Do you think progressives are really interested in the progressing science, or just want to trample on the rights of Christians?

Posted by: giraffelover

Do progressive organizations exist to progress science or to eliminate Christian principle. And don't try that tired argument that Christianity is in the way of science.

  • Really trying to progress science

  • Trying to crush rights of Christians

71% 22 votes
29% 9 votes
  • Duh

    Posted by: ChrisF
  • Alright, why don't I just put it like this. Christians, as much as you might think so, the world doesn't revolve around you. Progressives are actually interesting in progressing society through science and legislation. If this science somehow contradicts your religion, it is usually coincidence. Considering that science is based off of fact, it takes precedent over religion. If something that comes out of science proves something in the Bible to be incorrect, then it is just that, the bible being incorrect. They are not leading a witch hunt on your ideals; they're just doing what they believe will help society. In their minds, that's science, and I happen to agree with them some of the time.

    Posted by: Seido
  • This is the stupidest $hit I ever heard. Christianity has no place in politics. The Progressive party was actually founded by Christians anyways.

  • The problem with progressing science is that science itself is ultimately and fundamentally incompatible with religious faith. That is not the fault of Progressives, that's just the fact. The problem with Christians, and religious people in general, is that they've had so much privilege and entitlement for so long that, now that it's slipping away, it's quite painful. I would sympathize, except that their barbaric incursions into the secular arena and their outdated concepts of morality preclude me from doing so.

  • stupid poll

  • When reality does not conform to your expectations, you do not blame reality and claim it is wrong, you blame your expectations. Some people with a persecution complex, despite being part of an overwhelming majority which is known for persecution, may tend to mistake this process occasionally.

  • Christianity is a non-sequitur, with respect to the advancement of any culture. The christian people can't even agree within themselves, and still they demand sole and exclusive dominion over the realm of morality. They have absolutely no place in politics (religion, in general), and still they move for idiotic laws like bans on gay marriage (I'm a married heterosexual, by the way). Irrespective of whether they believe their 'rights' are being trampled, perhaps it's their turn to feel what it's like to be excluded, due to dissenting belief... They've done it for centuries, and now they complain as though they are the oppressed, rather than the oppressors, losing their authority.

  • progress in science dismisses religion as a way to explain our world, Was not on purpose but through science it was debunked anyway.

  • I don't know about all progressive organizations, but I know the ACLU, LGBT, and NOW are trying to crush rights of Christians. Kudos to the EPA for actually trying to advance science, even if they are only concerned with science to protect the environment.

  • Goes without saying. GLAAD, ACLU, the LGBT community all want to silence Christians

  • Why can't they progress religion?

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
ChrisF says2014-04-30T21:32:00.4896619-05:00
By the same logic, I can say the 15th Amendment oppressed white people by limiting their right to vote.
giraffelover says2014-04-30T21:33:50.5434074-05:00
How so?
ChrisF says2014-04-30T21:36:05.7216619-05:00
Well, if giving gay people equal rights oppresses Christians, then why doesn't giving African Americans the right to vote oppress white people?
giraffelover says2014-04-30T21:38:14.4330074-05:00
But I don't think the LGBT WANTS just equal rights for homosexuals. I think they want homosexual marriages to be the new "normal" because they LOVE to call people who stand up to them homophobic based on opinion.
ChrisF says2014-04-30T21:40:43.1364619-05:00
Again, I can use your logic to say that African Americans were trying to steal all the power from white people. Except when you change the groups involved, but leave the same basic idea, it sounds pretty idiotic.
Seido says2014-04-30T21:40:52.2936619-05:00
The majority of the LGBT community just wants equality. They want LGBT relationships to be considered normal, but they don't want heterosexual marriages to be considered any less normal either. They simply want to expand the definition of "normal" in regard to marriages to include them.
giraffelover says2014-04-30T21:44:39.2226074-05:00
Uh huh. Yea, right. (Nose shatters monitor.)
ChrisF says2014-04-30T21:46:12.0742009-05:00
Yeah, it's pretty stupid, I know, but true. Now, how long will it be before somebody tries to use the whole "slippery slope" argument?
kingcripple says2014-04-30T21:52:59.5500619-05:00
The slippery slope argument DOES have a TON of validity here. Not in the extreme "homosexuals turn into pedophiles or zoophiles" way but in that acceptance WILL lead to ACCEPTANCE of other deviant lifestyles
ChrisF says2014-04-30T21:54:56.5344619-05:00
The slippery slope argument can literally be used for any argument. Want me to use it to argue against the Civil Rights Act of 1964? Or the First Amendment?
Seido says2014-04-30T21:57:14.3113305-05:00
You claim that I'm lying? You seem to be under the impression that the LGBT community wishes to replace heterosexual relationships at the norm. Do you have any proof of this? If not, your argument really holds no validity as the burden of proof is currently on you.
kingcripple says2014-04-30T21:57:19.5396619-05:00
Yes it COULD be used for anything, but this is one of the few times where it is justifiable.
giraffelover says2014-04-30T21:59:22.3249305-05:00
How about the fact that they insist ANYONE who disagrees with them is a homophobe? Well, they're afraid of heterosexuals. They're heterophobes. My argument is as silly sounding as the LGBT's.
ChrisF says2014-04-30T21:59:29.1444619-05:00
Actually, the big irony of the slippery slope argument is that some of those "deviant lifestyles" are legal. For example, zoophilia is legal in 11 states.
Seido says2014-04-30T22:02:29.9796619-05:00
Alright, a few things here. Firstly, not all of the LGBT community claims that those who disagree with them are homophobes. I disagree with those that do. And technically speaking, most of those that do disagree with them, are more or less homophobes. Secondly, I have never met a member of the LGBT community who is afraid of heterosexuals. They don't agree with homophobes, but that doesn't make them afraid of heterosexuals. And thirdly, no, your argument isn't anywhere near as sounding as the LGBT's argument is. Yours is far sillier.
giraffelover says2014-04-30T22:06:02.2332619-05:00
And technically speaking, most of those that do disagree with them, are more or less homophobes. You just proved my point! I just copied and pasted this very statement from your comment. Or maybe you WILL NOT reject your "progressive" anti-Christian principles.
ChrisF says2014-04-30T22:07:36.5088816-05:00
When gay people start a massive movement to ban straight marriage, then you can call them heterophobes.
giraffelover says2014-04-30T22:10:46.7304619-05:00
Your opinion is noted. The summary is 2 people say they want to progress science, 2 people say it wants to crush the rights of Christians. Any more voters? Please vote one way or the other, voters.
Seido says2014-04-30T22:12:00.6120619-05:00
No, I really didn't. I used the word "most". Its called diction. I said "most" because not all those who disagree with the LGBT agenda are homophobes; however, many are. This is simple fact. And in regard to my "progressive and anti-christian values": If my scientifically backed beliefs conflict with a book that was written by humans over the course of thousands of years before modern science was invented, I'm going to have to take the side of science. The Bible is flawed. And another thing, as I have said before, science and the progressive agenda don't just oppose Christianity. They oppose any and all extremist belief systems, be them Islamic, Christian, Jewish, or anything else. When the majority of the scientific community agrees with the scientific facts that prove your book wrong, perhaps you should stop just believing in a magic man living in the sky, and should start using your head to actually think.
giraffelover says2014-04-30T22:23:14.9737995-05:00
Here's a site about scientists and religion. Http://wiki.Answers.Com/Q/What_percent_of_scientists_are_atheist?#slide=1
Seido says2014-04-30T22:27:36.2064619-05:00
Here are two studies that show that the majority of the scientific community does not identify as religious, or is agnostic/atheist. Http://phys.Org/news102700045.Html http://www.Lhup.Edu/~dsimanek/sci_relig.Htm
kingcripple says2014-04-30T22:46:24.9600619-05:00
As much as i want giraffe to be right, wiki answers isn't that great of a source, However, an unbelievable amount of classical scientists were believers in God.
SNP1 says2014-04-30T23:05:20.6891364-05:00
"The slippery slope argument DOES have a TON of validity here. Not in the extreme "homosexuals turn into pedophiles or zoophiles" way but in that acceptance WILL lead to ACCEPTANCE of other deviant lifestyles" WRONG! Homosexuals, bisexuals, and heterosexuals have had brain scans showing that their brains actually are physically different from each others, meaning that homosexuality is normal. Beatiality and Pedophila have no such brain structure, so they cannot be considered the same as homosexuality.
Jifpop09 says2014-04-30T23:42:02.4240619-05:00
Your "Christianity" doesn't have a place in politics to begin with.
Jifpop09 says2014-04-30T23:43:32.7324619-05:00
Progressivism actually has little to do with science. The first progressive leaders in the capitalist revolution were fully focused on modernization, as was the 1912 platform.
ChrisF says2014-04-30T23:47:06.3356488-05:00
From what I've seen, 12 states have legal zoophilia. Out of these 12, only 7 also have legal same-sex marriage. So evidently, if same-sex marriage didn't lead to zoophilia, then *gasp* they're entirely unrelated!
Jifpop09 says2014-04-30T23:50:43.0030235-05:00
IDEK about these people anymore. Were simply trying to offset the religious fundamentalism in society, which shouldn't even be there according to the constitution. Absolute idiots. They assume that progressives are all atheist, but they're not, and even so, it shouldn't matter.
perplexed says2014-05-01T00:22:38.0988619-05:00
"Do you think progressives are really interested in the progressing science, or just want to trample on the rights of Christians?" it's not christian rights....It's christian privilege...The time for it's reckoning has come. Watch out, the final death throes of the christian mob entitlement are here.... :D
Wylted says2014-05-01T04:52:24.4981549-05:00
I don't like either answer
HeavyReader says2014-05-01T09:14:36.8017549-05:00
I myself am gay and a representative to my school's Gay Straight Alliance that supports LGBTQA rights and I myself have never called someone a homophobe for disagreeing with me.
ChrisF says2014-05-01T11:19:09.1278730-05:00
@Weeksie - Science and religion are compatible, they're just two different ways of looking at the same reality. In fact, many, many scientists who have discovered some of the most important discoveries in history. Einstein, Newton, Mendel, etc. were all quite religious.
giraffelover says2014-05-01T21:17:07.7290588-05:00
Here's a hypothetical response: homosexuals have a difference in their brain, so it's natural. What if HOMOSEXUALITY CAUSED the difference in the brain. Example: Joe Smith has a normal brain, but then becomes a homosexual CAUSING the difference in the brain. I'm not saying homosexuals are inferior, but I AM saying that homosexuality is wrong. Homosexuals are more likely to get many kinds of diseases, too but the LGBT just ignores that fact.
giraffelover says2014-05-01T21:18:36.3838588-05:00
Here's another hypothesis: scientists aren't ALLOWED to question the mainstream ideas.
Seido says2014-05-01T21:23:16.2182479-05:00
At this point, there's not much point in arguing with you. You're merely reiterating things that you've heard from the bible. You can theorize all you want, but can you bring us any proof of any of your claims? Other than the bible, what proves that homosexuality is wrong? Does it harm you in some way? If not, why can't two consenting adults do whatever they damn well please?
giraffelover says2014-05-01T21:34:38.0477819-05:00
How about THIS reason? Http://www.Ncbi.Nlm.Nih.Gov/pmc/articles/PMC1045908/
giraffelover says2014-05-01T21:38:19.8641819-05:00
(Perplexed charges at my faith in an Abrams tank. However, I defend my Christian beliefs in an Assault-class Battlemech.)
irreverent_god says2014-05-01T21:44:07.3247997-05:00
Quite frankly, any argument that is based on religion or a 'holy' manuscript, of any kind, is invalid. If you are going to claim freedom of religion, in this country, you must include in that freedom FROM religion. LGBT relationships do not, in any way, 'threaten' hetero marriages. No law that includes any religious basis can be passed without imposing that religion on ALL dissenting religious (and non-religious) views. The 'slippery slope' argument is one based on pure, unadulterated fear, and brings to mind Ben Franklin: Any society that sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither freedom nor security. Religious blinders continue to limit this country. I refuse to live under the tyranny that is unavoidable, where religious rule is concerned.
giraffelover says2014-05-01T22:20:22.5398479-05:00
But, this source isn't based on the Bible: it talks about diseases homosexuals are likely to catch.
ChrisF says2014-05-01T23:29:28.8960594-05:00
Yes. Straight people can also catch these diseases. Straight marriage is legal. People from Africa are more likely to have STDs. Africans can marry as well. Therefore, your point is invalid.
irreverent_god says2014-05-01T23:41:52.0431409-05:00
Just one other point I'd like to make, here... The very same bible you deluded judgmental zealots like to quote, when condemning homosexuality also states that if a woman is not a virgin on her wedding night, she should be taken outside the city and stoned to death. How many of you people out there are willing to watch a woman get stoned to death (and not with weed)? How many of you would be willing to 'cast the first stone?' How much of this stupid book are you going to claim is 'the word of god,' and how much are you going to ignore, when following it doesn't suit you? Trampling on the rights of christians? Are you serious? How does recognizing a form of love on an equal level with others trample on ANYONE'S rights? This is nothing short of pathetic whining. And did someone mention diseases? Like we who sleep with the opposite sex are immune? Self-serving christian idiocy never ceases to amaze me...
giraffelover says2014-05-02T07:42:18.8344703-05:00
Ok, let me clarify my point. My point was these are diseases homosexuals are more likely to catch than heterosexuals. As for a woman who isn't a virgin on her wedding night, what did Jesus say about that? He said, "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." He wasn't referring just to whoever never committed adultery, but whoever never sinned ONE SINGLE TIME.
irreverent_god says2014-05-02T08:11:37.6168339-05:00
Read your bible, giraffelover. The jeebus wasn't talking about a non-virgin bride. He was talking about a hooker. Moreover, I was talking specifically about the mob, to which you just made reference. The fundamentalist christians represent the mob that was about to stone that woman. That's what christians do best: 1) Condemn others 2) Make excuses for their own Get religion out of our schools and government. It doesn't belong there. It belongs in the church and in the home. Nowhere else.
giraffelover says2014-05-02T16:09:11.5233151-05:00
I've noticed that those who preach tolerance act the exact same way. As to the mob, that's why I don't want to be a fundamentalist Christian. I just want to follow the example of Christ by forgiving you. (Sprinkles water of forgiveness on irreverent_god.) This is symbolic of me forgiving you.
giraffelover says2014-05-02T16:42:35.9076204-05:00
No, a man sleeping with a woman doesn't make him immune from STD. However, I learned in health class that people who only sleep with the person he/she is married with is much less likely to get STDs. Not to mention having a better relationship with his/her spouse.
Jifpop09 says2014-05-04T06:54:45.6548989-05:00
Actually, that's perhaps the smartest thing I heard southwillrise say (Not that he doesn't say other smart things). Religion has advanced several times through history, and has experienced even more revival movements. It is not a brick wall. The problem though, is people are refusing to budge a little, even when new developments have opened in other areas.
discomfiting says2014-08-21T01:03:07.8049549-05:00
Thesouth, religion doesn't want to progress. Christianity (in the way you follow) is a conservative belief, asking why progressives won't try to progress Christianity is redundant-- they ARE trying to progress Christianity you just dont want them too. That's why you're a traditionalist.
patmagsc says2014-10-18T22:33:48.8954956-05:00
Poorly worded question and choices for answers. Too many labels that have nothing to do with what one might see in Congress Sessions one might watch on C-SPAN or houselive.Gov.

Freebase Icon   Portions of this page are reproduced from or are modifications based on work created and shared by Google and used according to terms described in the Creative Commons 3.0 Attribution License.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.