shazard
... Atheism dies against one simple question (you can apply it to any of your claims) - "Sez Who?"
I can't believe you think that is an argument. Right back at you; "sez who"? Please prove your beliefs in a demonstrable and repeatable fashion. And do yourself a favour and look up 'Presuppositionalist', and see how the description fits you.
Of course, you can't; you might have an INTERNAL proof, but then there are (for example) people wearing penis gourds and body-paint who claim they have an INTERNAL proof of things which contradict your beliefs and neither you or these hypothetical witch-doctors can prove who is right.
Is it my duty to accept secular definition of rights?
As a human being? Yes, I believe so IF you are tolerant of others beliefs AND can see the wisdom in a non-sectarian basis of society. If you are intolerant of other's beliefs and want society to be sectarian, you might not regard it as your duty.
Or do I have rights to define my rights just like you have rights to define your rights?
Rights are defined by facts, not opinions. You are entitled to your own opinion, under which you might consider that you have some different or superior set of rights. However, we all share the same facts, so if facts are used to determine rights they should be applicable to you, me, everybody. Even if you don't like some rights people have as a result of a factual determination of rights.
Have I rights to judge you by my standart as you have rights to judge me by your standarts?
Look, you're supposedly a Christian; why do I have to remind you that you shouldn't judge others? By your own beliefs you do NOT have the right to judge others.
Do I discriminate gays when claim I don't like them or they discriminate me calling me homophobic?
YOU discriminate ("to make a difference in treatment or favour on a basis other than individual merit"). THEY describe; homophones practise homophobia ("irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuality or homosexuals"). If you don't like being a bigot ("a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices"), don't try to change the meaning of words, change your opinions.
Do I have rights of opinion different then yours or I have obligations to accept your opinion which you have rigthts to have even if it is not acceptable to me?
Why are you trying so hard to make it look like you are hard done by? Is anyone obliging you to marry a man? Is anyone obliging you to have sex before marriage? Of course you have the right to a different opinion. You just don't have the right to force people to comply with your opinion.
Provided someone leads their lives peacefully and does not harm others or otherwise infringe upon the rights and freedoms of others by their actions, what right has ANYONE to stop them from doing what they want to do just because such actions are (in another person's opinion) 'unacceptable'?
Being black or Jewish has been 'unacceptable' to various people in the past; normally they quote the Bible to support their hate. How do we know you are not just another hate-monger twisting Scripture to your own ends as anti-Semites and racists have in the past? I'm not saying that to be rude, I really want you to show that, unlike the many Christian denominations who have retracted racist or anti-Semite doctrines after centuries of hate, you won't turn around in the future week and say 'oh, sorry, being nasty to gay people is wrong, I've changed my mind, sorry'; this is effectively what the anti-Semites and racists using the Bible to justify themselves had to do, and as apologies go it stank.
So... Sez Who - Grad Question for Atheists! What I hear... democracy... majority? What is majority you speak about 2 billion Christians and 1 Billion Muslim majority or 17% "minority" is one who defines "rights" and "bases"? Why minority is given rights and majority only obligations? Majority has similar rights to rule as minority!
Who appointed you the spokesmen for the 2.1 billion Christians on this planet?
Some of them are gay and consider themselves JUST as much of a Christian as you, if not more so due to your intolerance of peaceful fellow humans. Many Christians think that anyone opposing homosexuality is missing the divine message of love we can read in the Bible and swallowing down the traditional prejudices and hatred of the humans that authored the work. You make it sound as if Christian equates to 'considers homosexuality wrong'. It doesn't. Unless you specifically go against what it says in the Bible and put yourself in god's place by judging others... .... in any case, given 1.1 billion seculars, 0.9 billion Hindus and .38 billion Buddhists, if we add in the Christians and Muslims who DO approve of homosexuality YOU are in the minority, LOL.
I think you are confused about the rights of individuals as opposed to minority or majority opinions.
It is not the number of people approving of an action that determines whether it is right or wrong; provided someone leads their lives peacefully and does not harm others or otherwise infringe upon the rights and freedoms of others by their actions, what right has ANYONE to stop them from doing what they want to do?
Neither a majority or a minority of opinion has the right to infringe the freedom of a peaceful person doing no harm to others, even if that person is the ONLY person exercising that freedom.
That is what human rights is about. It is about the rights of the INDIVIDUAL. A peaceful individual doing no harm to others should be allowed to do what the hell they please within those confines because that is their right as an individual.
I don't have to like it. You don't have to like it. But unless we can prove that persons ACTIONS harm or otherwise infringe the freedom of others, we have to let them do it.
Why anaflabets are not allowed for ministers and presidents... it is discrimination on Intelekt basis.
Why phisically disabled are discriminated in rescque service work?
Sorry, anaflabets is not a word in English I recognise. Do you mean some form of mental retardation? I think the gist of your argument is 'why are people who cannot do a job not allowed to do that job?'.
Competence is a different issue to rights. One might have the right to be an airline pilot or surgeon, but not necessarily the competence.
May be there are reasons why gays are not allowed to create family similar like why analfabets are not allowed to teach grammatics!
You would think that as you discriminate against people for reasons OTHER than personal merit. Some heterosexuals are dreadful parents, as are some gay people. Why not base your opinion on the individuals rather than your opposition against an entire sexual orientation? Basing discrimination against a physical trait or behaviour that doesn't harm others - whether that is skin colour or sexuality - is still bigotry of the lowest form.
To have some rights you have to have some prerequiremetns. To have rights of man you have to be man! And if you like to apply rights of animals to man, then be animal and don't ask for rights of human! Why you can have rigts to ask for rights and I don't have rights to deny you rights which you don't have prerequirements for?
Ah... please confirm whether you are declaring some people are sub-human on account of their sexual orientation. I want to know what I am dealing with.
By your spelling I take you to be a German native speaker... is that correct?
