One way religions can improve their standing

The widely accepted belief systems of Christianity, Hinduism, Islam, Judaism, Mitt-Romneyism, etc., etc. in their texts say (or at least imply) to kill great people like Ellen Degeneres, Rock Hudson, Elton John, Jane Lynch, etc., for no logical/fair reason.
Quite savage, really.

The Nazis also said to kill these type of people, so their prophet/god(s) are clearly as bad as the Nazis. Unless of course people of those faiths will condemn their prophet/god(s) for this atrocity.

Jesus will allegedly help you do well in something as trivial as the big softball game today (if a Christian prays to him), but in about 2000 years of his existence, he has steadfastly REFUSED to come down and tell us all definitively that "the main book associated with me got it wrong, so stop associating me with the slaughtering of innocent homosexuals!" That's because he doesn't exit, or he's immoral. In either case you wouldn't want to worship him, of course.

By unequivocally condemning your religion's text that teach to slaughter homosexuals, you'll be increasing it's standing in the world. Will you do that?

 

how about do what is right, no matter which text people whole?

grind right and wrong to life. What you do (actions you can cause to exist) are what is your defining atribute.

Try the rules:

good: support life to continue

bad: loss to the common

and then you measure what YOU will do!


Screw the old books as being the measuring stick!

will you do that?

make a choice!

 

I agree.
But what about the Christians/Muslims/Jews who don't harm LGBT at all themselves, but who give their own children a book that says to slaughter LGBT, and claim that it's the greatest book of all time?
They give their own children a book that, astonishingly, says to slaughter roughly 300 million people (because this is the number of people who are estimated to be LGBT in the world.) Are they "evil"?

What's your take on that?

 

What makes these people great? Does the fact that they are gay imply they are great?

The Nazis wanted to kill many kinds of people including other Christians, Jews, and so on.

Your argument against the existence of Jesus is illogical. Just because he hasn't revealed himself in a 2nd Coming doesn't mean he doesn't exist. Some atheists are so (*)(*)(*)(*)ed arrogant its slightly disturbing they can even function.

 

No one is killing homosexuals. This thread is pointless.

 

KSig: a compassionate entity, who can allegedly hear our private thoughts, act on prayers, etc. wouldn't sit by while horrific atrocities (killing gays because the belief system that bares his very name teaches that) are committed in his belief system's name. So either he doesn't exist or he's immoral. So he shouldn't be worshipped.

I think ALL people are great, in at least some ways. The Christian assumption is that all people are "sinners" (ie not great, it can be argued.) A clear distinction between SecHumanism and Jesus.

Don't you think those people are great, in at least some ways? Or do you feel that Christianity is correct, and we should slaughter them, because people who believed in talking donkeys told us to, with no proof/reasons?

To quote you: "The Nazis wanted to kill many kinds of people including [...] Jews, and so on." So it sounds like the Nazis are no worse than Jesus, as Jesus is perfectly fine with seeing that those same Jews (and Hindus, Bhuddists, me, Mother Teresa if she converted to Islam right before she died, etc.) get horrifically tortured forever for simply using their logic and not blindly worshiping him. Jesus was clearly not compassionate, then. He's arguably as bad as the Nazis.

 

So people have to be KILLED for a wrong to exist? Your moral threshold is low...real low, apparently?

They are being killed, as we speak, by followers of at least one of the Abrahamic faiths.
"Homosexuality is punishable by death in Iran, Mauritania, Saudi Arabia, Sudan and Yemen. In Malaysia, the Homosexual can be put in prison for 20 years. "
http://www.well.com/user/queerjhd/sxislamictreatment.htm

A homosexual is no less moral than you are (assuming you are a heterosexual.) Except in the twisted minds of Jesus/Mohammad/Moses, etc.

Can you say the Bible is wrong for saying to kill Elton John? It would seem that you can't? It's good to take a moral stand, by the way.

 

Yes, it's pointless to people who have as little compassion towards gays as Jesus did.

The norm for his time was to kill homosexuals, yet despite being a self-proclaimed moral teacher, Jesus never spoke out in favor of treating them equally. He went fishing, made a chair, spoke rudely to his own mother, threatened most people (most of the world has always been non-Christian) with eternal hell-fire, approved of slavery, was racist (said he was only there to help one specific group - the Israelites), but never, not once said the norm was wrong. A five-year old can see that it's wrong, but not Jesus.
To a Secular Humanist Jesus was clearly immoral.

 

So you're completely fine with teaching to kill innocent people, just as long as currently no one actually acts upon that advice?

The HATRED that most religions teach is a good enough reason to leave religions, not just the ACTS that that hatred might or might not cause. At least a moral person would subscribe to this thinking, no?

 

But no one is trying to kill gays. They're free to go to any gay bar and have all the meaningless, anonymous sex in a bathroom stall they want. You even have TV shows glamorizing the gay lifestyle and recruiting our youth. What more do you want? When will the demands ever end?

 

Reading between the lines, you clearly, clearly think that the Bible is correct when it says to kill them. Can you say the Bible is wrong in this regard? Please don't dodge this question. If you can't make that moral stand (saying that the Bible is wrong to teach to kill gays), then your belief system is inferior (morally at least) to Secular Humanism.

The Bible teaching to kill gays is warped, morally, as much as the Qur'an teaching to kill all the Jews (to usher in the end-of-days), or Mitt Romney's religion actually teaching that black people are inferior to white people.

 

Then say the Bible is clearly wrong, as (apparently) no one is following it, because they believe it's horrifically wrong on this issue.

Which is true?:
a. the Bible is correct, so therefore we should kill homosexuals, or
b. the Bible is NOT correct, in which case we obviously should go down it verse by verse and (if we care about our children) remove the incorrect parts, before we give it to our impressionable children who we love dearly.

 

This is America, so you have the right to edit the Bible as you please and publish your own version. I will congratulate you if you make money in that enterprise.

 

You're telling people to rebel against their god to satisfy you. How successful do you think that's really going to be?

 

just impose to the self delusional gang that they can like what ever they want but if found to lie to another human being, they will be judged quite harshly.

eventually, they will go extinct; same sex intercourse dont procreate

if 5 billion lie and mislead, then 'kill em all' (personally, i like giving folk a chance to change their ways but upon denial................. no quarter)

liking the same sexed person is not bad, but lying to others that it is normal to have sex with the same sex is lying.

just as telling children that the 'holy' book is the 'word of god' .... is wrong.

So bundle'em all up together; lying is for dying.

'seek -n- destroy'

Soon we can 'eat' people!

 

i can go with b

kind of like, teaching a kid that being gay is normal is just stupid!

ie... the life is doing what is natural!

 

denying theology is not denying 'god'.

stepping on the beliefs is what truth, enables!

ie.... truth destroys ignorance.


It is going to get far uglier before the world gets better.

 

Not to someone who does not believe the bible or quran is the word of god, no. To the people you're asking this of, at least a portion of them, do believe as much, and what you're asking is for them to decide between having god or you think less of them. Guess who's going to win that battle.

Maybe a better way would be to show that the holy book in question has more than one possible interpretation and introduce the believer to those alternate possibilities and let them work their way through it.

Matter of fact, if you want the truth to win the day, that's pretty much the way you're going to have to go about it. Attacking their belief is only going to result in them defending it more fiercely.

 

reality.

i could care less who believes me.

I prefer that each see for themselves and grow up.

ie.... the individual lives of the people, within mankind, has increased exponentially because of knowledge and science, the religious adherance have been the underpinning of oppresson on the earth. For example; if the religious had not controlled knowledge for so much of history, mankind could perhaps be vacationing on the moon by now.

open a thread on that and choose a topic.

My example would be: Why do people maintain religious belief? And the primary reason (within) each is for a 'longer' life.

but then to teach each what life is and how to live longer, that each can comprehend and understand and watch how 'true destroys ignorance' or to get biblical, it is what being 'born again' is all about. (the life comprehending what it is and how to live forever)

in a sense, i agree

and why i prefer sharing information than slapping idiots around

but then again, i find to address the liars, i learn how the lies are held and how to address the liars in debate.

i am learning how to deal with the swine and in doing so, many others can observe it as well.

 

Not to discourage you, but you're probably going to have a much easier time in your pursuits if you stop referring to the people you disagree with as idiots, liars and swine.

 

I think Jesus put to rest the idea we are supposed to stone people to death when he said, "Let he who has not sinned throw the first stone."

Does that part of the Bible count for the OP?

Seems to me he's picking and choosing.

 

The funny thing with Christians and homosexuality that I note is how some will say that all of our sins were paid for in blood by the sacrifice sort of giving them a free pass to basically ignore the OT, and yet they cling to certain parts like the homosexuality being an abomination. Those same ones may also come with the quaint notion of 'hate the sin, love the sinner', but it never seems to be evident when they deal with someone who's gay, or if there is a display it looks as phony as the day is long.

We do have in the one book Jesus warning about casting the first stone and not judging others lest we be judged ourselves. Sadly, there's also the bit in Matthew about how he didn't come to change the old laws but uphold them and whoever considers them least will they themselves be considered least in Heaven. Maybe Jesus was a consistent guy in his teachings- unfortunately his public relations people don't make a good case for that.

 

I like judging.

And i like people to see how it works and how absolute it is.

You can judge too!

but to false witness aint good so be wary wary careful!

 

big difference

that is adultery.


ie... if she did so to sedduce a married man and take the man from his loyalty to his wife, then she has a liability but if she is seeking a child, then life is doing its duty.

Jesus was leaning on forgiveness and all can do both, judge and forgive.

Forgiving is the greatest but likewise lying is the worst.

bible has lots of lessons but you need to keep your head to judge the situation and there in 'of witness'

i judge what i experience

and boy do i hate what liars do

we all do that

 

Lol, I guess you think people go out and recruit people for the heterosexual lifestyle? I didn't know people needed to be recruited into their sexuality.