*As a black power minister*


Well, my brother. Marriage, and even more so reproduction, is a vital part of continued government success. Homosexuals take away from both. We all know the United States ,traditionally, was a Christian Nation and it still is. So USA is not a fan of Atheist. Socialisism revolves around giving more power to the states and even local governments, just like the Bill of Rights. America doesnt believe in giving states, too much power. As for Arabic, well... Self explanatory.

Duh!!

1. Marriage has nothing to do with reproduction, at all.

I am referring to the so -called 'American Dream'. Why do you think they are trying to prevent divorces now.

The religious right isn't what America stands for. Their idea of the American dream is far different than what most people will tell you.

2. America is by no means a lowly populated nation. Due to the fact that American's have easy access to lifes necessities, people tend to procreate quite often.

I never stated that America is underpopulated, sir. More people just means more money for the government. Homosexuals overall takes away from these things.

Homosexuals, as I already stated, don't mean less people, since they can procreate via the aforementioned methods. Actually, the way homosexuals go about procreating actually strengthens the economy by giving business to hospitals not only for the delivery of the child, but the insemination process aswell.

3. Homosexuals take nothing away from marriage. If anything they would add to the business section that tends to cater to such festive events.

Could you please explain these more thoroughly. Sounds like your saying "They are good caterers".

I'm sorry, I thought you had a brain. By "add to the business secion that tends to cater to such festive events", I meant "they would stimulate the businesses that are often associated with weddings and other such large gatherings."

4. While homosexuals cannot procreate via sexual intercourse with their partner, they can do so via artificial insemination, in the case of a lesbian couple, or a surrogate mother, in the case of a male couple.

All of these can be more strenuous. Not to Mention, these method clash with the OVERALL religion that the country was founded upon. Some people even argue, that this could 'tarnish' the child into becoming homosexual or even being confused. It is a very common psychological debate, especially for child and developmental psychologist. People must make sure biases DO NOT influence results. Although, it seems inevitable overall.


There is no "OVERALL religion that the country was founded upon" since it was founded upon no religion at all. The FOUNDERS had religious beleifs, but again, an individual is not a nation state, they're an individual. Actually, it isn't a common psychological debate. The evidence comes up amazingly one sided in that having homosexual parents has absolutely no effect on whether or not a child raised by such a couple will be homosexual, bisexual, or heterosexual. Statistics from tests don't really lie, in that it's simply obtained information, not an analysis, but the pure unadulterated data.

5. The United States has NEVER BEEN and WILL NEVER BE a "Christian Nation". If you look right into the constitution itself you will notice that there's this thing known as the "separation of church and state", this basically says that God and all of his crazy stories play literally no role whatsoever in the role of government. A decent number of the founding fathers were Atheists. Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin were very outspoken of their anti-religious beliefs.

In Denial Much? Overall, this is a Christian Nation. Fact. The "Separation of Church and State" is, more so, simply to prevent tyranny and even being ran over or heavily influenced by the Church. IE the Pope and excommunications, etc etc.

[color=#FF0000]I'm far from in denial. The united states of america is NOT and NEVER WILL BE a "Christian Nation". We have the separation of church and state, and freedom of/from religion. Anyone in this country is free to observe, or not observe, whatever they so wish as long as it doesn't take away the rights of anyone else. The separation of church and state wasn't so much to prevent tyranny, as it was to establish individual freedoms, the descendants of the founding fothers did come from the puritans, whom were persecuted for having their beliefs, and thus why such a policy was instituted.

Thomas Jefferson was NOT Atheist! Though his 'random'(IMO) opinions were made to the point were you cannot summarize his opinions, or beliefs. They more so supported Anti-Christianity as he always acknowledges a God.
As quoted by Thomas Jefferson:[/color]

I can never join Calvin in addressing his god. He was indeed an Atheist, which I can never be; or rather his religion was Daemonism. If ever man worshipped a false god, he did.

-Thomas Jefferson, letter to John Adams, April 11, 1823

He wasn't really a christian though, and that's more so what I was trying to say. He's not an atheist, but not really a theist, he believed more or less that there was the possibility of an unknown creator force. A being that would be known as God, but not specifically the god of any religion, essentially that great unknown.


Benjamin Franklin wasn't a Christian, but he definitely believed in God.
Like most Enlightenment intellectuals, Franklin separated virtue, morality, and faith from organized religion, although he felt that if religion in general grew weaker, morality, virtue, and society in general would also decline.

Thus he wrote Thomas Paine,

"If men are so wicked with religion, what would they be if without it."

Again, the same thing with Franklin, not really an 'atheist' per say, but not exactly a firm believer in really anything. If anything he would be defined as agnostic.


Both of these men were Deist. Deism supports most reasoning and logic. These include morals, values and even the Overall Idea of what Jesus stood for and represented, to some. They do NOT believe in 'inmaterial' things such as angel, demons, or miracles.

Deism is more or less agnosticism.

6. Socialism actually revolves around giving more control to the national government and taking away from states. That's why in nations that tend to be more socialist, such as Canada and the European Union have things such as socialized (universal) health care. Therefore by your logic of America not liking to give states too much power, socialist practices would be perfect for the United States.

Funch, you must be THE dumbest...... Naw, I'm just kidding. Your absolutely right. I misinterpreted the Definition of Socialism, once again {U'd be surprised how much I do it}. It is, in my opinion, viewed as a 'Hippie' way of life.

"Let's all share the wealth man!"

Amen man. Socialism is easily one of the best forms of government. The problem is the people in charge can't be corrupt retards. =/

7. America doesn't "hate" people of arabic descent simply because the attacks on 9/11 were supposedly orchestrated by an Islamic terrorist group. Certain ignorant AmeriCANS, "hate" these people, and they are no better than common racists in the south who "hate" black people.

It isn't only in the south. I am not referring to racism. My comment was more focused and targeted at pop culture, and even subconscious cognitive prejudice that takes place today. As we know, it happens every day, but we must control and govern ourselves. Comedies and Comedians make good satire jokes and references about that. Some have based the careers on it. IE Harold and Kumar movies, Dave Chapelle and Carlos Mencia. {those are just examples, not personal opinions}
Duh!!