Yeah. It’s all in the distant past. All behind us.
I seem to recall a person in this discussion saying I ought not to focus on crimes in the 1940s, 50s and 60s, as they were too long ago and far away.
My examples of Christian persecution and violence against queer people were all drawn from the last 10-20 years.
I really don’t know what you’re point is anymore. Is it that atheism/science is an extant threat of the same magnitude as current religious conflicts and persecutions? If not, what are we talking about?
You cannot possibly be this dense. That’s what you cherry pick from this long thread to defend against a debilitating sarcasm attack?
It does strike me that it really gets to the heart of the thread it started in, namely that (1) people in general have no goddamned 
idea what atheists actually are and (2) it’s goddamned 
obvious that conflating liberals with atheists is dumb as hell
Often our discussions wander. It is easy to lose the general idea. I maintain that the threat posed to the weak, the poor and the unpopular are greater from people of science and enlightenment than from those of religion.
This is shown by recent world history. Of course hatred and destruction can come from both sorts and both deserve watching.
Funny then that the most equal countries in Europe are the secular ones and the most religious are the ones turning to fascism to maintain their bigoted restriction on individual choice.
Ah, it’s a kind of bold sociological/historical study. Enlightenment was all wrong, who new?
(I’m also beginning to fear that his stay in Saudi-Arabia might have messed up your radar)
Starting with his eyes. Saudi-Arabia is not exactly kind to the weak, the poor or unpopular.
Right. What about gay people specifically, today?
Can you provide a concrete example of such a threat? In what way is science being used to oppress the weak, poor and unpopular? Do you consider modern secular views on religion to be that threat, or something else?
Or the opposite: those who think they have nothing to fear, relatively speaking that is, from the religiously intolerant are less likely to have second thoughts about working in those places.
(May I say you have brought us back to the main idea. I thank you.)
Do you figure the destruction of an entire generation of Gay people will come about because of science or because of religion?
Already science has given us the ability to ensure imperfect people are not born. Imperfect might mean female, deformed, intellectually challenged or whatever. Soon parents will be able to ensure they will not have a Gay child.
Fuck you.
I had expected something better from a person of your intellectual standing.
So anyway, when fewer and fewer Gay children are born, maybe 10% of the present number, will you blame science or religion?
This is all a dumbass anti-abortion thing? 
Yeah, let’s pit science for letting bigots get rid of the unborn and ignore widespread religious persecution of the living. You really are a sad, old man.
No, thank you for asking.
We must fight secularists that support gays rights today, and support the religious who oppose them, so that we can avoid the secularists from gaining the upper hand wherein they will show their true colors as even more homophobic than the boy buggerers who are the standard bearers of the anti-gay movement today.
What a horrible thing to say.