Re: In the atheist bible, is homosexuality condemned?

On Jul 31, 2026 at 5:11:53 PM MST, "Attila" wrote
<[email protected]>:

> On 31 Jul 2026 22:56:47 GMT, Brock McNuggets
> <[email protected]> in alt.atheism with message-id
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>> On Jul 31, 2026 at 4:58:27?AM MST, "Attila" wrote
>> <[email protected]>:
>> 
>>> On 31 Jul 2026 08:43:18 GMT, Brock McNuggets
>>> <[email protected]> in alt.atheism with message-id
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On Jul 30, 2026 at 11:23:54?AM MST, "Attila" wrote
>>>> <[email protected]>:
>>>> 
>>>>> On 30 Jul 2026 15:19:21 GMT, Brock McNuggets
>>>>> <[email protected]> in alt.atheism with message-id
>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Jul 30, 2026 at 1:13:41?AM MST, "Attila" wrote
>>>>>> <[email protected]>:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On 29 Jul 2026 17:52:42 GMT, Brock McNuggets
>>>>>>> <[email protected]> in alt.atheism with message-id
>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Jul 29, 2026 at 10:42:19?AM MST, "Attila" wrote
>>>>>>>> <[email protected]>:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On 29 Jul 2026 15:32:43 GMT, Brock McNuggets
>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> in alt.atheism with message-id
>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 28, 2026 at 11:52:51?PM MST, "Rudy Canoza" wrote
>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]>:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> On 19 Jul 2026, Brock McNuggets <[email protected]> posted some
>>>>>>>>>>> news:[email protected]:
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 19, 2026 at 5:42:46?AM MST, "Attila" wrote
>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]>:
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 19 Jul 2026 07:25:04 GMT, Brock McNuggets
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> in alt.atheism with message-id
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 18, 2026 at 11:17:48?PM MST, "Attila" wrote
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]>:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 18 Jul 2026 23:39:32 GMT, Brock McNuggets
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> in alt.atheism with message-id
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 18, 2026 at 11:41:59?AM MST, "Attila" wrote
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]>:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 18 Jul 2026 14:28:47 GMT, Brock McNuggets
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> in alt.atheism with message-id
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 18, 2026 at 2:29:18?AM MST, "Attila" wrote
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]>:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 18 Jul 2026 06:27:25 GMT, Brock McNuggets
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> in alt.atheism with message-id
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Quote: "Do it legally and you are welcomed." / "They came here
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> illegally, they are criminals."
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Boundary-drawing rhetoric used by organized nativist networks
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to equate illegality with moral corruption and inferiority.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> See SPLC on FAIR and other restrictionist groups
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That is true.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> AI Overview                 criminal/'krim?nl/A criminal is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> an individual who has committed a crime or broken the law.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As an adjective, the term describes activities, behaviors,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or laws related to illegal actions and their punishments.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It is not necessary to be convicted of anything in court to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be a criminal.  Being here illegally is a violation of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> federal law and therefore such a person is automatically a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> criminal.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Being in the US illegally is a civil violation. So is speeding.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes.  A law official can punish in either case.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> They can also punish pedophilia but you do not care about
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> prosecuting Trump.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For what?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Pedophelia and his many other crimes.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Has he ever been formally charged?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Loony Left would not miss an opportunity to charge him
>>>>>>>>>>>>> with anything they can get into court.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> Remember you moved goal posts. In one case the standard is if they
>>>>>>>>>>>> have been charged. In the other it is not. And you also move goal
>>>>>>>>>>>> posts from BEING in the country illegally (charged or not) to ENTERING
>>>>>>>>>>>> illegally -- which are very different things. Many who are here
>>>>>>>>>>>> illegally did not enter illegally. And once they are here the charge
>>>>>>>>>>>> would not be about entry.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> That's crap.  Illegal is illegal.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Not all illegal acts are equal... but when you focus on a misdemeanor over
>>>>>>>>>> pedophelia,
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Uncharged, untried, and unproven.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Yet you want to deport them and have talked about not even wanting due
>>>>>>>> process.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Many have already had due process and deportation orders
>>>>>>> have been issued.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Many have not. And if you cared about them following the law you would
>>>>>> denounce them being abducted as they are in court, working with the laws.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> It is about bigotry, not legality. And you have already said you want to
>>>>>> ignore the law to target them.
>>>> 
>>>> You ignored this.
>>>>> 
>>>>> No, I have not.  Give a reference to where I made such a
>>>>> statement.  A link to a specific post.
>>> 
>>> Once again you fail to back up your lie.
>> 
>> Keep in mind the main differences between liberal and conservative world
>> views:
>> 
>> * Liberals: support equal rights and environmental protection, with a focus on
>> investing in the future and building a stronger tie between productivity and
>> financial reward.
>> 
>> Liberals want evidence-based regulation and oversight to help ensure clean air
>> and water, safe food, and human rights. This includes following the scientific
>> evidence about climate change and food safety, and things like setting levels
>> of lead and other harmful substances allowed, and even to wanting to do
>> research to reduce the harm of tools such as cars and guns and swimming pools.
>> This is a form of control, and conservatives are right to note that. And they
>> are right to note that sometimes these measures are taken too far.
>> 
>> * Conservative: support special entitlements for whites, Christians, males,
>> heterosexuals, those in lower populated states, and the wealthy, with a focus
>> on redistributing wealth to the very richest in the nation with the idea that
>> this will somehow help others.
>> 
>> Conservatives want regulation and oversight based on their own feelings and
>> what they believe has historically existed (which is often incorrect), or even
>> just based on their own religion. This includes controlling which consenting
>> adults can marry each other, what a woman can do with her own body, and even
>> insisting the government gets to define YOUR gender. They also work to create
>> regulations on voting to limit who can vote, for if the people truly get a
>> voice they know their ideas are less likely to be accepted. Liberals are right
>> to call conservatives out on this also being a form of control and, I think, a
>> less defensible one.
> 
> 
> I note you tried deflection to avoid answering my challenge.

We have been talking about it concurrently in other posts.

> Obviously you cannot find such a reference, which isn't
> surprising since it does not exist.
> 
> You lie.
> 
> Democrats are insane.

Why bring up Democrats?
> 
> They are all about votes to put their agenda into law.

And Republicans do not care about votes to get their agenda into law.

Thanks for the admission.

> A
> large number of them are dependent on government programs of
> some type such as  Medicare, Social Security, welfare, food
> stamps, and dozens of other  programs that give income to
> those who have not earned it.  Basically  income
> redistribution.

These programs are used by people in both parties and people who are not tied
to other, but the bigger issue is you are focusing on the poor but not the
rich who get MUCH more.

Once again you focus on attacking the poor and the minority over focusing on
equal rights and evidence-based policies.

Over 60% of total federal tax expenditure benefits flow to the top 20% of
earners (~20% goes directly to the top 1%).
This is done with preferential capital gains tax rates, step-up in basis,
pass-through business deductions, mortgage interest deductions, etc. Direct
Corporate Subsidies: ~$180B - $300B / year.Federal, state, and local tax
abatements, energy credits, and grants.

Notice below were you attack the poor... who actually have need but get far
less. This is grossly biased of you.
> 
> These people look at what they have and support those they
> trust to continue the something for nothing policies.  They
> line up in droves for those who will promise to give them
> even more,  whether it is free  medical care, college
> education, a higher minimum wage, or a minimum  government
> provided income for all.
> 
> They don't care where the money is coming from as long as
> they get their free stuff.  Many if not most of them know
> nothing about economics and care even less.  All they care
> about is whether or not  they will get their free stuff this
> month and possibly more next month.  Most of them cannot
> understand or care that someone must pay somewhere - as
> far as they are concerned it's government money,  Their
> experience is that the government always has money,
> and they cannot conceive of anything else.
> 
> They will vote for anyone who promises them to continue
> their free stuff, and especially those who will add to it,
> and reflexively attack with any weapon handy anyone
> they perceive as trying to end this situation.  False
> accusations, physical assaults, direct lies - nothing is
> barred and all is permitted in the name of continuing
> those free handouts.
> 
> When this becomes the actual numerical majority so
> that they can vote into office anyone who supports
> their cause of more free stuff and politically (and
> sometimes literally) destroy anyone who stands in
> their way the result will be a combination of any or all
> of a war of aggression to gain wealth to support the
> economy or a depression that will  make the Great
> Depression of the 1930's look like a day at
> Disneyland.
> 
> At any rate it will be time for all sane educated
> people who understand just what is going on
> to dig a hole, jump in, and pull it in after them.


-- 
It's impossible for someone who is at war with themselves to be at peace with you.