Rock n Rap on, young people! Keep it up. Educate the world as to the abjectly profound evils of religious dogma. This is one 61 yr old ol' lady who is very glad young folks of all heritages and backgrounds are getting rational thought out. Thank you! You are doing a much better job than we children of the 60's who later became complacent and turned into the pet dogs of "the man".
@hhfleury Strawman. Sex with children or animals has a consent issue. Why should I abstain from sex with my boyfriend (25) because YOU, a person I don't know on the Internet, wants me to? I'm bisexual, so it must infuriate you that I CHOSE to be in a gay relationship. It doesn't actually matter whether it's a choice or not - I'm not harming anyone, and me and my boyfriend are in love with each other. If you come back with a weak argument based on religion, I'll deal with that then.
It's no coincidence that most religions are anti-gay. The ideas behind religion were invented by the elders of bronze-age tribes - and their big concern was that their tribe should become bigger, so they could win out over the next tribe. But gays don't create babies, so... And this is just more proof that religion was invented by man, not God.
This really pisses me off. I accept and respect homosexuals. I can talk to them as equals. I can be friends with them. I can even help them with their relationship problems.
And guess what? I'm homophobic! Suck on that, you archaic, religious bigots! Grow the fuck up!
I have seen a few theists say, it's not right, but seriously, Even as as straight male, why is it so hard to accept LGBT's as humans, trying to survive like the rest of us..Really?? Maybe it's because I am a former cab driver, in that as long as you pay the fare, I can accommodate you. If you are gay, lesbian, or transgender, you should now that cab drivers have seen it all, and we will treat you all the same as long as you can pay the fare. Equality. Tolerance, and respect. Do not be ashamed.
@rounder421 Yeah you would think that this is basic stuff. As long as what someone's doing doesn't harm you...leave em be. No one is asking you to co-sign what they are doing cause it's none of your business anyway. Their just asking for the same respect that you would give anyone else. I don't think that's asking too much.
You are a little bit off about the ROOT cause of violent and vitriolic homophobia. It's not that some "moldy old text" tells them it's bad and wrong, it's that they personally find it disgusting. Then they have their emotional reaction SANCTIONED by the moldy old text. People don't need to be taught to hate (or at least be distrustful of) those who are different; it's hardwired. Theology doesn't shape personalities so much as one's personality determines the theology he/she will be drawn to.
I believe the root source is even more primitive. We've inherited much of the garbage that our ancient ancestors had and which enabled them to survive in what must have been *very* hard times in east Africa. This means that each of us has the propensity for bigotry, hatred, and violence. It is bred deep into our genes. Failing to recognize that and make *conscious* efforts to overcome it, make the beast more likely to emerge.
Religion has just been an excuse for humans to let loose the beast.
You have to understand that some people, regardless of their religion, find homosexual acts morally bankrupt and repulsive the same way they find paedophelic acts morally disgusting. Not everyone agrees on both of those issues. I find it disgusting for someone to have sex with a child, but others don't.
Homosexuals are not being judged for who they are, but what they are doing. I'm not a religious fundie, but homosexuals do have the power to control their choices and abstain.
@hhfleury Thats a bad point. Its like saying the murder victim had no business being in that bullets way when it splattered his brains over the sidewalk.
You cant compare paedophilia with homosexuality, that is dishonest. Does "consenting adults" ring a bell?
@xxhellspawnedxx Just because something happens between consenting adults doesn't mean it's okay. You're going to have to specify your criteria there. Even if I give you consent to kill me, and I'm an adult, you'll still get charged with murder.
@hhfleury My criteria for whats okey is if more good than harm comes out of it. If I murder you, while youre at prime health and working condition, with your consent, thats not okey. If you choose euthanasia over a life in a vegetative state, and i perform it, its not wrong. If two men or two women prefer sleeping with their own sex, whats the damage? I'll tell you: NONE. Thats why homosexuality isnt like killing someone with their consent.
I agree with you of course, but I think that if you want a modern day version of the Salem witch trials or European witch hunts you don't even have to change subjects. Look up "witch children" on youtube and watch a few of the videos. Just make sure to have kleenex and something to throw up into handy.
One thing I really like about your work is that you communicate as a normal guy, without the tone or arrogance or superiority common to some of the leading spokesmen of atheism.
Here, I respect your directness, not shying from an issue where you are a directly involved partisan. I'm straight too but would not have made your step. There is also a call out on the "internets" for short vids demanding 'Human Rights'. We are all partisans to human rights.
@AtheistCitizen Thanks my friend. If we allow any group of people to be harmed just because of who they are or how they think (especially on religious grounds) any one of us could be next. The same people that discriminate against gays more then likely hate atheists too.
Those 2 theists are not going by the scripture. They are picking and chosing. I think 2 adults should be able to do whatever they want but the 2 theists you speak of are picking and choosing.
@DarthAardvark1977 I agree with you that they are cherry-picking that book. And that's a good thing. I prefer that they do that then follow it literally. It's when they follow it literally that we have a problem because in order to do that, there will be violence against any opposed to it.
i disagree with u on the gay hate part. yes religion is the largest (atleast in the usa i think) contributor to hatred towards them folks.
my sister is gay. i only hate gay men who float around like fairies and act weird as shit. ur sexual preference is fine with me, but there is no reason to act like that as far as im concerned. well said tho guy
We are like white blood cells and religion is the invader, just scaled up. The human race and the sum of our knowledge work almost like a single body and mind, with internal struggles, but everyone pretty much working to keep the whole alive. Religion however seems much like a cancer in this context just spreading itself and halting the bodies natural flow. I also sort of picture religion as an impotent man in a way.
AFAIK, this resolution just removed particular examples of terms on which discrimination would occur. The resolution says that no kinds of discrimination are appropriate and the example is dropped.
I might be wrong, I haven't looked into it, a friend of mine did.
@ZergAteu Hey if you could, can you see if you could find a link or something to the actual info. All I keep getting is people's interpretation of the resolution in articles. I would really appreciate it.
@rationalwarrior I'll try to, but I won't have access to internet for the next week, so you'll have to wait. I think the actual report from UN and the official documents are enough to get a real oppinion.
Oh, and don't forget the Spanish Inquisition. Or the Holocaust. Or the Crusades. I reply to the UN with a quote from a show known as The League "Oh, thats horseshit!"
The really sad thing is, things like Salem happened because of scientific reasons (ergot poisoning.) If people would just pay attention to science instead of putting their fingers in their ears and screaming, "La, la, la, la!" at the top of their lungs, they might actually learn to stop hating. So many atrocities could be stopped if they would accept the scientific, backed up by dozens of facts, truth instead of that stupid Bible.
I agree 100%, though on the internet I've run into some crazy people, USUALLY, Gay people aren't trying to get you into adopting their lifestyle, aside from jail or rape in general, I've never experience a gay person trying to force others to be gay, and in those jail and other rape cases, it's wrong regardless of sexuality, it's EQUALLY wrong. But, the religious Zealots, like the Train Evangelists here in NYC, are trying to force people to hear, and assimilate into their religion, via threats
@Looneveli In NYC there are Train Evangelists? That's awful. I can't imagine being on a subway car and forced to hear that mindless tripe my whole way to work.
@rationalwarrior ooo yes there are, the sad thing is, most of them say the same thing, verbatim, as the others, and the dialog hasn't changed for at the very least, 6 years. thats why i'm thankful for music on my phone and earbuds, they truly have no respect for people, they never have a nice message, it's always homophobic, saying every other religion is wrong, or devil worship, and using the threats of hell and judgement day than trying to show POSITIVE aspects of their religion.
I raised my hand because too in Ghana they kill people for thinking they are a witch and it's 2010. The fact that people can be so ignorant it break my heart.
We're well into the 2010 and how far back do we have to reach to stone our children? or stone Adulterers or kill homosexxuals or every other persson who we love but wasat odds with the abrahamic religions? If you were a Jainist or a Buddist or a Scientologist (bad example) it would not be an issue...why the hate?
On way home heard on BBC that India was having a gay pride parade this year to celebrate being able to be openly gay vs prior years when parade was about protesting discrimination. Reason for parade change in tone is because Delhi court repealed Section 377 of India’s Penal Code - which criminalized “unnatural” sexual activity, including homosexual acts. -- Example things do change, even if slowly.
UN is world government organization. Change needs to be done nation by sovereign nation anyway.
I for one, have wonderful people in my life who happen to be LGBT, people who I love an appreciate. And in such a case, that an angry mob came for them with torches and pitch forks, I would risk my life to protect the victims. No matter who they might be.
If I want the world to be a better place, I have to make it a personal goal to do so...
I do believe that humans could do something like the salem witch hunts, and the european witch hunts, the inquisition and all that other evil, all over again. We ARE creatures of habit.
However I think there's some misunderstanding on the vote the UN put through. All the vote did was reword the right to cover a broader spectrum of people, and didn't intend to make an open season on LGBT's. However, zealots just MIGHT see it that way anyhow - there in lays the danger.
One argument that seems to circle a lot when I discuss this with others, is that they feel that "the gay agenda is being shoved down my and my family's throats."
I didn't know that spreading awareness was "shoving down your throat".
You hate what you fear, and you fear what you don't understand.
You know something though? I'm beginning to wonder why more people aren't talking about this. I'm also beginning to wonder what the whole scoop is on this. I saw a few videos and then read a couple of articles about it and based on that, it seemed that this was pretty cut and clear, and I made a vid to pass the word along. But day after day I'm seeing more people saying that it's not as bad as it's been conveyed as being by others. I wonder if they're in denial or if our info's wrong. Thoughts?
@TheIronAtheist Its the apologists that quietly condone it and say its not so bad. They all speak up when the denial of rights directly affects them, but as far as homosexuals go, they will still defer to the dogmatic commandments from a homophobic desert cult to shape their opinions.
Its the chipping away of the only structure that is stopping the entire world resorting to medieval insanity, they want to take the progressively secular world into another theocratic nightmare bit by bit.
@TheIronAtheist It could be either one. I've watched DLandonCole's video and he put it in a little perspective from another point of view. I've also read a few articles on this by people who possess more info then I and they are giving the action a thumbs down. So until something comes out that shows it's not bad conclusively, I think we would be better to err on the side of defending other people's rights...We can always retract it later if we're wrong.
I hate this action by the UN as much as the next guy... but we have to remember, the shit countries voted on this. It's democracy and thats how it works sometimes.
Also keep in mind that we're not going to win every battle. But we ARE winning the war.
@KaseyAkira No your wrong. The charter of the un is to protect communitys and groups as ww2 showed what happens when groups are killed etc.... im not sure what rule it is, but you cannot pass legislation to persucute a certain group.
You are right on with this. I really don't get how in this age, people can give a shit what other people do in privacy; especially when it doesn't affect them...AT ALL. I'm straight, but like you said...it doesn't matter. It is taking a group of people, and stripping them of their rights. And, any time a person is getting stripped of their rights...that is my battle.
I feel a bit naive.....in that I truly assumed things were getting better.
@undisputedgreatest Me too but every time I turn around someone convinces me otherwise. Once they dehumanize a group they can justify anything that's done to them. We have to be vigilant because if they could, atheists would be next. I haven't always thought that way either. I used to think that it didn't concern me. But anytime any group gets treated like crap just for being who they are.....we have got to say something.
@rationalwarrior Right on. I would say "in America," but all over...we need to protect the rights of minority groups. The U.S. was structured to protect those of minority opinion or circumstance; and that is how it should be. The Majority SHOULD NOT rule when it comes to the right to exist. As long as no one is getting hurt by it, people should be free to any opinion, belief, lifestyle, or existence. Whether that is Atheists, gays, etc.
@rationalwarrior Even if one day Atheists are the majority (I hope we make it to that day,) we still have to protect the rights of the religious to believe and practice as they want.
As the Japanese Mixed Martial Artist Genki Sudo says..."We Are All One." We have differences sure, but damn the world would be boring otherwise.
This shit just kills me. No real mature person, without following some totalitarian dogma, could find a reason to give a shit what other consenting adults do in their bedroom.
It's a divide and conquer tactic. Religions can more effectively grab power when they have a "wicked" scapegoat - someone to point at and say "they are different and that makes them evil". The UN is a rotten institution for allowing this to go on unchallenged.
@bowlsallbroken Gays don't want to just be in the bedroom. They want to be able to be open in public to kiss, hold hands, marry, raise kids. They want out of the closet. That's my view anyway.
@MegF142857 they want the same rights as heterosexuals. depending on where i am at public displays of effection seem cute or they seem to lack class, all depending on where i see them. so if its ok for a heterosexual couple to hold hands, than it should also be ok for a homosexual couple to hold hands. and if its ok for a heterosexual couple to marry than it should also be ok for a homosexual couple to marry.
there is nothing inherently more right about heterosexuality than homosexuality.
@greycloud24 Comment by "bowlsallbroken" had "what other consenting adults do in their bedroom." To me it's not just about doing what you want in the closet / bedroom, but wanting to be treated really the same and in open. This is what bothers me about "Don't ask don't tell" policy. It's morally wrong to say it's okay, as long as you keep quiet and hide.
I agree should be same. Doesn't mean need to be crass straight or gay in public. ;-)
@MegF142857 if you can kiss, hold hands, marry and raise, why can't others do the same? Do you think the gender of the people you sleep with makes u a better person?
@slowwormz Interesting reaction. You assumed that I was saying they shouldn't have that right? Was merely saying that it isn't "what other consenting adults do in their bedroom". Some folks over time have said that they are fine with homosexuals, as long as they keep it in the closet. My understanding is no one wants to be in a closet. This is why "don't ask don't tell" is morally wrong, for example. It's not just out of sight out of mind. Needs to be open or it's false acceptance.
@bowlsallbroken Yes, does no good to come out and be legal, if people are going to attack someone for doing so. I'm not sure there is a need for special "hate" crime protection, as it is already wrong and illegal to beat people up or harm them or harrass (at least where I live). Suppose doesn't hurt to add special protection, but shouldn't imply that other non-list people are excluded from such. Always is someone persecuted, so do we need to list everything or it isn't included? No.
These resolutions are more relevant to places like Uganda where there are actual, giant witchhunts in effect against gay people.
I get what you are saying, but I think, right now, it's prudent to itemize this one minority when they are so often the victims of atrocity - not to minimize any other victims but for the sake of clarity.
Its horrific how they can't seem to mind their own business, people who prop up stuff like this. Why are they so interested and invest so much time into the where- and what-abouts of homosexual peoples genitals?
Or maybe its just like scotish comedian Frankie Boyle said: "I wanna make homosexuality illegal... So I can feel naughty when I do it!" That would explain a great deal about why these monkeys keep trying to prop up laws such as these.
@xxhellspawnedxx It's funny cause now I'm hearing from people who belong to groups that are rarely discriminated against, acting as if THEIR rights are being violated by just mentioning minority groups who routinely are violated because of who and what they are.
@rationalwarrior Hey judt subbed to your channel keep up the good work you make a lot of sense and are honnest which i respect. Oh love the rap you did that was good. A fan from the UK :D
@qtzlctl2012 First it wasn't a law. The removed reference was originally contained in a non-exhaustive list in the resolution highlighting the many groups of people that are particularly targeted by killings. Mentioning sexual orientation as a basis on which people are targeted for killing highlights a situation in which particular vigilance is required in order for all people to be afforded equal protection.
@qtzlctl2012 It's not BEFORE others. The reason for the list in the first place is because those mentioned are routinely denied their rights because of who or what they are. In law you have to be specific at times to avoid loopholes that are used by unscrupulous people. including persons belonging to national or ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities, persons acting as human rights defenders (such as lawyers, journalists or demonstrators).
@qtzlctl2012 No it's not a law because nothing has been changed yet. This was a VOTE ON A RESOLUTION to amend the wording of the International human rights law They seek to change the wording to exclude sexual orientation. The resolution itself is NOT A LAW. But of course it uses legal terms because it seeks to change the wording of a LAW. For the past ten years the resolution included sexual orientation in the list of what qualified as discrimination.
@qtzlctl2012 The amendment removing the reference to sexual orientation was sponsored by Benin on behalf of the African Group in the UN General Assembly and was adopted with 79 votes in favor, 70 against, 17 abstentions and 26 absent. This is what the beef is about. Maybe you should read more in depth instead of only focusing on one part of the issue.
@qtzlctl2012 Yeah you read it and funny how you didn't see ANYTHING about the resolution or the list of things that are defined as discrimination or anything else that has been in writing about this discussion for the last 10 years. Or anything about why it was placed there in the first place because homosexuality is illegal in 77 countries and punishable by death in seven. Basically you read it without the context of the surrounding issues.
@qtzlctl2012 Also the point is why was it clear for them and not for you. If the majority understood...why didn't you? Maybe YOU were the problem. Maybe you don't like the way I discuss issues so maybe you should unsub.
@rationalwarrior first of all, i read the text that was applicable to the change in the resolution. And the word ANY still covers homosexuality. So the actual effect of the resolution is the exact same. To say anything other wise is a lie.
Second of all, you're "majority" argument is so fucking stupid. Think of it this way, if Nephilimfree could use it on his video, you should probably avoid it.
@qtzlctl2012 No cause the point is you said you didn't understand or that I wasn't clear but if I was clear for everyone else....who has the problem? This isn't about whether or not I am right in my assessment of the issue....this is about whether or not I made my point understandable. So the whole idea of your "fallacy" drivel fails.
@rationalwarrior I gave you the benefit of the doubt and watched the video over in its entirety. I will cede that I missed the main point of this video, while I will maintain you are blowing it so out of proportion it's insane.
@qtzlctl2012 Yeah cause all rappers act tough right? Now who's using a fallacy? I'm saying you're sounding tough cause of the "so fucking stupid" comment. How you resort to using inflammatory words....oh wait...that's right your first comment used inflammatory words didn't it?
@rationalwarrior yeah? and? Are you just laying on more irony (a rapper "bitching" about inflammatory words) ?
This reminds me of a recent Atheist Experience episode, when Matt used the word FUCK and the christian ran off, scared by the big bad F word. Are you trying to tell me you're on her side?
@qtzlctl2012 Ha! more fallacies. Attempting to apply this conversation to that one and asserting that I agree with a christian or am on her "side". Then implying that all rappers curse in their rhymes. I always find it's best to engage in debate without cursing cause it tends to show you are getting overly emotional. Music is not a conversation.
@rationalwarrior I love how you assert you're not on her side then immediately follow up by explaining in detail that you are. Because that side, in case you didnt' catch it, was that you don't like curse words in debate.
I for one don't mind cursing in a debate because if you're not overly emotional, then why the FUCK are you arguing? Get emotional DAMMIT. What are you? a FUCKING robot?
And music isn't a conversation? Who the FUCK are you singing to then? Well at least your music is good.
@qtzlctl2012 Thanks. But debates don't have to be emotional and arguing with someone doesn't mean your angry at them. And no I'm not on her side cause I didn't hang up on you. I'm still talking to you. And finally a song is not a conversation because only one party is talking. In order for a conversation to take place it takes more then 1 person speaking.
@rationalwarrior And using curse words doesn't mean you have to be angry at them either.
And you never get feed back on your music? Now you're just being disingenuous as an artist. Especially for one on youtube. All of your music is a conversation. And a forum. Your song is just a really ornate opening statement.
@qtzlctl2012 I'm not being disingenuous. I genuinely disagree with your definition of music being a conversation. And yeah I get responses but it's usually on whether or not they like the quality of the composition. Are you telling me that you only listen to music that has a message you agree with? I don't. There are plenty of songs that say things I disagree with but I like the composition of the music and words .
@rationalwarrior No that doesn't make sense. Only listening to music that has a message i agree with would be analogous to only having debates with people i agree with. It's obvious i don't do that.
I'm pretty sure you're just being modest. Knowingly or not. You don't give yourself enough credit for how your music affects people. You start conversations, and it's on your youtube channel that it's obvious you reply to. In fact, i'd go as far to say you maintain a musical blog.
@qtzlctl2012 There's got to be some back and forth. So unless someone writes an response to my song, I'm not conversing with anyone. I'm just making a speech to a beat.
@rationalwarrior I can't decide if you're being modest or obtuse. The content of your song makes me think modest.
I know that you know all of your songs have comments. if you received no comments, and had no subscribers, yes, that wouldn't be a conversation. But in that case you'd probably stop making the music.
But, even if you did continue to make your music, the hypothetical is still useless. It's an antrhopic principle. I know you have conversations, because...we're having a conversation.
@qtzlctl2012 Yes but as I said people usually comment on whether they liked the song NOT on the veracity of my claims in the song. For instance, did you think that I was talking to you in my Beyond Reason song. I think it was clear that I was attacking the opposition. "I'm giving nothing to your bloodthirsty god but total disregard" You know what...scratch that...cause some do say they agree with the sentiments. So I guess your right.
@qtzlctl2012 LOL No my friend be yourself. The truth is I only get good debates from fellow atheists. You guys keep me on my toes so it's pretty easy to smash theists. And yeah I can admit when the next man is correct....if I see that they are.
@rationalwarrior Good point. Can we even call them debates with theists? Well I';m glad we both admitted the other was right at one point tonight. That's the best conversation.
Keep inspiring with your music, or pissing me off with your talks, i'll keep posting and making myself look a jackass. I'll keep being my fucking self.
Well I agree. Another resolution the UN passed was one banning blasphemy world wide. I was on Sistersunnshine's channel recently watching one of her videos concerning this issue and i was surprised to find out that even though she is a christian she also is against this anti-blasphemy resolution. She gave an example of muslims persecuting christians for blasphemy of mohammed and thought that it might also become forbidden to say anything bad against mohammed here in the USA
@KasparHauser5 In this rare case I agree with her. Although I do wonder if her protest has more to do her wanting to say bad things about a competing religion and less about free speech. Just a little cynical when it comes to theists at times.
@rationalwarrior Oh yes definitely for sure. If the anti-Blasphemy law only forbade saying anything against christianity only. She would be an eager supporter of this law.
Many heterosexuals like us feel that we don't have a stake in fighting for the rights of the homosexual. But I feel that if we throw the homosexual under the bus then it is only a matter of time when the christian Zealots try to invade our own bedrooms and try to dictate our own heterosexuality.
Look into "authoritarian personality", because gay hatred is more about the psychology of the authoritarian than what a bunch of sand scribblings have to say. :/
Rock n Rap on, young people! Keep it up. Educate the world as to the abjectly profound evils of religious dogma. This is one 61 yr old ol' lady who is very glad young folks of all heritages and backgrounds are getting rational thought out. Thank you! You are doing a much better job than we children of the 60's who later became complacent and turned into the pet dogs of "the man".
LissaJo61 4 months ago in playlist More videos from rationalwarrior
@LissaJo61 Thank you so much ma'am!
rationalwarrior 4 months ago
@hhfleury Strawman. Sex with children or animals has a consent issue. Why should I abstain from sex with my boyfriend (25) because YOU, a person I don't know on the Internet, wants me to? I'm bisexual, so it must infuriate you that I CHOSE to be in a gay relationship. It doesn't actually matter whether it's a choice or not - I'm not harming anyone, and me and my boyfriend are in love with each other. If you come back with a weak argument based on religion, I'll deal with that then.
micmac274 5 months ago
People who are against gays have something to hide.
HybridD91 7 months ago
It's no coincidence that most religions are anti-gay. The ideas behind religion were invented by the elders of bronze-age tribes - and their big concern was that their tribe should become bigger, so they could win out over the next tribe. But gays don't create babies, so... And this is just more proof that religion was invented by man, not God.
mickmle1 1 year ago
thought you were going to say you play Starcraft II lol
AtheistKharm 1 year ago
Great points! "U must be gay" LOL!
julzabro 1 year ago
This really pisses me off. I accept and respect homosexuals. I can talk to them as equals. I can be friends with them. I can even help them with their relationship problems.
And guess what? I'm homophobic! Suck on that, you archaic, religious bigots! Grow the fuck up!
ootdega 1 year ago
I have seen a few theists say, it's not right, but seriously, Even as as straight male, why is it so hard to accept LGBT's as humans, trying to survive like the rest of us..Really?? Maybe it's because I am a former cab driver, in that as long as you pay the fare, I can accommodate you. If you are gay, lesbian, or transgender, you should now that cab drivers have seen it all, and we will treat you all the same as long as you can pay the fare. Equality. Tolerance, and respect. Do not be ashamed.
rounder421 1 year ago
@rounder421 Yeah you would think that this is basic stuff. As long as what someone's doing doesn't harm you...leave em be. No one is asking you to co-sign what they are doing cause it's none of your business anyway. Their just asking for the same respect that you would give anyone else. I don't think that's asking too much.
rationalwarrior 1 year ago
ladies and gentleman our first real black president has arrived
rellik31486 1 year ago 6
@rellik31486 LOL!
rationalwarrior 1 year ago
You are a little bit off about the ROOT cause of violent and vitriolic homophobia. It's not that some "moldy old text" tells them it's bad and wrong, it's that they personally find it disgusting. Then they have their emotional reaction SANCTIONED by the moldy old text. People don't need to be taught to hate (or at least be distrustful of) those who are different; it's hardwired. Theology doesn't shape personalities so much as one's personality determines the theology he/she will be drawn to.
Ermac514 1 year ago
What UN resolution is this? #?
DoctorMeh 1 year ago
Great Video man i found your channel through Darkmatter2525 and have to say you make great videos, hope to see more good work!
TheIntelligentFellow 1 year ago
2 people had someone come up to them and say: "You must be gay!!!" Haha kidding. Great video.
SGTProduction 1 year ago 2
@SGTProduction LOL Evidently......or two people feel unsure about their own sexuality.
rationalwarrior 1 year ago 2
I believe the root source is even more primitive. We've inherited much of the garbage that our ancient ancestors had and which enabled them to survive in what must have been *very* hard times in east Africa. This means that each of us has the propensity for bigotry, hatred, and violence. It is bred deep into our genes. Failing to recognize that and make *conscious* efforts to overcome it, make the beast more likely to emerge.
Religion has just been an excuse for humans to let loose the beast.
Astrobrant2 1 year ago
Keep on droppin' that alternative perspective.....until it's no longer alternative.
WestwindCA 1 year ago
Word.
MtlRedAtheist 1 year ago
You have to understand that some people, regardless of their religion, find homosexual acts morally bankrupt and repulsive the same way they find paedophelic acts morally disgusting. Not everyone agrees on both of those issues. I find it disgusting for someone to have sex with a child, but others don't.
Homosexuals are not being judged for who they are, but what they are doing. I'm not a religious fundie, but homosexuals do have the power to control their choices and abstain.
hhfleury 1 year ago
@hhfleury "homosexuals do have the power to control their choices and abstain"
And you have the power to control your choices and abstain from harming homosexuals.
Child rape?
Seriously, child rape?
I say it's morally bankrupt to coerce a gay man to marry a straight woman. How's she going to feel after twenty years of that?
loqiloqi 1 year ago 2
@hhfleury Thats a bad point. Its like saying the murder victim had no business being in that bullets way when it splattered his brains over the sidewalk.
You cant compare paedophilia with homosexuality, that is dishonest. Does "consenting adults" ring a bell?
xxhellspawnedxx 1 year ago
@xxhellspawnedxx Just because something happens between consenting adults doesn't mean it's okay. You're going to have to specify your criteria there. Even if I give you consent to kill me, and I'm an adult, you'll still get charged with murder.
hhfleury 1 year ago
@hhfleury My criteria for whats okey is if more good than harm comes out of it. If I murder you, while youre at prime health and working condition, with your consent, thats not okey. If you choose euthanasia over a life in a vegetative state, and i perform it, its not wrong. If two men or two women prefer sleeping with their own sex, whats the damage? I'll tell you: NONE. Thats why homosexuality isnt like killing someone with their consent.
xxhellspawnedxx 1 year ago
@hhfleury Could you abstain? For your entire life? Doubtful.
Juxtaroberto 1 year ago
@Juxtaroberto A lot of people do, some forced and other not.
hhfleury 1 year ago
@hhfleury And how psychologically healthy are they? Not very.
Juxtaroberto 1 year ago
Great video man...
FairCogent 1 year ago
I agree with you of course, but I think that if you want a modern day version of the Salem witch trials or European witch hunts you don't even have to change subjects. Look up "witch children" on youtube and watch a few of the videos. Just make sure to have kleenex and something to throw up into handy.
LynxChan 1 year ago
@LynxChan I'm going to check it out thanks.
rationalwarrior 1 year ago
Excellent vid.
TheLunarmonkey 1 year ago
Hand goes up.
Cheers Christine
christinepeace 1 year ago
2:40 "...that religion's tenements..."
I think you mean "tenets".
Great video anyway. I totally agree.
loqiloqi 1 year ago
@loqiloqi You're right. Slipped up.
rationalwarrior 1 year ago
One thing I really like about your work is that you communicate as a normal guy, without the tone or arrogance or superiority common to some of the leading spokesmen of atheism.
Here, I respect your directness, not shying from an issue where you are a directly involved partisan. I'm straight too but would not have made your step. There is also a call out on the "internets" for short vids demanding 'Human Rights'. We are all partisans to human rights.
AtheistCitizen 1 year ago
@AtheistCitizen Thanks my friend. If we allow any group of people to be harmed just because of who they are or how they think (especially on religious grounds) any one of us could be next. The same people that discriminate against gays more then likely hate atheists too.
rationalwarrior 1 year ago
Good vid.
MrHacksawJoe 1 year ago
Those 2 theists are not going by the scripture. They are picking and chosing. I think 2 adults should be able to do whatever they want but the 2 theists you speak of are picking and choosing.
DarthAardvark1977 1 year ago
@DarthAardvark1977 I agree with you that they are cherry-picking that book. And that's a good thing. I prefer that they do that then follow it literally. It's when they follow it literally that we have a problem because in order to do that, there will be violence against any opposed to it.
rationalwarrior 1 year ago
i disagree with u on the gay hate part. yes religion is the largest (atleast in the usa i think) contributor to hatred towards them folks.
my sister is gay. i only hate gay men who float around like fairies and act weird as shit. ur sexual preference is fine with me, but there is no reason to act like that as far as im concerned. well said tho guy
drinkycrow67 1 year ago
well said
drinkycrow67 1 year ago
So why is nobody upset that there where 27 NON voters??
(and I am not talking about the 17 abstainers)
27 Countries where not present during this vote!
UNBELIEVABLE!!
And why are non-democratic countries been given the right to vote??
gilgameshismist 1 year ago
I agree totally bro!
EvilBeatsmith 1 year ago
We are like white blood cells and religion is the invader, just scaled up. The human race and the sum of our knowledge work almost like a single body and mind, with internal struggles, but everyone pretty much working to keep the whole alive. Religion however seems much like a cancer in this context just spreading itself and halting the bodies natural flow. I also sort of picture religion as an impotent man in a way.
Stuckherewithyou 1 year ago
@Stuckherewithyou Good analogy.
rationalwarrior 1 year ago
@Stuckherewithyou We aren't all white, you racist. :)
squirreljester2 1 year ago
@squirreljester2 You could be a black blood cell...but I have a feeling the immune system would be suspicious and pull you over.
Stuckherewithyou 1 year ago
@Stuckherewithyou Nice hehe.
squirreljester2 1 year ago
"rational" "warrior"
C'est bien.
svengalie 1 year ago
AFAIK, this resolution just removed particular examples of terms on which discrimination would occur. The resolution says that no kinds of discrimination are appropriate and the example is dropped.
I might be wrong, I haven't looked into it, a friend of mine did.
ZergAteu 1 year ago
@ZergAteu Hey if you could, can you see if you could find a link or something to the actual info. All I keep getting is people's interpretation of the resolution in articles. I would really appreciate it.
rationalwarrior 1 year ago
@rationalwarrior I'll try to, but I won't have access to internet for the next week, so you'll have to wait. I think the actual report from UN and the official documents are enough to get a real oppinion.
Resolution available at tiny . cc / gashc3997
ZergAteu 1 year ago
Oh, and don't forget the Spanish Inquisition. Or the Holocaust. Or the Crusades. I reply to the UN with a quote from a show known as The League "Oh, thats horseshit!"
Hexist2 1 year ago
The UN done messed up. The consequences will never be the same.
sKepptiksowat 1 year ago
you have a perfect head.
216trixie 1 year ago
It does not matter they havn't met him.
Look at bannana man and his popularity. Could anyone follow anyone stupidier?
Ilamarea 1 year ago
@Ilamarea Very true.....
rationalwarrior 1 year ago
The really sad thing is, things like Salem happened because of scientific reasons (ergot poisoning.) If people would just pay attention to science instead of putting their fingers in their ears and screaming, "La, la, la, la!" at the top of their lungs, they might actually learn to stop hating. So many atrocities could be stopped if they would accept the scientific, backed up by dozens of facts, truth instead of that stupid Bible.
rhian116 1 year ago 4
@rhian116 That is so true. But no they rather defame science and scientists yet hold superstitious drivel in high regard.
rationalwarrior 1 year ago 2
UN should be brought to trial for this. It's a shame they hold all the international courts.
henriktor 1 year ago
Well said rationalwarrior...
Katalyzt
Katalyzt 1 year ago
Im straight and never had any gay tendencies...Im not threatened lol Nice video.
JoMariebentzler 1 year ago
The UN's human rights group is just foxes guarding the hen house.
triftenC 1 year ago
GAY OR DIE!
platypus4242 1 year ago
There are witch hunts going on right now in Africa lead by fundamentalist Christians
sniperofbuffalo 1 year ago
I agree 100%, though on the internet I've run into some crazy people, USUALLY, Gay people aren't trying to get you into adopting their lifestyle, aside from jail or rape in general, I've never experience a gay person trying to force others to be gay, and in those jail and other rape cases, it's wrong regardless of sexuality, it's EQUALLY wrong. But, the religious Zealots, like the Train Evangelists here in NYC, are trying to force people to hear, and assimilate into their religion, via threats
Looneveli 1 year ago
@Looneveli In NYC there are Train Evangelists? That's awful. I can't imagine being on a subway car and forced to hear that mindless tripe my whole way to work.
rationalwarrior 1 year ago
@rationalwarrior
Nothing appeals to the evangelists like a captive audience.
smaakjeks 1 year ago
@rationalwarrior ooo yes there are, the sad thing is, most of them say the same thing, verbatim, as the others, and the dialog hasn't changed for at the very least, 6 years. thats why i'm thankful for music on my phone and earbuds, they truly have no respect for people, they never have a nice message, it's always homophobic, saying every other religion is wrong, or devil worship, and using the threats of hell and judgement day than trying to show POSITIVE aspects of their religion.
Looneveli 1 year ago
I find it funny that the times of controlling religious absolutism were called 'the dark ages'.
whisperingdoom 1 year ago
Great video. :) I am glad I watched this.
Bobbiethejean 1 year ago
I raised my hand because too in Ghana they kill people for thinking they are a witch and it's 2010. The fact that people can be so ignorant it break my heart.
MistressArte 1 year ago
Damn right!
Saukko31 1 year ago
well said
ClownMouse 1 year ago
Comment removed
ClownMouse 1 year ago
We're well into the 2010 and how far back do we have to reach to stone our children? or stone Adulterers or kill homosexxuals or every other persson who we love but wasat odds with the abrahamic religions? If you were a Jainist or a Buddist or a Scientologist (bad example) it would not be an issue...why the hate?
Naked4Jesus 1 year ago
While I was watching this vid, you blew up my coolometer.
chthonios 1 year ago
On way home heard on BBC that India was having a gay pride parade this year to celebrate being able to be openly gay vs prior years when parade was about protesting discrimination. Reason for parade change in tone is because Delhi court repealed Section 377 of India’s Penal Code - which criminalized “unnatural” sexual activity, including homosexual acts. -- Example things do change, even if slowly.
UN is world government organization. Change needs to be done nation by sovereign nation anyway.
MegF142857 1 year ago 2
@MegF142857 I didn't hear about that. Excellent news.
Darkmage1293 1 year ago
You have a wonderful voice. Keep speading the truth!
dreams0f4ever 1 year ago
I for one, have wonderful people in my life who happen to be LGBT, people who I love an appreciate. And in such a case, that an angry mob came for them with torches and pitch forks, I would risk my life to protect the victims. No matter who they might be.
If I want the world to be a better place, I have to make it a personal goal to do so...
Xeletoph 1 year ago
I do believe that humans could do something like the salem witch hunts, and the european witch hunts, the inquisition and all that other evil, all over again. We ARE creatures of habit.
However I think there's some misunderstanding on the vote the UN put through. All the vote did was reword the right to cover a broader spectrum of people, and didn't intend to make an open season on LGBT's. However, zealots just MIGHT see it that way anyhow - there in lays the danger.
Who will fight such zeal?
Xeletoph 1 year ago
One argument that seems to circle a lot when I discuss this with others, is that they feel that "the gay agenda is being shoved down my and my family's throats."
I didn't know that spreading awareness was "shoving down your throat".
You hate what you fear, and you fear what you don't understand.
fiveheadlol 1 year ago
You know something though? I'm beginning to wonder why more people aren't talking about this. I'm also beginning to wonder what the whole scoop is on this. I saw a few videos and then read a couple of articles about it and based on that, it seemed that this was pretty cut and clear, and I made a vid to pass the word along. But day after day I'm seeing more people saying that it's not as bad as it's been conveyed as being by others. I wonder if they're in denial or if our info's wrong. Thoughts?
TheIronAtheist 1 year ago
@TheIronAtheist Its the apologists that quietly condone it and say its not so bad. They all speak up when the denial of rights directly affects them, but as far as homosexuals go, they will still defer to the dogmatic commandments from a homophobic desert cult to shape their opinions.
Its the chipping away of the only structure that is stopping the entire world resorting to medieval insanity, they want to take the progressively secular world into another theocratic nightmare bit by bit.
123backinyerface 1 year ago
@TheIronAtheist It could be either one. I've watched DLandonCole's video and he put it in a little perspective from another point of view. I've also read a few articles on this by people who possess more info then I and they are giving the action a thumbs down. So until something comes out that shows it's not bad conclusively, I think we would be better to err on the side of defending other people's rights...We can always retract it later if we're wrong.
rationalwarrior 1 year ago 3
@rationalwarrior
That sounds reasonable to me and I agree. Thanks for your thoughts on the matter.
TheIronAtheist 1 year ago
I hate this action by the UN as much as the next guy... but we have to remember, the shit countries voted on this. It's democracy and thats how it works sometimes.
Also keep in mind that we're not going to win every battle. But we ARE winning the war.
KaseyAkira 1 year ago
@KaseyAkira
Please excuse me, but to what war are you referring?
TheIronAtheist 1 year ago
@KaseyAkira No your wrong. The charter of the un is to protect communitys and groups as ww2 showed what happens when groups are killed etc.... im not sure what rule it is, but you cannot pass legislation to persucute a certain group.
loudman12 1 year ago
Dude, go get em! I support you 100%
camcan004 1 year ago
I raised my hand...you can take my word for it!
You are right on with this. I really don't get how in this age, people can give a shit what other people do in privacy; especially when it doesn't affect them...AT ALL. I'm straight, but like you said...it doesn't matter. It is taking a group of people, and stripping them of their rights. And, any time a person is getting stripped of their rights...that is my battle.
I feel a bit naive.....in that I truly assumed things were getting better.
undisputedgreatest 1 year ago 2
@undisputedgreatest Me too but every time I turn around someone convinces me otherwise. Once they dehumanize a group they can justify anything that's done to them. We have to be vigilant because if they could, atheists would be next. I haven't always thought that way either. I used to think that it didn't concern me. But anytime any group gets treated like crap just for being who they are.....we have got to say something.
rationalwarrior 1 year ago 8
@rationalwarrior Right on. I would say "in America," but all over...we need to protect the rights of minority groups. The U.S. was structured to protect those of minority opinion or circumstance; and that is how it should be. The Majority SHOULD NOT rule when it comes to the right to exist. As long as no one is getting hurt by it, people should be free to any opinion, belief, lifestyle, or existence. Whether that is Atheists, gays, etc.
undisputedgreatest 1 year ago
@rationalwarrior Even if one day Atheists are the majority (I hope we make it to that day,) we still have to protect the rights of the religious to believe and practice as they want.
As the Japanese Mixed Martial Artist Genki Sudo says..."We Are All One." We have differences sure, but damn the world would be boring otherwise.
undisputedgreatest 1 year ago
very well spoken, no one is expecting everyone to become gay, they just want to be accepted for who they are. Bravo man bravo
WBCohorn 1 year ago
@WBCohorn Thank you sir!
rationalwarrior 1 year ago
Fuck the UN, kick them out of New York, let them go to Iran.
615Deathdealer 1 year ago
When Zealots attack, Noble team better take them down!
AntiFredMissile 1 year ago
@AntiFredMissile Pfff. Send the Duke after them.
Without homosexuality, the Duke would miss out on lesbians and bisexuals.
The Duke does no aprove of this =D
RockJosiah 1 year ago
This shit just kills me. No real mature person, without following some totalitarian dogma, could find a reason to give a shit what other consenting adults do in their bedroom.
It's a divide and conquer tactic. Religions can more effectively grab power when they have a "wicked" scapegoat - someone to point at and say "they are different and that makes them evil". The UN is a rotten institution for allowing this to go on unchallenged.
bowlsallbroken 1 year ago
@bowlsallbroken They need a "bad guy" to play off of and to use as cover while they commit some of the most heinous acts ever.
rationalwarrior 1 year ago
@bowlsallbroken Gays don't want to just be in the bedroom. They want to be able to be open in public to kiss, hold hands, marry, raise kids. They want out of the closet. That's my view anyway.
MegF142857 1 year ago
@MegF142857 they want the same rights as heterosexuals. depending on where i am at public displays of effection seem cute or they seem to lack class, all depending on where i see them. so if its ok for a heterosexual couple to hold hands, than it should also be ok for a homosexual couple to hold hands. and if its ok for a heterosexual couple to marry than it should also be ok for a homosexual couple to marry.
there is nothing inherently more right about heterosexuality than homosexuality.
greycloud24 1 year ago
@greycloud24 Comment by "bowlsallbroken" had "what other consenting adults do in their bedroom." To me it's not just about doing what you want in the closet / bedroom, but wanting to be treated really the same and in open. This is what bothers me about "Don't ask don't tell" policy. It's morally wrong to say it's okay, as long as you keep quiet and hide.
I agree should be same. Doesn't mean need to be crass straight or gay in public. ;-)
MegF142857 1 year ago
@MegF142857 if you can kiss, hold hands, marry and raise, why can't others do the same? Do you think the gender of the people you sleep with makes u a better person?
slowwormz 1 year ago
@slowwormz Interesting reaction. You assumed that I was saying they shouldn't have that right? Was merely saying that it isn't "what other consenting adults do in their bedroom". Some folks over time have said that they are fine with homosexuals, as long as they keep it in the closet. My understanding is no one wants to be in a closet. This is why "don't ask don't tell" is morally wrong, for example. It's not just out of sight out of mind. Needs to be open or it's false acceptance.
MegF142857 1 year ago
@MegF142857
Yes, that's what many of them want, and that's what they should have.
That is, in addition to the end of shunning/ridicule, condemnation, persecution, and execution everywhere.
bowlsallbroken 1 year ago
@bowlsallbroken Yes, does no good to come out and be legal, if people are going to attack someone for doing so. I'm not sure there is a need for special "hate" crime protection, as it is already wrong and illegal to beat people up or harm them or harrass (at least where I live). Suppose doesn't hurt to add special protection, but shouldn't imply that other non-list people are excluded from such. Always is someone persecuted, so do we need to list everything or it isn't included? No.
MegF142857 1 year ago
@MegF142857
These resolutions are more relevant to places like Uganda where there are actual, giant witchhunts in effect against gay people.
I get what you are saying, but I think, right now, it's prudent to itemize this one minority when they are so often the victims of atrocity - not to minimize any other victims but for the sake of clarity.
bowlsallbroken 1 year ago
Conquer. build. spread your religion... The three step program to get your religion famous.
TheGravityApple 1 year ago
when the hell did this happen. Man, the U.N. just keeps getting more and more irrelivant every day
canadianpearlist 1 year ago
@canadianpearlist Not quite sure of the exact date but it was fairly recently.
rationalwarrior 1 year ago
You are right on the money.
teafortess 1 year ago
Good stuff bud. Ty.
sweetmonkeylove1 1 year ago
Excellent video.
Eminemno1fan 1 year ago
Its horrific how they can't seem to mind their own business, people who prop up stuff like this. Why are they so interested and invest so much time into the where- and what-abouts of homosexual peoples genitals?
Or maybe its just like scotish comedian Frankie Boyle said: "I wanna make homosexuality illegal... So I can feel naughty when I do it!" That would explain a great deal about why these monkeys keep trying to prop up laws such as these.
A+ video btw, keep up the good work!
xxhellspawnedxx 1 year ago
@xxhellspawnedxx It's funny cause now I'm hearing from people who belong to groups that are rarely discriminated against, acting as if THEIR rights are being violated by just mentioning minority groups who routinely are violated because of who and what they are.
rationalwarrior 1 year ago
@rationalwarrior Hey judt subbed to your channel keep up the good work you make a lot of sense and are honnest which i respect. Oh love the rap you did that was good. A fan from the UK :D
loudman12 1 year ago
@loudman12 Thanks my friend!
rationalwarrior 1 year ago
oh give me a break. read the frickin' law first! you guys are driving me fucking nuts!!!
Since when is gay not included in "discrimination of ANY basis"?
qtzlctl2012 1 year ago
@qtzlctl2012 First it wasn't a law. The removed reference was originally contained in a non-exhaustive list in the resolution highlighting the many groups of people that are particularly targeted by killings. Mentioning sexual orientation as a basis on which people are targeted for killing highlights a situation in which particular vigilance is required in order for all people to be afforded equal protection.
rationalwarrior 1 year ago
@rationalwarrior so you're admitting that in order to gain "equal" protection, some targets must be "highlighted" before all others?
qtzlctl2012 1 year ago
@qtzlctl2012 It's not BEFORE others. The reason for the list in the first place is because those mentioned are routinely denied their rights because of who or what they are. In law you have to be specific at times to avoid loopholes that are used by unscrupulous people. including persons belonging to national or ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities, persons acting as human rights defenders (such as lawyers, journalists or demonstrators).
rationalwarrior 1 year ago
@rationalwarrior This is rediculous. It's only more obvious you haven't read the text.
First, you're saying it's a law now? When before you said it's not?
Second, what list? There is no list. Read the text.
Third, i'm unaware of a loophole big enough to go around "ALL BASIS"
qtzlctl2012 1 year ago
@qtzlctl2012 No it's not a law because nothing has been changed yet. This was a VOTE ON A RESOLUTION to amend the wording of the International human rights law They seek to change the wording to exclude sexual orientation. The resolution itself is NOT A LAW. But of course it uses legal terms because it seeks to change the wording of a LAW. For the past ten years the resolution included sexual orientation in the list of what qualified as discrimination.
rationalwarrior 1 year ago
@rationalwarrior yes, thank you for missing the point.
The RESOLUTION still calls for a ban on ALL executions of ANY discriminatory basis.
You're just like the republicans shouting "obamacare calls for death panels!"
qtzlctl2012 1 year ago
@qtzlctl2012 The amendment removing the reference to sexual orientation was sponsored by Benin on behalf of the African Group in the UN General Assembly and was adopted with 79 votes in favor, 70 against, 17 abstentions and 26 absent. This is what the beef is about. Maybe you should read more in depth instead of only focusing on one part of the issue.
rationalwarrior 1 year ago
@rationalwarrior and maybe you should clarify your "beef" before generalizing.
qtzlctl2012 1 year ago
@qtzlctl2012 Funny how out of 78 commentators YOU are the only one who didn't get it.
rationalwarrior 1 year ago
@rationalwarrior appeal to popularity, nice. Here's a guess: out of 78 commentators, i'm going to say i'm also the only one to read the UN's text
qtzlctl2012 1 year ago
@qtzlctl2012 Yeah you read it and funny how you didn't see ANYTHING about the resolution or the list of things that are defined as discrimination or anything else that has been in writing about this discussion for the last 10 years. Or anything about why it was placed there in the first place because homosexuality is illegal in 77 countries and punishable by death in seven. Basically you read it without the context of the surrounding issues.
rationalwarrior 1 year ago
@qtzlctl2012 Also the point is why was it clear for them and not for you. If the majority understood...why didn't you? Maybe YOU were the problem. Maybe you don't like the way I discuss issues so maybe you should unsub.
rationalwarrior 1 year ago
@rationalwarrior first of all, i read the text that was applicable to the change in the resolution. And the word ANY still covers homosexuality. So the actual effect of the resolution is the exact same. To say anything other wise is a lie.
Second of all, you're "majority" argument is so fucking stupid. Think of it this way, if Nephilimfree could use it on his video, you should probably avoid it.
qtzlctl2012 1 year ago
@qtzlctl2012 "So fucking stupid" You sound real mad right now. Real tough too.
rationalwarrior 1 year ago
@rationalwarrior That comment was pointless. So are you agreeing you're using a creationist's tactics by calling on popular support?
qtzlctl2012 1 year ago
@qtzlctl2012 No cause the point is you said you didn't understand or that I wasn't clear but if I was clear for everyone else....who has the problem? This isn't about whether or not I am right in my assessment of the issue....this is about whether or not I made my point understandable. So the whole idea of your "fallacy" drivel fails.
rationalwarrior 1 year ago
@rationalwarrior I gave you the benefit of the doubt and watched the video over in its entirety. I will cede that I missed the main point of this video, while I will maintain you are blowing it so out of proportion it's insane.
qtzlctl2012 1 year ago
@rationalwarrior Thanks for the irony on a rapper calling me tough though.
qtzlctl2012 1 year ago
@qtzlctl2012 Yeah cause all rappers act tough right? Now who's using a fallacy? I'm saying you're sounding tough cause of the "so fucking stupid" comment. How you resort to using inflammatory words....oh wait...that's right your first comment used inflammatory words didn't it?
rationalwarrior 1 year ago
@rationalwarrior yeah? and? Are you just laying on more irony (a rapper "bitching" about inflammatory words) ?
This reminds me of a recent Atheist Experience episode, when Matt used the word FUCK and the christian ran off, scared by the big bad F word. Are you trying to tell me you're on her side?
qtzlctl2012 1 year ago
@qtzlctl2012 Ha! more fallacies. Attempting to apply this conversation to that one and asserting that I agree with a christian or am on her "side". Then implying that all rappers curse in their rhymes. I always find it's best to engage in debate without cursing cause it tends to show you are getting overly emotional. Music is not a conversation.
rationalwarrior 1 year ago
@rationalwarrior I love how you assert you're not on her side then immediately follow up by explaining in detail that you are. Because that side, in case you didnt' catch it, was that you don't like curse words in debate.
I for one don't mind cursing in a debate because if you're not overly emotional, then why the FUCK are you arguing? Get emotional DAMMIT. What are you? a FUCKING robot?
And music isn't a conversation? Who the FUCK are you singing to then? Well at least your music is good.
qtzlctl2012 1 year ago
@qtzlctl2012 Thanks. But debates don't have to be emotional and arguing with someone doesn't mean your angry at them. And no I'm not on her side cause I didn't hang up on you. I'm still talking to you. And finally a song is not a conversation because only one party is talking. In order for a conversation to take place it takes more then 1 person speaking.
rationalwarrior 1 year ago
@rationalwarrior And using curse words doesn't mean you have to be angry at them either.
And you never get feed back on your music? Now you're just being disingenuous as an artist. Especially for one on youtube. All of your music is a conversation. And a forum. Your song is just a really ornate opening statement.
qtzlctl2012 1 year ago
@qtzlctl2012 I'm not being disingenuous. I genuinely disagree with your definition of music being a conversation. And yeah I get responses but it's usually on whether or not they like the quality of the composition. Are you telling me that you only listen to music that has a message you agree with? I don't. There are plenty of songs that say things I disagree with but I like the composition of the music and words .
rationalwarrior 1 year ago
@rationalwarrior No that doesn't make sense. Only listening to music that has a message i agree with would be analogous to only having debates with people i agree with. It's obvious i don't do that.
I'm pretty sure you're just being modest. Knowingly or not. You don't give yourself enough credit for how your music affects people. You start conversations, and it's on your youtube channel that it's obvious you reply to. In fact, i'd go as far to say you maintain a musical blog.
qtzlctl2012 1 year ago
@qtzlctl2012 "Musical Blog"? I like that LOL
rationalwarrior 1 year ago
@qtzlctl2012 There's got to be some back and forth. So unless someone writes an response to my song, I'm not conversing with anyone. I'm just making a speech to a beat.
rationalwarrior 1 year ago
@rationalwarrior I can't decide if you're being modest or obtuse. The content of your song makes me think modest.
I know that you know all of your songs have comments. if you received no comments, and had no subscribers, yes, that wouldn't be a conversation. But in that case you'd probably stop making the music.
But, even if you did continue to make your music, the hypothetical is still useless. It's an antrhopic principle. I know you have conversations, because...we're having a conversation.
qtzlctl2012 1 year ago
@qtzlctl2012 Yes but as I said people usually comment on whether they liked the song NOT on the veracity of my claims in the song. For instance, did you think that I was talking to you in my Beyond Reason song. I think it was clear that I was attacking the opposition. "I'm giving nothing to your bloodthirsty god but total disregard" You know what...scratch that...cause some do say they agree with the sentiments. So I guess your right.
rationalwarrior 1 year ago
@rationalwarrior that's one way to leave me speechless: agree with me.
You have any idea how many comebacks i had lined up that you ruined?
nice talk. I'll try to be nicer in my opening posts next time.
qtzlctl2012 1 year ago
@qtzlctl2012 LOL No my friend be yourself. The truth is I only get good debates from fellow atheists. You guys keep me on my toes so it's pretty easy to smash theists. And yeah I can admit when the next man is correct....if I see that they are.
rationalwarrior 1 year ago
@rationalwarrior Good point. Can we even call them debates with theists? Well I';m glad we both admitted the other was right at one point tonight. That's the best conversation.
Keep inspiring with your music, or pissing me off with your talks, i'll keep posting and making myself look a jackass. I'll keep being my fucking self.
qtzlctl2012 1 year ago
@qtzlctl2012 LOLOL I'll talk to you later!
rationalwarrior 1 year ago
Well I agree. Another resolution the UN passed was one banning blasphemy world wide. I was on Sistersunnshine's channel recently watching one of her videos concerning this issue and i was surprised to find out that even though she is a christian she also is against this anti-blasphemy resolution. She gave an example of muslims persecuting christians for blasphemy of mohammed and thought that it might also become forbidden to say anything bad against mohammed here in the USA
KasparHauser5 1 year ago
@KasparHauser5 In this rare case I agree with her. Although I do wonder if her protest has more to do her wanting to say bad things about a competing religion and less about free speech. Just a little cynical when it comes to theists at times.
rationalwarrior 1 year ago
@rationalwarrior Oh yes definitely for sure. If the anti-Blasphemy law only forbade saying anything against christianity only. She would be an eager supporter of this law.
Many heterosexuals like us feel that we don't have a stake in fighting for the rights of the homosexual. But I feel that if we throw the homosexual under the bus then it is only a matter of time when the christian Zealots try to invade our own bedrooms and try to dictate our own heterosexuality.
KasparHauser5 1 year ago
@KasparHauser5 Very true. For a while I didn't see the connection. But I do now.
rationalwarrior 1 year ago
I raised my hand but since you can't see me i posted a comment about it. Keep the videos going man.
Shydrow 1 year ago
Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
FraggedMind 1 year ago
Look into "authoritarian personality", because gay hatred is more about the psychology of the authoritarian than what a bunch of sand scribblings have to say. :/
ApemanD 1 year ago
@ApemanD I'm reading some research on it now.
rationalwarrior 1 year ago
Great video :) Thanks man.
Vogter2100 1 year ago
If given the chance religion will misbehave again....not quoted but derived from Christopher Hitchens....
peyo001 1 year ago