Anonymous wrote:That sounds great, and I'm all for greater societal acceptance of gays and atheists alike.

Just know that as long as the face of atheism is represented on places like DCUM by posters like the Catholic Hating Troll and that atheist who is obsessed with sophomoric and historically loony taunts about Mithras and Horus, it will be hard to shed the whack-job/bogeyman (9:58's word) image completely.

perhaps part of the consciousness-raising process will involve Christians not fixating on what they perceive as "loony taunts." A secure faith needn't be upset by hearing about earlier mythological gods who had some of the same characteristics of Jesus -- something that religious scholars and many ministers are well aware of.

By the same token, people secure in their heterosexual relationship and comfortable with their individual sexuality, aren't threatened by homosexuals expressing their sexual orientation just as openly.

Expecting atheists to shut up about Horus and Mithras would be like expecting gays not to mention their partner or not to hold hands in public -- things that heterosexuals do openly and regularly

That sounds great, and I'm all for greater societal acceptance of gays and atheists alike.

Just know that as long as the face of atheism is represented on places like DCUM by posters like the Catholic Hating Troll and that atheist who is obsessed with sophomoric and historically loony taunts about Mithras and Horus, it will be hard to shed the whack-job/bogeyman (9:58's word) image completely.

Anonymous wrote:Well, I can be fired for being gay but not for being Methodist. My religion has nothing to do with my ablility to adopt children or make end of life decisions for my spouse. I've been chased down the street by men wielding bottles calling me dyke but never assaulted for my belief nor lackthereof (though I realize people are threatened, hurt and even killed for their faith or lackthereof).

Yes, it's harder in this society to be gay than to be atheist. For one thing it's easier for atheists to "pass" - you can act religious just by bowing your heard when expected to pray. Already a lot of people don't go to church regularly, so hiding one's atheism doesn't demand the huge lifestyle compromises that being gay has demanded. Also, there aren't a lot of laws on the books against it - though there are a few in some states, and it's political suicide to be openly atheist if you plan to run for office.

Perhaps widespread and successful efforts for homosexuals to be accepted as respectable citizens have paved the way for acceptance of atheism - another previously hidden, reviled minority. As more atheists "come out" more people can see that they are not the bogeymen they were perceived to be -- like gay people, they are literally our brothers and sisters, friends and neighbors and co-workers.

Well, I can be fired for being gay but not for being Methodist. My religion has nothing to do with my ablility to adopt children or make end of life decisions for my spouse. I've been chased down the street by men wielding bottles calling me dyke but never assaulted for my belief nor lackthereof (though I realize people are threatened, hurt and even killed for their faith or lackthereof).

Anonymous wrote:I think there are similarities when you put it as you did in 16:49, but there are real differences as well- in jurisprudence and social acceptance.

What are the differences?

I think there are similarities when you put it as you did in 16:49, but there are real differences as well- in jurisprudence and social acceptance.

Of course. The world is getting grosser.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, do you mean there is a national shift in attitudes toward religion? I do think people have always had issues with religion, but now are more vocal about it. I don't think the faithful are going to become less so because of anyone else's opinion.

Yes - specifically, that not being religious is more accepted now, because, like homosexuality, more people are identifying themselves as not religious and the people around them can see that they are pretty much ordinary people - not amoral or evil or troubled, as often depicted.

Ohhhh, I see. Not the pp but I was confused by what you said and it was easy to jump to conclusions -- and the conclusions I jumped to were wrong. Thanks for the clarifying.

Anonymous wrote:OP, do you mean there is a national shift in attitudes toward religion? I do think people have always had issues with religion, but now are more vocal about it. I don't think the faithful are going to become less so because of anyone else's opinion.

Yes - specifically, that not being religious is more accepted now, because, like homosexuality, more people are identifying themselves as not religious and the people around them can see that they are pretty much ordinary people - not amoral or evil or troubled, as often depicted.

OP, do you mean there is a national shift in attitudes toward religion? I do think people have always had issues with religion, but now are more vocal about it. I don't think the faithful are going to become less so because of anyone else's opinion.

Anonymous wrote:I think religion is going down the same road, but in the opposite direction.

I'm 15:48 and I can't tell what direction OP thinks anybody is headed in.

I think you have it backwards: homosexuality is the new religion.

I think religion is going down the same road, but in the opposite direction.

Not sure what you mean.

But a friend said he recently "came out about being a Christian" (a liberal protestant) to his anti-religion coworkers.

I certainly dislike the "victim" card and I'm not banging that drum. Still, I think it's sometimes pragmatic to keep your faith to yourself, because other people sometimes have problems with it.

as per an opinion expressed on another thread:

"Think about how discussions and attitudes regarding homosexuality have changed in the past 20 years. Religion seems to be going down the same road."

What do you think?