Indiana's governor signs bill allowing businesses to reject gay customers

[Darth Executor]

I highly doubt the vast majority of experts have done any personal research in the first place. The entire field, not just the APA, is overrun with liberals. You can scream until you turn blue that we have to accept arguments from authority made by institutions you corrupted (not that the field's ever been anything more than a magnet for quacks and nutjobs) but funny thing about corrupt institutions... people don't really trust them. You don't even need to do any in-depth research to see they are ideologically devoted to normalizing homosexuality, you can just look at some of the poor arguments like "other animals do it too" (you can find cancer in other animals too), arguments that would be bad even if they were right but they make them anyway because they're devoted to The Cause rather than pursuit of truth.

[Tassman]

Yeah reproductive biology and ethics are right up the alley of people who can't figure out why a human brain that misidentifies appropriate reproductive partners is not functioning normally.

hypothesis is no longer the dominant view of homosexuality among very many people, including many Christians.

[Darth Executor]

And your qualifications for speaking so authoritatively on the subject of reproductive biology and ethics are……?

I am enlightened by my own intelligence.

OR are you merely sprouting your personal interpretation of scripture? Sadly for you the “burn in hell” hypothesis is no longer the dominant view of homosexuality among very many people, including many Christians.

In an atheistic universe dysgenic trends will destroy them all.
In a Christian universe God doesn't care about their personal opinion when He revs up the Great Auschwitz Death Camp in the sky. Christianity is not a democracy.

[Tassman]

I am enlightened by my own intelligence.

What a comedian!

In an atheistic universe dysgenic trends will destroy them all.

In a Christian universe God doesn't care about their personal opinion when He revs up the Great Auschwitz Death Camp in the sky.

Christianity is not a democracy.

Of course not! Religions are always totalitarian.

[Darth Executor]

Nope! The countries ranked highest on the Human Development Index tend to be the least religious. It’s the ones near the bottom that tend to be the dysgenic religious ones.

I don't think you understand what dysgenic means. The Human Development Index doesn't have anything to do with it and will mean when you fail to reproduce, fail to care about anything other than your own personal pleasure and get overrun by savages who have zero interest in reciprocating your universalist drivel.

Of course not! Religions are always totalitarian.

That's what I keep telling people.

[Tassman]

I don't think you understand what dysgenic means. The Human Development Index doesn't have anything to do with it and will mean when you fail to reproduce, fail to care about anything other than your own personal pleasure and get overrun by savages who have zero interest in reciprocating your universalist drivel.

That's what I keep telling people.

[Darth Executor]

No, dysgenic pertains to reproductive fitness, which liberal atheists are terrible at simply because you won't even reproduce at replenishment rates. Your genes are doomed. Comparing different populations is asinine anyway, you should compare the relative wealth and power of Western countries when they were ruled by people like me vs today. Nobody in their right mind would claim modern day Britain which ships in Pakistanis to rape their kids (when the politicians and BBC personalities aren't raping them) is in any way superior to the British Empire, beyond technological advancements that were manifesting just fine without parasites like you.

It doesn't matter what you want, the maws of hell hunger for your soul and there is no escape.

[Joel]

Precisely!

And likewise for individuals, groups of more than 2, and close relatives.

Of course.

(It also implies that anti-discrimination laws should be abolished. They impose inequality before the law.)

No they protect equality before the law.

No, they don't. If you choose whom you want to be friends with, you are being unequal, but that isn't inequality before the law.
Likewise if the law equally protects everyone's right to choose their friends (freedom of association), then that is equality before the law, not inequality before the law. The law in that case is treating everyone equally. (Although such individual choices are inherently unequal, the law would be treating everyone equally.)

Same for if the law equally protects everyone's right to decide what/whether to buy anything and whom to buy it from.
Same for if the law equally protects everyone's right to decide what/whether to sell anything and whom to sell it to.
In these cases, the law is treating everyone equally.

Therefore, if you then introduce anti-discrimination laws, you are not correcting any inequality before the law. So it cannot be said that the anti-discrimination laws are protecting equality before the law.

That leaves only the question of whether such laws create inequality before the law.
Instead of protecting everyone's rights equally, such laws pick certain exchanges and privilege one of the two parties by forcing the other to exchange and/or associate with the the first party. The anti-discrimination law inherently treats the two parties unequally.

[Joel]

I am enlightened by my own intelligence.

A major point of the Enlightenment was the idea that individuals could be enlightened by their own intelligence and not have to rely on propositions handed down by authorities.
Today, U.S. culture (at least on the "left") has come full circle to where no one is considered reasonable who questions the approved authorities or who has or expresses an opinion without being an approved authority.

[Tassman]

No, dysgenic pertains to reproductive fitness, which liberal atheists are terrible at simply because you won't even reproduce at replenishment rates. Your genes are doomed. Comparing different populations is asinine anyway, you should compare the relative wealth and power of Western countries when they were ruled by people like me vs today. Nobody in their right mind would claim modern day Britain which ships in Pakistanis to rape their kids (when the politicians and BBC personalities aren't raping them) is in any way superior to the British Empire, beyond technological advancements that were manifesting just fine without parasites like you.

The reproductive fitness of the human animal is demonstrably compromised when it replaces one of its greatest survival advantages, namely understanding how the world around it functions, with mythological escapist fantasies. This can be seen in the tendency of the less religious nations to rate highly in the Human Development Index and vice versa! Even the UK ranks more highly than the USA, so you're hardly in a position to sneer.

It doesn't matter what you want, the maws of hell hunger for your soul and there is no escape.

Sounds like daily life for the blacks in the great Christian nation of the USA.

[Tassman]

And likewise for individuals, groups of more than 2, and close relatives.

No, they don't. If you choose whom you want to be friends with, you are being unequal, but that isn't inequality before the law.
Likewise if the law equally protects everyone's right to choose their friends (freedom of association), then that is equality before the law, not inequality before the law. The law in that case is treating everyone equally. (Although such individual choices are inherently unequal, the law would be treating everyone equally.)

Nonsense! This is a tortuous and irrelevant analogy.

Same for if the law equally protects everyone's right to decide what/whether to buy anything and whom to buy it from.
Same for if the law equally protects everyone's right to decide what/whether to sell anything and whom to sell it to.
In these cases, the law is treating everyone equally.

Therefore, if you then introduce anti-discrimination laws, you are not correcting any inequality before the law. So it cannot be said that the anti-discrimination laws are protecting equality before the law.

That leaves only the question of whether such laws create inequality before the law.
Instead of protecting everyone's rights equally, such laws pick certain exchanges and privilege one of the two parties by forcing the other to exchange and/or associate with the the first party. The anti-discrimination law inherently treats the two parties unequally.

This nonsensical gobbledygook is a futile attempt to make the laws against discrimination appear to be unfair to the bigots.

A major point of the Enlightenment was the idea that individuals could be enlightened by their own intelligence and not have to rely on propositions handed down by authorities.
Today, U.S. culture (at least on the "left") has come full circle to where no one is considered reasonable who questions the approved authorities or who has or expresses an opinion without being an approved authority.

Not quite, 'The Enlightenment' emphasized reason, analysis, and individualism rather than traditional lines of authority such as unevidenced religious authority.

[Darth Executor]

The reproductive fitness of the human animal is demonstrably compromised when it replaces one of its greatest survival advantages, namely understanding how the world around it functions, with mythological escapist fantasies.

Not true, nor are they mutually exclusive. After all religious people studied the world just fine without your help. Understanding how the world functions is meaningless if that knowledge is used to feed self-indulgence rather than pave the way to a sustainable future.

This can be seen in the tendency of the less religious nations to rate highly in the Human Development Index and vice versa! Even the UK ranks more highly than the USA, so you're hardly in a position to sneer.

I'm Canadian. And as I've explained to you before, having a comfortable life does not increase your reproductive fitness. In fact it does the exact opposite as you get caught up in hedonism and fail to reproduce enough to sustain your society.

Sounds like daily life for the blacks in the great Christian nation of the USA.

They seem to enjoy it.

[Tassman]

Not true, nor are they mutually exclusive. After all religious people studied the world just fine without your help. Understanding how the world functions is meaningless if that knowledge is used to feed self-indulgence rather than pave the way to a sustainable future.

Sure they did <sarcasm> and they resisted all knowledge that threatened their religious presuppositions (e.g. geocentricism) and still do (e.g. anti-evolution Creationism)

I'm Canadian.

And as I've explained to you before, having a comfortable life does not increase your reproductive fitness. In fact it does the exact opposite as you get caught up in hedonism and fail to reproduce enough to sustain your society.

They seem to enjoy it.

So we keep seeing in the news day after day.

[Sea of red]

No, dysgenic pertains to reproductive fitness, which liberal atheists are terrible at simply because you won't even reproduce at replenishment rates. Your genes are doomed. Comparing different populations is asinine anyway, you should compare the relative wealth and power of Western countries when they were ruled by people like me vs today. Nobody in their right mind would claim modern day Britain which ships in Pakistanis to rape their kids (when the politicians and BBC personalities aren't raping them) is in any way superior to the British Empire, beyond technological advancements that were manifesting just fine without parasites like you.



It doesn't matter what you want, the maws of hell hunger for your soul and there is no escape.

Spooky! Spooky!



tumblr_ml2ag9Cgkl1rxa2k2o1_500.gif

[Sea of red]

http://www.psychologicalscience.org/...man/74794.html



That psychology is overrun by liberals (at least on social issues) is a fact, plain and simple. They don't even deny it.

OK.

Let all the mentally-ill out of the wards. We can't trust the LIBERULZ who say they are dangerous.