Hypocrites?!

I'm saying, depending on the reason, condemning religion while advocating gay rights CAN be hypocritical.

If you say I "I advocate rights, so I advocate gay rights" then condemn religion, that's hypocritical reasoning.

However, if I say "I advocate things that don't harm others, so I advocate gay rights" I can condemn religion without violating my previous statement.

i think we should always look in other peoples perspective. you know, understanding someone and asking why do they do this? what can they get? Does it REALLY effect me?

i mean i'm religious and i don't go walking around cursing gay people out. instead i befriended some(i'm till friends with some today)and talked to them, tried to understand what it really was for them and in the end of the day i realized we are all just humans. we should support each other! you don't have to turn gay or accept it to be right however i believe we should not push each other down because the other doesn't like what the other one is or does.

that goes for both sides. everyone looks at religious people like monsters or freaks now a days and way back when, religious people viewed gay people like monsters or freaks. someone has to be the bigger person or this hate will become a never ending cycle of hate until one crushes the other and even then a new will just take its place.
it has happened millions of times.

"Because you're not supposed not hate one thing, you shouldn't hate anything! Otherwise you'll get a never ending cycle of hate!"

Baloney.

There are things that should be ridiculed. Bottom line. Like you said, gay people are just humans; they're born that way, can't help it, and don't harm others because of it. Religion though? Unlike homosexuality, it's a choice, and it degrades society for reasons I've already posted. It's not that I "hate" religion on a personal level. That would be like "hating" cancer. I just want to be rid of it. Of course, I know simply saying "make religion illegal!" would be absolutely stupid. All I can do is explain why it's a bad choice. Here's my post from the "oh gods!" thread.

Religion "degrades" society no more than smoking or alcohol. Because, guess what, not everyone participates. Yeah, there are influential figures, but, like I said, not everyone participates. And if you want to "get rid" of religion, then you might as well "get rid" of all vices that "degrade" society. And I can tell your opinion is obviously one based on North America. If you considered others like maybe Shinto or Buddhism, I fail to see how they "degrade" anything.

religion hasn't degraded anything, when it comes down to it the simple fact is religion isn't a person its a thing, idea, group. people fill these groups and that's the point people create problems with other people and the quickest way to start a fight is pick something out of moral code, book, belief. its just naive to say that.
you do realize that without ever having religion, we probably wouldn't be sitting here using a computer. religion was the start of morals like do not kill or treat someone nicely and stuff that make up a code of laws.
no, i'm sorry i cant even draw you a mental picture it's to difficult to explain everything. go ask a human geography teacher why its important, it might help better than i can.

....Did you understand my post at all? I'm agreeing with you (to a certain extent).

No... Religion is a set of organized beliefs. If the core beliefs are false, believing anything else is stupid. Therefore, it is stupid. I don't know why you are trying to change basic logic but okay, whatever floats your boat.

And the apple thing can be said because logic doesn't start out caring about truth, it starts out caring about the premises being valid or invalid. I could say: «All men are deaf. Socrates is a man. Therefore, Socrates is death.» Perfectly valid argument. The apples example follows the same way. It's meant to show validity, not absolute truth. You know, since there isn't any.



No it's not because condemning religion is NOT the same as condemning the right to practice it. It would be the exact same as saying you don't support gay rights because you don't like seeing two dudes going at it. It's one thing to say religion is bad, it's another to say people should be banned from it. And no one is saying the latter.

Firstly, by "condemning" I mean "looking down upon", not "banning entirely". Quit nitpicking. My point is that depending on motives, "disliking" the notion of religion, or the notion of practicing a religion, while accepting homosexual rights, or homosexuality itself, may or may not be hypocritical, depending on if the motivations behind each belief intersect.

Secondly, I'm not as good at proofreading your posts as other people here are. Just saying. I don't know if you mean "No it's not, and you're wrong, because condemning religion is not the same as condemning the right to practice it," or "it isn't because condemning religion is not the same as condemning the right to practice it, it's because something else"



As for you two, I also understand that it might seem at times I'm lumping religions together, but even practicing a perfectly safe religion sends the message that believing in something irrationally is OK, giving rise to worse religions or even bad things other than religion.

The main problem with religion is that it's seen as something other than a vice. Sure, people drink alcohol, and bad things happen because of it, but that's known; religion on the other hand is generally treated like something helpful.

You're both wrong! Well, er, kinda.

ecchibakagaijin, I agree with you that religion can benefit people, I also agree that religion can harm people. However, in regards to your suicide rates example, I feel that it's not entirely correct. I feel this way because, in my opinion, people who are going to commit suicide are capable of finding their salvation in just about anything or anyone. Taking religion out is just taking one option out of an ocean of them.


Chat, a few things.
I don't believe that religion is a good thing, but on the other side, I don't believe that religion is a bad thing. Religion is simply a thing. Whether religion is good or bad is essentially defined by the people using it. (just like every other thing)

Believing in something irrationally generally is okay. Most religious people that I've met (who are also educated--most people I know are educated) understand that what they believe is irrational, and they are capable of making a distinction between it and reality. These people are still capable of making rational choices when faced with difficult decisions, just like those who don't believe in something irrationally.

I see religion as something that helps deal with loss the same way alcohol helps deal with a breakup.

Fakku SD motto

How can you believe in something, but also distinguish it from reality?

Suspension of disbelief.

There's a difference between not believing that people have the right to practice religious beliefs and criticizing them. That's the lovely thing about freedom of speech.

Want to continue practicing your religion even though it okays:
Intolerance
Bigotry
Slavery
Oppression

Go ahead and be my guest, but don't expect people not to bash you for believing in stupid shit. Before you start, yes, not all religions are like that, but if your religious text state that you must disapprove of something as trivial as 2 men fucking each other, then more than likely, it does include all those things.

I'm not even an LGBTQ advocate, but acting like you're suffering oppression is downright disrespectful especially when you openly and willingly subscribe to religious beliefs that say it's okay to deny others of their rights.

Plus three positive posts, minus two negative votes... I wonder who could have done it... God, perhaps...

...the hell is that?

"I'll believe in this for now, but I'll quit next week."

I don't even slightly understand where you're coming from. How do you suspend disbelief?

That person didn't use it right.

It's more along of being willfully ignorant, and not nitpicking every illogical thing in a game/book/movie for the sake of convenience.

Oh, I see.

At the same time, Senta, are religious people religious because they're just "not nitpicking the details?"