bible where it specifically refers to homosexuality being against the rules.

          If you mention Leviticus 18:22 please keep in mind that the word used (to’ebah) usually refers to “ritual uncleanliness” and does not use the word commonly associated with individual “sin” (zimah).

          If this is your only reference, please tell me why you DON’T believe in these:

          -A child is to be killed if he/she curses their parent (Leviticus 20:9)
          -All persons guilty of adultery are to be killed (20:10)
          -The daughter of a priest who engages in prostitution is to be burned alive until dead (21:9)
          -The bride of a priest is to be a virgin (21:13)
          -There should be ritual killing of animals, using cattle, sheep and goats (22:19)
          -A person who takes the Lord’s name in vain is to be killed (24:16)

          I look forward to your reply.

  • John Monett

    17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. 18 Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son. 19 This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but people loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. 20 Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that their deeds will be exposed. 21 But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what they have done has been done in the sight of God.

    John 3:17-21

    • Ty

      The Cow

      In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful.
      [2.1] Alif Lam Mim.
      [2.2] This Book, there is no doubt in it, is a guide to those who guard (against evil).
      [2.3] Those who believe in the unseen and keep up prayer and spend out of what We have given them.
      [2.4] And who believe in that which has been revealed to you and that which was revealed before you and they are sure of the hereafter.
      [2.5] These are on a right course from their Lord and these it is that shall be successful.
      [2.6] Surely those who disbelieve, it being alike to them whether you warn them, or do not warn them, will not believe.
      [2.7] Allah has set a seal upon their hearts and upon their hearing and there is a covering over their eyes, and there is a great punishment for them

      • kholdom0790

        Sold!! Thanks for finally allowing me to see the light, Ty! I just feel in my heart and soul that Allah is the one true god. Sorry, John.

  • John Monett

    It is simply amazing just how judgmental you people are about Christians. Yet, you guys accuse Christians of being judgmental. Why are you people so passionate about a God that you claim you don’t believe in?

    • Kodie

      It’s the annoying peeeeeeeople, who keep believing their imaginary friend should rule everyone’s lives. Keep it to yourselves and we’ll be fine, because there’s no hell. I don’t care what you do, and you shouldn’t care so much what other people are up to as far as preaching in their faces like an asshole. What does gay marriage have anything to do with if you’ll go to hell. You’re not gay “anymore.” Shut up. God doesn’t bother me, since he doesn’t exist, but you exist, and you’re fucking annoying as fuck. That preach the gospel crap is an excuse to annoy people and pester their lives the way yours was pestered. Your anecdotal gaylessness isn’t convincing anyone there’s a Jesus, who saved you from being gay. It just means if you will yourself strongly enough out of fear, you can be convinced to alter your own behavior, but that’s not from a place of love. You don’t love yourself. I don’t really care if you did it, or if it can be done, but that nonsense about homosexuality being a sin is without basis. Atheists’ issues aren’t with god we don’t so much believe in, but people like you who do believe, and think that’s an excuse to “love” people by bothering them.

    • kholdom0790

      People, not gods. We are passionate about disgusting, nasty, preaching*people*, the ones that do all the damage. How thick do you have to be? Just go live in a cave and stop bothering the ones who want to make this world a place worth calling home.

    • Ty

      Oh, you mean my quotation from a holy book you don’t believe in didn’t change your mind?

      Then why did you think yours would change ours?

      • Jag

        Oh wow, I think I might love you!

        I mean this in the most non-creepy way possible to say such a thing to a complete stranger on the internet.

        • Kodie

          Everybody loves Ty.

          • UrsaMinor

            It’s cuz he’s so soft-spoken.

    • Custador

      Well John, mostly it’s because people like you come to places like this, which are mostly a social outlet for atheists, and intrude into our lives with your vile, loathsome, hate-filled religious rhetoric, call it love, then ask stupid questions like “Why do you even care?” when we start to get pissed-off at you.

    • Mogg

      Ah, so it’s perfectly fine, indeed compulsory, for you to follow a supposed command of God to judge and condemn people and oppose them achieving legal equality on the basis of who they are attracted to, but not okay for us to say that that we think that opinion is wrong and hateful?

    • Bill

      Judgmental? What is judgmental about this exchange?

  • John Monett

    I will pray for you all.

    • Kodie

      I will learn to play tennis for you.

      • Kodie

        That’s actually not true.

        • Sunny Day

          If you did learn to play tennis you would have done something far far more useful than praying.

          • Kodie

            When I hit a ball away from me, I mean it. Also, I already know how to play tennis, and if I didn’t, I wouldn’t pick it up for John Monett as I implied that I would. He’s not in the equation at all, it was just a random and spontaneous and not thought-out remark. :) As long as people like him keep hitting the ball, you got to hit it back, I suppose that’s true.

    • Jabster

      Hi John,

      I keep it short and sweet … just fuck right off you annoying little pathetic twat.

      All the best … Jabster

    • Sunny Day

      Good.
      I encourage that.
      Please Pray.
      Pray alot.
      Spend all your time in Prayer.

      I would rather have you spend your time being unproductive rather than pestering other people or trying to enact your silly beliefs into law.

      Keep praying.

      Thanks.

      • kholdom0790

        Great advice, I might start using this, haha!

    • Ty

      And we’ll think for you.

    • Mogg

      If you like. I’d prefer you did something useful, but hey, it’s your time.

    • Azel

      I will have to revise my previous statement: you seem unable to offer a good debate. So, reflect on why do you hold your ideas and, above all, why are they moral and what do that says about your morality (or God’s morality given that your a

      • Azel

        (Sigh…clicked by mistake on “Post comment”…) …answer to the first question will probably be “God says so”), reflect on why does God gets to decide our morality for us and why should we obey.
        When you have at the very least a position open to debate and arguments able if not to convince us at least to make us think, you are welcome to try your hand again to proselytism.
        Before then, please refrain from proselyting without an interesting argument, the regulars seem to be weary of discussing the same tired points presented in an unappealing manner…and I don’t think they’re all that wrong: it’s tiring to discuss with a wall

  • John Monett

    Wow! I am amazed that you people think you can tell me what to do! Do I answer to you? Do you think you are God? I do not answer to you. I do not have to obey you. I answer to God alone. I will do as He tells me to do.

    • Jabster

      Hi John … which bit off fuck off did you not understand?

      • John Monett

        I understand what you are telling me. I just don’t have to obey you. You are not God. If you think you are God, then maybe I should bow down and worship you.

        • Custador

          We may not be God, but if you don’t stop your idiotic trolling you’ll very shortly find that you’re inexplicably unable to post comments here any more. I won’t warn you twice.

        • Troutbane

          How does:”Do whatever the hell you feel like, it doesnt affect me” become “Telling you what to do”?

          Even Jabster I think was merely encouraging yourself to go self gratify (although I cannot speak for him).

          • UrsaMinor

            How does:”Do whatever the hell you feel like, it doesnt affect me” become “Telling you what to do”?

            That’s what it sounds like when your worldview is protected by the patented Persecuted Christian Filter™.

        • Jabster

          It’s really simple … first word fuck second word off i.e. fuck off

        • dmantis

          Please respond to my earnest request above at 11:24am.

          • dmantis

            John,
            In an attempt to actually learn something on my part, PLEASE answer my question at 11:24am.

    • Custador

      Allow me to double-down on Jabster’s comment: If you don’t like hearing what we have to say, then keep your own opinion to yourself. Nobody forces you to post inflammatory, homophobic garbage in a community of social liberals, and you are free to fuck off and never come back at any point you like.

    • Kodie

      You don’t actually answer to god, you answer to people who have learned you a story. If you want to talk, that doesn’t make you right, that doesn’t clarify or prove any of your statements, and doesn’t remove any right for people to talk back at you. None of us are commanded by god to talk to the other. Not you, not me, not anyone else. You are by choice here to say some dumb things, and it’s your choice to pretend you have an adequate defense for saying them. I think you’re a waste of air, and deluded that god prefers you that you’ve changed yourself. Good for you. You don’t live anyone else’s life for them, so your transcendence is now that you’re a troll, you hate people enough to pester them and insult them. You have little regard for people, despite what your religion brainwashes you to think, you have no control over what people do, you have limits (great ones) over how many minds you can change with your pathetic attempts to contribute here, and now you’re getting really nasty, offensive, defensive, and deflecting responsibility about it. I can’t stop you from being an immature turd, but I can sure tell you that you are if you continue to be so in public. Gay people aren’t hurting you by being gay, and you’re not hurting anyone by being ex-gay except when you think your will to influence everyone with your story by calling them sinners and babbling scripture at them. Nobody here buys that, we heard you the first time. You’re filled with hate and non-acceptance. Your Jesus didn’t accept you and let’s supposing he’s real, you’re being so un-Christlike now. Evil has taken you over and you’re so wrought over your conflicting sexual urges and your religion that you project it by bossing people around and being an asshole. Are you the boss? Are you god? You love it because you’re like a martyr, you’re being persecuted. Let me correct that for you – nobody cares. You told your story, nobody cares.

    • Mogg

      What do you mean, we think we can tell you what to do? You don’t appear to have a problem telling us what to do, based on opinions we hold in no regard at all. If you want a discussion, fine. At the moment you apparently want a one-way communication where you preach and we accept what you say without argument, and the moderators are perfectly entitled to warn you or ban you for that.

  • John Monett

    Why would the author of “Homosexual marriage: a ruse to persecute Christians?” want to post this article? The judgment that Christians persecute gays is silly. Christians stand up for their religious beliefs. We live in a country where we have religious freedom. Is it your intention to get rid of this sacred right? Is it religious freedom for some, but not for all? Or, should people not have the right to have a religion, according to you?

    • Custador

      I’ll explain this slowly so that even a brain-dead like you can grasp it:

      YOU DO NOT HAVE A RIGHT TO PERSECUTE PEOPLE. PREVENTING YOU FROM PERSECUTING PEOPLE IS NOT THE SAME THING AS PERSECUTING YOU.

      You really are a dick, and my sympathy for you has long since expired.

      • John Monett

        How am I persecuting people? I simply ask a question and I get attacked for it.

        • Custador

          Oh, you can nest comments correctly after all. I was beginning to wonder.

          You have contended that homosexuality is wrong and a sin (religious belief not matched by biological reality). You “stand up for” your “religious rights” by discriminating against gay people, generally being homophobic, and fighting to deny gay people the same rights that everybody else enjoys. That is NOT an example of you exercising your religious rights, it is an example of you persecuting gay people. Similarly, when the courts prevent Christians like you from persecuting gay people, the courts are NOT persecuting Christians – They are preventing Christians from persecuting gay people. Your right to believe what you want DOES NOT MEAN THAT YOU GET TO IGNORE THE LAW, and it DOES NOT MEAN THAT YOU GET TO PERSECUTE PEOPLE AND CALL IT A RELIGIOUS EXERCISE.

          • John Monett

            I have gay friends, but none of them are Christian. I do not judge them. However, if a gay man goes to my church and does not repent, then we can hold him accountable. In general, the American Church believes that unbelievers must behave like believers. This is wrong. I do not support the religious right when they force their beliefs on others through law.

            • Custador

              So you accept that gay marriage should be legal?

            • Kodie

              So you say you don’t judge your gay friends, but do you call them sinners? That’s judging them. Do you invite them to come along with you to church, do you tell them how the church un-gayed you so they can be un-gay too? I’m sure you judge them. The only reason people are so frightened of realizing they are gay and so ashamed is the pestering judgment of people who believe it’s a sin and they’re going to hell.

              How come these gay people are your friend? I have an idea. If you’re as much of a douche in person as you came here to be, they would be happy to avoid running into you so it must be something else.

  • John Monett

    To say that Christians persecute is generalized and is unfair. Not all Christians persecute. It is important to understand that. But, my contention is that those “Christians” that persecute are not Christians at all. They do not live they way Jesus did on Earth.

    • Custador

      Tell me John, do you live in a socialist commune with twelve friends and a hooker, in which all your belongings are shared with your peers, you have no extraneous goods or wealth, and you divide absolutely everything you earn and own between the poor and the needy, keeping nothing back for yourself? No? Then by your own rules, YOU are not a Christian, because YOU do not live how Jesus supposedly lived.

      • John Monett

        Christians are not perfect. We will sin. The question is not “are we going to be perfect” the question is “are we going to be honest with each other, with ourselves, and with God and are we going to struggle against our sin.” We believe that we sin and need God’s forgiveness.

        • TrickQuestion

          Then i feel sorry for you, being saddled with that instead of realizing that it’s just a way to make you do what your so-called leaders want you to do.

        • Custador

          Why do you get to pull a No True Scotsman in such a hypocritical way, I wonder?

          • John Monett

            Gay marriage should not be legal, either. What this will do is put the government against the Church and the Church against the government. Those churches that believe that homosexuality is sin will be known civil rights violators, if this is allowed to happen. I believe that government should stay out of the marriage issue.

            • Bill

              You have no idea how the law works. Either that or you are being willfully ignorant in order to set up a scenario where you get to deny others fundamental rights based on your religious beliefs.

              I’m guessing it’s the later, but I’d be willing to accept that you are just ignorant,

            • Kodie

              Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

              The prospect of opposing gay marriage and making heterosexuality the law of the land amounts to Congress establishing a religion. Keep your religion out of government. Pushing for the allowance of gay marriage and all the civil rights and benefits that marriage entails is correcting the issue. It doesn’t mean your church has to conduct gay marriage, and it doesn’t mean you have to get gay married just because you’re gay.

            • Bill

              “I believe that government should stay out of the marriage issue.”

              Who issues marriage licenses? If you want to end your marriage, where do you go to get a divorce decree?

              You can’t actually be this stupid.

            • UrsaMinor

              When you put it together with the other things he’s saying, John’s real argument appears to be “I believe that government should weigh in on the marriage issue, and strictly enforce Christian practices on the entire population.”

              The current arrangement already does pit the government against religions that have different traditions of marriage than the current Christian one. You are asserting that we should maintain the status quo and the Christian monopoly on defining marriage. This is exactly the opposite of government “staying out of the marriage issue”.

            • Custador

              You’ve just proven yourself a liar and a hypocrite. The ONLY reason to oppose gay marriage is that it disagrees with your religion. You CANNOT claim that you don’t want religious people to be able to inflict their views on non-believers through law, while at the same time arguing that gay marriage should be illegal. The two statements are absolutely mutually exclusive.

              Further, marriage is defined in LAW. Not in religion, LAW. I’m not saying that churches should be forced to conduct religious ceremonies for gay couples – But I AM saying that gay couples have every right to be married in any institution, secular or religious, which is willing to marry them, and that marriage should have the same legal standing, the same rights, and the same NAME as any other marriage.

            • Jag

              Marriage is a contract. A legally binding contract, which is why a couple that gets married in a civil ceremony is no less married than a couple that was married with a religious ceremony.

              YOU are talking about the “sacrament” of marriage; the religious ceremony that takes place to celebrate the contract of marriage.

              There’s no way to take the government out of marriage. Without the government’s involvement, it’s just a party.

        • Kodie

          I’m not going to generalize all Christians, so I’ll specify the “true Christian” that you are, those people are sickening to me. Out of pure imagination, the goal is to un-gay you, make you feel terrible as you were, and then turn you into their mouthpiece, their proof that homosexuality is a choice, and you’re so warped, this is wonderful to you. Because of the promise of salvation, you feel so awesome to have changed that you are compelled to share, to warn, to preach, to try to make everyone believe that same garbage as an expression of your “religious freedom.” Your religious freedom stops at your decision to pretend you’re not gay so your friends like you. That’s as far as you go. Your imaginary reasons for opposing civil rights of marriage for two people who love each other and committing to a life together who have the same parts is an opinion. You don’t have to marry a dude. That’s how gay marriage doesn’t affect you, it doesn’t make you marry a guy even though deep down you wish there was nothing wrong with it. You wish Jesus loved dudes too, and made it ok for you to love another dude and marry him and raise children. You’ve been infected by a sickness called Christianity that makes you suddenly feel that’s not ok, but that shouldn’t affect the rest of us who aren’t sick like you. There isn’t anyone jumping in to prevent you from living a lie for nobody.

  • John Monett

    Should a homosexual be allowed to sexually harass or sexually assault another person simply because he or she is gay?

    • John Monett

      This has happened to me.

      • Custador

        You’re an idiot.

    • Custador

      WHAT?! Are you seriously fucking suggesting that:

      A) Sexually assaulting people is an inherrant part of being gay, and;
      B) Gay people have a legal right to sexually assault people?!

      What the actual fuck, John?! How does your bizarre question in any way contribute to the discussion?!

      • John Monett

        based on your attitude, you could be called a homophobe. so, you believe that if a homosexual sexually harasses or sexually assaults someone is illegal. what do you base your view on?

        • Custador

          1) The one and ONLY person professing homophobic views in this thread is you – I strongly suspect that those readers who actually know who I am IRL just fell off of their chairs laughing at you calling me homophobic. You idiot.

          2) There is no law in any statute book in any country on Earth which says that laws regarding sexual assault and harassment somehow don’t apply if the person doing it is gay. I find your assertion that there is to be as absurd as it is bizarre. Rape is rape. Sexual assault is sexual assault. Sexual harassment is sexual harassment. The gender or sexuality of either party is not in any way relevant. You idiot.

          3) Answer the question I just asked you. You idiot.

          • Bill

            Custy is absolutely right.

            Also, what does this have to do with the original topic any way? It’s like you are trying to come up with the most absurdly homophobic word salad ever.

        • John Monett

          if you complain about a homosexual sexually harassing you, you could be accused of homophobia. i have heard this before too.

          • Custador

            Wow. Just wow. I honestly thought your idiocy couldn’t get any more idiotic, but you sure showed me.

            Why don’t you cite me some reliably documented cases of that actually happening, John. In your own time.

          • John Monett

            a lot of people are scared of being labeled as a homophobe simply by speaking up.

            • Custador

              John, you are a homophobe. Every word you type proves it more and more. If you don’t like being accused of homophobia, then what you should do is (write this down, there may be a test): Stop being homophobic.

              Now, you’ll notice that I don’t mind being called a homophobe, because you see, the thing is, I’m not a homophobe, so really, you calling me one in a public discussion like this doesn’t reflect badly on me in the slightest. It just makes you look stupid.

            • Sunny Day

              They should be scared.

              By their actions (and words) you shall know them.

        • Azel

          Mmm…he bases his view on the law of almost every country in the world ? Although till recently the FBI definition of rape didn’t include female-anyone or male-male rape (and the definition of some states still don’t include them), they are in these cases re-qualified as sexual assault, so still illegal.

  • John Monett

    i don’t like it when a homosexual sexually harasses me, because i believe homosexuality is sin. does this make me a homophobe?

    • Custador

      I don’t like it when a homosexual sexually harasses me either.

      I also don’t like it when a heterosexual sexually harasses me.

      Because sexual harassment is a crime.

      The fact that you specified only homosexuals, and the fact that your reasoning had nothing to do with being sexually harassed, but rather centered solely on the fact that it might be a gay man doing it – that is what you are saying that’s homophobic.

      Now, go back and answer the questions you have been asked and stop your hand-waving and deflecting:

      Are you seriously suggesting that:

      A) Sexually assaulting people is an inherrant part of being gay, and;
      B) Gay people have a legal right to sexually assault people?

      Seriously, I want you to answer those questions.

    • Azel

      Depends on what do you mean by “sexual harassment” (Lord knows I have seen peculiar definitions of these kind of words and offences…), but if that qualifies not liking the harassment does not make you a bigot.
      That does however makes you horribly misguided: you just admitted you would like the harassment were you not a Christian…

    • Mogg

      So the harassment itself doesn’t bother you, just who it comes from? If so, then yes, homophobic. I’d be interested in your definition of harassment – did this person do something that you would have found acceptable either if coming from or directed at a woman, or was it something unacceptable no matter what?

    • Bill

      Can we imply from this that you’re cool with being sexually harrassed by heterosexuals?

    • Kodie

      Everything you said so far suggests you feel sexually harassed by the existence of gay people and when you assert yourself, you’re labeled the homophobe that you are. As in, I don’t know what really happened, but I’m guessing the exchange included a phrase like, “leave me alone, faggot.”

      You’re too uncomfortable around gay people to be socially well-adjusted. Perhaps he used his gaydar and thought you’d be up for it. As far as I’m concerned, you probably over-reacted because you loathe your homosexual urges, but I don’t know what actually happened, I’m projecting the scenario from your comments.

  • John Monett

    i am not scared of homosexuals. if i was, i would not be saying anything against them. i would be saying nothing at all.

    • Jabster

      … but you are a homosexual. The sooner you realise that (please don’t tell me you got married to prove you’re staight) the better not only for you but those around you.

      • John Monett

        I am attracted to women now. Please do not tell me what I am. You do not know me. I know who I am.

        • Jag

          Based on what you’ve had to say here, I respectfully disagree. I don’t think you have the faintest idea who you are.

          But hey, you keep responding, so you must be getting something out of all this talk about sex and god. Funny how often the two seem to go hand-in-hand.

  • John Monett

    the answer is no.

    • Custador

      Comment nesting fail, but never mind.

      Okay.

      Great.

      Given that you A) don’t think that sexually assaulting people is an inherent part of being gay, and B) don’t think that gay people have a legal right to sexually assault people:

      What did your comment have to do with the basic point that seeking to enforce religious rules on a secular legal system is wrong and illegal?

  • John Monett

    the issue is not homosexuality, the issue is morality. i base my morality on the Word of God. what do you base your morality on?

    • Custador

      Will you please learn to nest your replies properly? Please? For me?

      In fact, you don’t base your morality on “the Word of God”. Not only because you, like every other Christian, cherry-pick the bits that suit you best from the Bible and hand-wave the rest away as allegory, but also because the various bits of moral doctrine contained in the Bible are simply a reflection of the prevailing moral Zeitgeist(s) at the time(s) it was written. Biblical morality came from Bronze Age morality that was already prevalent, not vice versa. Now, I’m saying we’ve moved on a bit. The reason your Bronze Age “morality” clashes so hard with real life is because it’s no longer relevant. The bits about homosexuality are about as relevant as the bits about not cutting your hair, wearing cotton-polyester blends or taking virgin girls as sex slaves after you murder their parents. The fact that I hear religious people screaming at the top of their lungs about gay marriage, but fail to see those same people picketing River Island tells me all I need to know about their “morality”.

    • Bill

      Observing the world around me.

      Evaluation of the situation in which the ethical question arises.

      Logic.

      Empathy.

      What I don’t base it on is a rigid set of rules set forth in an unreliable and historically inaccurate book written ages ago.

    • Azel

      I can’t say for the others, but I am an hedonist, so “pleasure is the greatest good” and the Golden Rule…in both positive (treat others as you would like to be treated) and negative (do not treat others like you would not like to be treated) forms

      • trj

        The negative form is actually called the Silver Rule.

    • Mogg

      You do not base your morality on the word of God, only this specific part of your morality. Unless you actually do agree with stoning adulterers and children who backchat their parents, forcing female rape victims to marry their rapist, never eating or handling pigs and rabbits or anything made from their skin or tissues such as footballs and replacement heart valves, defining women as legally entitled to less than men for inheritance purposes…. The list goes on. You base your morality on the current acceptable interpretation of those laws within your particular church, combined with a mixture of currently acceptable morality in the wider culture in which you live and a certain amount of basic ‘moral thinking’ which is biologically driven, common to all humanity and part of what makes us a social species.

      We are the same, we just leave out the bit where we feel we have to live according to rules made up by a completely different culture three thousand years ago.

      • dmantis

        JOHN,
        Please teach me something about your morality. I honestly want to know.

        Where in the bible does it mention that gay people are bad? Is it only Leviticus 18:22?

        Do you believe based on your ‘morality of the word of god’ that:
        A) A child is to be killed if he/she curses their parent (Leviticus 20:9)
        B) All persons guilty of adultery are to be killed (20:10)
        C) The daughter of a priest who engages in prostitution is to be burned alive until dead (21:9)
        D) The bride of a priest is to be a virgin (21:13)
        E) There should be ritual killing of animals, using cattle, sheep and goats (22:19)
        F) A person who takes the Lord’s name in vain is to be killed (24:16)

        These are all from Leviticus, so the logic follows that you take these rules very seriously. If you do not, please explain why.

        • John Monett

          Christians do not live under the Mosaic law anymore. We live under grace and mercy. But, God is also righteous and just. He is perfect. He is waiting for ALL humans to come back to Him through accepting the gift of salvation through Jesus.

          • John Monett

            God is love. Humans are not love. Humans are rebels against God. Jesus loves you so much that He died and rose again. He paid the price of your sin.

            • Sunny Day

              Therefore there’s no reason to oppose homosexuality.

              Thanks.

            • Custador

              Dying for a couple of days – Not that big of a deal, is it? I mean, he got to come back, so what has he actually given up? Nothing. Well, if it had actually happened, of course. Which I don’t believe it did. So it’s kind of irrelevant. By the way, proclamations about Jesus, much like Bible verses, don’t impress anybody here. Know your audience.

            • Azel

              The price an immortal had to pay was “dying” for three days ? It hasn’t been more inconvenient for him than someone pinching us would be and we should pay by an eternity of suffering ? How in the blazes do that count as being just and fair ?

          • Custador

            If Mosaic law no longer applies (in the NT, the character Jesus strongly said that it still does, but we’re accepting your assertion for purposes of moving the conversation forward), then why do Christians still persecute homosexuals? Please don’t argue that they don’t; one only has to look at the ridiculous sums of money spent by various religious factions on opposing Prop 8 and similar measures to prove that they do.

            • John Monett

              In the Old Testament, homosexuals were to be put to death. While homosexuality is still sin in the New Testament, we are not allowed to put them to death. Only God can punish them.

            • Custador

              “We are not ALLOWED to put them to death”

              Implying that you want to put them to death. Christian morality at its finest.

            • Kodie

              Punishment is not equal to death. Punishing them by not allowing them to enjoy the status of marriage is not god’s doing. You might think it’s god’s wish that you carry it out, but then that would be going against letting god punish them. If it’s allowed, then god allowed it, and if god means to punish them, leave that to god. Of course, every time there’s a devastating hurricane or earthquake, you think that’s god sending a clear message, but still. Can you make the earth quake? Stay out of it. You’re afraid of catastrophic events and you want to limit people to please god. That’s what makes people think you’re so remarkably stupid and that your faith is ridiculous and ignorant. If you don’t want to be gay, don’t be gay. If you think this pleases your god, that has nothing to do with the rest of us. It doesn’t keep you any safer from hurricanes and earthquakes. That’s a superstition. That’s why people ridicule you, and if you want to cling to it anyway, that’s your problem.

            • Bill

              “In the Old Testament, homosexuals were to be put to death. While homosexuality is still sin in the New Testament, we are not allowed to put them to death. Only God can punish them.”

              first, please establish why we should believe that the bible presents any rules by which we have to live.

              Assuming you can establish that, please provide the biblical citations you believe support the statements above. Because, honestly, I think you’re talking out of your ass.

          • dmantis

            “Do not think that I [Jesus] have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke or a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. (Matthew 5:17-18)”

            Seems your buddy JC was pretty clear when it came to following Old Testament Law. Seems your morality is of the cherry-picking variety.

            If it is not, then please explain WHERE ELSE DOES THE BIBLE CONDEMN HOMOSEXUALITY? Book and verse please.

          • Yoav

            Maybe you can answer a question I have and been trying to get an answer for from cristians for quite some time. If your god is all knowing and perfect, how come he couldn’t get it right on the first try and had to reboot the franchise?

    • UrsaMinor

      I base my morality on what Christianity phrases as the Golden Rule (and no, Christianity didn’t invent the concept. It occurs in multiple cultures, and several formulations of the Golden Rule predate the New Testament by hundreds of years). A contemporary phrasing might be “Treat other people the way they’d like to be treated, and don’t be a dick.”

      The Wiccan Rede sums up another important concept, that of personal freedom combined with responsibility to others: “Do as you will, if it harms none.” (No, I’m not a pagan. I just think Wicca phrases it well.)

      A world where everyone follows these precepts allows for the diversity of different worldviews, and is a more pleasant and harmonious one for all parties. It affords the best balance of social responsibility and individual freedom that I can think of.

    • http://fugodeus.com Nox

      You do have a right to believe whatever you want. But your beliefs are wrong. And your imaginary friend is causing real harm to real people. And you don’t have a right to not be called on your bullsh*t.

      If your religious belief tells you not to f*ck men, that’s your choice.

      If your religious belief entails what other people do with their c*cks, you’re already nullifying the religious freedom argument.

      If your religious belief entails telling other people they are sinful because of their own private sexual feelings or activities, you’ve gone beyond expressing your belief to practicing bigotry.

      If your religious belief entails trying to infringe on the rights of others, attempting to make it illegal for anyone to do something just because you think it is sinful, then you have crossed the line into persecution.

      In your activities here on this thread you’ve only gone as far as bigotry. But I bet if you think back to the people who cured you, or the ones who told you that you were sick in the first place, you could probably remember a few examples of christians persecuting homosexuals.

      And if you can’t think of any examples yourself, try this one(or if you want to see what the true face of your church looks like when it doesn’t have an establishment clause to keep it in check, here’s an example from abroad that was supported by at least one church in the U.S.).

      Gays have had to fight for basic human rights at every step against an entrenched belief system that teaches people to treat them as second class citizens if even human. And teaches them to treat themselves as sinful and dirty. At every stage (including the current one) of their struggle the biggest obstacle between gay people and equality has been the christian church.

      When you started posting your ignorant bullsh*t here, the first thing I told you was “you don’t have to be ashamed of who you are”. You were already spreading a harmful message, but my immediate concern was for your pain. I wanted to help you (now that it’s clear you’re beyond helping my concern has shifted to making sure you don’t hurt others). Think about that for a second.

      No one is telling you what to do. No one is telling you that you can’t be christian, or that you have to f*ck men, or even that you can’t be homophobic. No one here is trying to impose our will on you. And some of us have been trying to free you. You’re drinking an unneccessary poison and we’re simply telling you that you don’t need to do that. You’re denying yourself part of life to make a fictional dead character happy. I may not like you, but that is still a tragedy I don’t wish to see happen to anyone.

      Remember a few days ago when you said you wouldn’t be loving others if you didn’t tell them they were going to hell. Imagine that a similar sentiment might motivate someone to not want someone else to waste the only life they have. For many of us this is a big part of why we care enough to criticize a god we don’t believe in. Because you should have a choice. What you have been perceiving as persecution of your faith is an attempt to protect your freedom.

      Where people here don’t respect your choice (aside from the part where your spreading a hateful message) is that it clearly was not a choice that you yourself actually made. Your church told you that your natural desires were against the will of god. They made you feel guilty about how god made you, and then they told you god could fix you. They probably coerced or forced you into a reeducation camp where you spent six weeks being screamed at by counselors and told that you were evil (I’m basing this guess on the assumption that your story is true, which I’m a bit unsure of at this point).

      Is that an experience you really wish on others. To live a life of denial and shame. To never experience sexual fulfillment because the thing you really want to do that doesn’t really hurt anyone isn’t approved of by some people whose business it isn’t anyway. Is it really so f*cking great to have to spend every day pretending to be someone you’re not?

      Besides it’s not fair to your wife to keep making her wear that fake mustache.

      “In general, the American Church believes that unbelievers must behave like believers. This is wrong. I do not support the religious right when they force their beliefs on others through law.”

      “Gay marriage should not be legal, either. What this will do is put the government against the Church and the Church against the government. Those churches that believe that homosexuality is sin will be known civil rights violators”

      So you don’t mind that they violate civil rights, you just don’t want them to get in trouble for it.

      Well you don’t need to worry. That’s never going to happen anyway. The scenario you’re afraid of was made up to scare stupid people into thinking gay marriage would be a threat to religious freedom. The thing you need to understand (that few christians seem to understand) is that there is a difference between civil law and canon law.

      Religious freedom doesn’t mean religion always gets its way. But part of what it does mean is that the government can’t ever tell your church what to believe.

      If a church doesn’t want to perform or recognize gay marriages, no one is ever going to make them. If a church wants to preach that homosexuality is a sin, that may be incredibly unhelpful to society, but it will always be legal. As people (even christians) gradually begin to understand that gay people are human, and attitudes shift from disapproval of gayness to disapproval of homophobia, society will eventually get the good sense to shun those churches which cling to hate. Other christians will be ever more embarrassed by their presence. They will drive away parishioners and lose power until the obvious malignance of their message has reduced them to screaming irrelevently in their own little corner of Kansas. Those of us who already know how harmful these beliefs are will criticize them the whole time, but (and this is the important part) no one is ever going to take away their right to have those beliefs.

      The flipside of this whole religious freedom thing is we don’t establish churches. No one can rightfully or constitutionally be compelled to submit to any church or have any religious belief. In other words, it doesn’t f*cking matter if the church says gayness is a sin. The law isn’t about sin. It’s about what is best for society. What god (if any) you believe in or where you put your c*ck are matters best left to the individual. Would your theocratic mind even be comfortable with the idea of an elected body making decisions about what constitutes sin?

      To say that the government should deny people equal rights because of their sexual orientation is to say that the government should be regulating religious belief. You say that gay marriage should be illegal because the government shouldn’t be in the religious business. But to say that gay marriage should be illegal, is to say that government should be in the religious business.

      The only reason anyone is opposed to gay marriage is because of religion. The religious idea that homosexuality is a sin, is the reason why homosexuals are persecuted. The only reason gay marriage wouldn’t be legal is because the american church believes that unbelievers must behave like believers and has been quite successful about forcing their beliefs on others through law. As this is the same thing you just called wrong, perhaps you can see why we think it’s wrong as well.

  • John Monett

    I do not fear anyone who is evil. I fear God. I will obey His Word. God is all-powerful. He is the judge. He created the rules. I am simply doing my best to follow Him. I am content to know that He will defend me.

    • TrickQuestion

      As long as you are not true to who you are,

      • John Monett

        I am a follower of Christ. I am true to Jesus.

        • TrickQuestion

          You follow what you have been told to follow. I feel sorry for you, having to keep your true self hidden.

          • John Monett

            Actually, I know why I follow Jesus. I have challenged my faith. It has been proven correct to me. I used to be an unbeliever, like you.

            • TrickQuestion

              I submit that you found a community, albeit a community that didn’t like who you were and sought to change you , but a longing to belong somewhere lead you to give in to what they said, just to be accepted. Peer pressure is peer pressure.
              I will say this- Most of us atheists would have accepted you as you were, flaws and all, no matter what your feelings for others were, without asking you to change who you “have” to like in order to fit into a neat little mold.

    • Bill

      “I will obey His Word”

      How do you know what “his word” is?

      • John Monett

        The Holy Bible is the Word of God.

        • John Monett

          He and I are on speaking terms.

          • Troutbane

            This. This is what scares me about zealots. If anyone else said “I hear voices in my head, they tell me to do things” we would likely get them help. If someone says “God tells me to do things” too many people accept it. Most of the time, no big deal, its when God tells you to kill abortion doctors, blow up Federal buildings, drown your kids, or fly planes into buildings where it become a danger to society.

            • John Monett

              I agree with you. God does not condone that. He would never tell someone to violate His rules.

            • Kodie

              But doing any of those things would make him not a true Christian, so Christians never have to own up to hearing voices in their heads that merely keep reminding them not to be gay every time they see a guy with a cute ass who smiles at them.

            • Custador

              Being a guy with a cute ass who smile at John Monett is sexual harassment, apparently. We covered this yesterday.

            • TrickQuestion

              he does it all the time in his own storybook…

            • Jag

              If Moses tried that same routine today, he’d be committed for the obvious schizophrenic that he must have been.

              Burning bush, talked to God-with-a-capital-g, seriously? He’d be medicated for his own safety.

          • Bill

            How does he speak to you?

          • Len

            He and I are on speaking terms.

            I’m on speaking terms with several people – my friends, my family, my colleagues – just about anyone, really. Even my ex-wife. When we speak, I tell them stuff and they tell me stuff. Specifically, they tell me stuff that I didn’t know.

            What has your god ever told you that you didn’t already know?

            I don’t mean stuff like who’s going to win the football match, but something real. Something that wasn’t just an extension of what you already knew or already believed.

        • Bill

          How do you know the bible is the word of god?

          Which version?

          Is the entire bible the word of god? If so do you follow laws in the old testament?

  • John Monett

    Everytime you guys attack my faith, my faith in Christ is made stronger. John 15:18 “If the world hates you, remember that it hated Me first.” You guys attack me, because you are fearful.

    • Troutbane

      I love how challenging your preconceived notions equals attacking your faith. I also love how you absolutely refuse to answer the questions presented to you.

    • Kodie

      Not really. Fearful of a world where idiots like you get to be in charge of making the laws for everyone else, a little. Your “faith” is made stronger by a psychological trick meant to pen you in instead of think for yourself. Thinking for yourself is called “evil,” and warned against, not because it is, but because they don’t want you to do it. Your aggression towards people who think for themselves is from your fearfulness of harming an imaginary person, but you go about trying to harm real people, that’s pretty awful of you.

    • Elemenope

      “The craving for a strong faith is no proof of a strong faith, but quite the contrary. If one has such a faith, then one can afford the beautiful luxury of skepticism: one is sure enough, firm enough, has ties enough for that.”

      Protestations of strong faith indicate only that the faith is weak. The strong in faith heartily welcome honest questions, the weak in faith are terrified of them; for if your faith is strong, what risk is there in answering questions? The risk is obvious if the faith is so brittle that it might shatter if you answered one.

    • trj

      Funny how you constantly need to reassure us how strong your faith is.

      • trj

        I see ‘Nope already said as much.

    • UrsaMinor

      I do not fear your god, any more than you fear Zeus.

      I do fear your god’s followers, for what they have done in his name in the past. Their track record is not pretty. I fear what they will do in his name in the future.

      • John Monett

        I agree. I don’t trust too many Christians either. That is why I want to know the person on the inside. Words mean nothing to me. I want to know how they live their lives.

        • John Monett

          Christians are not perfect. However, those who break God’s law and say it is done in God’s name are not Christians.

          • Elemenope

            That would roughly be all of them.

            I take it as evidence enough (unless you happen to be typing this message from a library public computer, in which case, kudos) that you owning a computer is incompatible with the command to share freely everything you have with others, especially the poor. How can you own a computer when thousands of Christian children worldwide want for their daily bread?

            And you do this so you can proclaim your faith on an atheist’s website. Do you do this in God’s name? I think you do. Very naughty.

          • Bill

            Here’s the thing, You’ve done a piss poor job of defining what god’s law is or its source. If you want your definition of True Christian taken seriously you need to prove that the definition has foundational truth.

            You haven’t.

    • Bill

      Who is attacking your faith? Disagreeing with you is not the same as attacking.

      • Elemenope

        To be fair, what I said could be construed as attacking his faith; I would say only that I am attacking the protestations of the quality of that faith, not the fact of him possessing it. You’re free to call yourself a Christian and I would not attack a person for doing so. Call yourself a person of unshakable faith and a special “true” Christian and that claim is gonna get roughed up a bit.

        And, of course, he started complaining about people attacking his faith long before I attacked it in even that limited way. Seeing as how this whole thing seems to be nothing more than an exceptionally perverse form of self-affirmation therapy for him, I think I’m done with the whole conversation.

        • Bill

          This doesn’t really fit in to my definition of “attacking” though. Nobody is telling him not to believe what he believes. Nobody is saying he shouldn’t be allowed to believe what he believes. People are just saying they disagree with his beliefs and that they are logically flawed.

          If that’s attacking, then any disagreement whatsoever is an “attack.” A rather strange definition given that he showed up here and clearly sought to challenge the beliefs of this community.

    • Custador

      The Christian persecution complex is strong with this one. It’s like a fetish with these people:

      “Hate me! Hate me! Ffffffuck yeah! Hate me good!”
      “Uh… We don’t hate you dude.”
      “Yes you do! You hate me for being such a good Christian! Everybody hates Christians!”
      “Whatever dude.”
      “SEE! YOU DO HATE ME! JESUS I’M CUUUUMMMMIIIIINNNNGGG!”

      Shit is just not normal.

    • Mogg

      What happened to “not judging” and “not assuming someone else’s mental state” like you accused us of the other day?Your statement here is much more directly assuming than anything anyone said to you then.

      Seriously, fearful? I can truthfully say that I have orders of magnitude less fear now than I had when I was a Christian.

  • John Monett

    Do you believe that Christians should go to jail when they disagree with you on homosexuality?

    • TrickQuestion

      Yes, I sure do.

      • John Monett

        why is that?

        • TrickQuestion

          Because anyone who doesn’t think like i am is obviously someone i can’t trust and therefore must be a criminal.

          • Jabster

            Couldn’t agree more – it’s about time we took our once great country back from the likes of John and returned in the the core values as set down by the founding fathers and described in the constitution – well of course only the bits we like, the other stuff is obviously wrong and should be changed.

            Lock and load TQ … lock and load …

            O! say can you see by the dawn’s early light,
            What so proudly we hailed at the twilight’s last gleaming,
            Whose broad stripes and bright stars through the perilous fight,
            O’er the ramparts we watched, were so gallantly streaming?
            And the rockets’ red glare, the bombs bursting in air,
            Gave proof through the night that our flag was still there;
            O! say does that star-spangled banner yet wave,
            O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave?

            I’m welling up here …

            • UrsaMinor

              You do the Rabid American Patriot pretty damned well for a Brit. Michele Bachmann is gonna want to be your buddy so you two can exchange cookie recipes and trade tips on how to subvert the Constitution.

        • Custador

          TQ is being facetious. The answer is no: No atheist considers having a different opinion to them a criminal offense. The same certainly can’t be said for Christians.

          • Jabster

            Absolutely not … have you not heard of the group Christians Unite No To Secularism?

            I bet you £1 that John’s a member.

            • Len

              I want that bumper sticker.

            • Bill

              I thought it was:

              Patriots Rallying In Christ’s Kingly Service.

      • John Monett

        Christians do have a right to disagree with about homosexuality. To put them in jail for their beliefs is hateful.

        • TrickQuestion

          Not at all. I would simply put them there to protect them from the taint of other people’s beliefs. It’s a safety precaution more than anything. If they’re all in one place, we won’t have to interact with each other, therefore we won’t be able to disagree. It’s totally win win.

          • UrsaMinor

            Naughty, evil TQ! It should be obvious to you by now that John’s facetiousness detector simply isn’t functioning.

            It’s such a common affliction among fundamentalists. I wish I could figure out why.

            • trj

              I’d argue that sense of irony (and sense of humor in general) is correlated with, among other things, reflection and perspective – things which are generally less applied in the dogmatic minds of fundies and fanatics.

      • John Monett

        how will you force christians to be silent about their beliefs?

        • TrickQuestion

          i dunno…duct tape?

        • http://fugodeus.com Nox

          The biggest perpetrator of actual persecution in history has been the christian church.

          At this point I take back the thing I said earlier about how you shouldn’t be ashamed of who you are. I don’t mean the gay part. There’s still nothing wrong with that. You should be ashamed of who you are because who you are is a dishonest willfully ignorant condescending prick.

    • Bill

      Ok, now I’m thinking Poe.

  • John Monett

    If you don’t believe in God, why do you go out of your way to react negatively toward Christians? Why do you care what we believe, if you don’t believe in God?

    • TrickQuestion

      Because they usually try to force their beliefs down people’s throats, and react negatively towards those who do not share them.
      We don’t go out of our way to do it, we just call them on it when they are doing exactly the same thing.

      • John Monett

        Personally, I have not shoved my beliefs down your throat. I have not once told you guys to be Christian. So, to react negatively toward me is not fair.

        • UrsaMinor

          Your question was phrased as a general one, not as “why do you react negatively to me?”

          Some people here are using you as a whipping boy who represents all Christians. I’ll agree, that isn’t really fair.

          And although this in no way excuses the reaction to you as an individual, you have to understand that you have come here and unwittingly trod over the same tired ground and offered the same bad arguments and demonstrated the same abysmal ignorance and lack of wider perspective as dozens of other Christians have done before you. Folks get a little bit cranky at the repetition.

        • Kodie

          Are you saying it’s not ok to challenge your bigotry?

          • John Monett

            I am only a bigot to you, because you don’t believe in God. Since my beliefs are based on God’s laws, I have to assume that you are rebelling against God, just like Jesus says.

            • Kodie

              That’s pretty blind. Things they say to keep you in the religion. I’m not rebelling against god, and you’re not abiding by god. You’re abiding a manipulative system for people to get you to behave a certain way based on fear of an imaginary person, while the rest of us live in the real world.

              We’ve all heard the good news, it’s just not that convincing. Gay guy goes straight because Jesus talks to him, also not convincing. What god is there to rebel against?

            • UrsaMinor

              We’re not rebelling against your god any more than you are rebelling against Thor or Isis. This meme needs to die.

              Personally, I never call anyone a bigot just because of their religious beliefs. I call people bigots when they engage in discriminatory behavior. If you think a certain thing is a sin, fine with me. Don’t engage in that thing. It’s when people try to force other people to refrain from engaging in that thing that I have a problem.

              This may come as a shock to you, but I have lots of religious friends, and I don’t call any of them bigots. If I had to make an estimate, I’d say about a third of my friends are practicing Christians, another third are Jews or neopagans, and the rest are agnostics or atheists.

    • UrsaMinor

      You really are blind to the privileged position that Christians enjoy in the U.S., aren’t you, John?

      Honestly, we don’t care what you believe. You may practice, or refrain from practicing, whatever your think your god requires of you or forbids you to do. And if that was all there was to it, there would be no conflict between Christians and atheists.

      But in practice, you make terrible neighbors. You are a supermajority in the U.S., and you abuse your political power.

      We do care a great deal when you pass laws that force other people to yield to Christian practices. New York State’s old “blue laws” are a good example of this. It used to be illegal for anyone to do business on your holy day. Even today, Sunday is treated differently under the law. More recently, women in this country are being routinely being denied access to medical care, and in two different states they are on the brink of being forced to undergo unnecessary, medically inappropriate and potentially risky invasive procedures, because of religious beliefs Christian legislators have enshrined or are working to enshrine as law.

      Step outside the Christian bubble and get a clue, John.

      • John Monett

        A lot of Christians do force their beliefs on others. I do not like that. Christians should not be doing that.

        • Jabster

          … but you’re still a complete arsehole aren’t you.

        • UrsaMinor

          Alright, John, let me ask you a question. Do you support same-sex marriage? Have you spoken out in favor of legislation that secures equal marriage rights for all U.S.citizens, regardless of sexual orientation? Have you opposed religious leaders who want to make sure that that the only legally valid marriages in this country are those that conform to their religious beliefs?

          Sure, there are lots of little annoyance laws which favor Chrisitans which are, well, annoying, but not really much more than that. But we’re talking about a fundamental right here. Marriage creates legal kinship; it bestows strong legal protections on a spouse that cannot be granted contractually.

          Where do you stand on this issue, John? Should all marriages in the U.S. be required to conform to your religion’s beliefs? Yes or no?

          • John Monett

            If I say that I support same-sex marriage, you will call me a hypocrite for calling myself Christian. If I say I oppose same-sex marriage, then you will call me a bigot. So, this is a lose-lose situation.

            • Kodie

              You’re allowed to be a bigot and I’m allowed to call you a bigot. That’s how it works. If you think Christianity has to take control of the government so they can tell the rest of us how to live according to your imaginary friend, there we have a problem. If you want to discuss openly your feelings about gay marriage, well, you’re doing that. That doesn’t mean the discussion is closed. But I have a feeling nobody’s changing your mind, so I don’t know why you’re still here. You just want everyone to know you’re a bigot, why keep repeating yourself? And then additional weird nonsense like the homophobe who got sexually harassed at work, or do we think Christians should be put in jail for having mean opinions. Where do you come up with this stuff? You’ve stood up for your beliefs, now start serving some kind of purpose. You’re so boring now.

            • Jabster

              Just answer the fecking question aresehole …

            • UrsaMinor

              Perhaps I phrased the question badly. Yes, clearly same-sex marriage is against your religious principles; I totally get that. But you have stated “A lot of Christians do force their beliefs on others. I do not like that. Christians should not be doing that.”

              So let me change the question to “Do you support the right of same-sex couples to marry?” I’m not asking you if you approve of it, I’m just asking whether you are willing to support the rights of a minority whose conception of marriage that differs from your own to wed.

              It really boils down to the second question I asked, which is, do you believe that your religion should have the sole say in defining civil marriage for everyone?

        • Jag

          Christian isn’t a necessary qualifier – no one should be doing it, regardless of religion, or lack thereof.

          The bigger point that you seem to be missing is that you are talking to the wrong audience. Since everyone here seems to completely agree with you on this one point, perhaps you should go tell the Christians?

  • John Monett

    Marriage was created by God, not government. Government should not be redefining marriage. Marriage should remain with the Church.

    • Kodie

      So let your church be the one who defines marriage in it, but not outside it. The government issues rights and benefits bestowed through marriage that should not be kept from anyone else just because your religion condemns it. Your religious beliefs should have no affect on how government determines that two people are qualified for marriage. You are kind of dense, though, I don’t think you’ll understand, then you’ll say something unrelated just to keep hopping around the point and not answer anything.

      • John Monett

        Our rights come from God, not the government.

        • UrsaMinor

          Fine. Have a strictly religious ceremony. Do not get a government marriage license, do not file a government marriage certificate. You will still be married in the eyes of your god.

          • John Monett

            We don’t have a choice in the matter. We have to get a government issued marriage certificate. Otherwise, the marriage will be void.

            • Kodie

              The marriage only matters in god’s eyes, then what regard to you have for whether the government says it’s void?

              I’m tired of trying to get anything through that thick skull of yours.

            • UrsaMinor

              Don’t be deliberate obtuse, John. You know exactly what I mean.

              If your god defines marriage, then your god’s opinion of whether or not your marriage is the only thing that counts. There is no requirement to register a marriage with the government in order for it to be valid with your god.

              You only need to register a marriage with the government if you want secular legal benefits.

    • UrsaMinor

      You don’t really mean that. What you mean is “Government should continue to recognize only my religion’s definition of marriage”.

      And if you truly believe that marriage is defined by your god, why involve government in it at all? Why should the government issue marriage licenses and record marriages and confer a special legal status on married couples? All you have to do is have a religious ceremony that your god approves of, and you are married in the only way that matters.

      But I bet you’re not willing to give up the special legal status that a civil marriage grants.

      • John Monett

        Actually, I do mean that God created marriage, not government.

        • UrsaMinor

          So, you’re going to step completely around the main point?

          You are not sincere. You are clearly not willing to give up the legal benefits of government-recognized civil marriage in favor of a purely religious ceremony that is between you and your god and remains entirely within the church.

          • John Monett

            Religious institutions should be the ones giving the marriage licenses and certificates. The married couple should then go to the government and show the license, so that they can get benefits. But, I will say again that the government should never be issuing marriage licenses and certificates.

            • UrsaMinor

              This will probably surprise you, but this is very much in line with my own opinion on how things should be arranged. The function of the government should be to record marriages for the purposes of establishing the legal status of the couple as married.

              I take it, then, that you are willing to accept that some churches (some calling themselves Christian, others not) will see fit to perform same-sex marriages, and that these same-sex marriages will be recognized under this system?

            • John Monett

              yes.

            • UrsaMinor

              Then we agree on the fundamental civics of the issue. You should not be forced to use my definition of marriage, and I should not be forced to use yours. The government is obligated to impartially recognize both definitions.

      • John Monett

        Government should NOT be issuing marriage licenses at all, to anyone!

        • UrsaMinor

          OK, I saw this after I posted my last comment above.

          Fair enough. No government recognition of marriage. At all. The legal status as it currently stands is abolished.

          You are willing to accept things like married couples:

          - not being recognized as legal kin
          - being required to testify against against each other in court
          - having no say in health care or funeral arrangements
          - having no legal standing to file suit on behalf of the spouse in cases of incapacity or death

          These are just the tip of the iceberg, and may give you a clue as to why the government formally recognizes marriages.

          Now, if no one can have this status, that is fine. It will be awkward, but it least it’s even-handed.

          • John Monett

            If same-sex marriage is going to be called a civil right, will Christians be accused of violating civil rights based on their beliefs? This is a slippery slope.

            • UrsaMinor

              U

            • UrsaMinor

              I’m sorry, that is a complete non-sequitur. We were talking about abolishing government recognition of marriage altogether. I.e., it is no longer a civil right because the status does not exist for anyone.

            • John Monett

              When Gov. Christie vetoed the same-sex marriage bill and said the people should decide, the Democrats said that same-sex marriage is a civil right and that the people should not decide. This is bad for the Christian.

            • Custador

              “Tyrany of the majority”. Google it, tyrant.

            • UrsaMinor

              How is this bad for the Christian? No one is suggesting taking away any rights of Christians. No one is going to force any church to perform any marriage that they don’t approve of. It’s already illegal to do that, and it will remain so. So I ask you, slippery slope to what?

              I find it astonishing how Christians repeatedly and nonsensically equate extending equal rights to homosexuals with persecution of Christians.

            • John Monett

              Some people will try to sue a church, because of their beliefs. It has happened in Iowa. A cake decorator who is Christian refused to make a wedding cake for a same-sex couple, because it was against her beliefs. The same-sex couple is now suing her.

            • John Monett

              Another example, in NJ a Christian school had their tax exemption taken away when they refused to comply with the state’s ruling that the school teach about homosexuality as a viable lifestyle.

          • UrsaMinor

            These are bogeymen that your pastor is trying to scare you with. The Iowa case cannot succeed; the freedom of religion granted by the Federal constitution guarantees it, and it is a waste of everyone’s time.

            In New York, the recent same-sex marriage law specifically shields churches from this sort of lawsuit. Massachusetts law is similar. The cases can’t even get into court. Still scared?

            I simply don’t believe the NJ case as you have stated it. Oh, I’m sure there’s a real lawsuit out there, and that it revolves around the topic of homosexuality, but the details are absurd and sound just like the usual fundamental Christian scare tactic of taking a grain of truth and embellishing on it. A state government requiring a church to teach children that homosexuality is a valid lifestyle? No way that is happening. Give me a break.

            Please provide a link to a relevant news article on the topic.

            • UrsaMinor

              Question for teh Srvr Munkehs: I’m really not this bad at nesting comments in their proper place. Is something weird going on today?

            • John Monett

              The laws in NY and MA are illegal. The government is not allowed to protect one religion over another.

            • John Monett

              My pastor is not scaring me. I saw the news article about that case in Iowa. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/14/iowa-wedding-cake-lesbian-couple_n_1092789.html

            • John Monett

              and my pastor never mentioned the case.

            • John Monett

              Actually, i was mistaken. A Methodist retreat center recently refused to allow two lesbian couples to use a campground pavilion for a civil union ceremony in NJ. The state took away their tax-exempt status because of it.

            • Troutbane

              Wait, I read that article and one attached to it for the same sex couple and the cake. Where did it say the baker was getting sued for refusing them? The couple said they felt humiliated but I didn’t see where they were suing. Please, if you are going to say something and make a link, make sure the link backs up your story.

            • Troutbane

              The thing with the Methodists:
              http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/03/nyregion/03ocean.html?pagewanted=all

              Please note this:
              “Some see an inherent conflict between the association seeking tax-exempt status as a public open space with one state agency while suing another state agency for violating its rights as a private religious group.”

              That is what the lawsuits are about. You cant get money (in this case tax breaks) from the public and then turn around and claim you are wholly a private institution. You take the pay, you play the game. Its actually very simple.

            • John Monett
            • Custador

              As an individual, your biggotry is your own. As a business, it is not. How would it be if that baker refused to sell to a black or interracial couple? Same thing.

            • Troutbane

              If that lawsuit does go through, this will be interesting. On the one hand, it definitely is a civil rights issue, but on the other, it is definitely a religious freedom issue. I think if the baker was advertised as a “Christian” bake shop, she would definitely have a stronger leg to stand on. At the same time, she does provide service to the general public (i.e. she does not work at and for a solely private group such as a country club)
              A somewhat outdated link:
              http://www.legalzoom.com/us-law/equal-rights/right-refuse-service
              For example, if someone was a member of a legitimate religion that refused to serve the disabled or blacks because they truly thought that God had punished those people, would it be a violation of civil rights?
              I am actually of the opinion that individual private business owners do have the right to refuse service for a “legitimate” religious idea, but others may disagree.

            • http://fugodeus.com Nox

              LOL at the “news” categories on LifeSiteNews.

              “Abortion, Bioethics, Contraception, Culture of Life, Euthanasia, Faith, Family, Freedom, Homosexuality, Newsbytes, Politics, Stem Cells, Canada, International, USA”.

              So everyone here already knows John is lying and could easily guess that LSN plays a bit loose with their source, but here’s the original clip from KCCI Des Moines in case anyone wants to see it. It contains the wonderfully illustrative sentence “I didn’t do the cake because of my convictions for their lifestyle”.

            • John Monett

              Then, don’t you see that if same-sex marriage becomes law of the land, some people will use it as a weapon to hurt others?

            • UrsaMinor

              Well, for the sake of argument, let’s take the case of the lesbian couple in Iowa and see what the legal issue is.

              John, as you are no doubt aware, there are laws in this country against discriminating on the basis of religion, outside of churches themselves. The baker in question runs a business, not a church; this means that she is required to comply with non-discrimination laws. She cannot turn people away on the basis of their gender, skin color, national origin or beliefs, among other criteria.

              If you are going to argue that she should have that right outside of a church setting, then I presume that you are okay with having that particular gun pointed at YOUR head some day, when you go to some business whose owner doesn’t like your race/religion/whatever.

              Your assertion that the laws in NY and MA protecting religious organizations from having to deal with homosexual couples (or anyone else they don’t approve) is invalid because it violates the Establishment clause is absurd on the face of it. It applies equally to all religions; the government is not playing favorites here. The law does not say that only Christian churches have right of refusal.

              If you think the law is bad, consider the consequences of not having it. Catholic churches, for example, could then be forced to perform wedding services for a couple consisting of a divorced Catholic whose first marriage the Church had refused to annul, and a Jew or a Muslim or a neopagan or an atheist.

              Any organization that accepts government money operates in the public realm with that money; if they refuse to comply with the laws requiring non-discrimination, they are rightly vulnerable to lawsuits. You cannot expect to have your cake and eat it, too. If you are a religious organization and want the government to give you funding for providing a public service, those are the breaks. If you keep your funding private, then it’s a different story.

            • Troutbane

              Does a diner run by a fundamentalist Mormon have the right to deny patrons who are not in polygamist marriages?
              Could an atheist gay deli owner refuse to serve people who wear crosses around their necks?

              It does not matter whether this marriage or that marriage is legal or not. What matters is can a business that provides a public service deny someone that service because it conflicts with their religion or beliefs? Its interesting that you see it as a hurt whereas others see it as civil rights.

            • UrsaMinor

              Then, don’t you see that if same-sex marriage becomes law of the land, some people will use it as a weapon to hurt others?

              And you don’t see that since same-sex marriage is not the law of the land at the Federal level, people are already using it as a weapon to hurt others? And the instances to date are pretty vile, unless you think it’s perfectly okay to do things like barring a spouse from even talking to a dying partner in the hospital, and then shipping the body off and not allowing them to attend the funeral or even know where the body is buried.

              I’d also like to hear how you think people are going to use same-sex marriage to hurt others. That’s a pretty vague claim.

            • John Monett

              Yes, a business can deny service if it goes against their religious beliefs.

            • Sunny Day

              “The state took away their tax-exempt status because of it.”

              “Every three years since 1989, the association has applied for, and received, tax exemptions for its boardwalk, beach and the pavilion under the Green Acres Program, designed to encourage the use of privately owned lands for public recreation and conservation. This is the first time any part of its application has been turned down.”

              “It is clear that the pavilion is not open to all persons on an equal basis.”

              It sounds like it wasn’t open to the public, no wonder they lost their tax exemption.

            • Sunny Day

              To reiterate Ursa’s question: “I’d also like to hear how you think people are going to use same-sex marriage to hurt others. That’s a pretty vague claim.”

              Or were you just trying to pad your “poor persecuted christian” stock?

            • Troutbane

              Well, John, I actually do agree with you (somewhat) in regards to private business refusal for religious reasons. But understand, that should apply to all: Muslim refusing Jew, Catholic refusing Protestant, or even atheist refusing closeted self-hating gay Christians.
              However, many arguments you are making here are in regard to government and public institutions.

            • Kodie

              in regards to private business refusal for religious reasons.

              Private business such as refusing to hire someone who is qualified for a job except for something your religious beliefs don’t like about them.

              http://www.eeoc.gov/

        • Kodie

          I think you said that already. Round and round? I’m out. It doesn’t mean you win the argument just because you tire everyone out.

        • vorjack

          I don’t want to butt in to someone else’s argument, but it should be pointed out that marriage was a civil matter long before it was a religious matter. Christianity in particular was late coming to the party, since early Christians viewed purity and celibacy as a more holy way of life. After all, Jesus never married.

          Heck, even after the Catholic Church decided to make marriage a sacrament, Luther and Calvin went against them and declared it a civil matter again.

          It seems odd that governments should suddenly be asked to cede the field to Christianity after being the sole guardians of marriage for so long.

          • UrsaMinor

            Well, at least we have established the following. According to John, only his god gets to define marriage. And he’s somehow forced to have it recognized by the government (he hasn’t made it clear if his god will reject the marriage if it isn’t also cleared by the government, or if he just wants the secular benefits of civil marriage). And he want the government out of the marriage definition business so that gets left to the churches. He hasn’t made a definitive statement yet on whether or not the government should recognize marriages that don’t conform to his church’s definition of it.

  • John Monett

    God says that homosexuality is sin. Therefore, as His follower, I cannot support homosexuality and same-sex marriage. However, I believe that homosexuals should be treated with respect. They should not be beaten or killed. They should not be made fun of. They should not be denied jobs, housing, or other essential services for their well-being.

    • Kodie

      But love and sex and raising children is only for straight people, so you are in favor of punishing homosexuals. Your church does not own the definition of “sin” outside its followers.

      • John Monett

        I am not in favor of punishing homosexuals. God is the one who defines sin, not humans.

        • John Monett

          And God will be the One who punishes, not humans.

          • Kodie

            Then you don’t have a conflict about gay marriage, per se. Nobody is making you marry a guy. Keeping gay people from being able to enjoy the legitimacy of a government-issued marriage certificate just like all the straight people is punishing people. You are, your friends are, other Christians are. God isn’t punishing them. God isn’t punishing you. If you let gay people marry, or should I say, not interfere with the prospect that gay marriage will be legalized in the US, it shouldn’t make any difference to you, since nobody is forcing you to like it or to marry someone the same sex as you.

            Do you understand any of this? I feel like you’re just a troll.

            • John Monett

              I do have an objection to gay marriage. I said God says that homosexuality is sin. Therefore, I cannot support it.

            • Kodie

              You don’t have to support it, you just don’t have a right to keep it from happening. God’s not in charge of the government, religion’s not in charge of the government, and the government isn’t stopping you from not liking it, and the government isn’t making you marry a man. If (Christian) people are the ones who are punishing gay people by stopping them from having legal marriage as a right equal to straight people, then god has no action here. I thought you said god was in charge of punishing people and you weren’t allowed to. God doesn’t need you to stop this from happening, he’ll deal with it, that’s what you said.

          • John Monett

            Actually, Christians do have the right to keep same-sex marriage from happening. We have the right to defend ourselves. We live in a democracy. So, yes we do have the right.

            • trj

              Except for the small fact that Christians denying gays to marry is not self-defense.

              None of your rights or privileges are infringed in any way whatsoever by the existence of gay marriage. Only your precious sense of self-righteousness is hurt, which frankly is no big loss to society.

            • John Monett

              We also do not want to see gays go to Hell. That is why we are taking a stand against it. Our battle is not against humans. It is against the Devil and his demons!

            • Kodie

              As soon as the government indulges religious reasons for obstructing certain people, gay people, from having the same rights as straight people to marry, that’s establishment. The way it is now amounts to establishment, the oppositions to gay marriage by the people in many states amounts to establishment, and that’s why it’s slowly getting corrected.

              Your rights to believe aren’t changed at all by this.

            • Kodie

              We also do not want to see gays go to Hell. That is why we are taking a stand against it. Our battle is not against humans. It is against the Devil and his demons!

              That just means you’re deluded and belong in an institution. I’ve seen no devils or demons, just nice happy people who love each other. Don’t inflict your crazy business on everyone else.

            • Sunny Day

              “We also do not want to see gays go to Hell.”

              But you’ve also said that Jesus has forgiven them their sins, also that you don’t sit in judgement of them. It is truly none of your business and are not being harmed by the actions of other people.

              You were also commanded to live your life as an example to others. You cant live as an example if you about barring all other paths to people.

            • UrsaMinor

              John, you do not have even a fifth-grader’s grasp of what the Constitution says and how the United States government works. Your understanding of civics is even shallower.

              And you’re fucking contradicting yourself all over the place.

              I think I’m done here.

            • trj

              Funny, you just said “We live in a democracy”. And yet you want to deny equal rights to a minority.

              You don’t really think very far, do you? You just spew clichés in order to defend your position of privilege, without even realizing how you constantly contradict yourself.

            • Kodie

              It might be worth noting, and I just myself realized this might be why UF has had some weirdly simple-minded traffic, but a lot of kids are on winter break from school this past week.

            • Custador

              I was wondering, particularly about John M. He comes over as a particularly badly educated (home schooled?) twelve year old. He’s most certainly not reading, writing or thinking at an adult level, not even an adult in the Tea Party or a Ron Paul supporter.

            • Jabster

              @Custy

              I think you give adults too much credit … only this week I overheard once person explaining to another the difference between Belgium and Belgian.

            • Len

              Yes – Belgians live in Belgium, just like Christians live in Christium

            • TrickQuestion

              Wait, i thought christium was just a sort of shiny worthless metal that nonetheless people seem to go crazy for…

            • http://themikewrites.blogspot.com JohnMWhite

              This stance makes no sense and appears to be born out of pure spite. Barring certain people from being granted legal rights and protections as the spouse of one another does not defend you, yourself, from anything. Living in a democracy has nothing to do with having the right to control how others live their lives, in fact it has the opposite effect. Do you honestly think that democracy simply means the majority gets to vote for whatever rules and controls for other people they feel like and if they win, that’s democracy in action? And do you really want to follow that through to its logical conclusion? Opinion polls from the last year show that a slim majority of Americans (I’m guessing that’s where you are from) support legalising gay marriage. So if you want to open it up to ‘democracy’, you lose anyway.

              And if you do not want to see gay people go to hell, why aren’t you in Vegas appealing to gamblers, or standing outside cheap motels offering dire warnings to adulterers, or occupying McDonalds’ restaurants to stop people from going to hell for having a cheeseburger? Until I see some consistency in your concern about people going to hell, I’m going to have to conclude you’re just a bigot trying to justify your efforts to hurt people who have done nothing to you.

    • UrsaMinor

      If it were not for the fact that civil marriage is a unique legal status that grants rights and privileges that are not available by any other means, I’d agree with your argument. But the benefits and protections of marriage under our legal system are so substantial, and the consequences of not having those protections so profoundly damaging, that you cannot claim that denying same-sex couples the opportunity to marry is not harming them in any way.

    • Bill

      Where does god say homosexuality is a sin?

      • John Monett

        9 Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men 10 nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.

        1 Corinthians 6:9-10

        13 “‘If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable.

        Leviticus 20:13

        These are the passages in the Bible that discuss that homosexuality is a sin.

        • TrickQuestion

          Everyone knows those are simply allegories and metaphors, not to be taken literally.

          • John Monett

            do you mean everyone, but Christians? The Bible is the Word of God. We take it seriously. You do not.

            • TrickQuestion

              I’m saying that the passages you quoted don’t mean what you think they mean. They’re not meant to be taken literally, but meant to look at the deeper meaning in them. I wouldn’t expect you to really get it, not being a true christian and all.
              BTW, I am currently a registered and practicing minister.So yeah, i kinda have authority here.

            • John Monett

              What do they mean, then?

            • TrickQuestion

              The deeper meaning would be lost on you. I prefer to share it with true believers. Sorry, but you simply don’t qualify for that. i will pray for you , and hopefully one day your understanding of the word will be sufficient to really get the meanings.

            • John Monett

              That does not sound like Jesus at all. Are you sure you follow Him?

            • John Monett

              If you have knowledge from God to help others, you need to share it.

            • TrickQuestion

              I do share it, but only with those who are receptive to it, which you clearly are not. you’re confronting me with doubt and suspicion instead of simply taking what i say to be what god has told me to share with you. Are you doubting god? I am only speaking what he has inspired me to say. I can’t do any more than follow what i am instructed to do.

            • John Monett

              You have not shared with me what this deeper meaning is. Please enlighten me and I will change my beliefs accordingly.

            • TrickQuestion

              I have not been told to do it by the divine will, and as such i can not tell you the deeper meaning, though i know it. Pray on it, and perhaps the lord will see fit to give you the knowledge or to allow me to give it to you. It is not my choice whether i can share it with you or not, i simply have to do what i am instructed to do. I’m very sorry that the lord has not given me permission to share it with you at this time, and i will pray that he does so in the future.

            • John Monett

              WOW!!! I am amazed!!! I thought Jesus wanted to reveal His truth to us? He does, doesn’t He?

            • John Monett

              It must be a secret, then. God is not cold!!! Get thee behind me, Satan!!!

            • Sunny Day

              I believe you TQ.

              I thank you for bringing to me this greater understanding of god.

            • Jabster

              I also believe you TQ … it’s people like John that are the closed minded ones. If you say you have evidence then how dare he call it into question or even expect you to say what that evidence is – sounds like persecution to me.

            • TrickQuestion

              But he IS revealing his truth. You just can’t understand it. I’m sorry but until the lord allows me to share my knowledge with you, then i can’t help you any further. I will pray for you though. It’s the very least i can do.

            • TrickQuestion

              I would note that, honestly, it hurts me to know that children of the lord such as yourself are so out of touch with the holy spirit that you would question what the lord has specifically told me personally to do, what path of action to take. I am offended and hope that in the future you will not mock or belittle my personal connection to the one truth.

        • Bill

          What translation is that?

          • Bill

            http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_sav1.htm

            Because it seems there are a number of translation that are considerable kinder to gay people. Funny how you’ve chosen the one that so explicitly condems them.

            Also, I assume you follow all the other “rules” in Leviticus as well.

            Oh yeah – and pleas prove the bible is the word of god at all.

            • John Monett

              I do not have to prove it to you. That is what faith is all about. Believing without seeing. You should prove the Bible to be the Word of God to yourself.

            • Custador

              John, go away. You’re just spamming now.

            • Bill

              “I do not have to prove it to you. ”

              Well technically this is true. But you came here making certain claims, presumably because you wanted to convince people you were right about those claims. If you want to convince anyone you do have to support or “prove” your claims. If you don’t want to convince anyone, then why the hell are you here?

        • http://www.agnostic-library.com/ma/ PsiCop

          Is there any particular reason that (what you call) the “sins” of other people … which occur in private, out of your sight, unknown to you … should be your concern? What does any of it matter to you?

          My question is a serious one. I want to understand why other people’s private activities are yours to control. I challenge you to explain it.

          And if you want to throw Bible verses around, here are three for you to consider:

          for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God (Rom 3:23)

          You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye. (Mt 7:5)

          But when they persisted in asking Him, He straightened up, and said to them, “He who is without sin among you, let him be the first to throw a stone at her.” (Jn 8:7)

          If it’s true that we are all “sinners”; if it’s further true that each of us needs to cleanse ourselves of sin before trying to cleanse others of sin; and if it’s also true that only those who are without sin are entitled to condemn others for their sins; then doesn’t all of this mean that militant Christians who hate homosexual “sin” are required to just keep their freaking mouths shut and quit bellyaching over it?

          Just asking.

        • dmantis

          After all this time you finally decide to answer what I asked on Feb 22, 11:24am.

          So, please explain your morality which must believe the following:
          -A child is to be killed if he/she curses their parent (Leviticus 20:9)
          -All persons guilty of adultery are to be killed (20:10)
          -The daughter of a priest who engages in prostitution is to be burned alive until dead (21:9)
          -The bride of a priest is to be a virgin (21:13)
          -There should be ritual killing of animals, using cattle, sheep and goats (22:19)
          -A person who takes the Lord’s name in vain is to be killed (24:16)

          Since you believe Leviticus 20:13, you must believe all these other “Laws”. If not, then why are you allowed to pick and choose your morality if it is supposedly based on this ‘holy’ book?

    • Bill

      How old are you John?

  • John Monett

    It is really disturbing that you guys will accuse Christians of being judgmental of others, while at the same time you judge us. An article written by Chuck Colson is being used to mock Christians. It is not right for you to judge the beliefs of others, if you don’t believe in it. Ask yourselves why you think you can sit in judgment over those you disagree with. Are you God? It is amazing to see how many people in here are doing the same thing they accuse Christians of doing!

    • Custador

      What part of “go away and stop spamming” was ambiguous?

    • Kodie

      It’s not fair, it’s not fair!!!! I hated you first, you can’t hate me back!

    • Troutbane

      It sure is unfair of you guys to point out the ridiculous stance that Christians use to try and take away basic rights of their fellow citizens. It’s even worse when you point out the hypocrisy inherent in those same Christian’s beliefs. Shame!

    • UrsaMinor

      When you maintain that it is just and proper to arrogate basic civil rights unto yourself and use those laws to harm people that you disagree with, you’re damned right I’m going to be judgmental of you.

      Anyone who is not your idea of a Good Christian should never, ever turn his back on you, John, lest he find you’ve stuck a knife in him.

    • Bill

      Fundie: “I’m here to announce that I know the absolute word of god, and have been commanded to use it in order to judge people around me. Judgy, judge, judge judge. Gay people are going to hell. Athiseist are going to hell. Non-christians are going to hell. Judgy, judge, judge, judge.”

      UF: “You are wrong. Your basis for believing you know the word of god is flawed. Please prove to us that your are right about this.”

      Fundie: “I will move the goalposts, avoid your questions and just repeat what I’ve already said.”

      UF: “You haven’t answered our questions. Here’s some evidence that shows you are wrong. (Long citation.)”

      Fundie: “Ignore, ignore, ignore. Judge, Judge, Judge some more. Hell, god’s love. Word salad.”

      UF: “Are you even paying attention? You are acting like an idiot. Answer our questions. Take a look at the evidence.”

      Fundie “STOP JUDGING ME! ONLY GOD CAN JUDGE!”

      It would be funny if we didn’t have to deal with these morons so often.

      • Custador

        Yup.

      • UrsaMinor

        Dammit, Bill, why didn’t you just post this first and save us all the effort? You know what suckers we are for engaging fundies honestly, and we get burned for it every time.

        • Bill

          For some reason I have a blind spot at the outset.

          I’m working on it.

          • UrsaMinor

            I think Jabster is the one who sees these things most clearly. :)

            • Jabster

              Well I do try … my fundar is well honed.

            • Bill

              Maybe we should all consult Jabster before engaging in the future?

            • TrickQuestion

              so…it’s come to this.

            • Kodie

              :) at TQ.

    • trj

      It is not right for you to judge the beliefs of others, if you don’t believe in it. Ask yourselves why you think you can sit in judgment over those you disagree with. Are you God?

      Actually, it’s entirely appropriate for us to judge your beliefs when they have a large impact on other people’s lives. Why the hell wouldn’t it be? One doesn’t have to be God to see how your bigoted views cause harm to others – and yourself, for that matter.

      If you don’t want to be judged to be a narrow-minded bigot, don’t fucking act like one. Your religion doesn’t entitle you to win automatic respect or even tolerance of your views, hard as that may be for you to understand. Grow up and stop your ridiculously demands for special treatment of your opinions.

    • Sunny Day

      I’ll explain and I’ll use small words so that you’ll be sure to understand, you warthog faced buffoon.
      We do not have a holy book that tells us not judge others. In fact, you pig, our beliefs derive entirely from judgement.
      What that means, you miserable vomitious mass, we base our decisions on the evidence provided.

      That you’ve been on this site for so long and not come to understand this is further evidence of your imbecility.

      Go the Fuck Away.

  • John Monett

    You guys so angry and judgmental against those who even have a belief!!! You have no right to judge!!! Stop being hypocrites!!! Stop behaving like the people you accuse!!! I question your sincerity!

    • UrsaMinor

      Wrong again, John. I challenge you to find anywhere in these comments where I have questioned your religious beliefs.

      They are not the issue. Go, worship the god of your choice. Marry the person of your choice. All I’m asking for is the right to do the same.

      Giving someone else equal rights does not infringe on your rights or take anything away from you. This is what you don’t get.

      So if you’re going to continue to assert, in a country whose constitution fundamentally guarantees religious freedom for all, that other people MUST abide by the rules of YOUR religion, you can fuck off.

      Why do you oppose America’s religious freedoms so much, John?

      • Sunny Day

        He’s just trying to save you from hell Ursa.

        But how shithead-John Monett would know that without judging you is anybody’s guess.

        I have every right to judge. I live on this world and your hurtful actions affect me and others around me.

        If I had a magic book that commanded me not to judge people and I took steps to constrain the actions of others based on my beliefs that would make me a hypocrite.

        However you feculent slime, pointing out your hypocrisy doesn’t.

        • UrsaMinor

          Save me from hell? Oh, please! I’m damned by every major religion but Buddhism.

          It never fails to astound me how fundies manage to construe “freedom of religion” as “Wow, that means MY religion gets to call all the shots”.

          I am absolutely certain that John would be violently opposed to the idea of one religion being the basis of all secular laws if it weren’t his particular religion.

          • Sunny Day

            Oh, please! I’m damned by every major religion but Buddhism.

            Showoff :)

          • Elemenope

            I was under the impression that most branches of Buddhism were relatively intolerant of homosexuality too, just not to the same extent as the Western faiths.

            Unless your point is that Buddhism doesn’t generally contain the concept of damnation.

            • UrsaMinor

              Yes, at worst the Buddhists disapprove of my behavior in this life, and entertain the possibility that I will get better in a future one. I think it is very similar to their take on drunkenness.

              It is definitely not the same thing as being damned to torture for all eternity.

            • Kodie

              At best guest, Buddhism concerns homosexuality as a state of being that isn’t quite perfected as heterosexuality is, in the same way society has the white male heterosexual as the default person while anyone who deviates from one or more of those aspects isn’t quite ideal and needs to be specifically denoted. An example of this would be to say something like “gay marriage,” while no one says “heterosexual marriage,” they just say “marriage.” Marriage is marriage no matter who marries whom, but plainly stated “marriage” invokes thoughts of a man and a woman, as a default. Without noting the details, I can only assume that most faiths of reincarnation consider man-woman the only valid pairing and anything else is “less” that hasn’t got it quite right but they have future lives to work it out until they do measure up to the ideal. It’s not exactly derogatory and exclusionary in the typical (Christian) way, but it’s still derogatory and exclusionary in the sense that it’s not yet reached it’s ideal and it gives extra chances.

            • Elemenope

              @ Ursa and Kodie

              Thanks for the info and clarifications. :)

            • UrsaMinor

              Just for the record, when people ask, I tell them I’m “married”, not “gay-married”.

              My latest victim was a medical receptionist. Apparently she couldn’t quite grasp the meaning of the word “husband” on my insurance form. I made my point by giving her the finger- the one with the wedding ring on it. She got my drift.

              UrsaMinor, Inc: Confounding the expectations of the unthinking majority on marriage since 2011.

    • Bill

      Why do you hate America?

    • Kodie

      You question our… sincerity? Who is using all the exclamation points – that’s the devil’s punctuation mark. I don’t find it hypocritical to want you to keep your religious freedom out of my religious freedom.

      • dmantis

        hey, thats not fair…i like exclamation points and i’m sincere…but i do like the devil………………..wait, what……nevermind.

    • Custador

      You know what? That’s quite enough of your bizarre self-flagellation style troll-spam. Goodbye John.

      Can we move on from the swamp of a discussion this arsehole has created and talk about something worthwhile instead now, please?

      • UrsaMinor

        May I suggest some worthwhile topics?

        Beer
        Sex
        Chocolate
        Bacon

        And my personal favorite:

        The Fact That I’m Legally Married Despite the Attempts of People Like John To Prevent It (Neener, neener!)

      • Jabster

        … ah? What did you do that for. I was just warming to John.

        • Custador

          Oh Jabster! For a second there I thought you were being serious!

  • Nzo

    Is that a threat?

    • Nzo

      err… that was quick srvr munkehs… le threat post eez gon!

      • Custador

        Sorry, Nzo! I assumed it was a spam comment from a bot because it was so silly, so I spammed it. Then I realised it was John Monnet sock-puppeteering. Which really didn’t motivate me to put the comment back, since he’s already been banhammered for spamming.

        Edit: In case anybody was wondering, the comment said something like “You all need to be careful because the people you’ve been bad-mouthing could sue you”, or words to that effect.

        • Nzo

          No worries

    • Kodie

      I think it was just supposed to scare us enough not to say mean things, although I’ve been threatened with legal action for things I’ve said on the internet before!

      • Custador

        With hindsight, I’d put the comment back if I hadn’t already emptied the spam bin – It’s worth the space just because it’s so laughable. Damn my pessimistic assumption that ridiculously out of place comment = bot!

    • UrsaMinor

      Meh. I’d already forgotten about him. When they all make the same arguments, they kind of blur together anyway.

      • Kodie

        I don’t know why anyone thinks it’s a good idea to use their real name on the internet, but legal threats seem to be a last resort when someone doesn’t have a good argument and wants people on a site he/she voluntarily visited to be censored from opinions about that person’s character. Butt-hurt over being banned or ignored or protecting their own incendiary comments while complaining about others’, it goes hand in hand with the concept of crying about being censored (i.e. persecuted) on a blog or forum: make a sock puppet -> threaten people with legal action.

        Or: make a sock puppet and tell us how you really feel.
        Or: make a sock puppet and actually believe people think you’re a different person who independently arrived and supports the person who was banned or called out.
        Or: make a sock puppet whose name insults the reg who angered you the most.

        None of these take the place of presenting logic and evidence, but make the troll feel more empowered, sorry them. It’s really pathetic – @unicorn.

  • John Monett

    i say that gays should be allowed to marry legally. Christians don’t have a right to judge non-believers.

    • Nox

      An interesting bit of progress.

      • John Monett

        It’s not progress. I love people.

        • Fred

          I love people too.
          I just can’t eat a whole one.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X