Almost Politically Correct Redneck

UrinalCakes · 1 day

Yeah, this is basically a repost of a BC2 screenshot.

LatinBeef · 1 day

I'm glad at least one person got it...

NemisisX31 · 2 days

Here's a simpler way of looking at the problem, the percentages in the "answers" are meaningless. We must assume that all four answers are both correct and incorrect to be able to solve the problem...

Johnny has four letters in his pocket, 2 A's, 1 B, and 1 C (Representing the possible answers). The teacher has three letters in his pocket 1 A, 1 B, and 1 C (Representing the actual answer). What is the chance that when both Johnny and the teacher reach into their respective pockets they will each pull out the same letter?

Solve this and you've solved the OP's problem, as the actual answer is not influenced by the percentages listed in the problem itself, because every answer must be assumed as both the correct answer and the incorrect answer.

whatisdooky · 9 days

You will never be taken seriously dressed like that. Quite frankly, you look foolish and insecure.

DirtyBastardMI · 13 days

Churches absolutely CAN discriminate against hiring gay employees...This article explains the boundaries of the law.

http://www.abpnews.com/content/view/5304/53/

And no the argument isn't because it's old, it's because to change how religions conduct marriage is the same as changing the religion...

Your view point demands the government changes my religion, my view point ask you and the government to just not participate in my religion.

DirtyBastardMI · 14 days

All of what you said is anthropologically correct, but this isn't about all that necessarily. This is about the concept of one man and one woman committing to each other for non anthropological reasons. A commitment of spiritual origin rather than one of necessity or survival. A relationship founded on ethical and moral reasoning rather than instinct and brute force. A dedication to monogamy for the sake of what's right and whats wrong rather than to limit the spread of disease or something along those lines.

I won't argue that men and women haven't formed "marriage" like relationships in almost all cultures prior to religion because that wouldn't be true, but I will argue that religion added the morality to that relationship, the covenant, the sacredness, and all of this before God. The concept of two people becoming one through this type of relationship is directly from the abrahamic religions and is what the term marriage means. This covenant has been lost somewhat in modern times, but Christianity still values it for its original intent and purpose.

DirtyBastardMI · 14 days

The union of a man and woman is common among many cultures, yes, but " marriage" has very distinct roots. What causes the confusion is that our legal system decided to get involved in regulating this religious act, and because of that some people have lost sight of its true meaning and history. Denying that "marriage" in the context of what people are complaining about, is NOT a religious act is the same shallow argument that r/atheism tries to make about Christmas not being a Christian holiday...both are weak attempts.

DirtyBastardMI · 14 days

Marriage was a religious tenant. Now it isn't.

This is quite a bold statement, but completely ridiculous. When did marriage become a pagan concept? When was the shift? What year did this happen? Is Easter still a religious holiday, or did it only used to be a religious holiday? Why are ordained ministers still required to officially marry someone without a judge present?

No one forces a church to marry gay people

No not yet, but just wait and see. Churches will begin being sued for refusing to house gay weddings or hire gay employees. This is the exact same scenario as the birth control issue. The federal government wants to mandate Catholics provide a medical service to its employees that their religion fundamentally does not condone. No one forces it, because it is not a federal law yet...

If anything is rhetoric, it's the claim that a several thousand year old religious tradition should be changed to accommodate those opposed to it, and if it's not it's because of bigotry and hatred.

DirtyBastardMI · 14 days

Agreed.

Unions would be entirely a legality thing...death benefits, hospital visits, financial s...etc. They would have nothing to do with religion. The tax breaks from the government are designed to reward stable homes which are beneficial to a society, especially to raising children and maintaing a large middle class.

DirtyBastardMI · 14 days

This just further proves r/atheism as a circle jerk. Religion does not equal Christianity. His argument is ignorant and should not be praised.

Marriage is, however, a religious tenant representing a covenant between a man, woman, and God. Marriage is rooted in the old testament which is shared by the three major world religions. This is also why an ordained minister (or it's equivalent in Judaism and Islam) is the one who oversees and validates the marriage, and also why people get married in churches. It is a modern phenomena for two people to marry outside of religion.

While I support consenting adults doing any act that they want to do that doesn't interfere with others rights, I do not support the government dictating to a religion the need for them to adopt a practice that directly contradicts said religions canon. The government should have absolutely no involvement or say in the marriage criteria or the marriage process...this belongs the the church.

For legal purposes the government should oversee unions, because these type of relationships benefit society. I have no problem with two people of the same sex being legally recognized by a state government, the problem is the government mandating what a religion must recognize. Notice I said state.

Marriage is 100% religious, even though it predates Christianity, it does not predate the Torah, which Christianity accepts as truth.

It is quite ironic that a group of people claims oppression and demands the solution to be to oppress those who oppose the minority belief...and that r/atheism would support that.

Agnostalypse · 17 days

Probably because Mike's argument against the op is "that's dumb"...which always gets a good response from r/atheism

LatinBeef · 1 month

Will do, thanks for checking it out.

Jacob13 · 1 month

Haha...encore you say?

How does the sun cuts its hair?

Eclipse.

cindisART · 1 month

While this is terrible, the mother would have had to sign some type of treatment waiver to allow this to happen to her minor son. She, along with the others, should be held accountable for volunteering her son to this treatment, her claim of ignorance is as shameful as this method of discipline.

Jacob13 · 1 month

What's the opposite of Antartica?

Uncle Artica.

I made that one up.

KKKneegrow · 1 month

This actually happens when your signed on to reddit from multiple devices at the same time. For instance, if you're trying to submit comments on your phone while still logged in on your computer your going to have a bad time. Easy fix is to log off when you're done browsing on any one device, although, I can't offer any advice on how to be done browsing...

LatinBeef

TROPHY CASE

you'll need to login or register to do that

create a new account

login