LGBTQI atheists, nontheists, and friends


LGBTQI atheists, nontheists, and friends

Nontheist lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and intersex people & friends.

Members: 18
Latest Activity: Mar 6

Comment Wall


You need to be a member of LGBTQI atheists, nontheists, and friends to add comments!

Comment by Ruth Anthony-Gardner on November 26, 2016 at 2:42am

Wow! Bertold my head is spinning with how fast the right wing is destroying decades of progress. This would be even worse than 1950, because this would be outright codified national law, not a loose collection of various laws and traditions of hate.

Yes, I can see that a family name might die out in a few generations without laws permitting gay folks to adopt or have surrogate-assisted kids. Thanks for sharing. I'm bi but chose to not have kids because of an inherited birth defect and type 2 diabetes from my mother's side. My not very bright siblings made up for my choice by way over-producing.

Comment by Bertold Brautigan on November 16, 2016 at 5:13pm

Here we go, back to the past.

The GOP’s Anti-LGBT, Anti-Women ‘Religious Freedom’ Law on Steroids
The First Amendment Defense Act would allow hospitals, governments, universities, and businesses to ignore same-sex marriage, deny women healthcare, and fire gay people.

Comment by Grinning Cat on November 2, 2016 at 12:04pm

Ruth sent me an article about an unlikely but not impossible scenario: How Evan McMullin Could Win Utah And The Presidency (

We could have a President McMullin, rather than Clinton or tRump, if:

  1. McMullin wins Utah (getting some electoral votes),
  2. The Electoral College deadlocks (neither tRump nor Clinton gets 270 electoral votes) -- in which case the House chooses the president from among the top three candidates, and the Senate chooses the VP from among the top two.
    In the House, there's one vote per state delegation, majority required; and if they're still deadlocked by Inauguration Day, the vice-president becomes acting president.
  3. tRump loses enough House Republican support that nobody has a majority; and the party that loses in the Senate decides that McMullin/Pence is preferable to having Pence in charge, or that McMullin/Kaine is preferable to Kaine.
Comment by Grinning Cat on November 1, 2016 at 7:37am

If someone -- "patient zero" or not -- knowingly spread a horrible disease to other people, selfish recklessness is exactly the right term!

Bertold, very well said! Especially in view of one well-known world religion forbidding its authority figures from marrying or having sexual relationships -- it's ironic and backwards that supposedly celibate priests and bishops give advice and issue dicta on marriage! The analogy extends equally well to people who love cookies but hate donuts, and don't want to see anyone else eating them.

I was glad to see this graphic of mine (unfortunately still relevant post-Obergefell) show up in a few other places on the web:

Claiming that someone else's marriage is against your religion is like being angry at someone for eating a doughnut because you're on a diet. [Background: pink frosted donut with colored sprinkles, a big bite taken from it, fading to grayish tones at the bottom]

Comment by Bertold Brautigan on October 31, 2016 at 12:40am

Comment by kathy: ky on October 26, 2016 at 8:20pm
Did anyone else catch the article in the LA Times, today, about patient o being found not to be the original carrier of the HIV virus found in the US? Seems that it was all a misunderstanding. I can't recall the name of the movie but it made him out to be the really bad guy.
Comment by Grinning Cat on October 25, 2016 at 3:30pm

Amen, Spud!
(In the original sense, "Hear, hear! I believe it!" No spooks needed.)

A much better question than "What does God want? What makes God happy?" -- when the universe, and our planet, and human and other life look exactly as we'd expect with no gods -- is "What's best for us? What makes us happy?" Hopefully with a broad view of "us" that includes all of our fellow human beings.

Reposting a comment of Joan's:

Morals and ethics come from being born a social animal (picture: an International Space Station crew, over a background of the Earth seen from space)

Comment by Idaho Spud on October 25, 2016 at 3:02pm

GC, I was saddened that Josh still believed in the mormon god.  Hopefully, he will come to realize that god doesn't exist.

Comment by Idaho Spud on October 25, 2016 at 2:57pm

Daniel, I had the same thought:  "Now can it give them their lives back?"

Josh's Afterlife Analogy was good until he said he still has faith that god will give him what makes him happy.  That's something that was never taught when I was mormon.  They say the only way to be happy is to have many wives pumping-out billions of children.

Of course, they may have changed their tune in the last 30 years. They tend to do that to keep the money rolling in.

Comment by Grinning Cat on October 25, 2016 at 2:50pm

Interesting how "virgins" is most often associated with women!

Maybe Josh will realize that such a god -- whose afterlife of "perfect happiness" would make him, and millions of other gay men and lesbians, miserable -- is simply not worth following and worshiping and obeying. (But an official Mormon website wouldn't cover that!)

Of course, if an all-powerful god were so opinionated about our attractions and sexualities, he could turn everyone straight in heaven. If all those premises were true, he could just as easily have turned everyone straight here in the actual world. Hasn't happened.


Members (17)




Update Your Membership :




Nexus on Social Media:


© 2018   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service