The World's Largest Coalition of Nontheists and Nontheist Communities!
Nontheist lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and intersex people & friends.
Latest Activity: Apr 7
@C.L.A.W.S. The title was Growing Pains, and Cameron was cute as a button. I don't think I missed an episode. He played a character that is 180-degrees away from the guy he is now that he's having a midlife crisis and remembers the night he took some K and cocaine and fucked his brains out with one of the show's groupies, one of many. He is now feeling guilty about those years and has found Jesus. What a shame. Gay men tell me he is bisexual but in denial. Christianity will do that to a person.That's why Ted Turner called it "a religion for losers."
Who is Kirk Cameron? I never heard of hiim, so IMO he's a "never-was," just like Jeebus.
OR....maybe it's a case of "methinks the [person] doth protest too much."
When someone starts yammering about "sin" to me, I ask them to define the word. Most xians can't. They just stammer.
@Daniel W, in enlightened countries, such as those free of religious bigotry, and where the age of consent is more in line with what we know about not only child development but scientific theories of nature over nurture causality, fifteen is not subject to statutory rape. Our laws need revamping considerably, bearing in mind the old 7's "law" based on the notion that 7's are a lifetime change number so that laws were passed to apply to those under 7, over 14, and, as is currently the law with regard to drinking, 21. Also ignored by the report is the level of sexual sophistication the boy had. I'd like to defend these men in court. Blow this whole issue up. For all we know, that 15 year old knew more about sex than both of the adults combined.
So right, Daniel. As the old Mellencamp song goes, "Ain't that America!" Don't Ask, Don't Tell was about as juvenile and absurd a policy as can be imagined, but I guess it was the most Clinton figured he could get.
Sorry, but I'm pasting in the Rude 1's entire blog for the day.
I am paranoid about the "American-ness" argument. When religious minorities in the U.S. start holding non-believers and/or lgbtq people up as "immoral" because Mideastern Islamic groups and/or leaders (imams, ayatolahs, and other Moses-like tribal chieftans, the epitome of ruler-priests) claim the we are immoral in our affronts to Allah...I think you can see the implications of such thinking. Truly Hitlerian.
Dear Cat...there was/is NO marriage ceremony (with exchanging of vows and stuff) in the buybull at all. (As far as I know)...just the wine-drinking party at Cana.
A Christian rebutting the "Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve" argument:
"The Genesis 2 marriage model says nothing about wedding gifts therefore God must be against wedding gifts. Of course, no one believes that and no thinking person would draw that conclusion from Genesis 2." (Rick Brentlinger, from gaychristian101.com)
Similarly, it's just as illogical to conclude that God must be against wedding rings... and against getting married in church... and against adopting children... and against same-sex couples.
Charles P. Pierce comments on the upholding of marriage bans
-----I can hardly wait for the Nine Wise Souls (finally) to weigh in on marriage equality. We will get to hear Antonin (Short Time) Scalia say "sodomy" a lot. John Roberts will seek to excuse himself when the testimony gets too icky. Clarence Thomas will say nothing. And Anthony Kennedy will show up in a white sarong, blindfolded, holding a scale. It ought to be a hoot, it should.The Sixth Circuit Court Of Appeals fast-tracked the issue up the food chain late yesterday, handing down a ruling that upheld bans on gay marriage in four states, reversing lower court rulings on the subject. Because there is now a "split" between the Sixth Circuit and several other federal circuit courts of appeal, the Nine Wise Souls can't duck the issue any more -- not since Judge Jeffrey Sutton, who wrote the majority opinion for the Sixth Circuit, has positioned himself in his arguments as the last person holding back the forces of unchecked Fabulousness.
-----He also quotes the one out of three dissenting judge's statement:
-----The author of the majority opinion has drafted what would make an engrossing TED Talk or, possibly, an introductory lecture in Political Philosophy. But as an appellate court decision, it wholly fails to grapple with the relevant constitutional question in this appeal: whether a state's constitutional prohibition of same-sex marriage violates equal protection under the Fourteenth Amendment. Instead, the majority sets up a false premise-that the question before us is "who should decide?"-and leads us through a largely irrelevant discourse on democracy and federalism. In point of fact, the real issue before us concerns what is at stake in these six cases for the individual plaintiffs and their children, and what should be done about it. Because I reject the majority's resolution of these questions based on its invocation of vox populi and its reverence for "proceeding with caution" (otherwise known as the "wait and see" approach), I dissent.
Welcome toAtheist Nexus
Sign Upor Sign In
Or sign in with:
Update Your Membership :
Nexus on Social Media:
© 2018 Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.
Report an Issue |
Terms of Service
Please check your browser settings or contact your system administrator.