Things you will always defend.

[Tyler Trahan]

Quoted instead of edited, ****IGNORE****

 

[lacktheknack]

I'll always defend scepticism, ethical scientific enquiry, and that individuals should carry equal rights under law.

EDIT:

I'm unabashedly pro-religion, and will defend freedom of religion and oppose anti-theism until the day I die.

Pro-religion in what sense? I'm an antitheist myself (i.e. I believe religion does more harm than good) but I would never seek to legislate against practicing religion or silence the voices of the religious. As long as the religious activities don't directly harm others I strongly support freedom of religion (for example I don't believe practicing child sacrifice, genital mutilation (including male circumcision), or forcing a minor to undergo homosexual conversion therapy should be legal, but people are free to worship deities and wear silly hats to their heart's content).

Then there's the issue of whether or not we should give myths and legends the same consideration as science and demonstrable facts; should we prosecute parents that pray for sick children instead of taking them to a doctor? I believe we should - being woefully uninformed isn't considered justification for negligence, so neither should believing nonsense. As the responsible guarding of another individual I believe people have an obligation to NOT be woefully uninformed, and that the state has an obligation to protect said individual if their carer's ignorance is clearly harming them.

I'm curious to see how far, if at all, your vieiws deviate from my own.

Well, that's not the kind of anti-theism I'm used to. I'm used to "kill all the religious" viewpoints.

Anyhow, I don't feel it's religion's duty to meddle with non-religious people (as that violates their freedom to abstain from religion). Likewise, it's not society's duty to meddle with religion, so you dhould stop trying. You're never going to get a pope who advocates for gay marriage, for example, for the same reason you'll never get a scientist to advocate a flat-with-edges Earth model, so stop acting like it might, or even should, happen. It's the government's job to recognize gay marriage, not the Church's. The Church has so little influence over athiests that I can't understand why they're vocql about it.

Circumsision is iffy, but it comes down to whether you believe religious traditions are a good reason or not.

As for prosecuting those who neglect their children and such, well... good luck finding an established religion that doesn't condemn that.

 

[Friendly Lich]

Freedom of speech
social equality
right to gay marriage
Helping the poor
Education
Right to defend your own life
Pro-Choice
Right to own firearms
Video games made for men and women (one does not have to replace the other)
People can have sex with whoever they want without feeling ashamed.

 

[NoeL]

Spoiler: Discussion condensed

I'll always defend scepticism, ethical scientific enquiry, and that individuals should carry equal rights under law.

EDIT:

I'm unabashedly pro-religion, and will defend freedom of religion and oppose anti-theism until the day I die.

Pro-religion in what sense? I'm an antitheist myself (i.e. I believe religion does more harm than good) but I would never seek to legislate against practicing religion or silence the voices of the religious. As long as the religious activities don't directly harm others I strongly support freedom of religion (for example I don't believe practicing child sacrifice, genital mutilation (including male circumcision), or forcing a minor to undergo homosexual conversion therapy should be legal, but people are free to worship deities and wear silly hats to their heart's content).

Then there's the issue of whether or not we should give myths and legends the same consideration as science and demonstrable facts; should we prosecute parents that pray for sick children instead of taking them to a doctor? I believe we should - being woefully uninformed isn't considered justification for negligence, so neither should believing nonsense. As the responsible guarding of another individual I believe people have an obligation to NOT be woefully uninformed, and that the state has an obligation to protect said individual if their carer's ignorance is clearly harming them.

I'm curious to see how far, if at all, your vieiws deviate from my own.

Well, that's not the kind of anti-theism I'm used to. I'm used to "kill all the religious" viewpoints.

I guess it's the same as the feminist schtick. Feminism has solid and reasonable principles, but the movement has been largely hijacked by radicals.

Anyhow, I don't feel it's religion's duty to meddle with non-religious people (as that violates their freedom to abstain from religion). Likewise, it's not society's duty to meddle with religion, so you dhould stop trying. You're never going to get a pope who advocates for gay marriage, for example, for the same reason you'll never get a scientist to advocate a flat-with-edges Earth model, so stop acting like it might, or even should, happen. It's the government's job to recognize gay marriage, not the Church's. The Church has so little influence over athiests that I can't understand why they're vocql about it.

... are you addressing me specifically, or the larger anti-religion movement? Anyway, the atheists are against the Church because the Church informs the people and the people elect representative officials and officials write the laws. You're correct that it's up to the government to legalise same sex marriage, but as long as the Church has enough influence to keep people opposed to the idea nothing's going to change in the law. The government isn't (supposed to be) some big brother dictating what the populace can or can't do, it's a representative voice of the people designed to cater to how people want to conduct their lives (to a degree - there are constitutional rules to prevent majority rules from being enforced). It's in this sense that the Church is obfuscating fairness and equality in the eyes of the law, which is why I'm totally in favour of openly condemning Churches that spread hate and bigotry. I'm not asking them to change their religion per se, I'm just pointing out to the public why they shouldn't adhere to such nonsense.

Your analogy with the scientist baffles me a bit. You're also incorrect on the rigidity of the Catholic church. For a long time they were opposed to the theory of evolution, as it contradicts the story in Genesis (though they'll now argue it doesn't). It wasn't until evolution gained widespread acceptance and people started losing respect for the church for denying the obvious that the church, in an attempt to stay relevant, changed its stance. I can almost guarantee that when same sex marriage is near universally accepted you'll have that hip, spry, 65-years-young Pope that's like "Same sex marriage? Yeah, we're totally cool with that! Now start paying attention to us again!".

Circumsision is iffy, but it comes down to whether you believe religious traditions are a good reason or not.

Do you think tradition is a valid reason for a white supremacist to tattoo a swastika on their newborn's forehead? Tradition should NEVER be an acceptable reason to permanently alter the physical appearance of a non-consenting individual. What if the kid doesn't want to be a racist? What if he wants his WHOLE penis? They're free to get that tattoo or circumcision when they become consenting adults, so there's absolutely no reason why "tradition" should be a valid reason to mutilate someone without their consent.

As for prosecuting those who neglect their children and such, well... good luck finding an established religion that doesn't condemn that.

Right wing, fundamental Islam has no problem with honour killings. Hell, even the Catholic church has spread horrific lies like condoms INCREASE the risk of contracting AIDS, which has lead to COUNTLESS deaths in AIDS-ridden African countries. Again, there are denominations of Christianity that encourage "pray the gay away" therapy, which has been pretty conclusively shown to be nothing but mental torture. Even just the widespread claim that homosexuality is evil and unnatural has lead to a higher-than-average suicide rates among gays. There's also Jehovah's Witnesses who don't seem particularly bothered their children are dying because they refuse blood transfusions, as well as Scientologists whose distrust for psychiatry has lead to gross negligence of the mentally ill - yet again, you don't hear the Scientologists condemning that. And that's all just off the top of my head! "Good luck" you say!? There are ALL SORTS of horrible practices that established religions not only not condemn, but encourage.

 

[Silly Hats]

I'll defend my religion, all religious institutions that promote peace and love, and the concept of religious freedom as a whole.


Mass Effect 3, even it's ending because though it may not be great it's still not deserving of the hate it receives.

Agree'd

I never got the ME3 hatred either, It's an ending. The previous two games didn't have amazing endings either, hell most games don't - so what? It's a brilliant series.

Also, not religious and I agree. It's human nature to justify their own beliefs and intellect, putting down someone's Thiesm/Athiesm/Agnosticism because they cannot see why that person has a connection to it.

Eitherway;
Just because something is popular doesn't make it good
Just because something is rare doesn't make it good
Equality
Refugees should be treated fairly

 

[Squilookle]

I will probably always defend Goldeneye as having stood the test of time.

Don't get me wrong, I recognise as much as anyone that the multiplayer is -by modern standards- positively barren by comparison, but the singleplayer is still some of the finest, expertly crafted gameplay of the FPS genre. People tend to forget that the game even has a singleplayer, let alone that it's one of the tightest, most fluid controlling, challenging and rewarding singleplayer games out there.

Oh, and for anyone about to say it's just nostalgia goggles; shut up. Just shut up. That label immediately assumes someone hasn't played the game for years. Well I play it often and always have. I had a good 3 hour session with it just today. It is just as fun now as it was when it came out, and only ever gets better compared to current shooters -in particular current Bond shooters- that fail to deliver as complete a package as it did.

 

[Kipiru]

Mass Effect- all 3 of them so far

 

[HoneyVision]

- Christianity. Because most people have no idea what it is.
- Equality in race, ethnicity, gender, belief and class.
- Acceptance rather than intolerance.
- The right to decide where each cent of our tax goes/doesn't go.
- Art in schools and art in general
- Final Fantasy, because they're awesome.
- Mariah Carey, because I Looooooooove her ^_^

 

[almightysheep]

Right to keep and bear arms, freedom of speech, can't think of much else, I am for same sex marriage but because I am heterosexual it isn't really in my list of things to die for. Racial equality ... Gender equality, as long as it does not in any way give an advantage to either gender in the court of law, or a field where a woman can perform the same task as a man and vise-versa, and anything else. I'd defend video games and media, like movies, seeing as it is under the umbrella of the first amendment.

 

[Lonewolfm16]

More serious stuff: Atheism (as in atheism is the most logical position one can take on a deity), feminism is mostly unnecessary and does more harm than good in the modern world, science and rationality are how we should determine our beliefs in all cases, morality should be decided upon by logic and reason rather than emotion, cannibalism (for survival or as a voluntary funeral rite) is morally acceptable, as is incest (and obviously homosexuality) we should not believe in anything super-natural until it can be verified by scientific experimentation or observation, a more libertarian government would be vastly beneficial, our government should be secular and religiously tolerant.
Less serious: Eragon and the other Inheritance books are pretty good, anime is awesome, sexualisation is not sexist (see feminism above), Dragon age II was pretty good, and insects/arachnids and monkeys/apes are not the same thing and never will be. Also humans are actually Great Apes, by classification.

 

[The Unworthy Gentleman]

Freedom of sexuality, namely homosexuality and incest (I haven't yet formed a concrete opinion regarding bestiality. That's something I'm still thinking about). I really hate to see people oppressed based upon such a personal thing (where they often have no choice over) as their sexuality. Regarding marriage, it's hard for me to campaign for marriage rights as I have no care for marriage in any form at all (though if asked, I'd say yeah, go for it). To defend this topic for me, is mostly a tolerance and legal thing. I'd defend them so it became commonly accepted and legal by the general populace, rather than heatedly debated or, in some corners of the world, even outright despised.

Edit: I know this is probably going to be a very common answer on this forum, a kind of preaching-to-the-choir scenario. But still, it's one of the few topics I can think of where my stance would never change.

Wait... incest? That's not a sexuality that's fucking creepy. Incest is so wrong that even our genetics oppose it.

OT: I'll usually try to defend mental health and people's rights in person. I don't know what it is about mental health but I take it pretty seriously and I don't like seeing or hearing people make fun of undermine serious conditions. As for people's rights I would assume that's a given for everyone but I know better than that. I feel especially strongly about men's rights, which seem to be neglected, though they're rarely brought up in conversation.

 

[BathorysGraveland2]

Wait... incest? That's not a sexuality that's fucking creepy. Incest is so wrong that even our genetics oppose it.

I disagree. As long as the involved parties consent to it, and are over the legal age limit in their country, I'm all for it. I am aware of the possible birth problems that can be caused because of it, and I raise a simple solution: adoption.

 

[Nouw]

Music, particularly hip-hop and dubstep which people love to hate on. I'm a bit saddened I won't have @Vault101 around anymore to deliver righteous musical-fury.

Oh and the Starship Troopers film, not only as a fun action film but a smart and subtle film that is full of commentary and critcism.

 

[Lovely Mixture]

I'll fight for:
-Gay rights and equality in general
-Truth and Reconciliation

I'll fight against:
-Censorship
-Holocaust Denial
-Circumcision right after childbirth
-Terrorism
-Bullying

Also:
VACCINATIONS DO NOT CAUSE CIRCUMCISION.

Agree'd

I never got the ME3 hatred either, It's an ending. The previous two games didn't have amazing endings either, hell most games don't - so what? It's a brilliant series.

Not gonna redirect the conversation, but that's Common Practice Fallacy.

 

[The Unworthy Gentleman]

Wait... incest? That's not a sexuality that's fucking creepy. Incest is so wrong that even our genetics oppose it.

I disagree. As long as the involved parties consent to it, and are over the legal age limit in their country, I'm all for it. I am aware of the possible birth problems that can be caused because of it, and I raise a simple solution: adoption.

There are some things that are just wrong and incest is one of them. I mean c'mon, there has to be a line somewhere. Bestiality is also way over that line.

 

[BathorysGraveland2]

snip

You're awfully simplifying it based upon your own personal morals there. No, as long as all precautions are taken, I don't see anything wrong with it at all. If all parties are willing and legally aged, then tell me exactly why is it wrong? And don't just say "It's gross". Give me a meaningful answer.

As for bestiality. I am unsure. That is a topic that requires more contemplation on my part, before I reach a conclusive opinion.

 

[putowtin]

Human Rights

The right to love who you want, worship who you want, and do what you want.
Sound's simple? I wish it were so.
One other stipulation, in doing the above you cannot force your opinion/beliefs/desires upon another

 

[The Unworthy Gentleman]

snip

You're awfully simplifying it based upon your own personal morals there. No, as long as all precautions are taken, I don't see anything wrong with it at all. If all parties are willing and legally aged, then tell me exactly why is it wrong? And don't just say "It's gross". Give me a meaningful answer.

As for bestiality. I am unsure. That is a topic that requires more contemplation on my part, before I reach a conclusive opinion.

Okay, why do the parties have to be legally aged for it to be alright? Why do they have to be an arbitrary age defined by the government for it to be morally right? And before you say consent, I'm fairly certain that almost anyone 12 and up is smart enough to understand what sex is and make a judgement on whether they want to do it or not.

The reason it's not right is similar to the reason it's not right for kids to be doing it. Because there are boundaries for things like this, or at least there should be. Kids shouldn't be allowed to hump everything just because they can, they should wait for an age where it's appropriate. I'm not saying all laws have it right, but 16 seems like a decent enough age to be waiting till. Same with incest, distant family isn't so bad but a brother getting it on with his sister isn't right. These people have grown up together with a certain kind of relationship, making it a romantic or sexual relationship isn't particularly great.

I'm likely not satisfying your desire for a justified opinion, but morals can be like that sometime. There's no way anyone can really stop this sort of thing but I definitely condemn it.

 

[BathorysGraveland2]

snip

Actually, the reason there is an age limit is because, by most people's reckoning, minors cannot give consent. Just like a heavily intoxicated person cannot give consent. Not because it's icky. That's why I brought age into it, because if a brother and sister was over the legal age, then they can give consent. In that case, who's business is it but their own? If a brother and sister love each other more than family, then who is it harming? Provided they take the precautionary measures regarding children, they aren't harming anyone.

Now, I can understand people thinking its disgusting. I understand that, and accept that. What I can't accept, is how incestual couples can be fucking jailed for it, as its illegal in many areas across the world.

 

[latiasracer]

You don't have to be a confrontational asshole to be an athiest
& When people call out conspiracy, with no actual sound evidence or basis for their claim other than "i dont trust the goverment". Particually with the moonlandings did happen. When people rattle on about how "ERMEGERD DER FLERG ERS WERVERN ERN DER MERN WERV NER AIR CONSPERECER" i often get really angry, and have to give them a good old fashioned lecture