Reply to Is Atheism a religion without a church or temple ?

Forum Index » Religion

Reply to "Is Atheism a religion without a church or temple ?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Gosh, I haven’t seen any of those here. You can not believe in religion and even dislike religion, but certainly still be an American who values the Constitution and the right to worship as you wish.

Or not.[/quote]

I sure have seen anti-theistic posts here. And I’ve seen people who disparage religious people as bigots be just as bigoted about religion, without one ounce of self-awareness.

[/quote]

People telling you to stop shoving your religion in their face and up their vagina absolutely do support the Constitution. In fact, we just want our personal liberty back. [/quote]

Freedom of religion- nobody is shoving their religion “in your face.” How would a religious person be shoving their religion in your face?

No one is shoving their religion in anyone’s vagina. That’s a hysterical, crude, and disgusting statement, completely without merit. It’s inflammatory and ridiculous rhetoric that people use to justify killing innocent babies, while painting themselves as victims.
The victims are the babies whose lives and bodies are destroyed for the sake of convenience.[/quote]

You are absolutely shoving your religion in my face and up my vagina. If you want to believe that a clump of cells is a “baby” and women have no personal liberty, then you believe that in your house with consenting adults. You can’t force your extremist religious beliefs on others. 
[/quote]

Like toddler or adolescent, the terms embryo and fetus do not refer to nonhumans, but to humans at particular stages of development.

Once we grant that the unborn are human beings, it should settle the question of their right to live.

The right to live doesn’t increase with age and size; otherwise toddlers and adolescents have less right to live than adults.

The comparison between a baby’s rights and a mother’s rights is unequal.  What is at stake in abortion is the mother’s lifestyle, as opposed to the baby’s life.

It is reasonable for society to expect an adult to live temporarily with an inconvenience if the only alternative is killing a child.[/quote]

You are welcome to have your religious beliefs around personhood. But you don’t get to define it and force it on everyone else.

Humans are not a “person” until they are born alive. An embryo/fetus is not equal to a living, breathing woman.

Keep your religion to yourself and stay out of my vagina. Thanks. 
[/quote]

A child’s “breathing,” her intake of oxygen, begins long before birth.

Someone’s helplessness or dependency should motivate us to protect her, not to destroy her.

The point of viability changes because it depends on technology, not the unborn herself.  Eventually babies may be viable from the point of conception.

In a broad sense, many born people are not viable because they are incapable of surviving without depending on others.[/quote]

An embryo/fetus absorbing oxygen via the umbilical cord is not equal to a living, breathing woman.

Woman are people who have autonomy over their body. Your religion says otherwise.

Keep your religion out of my body. You are infringing on my rights. 
[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics