fordy said:
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.... |
Wow you really don't have much solid arguments now that you start calling me a religious zealot to justify your stereo type of me. I really don't see the point in carrying on this off topic debate here in this thread. It is derailing the thread and really pointless considering your view about marriage not being controlled by the state, I completely agree.
As for my opnion on your New South Wales premier I can't really comment since I have no freaking clue what your ethic classes teach or even for that matter what is being taught in the scripture classes. Am I happy? I have no clue and since I am not really even a Conservative outside of Canada I really can't form an opinion.
To be honest I vote Conservative in Canada and would vote Democrat in the US, it all depends on the different views of the politician. I'm not a stereo typical Conservative infact a recent survey and poll I filled out classified me as a center right, barely to the right and another called me a center left. So being a right wing fanatic isn't exactly correct.
Since you don't actually know me outside of my position on marriage and abortion you have no right to stereo type me. Just like I can't call you a left wing socialist nut job you have no right to call me a Conservative Religious zealot.
Again just because we have different viewpoints doesn't mean we should attack each other. Theirs something called civil conversation, this is a debate.
Please stop stereotyping me, I don't stereo type you and it gets way out of hand to do so on either of our behalfs!
-JC7
"In God We Trust - In Games We Play " - Joel Reimer
