data=”http://www.youtube.com/v/z9z66Bj9mSY?fs=1″>You need to a flashplayer enabled browser to view this YouTube video
In February, a brave gay Ugandan man living in exile appeared at the National Press Club in Washington with a paper bag over his head to denounce Uganda’s draconian Anti-Homosexuality Bill. He wore the mask to conceal his identity because he feared for his life.
Today, Kushaba Moses Mworeko took off his mask to urge the African Anglican Bishops at the All African Bishops Conference in Entebbe to speak out against Uganda’s “Kill the Gays Bill” and other forms of anti-gay discrimination on the continent.
“It is time for Christian leaders in Africa to start promoting peace and stop persecuting LGBT people,” said Kushaba Moses Mworeko, who recently escaped to the United States. “I call on the Anglican Church to speak out forcefully against the Anti-Homosexuality Bill and to support decriminalizing gay relationships across the continent. As the church grows in Africa it must choose to be a force for good and not intolerance.”
Speakers claimed that the continent would have 673 million Christians by 2025 and lead Christendom in the 21st century. Egyptian Bishop Mouneer Anis spoke of the significance of this meeting when he told bishops from more than 400 dioceses, “There is no doubt that history is going to record what happens at this conference for future generations. This is no ordinary conference because it’s happening in an extraordinary context.”
The Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr. Rowan Williams, (pictured) spoke at the event, but has yet to effectively use his bully pulpit to shape a more accepting environment towards LGBT people in Africa.
“The All African Bishops Conference offers Rowan Williams a unique opportunity to show leadership and moral clarity by denouncing Uganda’s Anti-Homosexuality Bill,” said Mworeko. “I urge the Archbishop of Canterbury to display a backbone and set a positive tone for the Anglican Church in Africa. His silence will be seen as a green light for the witch hunts against the LGBT community to continue.”
In a new Youtube video, Mworeko sent a message of perseverance and hope to his LGBT brothers and sisters still living in Uganda.
“We shall continue fighting for our rights and the time to fight is now,” said Mworeko. “This is about liberty, this is about equality, this is about justice. We are here to reclaim our freedom.”
“If Moses has the courage to put his life at risk by speaking out against intolerance and injustice, the least Rowan Williams can do is acknowledge the inhumanity of the Anti-Homosexuality Bill while he is at this conference,” said Truth Wins Out’s Executive Director Wayne Besen. “His noticeable indifference to the suffering of LGBT people in Africa and worldwide is a great stain on his shrinking legacy. Only by finding his voice on LGBT issues can Williams reverse the damage that has occurred on his watch.”
Truth Wins Out is a non-profit organization that fights anti-gay religious extremism. TWO’s goal is to create a world where lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people can live openly, honestly and true to themselves.
Gene said “like it or not, most of this world is made up of people with a religous identity, not those without it.”.
So what?
Gene said “People dont listen to people they consider nuts and fools.”.
There you go again claiming to speak for all religious people – you don’t, that’s an arrogance that really makes me dislike you.
Gene said “even the modern Confession of the Presbyterian church says that the Bible is inspired by God, but written by men, and thus open to error.”.
Let’s see your proof that the bible was inspired by a god.
Gene said “Sorry Priya, but, your claims that I have said what I did not, are not correct.”.
I don’t know what you’re referrring to here. Please quote me claiming you said something you didn’t.
Gene said “What matters the most to you Priya? Understanding these bigoted men in a way that may help you help them see the errors of their way of seeing the place of gay people, or, the self satisfaction of feeling superior towards them.”
You keep making this baseless claim that I don’t understand them. I’ve repeatedly asked you to demonstrate where I’ve expressed such a misunderstanding and you have failed to do so. Go f**k yourself a*****e.
Gene said “You make a blanket statement that kids are not heavily invested in religion…and accuse me of claiming a universal statement mantle.”.
I’m not the one claiming to speak for all religious 15 year olds and all religious people in general, you are. Its obvious and non-controversial that any religious child is going to be less heavily invested in religion than an older adult by virtue of less years dedicated to it. If you want to dispute that you need some rational, not just an empty; and false “that’s a blanket statement”.
Gene said “IF an athiest 15 year old came to me, as in your scenario, I would say, as I have when athiest children and young adults have told me of their athiesm or agnosticism, that I am a believer, but that I respect their opinion, and that many good and decent people are humanists and brights.”.
Uhuh, but you wouldn’t tell them there’s no god because he might find that comforting yet you ask me to tell a religious child there is a god. You don’t ask the same of yourself that you ask of me. Once again, go f**k yourself.
Gene said “Personal honestly is a noble thing. Knowing when to hold ones tongue…like in a hospital ER…or when debating a bigot who just MIGHT have otherwise listened and had his attitude softened…which, to a gay man he might meet and not abuse in the future, is not dishonestly”.
I never said it was. You however said I should tell the religious 15 year old “god don’t make no junk”. You asked me to lie to such a 15 year old, that is dishonesty. Once again, go f**k yourself, not going to happen.
Bob said “Priya, it just that if you say very simple things inaccuratly how can I trust your more involved arguments?”.
Oh, please you wouldn’t have trusted me if I had said “fruit” and “tree of knowledge of good and evil”. That’s just a convenient excuse.
Bob said “In the story it was a test of trust. God said don’t eat of that fruit. Satan claimed God is unfair and they now have a choice.”.
And yet your god punished them for failing that test by throwing them out of the garden of eden. We punish people for wrongdoings. We don’t punish people for failing to trust others. Once again, how without the knowledge of good and evil were Adam and Eve to know it was wrong not to trust god? Why would you punish someone for something unless it was a wrongdoing? God is omnisicent, he knew when he created them that he made them in such a way that they were going to eat the apple even though he told them not to – why punish them for behaving exactly as he created them to and he knew they would? Once again, the foundation of your very religion is nonsensical.
How about now you explain to me how it makes moral sense for your god to make people inherit the sins of their ancestor Eve. How exactly is it just to say a baby has “original sin” not because of something the innocent baby did, but because of something the babies far distant ancestor did? How is it right to curse and punish the innocent?
Gene said “Mikyui, it was his athiesm that lead him to see humans as purely animals, and as animals to believe that we are basicly here to breed, so yes, it WAS his athiesm that lead him to that opinion of homophobia”.
That’s one non-sequitor after another. There is nothing about a disbelief in god(s) that requires one to believe humans are animals only here to breed and there is nothing about the belief that animals are only here to breed that requires one to hate gays.
You keep trying to suggest atheism leads to negative beliefs, but the facts are against you. Explain why 85% of non-religious Americans support marriage equality for gays when less than half of the religious people do. Here, I’ll do it for you. Without a belief in christianity you aren’t encouraged to believe its wrong to be gay, you reach an independent judgment on the morality of gayness and without god the vast majority of people conclude its moral to do whatever you want as long as you harm no one.
Religious peoples’ misconceptions about atheism are so weird.
But then again, churches have to demonize atheists because they know that when believers come face to face with real atheists, their membership rolls tend to drop.
And Bob, why does god need to test the trust of Adam and Eve when he’s all-knowing and knew prior to the test they wouldn’t trust him?
“And yet your god punished them for failing that test by throwing them out of the garden of eden.”
Not to mention painful and potentially deadly childbirth.
Priya (102) I know you think that God must surely follow at least the sense of morality you have and it seems the Bible depicts otherwise. While I have similar thoughts at times I also know that I cannot see beyond the limits of myself and I believe it is unreasonable to make moral demands on God when I cannot possibly fathom all that He sees and knows. I trust.
I can and have come up with all the same kinds of arguments you seem to use but in the end I doubt them.
Priya (105) Why? I don’t know. I think God did not need their trust but He wanted it.
Bob said “I know you think that God must surely follow at least the sense of morality you have and it seems the Bible depicts otherwise.”.
It most certainly and obviously depicts otherwise.
Bob said “While I have similar thoughts at times I also know that I cannot see beyond the limits of myself and I believe it is unreasonable to make moral demands on God when I cannot possibly fathom all that He sees and knows. I trust.”.
Is it reasonable for your god to do what appears unreasonable and fail to explain how it actually is reasonable? Is it reasonable for your god to ask you to trust him when your understanding shows him to be evil? No, Bob it isn’t. It isn’t reasonable because the bible isn’t the word of an omnisicient, just, loving god, its the word of primitive bronze age goat herders and that’s why its loaded with mistakes and moral inconsistencies like this.
Bob said “I can and have come up with all the same kinds of arguments you seem to use but in the end I doubt them.”.
What reason do you have to doubt them? What evidence do you have to support the idea that your god exists and the bible is not a fairy tale just like you believe the Koran or Hinduism’s holy books are?
Bob said “Priya (105) Why? I don’t know. I think God did not need their trust but He wanted it.”.
That he did not need their trust but wanted it does not explain why he would test that trust when he already knew it wasn’t there. Obviously your god couldn’t have wanted their trust or he wouldn’t have created them without it as he surely knew he was going to, being omniscient and all.
Gene, btw, if your point was that I had called religion “crap” at some point. I don’t think anyone’s mind is changed about religion on these websites. I don’t think calling religion “crap” is going to change anyone’s mind but I have the right to say that it is “crap” and I believe that it is. I will continue to call it crap and continue to believe that it is crap. No, my mind wasn’t changed by people calling it “crap”, but neither was my resolve that it’s true. I’m not trying to convince you (or Pat, or Jolly) that religion is crap–they’re not actually taking in anyone’s arguments anyway.
Priya (108) My understanding does not show Him as evil. It shows I do not understand as He really is. If I think God is evil I don’t jump to the conclusion that my impeccable logic has finally won out. I realize I am very likely flawed and incomplete in my thoughts and that God is in fact not evil.
While it is true that at least one goat herder (David) wrote parts of the Bible, the writers span a range of occupations and backgrounds. People were not fundamentally less intellegent or capable of intellectual thought then as now.
While it is also true that there are other books received as holy by others and that it may appear simply as cultural bias as to why I believe one and not the others I think there is some truth in many books but where I part with them is the uniqueness of the Bible and the centrality of Jesus.
As to why God, being omniscient and all powerful would do what he did the way he did it is interesting to discuss but ultimately leads nowhere because we just cannot know. I know you like to ask question apon question as to why becaue you love point out what you see as inconsistencies and that’s fine. But regarding the 15 year old. Are you telling him absolutly there is no God as your opinion or as a fact using your authority as an adult? If the latter why is that not abusing your position? And don’t say because your right.
And you lose credibility when you tell people to go f*** themselves.
Now, I realize that the purpose of TWO is not to debate theology, I am not going to go further with this discussion. Have the last word if you wish.
Bob said “My understanding does not show Him as evil. It shows I do not understand as He really is. If I think God is evil I don’t jump to the conclusion that my impeccable logic has finally won out. I realize I am very likely flawed and incomplete in my thoughts and that God is in fact not evil.”.
If you do not understand how he really is, how do you know he’s not evil? What makes you think morality is so complex that you can’t understand the basics of it? Wouldn’t you agree that its always wrong to punish the innocent? Yet your god does that over and over and over. If you can’t conjure up a plausible scenario as to how that’s moral maybe its time for you to consider that it isn’t. You say your god wants our trust, does it make sense for him to seek our trust and appear so untrustworthy and to somehow be trustworthy yet unwilling to explain how? Which is more likely, that your god appears indisputably evil over and over but isn’t, or that the bible was made up by ignorant people piecing together disparate stories and that’s why its full of one moral inconsistency after another?
Bob said “While it is true that at least one goat herder (David) wrote parts of the Bible, the writers span a range of occupations and backgrounds. People were not fundamentally less intellegent or capable of intellectual thought then as now.”.
If that’s the case then why is the bible loaded with errors like PI=3, bats are birds, birds walk on all fours, stars can fall to the ground and be held in your hand, unicorns exist, a “firmament” holds up the sky and when it rains the “firmament” opens up and allows the waters above to fall on the waters below? People back then had the same intellectual potential that we have, but they were ignorant of a huge array of knowledge that we take for granted. That’s why the bible reads like the work of primitive goat herders and not like the words of an all knowing super-being.
Bob said “While it is also true that there are other books received as holy by others and that it may appear simply as cultural bias as to why I believe one and not the others I think there is some truth in many books but where I part with them is the uniqueness of the Bible and the centrality of Jesus.”.
What makes Hinduism’s holy books any less unique than the bible, what about the centrality of Vishnu to the Hindu texts? Why should the centrality of Jesus be more convincing than the centrality of Vishnu?
Bob said “As to why God, being omniscient and all powerful would do what he did the way he did it is interesting to discuss but ultimately leads nowhere because we just cannot know.”.
Because it that story is a fabrication, not because your god really exists and makes sense.
Bob said “I know you like to ask question apon question as to why becaue you love point out what you see as inconsistencies and that’s fine.”.
If they’re not inconsistencies, why can’t you explain them?
Bob asked “But regarding the 15 year old. Are you telling him absolutly there is no God as your opinion or as a fact using your authority as an adult? If the latter why is that not abusing your position? And don’t say because your right.”.
I’m telling him that there is almost certainly no god because there is no evidence to support that conclusion, the bible is loaded with scientific, geographical and historical errors, loaded with xenophobia and moral inconsistecies rather than being unlike any other book you’ve ever read in its beauty and accuracy, loaded with unknowable facts, a dazzling delight like you’d expect the writings of an omnisicent god to be. I’d tell him that over and over and over we’ve found natural explanations for things people back then thought were caused by gods, I’d tell him that while there is a vanishingly small chance that there is some sort of god its impossible for it to be the god of the bible because the god described there simply could not exist. A loving and just god that allows him and his religion of choice to be questionable and who eternally tortures people for the innocent act of believing its not true simply cannot exist.
Bob said “And you lose credibility when you tell people to go f*** themselves”.
So then why are you conversing with me?
Bob said “Now, I realize that the purpose of TWO is not to debate theology, I am not going to go further with this discussion.”.
I get it. You’re afraid to examine your beliefs too closely because you sense that if you do so you’ll find that they aren’t likely to be true.
@Priya Lynn, I am on your side in the religious debate, but isn’t this all really irrelevant to the main story? And you gay-tolerant Christians, do you see any way to fight movements like this one in Uganda, that use Christianity (and outright lies like Eat Da Poo Poo Sempra) to justify their viciousness?
Uhm. as I’ve got both Dawkin’s and Hitchen’s new books in my bedroom so no your charge that I am afraid is baseless.
I just want to respect the purpose of TWO and not get into a protracted argument like a few months ago.
Oh, yes, are you the guy who was afraid of answering the moral dilemma I presented of whether it would be moral if god told you to rape and burn an innocent baby and said that act was moral?
Tom, Yes, I speak about it to my Christian friends to raise awareness. Christian leaders are speaking out but should do a lot more. Christain aid groups could speak out more and withold money from groups supporting the anti-gay bill.
Oh yes, I’m pretty sure that was you Bob. You’re definitely afraid to examine your beliefs too closely for fear of finding they aren’t likely to be true. Its one thing to read a book and formulate rebuttals in your mind that no one can respond to and quite another to have an interactive conversation with follow up questions (which you hide from like the coward you are). Not surprising that you don’t want to examine your beliefs in any detail.
Oh yeah? Well I have Richard Dawkins in my bedroom. Maybe I should untie him…
Priya, you are showing a truly astounding lack of understanding…both of faith and of human nature.
And, from your foul langauge…of basic manners and conversation. in refernece to your post referring to the 15 year old, I think I should have better expressed himself. At such a painful moment, the last thing on earth I would do is contradict the15 yer old athiests belief. He might be getting comfort from the idea that his dead mom is just gone….no more suffereing, just ended. It would be the hight of cruelty of me to interject my faith on him at that moment. If he asked me, ‘do you think she just ended..?” I would say, “I dont know” (which I can say honestly, for while I have faith, I have no proof…faith is the belief in things unseen, afterall)”but she did, and thats what matters. Tell me about her, if you feel like talkng, of, we can just sit here together, if you want company”. If he asked outright, “do you really think she is just…done…and is not hurting now?” after a heinous car accident, YES, I would happily lie, and say “yes”.
There is a time and place for everything…and, would it be a lie, to give the child comfort at that moment when his world was ending? Yes…but, it would be to the greater good. But, I suppose you would just call this dishonesty.
Must be nice to live in a world of such perfect black and white. The 15 year old is a hypothetical. The other teenageer I referred to was not.
Daniel…I think I seriously miswrote something, or you seriously misread it…I dont remember you EVER saying that religion was crap. If I implied you did, my apologies. If you did…cool with me. My favorite uncle calls it crap all the time :)
Priya, let me turn the question for you….why do 15% of athiests NOT support gay marriage? It is always dangerous to speak in absolutes. for example, when someone makes a statement that a sensible person would assume was a generality (such as my comment about telling most religous 15 year olds what that there is not God and their ignoring the rest of what you say), angry, bitter people will twist this, and make a point that gets away from the whole arguement…which was that mocking the faith of an opponant is the best way to have them ignore you thereafter.
I concur with bob…I was not here, as I said before, to discuss theology…but the best way to influence and interact with people who ARE passionate about their faith. You seemed intent on turning it into the athiest hour. Have the last word, if you wish. But, after your rather vulgar show, all I am wondering is where that pool of anger comes from…and my hope you someday address it.
It would be about the child, and their pain. NOT me.
You seem to 1) be obcessed with your own point of view
2) to quote Kim Bassinger, speaking to Russel Crowe in “Hollywood Confidential” when his character seemed out of controll duo to his choice of language; “you say f**k a lot”.
Makyui, in post 79, you said that no one said that because they were an athiest, they had a view of gay people as disquesting. Well…I gave you an example of a man whose athiesm lead him to believe that all mammals and primates are basically animals and that those who did behave in sexual manner that lead to breeding, which he saw as the continuation of he species and the primary biological goal of existance, as defective, and thus, ‘less’ than heterosexual persons.
You asked…I gave an example of someone whose athiesm lead to these opinions. dont shoot the messenger.
And, many times, I have pointed out that I know a lot of wonderful, decent and moral people are athiests. I am not anti athiest, thank you very much.
Damn…missed Toms comment…so, one last post.
Do I see faith as a way to fight the idiots? Yes, and I have seen it personally, with a friend who USED to be a homophobe in Kenya. After discussion…long discussion, where I showed him both the arguments FOR a gay welcoming Christianity, AND showed him both kindness and even respect (not at first deserved or reciprocated), he saw a new way of looking at Christianity AND gay people and our families. He was OFFENDED by the existance of the bishop Robinson, but, the Bishops very existance allowed the conversation to begin. As it happens, just starting with “your faith is bull” would, I know with 100% certainly, from him, have just shut down the conversation.
No…we have to talk to them and explain how the church has changed on many things, from slavery to the role of women…and then, show how this can, and is, happening with gay people also.
Or, we can feel self rightous and just tell other people how stupid their beliefs are. Always a GREAT way to ‘win friends and influence people’. Start with what they will see as an insult.
Which makes better sense you think?
(note: if you think they are studid, fine….but, tone, language, and choice of topic matter, and timing if one wants to influence someone…not just feel great about being, as one sees it, right)
Gene, not sure where you get the 15% of atheists not supporting gay marriage–but if it’s true, I suspect, based on my own experience it’s because they don’t support marriage at all. This is usually the argument I get from atheists is that marriage is an oppressive religios institution that has been used to subjugate women–which isn’t the same as saying gay people shouldn’t be allowed the same rights as heterosexuals.
Gene go f**k yourself. I’m not reading any more of your lies or pompous BS.
Gene, I may not have said religion is crap, but it’s not beyone the possiblities. I don’t usually just attack people’s beliefs. I think I have stated that Bible stories like Adam & Eve and Sodom & Gamorra are myths and shouldn’t be the basis of laws.
“Well…I gave you an example of a man whose athiesm lead him to believe that all mammals and primates are basically animals and that those who did behave in sexual manner that lead to breeding, which he saw as the continuation of he species and the primary biological goal of existance, as defective, and thus, ‘less’ than heterosexual persons.”
Actually, you gave me an example of a guy who, because he believed that animals are supposed to procreate, saw gay people as “less than”.
Lots of believers understand that humans are animals and primates, too, and some atheists (many Buddhists being among them) believe that humans are spiritual beings that are meant to move into a “higher” existence. One doesn’t necessarily lead into the other. Did the guy actually say, “Because I am an atheist, I believe gay people are ‘less than’,” or something to that extent?
Because I’ve seen several people say, “Because of my religious beliefs, I believe that gay people are sinful and unwholesome,” one of them being the attorney general here in Florida.
Well, Makyui, yes. This guy told me bluntly, his athiesm lead to a view of humans as animals, and that animals that dont breed successfully must be defective, thus gay = bad. Sorry to disappoint you, but, this is what he said. EXACTLY that, his athiesm lead him to his homophobia. Pretty much, yup, he is as big an idiot as the AG of FL.
Now, as an athiest, you might be thinking, “but that should not happen!”, but it did. You implied that athiesm would lead to some world without homophobia, and this may be true, and I do find athiests are less likely to be homophobic than religious people. I have a lot of athiest friends. But, not universally at all, and I gave an example of a case where the opposite happened.
You are quite correct that most people of faith see humans as the primates we are. But, like the Buddhists (some of whom are athiests and approach Buddhism as an elegant and sophisticated philosophy, others, like my in laws, see it VERY much as a religion, which they practice…and a lovely one I might add, in my opinion at least) see humans as more than merely animals. This is also the standard Christian belief by the way. In this guys case, his athiesm did lead him to his homophobic view…which is unfourtionate.
This is the opposite of many people I know who, due to their faith, feel the call of people to honor the Biblical order to love justice, and to walk humbly with God, as overriding the old anti gay rulings, much as we see the same call to justice as overriding the Biblical allowance for slavery, and host of other abhorant things.
I hope you find this explanation helpful. You seem more perplexed at the idea of a bigoted athiest, and not so much angry at the idea, and me.
the big message here…the take home message that seems to drive some athiests nuts, is that 1) the world is mainly relgious, and will remain so. If anything, the world is getting MORE religious.
2) if we go into conversations, guns a’ blazen, and tell the religious they are nuts, we lose far more chances to influence them then we will ever gain…and thats just common sense, for people who feel insulted are seldom influenced.
3) neither communities of faith, nor communities of athiests are monolithic. And the faith community is FAR larger. Does it not make sense to try to influence it? And to support those parts of it that welcome and love us, as well as welcoming the contributions of the many gracious and tolerant athiests who are often our strongest supporters?
I wont apologize for common sense people. Nor for not losing my temper.
We dont have to agree on issues of faith or lack of it, but we are weakened when we do not support every pillar that supports us, and respect each others faiths, or lack there of. Or curse and rant like children when someone points out examples that do not support our world view.
A smart lawyer once asked me this when I was younger, and more strident “do you want everyone to think just like you…or to do what you want them to do?”.
Now, I will wait for any semantic error, tiny point, or grammer error to be pounced on, and my point, again ignored. That point being that if you insult a person of faiths beliefs they (oh, pardon…some percentage larger than zero, and from pesonal experience and common sense, since most people honor and respect their own beliefs, but less than 100, also known as a majority…specific enough priya?) will not listen to you, and you lose your chance to influence them, and lesson homophobia in the world.
Priya, you mentioned 85% of athiests supporting marriage for gay people. As it happens, you either luckily made up a good number, or, you checked polling data, available at Barna. I just assumed you were using good data, which, in this case, you were.
The vase majority of athiests, about 85% support us…about 15 % do not. DAniel, a good question, but, that is not all of the 15% opinion I am sure. I know some athiests who are anti marriage in general, and some who are in very happy marriages, hetero and gay. There are athiest homophobes out there, a few of which will tell you that their athiest world view leads to their view of gay people as defective. The was official Soviet medical policy folks. Check the history books.
“Sorry to disappoint you, but, this is what he said. EXACTLY that, his athiesm lead him to his homophobia. Pretty much, yup, he is as big an idiot as the AG of FL.”
Giving you the benefit of the doubt, then yes, he’s a moron who doesn’t seem to get that atheism isn’t a moral code, nor does it necessitate ANYTHING that he said.
“You implied that athiesm would lead to some world without homophobia”
No, I never implied any of that. I was taking exception to your implication that it was the fact that Russia and China were atheist that encouraged a homophobic society — instead of, you know, the possibility that was it the same political philosophies that led to banning religious institutions (which isn’t necessarily atheist, either, for the record) as led to anti-gay legislation.
In other words, the fact that the countries were “atheist” probably had little to do with it.
On the other hand, you have the US, with many government officials who not only tout it as a “Christian” nation (and it isn’t), but outright state that their religious beliefs are justification for passing anti-gay legislation.
Although, yes, I could be implying that without religious justification, people would be much less likely to be homophobic, and according to Priya’s statistics, that does seem to be the case.
“You seem more perplexed at the idea of a bigoted athiest”
No, not really. I’ve met bigoted atheists before. I’m just making sure that you’re not unnecessarily conflating two completely different things.
“If anything, the world is getting MORE religious.”
Um. You got evidence to back this up? Because the trend seems to be leading towards increased secularism, not the other way around.
“and thats just common sense, for people who feel insulted are seldom influenced.”
That’s not necessarily true. How many kids stopped believing in Santa Claus after they were ridiculed by the older kids at school?
“neither communities of faith, nor communities of athiests are monolithic”
Indeed, though not equally so, since religions have actual, documented tenets that followers are supposed to adhere to, while atheism does not.
“Does it not make sense to try to influence it?”
Isn’t that what we’re doing?
“That point being that if you insult a person of faiths beliefs they … will not listen to you, and you lose your chance to influence them, and lesson homophobia in the world.”
And if we tell them that their beliefs/bible/god are wrong, how is that any different? If an evangelical has decided that their bible is inerrant and it says that gay people are sinful, and you tell them that no, it doesn’t actually mean that, is that not insulting to them?
“Now, I will wait for any semantic error, tiny point, or grammer error to be pounced on, and my point, again ignored.”
Oh come on, don’t be that way. You can’t make logistical errors and unnecessary conflations, and then get upset when people point them out. …Well, you can, but it’s not a good idea. A better idea is to make sure that your statements are as well thought out as you can muster, and then people won’t “nitpick”.
It gets really, really old to hear theists talk over and over about communist Russia, and Stalin and Marx and blah blah blah, as though it was atheism and not political b******t that made that society so big and bad, every time someone brings up the fact that lots and lots of people can, and do, justify their bigotry with specific religious dogma.
Maybe we’re just supposed to sit down and shut up, like good little obedient atheists.
“The was official Soviet medical policy folks. Check the history books.”
Like now. You used the word “communist” as well when referencing Russia and China, but you decided that “atheism” was the reason why gay people were treated as lesser. Why? This is an unfair conflation. Would it make as much sense to state that since Russia was a communist state, that communism leads people to being homophobic?
I don’t think anyone said that no atheists anywhere ever are homophobic — obviously, since atheism isn’t a moral code, it’s going to include lots of people with lots of different morals. Because of this, unlike religious people, atheists don’t get to use the excuse that because they are atheist they should believe X, because it isn’t true.
On the other hand, theists who choose to ignore homophobic lines in their bible do so despite their religious tenets, not because of them.
The comparison doesn’t mesh.
Makyui, a well presented response. I appreciate that. I did offend against you in one particular way…it was not you who specificly stated that an athiest dominated world would be less homophobic, although the overall gist of the conversation from the athiests was to imply that it would be a bette world than a religious one.
I take issue with a few of your comments. I promise you, when a Christian or Jew sees their Holy Book and beliefs as demanding that they “do justice, love Mercy, and walk with their Lord”, and see this as superseeing any teaching that would lead to homophobia or other ills, it is NOT “despite” their faith, but because of their faith that they are gay inclusive.
The commenton semantic errors was a refernece to Priya, who jumped on my comment about a religious 15 year old not appreciating being told their faith was untrue. I suppose I should have said “most”, but, it sure seemed to me that a small error in presentation was used to divert the conversation away from my real point, which is, once again, Insulting Religious People Only Makes Them Ignore You.
You made half a good point about telling a literalist fundamentalist that he or she is not interpreting the Bible correctly can be seen as insulting…but, not quite. Most literlaists will engage in a discussion about this, and, truly, I have seen many later change their opinion and later become gay welcoming and friendly. In contrast, is you just say “Its all wrong, and all untrue” they see you not as a misguided or wrong fellow, but “other”, and that glassey look in their eye as you tgry to explain why its all untrue, well…there is a reason for that.
As per the world getting more relgious, well, thats easily enoough proven. Just dig on line for easily gotten stats on life in India, the spread of Christiaity in China (amazing growth!) and of Islam there also. I have been there several times (married to a wonderful Chinese man), and have seen this myself. Africa, from the RofSA to the Islamic north is one of the fastest growing population regions on earth, and virtually everyone there is religious, from the tolerant Archbishop Tutu and Anglicans of SA to the homophobic and violent Christians of Nigeria and Uganda. Non believers are rare as rubies there, and their birthrate is high. Same for latin America. Look at a list of nations in “population decline by nation” and a list of fastest growing nations, and notice which are secular. Mainly, the decliners are in northern Europe, with their declining populations, and are the only place on earth, Canada aside, also with a declining population, held up only by immigration, mainly from nations with high religiosity, where secularism is the norm, and even there, majorities in almost every nation are at least nominally Christian…if only the baptism, Christmas and Easter type. No, the growing population nations, from Egypt to Pakistan to Congo to Brasil, to China and India, Africa and the Caribbean are VERY relgious, and growing more so.
I am not presented these facts as good or bad…just as “is”. And, a development we must deal with.
Even in secular Europe, old churches are finding new uses…as churhces for Caribbean immigrants, and Mosques for newly immigrated Turks and Arabs (among
others). The most common name for baby boys in Amsterdam (!!!) is… Mohammad….which makes sense, since the city is now (seriously, check it out) majority Muslim (with a Jewish mayor no less). Same in Rotterdam, Cologne, Marsailles, etc. Formerly officially athiest Russia is rapidly embracing Orthodoxy (and a homophobic variety, sad to say) and 1/7 of Russians are Muslim. Forgive the length of this…but, I think by now you see my point.
Lastly, no…I can say with utter honestly, you are not really influencing it (in reference to the question about influencing people of faith) in a serious way. I am not saying NO one will be influenced by your arguements against religion…but, from personal experience, far more people will shut your arguements off. They are not interested in hearing that their religion is untrue. But, as the movement of whole denominations that were once homophobic (Episcopal, Presbyterian, UCC, Lutherans among others) shows, the religious CAN and ARE changing. Slowly. It is a lot easier, and possible, to show religious people why they should be gay friendly (and millions of them have made this move) than it is to just get them to see faith as a false thing. If they already think you are wrong about one thing (their faith), they will, logically be predisposed to assume a person mistaken (in their opinion) about one important thing will be wrong about another (how they should see/treat gay people).
Makyui, one of my best pals is an athiest. He is hetero, and has little use for religion. But, he is a lawyer, and the best debater I know, and a REAL ally and gay rights activist. It was he that first pointed out these things to me. I hope these answers are of some use to you. I appreciate your attitude and tone.
Gene, it’s hard to wade through all this, but a huge distinction exists between those who support their position by reasoning and appealing to evidence (which may be faulty), and those who defend a position with a holy text. The first can possibly be reasoned with, the second can have every single argument knocked down, and in the end will point to the holy text. That’s what’s so sad about Fundamentalists. They derive huge comfort from their beliefs, but can end up committing atrocities to that end.
The witch hunts against children in Africa are a great example.
Gene, atheism is ONLY that you don’t accept that there is a God or Gods. That’s it. Therefore Buddhists, Scientologists and Raelians could all be considered atheists. Beyond that there is no dogma. Being an atheist doesn’t require that you accept evolution, science or anything else. In fact, many people who call themselves “evolutionary biologists” are extremely homophobic and are also atheists. Whether someone’s atheism led them to their homophobia isn’t an endightment on all atheists any more than the vast number of people who rely on their religious beliefs to justify their own bigotry. All atheism requires is that you don’t believe in any god–beyond that there can be any number of kooky beliefs.
“I take issue with a few of your comments. I promise you, when a Christian or Jew sees their Holy Book and beliefs as demanding that they “do justice, love Mercy, and walk with their Lord”, and see this as superseeing any teaching that would lead to homophobia or other ills, it is NOT “despite” their faith, but because of their faith that they are gay inclusive.”
See, I would disagree here and say that it’s the natural disposition of the person that does this, because in order to reach this conclusion, they would have to deliberately ignore the parts in the bible that encourage intolerance and focus instead on the positive and inclusive parts. In all likelihood, they’d be tolerant people regardless of what their religion was; I find it extremely hard to believe that without their religion, they wouldn’t already want to do justice and love mercy, and all that.
“The commenton semantic errors was a refernece to Priya”
Okay, fair enough.
“Forgive the length of this…but, I think by now you see my point.”
Sure, and thanks for all that.
“In contrast, is you just say “Its all wrong, and all untrue” they see you not as a misguided or wrong fellow, but “other”, and that glassey look in their eye as you tgry to explain why its all untrue, well…there is a reason for that.”
Bigotry? …Okay, that wasn’t entirely serious, but saying that they’d dismiss us not because we’re wrong, but because we’re “other” has an unhappy implication that we’re completely unworthy of consideration just because we’re atheist. Kind of a familiar ring to that, no? LGBT people are “othered”, too, but we as LGBT people are not expected to STFU about things in the way that we as atheists apparently are.
It’s not necessarily an automatic shutout, if they’re already reasonable enough to consider that their stance on homosexuality is in error. If they argue that it’s a statement from God, and you argue that there is no evidence for that, and they have no answer to that, then they’ve lost the argument. If “there is no evidence to support it” is too incredulous an explanation, then they’re the ones being unreasonable and they ought to be called on it.
Honestly, in my case, “you have no evidence for your god” isn’t going to be the first thing out of my mouth, but if they’re going to spit venom and fire at me and claim that I’m an agent of Satan and that God is going to send me to Hell, I don’t think it’s unreasonable to point out that they’re standing on a tower built on a foundation made of farts.
We speak a message of wisdom among the mature, but not the wisdom of the rulers of this age who are coming to nothing. God has revealed it by His Spirit. The Spirit searches all things even deep things of God. The man without The Spirit of God does not accept the things that come from the spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him and he cannot understand them because they are spiritually discerned.
about homosexuality, it is among the signs of the end of the World we are in today.Other signs include, the wars, nation rising against nation,famines eartquakes etc- If you checked your current affairs you would realise that many unusual things are happening worldwide! actually they are called begining of birth-pains! some birth pains take a whole day a week or some hours.
God will judge us using our own words whether we claim homosexuality is good, or that God does not exist.Or abuse others
Check your deepest thoughts/heart because only an individual can know thier deepest heart and ensure that you are strongly certain of your life span and incharge of what happens in your life in and around, NOw and in the future. If you are certain about the power or powers that cause the earth to rotate around the sun and other scientific facts about this life (other than God) then you can always reject the person of GOD the ALMIGHTY!The beauty is you make a choice. however if you are not sure and I mean not sure, then seek for the right things. Make sure in the future both in your physical life here on earth and when you don’t have breath anymore that you never have regrets or you will not make statements like I wish I knew!or how could this have happend, or I should have listend!
This is our stand;Homosexuality is a perversion, and unnatural and a lie infested in humanity by satan-lucifer, the devil! why? because the devil seeks for humans who neither glorify God, or give thanks to him to deprave thier minds!These people are victims of the devil given over to unnatural, shameful perversions.The only enemy that we as human beings have is Satan! but not ourselves. We Love the people BUT the act must not be accepted!each one condoning this act is actully involving in satan’s waggon of making people become perverted
[...] international fight for equality as evidenced by a recent blog post at Truth Wins Out. In it, Moses called on Anglican leaders to denounce the Anti-Homosexuality Bill. It is time for Christian leaders in Africa to start [...]
I write with a disbelief of what my close friend called Moses has turned to. I believe that Moses knows very well that he had a father and a mother even when they died when he was still tender. I simply ask the good Lord, Why Moses Mworeko? It’s better that both parents are no more otherwise it would have been a life shuttering experience for the rest of their lives!
I attended Moses’ wedding and tears of joy were running not only on my chicks but also his caretakers as they gave the speaches. As of now, they have no words for the girl’s family! Moses’ children will in real sense have no father! What about the beautiful lady he left home? I believe in a God of miracles and Moses knows that very well, hoping the light will shine upon his face to know ” The Way, The Truth and The Life” JOHN 3:16
Forget me, forget your wife, forget your only biological children and NEVER FORGET GOD.
God Bless you Moses as you read this message!
Justine, blame the people who want him and others like him dead because of the lie that he’s somehow evil for being who he is.
Change the society who wants to murder and slay out of hatred and bigotry, and there won’t be any more need for people to hide in sanctuary out of fear for their lives.
Mr.Makyui, Moses has the ball in his court. He can decide to free himself by turning to God and repent. God accepts repentant sinners and I’am sure that his family and the church will rejoice at his decision. May the Holy spirit guide him in making his choices.
Perhaps the people who want him dead should repent, instead.
[...] sensationally anti-gay tabloids in his home country. He has called on African Anglican Bishops to condemn anti-homosexuality legislation and current state-sponsored criminal [...]