| Joelcool7 said: So should those benefits be offered to gay couples? No they shouldn't gay couples can't reproduce or create a family. Helping them out financially to encourage them to found families is stupid and makes no sense. |
You know what's even stupider? Encouraging more fucking people on an overpopulated planet. Like religion, such facts of the past are moot and need to be explelled from society ASAP.
| Joelcool7 said: But here's the fact, Stephen Harper talked about giving gays these benefits under a civil Union. So this argument makes no sense even If I don't think gays should get these benefits they were going to anyways just under the name union instead of marriage. Again equal treatment! |
That would work under the following terms:
- The state recognises all marriage as civil unions and nothing more
- The state abolishes all mention of "marriage" from it's laws
- The state adds to the constitution that all rights and benefits pertaining to a civil union must be to a civil union only. None of this picking and choosing crap.
Even if those three things were implemented, you'll see marriage being reduced to nothing more than a word, which gay couples would still use. So when that happens, will you be pursuing those gay couples who dare utter the word? Where does the line get drawn?
| Joelcool7 said: How is Athiesm not a religion? They have as much faith in their beliefs as anyone from any religion. |
You answered your own question there. The name even explains itself. A meaning the complement, and theism; anti-theism, a REJECTION of all beliefs.
Atheism is more skepticism than a belief. In fact, I know many Atheists who would immediately convert once adequate proof of a deity existed, or became known. This is the same course for most modern states. On a lighter note, I notice a lot of conservatives being climate change skeptics, demanding the government not waste any money on something that isn't proven. You know what that is? Hypocrisy.
| Joelcool7 said: Buddhists don't believe in God, yet they are classified as a religious belief. |
And that's why many consider Buddhism to be a philosophy over a religion. The only similarity with religion is the code on which to live by.
| Joelcool7 said: Some will say "Well we believe in scientific fact meaning we don't have faith and aren't a religion" but I have yet to see a single scientific fact that proves how the earth was made, all that exists are theories and hypothesis that may or may not be based on Scientific fact. Fact is you have faith in the unseen and unproven. |
Really? You mustn't be looking too hard then. Then again, that's what religious zealots do, stubbornly cling to their beliefs and shut the outside world out.
I'll give you the simple answer. The Earth is part of the remnants of a dead star. Stars expel energy by means of nuclear fusion, creating heavier elements from lighter elements. All light element fuse exothermically (in other words, they expel energy). This is the same case when heavier elements are fissiled (torn apart, which is what happens in modern reactors. This isn't belief so far, it's fact). Both sides reach a point of stabilisation (where an element can neither be fused of fissiled to expel energy) at Iron, the main element that makes up the Earth.
There are plenty of facts and evidence supporting this, and the theories, every day more evidence is found to prove that either those theories indeed happened, or are readjusted to cater for the new data.
| Joelcool7 said: As for the job description changing. Its not the employee's fault that the employer made a decision that violates the employees religious rights. The employer should find a job that doesn't require the employee to violate his beliefs. Their is a reason these things are called rights. A huge example is in Canada when their is a religious holiday you are entitled to the day off if you practice that religion. If you hire someone with a religious viewpoint then you as the employer need to respect and accomodate that religion. To do other wise is discrimination or persecution. |
Then what do you do when the job description changes? You said it yourself, "The employer should find a job that doesn't require the employee to violate his beliefs". So, why can;t they be relocated to other public sector jobs? And keep in mind that this is not a violation of Freedom of Religion. Freedom of religion gives you the right to practise your faith, not preach it.
| Joelcool7 said: As for pastor's being hunted down. They actually were, a group of like 50 gay rights activists picketed my church after the pastor refused to marry the gay couple. They said horrible things and tried to block traffic into the church. They yelled at us and even spit at some congregants who came out to give them coffee and donuts. Fact is spit is assualt and picketing a church because a pastor stands up for his constitutional rights is totally wrong. |
While I do not condone the violent acts, saying horrible things and protesting are their rights too, you have to understand that. You cannot have a set of rights to hide behind and think that the other side should have none. That's the superioriority complex of the conservative movement. They think they're born to lead, and they believe they're above everyone else.
| Joelcool7 said: You can argue longer and longer but just because you'd like something to be fact doesn't make it so! |
Oh the sheer hypocrisy that this sentence comes from a religious zealot.
I'd also like to point out that as of today, conservative nutcase New South Wales premier Barry O'Farrell is one step closer to removing ethics classes from schools. You ask why? Because students get a choice between ethics and scripture, and he believed scripture shouldn't have that kind of competition. So, are you conservatives happy now? Are you going to stop before the world enters into a 2nd period of the Dark Ages, where any scientific belief against religion is persecuted severely? You pull shit like this, and wonder why the science-oriented have such a vendetta against religion....
