iNow

No. Theism or atheism are positions of belief. Agnosticism is a position of knowledge. One can be an agnostic theist or an agnostic atheist (lack certainty), but calling oneself agnostic usually means you’re an atheist without the courage to just say so.

Atheist. A+theist. Not+theist. It’s right there in the word. Not theist. Just happen not to believe in god(s). MigL - You’re conflating that far more common form with a far less common form called “hard atheism.” As opposed to regular atheism where gods just aren’t accepted as valid, hard atheism is the Active belief that there are no gods. That’s what you’re arguing against, perhaps bc it’s an easier target? Beliefs in deities exist along a spectrum really, but it’s also irrelevant since the OP meant “against religion” (and didn’t even mean that it turns out they just meant “against the popular ones”).

Okay, but which religion(s), then? Are you against Buddhism? What about Jainism? Do your feelings differ at all when it comes to Shintoism? You probably mean Christianity and Islam, which is understandable, but terribly imprecise.

I believe we’ve located the source of the misunderstanding..

He was OOO. Had an appt at the Department of Redundancy Department. Or it was AI generated text… especially common in financial news pieces

Is “not playing golf” learned? Is “not collecting stamps” learned? Is “not playing the guitar” learned? Is “not believing in Zeus” learned? If not, then why would “not believing in the current flavor-of-the-day god(s) that happen to be popular” be learned? Autodidact So, against religion, not just secular? It’s not hard to understand why 😲

My mistake. Read this wrong.

Self-identity and social acceptance play big meaty roles here. Challenges to either can knock the wind right out of us at times, especially when delivered crisply by someone admired on a topic on which we define ourselves as expert. So many great posts here already it’s challenging to add, but so much of this is about perspective. What does our brain space look like at the time? What’s our “neural baseline” state when the new stimulus perturbed it? How wobbly were our brains and bellies (same thing?) when the information arrived and a narrative constructed around it? What other demands on our minds were burdening us when the interaction happened? How familiar or novel was the event? How loud was the ambient, how cold was the room, how full were our stomachs… All of that context matters, and so does the topic / topic area. I love science, studied science, and think scientifically, but I play more here in Politics so in that regard I tend prioritize throwing hard bruising rhetorical punches over protecting other people’s feelings. It makes me a polarizing figure, and while I’d prefer being accepted, I have no plans to change who I am to allow for that. That’s not the outcome I prioritize in those exchanges. I am comfortable with who I am and accept myself. I didn’t always and it’s some days are harder than others, but my only goal is to be better today than I was yesterday, and better tomorrow than I am today. If I can influence the world/cosmos in some way to also be somehow better today and tomorrow than yesterday, well then it’s hard to hope for much else.

Technically, yes. Insects are an excellent source of protein and even the ONLY source of protein in some locales. Just bc we fancy rich Americans prefer steak and pork and chicken and various artery clogging preparations of them does not make them better than insects or grubs or various other bugs that help millions survive. They’re just more familiar … more comfortable … like boys doing things with girls instead of boys doing things with boys. It’s called Fear Factor because the response is rooted in fear. Why do so many people still fear two men loving and being intimate with one another?

No x2 Other than ad buys and fees for events or equipment rentals or fair grounds…. or digital media and sponsorships of content and paying people to knock on doors or get signatures or… what exactly are they teaching you in political science class if you don’t already know this?

We all have our own preferences, myself included. Some of these are hetero-normative and accepted by culture, others are not hetero-normative and thus get shunned by culture... at least until the holdouts eventually die off and go away. Part of where I'm struggling here, however, is with the examples being used. In everyone's attempt to make themselves better understood, you're choosing very prejudicial comparisons. I mean, don't me wrong. If all you're saying is, "yeah, that's just not my cuppa tea," then super! Good on ya! I couldn't care less, and guess what? It's not my cuppa tea, either!! But that's NOT what is being said. Instead, we're seeing non-hetero sexual acts between a same sex couple getting compared to: - Pissing on someones face - Shitting on a salad and being asked to eat it - Shoving inanimate objects into ones asshole - Spitting, coughing without covering, picking ones nose, and scratching ones balls - Mental illness, disabled, defective minds, nasty... all right here just in this ONE thread! We've got scores of them here all doing the same thing... Now magnify that across all interactions homosexuals are having every single day of their lives... all just to be accepted for who they are. And you know what chaps my ass even more? You DON'T feel this way about "homosexuality." No... You've probably beaten your baloney pony more than once at the thought of two girls being intimate together, because that's about POWER. It's only when two dudes do to each other some of the exact same things dudes often do with dudettes (butt sex and blow jobs are hardly limited to homosexuals, my friends)... it's only THEN that you suddenly magically have a "disgust" problem. It's not the act you find distasteful since it's fine when its opposite sex couples engage in it. It's the same sex couple, specifically the males, that you just can't bring yourselves to accept. I don't care if you get hung up on the word prejudiced or if it causes you to feel some cognitive dissonance with the "good person" narrative you have in your self-identity. It IS prejudiced, especially since it's NOT an amygdala-level olfactory response like the way you feel drinking coconut water being described here. It's learned, and thus can be unlearned. Extinguished like a bad smoking habit.

Which people? Can you quote where they did this? Nobody is forcing anything. How would we? Weird comment dude. Is there a good reason for your distaste? As noted above, lots of people also used to find interracial couples distasteful. There’s a reason that was silly, and the same applies IMO to distaste for homosexual activities.

And if the current software version being run here even allows for such a configuration then I trust the staff will be more than happy to enable it.

As Markus stated in his OP, so we can easily reference them without links, quotes, etc. For comparison, imagine for a moment giving driving directions. Saying “take exit 137 on the highway” is vastly cleaner and faster than saying, “take the exit for Main Street in the town of Scienceville on the highway, but not the Main Street exit in Fictiontown.”

This sounds to me like a distinction without a difference, but perhaps my definition of prejudice isn’t as restrictive as yours. Repulsive is such a strong word that prejudice seems to fit. Unless you’re inserting gay sex into your mouth and swallowing it, I’m unsure of the relevance.

Find the URL under the text “posted 28 minutes ago” at the top of all posts and copy/paste it (whatever time interval has passed since submission). Here’s a link to your post I just quoted. https://www.scienceforums.net/topic/128812-numbering-posts/?do=findComment&comment=1230067

So was I, but it’s a distinction without a difference anyway. Correct, such as the spending that helps campaigns but isn’t directly allocated to their official funds

They can, but then they become subject to the limits https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/money-politics-101-what-you-need-know-about-campaign-finance-after

Oui. C’est vrais, quelquefois Moi aussie, mais presque jamais.

Unsure, but since neither will be campaigning in a Chinese or similar spy balloon, I reckon it’s even farther off-topic here than we already are

I’m sure I’ll see him at the Iowa State Fair this summer glad handing and flipping pork chops on the grill. In fact, Nikki Haley is already gonna be just up the road from me this coming Monday… VP Pence and Mike Pompeo (who shockingly also both have books) surely aren’t far behind, either.

You can like or dislike anything you want. Quit being so melodramatic. The point is we can tell you how certain of your dislikes are outdated and need to be softened, if not abandoned entirely. People used to dislike white women being with black men (some people still do). Some used to dislike Jews (again, some people still do). Some people used to dislike letting Italians and Irish into the country. Some disliked the Polish. Dislike of homosexuals and transsexuals and acceptance of both is just the latest in a long string of human hatreds and small minded ignorance. Some dislikes just need to go away and die. Some of us dislike how long that seems to be taking and are maybe trying to help accelerate the pace.

I guess some speech is more equal than others.

Why, indeed Why is our governance reliant at all on who the best fundraiser is as opposed to who has smart plans to achieve the maximum good? Why are the people ruled by laws about fund raising the same ones writing those laws?

+1 for this. That's not often an easy thing to do... to look inward in an attempt to understand why we think or feel what we do. I'm not a fan of simplistic, monolithic, one-dimensional labels and caricatures like "homophobe," or even "liberal" and "conservative" or "democrat" or "republican" etc., BUT... If we continue being honest with ourselves here on THIS topic... Well... then yeah. There is at least a modicum of homophobia in caring at all who other people prefer to love and engage with in intimate acts. You're already farther along than most IMO, though, with the fact that you're trying to understand and likely minimize those feelings which are sadly today still rather common. I wish MORE people would have the courage to consider these thoughts and feelings like you are, so good on ya!