Obviously convincing someone of Atheism is better than convincing them of the acceptability of homosexuality, but that doesn’t mean that the latter is bad. The comparison to swaying an Astrology believer (saying they’re an Aries, not a Taurus) is not apt; OP’s idea is not to trick them using theist arguments, but to point out the intellectual bankruptcy of believing both in tenets A and B. As a few of the others here have pointed out, the way to remove the wooden beam might be by removing it sliver by sliver.
I think a site such as this would offer an excellent resource for Atheists/Agnostics who regularly argue with Christians over this topic; during my own deconversion process, I was greatly aided by the likes of Professor Richard Carrier who did the scholarly work and laid out the arguments for me—it saved me months of time spent researching, reading, and seeking out sources.
One argument, OP, that I hope you address—I heard this from a bartender the other day. “I’m against gay marriage/adoption because a child needs influences from both sexes.” A trite, easy to understand response to this would be wonderful (I’m sure everyone here knows the answer, but I’m trusting that knb will be able to write it with eloquent rhetoric).
I find a better strategy is to argue: “Well, of course I agree with you—” [always say this and nod, it will make them think that what you’re about to say is something they already thought of] “-and of course any good and stable couple is going to ensure that they have a role-model of a different gender. Gay or straight, it don’t matter—gays who prevent the kid from having an Aunt/Uncle figure are as bad as single mothers who hate all men. But C’mon man, honestly, how many gay guys do you know without a platonic girlfriend?”
“Yes.” “But … but … then you have to go through the non-trivial task of finding a married, male-female couple to raise those children!” ”Implementation issue.”
I’m surprised by the number of nay-sayers here.
Obviously convincing someone of Atheism is better than convincing them of the acceptability of homosexuality, but that doesn’t mean that the latter is bad. The comparison to swaying an Astrology believer (saying they’re an Aries, not a Taurus) is not apt; OP’s idea is not to trick them using theist arguments, but to point out the intellectual bankruptcy of believing both in tenets A and B. As a few of the others here have pointed out, the way to remove the wooden beam might be by removing it sliver by sliver.
I think a site such as this would offer an excellent resource for Atheists/Agnostics who regularly argue with Christians over this topic; during my own deconversion process, I was greatly aided by the likes of Professor Richard Carrier who did the scholarly work and laid out the arguments for me—it saved me months of time spent researching, reading, and seeking out sources.
One argument, OP, that I hope you address—I heard this from a bartender the other day. “I’m against gay marriage/adoption because a child needs influences from both sexes.” A trite, easy to understand response to this would be wonderful (I’m sure everyone here knows the answer, but I’m trusting that knb will be able to write it with eloquent rhetoric).
“Should we take children away from single mothers, then?”
Nope, that’s natural, and you can’t help it.
I find a better strategy is to argue: “Well, of course I agree with you—” [always say this and nod, it will make them think that what you’re about to say is something they already thought of] “-and of course any good and stable couple is going to ensure that they have a role-model of a different gender. Gay or straight, it don’t matter—gays who prevent the kid from having an Aunt/Uncle figure are as bad as single mothers who hate all men. But C’mon man, honestly, how many gay guys do you know without a platonic girlfriend?”
I believe this constitutes a textbook exercise of the Light Arts.
Never leave home without ’em!
“Yes.”
“But … but … then you have to go through the non-trivial task of finding a married, male-female couple to raise those children!”
”Implementation issue.”