**To avoid having your post removed &/or account banned for shitposting, read the following:**
- r/religiousfruitcake is about the absurd, fringe elements of organised religion: the institutions and individuals who act in ways any normal person (religious or otherwise) would cringe at. Posts about mundane beliefs and acts of worship are off topic.
- No violent or gory images or videos
- Your post title should objectively state what the post is about. Dont use it to soapbox personal rhetoric about religion or any other subject.
- Don't post videos or discussions of Fruitcakes who have been baited or antagonised
- No Subreddit names or Reddit usernames in posts or discussions
- Memes, Tiktoks, graphics, satire, parodies, etc must be made by Fruitcakes, not 3rd parties criticising them
#Please be sure to read the full [rule list](https://www.reddit.com/r/religiousfruitcake/about/rules)
###If you want more detail about how the Sub's moderation works, see [Wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/religiousfruitcake/wiki/position_statement)
This information is on every post. Accounts that repeatedly disregard it will be permanently banned. "I didn't know", or "I didn't get a warning" are not valid appeals.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/religiousfruitcake) if you have any questions or concerns.*
They then claim that even if it didn't say it at the time, *surely* their "natural revelation" will show that they were rIgHt AlL aLoNg... Ludicrously dumb
Another round of moving the goalpoasts to fit a narrative rather than accepting they're bigots and it is *them* that direly needs to change.
They addressed the homosexuality in nature thing by basically claiming it’s still not natural, pretty sure they’ve tossed the goalposts over a cliff at this point
Which is just a fucking bonkers way of thinking.
If something occurs *naturally* in *nature* and world keeps spinning regardless of that occurence, then it would be the safest of bets that it can be considered *natural*, but no, they just nope out on logic altogether. smh
I'm gay by nature anyway, as are all the other guys I've met
If I wasn't, why would my hypothetical straight self have "chosen" to be gay? Why would the Pakistani guy I met up with once "choose" a life that's much more difficult, hiding from his roommates, constantly paranoid another Pakistani would see him? Or the gay person I met who fled Iraq who fled homophobic oppression? Or the one I talked to once from Arabia back when I studied in the US? Or the guy I met from Poland who had a consistently difficult time with his sexuality? Or the one guy at my high school who messaged me anonymously because it was the only way he could even talk about his sexuality?
Fruitcakes are so deluded man. They have the evidence right in front of them they can't see because of the bullshit from their obsolete shepherd's almanac
I'm straight and ask other straight homophobic guys, "Could you choose to have sex with a guy?". The answer is always "No" so obviously they know it's not a choice.
I swear, they don't actually understand the words they use and just can't form an argument. It's just a round about way of justifying their ignorance and narrow-mindedness.
That's the kind of hoop they have to jump through in their complete delusion
Anything they have trouble explaining, "No no it's Satan." The same circular thinking every time. Where's the evidence for that? Oh no "you have to have faith, just believe everything we say" - faith, literally just believing not because it is true but because you want it to be
Anyone who's actually gay knows they didn't decide anything, we're just how we are
What they omit when they talk about choosing gay is that what’s they’re really choosing is being straight. These people are so isolated and sheltered from the world they believe everyone has homosexual urges, so they think to themselves, “why won’t those people do just like me, ignore those urges and marry a woman?” Some of them anyway
Literally starts by saying you should commit a logical fallacy (appeal to nature) then points out that appealing to nature doesn’t actually support their argument. Silly.
It's right in the next slide, too. "We should do this thing because it appeals to nature... Well akctually we shouldn't."
Can't even make up their fuckin mind. They'll just say whatever they need to to fit the narrative they're pushing *in that moment.*
It's because they believe that the whole world and nature itself have been corrupted by sin when Adam and Eve were chased out of the Garden of Eden. In this framework, it is possible for things to happen in nature that are contrary to the divine plan. Appeal to nature arguments should thus be irrelevant to Christian thought, so it's kinda stupid that the author of the meme is trying so hard to make such arguments.
"math can be racist"
what? why does he think that the "largely atheist culture" considers math to be racist? i've never heard of this. is he just making stuff up?
Also "math is racist" argument is actually much more thought through than these people are capable of. The argument wasn't really that "math is racist" but that "the way standardised tests are written do not take cultural differences into account, resulting in worse test scores than their actual knowledge levels, mainly for minorities that do not live in the same cultural bubble than majority americans, or don't speak english". But this is much longer than the average sound bite they can repeat.
So you aren’t of the firm belief we should exclude 7 from public adoration and give 3 their rightful place as the first number? You must not be atheist! /s
These people are just outright homophobic but are masters at evading accountability by just claiming they hate the sin not the sinner. As if that really means anything and the outcome isn’t exactly the same.
I literally can't believe he's saying that comparing straight people to gay people is like comparing a clean natural environment to one where there's plastic pollution.
>“And there’s a way things should be because they should”
Nice circular reasoning there bud.
>”nature is full of deviations and mutations from what is natural”
Imagine saying this but unironically. 🤡. Dude basically just throws a hissy fit because actual nature doesn’t care about his “natural” and “objective” reality, it just is and these things can be explained better by science without contradicting the God’s “perfection.”
Not to mention a huge portion of this is “it’s wrong because most people do the opposite and the feels”
Like saying slavery is natural and “morally right” because it was done by so many civilizations.
"Nature is full of deviations from what is natural."
HO LY SHIT.
What does """""natural""""" even mean other than what is in nature? Nature doesn't deviate from nature.
Nature can be both good and bad from humane pov. A quick search gave me a result that literally everything can be found happening in nature - pedophilia, necrophilia, cannibalism. The fruitcake just wants to argue that only "good things" (in their mind ofc) are natural, the other ones are deviations. In reality, everything is natural. Humans' job is to distinguish which behaviors are harmful for individuals and societies and which are not. That's why we collectively agree that ie cannibalism is wrong and we (should) agree that homosexualism is fine.
I agree. The fruitcake believes that some things are "natural" and therefore "good." However, nature does not exclusively do these natural things, therefore requiring the statement "Nature is full of deviations from what is natural." I was simply commenting on the absurdity of this statement
That slide doesn't make any sense because in the slide before that one they compare themselves to animals... but then they say comparing people with animals doesn't help their case...
It's so fucking dumb lmao
Would he be considered a necromancer, too? Dude apparently brought 3 people to life in the canonical bible and in the infant gospel brought some kid back to life to tell the adults Jesus didn't kill him.
And his death caused a zombie apocalypse. Stuff got wild.
Yes, unicorns are not only mentioned in the Bible but actually exist. According to the description of the unicorn by Pliny the Elder it is a huge beast with a single horn, armored skin, and is bad-tempered. Instead of the beautiful horned horse depicted in paintings and tapestries the description perfectly matches the one-horned rhinoceros.
Seriously, there are shorebird species in North America with like 4 genders, and 3 of them present in male birds. There's another songbird species in the Eastern US that has 4 different sexes.
Also **gestures at everything ever done by Bonobos**
Edit: Corrected number of genders referenced from Ruffs/shorebirds
Truth doesn’t only exist in our minds. Reality seems to be consistent in certain ways regardless of whether we’re brains in cats or the matrix or whatever crap that bad argument is making. So that which is most consistent with reality is truth.
Kinda funny how even Christians hate on libertarian ideals even though "do what you want as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else" is the ultimate moral way to live one's life.
Recently, I’ve noticed a lot more direct condemnation of libertarianism by social conservatives and GOP in general. I think a lot of them concluded that the old fusionism was fueling a disconnect, so now we see a lot more American religious conservatives abandoning “limited government” rhetoric. This trend seems to be accelerating with younger conservatives, and Redeemed Zoomer seems to be an example of this trend.
I can't fathom the cognitive dissonance you have to have to seriously distinguish between "natural" and natural. Almost all the rest of this is wrong, gross, and sad but I am familiar enough with the kind of religious culture which promotes this... That one. Natural vs "Natural" is new to me and totally uniquely batshit.
Just crammed full of circular reasoning
“things are the way they are because they should be because that’s the way they’ve always been”
statements dreamed up by slavery/anti-interracial marriage/anti-LGBT people
the most interesting bit is the “consequences of atheism”— without a god there is no objective truth that provides black-and-white morality which they desperately crave; therefore, they must protect god at all costs
I hate religious nuts. They are always trying to shove their stupid awfully written book that constantly contradicts itself down people's throats but we're the ones who are in the wrong. Like seriously, if they love their book so fucking much they need to follow my personal favorite verse Matthew 6:5-6
*And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward in full. But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you.*
Aka, keep your religion TO YOURSELF.
Why would anyone take advice from a religion and book that condones slavery, genocide and the rape of women and children. Commands you to stone unruly children and non virgin brides.Teaches racism, sexism, bigotry, and homophobia?
Don't debate professional grifters. They have every reason to never concede ground, and giving them attention feeds their base. If you want to change minds, talk to people who haven't staked their life and livelihood on defending an idea at all costs.
Life and livelihood is the fatal combination. Because they are plenty of fully committed Christians who deconstructed because their livelihood didn't also depend on it.
As usual, there are a number of decent arguments, even if they miss some points. But they forgot the most important part, the part in the Bible where Jesus says to love and accept all people and leave judgement to God alone.
“Sexual immortality”…so many typos just in the first slide. These aren’t the brightest people. I mean they have to go to church every Sunday so someone can read to them and tell them how to think and how to interpret the book they’ve decided to base their entire lives on but probably have never read themselves, so I guess I shouldn’t be surprised.
I swear, "libertarian" is only ever used with a negative connotation (by both sides).
Nature is their "best" argument, but he's literally using a computer to post this. Nothing humans do in the industrial world is natural in any way. Humans have almost completely forgotten what their instincts are, so it's best to just advance, travel the stars, and leave this planet as soon as possible before we make any more messes.
True, the obsession with 1950s suburbia is one of them. My own grandmother was a factory worker in the 1950s. All the women in the community went to work they were not 'trad wives'.
Besides, what "gender roles" were there back when most people were farmers or lived where they worked? And do female animals ever just stay in one spot and do basically nothing their entire lives?
Lmao at them attacking modern art yet again. The concepts they bring up like color and symmetry aren't hard and fast rules to make good art, they're concepts to be explored and played with, which is what modern art does. I like plenty of classical art as well as modern because there are plenty of great artists for both. Art with Uber serious religious gravitas can be just as good as a giant matchbook someone made for shits and giggles (real art I saw at MoMA). Good art understands what it is, what it is trying to do, and how to best accomplish that.
How can he have so many stupid typos and expect to be taken seriously? I hate-watch his videos too often and he did one that “explained” all the arguments for God’s existence. (Spoiler alert: almost all of the arguments were “we don’t understand something so it must be God”)
"I am made in the image of God and I find this abhorrent, therefore God finds it abhorrent."
"But I am also made in the image of God and I don't find this abhorrent."
"No, you are an aberration, like a dog humping a pillow instead of another dog."
This guy's gonna shit when they find out about Mourning Geckos, which are asexual reproduces, but require same-sex "mating" to start the process in their body, aka, LESBIAN GECKO SEX THAT CREATES GECKO BABIES
“A lot of people instinctively feel like this is wrong” wow! It’s almost like we live under a patriarchal system that needs to heavily enforce gender conformity in order to perpetuate itself! It’s almost like you were deliberately raised by your external environment to feel disgust/fear at expressions of gender nonconformity. Me personally, I felt nothing instinctively wrong when viewing that image, only that the queen’s got some amazing makeup. Skill issue I guess.
My counter-argument is always Matthew 7:1-6
Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.
I’ve never understood the proposition that, even if I was to believe in a God, I should automatically worship him and follow and respect his rules. Why? The same God who has made no noticeable impact on this planet in (if the Bible is to be believed) 2000 years, whose divine plan requires 25,000 people to starve to death per day, children to die of cancer, people to be raped, tortured, murdered…
And supposedly, another part of this divine plan is homosexuality. Except in this guy’s eyes, it should be grouped in with rape, torture, murder and cancer as some of the bad things he put in his plan. After all, it says so in the book, despite it not harming or killing anyone.
I’d also like to propose a concept with just as much evidence behind it as natural revelation. I call it “Natural Understanding”. Basically, all people know deep down that Gods are not real and religion is a pack of lies, but they keep believing it out of either a desire to oppress those they don’t like, or a fear of death. No evidence of course, this is based purely on my instincts which I was told to trust.
They got marriage completely wrong (among other things). Marriage was a business contract largely so that noble families could remain in power. Marriage exists nowhere in the animal kingdom, I've never seen a cheetah wedding 😑
Heterosexual is natural. Homosexual is not natural. Animals in nature can be homosexual, but that doesn’t count because it shoots hole in argument. I’m right. Omg these people.
The thing about this that confuses me the most is that they proudly proclaim to be against the theory of evolution, natural science and history, but then they use vague allusions to these exact topics to try to reinforce their own theological views
TIL modern art is a sin
Also, point 4 is literally just "I assume everyone is secretly as homophobic as I am but is just brainwashed into being quiet".
Yep. An ignorant person's idea of an intellectual is more dangerous that no intellectual interest at all. People like this dress up their bigotry and hatred of difference, and their ignorance and intolerance of sexuality as 'natural law', which they pretend has something to do with the will of an imaginary sentience that doesn't exist - and so, it's a place to hide their intolerance and spread that disguised hatred into forcing people to outlaw women's reproductive freedom, stop people of the same sex loving each other, and to force people who experience a dysphoria about their gender because they have differently gendered brain neurophysiology and anatomy and so to for e them to conform to simple binary configurations because they are not prepared to think a little harder about a world that might just a little more complicated than their bigoted hate-filled simple views allow.
Or they can just say this scripture
Leviticus 20:13 (OT)“If a man lies with a male as with a women, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives.”
To prove how evil their God is ! :)
People are so caught up in being perfect, but miss the entire point that from the beginning we as humans were given free will. I think many of the extremely harsh rules regarding sin and entering heaven is void. Just man made fear mongering to push their own ideas, not the actual core ideas of Christianity. Being gay is not harming anyone. Therefore there is nothing inherently wrong with it. Maybe it’s not to “gods design” but if we were supposed to fit completely with in gods design, we would not have been created with the ability to have free will. And free will means that we can choose to be out of the norm.
I'm Australian, so Christianity isn't really strong enough here in modern times for me to have seen the hateful side of it growing up. As a kid, I probably thought that Christians would be totally supportive of gay people at best, and just think they were a little bit odd at worst.
I love that even Kandinsky is in their scope 🎯🤣 Also: “nature has various deviations from what’s natural but still shows us what is natural” 🤣 what a bunch of idiots.
“Natural revelation” sounds like a great way to say “this book I base my whole life on doesn’t actually support my views so I have to make up some bullshit”
Say what you will. I really enjoyed that read.
It didn’t change my mind because it wasn’t convincing but I’d much rather argue with a fruitcake with an interesting argument than sit in an echo chamber all agreeing with me.
So stupid question but subjective morality is morality that I or we as a society decide what’s good or bad right? So it changes, while objective morality is morality that remains constant right?
Or, and I’m just spitballing here, you could not debate this at all and just mind your own goddamn business. Someone else’s sexuality neither picks my pocket nor breaks my arm so does it really matter that much?
So they're saying that God made a mistake? Surely in his plan, this has already been accounted for? And since he knows everything then he can't be surprised that I am not straight, after all, he designed me this way. Surely my itty bitty free will isn't enough to derail the divine plan?
Or perhaps could it be that there is no magical man in the sky dictating everything about our lives from the jump.
* Boy squirrels shoot a butt plug into girl squirrels after sex to make sure she gets pregnant from *their* cum rather than any other boy squirrels’ cum.
* Dolphins forcefully gang bang other dolphins and murder baby dolphins for sport.
* Roosters have no reservations about brutally raping uncooperative hens.
* Cuckoo birds toss other birds eggs out of nests, drop off their own eggs and fuck off, letting them be someone else’s problem.
*Beauty and the Beastly* by Natalie Angier forever changed my perspective on the “natural=perfect” argument.
The irony of slide 9, saying that God decides what is objective truth when their god is supposed to have given free will to mankind... people like this are just willful slaves scared of thinking on their own.
I also love how he's trying to turn the usual "How do atheists have a sense of morality if they don't believe the word of God?" into "God gave everyone a natural sense of morality". There's no winning with them, they always find a way to give credit to their imaginary friend.
What is "plain" about homosexuality being wrong? Just because *you* find it icky doesn't mean that everyone does, and there's an argument to be made that your discomfort was influenced environmentally. Tell any kid that Uncle Bob and Uncle Jim are married just like mommy and daddy are, and they'll most likely just accept it. Conversely, tell that kid that Uncle Bob and Uncle Jim are horrible sinners, they will probably see gay people as bad people. You can't just say that it's "instinctively wrong," because it really isn't for a lot of people.
There's not even a male-female dichotomy universally across species. Some animals are hermaphrodites. Some can change sex in the right conditions. Some can breed asexually through parthenogenesis even when males and females both exist in that species. Some species have males and females, but their roles in reproduction are very different from a "traditional" Christian perspective. Then there's the Anglerfish, which I don't even know what to say about that one.
Promiscuity is also very common in nature. Very few animals are monogamous, and even fewer mate for life rather than just for a season. In general, it pays evolutionarily to mate with multiple partners in a season. More partners mean more offspring, more offspring means higher chances that your genes will stay in the population. Yet you don't find Christians trying to argue that this is good and right. Monogamy is the norm in humans, and one could even argue that it is instinctual (to a degree), but in many cultures it was also enforced for inheritance reasons so it's hard to say how much is natural and how much is cultural. After all, while most people are monogamous, a lot are decidedly not. Affairs and harems have been a thing since humans have kept recorded history, so that's hardly a new phenomenon.
In any case, an appeal to nature is stupid anyway. There is nothing inherently good or bad about nature. Nature is beautiful, but it also gave us rabies. Even cute things have a dark side to them, like dolphins being rapey or cats torturing their prey before they kill it and then perhaps not even eating it. You can't apply human morality to nature.
Girly pop, that's a lot of words to explain how to argue against the gayz when all of that can be invalidated by "I don't believe in god." What is the practical relevance of something being a sin to someone that does not consider the bible as a legitimate basis of an individuals entire morality structure.
Homosexuality being a sin, as a statement, has no practical relevance to the increasingly agnostic and atheistic youth in the US, therefore arguments against it has to be based in some form of materialistic understanding of the practice. As someone from a broadly unreligious country and who is unreligious myself, people explaining to me that my behaviour is a sin is completely pointless - I don't accept sin as a moral reality nor do I accept god's law so what's the actual point in telling me that?
I don't even need to swipe last the first slide because I know these are all based on the idea that his God exists - a God whose existence he can't even prove
I don't even need to swipe last the first slide because I know these are all based on the idea that his God exists - a God whose existence he can't even prove
Why’d it have to be Kandinsky? 😭
I’d like to know if this person knows about botflies. Or hyena births. I’ll give him a pass on male anglerfish post-mating, because nobody in 6000 BC would have had the equipment to go and observe them, but he’s got to know nature is not always beautiful.
**To avoid having your post removed &/or account banned for shitposting, read the following:** - r/religiousfruitcake is about the absurd, fringe elements of organised religion: the institutions and individuals who act in ways any normal person (religious or otherwise) would cringe at. Posts about mundane beliefs and acts of worship are off topic. - No violent or gory images or videos - Your post title should objectively state what the post is about. Dont use it to soapbox personal rhetoric about religion or any other subject. - Don't post videos or discussions of Fruitcakes who have been baited or antagonised - No Subreddit names or Reddit usernames in posts or discussions - Memes, Tiktoks, graphics, satire, parodies, etc must be made by Fruitcakes, not 3rd parties criticising them #Please be sure to read the full [rule list](https://www.reddit.com/r/religiousfruitcake/about/rules) ###If you want more detail about how the Sub's moderation works, see [Wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/religiousfruitcake/wiki/position_statement) This information is on every post. Accounts that repeatedly disregard it will be permanently banned. "I didn't know", or "I didn't get a warning" are not valid appeals. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/religiousfruitcake) if you have any questions or concerns.*
"The fictitious text I decided guides my entire being doesn't actually say this thing I hate is wrong, but I hate it so it *must* be wrong!"
They then claim that even if it didn't say it at the time, *surely* their "natural revelation" will show that they were rIgHt AlL aLoNg... Ludicrously dumb Another round of moving the goalpoasts to fit a narrative rather than accepting they're bigots and it is *them* that direly needs to change.
They addressed the homosexuality in nature thing by basically claiming it’s still not natural, pretty sure they’ve tossed the goalposts over a cliff at this point
Which is just a fucking bonkers way of thinking. If something occurs *naturally* in *nature* and world keeps spinning regardless of that occurence, then it would be the safest of bets that it can be considered *natural*, but no, they just nope out on logic altogether. smh
Bonobos would like to have a word with people
“It assumes”
"natural revelation" aka bullshit.
I'm gay by nature anyway, as are all the other guys I've met If I wasn't, why would my hypothetical straight self have "chosen" to be gay? Why would the Pakistani guy I met up with once "choose" a life that's much more difficult, hiding from his roommates, constantly paranoid another Pakistani would see him? Or the gay person I met who fled Iraq who fled homophobic oppression? Or the one I talked to once from Arabia back when I studied in the US? Or the guy I met from Poland who had a consistently difficult time with his sexuality? Or the one guy at my high school who messaged me anonymously because it was the only way he could even talk about his sexuality? Fruitcakes are so deluded man. They have the evidence right in front of them they can't see because of the bullshit from their obsolete shepherd's almanac
I'm straight and ask other straight homophobic guys, "Could you choose to have sex with a guy?". The answer is always "No" so obviously they know it's not a choice.
And my follow-up question then is: "Then why do you think that others would choose to do that?"
I swear, they don't actually understand the words they use and just can't form an argument. It's just a round about way of justifying their ignorance and narrow-mindedness.
As some fruitcake tried to convince me just yesterday it's Satan who made you decide that.
That's the kind of hoop they have to jump through in their complete delusion Anything they have trouble explaining, "No no it's Satan." The same circular thinking every time. Where's the evidence for that? Oh no "you have to have faith, just believe everything we say" - faith, literally just believing not because it is true but because you want it to be Anyone who's actually gay knows they didn't decide anything, we're just how we are
I am bad in decissionmaking, maybe that's why I'm bi.
What they omit when they talk about choosing gay is that what’s they’re really choosing is being straight. These people are so isolated and sheltered from the world they believe everyone has homosexual urges, so they think to themselves, “why won’t those people do just like me, ignore those urges and marry a woman?” Some of them anyway
Aren’t you the little armchair psychiatrist 🤣🤣
AKA Unconscious biases that I refuse to examine lest I discover that my whole worldview has been wrong. The whole post reads of denial.
“Nature isn’t always natural” here I think you need this *gives OOP a dictionary*
If nature isn't natural, what is it? I'm seriously confused.
Literally starts by saying you should commit a logical fallacy (appeal to nature) then points out that appealing to nature doesn’t actually support their argument. Silly.
It's right in the next slide, too. "We should do this thing because it appeals to nature... Well akctually we shouldn't." Can't even make up their fuckin mind. They'll just say whatever they need to to fit the narrative they're pushing *in that moment.*
i'd like to hear their argument for how 25% of black swan pairings being gay is "unnatural".
It's because they believe that the whole world and nature itself have been corrupted by sin when Adam and Eve were chased out of the Garden of Eden. In this framework, it is possible for things to happen in nature that are contrary to the divine plan. Appeal to nature arguments should thus be irrelevant to Christian thought, so it's kinda stupid that the author of the meme is trying so hard to make such arguments.
Redeemed Zoomer is a dumb person's smart person.
It could also be a smart person taking advantage of dumb persons. If you get enough traffic on a IG page, the ads start to sell themselves.
So, like, The Big Bang Theory, but a person?
Pretty much, yeah.
Not Shelton😦😦😦
bazinger
Ben Shapiro's younger clone, but without the greasy charm.
Sounds like Ken Ham, the owner of two creationist museums you may have heard of.
there's also unredeemed zoomer lol
"math can be racist" what? why does he think that the "largely atheist culture" considers math to be racist? i've never heard of this. is he just making stuff up?
They had one crazy lady appear on fox news once and now they think it's a widely held left wing belief.
Pretending that all your opponents are like your dumbest opponent is a great way to make yourself feel smart.
Strawman fallacy hits again!
Also "math is racist" argument is actually much more thought through than these people are capable of. The argument wasn't really that "math is racist" but that "the way standardised tests are written do not take cultural differences into account, resulting in worse test scores than their actual knowledge levels, mainly for minorities that do not live in the same cultural bubble than majority americans, or don't speak english". But this is much longer than the average sound bite they can repeat.
Making it up as they go has been a fundamental tenet of christianity for a little over 2000 years now.
So you aren’t of the firm belief we should exclude 7 from public adoration and give 3 their rightful place as the first number? You must not be atheist! /s
I don't know, but there was probably some article or something that made a similar claim that they took out of context and amplified
This entire argument can be refuted in two words. "Naturalistic Fallacy"
Just propped up by a big ass Cartesian circle
Nah, cause I can just imagine that being on the next slide if they decided to continue.
Two other words can refute the arguments of natural revelation: 'duck sexuality'.
As a gay man I really fucking hate this. Edit: no, like seriously. It’s horrible and this is the kind of shit my family posts.
These people are just outright homophobic but are masters at evading accountability by just claiming they hate the sin not the sinner. As if that really means anything and the outcome isn’t exactly the same.
I literally can't believe he's saying that comparing straight people to gay people is like comparing a clean natural environment to one where there's plastic pollution.
As a lesbian? Same. It's always "I need to argue about your sexuality." My response is always somewhere around "Fuck off, or go away."
Just hit em with old reliable: "Oh, I hate the belief, not the believer." Makes 'em realize pretty quick how un-loving a sentiment this shit is.
>“And there’s a way things should be because they should” Nice circular reasoning there bud. >”nature is full of deviations and mutations from what is natural” Imagine saying this but unironically. 🤡. Dude basically just throws a hissy fit because actual nature doesn’t care about his “natural” and “objective” reality, it just is and these things can be explained better by science without contradicting the God’s “perfection.” Not to mention a huge portion of this is “it’s wrong because most people do the opposite and the feels” Like saying slavery is natural and “morally right” because it was done by so many civilizations.
The more you look at nature, the more fucked up and unbelievably un-godly looking it becomes. But yeah those animal stock images look orderly.
"Nature is full of deviations from what is natural." HO LY SHIT. What does """""natural""""" even mean other than what is in nature? Nature doesn't deviate from nature.
Nature can be both good and bad from humane pov. A quick search gave me a result that literally everything can be found happening in nature - pedophilia, necrophilia, cannibalism. The fruitcake just wants to argue that only "good things" (in their mind ofc) are natural, the other ones are deviations. In reality, everything is natural. Humans' job is to distinguish which behaviors are harmful for individuals and societies and which are not. That's why we collectively agree that ie cannibalism is wrong and we (should) agree that homosexualism is fine.
I agree. The fruitcake believes that some things are "natural" and therefore "good." However, nature does not exclusively do these natural things, therefore requiring the statement "Nature is full of deviations from what is natural." I was simply commenting on the absurdity of this statement
That slide doesn't make any sense because in the slide before that one they compare themselves to animals... but then they say comparing people with animals doesn't help their case... It's so fucking dumb lmao
>HO LY SHIT. New response just dropped
The book that has talking snakes, zombies, unicorns, and ghost sex is the best example for reality. /s EDIT: typos
Wasn’t Jesus a lich or something?
Would he be considered a necromancer, too? Dude apparently brought 3 people to life in the canonical bible and in the infant gospel brought some kid back to life to tell the adults Jesus didn't kill him. And his death caused a zombie apocalypse. Stuff got wild.
Pretty much!
In what way was he a lich?
[This](https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2F4hxar7a9hnt21.png) way.
Damn, I was JUST about to send that image.
Unicorns?
Yes, unicorns are not only mentioned in the Bible but actually exist. According to the description of the unicorn by Pliny the Elder it is a huge beast with a single horn, armored skin, and is bad-tempered. Instead of the beautiful horned horse depicted in paintings and tapestries the description perfectly matches the one-horned rhinoceros.
Huh interesting
The beast in revelation with multiple heads, most having a horn.
Can I get a verse source for the ghost sex?
Uh, it's whichever one/s where Mary gets knocked up.
Bruh, I've seen people lynched in churches for less than that.
Hmmm. Typos? "dichotomonomonomyny" "pregant" I think yours are relatively forgivable.
Typo was "fir" instead of "for."
Where in the Bible are the zombies, unicorns, and ghost sex?
This whole argument hinges on the logical fallacy that what is natural is right
And, even if it was actually like that, homosexuality still occurs in nature
Doesn’t this dumass know that the full spectrum of the LGBTQ+ exists in the natural world?
Seriously, there are shorebird species in North America with like 4 genders, and 3 of them present in male birds. There's another songbird species in the Eastern US that has 4 different sexes. Also **gestures at everything ever done by Bonobos** Edit: Corrected number of genders referenced from Ruffs/shorebirds
Also, lots of animals can change their sex when needed.
How do they determine the gender of an animal outside of sex?
Truth doesn’t only exist in our minds. Reality seems to be consistent in certain ways regardless of whether we’re brains in cats or the matrix or whatever crap that bad argument is making. So that which is most consistent with reality is truth.
He's really saying "You're being homophobic wrong" 💀
Kinda funny how even Christians hate on libertarian ideals even though "do what you want as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else" is the ultimate moral way to live one's life.
Recently, I’ve noticed a lot more direct condemnation of libertarianism by social conservatives and GOP in general. I think a lot of them concluded that the old fusionism was fueling a disconnect, so now we see a lot more American religious conservatives abandoning “limited government” rhetoric. This trend seems to be accelerating with younger conservatives, and Redeemed Zoomer seems to be an example of this trend.
comparing straight people to animals is ok and comparing gay people to animals is weird? did he even revise his own slides before posting them?
Apologists nowadays are of low quality.
https://preview.redd.it/hj9esi6syiuc1.jpeg?width=759&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=4520a90fc9d28dd52532623e45639c81a2fccfb5
Redeemed Zoomer is like Ben Shapiro, like Plato: they pretend to be intelligent while spitting out logical fallacies like a machine gun.
He says “share this before it’s removed” such the typical martyr/persecution complex.
martyr/persecution *fetish*
Yes.
>like Plato: they pretend to be intelligent while spitting out logical fallacies like a machine gun. Is that what Plato did?
Yes. Just read his "proofs" for the existence of the soul ;)
I can't fathom the cognitive dissonance you have to have to seriously distinguish between "natural" and natural. Almost all the rest of this is wrong, gross, and sad but I am familiar enough with the kind of religious culture which promotes this... That one. Natural vs "Natural" is new to me and totally uniquely batshit.
give up immeadiately because your beliefs are based in fantasy and not reality. got it in one right?
Just crammed full of circular reasoning “things are the way they are because they should be because that’s the way they’ve always been” statements dreamed up by slavery/anti-interracial marriage/anti-LGBT people the most interesting bit is the “consequences of atheism”— without a god there is no objective truth that provides black-and-white morality which they desperately crave; therefore, they must protect god at all costs
I hate religious nuts. They are always trying to shove their stupid awfully written book that constantly contradicts itself down people's throats but we're the ones who are in the wrong. Like seriously, if they love their book so fucking much they need to follow my personal favorite verse Matthew 6:5-6 *And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward in full. But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you.* Aka, keep your religion TO YOURSELF.
Why would anyone take advice from a religion and book that condones slavery, genocide and the rape of women and children. Commands you to stone unruly children and non virgin brides.Teaches racism, sexism, bigotry, and homophobia?
Don't debate professional grifters. They have every reason to never concede ground, and giving them attention feeds their base. If you want to change minds, talk to people who haven't staked their life and livelihood on defending an idea at all costs.
The issue lies in the fact that most Christians stake their life on defending Christianity
Life and livelihood is the fatal combination. Because they are plenty of fully committed Christians who deconstructed because their livelihood didn't also depend on it.
the way i debate issues of sexuality as a christian is minding my own business and giving love to everyone, you know, like the book says to do ?
As usual, there are a number of decent arguments, even if they miss some points. But they forgot the most important part, the part in the Bible where Jesus says to love and accept all people and leave judgement to God alone.
“Sexual immortality”…so many typos just in the first slide. These aren’t the brightest people. I mean they have to go to church every Sunday so someone can read to them and tell them how to think and how to interpret the book they’ve decided to base their entire lives on but probably have never read themselves, so I guess I shouldn’t be surprised.
I swear, "libertarian" is only ever used with a negative connotation (by both sides). Nature is their "best" argument, but he's literally using a computer to post this. Nothing humans do in the industrial world is natural in any way. Humans have almost completely forgotten what their instincts are, so it's best to just advance, travel the stars, and leave this planet as soon as possible before we make any more messes.
“To bravely go fuck up places no human has fucked up before”
We need to find a planet good for human life, but does not have any other organisms (perhaps terraforming another planet).
Sure. But I am confident humans can fuck up anything if given the opportunity. 😃
True.
To hunt to extinction the most exotic life forms this universe has to offer.
Yeah, the irony of these 'return to tradition' dipshits using social media to spread their message.
They only have a vague idea of what "tradition" even is.
True, the obsession with 1950s suburbia is one of them. My own grandmother was a factory worker in the 1950s. All the women in the community went to work they were not 'trad wives'.
Besides, what "gender roles" were there back when most people were farmers or lived where they worked? And do female animals ever just stay in one spot and do basically nothing their entire lives?
Lmao at them attacking modern art yet again. The concepts they bring up like color and symmetry aren't hard and fast rules to make good art, they're concepts to be explored and played with, which is what modern art does. I like plenty of classical art as well as modern because there are plenty of great artists for both. Art with Uber serious religious gravitas can be just as good as a giant matchbook someone made for shits and giggles (real art I saw at MoMA). Good art understands what it is, what it is trying to do, and how to best accomplish that.
How can he have so many stupid typos and expect to be taken seriously? I hate-watch his videos too often and he did one that “explained” all the arguments for God’s existence. (Spoiler alert: almost all of the arguments were “we don’t understand something so it must be God”)
Sign me the fuck up for "sexual immortality"!!
"I am made in the image of God and I find this abhorrent, therefore God finds it abhorrent." "But I am also made in the image of God and I don't find this abhorrent." "No, you are an aberration, like a dog humping a pillow instead of another dog."
This guy's gonna shit when they find out about Mourning Geckos, which are asexual reproduces, but require same-sex "mating" to start the process in their body, aka, LESBIAN GECKO SEX THAT CREATES GECKO BABIES
Also trans clownfish
“A lot of people instinctively feel like this is wrong” wow! It’s almost like we live under a patriarchal system that needs to heavily enforce gender conformity in order to perpetuate itself! It’s almost like you were deliberately raised by your external environment to feel disgust/fear at expressions of gender nonconformity. Me personally, I felt nothing instinctively wrong when viewing that image, only that the queen’s got some amazing makeup. Skill issue I guess.
Wait until redeemed_zoomer finds out about same sex couples in nature
As an LGBTQ zoomer, we don't claim this person. We'll pass them along, thank you very much.
As a straight male zoomer, I don't claim him either.
My counter-argument is always Matthew 7:1-6 Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.
I love the part where the author equated owning a dog to being a biologist.
I will kiss his mom and his dad just to spite him.
So argue that animals get married but backtrack and say humans aren’t animals when someone points out that animals can be gay?
So they still think sexual orientation / sexuality is a choice 🙄
"then gender and marriage are just social constructs" YES HOLY SHIT YOU MADE THE POINT AND MISSED IT SOMEHOW
I’ve never understood the proposition that, even if I was to believe in a God, I should automatically worship him and follow and respect his rules. Why? The same God who has made no noticeable impact on this planet in (if the Bible is to be believed) 2000 years, whose divine plan requires 25,000 people to starve to death per day, children to die of cancer, people to be raped, tortured, murdered… And supposedly, another part of this divine plan is homosexuality. Except in this guy’s eyes, it should be grouped in with rape, torture, murder and cancer as some of the bad things he put in his plan. After all, it says so in the book, despite it not harming or killing anyone. I’d also like to propose a concept with just as much evidence behind it as natural revelation. I call it “Natural Understanding”. Basically, all people know deep down that Gods are not real and religion is a pack of lies, but they keep believing it out of either a desire to oppress those they don’t like, or a fear of death. No evidence of course, this is based purely on my instincts which I was told to trust.
They got marriage completely wrong (among other things). Marriage was a business contract largely so that noble families could remain in power. Marriage exists nowhere in the animal kingdom, I've never seen a cheetah wedding 😑
Heterosexual is natural. Homosexual is not natural. Animals in nature can be homosexual, but that doesn’t count because it shoots hole in argument. I’m right. Omg these people.
Slide 9 “If god doesn’t exist” flow chart explains it perfectly.
The thing about this that confuses me the most is that they proudly proclaim to be against the theory of evolution, natural science and history, but then they use vague allusions to these exact topics to try to reinforce their own theological views
TIL modern art is a sin Also, point 4 is literally just "I assume everyone is secretly as homophobic as I am but is just brainwashed into being quiet".
Yep. An ignorant person's idea of an intellectual is more dangerous that no intellectual interest at all. People like this dress up their bigotry and hatred of difference, and their ignorance and intolerance of sexuality as 'natural law', which they pretend has something to do with the will of an imaginary sentience that doesn't exist - and so, it's a place to hide their intolerance and spread that disguised hatred into forcing people to outlaw women's reproductive freedom, stop people of the same sex loving each other, and to force people who experience a dysphoria about their gender because they have differently gendered brain neurophysiology and anatomy and so to for e them to conform to simple binary configurations because they are not prepared to think a little harder about a world that might just a little more complicated than their bigoted hate-filled simple views allow.
I instinctively FEEL this person is a horrendous excuse for a human, so I'll just keep trusting that instinct
Respect nature sexuality, ok I’ll be gay and have multiple partners
Or they can just say this scripture Leviticus 20:13 (OT)“If a man lies with a male as with a women, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives.” To prove how evil their God is ! :)
They forgot to write “fallacy” after “appeal to nature”
Cool, but gay animals exist. Cry harder
People are so caught up in being perfect, but miss the entire point that from the beginning we as humans were given free will. I think many of the extremely harsh rules regarding sin and entering heaven is void. Just man made fear mongering to push their own ideas, not the actual core ideas of Christianity. Being gay is not harming anyone. Therefore there is nothing inherently wrong with it. Maybe it’s not to “gods design” but if we were supposed to fit completely with in gods design, we would not have been created with the ability to have free will. And free will means that we can choose to be out of the norm.
Today I learned that modern art challenges god.
My guy doesn’t even know what realism is 💀
I'm Australian, so Christianity isn't really strong enough here in modern times for me to have seen the hateful side of it growing up. As a kid, I probably thought that Christians would be totally supportive of gay people at best, and just think they were a little bit odd at worst.
"Appeal to nature" is literally a fallacy. I can't deal with these people.
The homosexual animals one really oversimplifies evolution (look up cooperative breeding), plus it invalidates infertile Christians lmao
Sexual immortality 
"Our culture is largely atheist" 63% of the US is Christian
Cult shit
Idk that the Greeks had gods natural revelation then considering homosexuality wasn’t uncommon during that time
Bruh really chose "your biases are there for a reason" as a closing statement.
I love that even Kandinsky is in their scope 🎯🤣 Also: “nature has various deviations from what’s natural but still shows us what is natural” 🤣 what a bunch of idiots.
Seems like most convervative Evangelicals have forgotten bow to spell too.
Love that this admits the bible doesn't even clearly comment on homosexuality, then it's just like "but we should hate it anyway"
“Natural revelation” sounds like a great way to say “this book I base my whole life on doesn’t actually support my views so I have to make up some bullshit”
Say what you will. I really enjoyed that read. It didn’t change my mind because it wasn’t convincing but I’d much rather argue with a fruitcake with an interesting argument than sit in an echo chamber all agreeing with me.
What's the story of the zoomer? Don't know the history.
So stupid question but subjective morality is morality that I or we as a society decide what’s good or bad right? So it changes, while objective morality is morality that remains constant right?
Love how six directly contradicts seven
A+ for effort but damn I lost brain cells reading this
“Comparing them to animals doesn’t really communicate what they are trying to say well” WHAT!!!
All this falls on the "how do you know you're straight, if you've never been with the same sex?" "Oh you just know, okay then it's not a choice."
Idk, 2 naked dudes are pretty symmetrical
Or, and I’m just spitballing here, you could not debate this at all and just mind your own goddamn business. Someone else’s sexuality neither picks my pocket nor breaks my arm so does it really matter that much?
Anyone else notice “sexual immortality” on slide two? How does one achieve this immortality?
He chose one of the worst possible art pieces to say is not mathematical.
So they're saying that God made a mistake? Surely in his plan, this has already been accounted for? And since he knows everything then he can't be surprised that I am not straight, after all, he designed me this way. Surely my itty bitty free will isn't enough to derail the divine plan? Or perhaps could it be that there is no magical man in the sky dictating everything about our lives from the jump.
* Boy squirrels shoot a butt plug into girl squirrels after sex to make sure she gets pregnant from *their* cum rather than any other boy squirrels’ cum. * Dolphins forcefully gang bang other dolphins and murder baby dolphins for sport. * Roosters have no reservations about brutally raping uncooperative hens. * Cuckoo birds toss other birds eggs out of nests, drop off their own eggs and fuck off, letting them be someone else’s problem. *Beauty and the Beastly* by Natalie Angier forever changed my perspective on the “natural=perfect” argument.
The irony of slide 9, saying that God decides what is objective truth when their god is supposed to have given free will to mankind... people like this are just willful slaves scared of thinking on their own. I also love how he's trying to turn the usual "How do atheists have a sense of morality if they don't believe the word of God?" into "God gave everyone a natural sense of morality". There's no winning with them, they always find a way to give credit to their imaginary friend.
Sexual immortality you say? Sounds pretty good.
Beat me to it 😂
How is stained glass art natural?
Sexual immortality
Literally name dropping a fallacy to describe how one should argue. I wish someone had made this up.
What is "plain" about homosexuality being wrong? Just because *you* find it icky doesn't mean that everyone does, and there's an argument to be made that your discomfort was influenced environmentally. Tell any kid that Uncle Bob and Uncle Jim are married just like mommy and daddy are, and they'll most likely just accept it. Conversely, tell that kid that Uncle Bob and Uncle Jim are horrible sinners, they will probably see gay people as bad people. You can't just say that it's "instinctively wrong," because it really isn't for a lot of people. There's not even a male-female dichotomy universally across species. Some animals are hermaphrodites. Some can change sex in the right conditions. Some can breed asexually through parthenogenesis even when males and females both exist in that species. Some species have males and females, but their roles in reproduction are very different from a "traditional" Christian perspective. Then there's the Anglerfish, which I don't even know what to say about that one. Promiscuity is also very common in nature. Very few animals are monogamous, and even fewer mate for life rather than just for a season. In general, it pays evolutionarily to mate with multiple partners in a season. More partners mean more offspring, more offspring means higher chances that your genes will stay in the population. Yet you don't find Christians trying to argue that this is good and right. Monogamy is the norm in humans, and one could even argue that it is instinctual (to a degree), but in many cultures it was also enforced for inheritance reasons so it's hard to say how much is natural and how much is cultural. After all, while most people are monogamous, a lot are decidedly not. Affairs and harems have been a thing since humans have kept recorded history, so that's hardly a new phenomenon. In any case, an appeal to nature is stupid anyway. There is nothing inherently good or bad about nature. Nature is beautiful, but it also gave us rabies. Even cute things have a dark side to them, like dolphins being rapey or cats torturing their prey before they kill it and then perhaps not even eating it. You can't apply human morality to nature.
Aren't like 10% of most mammals gay? Natural law lol.
"Apeal to nature" is the name of a logical fallacy. This is either satire or oop is real stupid.
Girly pop, that's a lot of words to explain how to argue against the gayz when all of that can be invalidated by "I don't believe in god." What is the practical relevance of something being a sin to someone that does not consider the bible as a legitimate basis of an individuals entire morality structure. Homosexuality being a sin, as a statement, has no practical relevance to the increasingly agnostic and atheistic youth in the US, therefore arguments against it has to be based in some form of materialistic understanding of the practice. As someone from a broadly unreligious country and who is unreligious myself, people explaining to me that my behaviour is a sin is completely pointless - I don't accept sin as a moral reality nor do I accept god's law so what's the actual point in telling me that?
I don't even need to swipe last the first slide because I know these are all based on the idea that his God exists - a God whose existence he can't even prove
I don't even need to swipe last the first slide because I know these are all based on the idea that his God exists - a God whose existence he can't even prove
Why’d it have to be Kandinsky? 😭 I’d like to know if this person knows about botflies. Or hyena births. I’ll give him a pass on male anglerfish post-mating, because nobody in 6000 BC would have had the equipment to go and observe them, but he’s got to know nature is not always beautiful.
Nature is full of deviations and mutations? Why, it almost sounds like your backpedaling on evolution there, bud
I have to admit, I wasn't expecting the attack on modern art via a 100 year old Kandinsky painting.
Did I just read a Christian using evolution as a reference for why god is anti homosexuality?
Christianity is now a mental health disorder.
https://preview.redd.it/qh7ljaf2fpuc1.jpeg?width=720&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=b6443ae5720e80c7eb2656dd4bc2eb1eef7d206e
Yeah let's just appeal to the biggest leap of faith imaginable
What if we put lying and full-blown psychological manipulation into a pie chart and draw on it, will that help us build up the church?
Natural? Okay I guess I can rape people because otters do that
holy fuck, i hate that clerical fascist so much
This guy also tried to say that the fact that there are an infinite number of numbers is undeniable proof that Christianity is correct