Keep in mind I am only referring to the "saved by Jesus" crowd. The vast majority of typical run-of-the-mill Christians are functional atheists, ignoring God/Jesus stuff almost completely until it's time to get married or die. And then it's basically lip service. Most would be actual atheists if they had their druthers, however that is still socially risky. Easier to just nod and recite the silly prayers then take a courageous public position in favor of reality.

The "saved by Jesus" set is a particularly sad subset of religious folk. I have interviewed hundreds of them and looking into their eyes one sees only emptiness. Their minds have snapped and they typically respond to any philosophical question with obtuse references to random Bible passages. If you dig deeper into their pasts, you will often find a shocking and sad story. However, if the Jesus nonsense helps them to function, it's better than drugs, suicide, or sociopathy.

So now you are at 7. Out of 1.6 billion, that is pretty f'n fringe bro.

Let me ask you this: What percentage of Christians are protesting at gay people's funerals?

Except I didn't say 10 million, or most. You did.

Let us know when you've interviewed the whole world.

Though testing on such things is complicated.

Do you know any psychiatrists who draw conclusions looking into other people's eyes? Lovers do it not scientists.

Perhaps you're projecting the emptiness?

Yeah, I didn't mention the people in the congregation that agreed with him bro.

Let me ask you this: What percentage of Christians agree with them. Maybe we could look at the vote in NC regarding gay marriage to get an idea. Strange that religion is so strongly correlated with anti-gay marriage sentiment. I wonder why that is, if there are only 7 religious people (according to you) who are anti-gay.

You miss the point quite a bit, don't you?

I cannot possibly disagree with you anymore, in fact quite the opposite should be found by anyone with an open heart to the teachings of Jesus when reading the bible. Jesus broke bread with the sinners on multiple occasions and spoke of loving your neighbors and even enemies as well as not passing judgement, for those who judge in this world will be judged in the next. These are the teachings of Jesus which, ironically, or almost the exact opposite of the teachings of radicals like the Westboro Baptist Church which not only shame and embarrass any true christian but also supply endless reasons for people of the world to judge and hate them.

This is off topic to the OP and is not intended to be an argument against aethiesm but rather to bring light to the fact that any rational person, regardless of faith, should not consider radicals to represent the whole in any way just as I (and anyone with a mind) does not believe the Taliban represents all muslims, the KKK represents all white people, or the Black Panthers of the 60's represented all black people.

You are making some wild leaps here. This is typical liberal hyperbole in action.

You are now comparing people who believe in and want to protect the sanctity of marriage with people who openly and publicly mock dead, gay people at their funerals.


It's not strange at all, since the bible lists homesexual activities as sins, and defines marriage as between a man and a woman.

It's a leap to ask a question?

No, I am continuing to wonder how many people are anti-gay because of their religious beliefs. I know that some are going to be more militant than others...


I'm not so sure you want to go down the path of what the bible defines as marriage (or gives as examples...)

"Protect the sanctity" of marriage? Exactly how many wives did Solomon have?

Jesus was wrong. You should not love your neighbors. Unless they are worthy of and have earned your love. Jesus was wrong. You should not love your enemies. People who are rationally judged to be enemies because they are seeking to destroy or preempt your life or liberty should be killed, not loved. Jesus was wrong. Everyone should judge others constantly against a rational standard of values. IT IS OUR JOB TO JUDGE OTHERS. Judgement is use of the intellect to determine if a person is acting for good or evil. Judgement is critical for a successful life. It is MAN'S PLACE to judge. Not an imagined God's.

In fact, and this gets interesting, much more interesting than trying to prove the obvious (that God does not exist), we could have a lot more fun debating the teachings of Jesus, which are rationally EVIL and ANTITHETICAL to successful life. Many of Jesus's so-called "teachings" are absolutely wrong and we need to get rid of them.

Do you mean King Solomon who turned away from God, committed idolatry, and who's sin was so great it tore the kingdom apart?

edit: with regard to asdf

You are more than welcome to argue this, but that was not the point I brought up from the original post I quoted.

Again I am not here to argue against aethiesm as no minds will be changed and it is counter productive to flame each other over the internet when time would much better be spent understanding other peoples beliefs. I was just making a point that WBC parishioner =/ true christian as a means of encompassing what christianity believes.

"Anti-gay." That's the newest liberal slur used to justify bannings, exclusion and self-righteous condemnation. It's what they use in order to condemn and marginalize, when they cannot meet you squarely on the battlefield of reason. It's really weak.

'I believe a marriage should be between a woman and a man' = anti-gay.
'I believe a homosexual act is a sinful act' = anti-gay.
'I picket the funerals of dead gay people' = anti-gay.

When you are interested in honest conversation, and you are willing to drop the broad hyperbole and sensationalism, let me know.

God's issue wasn't the polygamy as much as it was the fact the wives were "foreign" (1 Kings 11).

God's issue was that his multiple wive's lead him to idolatry and other sins.

Using Solomon as an argument against christians argument of sanctity of marriage is a strange choice is my only point as Solomon is a cautionary tale of a man's wisdom and romance leading to his demise to which having multiple wives seems to be a catalyst.

Eh, I could of went with David as well. I could of also went with forcing a raped woman to marry her rapist. The point being that there's nothing 'sanctimonious' about a one man, one woman marriage.