WarmRoom

I will admit there are isolated incidences where this happens and it is usually related to liberal "tolerance" not atheism or atheists. this is an EXTREME blog and generally I had to stop reading a lot of it because I think it is just offensive and flat out wrong in some areas but if you want to see what atheists think about islam and tolerance you should take a look <<< remove link. >>> there is also the secular right which is for conservative atheists. Atheists are fighting just as vociferously against Islam in the public sphere you just don't here about it because fox news wont cover atheism in a positive light and it doesn't fit the liberal medias views of tolerance so generally people don't here about it. However to suggest this is widespread is a bit excessive. Also I was forced to pray when I went to school. Although I will admit I was a Christian at the time and didn't have a problem with it them but looking back the heavy influence of Christianity at school hampered my development in some areas in my life. So don't tell me that no one is forced to pray in schools because I was. There was even a muslim student in our school that the teachers made him recite Christian prayers also he was not given any breaks for Ramadan nor was it accommodated in any way.

well Shilo I am not here to argue with you. I think this "war on Christianity" is a bunch of hot air. the media tends to sensationalize things and can often take a very narrow view on any given subject to generate sales/ratings. I am not going to try and convince you otherwise if you bought it hook line in sinker i'll go ahead and let them real you in. I am not trying to knock down your argument either but you constantly bring up this Ramadan thing and its just a silly argument because schools are not enforcing Ramadan some schools are accommodating peoples religious beliefs this does not = school prayer where teachers make students pray before meals or class. If the teachers were making students adhere to Ramadan that would be a different matter. I would be up in arms about that. If your kid wants to pray in school I can support that I just don't want a teacher telling my kid that he has to pray before every meal. I don't think its that much to ask to not have religion crammed down my kid's throat at every opportunity.

Justin come on there is no war on Christianity that is about as much hootnanny as the GOP war on women and minorities. Are there some frivolous lawsuits sure just as much as there are frivolous laws making it illegal to serve public office without worshiping god. It cuts both ways and it is a minority on both sides of the argument you cant seriously argue that communities are being "impoverished" by these types of lawsuits. I think what happened at this court house is a prime example of the strength of our democracy where to separate groups with differing opinions on what should and should not be allowed in the public sphere can reach a compromise.

Yes because atheists love islam Shilo in fact last night I was thinking gee how do I further <<< Upset >>> Christians I know I am going to start Ramadan as a national holiday. If I had to choose between Christianity in schools or Islam in schools I would choose Christianity hands down every time if I had to choose between Christianity and Buddhism I think Buddhism wins out but then again that's just me. It is patently absurd to think that atheists support Islam. Do teachers enforce non Islamic students to practice Ramadan? yet we enforce the Christian holiday of Christmas? This is about a neutral play box and your assertion that atheism is IMO here to remove your right to religious expression is patently absurd. Did they remove the Decalogue in this case? NO so your conspiracy theory is false.

Its not that they feel the have a greater share of the public space Justin its about maintaining a neutral sandbox so everyone can believe in whatever god/gods/goddesses they want without feeling outcast by their government. I believe its not the governments place to enforce or support our religious beliefs. How would you feel if we just started making memorials to all of the saints and putting them in the court houses everywhere ? what if a monument to sharia law was placed in the courthouses? The idea is if you allow one you have to allow all or none at all. This is an example of allowing all.

I wouldn't really call it religious though as that would suggest they believe in a god. You can believe in something it doesn't mean it has to be religious. I think it is a natural part of our evolution as social animals to band together in groups. The big problem for a lot of ex-Christians is that sense of community you get from church. we are such a small percentage of the population that it really makes it hard to get the same group structures that churches provide. Also not to mention the whole spectrum and gamut of beliefs within the atheist/agnostic community. So if they appear religious its not that they are religious its acting on a most basic social function that we all share.

yeah Justin what monument are they tearing down? I think you may have misread the article. Again its not about originality Justin as I stated above it is a reaction from a previous held belief. It is something some atheists feel a need to contemplate because it had consumed so much of their lives at some point. Also if you want to believe that science has disproven evolution go for it I wont stop that but to say that science does not support it is a bit laughable. It has the largest amount of scientific consensus than almost any other biological hypothesis ever presented so I think its a stretch to claim that science does not support evolution. I have no problem with creationism being taught in schools I have a problem quantifying it as science though as it does not adhere to the scientific method. I could see it being taught as history or philosophy that would be a more apt description. however as revolutionist has pointed out we are getting off topic. So I am going to leave it there. This monument is not really about mockery it is being put up to show that there are other points of view and to keep an open mind. If you take this as a mockery than I would be afraid to hear what you think of real mockery like the famous art piece "piss Christ" in the 90's that is what real mockery is and that is meant to be offensive. Darwin fish FSM etc. are not meant to be mean or ugly they are just light commentary from some atheists trust me things can get a lot more ugly than this. As my dad used to say grow some thicker skin or everything is just going to piss you off.

Yeah lol we have gone a bit off topic hehehe. You have to understand though a lot of these symbols like the evolution fish etc. come from ex-Christians we use these symbols much like early Christians did to say hey I am an agnostic/atheist its ok to chat with me about these issues if you want. It is an evolution of the symbolism of sorts and I can totally understand why its offensive. It really is more of an inside joke we accept that Christians are not going to get it but it is away of expressing ones frustrations when dealing with a life that was once dedicated to something you no longer believe. Humor sometimes is the best medicine so to speak. But enough of Flying Spaghetti Monsters and pastafarians lets agree to accept each others differences with empathy and peace =D

well see that's an argument from a lack of understanding. Just because an argument is used by people who are aggressive towards Christianity does not mean that the argument itself is. You are assigning meaning to it that's not there. Its like guilty by association. Most pastafarians are not anti-religion. In fact pastafarians like to incorporate positive religious influences like the sense of community and support. There is even a pastafarian bible. While it does mock religion in a way its not negative towards religion just arguments used in some apologetics circles. Also Richard dawkins uses pink unicorns in his argument does this mean that pink unicorns are anti-Christian? Dawkins is also not touched by his noodely goodness so he cant speak to the matter.

well to be fair if they protested to take down my proposal the Decalogue would go with it. So I am not to sure they would try and take it down. The fact that the Decalogue would still be up is probably a win in their book. If they have to deal with some slightly offensive monuments in a reaction to theirs it kinda goes with the territory. I don't think FSM is meant to be as offensive as some people think it is. It is about proving a negative not trying to state that Christianity is evil. for example I say you cant prove god is real you say you cant disprove god then I say the flying spaghetti monster is real you say it is not I say you cant prove its not. it was started as a letter against creationism being taught in public schools. Not against Christianity and still to this day it is not against any religion in particular it is just an example to counter an argument.

I didn't say you were singling out a group shilo I said your words can give that view that you are this is different than actually singling out a group or not. Yes you are operating within the confines of the discussion at hand which is homosexuality. I am not assigning anything to your views I am merely stating they way in which you are arguing your position will lend itself to a view that you are being unfair. It doesn't matter if you claim you are not but the words you choose to use to defend your position makes it SEEEM that way it does not mean that it is. I would not claim for a second to understand what you believe and/or are thinking. If jesus is the cure what do they have to do to receive the cure? What happens when the cure in your opinion does not come the way you think it comes? You see they accepted jesus into their hearts why wont he reveal this truth that is so obvious to you to them or is sin more powerful than god? Secondly I think the real issue here for you is a semantic one not a theological one. Because they identify as homosexual you are getting an impression on them that might not necessarily be true.

also Addicts remain addicts. i.e. Alcoholism there is no such thing as a former alcoholic they are always going to be alcoholic they have to adapt strategies in their lifestyles to avoid the temptation of Alcohol

I don't think they are trying to pervert your words Shilo. The disagreement from my perspective seems not to be what the bible says about homosexuality but the nature of forgivness and the wages of sin. The bible says all sins are damning and equal before the lord correct me if I am wrong on this. So to single out those that claim they suffer from homosexuality as being doomed to hell seems to others that you are singling out a specific group. Applying your logic to other groups. Men who are repeat adulterers are just as guilty as the homosexuals as in both cases they have a sin originating from their heart the difference being one acts on that sin the other does not this makes it seem like you are overly focusing on the homosexual sin as some how being worse than the other sins. Lets try to put some perspective on the matter This group views that they are plagued by homosexual temptations this does not mean that they are homosexual does it? If I were to say I am plagued by drug abuse and the only way for me to keep my addictions at bay is to abstain from associating with drug abusers and situations that would put me into a place of temptation. They are abstaining from sex because this will trigger temptation that is unnatural to them. This is their best solution and they are trusting god to protect them from sin.

sorry shilo while paul was imprisoned its not quite what you made it out to be. Here is a really good link on the matter https://www.christiancourier.com/articles/144-pauls-two-year-roman-imprisonment I always interpreted the thorn in his side as dealing with sin not a physical ailment. My background was that of a southern Baptist. My preacher at first Baptist in Selma,AL preached as much. so my understanding is that the implication is we all have sin's that tempt us that are unique to the individual i.e. some struggle with lying others lust etc. We all have to face these temptations with the holy spirit guiding us and protecting us. We falter from these sins when we stray from god. The thorn in ones side is a reference to individual struggles of sin imho.

I agree the whole thing seems kind of silly to me as an artist it just hurts my eyes!!!! I am telling you if they wanted to make a statement they should have had raptorjesus sitting in the lap of the FSM holding the ten commandments except replacing god with man or something. It's cheeky enough to not be overly offensive and combines enough atheist memes together to make a more universal approach oh well to each their own I guess.

its not a monument to themselves the courthouse where they are erecting this at already has a ten commandments monument this monument they are erecting is going to parallel the ten commandments monument making a morality statement on the ten commandments. So even though it is being put in place by the AAO it actually has some religious context and value with the Christian god. I would have preferred a monument to the FSM or something like that. This is a perfect example of equal opportunity. Also I don't think the AAO denies that its a group its in the title American Atheist ORGANIZAION. Also if I as an individual sued the gov to give me equal access to a cause and a larger group finances me this does not mean that I support all of that groups position. This is a good example of freedom of speech and harms no one. If Ozymandias erects a monument to himself does that make it religious? this is also not the first secular monument either see Lincoln memorial mount rushmore etc.

call it what ever you want fresno there are some diseases that are genetic you can observe this if you want. You don't have to take my word for it.

Golden Eagle your right they have not isolated the gay gene yet. Our genome is a big and complex thing and we cant expect immediate results. We have found some interesting stuff though on the matter for example scientists have isolated a set of genes related to alcoholism. Of course nature can influence our genes and our genes do make switches as a result to environmental stimuli this further complicates the issue on sexual orientation. It will only be a matter of time before orientation is isolated and with gene switch research it is only a matter of time before you will be able to decide the orientation of your child. Now this brings up an interesting question. If we can control orientation at birth would this eliminate homosexuality? After all how many parents if they could would want to prevent their kids from an undo burden after all being homosexual is not exactly easy socially speaking. Also it begs the question is it morally right to do this? Right now we have the technology to decide gender however it is frowned upon socially speaking in the medical community and there is also a whole host of legal issues surrounding this. But if you live in California and don't mind spending between $25,000-$75,000 you can choose the gender of your child and I think even eye color. Seriously though gene switch technology is going to revolutionize the medical world. Being able to manipulate our genes is the pinnacle of health. You could eliminate any number of genetic disorders and issues cancer adhd bi-polar etc.

can you view homosexuality in a medical sense vs the spiritual sense Shilo? as far as semantics goes there could be a difference between what they view the term yet agree with your position. Their fear is that sex of any kind could promote those feelings and because of their disposition to homosexual sin it is better to avoid sex to prevent the urges that this might cause. their belief that the holy spirit can fill them up and prevent sexual desires is more logical than the holy spirit filling them up and completely changing their biological functions.

I don't think they are justifying anything Shilo I think they find it just as despicable as you they probably even hate themselves for it. Which is why they are trying to shield themselves from sexual thoughts. I think they classify themselves as homosexual in the medical sense not the spirtual

Your assuming they will fail at celibacy shilo can the holy spirit not fill them up and give them the strength to resist temptation. Matthew 19:10-12 The disciples said to him, “If such is the case of a man with his wife, it is better not to marry.” But he said to them, “Not everyone can receive this saying, but only those to whom it is given. For there are eunuchs who have been so from birth, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by men, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Let the one who is able to receive this receive it.” They want to receive celibacy this is their solution to fighting the wages of sin. Celibacy is not for everyone but for some it is their only option.

I am curious Shilo since you used the term abomination you are referring to Leviticus. What are your views on Christians who attend crawfish festivals?

No sir! The issue of sin is one of the heart the deepest part of us that all else stems from... if you have sinful desires and don't act on them.... you still have desire that is sinful! God tells us that in Jesus His Son new birth is possible- a spiritual reality where the wrong desire can be completely changed into right desire! Love, Steven thanks for clarifying. I cant agree with that assertion but then again I don't have to. At least it should give me a better perspective on that position though. I think I might have learned something today =D

I have just quick question if I may interject. Is this more along the lines of semantics? If they were to not identify as homosexual but recognized that they may have these urges and in doing so reject the temptation of the urge. While they might not be able to identify is heterosexual as there is no inclination to do so could they simply drop the homosexual moniker and state "because we have homosexual urges we feel it is in our best interest to abstain from sexual contact as we do not want to be tempted by sin." in this manner they don't identify as homosexual but just merely as a human being. Would this not resolve the issue at hand?

hmm I tried posting a link but I guess it didn't show up. www huffingtonpost com/2009/10/18/african-children-denounce_n_324943 html replace the spaces with dots. I gtg right now but ill be back on later for the other parts of your question. ill do some stat mining in a second as well so be patient. catch-up i.e the rate of overall total deaths from 1970 to now as a result of terrorism or religiously inspired violent revolution. ill identify the countries in my next post to just be patient =D update 1. list of countries with a particular problem of witch hunting Cameroon, Democratic Republic of the Congo, the Gambia, Ghana, Kenya, Sierra Leone, Tanzania, and Zambia. other cases of witch hunting exist all over Africa but are not prevalent enough to be consider a major problem. update 2. Due to the nature of information gathering in the area on the specific subject I could not find a source sufficient to meet my needs. There are a lot of articles scattered across the web but it doesn't seem as if anyone has collated the data yet there are individual reports since 1999 in some countries where as much as 200 people have been tortured and executed and other countries where up to 1000 people have been imprisoned and forced to drink poison cocktails. so an actual total I don't have at the moment. ill do some more digging