About Jian Ghomeshi & Terry Gross: the childless-gay interviews of public radio.
The way you love does matter.
If you love the wrong way you might just get AIDS, die, and leave your straight family with no father.
You can have abuses on both sides.
Atheists of Utah: one big problem with this group is that the focal point for their activities is attending the yearly gay pride festival in Salt Lake.
Regarding human sexuality: Unless kids come along naturally, you can end up with a life that goes nowhere.
Inherently non-reproductive sexuality does, in the long term, go nowhere.
To my fellow atheists & naturalists: will you try to eject me from your de facto church?
I can see why Tom in Portland went back to evangelical Christianity. Poor dating prospects in the secular groups, which are usually highly populated by gay fat women with strange hair.
Having kids is a good thing.
We need to reform atheist groups: extracting such groups from the dogmatism of the left.
Currently if you don't adhere to the ultra-liberal agenda you will undergo a heresy & excommunication trial in many secular / atheist / naturalist groups.
Regarding the GCHQ spying on the intimate activities of people who use Yahoo Messenger to have webcam chats: That does go too far. Gathering connection to connection data into a large database is one thing. But keeping content data, and being able to watch en-masse webcam chats by regular people, without court approval for each search of actual content does go too far.
The U.S. Capitol Building should be returned to the people, for open walking around. Right now it is most definitely not a "temple of freedom." Perhaps the Congress can go work elsewhere, and have the building returned to the people. An initial security scan is ok at the door. But after that people should be free to walk around the building. Until then, it is not, nor will it ever be, a "temple of freedom" as is claimed in the current mandatory film they show to all visitors at present.
Commentary on pronunciation issues with English. John Boehner's last name should be pronounced boner, not bayner. English is English. Pakistan is Pakistan, not Paaaakaaastaaaaan. It's France, not Fronce. It's Mexico, not Mehico. And so on. English is English. If Mr. Boner wants people to pronounced his name as Bayner then he should change the spelling of his last name.
Religion is a natural phenomenon - it cuts both ways
The dogmas of a religion can actually be natural
Concern about non-reproductive sex can be natural
Maybe a children need a mommy & a daddy
Maybe if you spend your life in a non-reproductive hole you'll be unhappy as a result
Why I've become more socially conservative: several years of observation of the gay community.
Thanks black atheists of Atlanta, for introducing some much needed skepticism into the "atheist movement."
Bad ideas & dogma can come from anywhere, including the left.
On the left we have dogma, elders, inquisitions, heresy trials, and witch hunts.
Go question liberal dogma in a group of liberals and see what happens.
Excommunication trials - only in Mormonism? No, liberals will happily do these as well.
The only real immortality we can ever experience comes via having children. I'm for questioning liberal dogma that draws us away from that. True & honest & enlightened naturalism, atheism, and humanism means this to me.
Can we open a "Friends of the Black Atheists of Atlanta" branch here?
Maybe if you work to be an ex-gay, maybe that's a good thing. Since I spend several years closely observing gay culture, I feel the need to mention this. Also ready heresy trials will quickly happen if you question this key liberal dogma point.
http://narth.com
http://pfox.org/default.html
Without god is everything permitted? If you listen to the liberals you might think so. But no, we're talking about humans. Humans have built in morality. Without god not everything is permitted - even if the liberals might think so, or act like this is true.
If you force yourself to believe a certain thing - a more deep part of human nature, that can make you unhappy. And being in a dead-end non-reproductive loop can, indeed, make you and everyone unhappy.
Tying into 14 billion years of evolution, directly, by having children is of value. Immortality - great value. More valuable than chasing your tail all your life, and trying to force others to state that your "choice" is just as valuable as any other choice.
Not all things are equal. Not all choices are worthy of respect.
Family values atheism - thanks black Atheists of Atlanta for reminding us that it's possible to have these words exist together. And, we can also thank the people in other countries who aren't members of the American-liberal-dogmatic church - people who may value family over forced relativism. How's that for naturalism & humanism? Examining what people *actually do* and making note that sometimes there's damn good reasons for stigma to be assigned to certain activities. A very hard thing for an ex-religionist to realize.
If you're not careful, a liberal-dogma-questioning epiphany may cause you, Mr. & Mrs. Leftie, to be subjected to a liberal heresy trial. But, you jumped out of one church, you may as well be prepared to jump out of another.
Free speech. Free thought. Freedom from religion, on the right and on the left. And thankfully we're human, so without god not everything is permitted - even if the lefties may de facto act like it is.
Family Values Atheism
Questioning liberal dogma
the Gay Flag: Freaks Welcome Here
questioning gay marriage
secular reparative therapy (choosing to live straight)
Examples of liberal dogma:
1. Everything is equal.
2. Gay marriage is as useful, helpful, healthy, and productive as regular heterosexual marriage.
3. Gay couples are as useful, helpful, healthy, and productive as regular heterosexual couples.
4. Gay sex is as useful, helpful, healthy, and productive as regular heterosexual sex.
5. For the individual, living the gay or homosexual lifestyle is just as useful, helpful, healthy, and productive as living a heterosexual life.
6. For groups of humans, it's important to be "accepting" of a much wider range of expressions of human sexuality.
7. Being gay is just "who you are," and whatever happens to pop into your head is "what's right for you."
8. If you find out you like men sexually, it's ok to cheat on your wife, get AIDS, die, and leave your family with no father (as happened with an uncle of mine).
9. Being around gay lifestyle living parents doesn't impact children to be gay. If you're the daughter of a gay man who otherwise cheated on your mother, got AIDS, and died as a result - it's no problem for you to learn from your father that being gay is ok and therefore to live as a lesbian.
The gay flag essentially means: "Freaks Welcome Here." I first saw such a flag being flown over the entrance to a Unitarian Univeralist church, a church which for several years was headed up by a transgendered woman/man/it (woman to man). "We won't judge you." Well, after several years of being exposed to gay culture via a nephew of mine I can safely say this: Yes, we need to "judge" the gay lifestyle. Yes we need to judge whether gay marriage is equivalent to regular true straight marriage. Yes we need to judge whether inherently non-reproductive sex is as useful to humanity as regular sex is.
There are some gay people who spend there lives in service & helping others - being part of the social fabric in a good way. But, there's also hordes of homosexuals who spend their lives selfishly chasing their own & other people's tails - to no useful end. A permanent stunted petty vain childhood state.
In cultures which are less accepting of the state of being homosexual, there are less homosexuals. Socialization plays a much larger role in what happens than the gay rights advocates will admit. And "just being born that way" doesn't mean your brain is 100% blocked from life as a more normal, healthy, productive, and happy person - living a life which isn't stunted.
So, if you've found that you like people of the same sex sexually, I would submit that you can choose to open yourself up to happy sexual marital long term family type relations with a person of the opposite sex. And what will be the benefit of such an action? Immortality.
I agree with the Black Atheists of Atlanta where they state that the only true flesh & blood immortality we will ever experience is through having children.
An animal which doesn't wish to reproduce for whatever reason is damaged. As an advocate for naturalism, I'm for examining ALL human cultures to see what may lie at the heart of human nature. And many cultures discourage homosexuality. Is that a bad thing? No! I support them. And in as much as I can join hands with the rebels who are in the Black Atheists of Atlanta, I'll do so - as a guy with lighter skin. But I'll join them in spirit and with the brave concept that as an atheist we can rebel against, and take a step back from, liberal dogma too!
Not everything that comes from religion is necessarily bad. What they advocate for CAN be part of human nature. And reproduction is a damn important part of human nature. If you find the liberal dogmas you're being taught draw you away from this key fact, you're being abused. So work to free yourself...
Raising children in a household which is accepting of the homosexual agenda can lead to children who won't reproduce. That IS a problem. Liberal dogmatists will try and tell you otherwise. But such people are essentially part of a new death cult. That's my view.
So, do I think homosexuality should be illegal & punished? Maybe not. But I do question the value of legalizing gay marriage, and of assuming that a gay couple can raise a child just as well as a regular straight family. A gay could will introduce the gay agenda meme set to the child as being acceptable, and that may well open up the child to being sucked into a dead-end, petty, stunted life path.
For the gay people who do live service oriented lives, I feel empathy and sympathy for them, and I feel sad for them as well. I also feel sad for the heterosexual liberal who also chooses to not have kids because they've been lied to and sucked into the liberal death cult that teaches, among other things, that overpopulation is a concern, and that overpopulation in third world countries means you shouldn't have any kids.
What a crazy and destructive idea: "Your right to be a zero." Ok, you've got that right, but I don't have to respect it. And being gay is another way to be a zero. Yes we have certain artists who we remember, but even they could have hooked up with a woman and had kids - if they would have opened their minds to the possibility. The possibility and option for immortality. Some of them did.
So, from a secular perspective, there's no shame in living a "reparative" life, that is a life where you choose to live "straight" even if you're inclined to varying degrees to be "gay."
It's heresy in liberal & gay groups to state that choosing a straight life is a.) possible, and b.) preferable. They'll go on angry witch hunts against such ideas. Remember the Spanish Inquisition? Today we have the Gay Inquisition. Watch how angry your average "gay" person gets online when they encounter such ideas.
Hey, it's not about god my friend. It's about tying into true & honest human nature, and that nature may well discourage people from engaging in inherently non-reproductive sex in the long term. That nature may well also discourage other destructive behaviors, such as sex which leads to deadly diseases and so on.
Human morals have some rather key foundational reasons behind them. Discouragement of homosexuality and encouragement of being a normal, healthy, productive, and dare I say, reproductive person, is a good thing. There, I said it. And if you're an atheist group who is ready to excommunicate people for having this view, or if you fly the gay flag to show how "accepting" you are, well, you're really no different than the religions you claim to be against.You've got your dogmas, and you're ready to back them up. But, I would argue, you're not really true humanists nor a true naturalists.
Religious & atheist groups are essentially meme set advocacy groups. Atheists groups DO advocate for a set of memes. So do religions. All these meme sets operate in human brains, and on the framework known as the human body. It's all natural, like it or not atheist & religionist. So that's what a liberal today has to come to terms with: examining which parts of religion, the parts that actually ascribe stigma to certain human behaviors - which stigma-advocating parts are actually valuable & worth advocating for? Oh my god, that's a super hard one for an ex-religionist to do.
The ex-religionist may well spend years of "letting it all hang out," and exploring Alice in Wonderland style all the hippie shit out there. But in the end maybe you'll then come around and find that some of the stuff they taught you as a kid, in your religion, may actually be, at least in part, correct. How can this be so? Because even in your religion it was humans talking to humans. A natural occurrence.
Liberals claim to be able to be more introspective - willing to do self examinations. But are you introspective enough to examine whether certain activities actually DO deserve to be shamed for (eg: discouraged)?
Many atheist groups have been similarly hijacked. The Unitarian Universalists were already hijacked and have been for some time. The creep of the gay freak flag has now moved on to "main line" atheist groups. But, the black atheists are thankfully pushing back.
Is Homosexuality Destructive For The Black Family?
In the video they're critical of "cracker culture." If by cracker culture they mean ultra-left liberal culture that assumes that everything is equal - I agree.
Ok, so this is turning out to be a long standing issue. Examine the history of science & religion. In the past scientists got locked up for doing science, because their work challenged the contemporary views of the world. And even today, atheists are being sent to prison for speaking their mind.
Galileo was found to be "...vehemently suspect of heresy," and later sentenced to prison. A relevant excerpt from his sentence - but read the whole thing when you get a chance:
We say, pronounce, sentence, and declare that you,
the above-mentioned Galileo, because of the things deduced in the trial
and confessed by you as above, have rendered yourself according to this
Holy Office vehemently suspected of heresy, namely of having held and
believed a doctine which is false and contrary to the divine and Holy
Scripture: that the sun is the center of the world and does not move from
east to west, and the earth moves and is not the center of the world,
and that one may hold and defend as probable an opinion after it has been
declared and defined contrary to Holy Scripture. Consequently you
have incurred all the censures and penalties imposed and promulgated by
the sacred canons and all particular and general laws against such delinquents.
We are willing to absolve you from them provided that first, with a sincere
heart and unfeigned faith, in front of us you abjure, curse, and detest
the above-mentioned errors and heresies, and every other error and heresy
contrary to the Catholic and Apostolic Church, in the manner and form
we will prescribe to you.
Furthermore, so that this serious and pernicious error
and transgression of yours does not remain completely unpunished, and
so that you will be more cautious in the future and an example for others
to abstain from similar crimes, we order that the book Dialogue
by Galileo Galilei be prohibited by public edict.
We condemn you to formal imprisonment in this Holy
Office at our pleasure. As a salutary penance we impose on you to
recite the seven penitential Psalms once a week for the next three years.
And we reserve the authority to moderate, change, or condone wholly or
in part the above-mentioned penalties and penances.
And then later we have the Scopes Trial, where teaching evolution was illegal in Tennessee.
No conflict between science & religion? That's what the Templeton Foundation would have us believe.
It almost goes without saying that creation "science" (which is not a science) is a direct response from religionists who see science as a threat.
The approach of the creationist religionists is as follows:
We don't like the answers science gives, they disprove our literalist interpretation of scripture. Therefore we shall simply redefine what science is and what science means, and we'll blow as much smoke as possible and muddy the waters with half and partial truths regarding what the true state of scientific discovery is.
This is precisely the approach taken by the "creation scientists:" blow smoke, change definitions, and lie when you have to.
And, the exact same approach is taken by the Mormon Church in the following articles, as they pathetically attempt to respond to DNA evidence refuting key claims in their founding religious documents on the origins of the American Indians. Check out:
A talk by Dr. Southerton to at an Exmormon Foundation conference: http://exmormonfoundation.org/audio2006.html
...look under the text on that page that says
"Simon Southerton, Ph.D.: 'Losing a Lost Race: From Radishes to DNA and Outer Darkness'"
Mormon scriptures that directly tie American Indians with Israel:
2 Nephi 26:19
19 And it shall come to pass, that those who have dwindled in unbelief shall be smitten by the hand of the Gentiles.
Enos 1:16
And I had faith, and I did cry unto God that he would preserve the records; and he covenanted with me that he would bring them forth unto the Lamanites in his own due time.
D&C 3:18
18 And this testimony shall come to the knowledge of the Lamanites, and the Lemuelites, and the Ishmaelites, who dwindled in unbelief because of the iniquity of their fathers, whom the Lord has suffered to destroy their brethren the Nephites, because of their iniquities and their abominations.
D&C 3:19
19 And for this very purpose are these plates preserved, which contain these records---that the promises of the Lord might be fulfilled, which he made to his people;
D&C 3:20
20 And that the Lamanites might come to the knowledge of their fathers, and that they might know the promises of the Lord, and that they may believe the gospel and rely upon the merits of Jesus Christ, and be glorified through faith in his name, and that through their repentance they might be saved. Amen.
D&C 19:27
27 Which is my word to the Gentile, that soon it may go to the Jew, of whom the Lamanites are a remnant, that they may believe the gospel, and look not for a Messiah to come who has already come.
D&C 28:8
8 And now, behold, I say unto you that you shall go unto the Lamanites and preach my gospel unto them; and inasmuch as they receive thy teachings thou shalt cause my church to be established among them; and thou shalt have revelations, but write them not by way of commandment.
D&C 32:2
2 And that which I have appointed unto him is that he shall go with my servants, Oliver Cowdery and Peter Whitmer, Jun., into the wilderness among the Lamanites.
D&C 54:8
8 And thus you shall take your journey into the regions westward, unto the land of Missouri, unto the borders of the Lamanites.
D&C Section 57 Introduction - 1986 Edition
Revelation given through Joseph Smith the Prophet, in Zion, Jackson County, Missouri, July 20, 1831. HC 1: 189-190. In compliance with the Lord's command (Section 52), the elders had journeyed from Kirtland to Missouri with many varied experiences and some opposition. In contemplating the state of the Lamanites and the lack of civilization, refinement, and religion among the people generally, the Prophet exclaimed in yearning prayer: "When will the wilderness blossom as the rose? When will Zion be built up in her glory, and where will they Temple stand, unto which all nations shall come in the last days?" Subsequently he received this revelation.
D&C 57:4
4 Wherefore, it is wisdom that the land should be purchased by the saints, and also every tract lying westward, even into the line running directly between Jew and Gentile.
[Footnote on the bottom of page 103 of the 1986 D&C:]
4b IE by metonymy "Jew" here refers to the Lamanites, and "Gentile" to the white settlers.
But notice, in the Doctrine & Covenants sections referenced above, we have The Mormon God, Elohim, speaking directly to Joseph Smith, right? Hey, Mormon Church, and FARMS, can you get around that?
The Mormon Brain Software, which was running in my own brain for several years, was a set of memes that operated rather like a virus or a biological system that put up defenses.
...and they do in all religions. If you have a doubt, that's from Satan. So, this is the last resort of all religionists. A newer tactic is to try to redefine what science means and what science is. That's the tactic of creation "scientists" and Templeton Chumps alike. And another longer standing tactic is to blow smoke. And then, if all else fails, just threaten people with the fear that any doubt comes to them via an evil spirit. How perverse, but it's par for the course in cult-type religions.
