Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Religion
In reply to the discussion: Mormon Church Threatens Critic With Excommunication [View all]AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)64. Your 'point' perfectly overlaps with one of the classic right wing anti-same-sex-marriage talking
points, and even NOW you insist on using it.
"You don't know my dog or my bicycle, just like I don't know your gun."
I know your dog and your bicycle are not, in any court in the land, a recognizable entity to join as a party to a contract. Neither examples have any legal capacity to CONSENT. Period. It is a vile, bigoted talking point that has been trotted out for decades as a fabricated objection to same sex marriage, as the 'logical next step'/fear-mongering. You claim to be for 'consensual marriage' and then you trot out parties that CANNOT CONSENT. parties that are intrinsically incapable of consent.
For someone who claims to be pro-same-sex-marriage, you sure are real insistent on repeating (in the same facetious 'positive' manner Mike Huckabee 'champions' for multiple marriage partners for bisexuals, with ANYTHING BUT their best interests in mind) right wing anti-same-sex-marriage talking points.
Two juries have agreed. Neither of them were from my alert. Neither jury was served on by myself, (indeed, I've never been on a jury for any post in Religion) or by anyone I know that has come forward.
Interestingly, your assertion that you are in favor of same sex marriage, and that you are an atheist, YET, your insistence that one can have a soul, and also that you should be able to marry your dog, bear striking and overpoweringly similar cognitive dissonance.
That you have a soul, is something a religious person would say.
That you ought to be able to marry your dog, is something a right wing opponent of same sex marriage would say. (As I linked you to, item #12 in the litany of classic right wing anti-SSM arguments list)
If you want people to stop wondering if you're a fake atheist, stop spouting religious precepts. (Existence of souls, for one)
If you want people to stop wondering if you're a homophobic bigot, (and also want juries to stop hiding your posts), stop spouting verbatim right wing anti-ssm talking points, like castigating other members of DU when they object to your insistence that people be allowed to marry hamsters, dogs, and bicycles.
Taking THAT shit back, would go a long way toward calming things down;
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1218&pid=124676
That is a vile post. You are attacking other DU'ers, for not supporting your claimed right to marry objects and animals that cannot consent, which YOU brought up in a thread about same sex marriage. The jury comments spelled out PERFECT comprehension of your post, and repudiated it accordingly.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
103 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
The Mormon Church is one of the biggest funders of those who favor anti-LGBT laws.
merrily
Jan 2015
#58
Mormon individuals, yes. An example of that is what this thread is about. Not the Mormon church.
merrily
Jan 2015
#69
My post was about the current positions and acts of the Church, not its individual dissidents.
merrily
Jan 2015
#80
The mormon church has a history of doing that when the government holds a gun to its head.
AtheistCrusader
Mar 2015
#91
If the mormon church is wrong about this, then it cannot pretend to hold revealed truth.
AtheistCrusader
Mar 2015
#89
Keep pretending non-belief and XYZ belief belong 'on the table' together.
AtheistCrusader
Jan 2015
#24
Just because someone has a "right" to an idea, doesn't mean that idea is sacrosanct.
Major Nikon
Jan 2015
#25
IMO, a religion's requires secrecy from its members about religious beliefs and
merrily
Jan 2015
#56
An event that is, basically, what I suggested a long time ago, and that you attacked me about.
AtheistCrusader
Jan 2015
#26
You weren't banned from A&A for 'stepping out of line', and you know it.
AtheistCrusader
Jan 2015
#27
Really? I think calling out the bullies, bigots and cyber stalkers was too much for some.
Starboard Tack
Jan 2015
#31
You can't even go two posts in a thread fork without contradicting yourself.
AtheistCrusader
Jan 2015
#63
I hope the entirety of DU is reading this thread, and your posts in particular, very carefully.
AtheistCrusader
Jan 2015
#66
I hope so too. Your obsession with me and distorting what I said is quite extraordinary
Starboard Tack
Jan 2015
#67
Starboard Tack has been blocked from the Atheist and Agnostic group:
beam me up scottie
Jan 2015
#35
LOL. Didn't realize Starboard Tack was ex-communicated from th A&A Group. I'm out of that loop.
pinto
Jan 2015
#38
Whoa, did you miss the point or what. BMUS, I think I ought to step out of this 3rd party side talk.
pinto
Jan 2015
#40
Thanks for the repost. I stand by that, silly as it may be. I made my point. Others misconstrued it.
Starboard Tack
Jan 2015
#49
Except I support same sex marriage and always have. I support all consensual marriage
Starboard Tack
Jan 2015
#54
No, you don't support consensual marriage. You just defended a post where you attacked people
AtheistCrusader
Jan 2015
#57
Oops sorry! Did I attack bigots who want to tell me who or what I'm allowed to marry?
Starboard Tack
Jan 2015
#62
Your 'point' perfectly overlaps with one of the classic right wing anti-same-sex-marriage talking
AtheistCrusader
Jan 2015
#64
My you think highly of yourself. I actually don't give a fuck about you at all.
beam me up scottie
Mar 2015
#98
If it were up to me he would have been banned from DU for his homophobic posts.
beam me up scottie
Mar 2015
#100
I appreciated the guy's talk a lot. Found some of it condescending and paternalistic.
pinto
Jan 2015
#17
Many religions are paternalistic and a hell of a lot worse than condescending to
merrily
Jan 2015
#59