Finally! A Useful Anti-Christian Bigotry Map!

a reply to: ketsuko

Yea this is where me and boy monkey can relate. I hate that Jehovah's Witnesses harrass all my neighbors and myself, hiding in my own house so I don't have to be rude. They're super nice but it takes everything I have to not be rude. I'm not gonna go preach against them though because I know they have every right to do what they do and unfortunately its not illegal to go knock on someone's door and speak with them

a reply to: windword

Sucks when the shoe is on the other foot doesn't it?

Maybe if these Christian organization weren't giant raging douchebags to other groups. They wouldn't be a target for anyone's ire.

I think I'll quote this here.

Dear World,

Religion is like a penis. It's fine to have one and it's fine to be proud of it, but please don't whip it out in public and start waving it around... and PLEASE don't try to shove it down my child's throat.

Sincerely, tired of hearing your religious guff

a reply to: JDmOKI

It isn't JW who come knocking on my door it is the local Methodist church.
Like I said If they just let be and didn't attempt to rule and convert I wouldn't be bothered.

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

That's if you assume that marriage is a right for anybody.

As we as a society progress further with science and technology, religion will become seen as antiquated. Today we view shamanism and forms of nature worship "backwards" and primitive. Someday organized religion will be as well.

The roots of modern religions were nothing more than control mechanisms to keep populations in line, and ensure that those in power stayed in power. Also, religion gives people a sense of comfort in being able to provide answers to seemingly unanswerable questions.

A great way to control people is to make them believe you know "how it works" and that you can somehow make sense of all the things in the world that don't make sense.

I believe that religion was needed, but is fast becoming tired, old, and antiquated. If we want to maximize the potential of our species, we need to shake off the shackles of religion. One doesn't need to live in fear of a judgmental omnipresent deity to live a moral life. It would seem that being a "good" person is something inherent to most people from birth.

a reply to: ketsuko

Yet the AFA says they don't have the right to marry. If marriage isn't a right then why do they believe gays don't have that right? Kinda contradictory don't you think?

a reply to: boymonkey74

Nice one BM... Couldn't agree more.

Prolysetizing is one of the bains of society, in my opinion.


People will believe what they want... Not what people force down their throats.



I've literally just got done reading a few Quran verses that deal with such forcible behaviour...

Would surprise a few I'm sure, including & especially Muslims that demand belief from people.



I'm also well aware that nobody here wants to be told what to do, there is a time and a place for preaching, & it's definitely not on ATS.

If the concept of marriage is somehow
"owned" by Christianity then why can anyone get married, Christian or not, except gay people? I don't see Christians up in arms over Jews, Muslims, or atheists getting married, so why the blatant double standard toward gays?

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: TrueBrit

So you don't think it's useful to know about those groups and organizations that promote an agenda that actively work against your beliefs and your right to express those beliefs? I say this for anyone who holds a belief.

Wait, so you agree that the organizations this map is pointing out are Anti-Christian? The idea that these organizations exist SOLELY to undermine Christianity like the AFA is suggesting is stupid. This map is just fundamentalist Christian nonsense and promotes intolerance. It certainly doesn't promote knowledge of who is coming after your religion.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

That's if you assume that marriage is a right for anybody.

Why isn't it a right for anybody? Christianity never invented marriage, it doesn't own it, and it certainly doesn't get to dictate the rules of it.

a reply to: windword

No problem windword, buddy!

a reply to: TrueBrit

Dear TrueBrit - you have said it so much more than I ever could. Your whole post, but this especially:

They cast aside the love that Jesus taught his disciples, and uphold only the fury and vengence of the Old Testament, and in so doing, they fail entirely to edify and glorify the name of Christ, and glorifying his name by good works and living in love and peace is something that all people who believe in the Lord of Lords, who hold Jesus word as their creed, should aspire to do. It is on not any single one of us, nor any large group, to dictate to those who do not hold our beliefs, about what is right and wrong. We are not permitted, nor are we fit, to chastise those who do not meet OUR approval.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

The fact that marriage comes with certain benefits financially and is part of American secular law goes to show its not owned by Christianity, yet Christians believe it is and believe they get to dictate how it works.

Atheists get married all the time, where's the outrage over that? Atheists are just as blasphemous as gays are (if not more so) in the eyes of Christians. Double standards man.

a reply to: ketsuko

Here's a little more information on this group, The American Family Association, whose methods you seem to be defending.

AFA has been listed as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) as of November 2010 for the "propagation of known falsehoods" and the use of "demonizing propaganda" against LGBT people. In 2015, the organisation officially repudiated views of former Director of Issues Analysis Bryan Fischer, including the claim that black people “rut like rabbits”; that the First Amendment applies only to Christians; that Hispanics are “socialists by nature” and come to the U.S. to “plunder” the country; that Hillary Clinton is a lesbian, and that "Homosexuality gave us Adolph Hitler, and homosexuals in the military gave us the Brown Shirts, the Nazi war machine and six million dead Jews.

On November 28, 2006, following the election of Keith Ellison, the first Muslim elected to the United States Congress,[76] the AFA released an "Action Alert." The Action Alert, entitled "A first for America...The Koran replaces the Bible at swearing-in oath: What book will America base its values on, the Bible or the Koran?", requested subscribers to write to their Congressional representatives and urge them to create a "law making the Bible the book used in the swearing-in ceremony of representatives and senators."

On August 10, 2010, Bryan Fischer, AFA's director of Issue Analysis for Government and Public Policy, posted on his blog on the AFA website[84] that "Permits should not be granted to build even one more mosque in the United States of America, let alone the monstrosity planned for Ground Zero. This is for one simple reason: each Islamic mosque is dedicated to the overthrow of the American government." Fischer continued: "Because of this subversive ideology, Muslims cannot claim religious freedom protections under the First Amendment."

en.wikipedia.org...

This is an intolerant and scary bunch, organized and well funded. Their position on the SPLC's "Hate List" seems to be well deserved, to say the very least. Moderate Christians should speak out against this kind of Christian fascism, as many in this thread have indeed done so, not empower or enable it, which is what you seem to be doing. These people, the AFA, are no better than the Westboro Baptists, if you ask me.

originally posted by: Metallicus
It seems logical to identify groups that are in opposition to the goals of you organization. How is this news or is it just another opportunity for anti-Christian bigots to take pot shots at a Christian organization?

Like those damn homosexuals...activities which go against Christian fundamentalism are bigoted! If you're a homosexual, you're an anti-Christian bigot!

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

It all comes full circle to reasoning based on intolerance. Both groups are equally blasphemous, but only one gets special attention and prevention.

a reply to: windword

Hey..Hey..HEY... That map? Where the heck is MY HOUSE.

NO just kidding. I don't hate Christians. This all just seems silly to me.

originally posted by: Metallicus
It seems logical to identify groups that are in opposition to the goals of you organization. How is this news or is it just another opportunity for anti-Christian bigots to take pot shots at a Christian organization?

Lets clear something up...

No LGBT group, no Human Rights group, is attempting to remove any rights from any Christian person. This is a fact, and if you can find any evidence to the contrary please share it. No Christian is being told they cannot be Christian, or that they can be fired for being Christian, or that they have to reject their faith, or that they deserve fewer rights than anyone else...

On the other side, these "Christians" directly want to remove the rights of others, they want to dictate who has which rights and who doesn't, they want to inflict their religious ideology onto society, they want to make others slaves to their imagined superiority, they want the exclusive right to refuse to treat others with respect, they want to control the lives of free people...

One of these groups is much like the Taliban, and one stands for freedom for all. All sane and rational people can tell the difference between these groups of citizens.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

That's if you assume that marriage is a right for anybody.

No religion owns marriage, although Christians like to pretend they do.
There have been thousands of various forms of marriage throughout Human history, throughout various religions (and none) and throughout various societies, but only Christians seem to want to pick out their specific form of it, from a specific period in Human history, and call it "traditional"

If we really want to use the common Christian excuse that "traditional marriage" should be paramount, we can ignore their specific format and go back further to the Pagans of Europe, or the Native Americans - both of whom recognized same sex partnerships.

Once again, marriage is not owned by Christianity, so Christians have absolutely no right to claim it as theirs and inflict their notion of it on an entire society.

I was going to say something else but I am in central Georgia and if someone saw over my shoulder what I was going to write they would probably beat me to death with a KJV.

Religion IS bigotry.