Atheists are Better than You...

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
41

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]mertdawg wrote:

analysis:
Racially homogeneous countries have less crime. Racially homogeneous states have less crime.
[/quote]

If the above is true, then why doesn’t it translate down to the city level. Some of our most crime-ridden cities and neighborhoods are “racially homogeneous”. Explain.

Do you mean White States and White Countries have less crime? [/quote]

They do. I think my point was that comparing Idaho to Mississippi or the United States to Sweden is a dishonest set-up by the author of the article.

42

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:
It isn’t complicated.[/quote]

Then you aren’t paying attention. If you merely disagree with Obama nowadays you could earn the racist label. If you’re for enforcing our immigration laws, yep, you get the same. If you dislike AA, the same. And what’s with the idiotic “you’re a homophobe” if you dislike homosexuality? Am I a coprophiliacaphobe, too? Or, a stepping-out-on-the-wifephobe? A swingers-phobe? Sorry, but to me, if the mumbo-jumbo term has any meaning at all, it could be applied to a minority smaller than homosexuals themselves.[/quote]

“Homophobia: Prejudice against (fear or dislike of) homosexual people and homosexuality.” From Princeton.edu, verbatim. So I guess that answers that.

And: there was no indication in the article that any of the author’s claims had anything to do with Obama, politics, immigration laws, affirmative action. And there was no indication that they didn’t. I don’t know how they were measured. And neither do you.

43

[quote]Aragorn wrote:

[quote]Charlie Horse wrote:

[quote]GCF wrote:

[quote]Charlie Horse wrote:

LOL

I know more believers than non-believers and I can’t say there is any difference as far as being a good person.
My dad is a believer and was totally accepting of me not being.
Maybe I just hang out with better believers, also I’m not American, so I guess those studies don’t apply to me.
[/quote]

That may be true but I know who I would rather have as my phone a friend on who wants to be a millionaire. [/quote]

I sometimes think that not all who claim to be believers really are, like politicians and people who only attend church during special occasions. As an atheist I have difficulty believing believers really believe. If that makes sense. lol
[/quote]

I would totally and completely agree! I would not say “all” or “most” but there are certainly a lot who claim it but don’t believe or claim it because their parents were that (“i’m a catholic/baptist/whatever”) but never believe. Kinda cultural almost (“i’m jewish by heritage not belief” sort of thing). Very politician like indeed.

[/quote]

A lot of practical atheists, (maybe they call themselves agnostic) that I know tell me that they don’t deny the possibility of a god, they just depise the religious institutions that have used fear and power to control people.

44

[quote]smh23 wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:
It isn’t complicated.[/quote]

Then you aren’t paying attention. If you merely disagree with Obama nowadays you could earn the racist label. If you’re for enforcing our immigration laws, yep, you get the same. If you dislike AA, the same. And what’s with the idiotic “you’re a homophobe” if you dislike homosexuality? Am I a coprophiliacaphobe, too? Or, a stepping-out-on-the-wifephobe? A swingers-phobe? Sorry, but to me, if the mumbo-jumbo term has any meaning at all, it could be applied to a minority smaller than homosexuals themselves.[/quote]

“Homophobia: Prejudice against (fear or dislike of) homosexual people and homosexuality.” From Princeton.edu, verbatim. So I guess that answers that.

And: there was no indication in the article that any of the author’s claims had anything to do with Obama, politics, immigration laws, affirmative action. And there was no indication that they didn’t. I don’t know how they were measured. And neither do you.[/quote]

Is it “prejudiced” if you already know that someone is homosexual and believe it to be immoral? America is a homophobic country! and homophobia is sanctioned, and traditionally considered to be a good thing, ie “immoralphobia”.

45

[quote]smh23 wrote:
What makes a person a homophobe is dislike of homosexuality or homosexuals. It isn’t complicated.[/quote]

And why is this immoral? At the most basic level it seems you are saying dislike of a sexual act or desire is immoral.

If I am into scat and my girlfriend loves rubbing my poop all over herself …and you thought that was disgusting…are you immoral?

If not then why is it immoral if you dislike two men having sex?

It is just a really strange thing to think.

46

[quote]smh23 wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:
I like how some of the social positions are held out as basic moral principles.[/quote]

Other than the death penalty and possibly corporal punishment for children, I don’t see anything that isn’t a pretty Manichean right-and-wrong issue.

Basic morality: torture is bad, racism is bad, sexism is bad, homophobia is bad, Antisemitism is bad, environmental degradation is bad, human rights are good. That doesn’t seem too controversial.[/quote]

Take homophobia, for example. What the hell does that mean? I don’t want gay studies taught in the public school system. Also, I don’t support government recognition of gay marriage. Do I want them dragged out of their homes, or beaten up by hoodlums? No. Even so, am I still a homophobe because of the earlier beliefs I put foward? If so, is that even ‘bad?’ By what authority is this sociologist declaring it ‘bad?’

Am I racist because I dislike affirmative action, am willing to confront uncomfortable facts, and want the government to do something about illegal immigration? If I am racist, how does he decide it’s ‘bad?’
[/quote]

What makes a person a homophobe is dislike of homosexuality or homosexuals. A racist dislikes a certain race of people. It isn’t complicated.[/quote]

So as a firm believer in the immorality of homosexuality who has good friends who are homosexuals…what does that make me?

47

I am definitely a fecafricationaphobe

48

[quote]DixiesFinest wrote:<<< So as a firm believer in the immorality of homosexuality who has good friends who are homosexuals…what does that make me?
[/quote]A Catholic? LOL. Dixie Dude, I was wundrin where ya ran off to.

49

[quote]DixiesFinest wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:
I like how some of the social positions are held out as basic moral principles.[/quote]

Other than the death penalty and possibly corporal punishment for children, I don’t see anything that isn’t a pretty Manichean right-and-wrong issue.

Basic morality: torture is bad, racism is bad, sexism is bad, homophobia is bad, Antisemitism is bad, environmental degradation is bad, human rights are good. That doesn’t seem too controversial.[/quote]

Take homophobia, for example. What the hell does that mean? I don’t want gay studies taught in the public school system. Also, I don’t support government recognition of gay marriage. Do I want them dragged out of their homes, or beaten up by hoodlums? No. Even so, am I still a homophobe because of the earlier beliefs I put foward? If so, is that even ‘bad?’ By what authority is this sociologist declaring it ‘bad?’

Am I racist because I dislike affirmative action, am willing to confront uncomfortable facts, and want the government to do something about illegal immigration? If I am racist, how does he decide it’s ‘bad?’
[/quote]

What makes a person a homophobe is dislike of homosexuality or homosexuals. A racist dislikes a certain race of people. It isn’t complicated.[/quote]

So as a firm believer in the immorality of homosexuality who has good friends who are homosexuals…what does that make me?
[/quote]

Figure it out yourself.

50

[quote]phaethon wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:
What makes a person a homophobe is dislike of homosexuality or homosexuals. It isn’t complicated.[/quote]

And why is this immoral? At the most basic level it seems you are saying dislike of a sexual act or desire is immoral.

If I am into scat and my girlfriend loves rubbing my poop all over herself …and you thought that was disgusting…are you immoral?

If not then why is it immoral if you dislike two men having sex?

It is just a really strange thing to think.[/quote]

No. HomosexuALS–i.e., they people who by the design of God or nature become adults that are attracted to other adults of the same sex.

I don’t give a shit what you think of the act itself, but when you hate or discriminate against or dislike the people that want to engage in it, you are a homophobe. I am disgusted by shrimp but I don’t hate people that eat it. Understand?

It’s simple. And if you ARE a homophobe, it is only natural that you would want to argue that homophobia itself is not immoral. In which case I really don’t care to argue it further…believe what you want and I’ll do the same.

51

[quote]GCF wrote:
So it turns out that atheists are more ethical, intelligent, better looking, better parents and overall have larger genitalia than religious folk. It says so in the Washington Post:
[/quote]

Everyone should really read some of the papers the article links to.

For instance:
http://www.pitzer.edu/academics/faculty/zuckerman/Zuckerman_on_Atheism.pdf

The paper states that young people are much more likely to be atheists than older people.

It also states that men are much more likely to be atheists than women.

The most secular group (in the US) is Asian-Americans, then Whites.

Now we all know that younger people are more educated than older people. We also know younger generations are more intelligent (hence the reason we keep normalizing IQ tests to 100 as otherwise they increase with every generation).

And all that is being shown is correlations.

Finally we know that Asian-Americans, and whites both have higher average IQ’s than Blacks and Hispanics.

So really what we article is saying is: Young white and asian males are more ethical, intelligent, better looking, better parents and overall have larger genitalia than everyone else.

Of course you can cherry pick the paper for parts that support your view (i.e. just like the author of the newspaper article has done). E.g.:

Page 10: “compared with the religious, secular adults are more likely to have had an extra-marital affair”

Why didn’t the journalist include being a cheating whore in immoral actions. Surely almost everyone agrees it is immoral.

Or:

Or this gem:
Page 8: “people who are religious devout, but not extremists, tend to report greater subjective well-being and life satisfaction more ability to cope with stress and crises and fewer symptoms of depression”

^^ The results of a 100 paper meta-analysis.

Finally the main thing the article is missing: The reason for such a belief. Perhaps people in a shitty situation / environment are more likely to believe in god. This has wide ramifications.

It could very well simply be that people without significant challenges in their life tend to be atheists. In fact there exists a high correlation. But of course also a high correlation between social rung and intelligence – see how hard it is to un-muddle data and make a fair point.

All in all the best you can get from the article is: Atheists aren’t the devil incarnate. They aren’t significantly different than religious people.

52

[quote]smh23 wrote:

[quote]DixiesFinest wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:
I like how some of the social positions are held out as basic moral principles.[/quote]

Other than the death penalty and possibly corporal punishment for children, I don’t see anything that isn’t a pretty Manichean right-and-wrong issue.

Basic morality: torture is bad, racism is bad, sexism is bad, homophobia is bad, Antisemitism is bad, environmental degradation is bad, human rights are good. That doesn’t seem too controversial.[/quote]

Take homophobia, for example. What the hell does that mean? I don’t want gay studies taught in the public school system. Also, I don’t support government recognition of gay marriage. Do I want them dragged out of their homes, or beaten up by hoodlums? No. Even so, am I still a homophobe because of the earlier beliefs I put foward? If so, is that even ‘bad?’ By what authority is this sociologist declaring it ‘bad?’

Am I racist because I dislike affirmative action, am willing to confront uncomfortable facts, and want the government to do something about illegal immigration? If I am racist, how does he decide it’s ‘bad?’
[/quote]

What makes a person a homophobe is dislike of homosexuality or homosexuals. A racist dislikes a certain race of people. It isn’t complicated.[/quote]

So as a firm believer in the immorality of homosexuality who has good friends who are homosexuals…what does that make me?
[/quote]

Figure it out yourself.[/quote]

Not going to answer?

I would venture a guess that seeing as homophobe is a word created as a label against anyone who diagrees with the homosexual lifestyle, I guess I am a homophobe. However, seeing as how I count among my good friends two of my classmates who are gay, I would suspect that I do not fear them or their lifestyle, which is of course would mean I am not a homopobe.

I am serious man, which is it?

53

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]DixiesFinest wrote:<<< So as a firm believer in the immorality of homosexuality who has good friends who are homosexuals…what does that make me?
[/quote]A Catholic? LOL. Dixie Dude, I was wundrin where ya ran off to.
[/quote]

haha proudly a Roman Catholic.

I have been busy with school and have not ventured much into PWI…following/keeping up with/posting in these threads takes much more time than the training threads

54

[quote]smh23 wrote:
What makes a person a homophobe is dislike of homosexuality or homosexuals. It isn’t complicated.
[/quote]

[quote]smh23 wrote:
No. HomosexuALS–i.e., they people who by the design of God or nature become adults that are attracted to other adults of the same sex.
[/quote]

You originally included homosexuality. Now you are limiting it to homosexuals.

[quote]smh23 wrote:
I don’t give a shit what you think of the act itself, but when you hate or discriminate against or dislike the people that want to engage in it, you are a homophobe. I am disgusted by shrimp but I don’t hate people that eat it. Understand?
[/quote]

So then thinking homosexuality is disgusting does NOT make you a homophobe. This is in direct contradiction to your original post.

[quote]smh23 wrote:
It’s simple. And if you ARE a homophobe, it is only natural that you would want to argue that homophobia itself is not immoral. In which case I really don’t care to argue it further…believe what you want and I’ll do the same.
[/quote]

It is not simple. You have already flip-flopped (see above). I consider homosexuality (the act and desire) disgusting. I don’t support homosexuality being taught in schools. I also don’t think that two men, or two women, can raise a child as well as a man and a woman (all else equal).

On the other hand my brother is gay. And I love him. So I love a gay bloke. I like plenty of gay people. I have never treated a gay person badly. I don’t consider it their fault that they are attracted to a different gender although I do think it is gross.

Am I a homophobe? Well it depends on who you ask. The point is how did the paper define a homophobe?

55

[quote]phaethon wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:
What makes a person a homophobe is dislike of homosexuality or homosexuals. It isn’t complicated.
[/quote]

[quote]smh23 wrote:
No. HomosexuALS–i.e., they people who by the design of God or nature become adults that are attracted to other adults of the same sex.
[/quote]

You originally included homosexuality. Now you are limiting it to homosexuals.

[quote]smh23 wrote:
I don’t give a shit what you think of the act itself, but when you hate or discriminate against or dislike the people that want to engage in it, you are a homophobe. I am disgusted by shrimp but I don’t hate people that eat it. Understand?
[/quote]

So then thinking homosexuality is disgusting does NOT make you a homophobe. This is in direct contradiction to your original post.

[quote]smh23 wrote:
It’s simple. And if you ARE a homophobe, it is only natural that you would want to argue that homophobia itself is not immoral. In which case I really don’t care to argue it further…believe what you want and I’ll do the same.
[/quote]

It is not simple. You have already flip-flopped (see above). I consider homosexuality (the act and desire) disgusting. I don’t support homosexuality being taught in schools. I also don’t think that two men, or two women, can raise a child as well as a man and a woman (all else equal).

On the other hand my brother is gay. And I love him. So I love a gay bloke. I like plenty of gay people. I have never treated a gay person badly. I don’t consider it their fault that they are attracted to a different gender although I do think it is gross.

Am I a homophobe? Well it depends on who you ask. The point is how did the paper define a homophobe?[/quote]

OK, redact the word homosexuality from my original definition. The only real evil in the matter is discrimination against people.

Other than that, I agree with most of what you said. I don’t exactly love the idea of gay sex either. But I respect adult human beings and their lifestyles as long as those lifestyles don’t hurt anyone else.

56

[quote]DixiesFinest wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:

[quote]DixiesFinest wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:
I like how some of the social positions are held out as basic moral principles.[/quote]

Other than the death penalty and possibly corporal punishment for children, I don’t see anything that isn’t a pretty Manichean right-and-wrong issue.

Basic morality: torture is bad, racism is bad, sexism is bad, homophobia is bad, Antisemitism is bad, environmental degradation is bad, human rights are good. That doesn’t seem too controversial.[/quote]

Take homophobia, for example. What the hell does that mean? I don’t want gay studies taught in the public school system. Also, I don’t support government recognition of gay marriage. Do I want them dragged out of their homes, or beaten up by hoodlums? No. Even so, am I still a homophobe because of the earlier beliefs I put foward? If so, is that even ‘bad?’ By what authority is this sociologist declaring it ‘bad?’

Am I racist because I dislike affirmative action, am willing to confront uncomfortable facts, and want the government to do something about illegal immigration? If I am racist, how does he decide it’s ‘bad?’
[/quote]

What makes a person a homophobe is dislike of homosexuality or homosexuals. A racist dislikes a certain race of people. It isn’t complicated.[/quote]

So as a firm believer in the immorality of homosexuality who has good friends who are homosexuals…what does that make me?
[/quote]

Figure it out yourself.[/quote]

Not going to answer?

I would venture a guess that seeing as homophobe is a word created as a label against anyone who diagrees with the homosexual lifestyle, I guess I am a homophobe. However, seeing as how I count among my good friends two of my classmates who are gay, I would suspect that I do not fear them or their lifestyle, which is of course would mean I am not a homopobe.

I am serious man, which is it?[/quote]

It isn’t my job to dole out judgement on the issue. And I don’t at all know you. And I have no idea what you mean by “disagree with the homosexual lifestyle”…as if it is some sort of academic thesis with which you can either agree or disagree.

There is nothing to agree with. Some people are gay. Why anyone thinks that that fact is contingent upon their approval is beyond me. Fucking arrogance.

57

[quote]smh23 wrote:
OK, redact the word homosexuality from my original definition. The only real evil in the matter is discrimination against people.

Other than that, I agree with most of what you said. I don’t exactly love the idea of gay sex either. But I respect adult human beings and their lifestyles as long as those lifestyles don’t hurt anyone else.[/quote]

Discrimination is what people do. Its instinctual. Society only agrees to limit the degree and target of discrimination. Race and Sex are different from behavior and the Constitution recognizes some and not others.

Homosexuality is not readily apparent either, at least not always, and while I think that many Gays have a STRONG genetic predosposition, even call it a genetic identity, I know some Gays who don’t. I know lots of women who were practicing lesbians in highschool and colllege who consider themselves to be 100% heterosexual now and recognize that they were reacting to abuse.

I know men who have questioned whether they were gay and answered “no”.

58

[quote]smh23 wrote:

[quote]DixiesFinest wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:

[quote]DixiesFinest wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:
I like how some of the social positions are held out as basic moral principles.[/quote]

Other than the death penalty and possibly corporal punishment for children, I don’t see anything that isn’t a pretty Manichean right-and-wrong issue.

Basic morality: torture is bad, racism is bad, sexism is bad, homophobia is bad, Antisemitism is bad, environmental degradation is bad, human rights are good. That doesn’t seem too controversial.[/quote]

Take homophobia, for example. What the hell does that mean? I don’t want gay studies taught in the public school system. Also, I don’t support government recognition of gay marriage. Do I want them dragged out of their homes, or beaten up by hoodlums? No. Even so, am I still a homophobe because of the earlier beliefs I put foward? If so, is that even ‘bad?’ By what authority is this sociologist declaring it ‘bad?’

Am I racist because I dislike affirmative action, am willing to confront uncomfortable facts, and want the government to do something about illegal immigration? If I am racist, how does he decide it’s ‘bad?’
[/quote]

What makes a person a homophobe is dislike of homosexuality or homosexuals. A racist dislikes a certain race of people. It isn’t complicated.[/quote]

So as a firm believer in the immorality of homosexuality who has good friends who are homosexuals…what does that make me?
[/quote]

Figure it out yourself.[/quote]

Not going to answer?

I would venture a guess that seeing as homophobe is a word created as a label against anyone who diagrees with the homosexual lifestyle, I guess I am a homophobe. However, seeing as how I count among my good friends two of my classmates who are gay, I would suspect that I do not fear them or their lifestyle, which is of course would mean I am not a homopobe.

I am serious man, which is it?[/quote]

It isn’t my job to dole out judgement on the issue. And I don’t at all know you. And I have no idea what you mean by “disagree with the homosexual lifestyle”…as if it is some sort of academic thesis with which you can either agree or disagree.

There is nothing to agree with. Some people are gay. Why anyone thinks that that fact is contingent upon their approval is beyond me. Fucking arrogance.[/quote]

Fucking arrogance? LOL Lighten up francis, I was just curious because your stated definition of homophobia seems contradictory.

I used the phrase homosexual lifestyle to try to stay as neutral as possible, guess that didnt work out as I intended.

IMO, homosexuality is wrong, but its a wrong that the person will answer to God for, not me, so far as I am concerned I wont treat my gay friend any differently than my straight friend.

It seems to me that so many people automatically connect mere disagreement with homosexuality to raving westboro bastard church hatred, which is simply not true.

59

[quote]smh23 wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

So, if I hit you in the head with a metal tube it is neither morally wrong or morally right?[/quote]

The obvious answer is that it is morally wrong. But why? God’s law? That cannot be proven. The government’s laws? They have little to do with morality, and are not free from error.

It boils down to common sense. Social living necessitates that individuals strive to not do each other harm. Morality, in my view, flows from that pragmatic, rather than absolute, truth.[/quote]

I agree with obvious answer is that it is morally wrong, we can agree with both have objective moral values (that doesn’t mean that it is mutually agreed upon what those values are), but what do you mean we cannot prove it?

I mean if there exist objective moral values, those moral values have either a natural or supernatural origin. Natural origins are insufficient to explain objective moral values, therefore, objective moral values have a supernatural origin in G-d.

60

[quote]smh23 wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:
It isn’t complicated.[/quote]

Then you aren’t paying attention. If you merely disagree with Obama nowadays you could earn the racist label. If you’re for enforcing our immigration laws, yep, you get the same. If you dislike AA, the same. And what’s with the idiotic “you’re a homophobe” if you dislike homosexuality? Am I a coprophiliacaphobe, too? Or, a stepping-out-on-the-wifephobe? A swingers-phobe? Sorry, but to me, if the mumbo-jumbo term has any meaning at all, it could be applied to a minority smaller than homosexuals themselves.[/quote]

“Homophobia: Prejudice against (fear or dislike of) homosexual people and homosexuality.” From Princeton.edu, verbatim. So I guess that answers that.

And: there was no indication in the article that any of the author’s claims had anything to do with Obama, politics, immigration laws, affirmative action. And there was no indication that they didn’t. I don’t know how they were measured. And neither do you.[/quote]

The term homophobia is still misapplied if this is in fact the definition.