What do you think of the mainstream religions that are homophobic and misogynous?

What do you think of the mainstream religions that are homophobic and misogynous?

I think they are stuck in the past and refuse to grow their moral sense to a higher level as they continue to discriminate and denigrate against gays and women without a just cause.

Should secular law do something against the religions that preach and teach poor morals and laws that are the opposite of the better secular law we live by?

We seem to be coming down on Islam and demanding they reform, but we seem to be ignoring Christianity’s efforts to make the world a worse place with homophobia and second class women.

Thoughts?

Regards
DL

There's a problem when you equate pro-life with misogyny.

livinglava wrote:

There's a problem when you equate pro-life with misogyny.

You're not pro life, you've already said other people's children are not your responsibility so you're quite happy to watch them die from preventable diseases.

All you're pro is controlling women's bodies. Once the kid's born it can die of neglect or be murdered by the NRA, it's all the same to you.

And yes, you are a misogynist.

I want to be perfectly clear about what you are saying here.

You are advocating for government control of churches, where the state controls what individual churches teach. You want to do away with the separation of church and state.

Do I understand this correctly?

Greatest I am wrote:

What do you think of the mainstream religions that are homophobic and misogynous?

I think they are stuck in the past and refuse to grow their moral sense to a higher level as they continue to discriminate and denigrate against gays and women without a just cause.

Should secular law do something against the religions that preach and teach poor morals and laws that are the opposite of the better secular law we live by?

We seem to be coming down on Islam and demanding they reform, but we seem to be ignoring Christianity’s efforts to make the world a worse place with homophobia and second class women.

Thoughts?

Regards
DL

There's a problem when you equate pro-life with misogyny.

There's a problem when you misunderstand restrictive sexual morality to single out homosexuality, when in fact all forms of hedonistic sexuality are in question.

Do you also realize that religious morality and morality generally is separate from governmental laws against things deemed immoral by religion?

People can agree that homosexuality is immoral and yet have different views about how to regulate it governmentally.

One person might think the best way to restrict sexual freedom among homosexuals is to insist they get married, like heterosexuals. Someone else might think it is better to make it illegal altogether. A third person might believe in 'don't ask don't tell,' as was the case for a long time in the military.

You have freedom of speech/religion to hold independent views regarding everything, including homosexuality, abortion, gender roles, etc. When you bring those views to the table for legislating laws, you are just proposing laws within a democratic discussion. As long as you don't jump the gun and begin enforcing laws on your own, you aren't doing anything wrong by proposing laws that someone else might not like.

People have different views and don't agree in many cases, but we still have to put ideas forth for the sake of legislative discourse.

He opposes abortion because he believes that life is sacred.

[Your god sure does not seem to see life as sacred.

Regards
DL

Greatest I am wrote:

[Your god sure does not seem to see life as sacred.

Regards
DL

You're making a huge assumption there. Where does Max claim to worship Yahweh?

The problem with you're take on gnostic Christianity is that you're so eager to show yourself as morally superior to the rest of us that you make assumptions and great leaps in logic.

My father is "consistently pro-life" (that is what he calls himself). He opposes abortion because he believes that life is sacred. He supports health care for poor people (including infant care) because he believes that life is sacred. He opposes ICE putting kids in prison because he believes life if sacred. He opposes the death penalty and the use of cruise missiles because he believes life is sacred.

Being consistent pro-life is part of a number of Christian denominations, some of who are quite active in actually helping immigrants, counseling people on death row and working for peace. I have a great deal of respect for this. Their religion is authentic, rather than posturing they are actually improve the lives of immigrants and poor people and making people's lives better.

If pro-life means anti-abortion, and nothing else, then the term is meaningless. What good is saving an "unborn" babies life if it is just going to die of starvation, or lack of health care or in an ICE detention cell.

This is cruel. Either you value life or you don't.

Why don't you ask him? There's more religions around than Christianity and Islam you know.

United States Constitution

First Amendment:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

I think you prefer to live in a fantasy world.