Does religion have to die out before homosexuality is universally accepted??

Quite so. Sexism may have a larger role in homophobia than we think.

 

No as the older people die off sadly to say more people religious or not will start accepting homosexuality and since it s at 60 percent for those who support gay marriage some of that has to be from religious people. In society it should be about minding your own business and taking care of your own affairs and as the younger generations get older more people are gonna let it what it is

 

That's odd, I've not run across very many anti-gay atheists ever, at least in the US, or seen a single atheist based anti-gay/LGBT group...though I have seen a lot of anti-gay Christian ones. In fact, it seems that almost every major anti-gay LGBT group in the US is Christian based.

Here's a list from the SPLC's Hate Group Watch List, for anti LGBT groups:

18 Anti-Gay Groups and Their Propaganda

Can't say I see any atheists among the power players and groups that lobby for legal change, and spend the big bucks. They all seem 'faith' based...

 

No humans need to die off. I'm sure the next species will be alot more tolerant

 

It's not plausible because religious people aren't the only bigoted people on earth hence, it'll never be universally accepted. Hypothetically speaking, even if religion did cease to exist, bigotry and intolerance will still be rampant in all societies.

 

I believe it but that is a sad reality right there. We need to combat it with our own groups but nobody really has done anything like that and it is kind of pathetic.

 

Here, I will substitution paraphrase John Stuart Mill and then go away: "Although it is not true that all religious people are homophobic, it is true that most homophobes are religious."

 

People need to think more for themselves and realistically is all.

 

Another thing that it should come down too and I am saying this as a religious person myself people need to keep their religious beliefs a private aspect of their lives meaning not causing it intrude on how others live their lives. I don't think the founding fathers intended religion to be used the way it is today.

 

Leviticus is the Law, it is for Jews only. The other verses may have been mistranslated.
I hope religion will not die out first.

 

Yeah, that's nice and all, but a lot of people intrude upon others with religion with the concerns of other going to hell etc... for instance, my father is afraid I'm going to be burning for eternity or at least not going to heaven. I myself, when I was religious, told my friends that active LGBT would go to hell if they didnt seek guidance.... (ew, I know right). It's out of concern for others when it's looked at as a reality/truth to you.

 

Dano, couldn't it be argued that your view basically says people can't have ethical beliefs if they are religious? I don't understand how it's possible to have a private view that doesn't affect other people when my belief system makes very strong (that is, very committed) claims about right and wrong.

I am going to want those things codified in the legal system of my jurisdiction.

<Adrienne>

 

Agreed and that is why people who are pro gay christians need to create organizations that combat this kind of bullshit instead of just talking shit about it. We don't have Muslim law, Jewish law, and we shouldn't Christian law or even Atheist law. We should law of all the people and religion should be private and luckily people who view their religion as private and don't let it affect other people's lives are a growing group and since the support for gay marriage is very high that includes christians as well.

 

I'm not sure I agree that they are a growing group. I think it's more fair to say that more Christians are converging on the view that gay and bisexual people are just as ethical and their love is just as valid as anyone else's. They aren't moving out of the way with their views and keeping them private.

Rather, they are saying marriage equality is consistent with their views.

 

It works the other way, too.

To take Christianity:

Spoiler

If you went back to the 1950s in America, it would be unthinkable to even have the number of supporters we, the LGBT community, do today, and religion was the moral anchor for many of the protesting population.

Go back about a decade and compare that to the 1950s. Folks interpret the Bible in different ways -- you have folks who believe it is a sin to be gay, so they don't act upon it like it's some spiritual test, while some believe God wouldn't do such a thing as it's "mean", just as two examples -- and it will continue to adapt and change.

I could drop something about 'if it was a perfect book, it shouldn't have to change', but I'm really not in the mood to branch this conversation towards that. I will say though, it interests me how many perceptions folks have over the same piece of literature.

If religion were to disappear, right this second, something else would take it place. Smart phones, a new trend or conforming mentality -- something, because society tends to rely on a guiding crutch of sorts. This crutch comes in the form of dictators and tyrants, massive armies and clergy, and so on; we don't even have to mention cultural and religious traditions, as they are a given.

Religion, at it's worst, simply allows a justification for many of the problematic attitudes we experience or witness. Why change when it doesn't affect you? This mentality is present in many individuals, with or without religion, the primary difference is, at least with religion one can claim a higher power is the reason for their ways, while without it it goes by a less appealing name: intolerance.

At it's best, religion gives people hope to do something. And that's fine, I'm all for people feeling inspired... but it's awfully fucking hard to portray an inviting environment, when the faith can't even agree on the same book they worship. A lot of this could be resolved if the Big Man came down and said, "Yo! Look, here I am, and this is what's up..."

Maybe I'm being ridiculously egotistical by suggesting that, but it certainly beats the alternative to entrusting people -- those behind much of what influences this world -- who are flawed, and promote this essence of righteous superiority.

To condense it:
Take out religion today, it will return in another way, sometime down the road. Folks need to do what works for them, because arguing about translations and technicalities is taking away time from, you know, being a positive witness.

Also, folks need to quit using a deity as a shield for their asininity. It reminds me of a child that hits their younger sibling, then runs behind their parent while blowing a raspberry.

I'm in a good mood, I promise. I'm just really fucking tired, RAWR. <3

 

I agree with that.

 

Does religion have to die out before homosexuality is universally accepted? No. It's possible for some forms of religion to exist and for homosexuality to be simultaneously universally accepted. Also, people with no religious beliefs can be anti-gay as well.

That being said, religion dying out tends to accelerate acceptance of LGBT people, because letting go of one's religion eliminates a potential reason/justification for not accepting LGBT people. In my experience interacting with fellow atheists (mostly online), those who lack religious beliefs tend to be a lot more accepting of LGBT people. I've never personally met a single anti-gay atheist (although they do exist), and it became easier for me to accept my sexual orientation when I relieved myself of religious beliefs*.

Like with other issues, religions will gradually adopt, kicking and screaming, to society's improving views of homosexuality and LGBT people.


*I didn't become an atheist so that I could accept my orientation. I became an atheist because that's where my research and reasoning led me, but it had the positive effect of making it easier for me to accept my own sexual orientation.

 

As many people said before, I don't think religion have to disappear for homosexuality to be universally accepted. Look at the Philippines, which is very religious and yet very open minded society. The problem is that some religious people are fundamentalists, so they believe in everything that is being said in a holy book of their religion, including the view on homosexuality

 

The question in the OP really entails the vast ignorance that there is, out there, regarding atheists and how we put things together, in our minds.

Our system of thought has ancient origins, going back, for all I know, to ancient Mesopotamia. At the very least, secular thought goes back to Thales of Miletus, who is considered to be the father of western philosophy. Thales of Miletus is reputed to have used reason to predict a solar eclipse, for instance, which ended what would otherwise have become a very nasty battle. He scared the breeches off them, but unlike most religious charlatans, he tried to explain the system that he used for making his prediction. This was really a big deal.

Later, many schools of philosophy came into being as the movement grew, and this systematic questioning of religious authority was not just some sprawling, disorganized rabble deciding they wanted to be disobedient. They slowly developed a system of rules for how they go about this. Besides Plato, whom most people know about, there were many other thinkers. Their various systems of thought were really very sophisticated, and they have had a major impact on modern secular humanism.

It's not that Christians are at fault for the ill treatment of gay people. This is a much older problem, and the pre-Christian Romans were very abusive toward gay people. Although homosexuality was not outlawed, passive homosexuals were treated like worthless trash. It was really pretty horrible. The Christians just absorbed this bad behavior into their own culture, and their efforts to outlaw it were probably inspired partly by how horrifically passive homosexuals were treated. The closest modern equivalent to pre-Christian attitudes toward homosexuality, in the Roman Empire, is probably a practice still common in Afghanistan and surrounding regions called Bacha Bazi, which is really pretty hideous. It is really not fair to blame the Christians for how horribly gay people have been treated.

On the other hand, us secular humanists have really moved forward a lot faster than the Christians, on some issues. That's really because our system of philosophy is really very organized and very sophisticated. It is not incompatible with Christianity. Many Christians use similar ideas, but secular humanism is really the fruition of many many centuries of development. It is not something that has happened in a vacuum, not by a long-shot.

The idea of social equality being a good thing is really something that goes back to the Stoics. Far from being impartial, in politics, Stoic thinkers have always been very vocal political activists, and they were among the first people to start calling for gender equality, believe it or not. Not all secular humanists overtly identify with the Stoic school of philosophy, but it's been a major influence. Besides that, Thomas Jefferson, a major author of the US Constitution, identified with a school of thought called Epicureanism:

LETTER: Thomas Jefferson to William Short

Epicurus considered himself a successor to Democritus, actually. Democritus is remembered as one of the fathers of democracy. Jefferson owned several copies of De Rerum Natura, which is one of the greatest works ever created on Epicurean philosophy.

Lucretius, De Rerum Natura, BOOK I, line 1

Michel de Montaigne, one of the key figures of the French Renaissance, quoted De Rerum Natura extremely extensively.

But just because us humanists have been doing a very good job of moving society forward, that doesn't mean that Christians have been altogether slouches. It doesn't make Christians at fault for all bad things in society. It doesn't even make Christians at fault for homophobia.

And us humanists have really busted our butts to try to make the world a safe place to live in. The guy who wrote the draft for the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, in which Eleanor Roosevelt, who was an Episcopalian, also played a key role, was a man named John Peters Humphrey. He was a humanist. He was basing his ideas on an inconceivably ancient system of thought that we have been hammering on and trying to perfect for centuries! It's not that only humanists were trying to make things better, at the time. We have just played a somewhat disproportionate role.

So no, it's not that religion is a problem. However, it would make you guys look a lot less silly if you stopped underestimating secular philosophy. We have done a lot to make the world a safe place for you guys to raise your families. We have busted our butts at it. It's not that you guys have been slouches, and we appreciate all of the soup kitchens, shelters, and all of the other nice things that Christians do on behalf of human rights. It's just that you're not the only people in the "Make the World Not Suck" game.

The secular humanists happen to be right about this one, and you'll look a lot more intelligent when more of you start to listen to us. That doesn't require Christianity to "die out." It just requires you to pull your heads out of your bums, and it would be really nice if you stopped the stupid pretense that atheists are defective Christians or something. Us secular humanists are, overall, extraordinarily educated, and we put a lot of thought into forming our views.

 

Most definitely not, religion and accepting homosexuality are very much compatible for plenty of people; I myself am a pretty devout Protestant.