Oh for the good-old-days when the stern faced religious "traditionalists ruled the roost!
Once upon a time and not so long ago one could be put in jail or even executed by the stern faced religious "traditionalists" for being a homosexual and the "crimes" of blasphemy, heresy and even apostasy. Social shunning and banishment were quite common.

Unmarried mothers were treated with unspeakable systematic cruelty and used as virtual slave labor in the christian institutions that "cared for" such "fallen" women and their babies/toddlers/children, who were also cruelly labelled as bastards.

Once upon a time systematic beating of babies/toddlers/children was the accepted norm. Beating the "devil" out of them was the justification and fathers had the "god"-given right to do so.

And of course it was considered impossible for a husband to rape his wife, because she had to submit to his "god"-given conjugal "rights".

Whether anybody's opinion, or point of view, or firm belief, is crack-pot or mainstream, they are entitled to it. Of course, other people don't have to agree with it - they're equally entitled to THEIR opinion, after all.

Of course, a reasoned opinion is probably better than a simple assertion, or an opinion knowingly built on bullsh!t, such as any sort of favourable opinion of Tr**pf, or of corruption, incompetence and evil in general. But it's still no more than an opinion.

Whether one can persuade others of an opinion's value, is up to the persuader. But neither a 'persuader' nor a doubter has the right to stand over anybody else and demand they change their opinion.

After all, isn't that the essence of On Line Opinion ?

Joe

No doubt about it:

The Right Reverend Margaret de Racket's religion is right rooted.

http://youtu.be/R7r-mdB2Ics

Off the Court I prefer FERGIE http://youtu.be/q0SyUgw98tE to Margie

If you're not a Christian, what the hell do you care what a Christian thinks or what Christianity thinks.

This is all about enforcing opinion and silencing opposition. If the woke and QWERTY crowd were confident in their views, they'd let this wash over them. But they are so fragile in their opinions and so incapable of mounting reasoned argument, that their solution is simply to shout and demoralise the opposition into silence. When one or two members of that opposition refuse to bend the knee, the woke become deranged - their sole means of winning an argument is demanding silence and after that they've got nothing.

So she thinks marriage is an institution between men and women. So what? Is she going to enforce that view? Is there a chance she'll convince a majority to reverse the homosexual marriage arrangements?

She's just voicing an opinion. Voice a different opinion if that's your want. But don't try to withhold her right to voice an opinion. That path leads to a much more dangerous place than any fundamentalist christian can lead you.

Coupla points on what's been written. Some Atheist shows s/he's a real atheist by failing to recognise that there a re two books in the bible. Sure the first says lot's of things that aren't accepted any longer. But that's because the second didn't confirm them. The second did confirm the view that homosexuality was an abomination before man.

It goes without saying that when Alan B makes a definitive statement of fact, its going to be factual wrong. Case in point: "The Apostle Paul was a self-confessed homosexual...". That's rubbish. No such confession was ever made.

Still its comforting that Alan B continues to make these fundamental errors. I think that if we ever see a post from him that doesn't contain a least a few outright porkies, it'll be the sign of the end-times.

Speaking of sporting legends, it seems another legend with a strong Christian background had another big win.

Tom Brady's Florida team won the Superbowl today. Brady famously supported Trump.

However some people are cautious about declaring the win on the basis that there's a chance that there could be an unexpected number of mail-in touchdowns delivered in the middle of the might.

" The second did confirm the view that homosexuality was an abomination before man."

How so?

David