Quote:
Originally Posted by Bownesian
A legitimate argument is that we were given instructions on what is right and what is wrong by a perfect divine creator and just as we were instructed not to murder, we were told that homosexuality is wrong.
|
Sure, within 'that' religion only, how anyone justifies pushing that personal belief to others who do not share it is beyond me.
Quote:
|
That you don't share that belief does not make it an illegitimate argument and de-legitimizing that belief (and mocking religious belief in general) is bigoted because you are belittling the thing that many people hold most dear.
|
lol, really? So this is what you believe in regards to those Christians who fought feverishly against interracial marriage and ending slavery? Because that is exactly what the majority of American Christians did, they opposed ending slavery until it was eventually no longer acceptable to hold that belief.
It evolved, because enlightenment thinking and secular values forced the hand of the religious.
Quote:
|
Put another way, people who mock religious people for defending their most personal beliefs are showing intolerance for a group of people whose beliefs are different from their own, the very definition of bigotry.
|
Beliefs based on a particular belief should not dictate laws of our nations. You can believe that god will spare your child with cancer and deny modern medicine, but we all know your a moron to think that. You can deny evidence that the earth is billions of years old but you shouldn't be dictating geo-earth education!
Scientology believes in Xenu, so am I intolerant if I suggest those that believe in a sci-fi book are dead wrong?
Not sure when debating ideas and calling the other side out was considered bigotry.
Quote:
Fortunately (in my opinion), we do not live in a Theocracy where the rules of a divine creator are also the Laws of the Land. We are in a democracy that has chosen to live under the aegis of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which does not allow for the imposition of laws that unreasonably discriminate against people. Our courts (also our choice through the selection of our system of government) said that the old definition of marriage was discriminatory and thus our parliament (also our choice) has changed the law.
I agree with all of those steps but I understand how people could believe those choices are wrong.
|
Sure, but I also can understand that people believe all kinds of things, but that does not give them rights to push their own beliefs to deny others their own secular civil rights at bare minimum.