- Joined
- Nov 28, 2016
- Messages
- 16,715
- Reaction score
- 20,988
Tank the basic point is, In the SSM debate, the no side only had "beliefs" to back up their case, they had no solid groundwork for their oppositionYeah and? I know that bro, your not talking to a dumb ****. I was replying to your quote that you sprout every couple of days. We know you strayed from Islam, we know you hate religion and religious people.
When we talk about religion you're the first one in to indirectly bag it and comment on it (where I directly bag out the extremist fuckwit atheists who talk shit. That's fine, you are still my brother. But don't act like it's religious people throwing it in your face, athiests, like vegans, love to show hate by their arrogance and superiority complexes.
For those who call to want to punch a Nazi, sounds like self directed hatred as they are acting like Nazis.
YES my faith that I would die defending tells me to turn the other cheek, but not against evil ***** insulting my faith or me. Obviously not pointed at you as we can discuss everything and anything while not punching on and respecting our differences.
The yes side has current anti-discrimantion laws to back up their case and that marriage had to be updated to reflect these laws.
So when wahesh introduces his religious beliefs, again he can believe in it as much as he wants but it has nothing to do with SSM because not everyone shares his religious beliefs.
Meanwhile our anti discrimination laws exist we all share that and the SSM was an update to the existing anti discrimination laws
So in this legal case if I say keep religion to yourself to wahesh, it means that there's a lot of us who don't live by his religious laws and hence we're not interested in it.
Whereas anti discrimination laws are valid for everyone (except in churches, synagogues etc).