tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post1032027443751267681..comments2023-09-24T07:53:50.826-05:00Comments on The Atheist Experience™: Catholics Aren't Anti-Gay?Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger92125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-3659989909040996602011-06-06T09:38:55.761-05:002011-06-06T09:38:55.761-05:00Tracieh, big pat on the back for your courage in p...Tracieh, big pat on the back for your courage in playing the race card against Vassilis. I'm not saying that dirty trick aren't allowed in debate. Usually they're at least half the fun! But when backed up with your act of breathless outrage... I learned some good tactics from you.Shadebursthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18066906664008027838noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-71004053875847822632010-07-27T19:14:51.323-05:002010-07-27T19:14:51.323-05:00"By his lack of comments I presume that the g..."By his lack of comments I presume that the guy has read the research I found and changed his mind."<br /><br />Ya, that's the most probable scenario.....*rolls eyes*<br /><br />;)<br /><br />I think we lnow the more likely outcome.<br /><br /> "You know the one thing that always annoys me when the topic of religion/God and homosexuality comes up is this whole BS about sex and marriage being solely for the means of procreation."<br /><br />Which is why pope ratface is always speaking out against sterile people marryi- oh, wait..magx01https://www.blogger.com/profile/14831638782847911405noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-82624071961109789132010-07-27T18:06:29.694-05:002010-07-27T18:06:29.694-05:00You know the one thing that always annoys me when ...You know the one thing that always annoys me when the topic of religion/God and homosexuality comes up is this whole BS about sex and marriage being solely for the means of procreation I mean if that’s how they really feel then why is promiscuity bad. <br /><br />Also if sex is only redeemed due to the sole aim of popping out a kid why not remove sex altogether and have couples use artificial insemination to avoid that whole sinful evil sex thing, I wonder how many would go for that and what they would come up with to get out of it?adamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04608250873440389331noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-66951851856824328422010-07-25T21:36:32.261-05:002010-07-25T21:36:32.261-05:00By his lack of comments I presume that the guy has...By his lack of comments I presume that the guy has read the research I found and changed his mind.Inghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13024689390434414829noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-72999053214609496742010-07-23T13:06:38.311-05:002010-07-23T13:06:38.311-05:00@ Ing: You're right, that was an unfortunate g...@ Ing: You're right, that was an unfortunate generalization on my part. Of course I recognize that fact. I was just frustrated, and failed to qualify the statement by prefacing it with the word dogmatic.<br /><br />Who gets to revoke the cards, btw? Is there, like, a governing body? <br /><br />;)magx01https://www.blogger.com/profile/14831638782847911405noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-10179582407676780512010-07-23T09:27:27.125-05:002010-07-23T09:27:27.125-05:00MagXo1
Careful there, you might get your skeptic ...MagXo1<br /><br />Careful there, you might get your skeptic card revoked. <br /><br />I know theists who don't sound like him. He sounds not like a theist but like a dogmatic assholeInghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13024689390434414829noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-7567971279689883272010-07-23T09:26:04.065-05:002010-07-23T09:26:04.065-05:00Hey why don't we take away all poor children f...Hey why don't we take away all poor children from their parents and give them to rich parents who can better afford to support them! The children's rights come first and life isn't fair.<br /><br /><br />On a side note, I've found that any time someone says "But life isn't fair" it's often followed by an unspoken "And by damn I'm gonna keep it that way"Inghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13024689390434414829noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-85367594876553414342010-07-23T08:16:36.213-05:002010-07-23T08:16:36.213-05:00@JT
I entirely agree about children having fewer ...@JT<br /><br />I entirely agree about children having fewer rights than adults, and rightly so. Perhaps the point should have been parents (or legal guardians) have fewer rights than the rest of us as they have an added responsibility.March Harehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13116034158087704885noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-65469329270832454142010-07-23T07:38:27.029-05:002010-07-23T07:38:27.029-05:00Children's rights are more important than adul...Children's rights are more important than adults'?<br /><br />That is so laughably reversed from reality. I would LOVE it if children had first amendment rights. Children then couldn't be <b>forced</b> into a religion by their parents.<br /><br />As an adult, no one can force me into one. The only people who <i>could</i> have the power to do so are restricted by the constitution.<br /><br />Shouldn't children have the right to be free from oppression, have free access to information and public education? Parents have an incredible amount of power of children to effectively ruin their lives - legally.JThttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08881036419280903737noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-87972274662356918222010-07-23T03:08:20.726-05:002010-07-23T03:08:20.726-05:00Do you have proof that there is no harm done to th...<i>Do you have proof that there is no harm done to their mental state by being adopted by gay couples?</i><br /><br />Fail.<br /><br />Burden shifting. <br /><br />You sound like a theist.magx01https://www.blogger.com/profile/14831638782847911405noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-4326481878747626722010-07-22T23:02:45.258-05:002010-07-22T23:02:45.258-05:00This comment has been removed by the author.Inghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13024689390434414829noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-2998757737618277752010-07-22T23:00:32.984-05:002010-07-22T23:00:32.984-05:00"Tracieh, Jeremiah, that is EXACTLY my point...."Tracieh, Jeremiah, that is EXACTLY my point. Children have rights too. And their rigths are more important than the rights of adult people. Simple as that. Do you have proof that there is no harm done to their mental state by being adopted by gay couples? I would be very very glad to hear that. Otherwise..."<br /><br />Ok are you blind as well as dumb? It's double posted just a few studies I found using some magic we geeks like to call "google". The fact that I could find the sources and consensus in two seconds shows you don't really CARE about the data. You're a prick and continue to hide your assholeness by pretending not to see the evidence even when its shoved under your nose. Granted I imagine it's hard to see over that shnoz when it's shoved so high in the air. <br /><br />Again let me spell it out for you in bullet points. I'll use small words so you can follow<br /><br />1) You start, by your own admission from Tabula Rosa, blank slate. You know nothing about the subject<br />2) You did NO research. None. Zip<br />3) You conclude that gays have a good chance of being dangerous to kids<br />4) you provide no way that will happen? Lets be honest. You think they'll rape the kids. Don't pretend we all know that bullshit.<br />5) You demand to see the evidence prooving you wrong<br />6) you would use your ignorance as the excuse to take away someone else's rights<br />7) I was going to put "fuck you" here but I promised not to be as big an asshole the last time this topic popped up /huckabeeism<br />8) You claim to have gay friends. I dare you to tell them what you think of them. See how many friends you keep<br />9) You claim to be doing this for the children. Do you really give a shit? Do you volunteer for orphans? Do a big brother program? Work in social services? Seriously? Or is your advocacy of children's limited only to the gay issue?<br />10) Changed my mind, fuck you.<br /><br />continuedInghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13024689390434414829noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-73189841877072265452010-07-22T23:00:00.631-05:002010-07-22T23:00:00.631-05:00Can I dual class it with the Jester class in order...Can I dual class it with the Jester class in order to hide my lack og knowledge? ;) "<br /><br />Why not, i believe it's what Penn does. *Rim shot*<br /><br />In all seriousness, I joke on him and March I'm that hostile. I just think March picked perhaps a hilariously bad example. <br /><br /><br />Now onto people I DON'T like. <br /><br /><br />"To give you an example, in an ideal world, children wouldn't be harmed by others simply because their parents aren't the norm. However we do not live in an ideal world and such notions only hurt the first ones to try them out if we are not careful. Being careful is the only thing I am talking about. Can't you get that without thinking about Human rights and (admittedly fine and worthy) general ideas"<br /><br />I have a family friend who is close to being like an aunt. She's also a quadriplegic. She has two kids, conceived and raised after she was crippled. You sound a lot like the fuckwits who would take her kids away. <br /><br />My SO was raised by a single mother. You sound like the fuckwits who would have taken her away from a good mother. <br /><br />I think you need to consider and replace gay with "Blind, Handicaped, or crippled" and see if you'd still agree.Inghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13024689390434414829noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-20947853072104619632010-07-22T22:54:37.653-05:002010-07-22T22:54:37.653-05:00This comment has been removed by the author.Inghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13024689390434414829noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-42968606478639244662010-07-22T18:36:54.936-05:002010-07-22T18:36:54.936-05:00There are lots of *very* bad parents around straig...There are lots of *very* bad parents around straight or otherwise. Any "ill effects of having gay parents" would *certainly* be insignificant compared to statistical noise in parent "quality" in general.<br /><br /><br />The only problem that the kids could have is bigotry by other kids and I really don't think that problems with bigotry will be solved with more bigotry.<br /><br /><br />And anyway, I believe this really is a non-issue in practical terms: if the option is foster care or orphanage(argh!!!) the gay parents would have to be very very nasty for the kid's situation to be any worse - the parents sexual orientation would be totally irrelevant to the nastiness. Continuing on this same line of thought while bigotry is still common, children would be awarded first to "common" couples: gay couples would be chosen to adopt last, until this sort of bigotry is not accepted and therefore even Christians (and other religious people) shouldn't worry too much about this issue.durrutihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00323553386420016974noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-10282443722455817342010-07-22T18:34:53.105-05:002010-07-22T18:34:53.105-05:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.durrutihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00323553386420016974noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-55438310583595687492010-07-22T18:02:39.929-05:002010-07-22T18:02:39.929-05:00Um, people are not animals? I sense a chasm growi...Um, people are not animals? I sense a chasm growing between our two realities because in mine people are indeed animals.<br /><br />Again, the studies you have asked for showing no harm to the mental state of children has been provided. You just don't seem interested in reading them so I will briefly quote one for you here:<br /><br />"Children raised by same-sex couples appear to do as well as those raised by parents of both sexes, suggests an international research review that challenges the long-ingrained belief that children need male and female parents for healthy adjustment.<br /><br />"It's more about the quality of the parenting than the gender of the parents," says Judith Stacey of New York University, co-author of the comprehensive review. It will be published Friday in the Journal of Marriage and Family."<br /><br />Secondly, you keep asking for scientific evidence (which has been provided) but where is your scientific evidence for your blanket assertion that gay parents cause some mental harm? How can you make that claim without any proof? I look forward to you providing the study that shows that kids raised by gay people turn out to be maladjusted sociopaths. <br /><br />You can't say that the rights of those children are being violated unless you can prove that some additional harm is coming to them by virtue of homosexual parents. You make a big deal out of, "oh we got to protect the kids" without ever showing us what the harm is that they need to be protected from. So yeah, children have rights, but you haven't demonstrated that their rights have been compromised in any way by being in a gay household. In the end all you are trying to do is dress up a bias against homosexuals in some faux nobility that you are only looking out for the welfare of the poor undefended kids. It isn't compassion, it is an emotional gimmick.Jeremiahhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06977623156609966553noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-25937866807805476232010-07-22T17:00:06.764-05:002010-07-22T17:00:06.764-05:00Vassilis listen to shockofgod and his ridiculous q...Vassilis listen to shockofgod and his ridiculous question: "What proof and evidence do you have that atheism is accurate and correct?". That's exactly how you sound.Petr Kudláčekhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13815604888905970321noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-14998085479641862402010-07-22T16:42:16.105-05:002010-07-22T16:42:16.105-05:00Vassilis:
Also, I neglected to add this:
>Do ...Vassilis:<br /><br />Also, I neglected to add this:<br /><br />>Do you have proof that there is no harm done to their mental state by being adopted by gay couples? I would be very very glad to hear that.<br /><br />Ing answered this earlier, I assume you missed it:<br /><br />http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2010-01-21-parentgender21_ST_N.htm<br /><br />http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=1907673<br /><br />in fact they may do BETTER<br /><br />http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1994480,00.htmlAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-15647544941780221702010-07-22T16:40:44.550-05:002010-07-22T16:40:44.550-05:00>Do you have proof that there is no harm done t...>Do you have proof that there is no harm done to their mental state by being adopted by gay couples? <<br /><br />This question encapsulates exactly the flaw in your entire line of reasoning (AKA the Shifting of the Burden of Proof) - it's based on a completely unfounded presupposition, namely, that gay parenting involves some kind of hazard to the child to begin with. <br /><br />So you're not even asking a coherent question.<br /><br />In fact, were it not the case that your underlying assumptions were simple bigotry your question would be exactly like asking how many angels can dance on the head of a pin or how many bottles would it require to bottle up all the light in your room.<br /><br />We can disregard your question for the same reason we do these others.<br /><br />>Homosexuality might be a normal human condition but it is not the norm....BUT it is not exactly the same as a straight couple.<<br /><br />How do you know these things? By what metrics have you made these determinations? What rigor has your theory here been subjected to? How robust is your result? I think I'll stop reading your comments here because you're already way off in the weeds with a bunch of unsubstantiated claims about gay couples and child rearing.<br /><br />See how it works? <br /><br />Again, we don't just take any Joe Blow's word for it when he starts making a lot of value/moral judgments and claims. We stop there and wait until JB substantiates those claims before we allow any moves to be made against his intended victims.<br /><br />Sorry, but the ball is still in your court.<br /><br />LSlshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17901508236729383702noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-67047452497411918552010-07-22T15:45:03.314-05:002010-07-22T15:45:03.314-05:00Vassilis:
>Do you have proof that there is no ...Vassilis:<br /><br />>Do you have proof that there is no harm done to their mental state by being adopted by gay couples? I would be very very glad to hear that. Otherwise...<br /><br />Otherwise WHAT? If I claim people who are left-handed will harm kids if they raise them…you think that’s sufficient to stop left-handed people from adoption? Unfounded accusations are not “reasons” to move forward with treating people differently under the law. The person making the claim must prove the claim: “Gays harm kids.” Nobody should believe an unfounded accusation until it’s been demonstrated. You clearly don’t understand burden of proof. You’re arguing like a theist.<br /><br />>Homosexuality might be a normal state for animals, but humans are not animals.<br /><br />Yes, humans ARE animals. Do you not understand basic biology?<br /><br />>Homosexuality might be a normal human condition but it is not the norm<br /><br />It is normal. It’s uncommon—such as being left handed. Why is that a problem?<br /><br />>So, yes, in every other aspect of life, homosexuals should not be treated differently from any other person.<br /><br />In any aspect of LAW they should be treated equally. We don’t treat people differently under the law for being in a minority. Left-handed, blue-eyed, gay, under 5-feet…it doesn’t matter. We don’t discriminate for irrelevant reasons. Do you think left-handed people are a threat to children?<br /><br />>Why? Because as I said, life isn't fair.<br /><br />Thankfully in the U.S., it is required to be fair in any area under the law. And saying sometimes people are biased and prejudice isn’t any sort of support for claiming it should be endorsed as being so. I can say sometimes people are abused. It surely happens. But I don’t think that’s an argument in support of abusing people.<br /><br />>I prefer to watch out for the rights of the children first.<br /><br />This has NOTHING to do with the safety of children. Please stop pretending that just because no one else on the list is an open bigot that we don’t care if children are harmed. I’m no more harming kids by saying left-handed people should not be discriminated against in adoption courts than gays. You have NO reason to think gay people will be harmful parents. So, saying gays should be treated equally in adoption courts in no way puts kids at risk. The only question is should we prejudicially discriminate against potential adoptive parents for NO reason other than unsupported bigotry. And I would hope the answer would be “no.”<br /><br />>children wouldn't be harmed by others simply because their parents aren't the norm.<br /><br />Now you’re blaming gays for homophobes. Where the homophobe creates the problem, the homophobe should be punished, NOT the victim. Again, it was once the case that interracial couples were treated in a discriminating fashion with regard to adoption—because of racists. True, racists existed and would be rude to kids in interracial homes. But your solution is to punish the couple, not the racists? Educate society not to be assholes—don’t support the assholes.<br /><br />>However we do not live in an ideal world<br /><br />Agreed. But you would give kids the message that bigotry and prejudice is right. Teaching them that we should bend to the will of racists or homophobes is totally the WRONG message to give to kids.<br /><br />>Being careful is the only thing I am talking about.<br /><br />No, you’re talking about supporting biased, prejudicial, bigoted fear-based irrational social policy.<br /><br />>Can't you get that without thinking about Human rights and (admittedly fine and worthy) general ideas<br /><br />We had a Civil War in the U.S. After that, we still didn’t “get it.” We then had Civil Rights movements where racists argued exactly as you’re doing now. It was wrong then, it’s wrong now. Asking people to let their rights be UNFAIRLY infringed due to wishing to appease bigots is the WRONG solution.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-23148815871577963072010-07-22T15:44:59.529-05:002010-07-22T15:44:59.529-05:00This comment has been removed by the author.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-73808200587165739192010-07-22T15:37:37.595-05:002010-07-22T15:37:37.595-05:00This comment has been removed by the author.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-19660090733717134202010-07-22T15:37:29.920-05:002010-07-22T15:37:29.920-05:00This comment has been removed by the author.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-55024845865766636242010-07-22T15:36:44.462-05:002010-07-22T15:36:44.462-05:00This comment has been removed by the author.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com