OK vs Not OK. . an atheist is okay. Being an atheist and shaming religions and spirituality as silly and not real is not okay. Being a Christian is okay. Being  OK vs Not an atheist is okay Being and shaming religions spirituality as silly not real a Christian
Upload
Login or register

OK vs Not OK

Click to block a category:GamingPoliticsNewsComicsAnimeOther
an atheist is okay.
Being an atheist and shaming religions and
spirituality as silly and not real is not okay.
Being a Christian is okay.
Being homophobic, misogynistic, racist, or
otherwise hateful person in the name of
Christianity is not okay.
Being a reindeer is okay.
Bullying and excluding another reindeer
because a he has a shiny red nose is not
okay.
...
+725
Views: 34644 Submitted: 05/16/2013
Hide Comments
willisteal has disabled anonymous comments.
Refresh Comments (95)
[ 95 comments ]
asd
#48 - joshiboy
+74 123456789123345869
has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #54 to #48 - notapeopleperson
+6 123456789123345869
(05/17/2013) [-]
Neither is being a hypocrite...
#59 to #54 - joshiboy
-1 123456789123345869
has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #60 to #59 - notapeopleperson
+1 123456789123345869
(05/17/2013) [-]
It's a paradox. By telling others that they can't tell other people what's okay, you are violating your own rules...
#71 to #60 - joshiboy
+1 123456789123345869
has deleted their comment [-]
#51 to #48 - foelkera
+11 123456789123345869
(05/17/2013) [-]
That is definitely not ok
That is definitely not ok
#5 - BerserkerMushroom
+1 123456789123345869
(05/16/2013) [-]
this is why i say bill nye is a dick. he generalizes religious people like they we're all retarded westboro babtist church mongoloids.
bring back the hate and red thumbs if you care, idgaf
User avatar #64 to #5 - kolmar
-1 123456789123345869
(05/17/2013) [-]
Bill Nye is a douchebag.
User avatar #23 to #5 - IamSofaKingdom
0 123456789123345869
(05/17/2013) [-]
Mongolids, ha ha. I love that word.
#18 to #5 - savingvalentine
+11 123456789123345869
(05/17/2013) [-]
In Bill Nye's video where he talks about people suppressing the teaching of evolution in schools, he directly explained that the people causing problems are the parents who teach their children to exclude science because of their religion. He doesn't call out all religious people.. just the ones that keep teaching their kids that evolution doesn't exist. Fortunately those people are a minority but they are the loudest ones.
#100 to #18 - teranin
0 123456789123345869
(05/17/2013) [-]
Thank you
User avatar #86 to #18 - YllekNayr
0 123456789123345869
(05/17/2013) [-]
Thank you.
User avatar #19 to #5 - gorginhanson
+22 123456789123345869
(05/17/2013) [-]
it isn't about mocking people for being religious, it's about mocking any person stupid enough to do what they're told rather than examine the evidence and think for themselves
#80 to #19 - anon id: 5c81875c
0 123456789123345869
(05/17/2013) [-]
There's no evidence for or against the existence of God and there never will be. He doesn't seem to realize the simple concept that religion is a matter of faith.
#63 - Blasphemer
+8 123456789123345869
(05/17/2013) [-]
It says nothing about blue noses.
#81 to #63 - anon id: 7bb1289f
0 123456789123345869
(05/17/2013) [-]
That's a raccoon-dog
#6 - kingnicholas
+6 123456789123345869
(05/17/2013) [-]
Just wondering if being against gay marriage makes one a homophobe.
User avatar #7 to #6 - rhetoricalfunny
-4 123456789123345869
(05/17/2013) [-]
I respect your ability to ask and I say,

just get the **** over it.

Marriage was only ever intended to share resources between families. That is "traditional" marriage.
Marriage today gives many rights and benefits to married couples. Which means that gay couples have no access to these rights. That is discrimination.
gay marriage does not affect you in any way whatsoever. You're not going to suddenly walk out of your door and see gay people ******* everywhere. It doesn't affect you so you should just get the **** over it.

If you are still against it, you are a homophobe, a bigot, and are supporting the discrimination of others.


there is more than enough scientific proof that gay people are in fact born gay.
User avatar #10 to #7 - ssurtrebor **User deleted account**
+1 123456789123345869
(05/17/2013) [-]
"Marriage was only ever intended to share resources." Yes, and black people were only ever intended to be slaves. How about you update your definition of "traditional?"
User avatar #12 to #10 - rhetoricalfunny
-1 123456789123345869
(05/17/2013) [-]
I was speaking in the terms of "traditional" marriage.
The earliest form of marriage was a form of sharing resources between families.
#62 to #7 - cumguzzler
-2 123456789123345869
(05/17/2013) [-]
So far you are the only person right in this thread. Do you others not understand that it isn't the fact that Christians don't want them to get married in their churches, but that they are not legally allowed to get married by the U.S. government that gay rights activists are protesting about. You can be against the idea of gay people getting married in a church without being a bigot, but when you are against gay marriages getting the same rights as straight marriages that makes you a bigot.
User avatar #110 to #62 - rhetoricalfunny
0 123456789123345869
(05/17/2013) [-]
There's really no consistency with FJ's belief system. There is absolutely no reason to be against the legalization of gay marriage.

I mean if you're talking about church sanctioned marriage then ****, be a bigoted prick. It's your religion, but legally it's just ****** up.
User avatar #56 to #6 - redtooth
-2 123456789123345869
(05/17/2013) [-]
You know, something I've never understood is why gay people don't make their own Church. I mean, surely it can't be such a big deal if Henry the Somethingeth or whatever number he was managed to create a ******* church for the sole purpose of divorcing his wife.

Surely you could create a Church with every ideal of Christianity, belief in the same God, except for the "thou shalt not lay with man as one lays with woman" part. Instead they have to try and butt into marrying in churches which prohibit gay marriage using the government to allow it to them; it's kinda like having the teacher force the bully to hang out with you instead of just finding your own friends who aren't ******* bullies. Surely that'd be the ideal solution? I mean, forcing the Church to abandon bigotry and hate will only make them hate you more; why don't they just make their own religion or whatever and get married as they like? I mean, I don't mind them or gay marriage, I'm an atheist so it's really none of my business, I mean, it's not like they're intruding on my religion, but I was really wondering why don't they just make their own subchurch or branch of religion or whatever it's called.
User avatar #46 to #6 - wiredguy
-1 123456789123345869
(05/17/2013) [-]
If you can give me scientifically valid, logical and benign reasons behind being against gay marriage, then sure.
But I'd bet all of my money that you couldn't.
User avatar #52 to #6 - mctoilet **User deleted account**
+1 123456789123345869
(05/17/2013) [-]
Wait wait wait. Has anyone tried to sit down and just think for a moment?
gay's arent really accepted by christians, which many people are trying to change now.
Thats okay, But then accept them to get married also? why?
and no, i'm not asking "Why should they get married?" i say : Why would a gay couple get married in the christian religion? why do they want to get married in the first place?
"they love eachother" , well *********** do! you can be a couple and share house,kids and money without being married. its just a christian title.
It's like having a boys night where you talk about girls are stupid. then someone says: "No. girls should be allowed to attend boys night aswell, even though they hate us" why would girls want to join that club? just because reasons?

TLR : don't understand why gays want to be married in a religion who does not accept them.

TLR
#85 to #52 - cerdomen
-1 123456789123345869
(05/17/2013) [-]
That's the thing that most rustle my jimmies or whatever... Why in hell it's YOUR title? People get married long before christianity, people celebrated the winter solstice long before Christmas was shoved down our throats. 2000 years of christianity don't gave you the right to call everything you like "yours"
#21 to #6 - toadsniffer **User deleted account**
+3 123456789123345869
has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #8 to #6 - spleed
+4 123456789123345869
(05/17/2013) [-]
Nah. You're against gay marriage. That's it.
Ignore the passionate person below me.
User avatar #11 to #8 - notthepedobear
0 123456789123345869
(05/17/2013) [-]
i love video games so much i played them since childhood like red plumber man and blue hedgehod on meth. good time and stuff.
User avatar #15 to #11 - tokitoki
0 123456789123345869
(05/17/2013) [-]
Are you really not the pedo bear?
User avatar #16 to #15 - notthepedobear
0 123456789123345869
(05/17/2013) [-]
what is this loli u speak of
User avatar #17 to #16 - tokitoki
0 123456789123345869
(05/17/2013) [-]
I... I...
What?
#38 - itsalwayslupus
0 123456789123345869
(05/17/2013) [-]
I don't like the idea of homosexuality I can work with them and talk to them I just don't like their life style. Isn't that tolerant enough?
User avatar #41 to #38 - snakefire
-1 123456789123345869
(05/17/2013) [-]
It is biologically incorrect.

Doesn't mean its wrong in my opinion.
#44 to #41 - anon id: efd99520
0 123456789123345869
(05/17/2013) [-]
Not necessarily. There are many species of animals that display acts of homosexuality all the time. So it's not really "biologically incorrect"
User avatar #47 to #44 - snakefire
-2 123456789123345869
(05/17/2013) [-]
They use it as a dominance thing. Only humans, dolphins and a few other mammals are truly homosexual.

Its still biologically incorrect because its useless. The point of sex is to reproduce, in which homosexuality does nothing.
User avatar #49 to #47 - darknesincontrol
+4 123456789123345869
(05/17/2013) [-]
but we humans have evolve sex to become a more intimacy thing and as act of pleasure, giving it something more than just to reproduce
User avatar #50 to #49 - snakefire
-1 123456789123345869
(05/17/2013) [-]
Which makes love beautiful. But regardless it's still not correct in terms of biology because it means no breeding.
User avatar #83 to #50 - figosound
0 123456789123345869
(05/17/2013) [-]
You cant accept that sex have other meanings? And tell me, why it MUST have a meaning? You think that all has one?
Tell me the meaning of the appendix.
User avatar #112 to #83 - snakefire
-1 123456789123345869
(05/18/2013) [-]
If it makes you happy it isnt wrong... morally...

But biologically it is, it serves no purpose.
User avatar #91 to #47 - hatesmlp
0 123456789123345869
(05/17/2013) [-]
Over 1500 species of animals got homosexual tendenses.
User avatar #111 to #91 - snakefire
0 123456789123345869
(05/18/2013) [-]
For dominance.
#40 to #38 - mrmamric
0 123456789123345869
(05/17/2013) [-]
I feel for you. Why the **** can't I think people are wrong anymore? That kind of world do we live in now when I can't say: that **** just isn't cutting it.
I feel for you. Why the **** can't I think people are wrong anymore? That kind of world do we live in now when I can't say: that **** just isn't cutting it.
User avatar #57 to #38 - ruebezahl
+2 123456789123345869
(05/17/2013) [-]
As long as you don't force others to accept your particular lifestyle, as far as I am concerned you can go ahead and dislike whatever you want.

It just becomes a bit difficult when one day your son discovers he is gay and can't talk to you about it, because he knows your feelings about it.
#61 to #57 - itsalwayslupus
+2 123456789123345869
(05/17/2013) [-]
I don't hate them by any means. I could accept the fact that my son is gay I wouldn't like it, but it doesn't mean that he and his partner are banned from thanksgiving and Christmas.
User avatar #103 - bitchplzzz
+3 123456789123345869
(05/17/2013) [-]
I know this post is a joke, but that's how it should be.
You're white? k.
You're black? k.
You're asian? k.
You're gay/straight? k

We're all humans
User avatar #104 to #103 - caesarslegion
+1 123456789123345869
(05/17/2013) [-]
Except for ******* pakis
User avatar #105 to #104 - bitchplzzz
+1 123456789123345869
(05/17/2013) [-]
Of course
#98 - toasthhemost
+3 123456789123345869
(05/17/2013) [-]
being a reindeer is okay
User avatar #101 to #98 - ragingflamingos
0 123456789123345869
(05/17/2013) [-]
Chopper and Rudolph should form a support society for reindeer with strange colored noses.
#99 to #98 - toasthhemost
+3 123456789123345869
(05/17/2013) [-]
turning into a monster and attacking your friends is not ok
#39 - anon id: a7a1754b
0 123456789123345869
(05/17/2013) [-]
I don't really have an opinion either way, but I never understood why from an evolutionary standpoint people support homosexuality. No babies=species not growing
#43 to #39 - anon id: ed154227
0 123456789123345869
(05/17/2013) [-]
well a lesbian couple can still get a sperm donor.
And gay couples could use a surrogate mother.
Homosexual people do still desire to raise their own offspring (if they want to have one that is)
User avatar #53 to #39 - herpymcderp
0 123456789123345869
(05/17/2013) [-]
Because humans have higher cognitive abilities and other species don't?
User avatar #55 to #39 - ruebezahl
+3 123456789123345869
(05/17/2013) [-]
Do you actually believe that our species need a lot of growing right now?

And no, I am not one of those 'tards who go on about how terrible humanity is and how we should not reproduce anymore. But I think it wouldn't hurt if the world population were to shrink just a little bit.

And by the way, there is a lot that doesn't make sense from an evolutionary standpoint. Our society has overwritten evolutionary demands in a lot of areas. If you want to base our lifestyle on what makes sense from that point of view, then there'd be a lot of stuff you'd have to change in modern society, and I bet you wouldn't like the end result unless you're the Mr. Alpha Top-of-the-Foodchain Spotless-DNA who will be allowed to reproduce.
#31 - hudspud
+3 123456789123345869
(05/17/2013) [-]
Here's a thought: Instead of saying homophobe (fear of gay people, a ******** term tried to shame people into supporting gay-marriage) we start saying gaycist (dislikes gay people, accurate)
#32 to #31 - kraetyz
+2 123456789123345869
(05/17/2013) [-]
How about we don't because the established term works?
#34 to #32 - hudspud
0 123456789123345869
(05/17/2013) [-]
Is that a question or a statement?
#35 to #34 - kraetyz
+1 123456789123345869
(05/17/2013) [-]
It is a questment. Or a stateion.
#36 to #35 - hudspud
+2 123456789123345869
(05/17/2013) [-]
Do I call you a quecist or a stateophobe?......
#26 - CargeLock
+3 123456789123345869
(05/17/2013) [-]
moderndayatheists.jpeg

Before you get angry, I am one myself. But holy **** guys, tone it down a bit. Extremism is bad, regardless of who it's coming from.
[ 95 comments ]