It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: Boadicea
You make an excellent point. I was raised in the Episcopal church - they have had female deacons and priests forever, and are LGBT friendly.
The right-wing moralists make scapegoats of homosexuals, who are now aboveground and who claim the full rights of human beings and citizens. Though in interviews Falwell appears more moderate on this subject than his book would suggest, we can expect the religious right to harass homosexuals and to try to deny them their civil rights.
Most Americans share the Moral Majority’s anxiety about signs of moral breakdown, including the weakening of the family. But the Moral Majority confronts these problems with a sledgehammer, and its proposed solutions would threaten other values.....
The tirades of the Moral Majority against "humanists" are misdirected. The various kinds of humanists I have mentioned usually are morally sensitive about a number of issues, including those related to justice and peace, personal integrity, poverty, hunger and oppression in many parts of the world. Very few American secular humanists are polemical atheists. The respect for religion and for the Christian and Jewish traditions in this country is widespread indeed, as shown in polls about beliefs and about church attendance. The culture is highly secular, but the problem is not one of an intellectually aggressive secularism orchestrated by humanists. It is true that there are probably more people today without either religious or moral moorings than was the case of a generation ago, but this situation is partly a consequence of disillusioning events and loss of roots and hopes that give direction and meaning to life. Humanists at least do have moral moorings.
originally posted by: BO XIAN
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic
Y'all have FORCED your daffynitions on Christians by political clout.
originally posted by: BO XIAN
Other atheists and agnostics mostly just don't care much about any of it one way or the other. They don't get their emotions triggered one way or the other.
Nope, but actions based in bigotry yes. Such as passing 'religious freedom laws'.
originally posted by: tothetenthpower
Neil MacDonald is a prominent Canadian journalist and writes a lot of opinion pieces, this one stood out for me.
The article begins by discussing the shooting at Montreal's École Polytechnique in 1989, where a young man killed 14 women before killing himself.
As Neil points out:
The atrocity, and its stated motivation, immediately triggered an angry and overdue conversation in Canada about misogyny and collective male guilt.
It was hard to swallow, but only a dullard could reject the logic outright.
And, at least partially as a result, open sexism and misogynistic humour became far less okay after Polytechnique, at least in polite company. It was a transformative moment.
And in the next paragraph, the hard part, the part nobody wants to talk about:
Now, after Omar Mateen armed himself, reportedly professed allegiance to ISIS and went hunting gays in an Orlando night club, could there possibly be a better time to have the same conversation about organized religion, and what responsibility it bears for the pain and misery and death inflicted on gays for so many centuries in the name of god?
At what point do we start having the national conversation that bigotry is not religious freedom. Not wanting to serve people because of your feelings towards them is not your right or your freedom in the 21st century. And I don't agree with Neil often, but this lat bit:
In any event, this much is singularly true: the worst mass murder in American history was directed at one group, and it was done by some one who had sworn allegiance to a fundamentalist religious group.
If casual misogyny and sexist humour helped create Marc Lépine, then organized religion must reflect on helping shape a culture that will this week have led to 50 funerals in Florida. It's not just the extremists who want to deprive gays of human rights.
I could not have said it better myself. As we've seen already, from some of the responses in the religious community, they are all but jumping for joy that this occurred in some circles or condemn the violence but not the outlook.
originally posted by: tothetenthpower
a reply to: TheBulk
Out of curiosity do you feel the same about musicians who won't play in States they don't like, or cake shops that won't make anti gay-marriage messages on their cakes?
One of these things is not like the other. The first is a musician practicing political activism the best way they can, by denying a state revenue based on it's chosen path of discriminating against people.
The other is just religious people who want to discriminate against gays. So, I don't know how to answer your question.
And once again we seem to have pivoted to talking about Christians even though it's Muslims who keep murdering people. It seems the anti-christian bigots will use any excuse to promote hate against their favorite scapegoat.
Ah there's the feigned outrage. The issue at large is since America is a 'christian country', and this man was American, he was likely more influenced by the mainstream religions of America in his line of thinking. And since they heavily discriminate and act intolerant of LGBT, well, you see where I'm going.
I'm not anti-christian or anti religion, I'm anti bigotry. It just so happens that a large swatch of Christians feel the same way and therefore get a lot of attention for it. If you'd like people to stop being mean to Christians, have Christians stop being mean to others.
originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Talorc
It should be obvious.
1.) It is not politically correct to criticize Islam as it may offend Muslims.
2.) They are generally anti-religious.
So they have to couch their anti-Islam arguments in terms of being anti-Christian because it is perfectly OK to hate on Christianity and Christians all they want and they since they are pretty much anti-religious, they don't mind. So it creates all of this weird so-called logical twisting you see where they attempt to create a way to curtail the one by attacking the other and end up taking out both and removing our basic liberties while they are at it.
Of course, they don't realize they'll end up taking away their own freedoms of speech while they're at it, but they're too busy chomping at the bit to attack religion to care.
This has been coming for a while sadly.
originally posted by: saintdopeium
a reply to: tothetenthpower
I'm still not sure where all of the Christian talk is coming from. This was a self identifying Muslim, correct? I'm not religious in the slightest but I am curious as to why Christians seems to catch so much hell when Muslims flip out and murder people.
originally posted by: Maverick1
The right to choose who one wants to be with should be protected. So should the right to be free from persecution
originally posted by: AMPTAH