"Only Gays think the US is turning into a Theocracy"

[DemGirl7]

By far the most stupid Freeper/Fundie thing ever said to me.
I was in an AOL political chatroom, just to see the BS that was being said in the chat, and the subject of Iraq turning into a Theocracy came up and I said that the US itself is turning into a Theocracy. I gave reasons like the fact that the Party that controls the US government, the republicans are controlled by the Fundies, that they are taking away birth control in the form of fundie pharmacists, and intelligent design being forced into public schools. The response I got was "that only gays think that", "that I must be gay", and "I should come out the closet". To which I responded that "I'm open-minded", and after that I was told "that I should respect the evangelicals right to practice their religion". Which I ended up responding that "I will respect it as long as they don't shove it down my throat or anyone else's", which I never got a response back to.

These people are fucking idiots...so now I guess everyone who wants to preserve the separation of Chruch & State must be a bunch of flaming homosexuals...this is one of most stupid responses I've ever gotten from these idiots on the rightwing. These people are by far lower than pond scum, not only are they homophobic assholes but they make goldfish look like rocket scientists with their logic.

[growlypants]

1. then I must be gay. Hmmmmm...the things I discover here on DU

[Taxloss]

2. This heterosexual thinks differently.

[rocktivity]

3. Tell him that a lot of Christians think so, too.

:crazy:
rocknation

[rodeodance]

4. my my they are the smart ones then.

[Pathwalker]

5. Uh-huh. I'm not gay and I've been screaming

about the coming theocracy for two decades. What can you expect, though, from people with the IQ of a pile of manure?

[melody]

6. straight and married for 27 years...and still think we're a theocracy

Typical freeper mindset. They ought to ask women of reproductive age what they think.

Anyway, since when do they get to shrug off the opinions of any segment of society (oh, that's right, they're freepers, they want everyone to think what they do)?

[China_cat]

7. If it ever came down to a choice (there's that nasty word again)

I'll take gay over republican any day.

[Autumn Colors]

8. Woo hoo!!!!

I must be gay!!! My husband will be so pleased! :sarcasm:

[Pushed To The Left]

9. Going by their logic, I must be gay, black, Jewish, female, Islamic,etc.

I support the rights of all of those groups, so therefore I suppose I'm a member of all of them! If somebody thought that I was a homosexual, I wouldn't take it as an insult. It's not accurate in my case, but it's not much different than if they thought I was a different race or religion.

[nytemare]

10. If they say you must be gay, reply, "you must have been beaten up by a gay

person." That is the only way to explain their anger. Somewhere, in their childhood, a boy who liked to try on his mommy's high heels kicked his ass, and he is embarrased.

:)

[really annoyed]

11. I call it AOHELL!

Those people told me I was a lesbian because I mentioned that I had a favorite female actress! :silly:
The guy who kept bothering me has some screen name to the effect of "godblessronaldreagan." His whole profile talked about how much he LOVED Reagan.... Hmm, I was SO tempted to say something to him, but I thought it better to keep my mouth shut. It was not worth it.

The political chatrooms on AOL are horrible. I haven't been to those rooms in several years.

And doesn't it make you wonder why conservatives are SO obsessed with gay people? I think that is a question you should post to them next time! :evilgrin:

[The Traveler]

12. Heh. I'm not gay

:rant:

But I know a lot of 'em and a significant percentage of those guys are a lot tougher --- mentally, physically, and spiritually --- than most of those pencil necked, lard-assed, small dicked idiots that hang at Free Republic. (Profile of average Freeper --- dead from the neck up and waist down.) Heh. "Free Republic". Interesting concept of freedom advocated over in those parts.

</end>

Oh, bloody hell I am NOT finished with my :rant:

The problem with allowing the evangelicals to "practice their religion" is that said practice includes forcing their moral regime on people of differing beliefs. For example, the fundies believe life begins at conception. To my knowledge there is no Biblical basis for this belief. As I understand it, Hebrew scholars contemporary with Jesus taught that the ensoulment of the body happens at the time of the child's first cry. That would appear to be the only guidance scripture and supporting texts provide on the matter, and is quite contrary to evangelical positions on the subject.

The concept of ensouled life beginning at conception dates back to the time of the intellectual love affair of the Roman Catholic Church with the Greek philosophers. Certain Greek philosphers taught that sperma were complete micro miniaturized humans, and that the female served only as a shelter and nourishment for the growing micro human. This is one of the reasons why the Church regarded masturbation as murder and hence mortal sin. Bizarre, ain't it?

Well, such a doctrine is clearly absurd and completely unsupported by the Bible. The fundies believe that their non-Biblical beliefs should be rammed down the throats of more sensible Christians, Buddhists, pagans of various stripe, Hindus, and atheists ... all of whom are every bit as worthy of having their religious views forced on non-believers as, say, Pat Robertson.

For example, I am a Reformed Druid. My religious beliefs compel me to demand that laws be passed allowing assholes be purged from the gene pool by piling them into large wicker man-shaped-figures which are then lit on fire while the rest of us dance naked and orgy around the conflagration.

Clearly, the separation of church and state is, indeed, a wise provision.

[Fleshdancer]

13. What an odd way to find out I'm gay. I guess I should go tell my husband

:eyes:

[wli]

14. I'm gay? whoa, my SO will be flabbergasted n/t

[BrotherBuzz]

15. Theocracies are easier to manipulate...

Neo-conservatives, had argued that separating church and state was the biggest mistake made by the founders of the US republic. "Secular society in their view is the worst possible thing," because it leads to individualism, liberalism and relativism –– precisely those traits that might encourage dissent, which in turn could dangerously weaken society's ability to cope with external threats. "You want a crowd that you can manipulate like putty".

Freeper/fundies are allowing themselves to be exploited and they have no clue it's even happening. Sad.

[Ian David]

16. AOL chatrooms are a step below chatting with Koko the Gorilla

I gave it up a long time ago.

[kweerwolf]

17. That's just one more reason why I gave up AOL years ago ...

I had some Freeper type on AOL give me the "you must be gay" rap once. My response to him was, "Why, yes, I am ... but before you go any further, I should tell you that I don't date outside my species."

[Bluerthanblue]

18. turn about- "Only fanatical religious lunatics could support the

direction our Nation is headed- The difference is, many of them aren't willing to die for their cause, they send our children, husbands, brothers, sisters, etc. as sacrifice to their God, who appears to them in the form of a bush"-

[GoneOffShore]

19. Take a look at the NYT

Op Ed page today(Sunday). "Intelligent Design" (sic) is a discipline without content. They're whole thrust is to get people to debate them without dealing with the content of their theory. Ask an "intelligent design" advocate what it is that sets them apart from Darwinist's and wait ... for a long time.
<snip>
Is "intelligent design" a legitimate school of scientific thought? Is there something to it, or have these people been taken in by one of the most ingenious hoaxes in the history of science? Wouldn't such a hoax be impossible? No. Here's how it has been done.

First, imagine how easy it would be for a determined band of naysayers to shake the world's confidence in quantum physics - how weird it is! - or Einsteinian relativity. In spite of a century of instruction and popularization by physicists, few people ever really get their heads around the concepts involved. Most people eventually cobble together a justification for accepting the assurances of the experts: "Well, they pretty much agree with one another, and they claim that it is their understanding of these strange topics that allows them to harness atomic energy, and to make transistors and lasers, which certainly do work..."
<snip>
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/28/opinion/28dennett.html (may require registration)