CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
You can share this debate in three different ways:
#1
#2
#3
Paste this URL into an email or IM:
Click here to send this debate via your default email application.
Click here to login and CreateDebate will send an email for you.
To All You Bible Thumping Bigots !
My Home state of Pennsylvania legalized gay marriage, face it you guys are losing, give up, America is no longer in the hands of Merican bigots, Whoohoo!
Congratualtions of America, but if you think we are close to winning anything you are very wrong. Only 21 of the 96 countries (colonies not included) allow gay marriage.
I realize the ... really awkward mistake I made. I didn't mean to say congratulations of America. I'm not even sure what I was thinking when I wrote that. But .. yeah
I was going on a tour to Philadelphia when suddenly a gay parade appeared. No joke. I was riding in a horse and buggy when the horseman says " This shit didn't flush when I was a kid" and it was the best part of the trip. I really don't care. If you Pennsylvanians want this, then congratulations.
Why do you think gay marriage is a good thing. Why should our modern times be expected to allow gays. Your statement didn't show why gay marriage is a good thing. Look at the posts of the people against it. They took some time to show thier point of view and explain why. All this side has done is support gay rights for no reason.
Like I said, I can't believe this is an issue. I didn't bother to dispute anyone because this is basic human rights, the right to allow legally consenting people to just be with each other, or at the very least for anyone not involved, to not be concerned. I ask you personally if you're not some troll, why do you care that gays can or cannot get married. I can tell you already I care because if we allow them to stomp on their rights, it'll only be a matter of time before they try to stomp on my rights.
First of all, I think freedom is already demenishing since we are constantly losing our capitalist roots, but that is another topic.
Second of all, you think because our side is focused on it was a sin so it wasn't so great. Avoiding sins is the main goal of one of the world's biggest religions.
Third of all, why are you bringing up other debates in this one. Inmaterafact, if you made such great discussions there, how come you decide to support it less here?
First of all, I think freedom is already demenishing since we are constantly losing our capitalist roots, but that is another topic.
Why is your solution to make sure we have less freedom? If you are so concerned about losing our capitalist roots, why are you fighting against the freedom of homosexuality? You don't make any sense.
Second of all, you think because our side is focused on it was a sin so it wasn't so great. Avoiding sins is the main goal of one of the world's biggest religions.
No, what I am saying is that saying the word sin doesn't automatically make your position make more sense or your actual argument any better. In fact, it makes less sense. You are complaining that the government isn't violating the constitution to appease you. The decision by Pennsylvania does not change your ability to avoid sins. Plus, it is hard for us to take you seriously when you only want to avoid one sin, but are perfectly fine with all other sins.
Third of all, why are you bringing up other debates in this one. Inmaterafact, if you made such great discussions there, how come you decide to support it less here?
This isn't even a debate. This is a drama post a guy put up to attack you. It was never meant to be a discussion on whether gay marriage should be legal. If you want the discussion about whether it should be legal go to the place where we discussed if it should be legal. I brought up the other debate to explain to you why these people didn't add their reasoning for siding with the decision.
1. I know not allowing gays to get married means less freedom, but this isn't something I think people should be allowed to do. I and so many other people oppose the idea of gays marring, if it wasn't all ready clear to you. What I was saying that freedom is all ready fading, your gay marriage thing isn't the only thing that's fading away. He is my point, I just don't like the idea of gay marriage that's why I don't support it, but I like the idea of capitalism, that's why I support it.
2. You don't care about the sin of gay marriage, I get it. On the other hand, I think that is a major sin and don't support it. Furthermore, what are all these sins you are blaming me of. You don't know me personally, what sin can you accuse me of on an online profile if you don't know what I do with my life.
3. I know it was an attack just to make Christians mad, but we made it a discussion. It wasn't for people to share their opinions on gay rights, but we are. I don't care if we weren't suppose to argue, we ended up arguing anyway.
1. You can have a bunch of people against gay marriage and still be wrong. What I am saying is that you can't complain about a loss of freedom.
2. How many sins do you feel the same way about. Why aren't you leading rallies against divorce? I am not accusing you of committing sins, only accusing you of not being vocal about other sins. You can be against all the sins you want, but allowing someone else to get married doesn't change what you are against or what you do with your life.
3. I don't quite think you understand what I was talking about. The reasons why we support the decision are: we don't recognize sin (or don't recognize homosexuality as a sin), we believe that the government is not supposed to use religion to decide public policy (because the constitution says so), gay marriage deserves the same protection as straight marriage, homosexuality is natural, we don't want to put restrictions on what people do behind closed doors, and this decision doesn't infringe on Christian rights. There are more reasons, but there you go. Now your sin argument looks flimsy.
You know, I wasn't with you before, but those are some good points. I never though it like that, and if gays want to get married, I have nothing against that. Good discussion, you win.
It is funny, you accidentally hit the dispute button. Next time when you agree with someone you should hit the support button. Have fun debating on here.
Kind of like "There he goes again defending his position for no reason. He thinks he is so much better but he can't give a single reason to defend gays, oh there are the reasons. Well, he does have reasons, that's all I was looking for." Hehe. :)
Lets leave religion behind for a second and look at this from a scientific stand point. Humans are the only animals to pair with partners of the opposite sex, proving that it's not natural. After all, if it was so natural, then why can't gay or lesbian couples produce offspring? If you want to be gay, feel free, but it's none of the governments business anyway, so what's the big deal?
Humans are the only animals to pair with partners of the opposite sex, proving that it's not natural.
Errrr.... no. This is something you can google and find many examples of within the animal kingdom. Mammals, birds, insects even. Here is a start, and if you really care to see your err.
After all, if it was so natural, then why can't gay or lesbian couples produce offspring?
Then women who have passed menopause or people who have had debilitating accidents are by your measures in the same boat. Homosexuals are still biologically able to produce offspring, just not with their partners.
Choosing to have kids or not is fine. There is more to being a couple than producing offspring. It benefits mental health for starters.
As for people with menopause and diseases, that is completely irrelevant. Are you comparing homosexuality to a disease because neither can produce offspring? Diseases and menopause are completely natural occurrences, whereas homosexuality does not make biological sense at all.
Just pointing out your measures (not mine, so no not my comparison. I also said accidents not disease) means older women and folks who had debilitating accidents fall under your measures of couplings that can result in no children from each other.
You failed to back your claim of why it is irrelevant, you just said Diseases and menopause are completely natural occurrences... after I showed you homosexual behavior happens all over in nature in mammals birds and insects. It seems you are not mulling this over.
As for how it fits in biology there are a few leading ideas....but as you first incorrectly stated the behavior doesn't happen elsewhere in nature I would be suprised if you knew about those other ideas let alone consider them.
Here is one competing idea just because. The more children a couple has the higher chance some of their offspring will have homosexual tendencies. It has been theorized that this helps reduce competition between family for potential mates.
Enjoy it now while you can because all sins will have to be paid for eventually. Your choice to be homosexual will only hurt you in the long run after death. But hey, who am I to judge, maybe gay marriage for one lifetime is worth spending eternity in Hell.
I disagree with this side's title. But there is a blatant error in your posting. Pennsylvania didn't legalize anything. A rogue federal judge yet again summarily overruled the will of the people.
It's no surprise really that they are going to legalize it now that it's "acceptable" to society now. I bet that all of the U.S states are going to legalize it in the future. The persecution is coming to America folks and its coming fast. My generation will see it and I'm going to be prepared to stand my ground and stick with what God ordained humans to follow.
Like I've been saying to other people on this site. I'll say it again because clearly a lot of people don't understand or get it. The OT laws, Christians aren't suppose to follow because God gave those rules to the state of Israel. Since God fulfilled the Law of the Prophets we don't have to follow the Law any more and are under the new covenant. Which is to follow Jesus and His commandments.
Just so we're clear- where in the New Testament, exactly, were the restrictions on unclean foods lifted? I mean, did Jesus' salvation extend to shrimp or something?
When Legion was driven into the pigs that drowned themselves, did they die for the sins of all pigkind?
The New Testament doesn't say anything about how a Christian should be killing someone. Why do you ask me how many people, I murdered when you know the answer already? So really asking that question is foolish since you already know the answer to your own question.
Now a man named Ananias, together with his wife Sapphira, also sold a piece of property. 2 With his wife’s full knowledge he kept back part of the money for himself, but brought the rest and put it at the apostles’ feet.
3 Then Peter said, “Ananias, how is it that Satan has so filled your heart that you have lied to the Holy Spirit and have kept for yourself some of the money you received for the land? 4 Didn’t it belong to you before it was sold? And after it was sold, wasn’t the money at your disposal? What made you think of doing such a thing? You have not lied just to human beings but to God.”
5 When Ananias heard this, he fell down and died. And great fear seized all who heard what had happened. 6 Then some young men came forward, wrapped up his body, and carried him out and buried him.
7 About three hours later his wife came in, not knowing what had happened. 8 Peter asked her, “Tell me, is this the price you and Ananias got for the land?”
“Yes,” she said, “that is the price.”
9 Peter said to her, “How could you conspire to test the Spirit of the Lord? Listen! The feet of the men who buried your husband are at the door, and they will carry you out also.”
10 At that moment she fell down at his feet and died. Then the young men came in and, finding her dead, carried her out and buried her beside her husband. 11 Great fear seized the whole church and all who heard about these events.
So i'm to kill you for lying, how many liers have you killed?
Ahh, it's so typical for you and everyone else to cherry pick scripture when you don't understand what happened in the verse. It clearly says in that verse why it happened but I guess, I'm going to have to explain to you because you don't understand.
The reason why Ananias and Sapphira died was because they lied to God. Christian's didn't kill both of them. God took away their lives because they lied not to human beings as it says in the verse but to God. So that doesn't mean Christians should kill people, try again please.
persecution = refusing a groups right to cause harm to others.
You can't dictate how other people live their lives. The state is secular. How can you expect them to make laws that harm other people based on what the book says? We don't believe it. Get over it kid.
I don't know if thats really an accurate description of persecution.
Christians are already being persecuted. Maybe not en masse, or by the majority- and they certainly are nowhere close to an 'oppressed minority' yet- however, the anti-religious agenda is taking things a bit too far. It's one thing to complain about displaying religious paraphernalia on government/public property- that seems pretty reasonable, really. But it's another entirely to object to an individual praying nearby, or wearing a piece of paraphernalia such as a crucifix or skullcap. This does happen. More and more, I see Christian individuals being dismissed out of hand altogether simply for being Christian. I'm well aware that there are other groups who suffer from far more severe and pervasive persecution than Christians, but dismissal of Christian persecution because of this is a clear case of the fallacy of relative privation.
One example: At the company I worked for prior to my current one, the CTO handled all hiring for the IT group. When a position opened, he would go through the resumes that came in, filter them down to a number of candidates. Then he'd conduct phone interviews, narrow it down further, then finally do a handful of in person interviews. Before hiring, though, in addition to background checks et al, he would look the person up on various social media sites. On numerous occasions, I heard/watched him discard applicants who had excellent background and skillsets simply due to discovering that they identified as anything other than atheist/agnostic- he felt wholly justified in this, saying he could not trust the judgement of those who believed in fairy tales. I should have reported him, and I'm ashamed for never having done so- I was more concerned with my employment than I was with principles. In my defense, I never had any kind of evidence anyway, and being on record as having filed charges against an employer damages ones employability in this climate- regardless of whether said charges were justified or not.
It's at a small scale now, but religion in general appears to be on a decline within the US; I expect more severe persecution in the future.
I was pointing out that legalising gay marriage is not a persecution against Christians unless Christians have a right to harm others.
As an atheist I don't have a problem with Christians exercising their religion as long as it does not cause harm to anyone else. My definition of what harm is is very wide though to the point where I'm only happy if Christianity doesn't effect the lives of others at all.
Ah, fair enough. This is what I get for posting arguments when I'm up far later than I should be. The context escaped me at the time. Apologies, thats a pretty shoddy excuse. Should have read the whole exchange with a clear head.
You are making less sense than the patience I have left for your victimization complex.
And really, HOW will Christians become prosecuted? Remember separation of church and state? There will never be a law targeting Christians, and even is atheists become a majority someday (which I seriously doubt will happen), people won't target you to hurt you because you're Christian.
Jesus specifically stated, more than once, that his return will happen before all of his then-current followers died, and THAT was 2000 years ago. HUNDREDS of people have used scripture, "intuition" or claims of revealed truth to say that the Rapture would occur on one day or another and virtually all of those days came and went without even so much as a new war breaking out or supervolcano eruption.
Everyone making these claims, including JESUS himself, has proven wrong for 2000 years. 2000 years worth of you Christians have been waiting for this and never experienced it. There is NO reason to assume that it will happen. When the day finally comes that humans die out, they will all do so for the same reasons, be they Christian, Buddhist, atheist or infant.
My how Christian of you. May I ask though, do you swear? do you follow the law to the t? do you eat prawns and bacon? have you ever lied? have you ever torn someone down because they are in love? If you have done any of those things (which don't say you haven't because we all have done one) then please return to your 2000 year old bible because you would not be following the laws of your lord.
If your God is this great forgiving man then tell me why can he not forgive those who love the same sex? Their love for each other is no different from any other so why should we treat as if it is?
Your religion taught men to treat those around us with respect, care and compassion. He taught us that all man kind is equal, he also taught us that those who live their lives in incompetence will never live a real life. Your religion should not change your views it is merely a guide that was written thousands of years ago. Do we still stone prostitutes to death? No we don't, so why cant you change your views on same sex marriage?
My how Christian of you. May I ask though, do you swear? do you follow the law to the t? do you eat prawns and bacon? have you ever lied? have you ever torn someone down because they are in love? If you have done any of those things (which don't say you haven't because we all have done one) then please return to your 2000 year old bible because you would not be following the laws of your lord.
No, I don't swear because in the Bible it specifically says that you shouldn't swear. I have lied before. Everyone makes mistakes nobody on this earth is perfect. I do read my Bible from time to time.
If your God is this great forgiving man then tell me why can he not forgive those who love the same sex? Their love for each other is no different from any other so why should we treat as if it is?
He can forgive those who love the same sex, but they have to to turn away from that sin and not do it again. If someone continues doing the same sin, God isn't going to forgive them unless they stop.
Your religion taught men to treat those around us with respect, care and compassion. He taught us that all man kind is equal, he also taught us that those who live their lives in incompetence will never live a real life. Your religion should not change your views it is merely a guide that was written thousands of years ago. Do we still stone prostitutes to death? No we don't, so why cant you change your views on same sex marriage?
What you just said about "stoning prostitutes to death" were apart of the OT law and those laws, Christians don't follow because they are for the Jewish people.
Yes we are suppose to treat others with respect, care and compassion but we are suppose to call out sin because Christ told us to do. I'm not going to change my views on same sex marriage because Christ clearly says in the Bible that it's wrong. I stand with what Christ says in the Bible and my views.
He can forgive those who love the same sex, but they have to to turn away from that sin and not do it again. If someone continues doing the same sin, God isn't going to forgive them unless they stop. What horse crap. It is not a sin for me to be bisexual because I didnt even choose to be bisexual.
It depends on what it is really. If you love the same gender it's a sin because that isn't what God ordained humans to be attracted to. That's why he made women for a reason, it was for men.
it makes no sense that a god who sent his son to teach man kind of love and compassion can turn his back on a group of people just because.
God still loves people even though they still mess up but He wants them to change and to turn to God. And not do that specific sin.
Please explain to me my dear LITTERALLY how is homosexuality a sin?
It's not natural and it's now how God wanted us to be from the very beginning. The only reason why there is so many people on the planet is because of man and women.
In the beginning the Creator made them male and female. For this reason, a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh (Matt 19:4, 5).
That verse above doesn't say and man would be united with another man or women with another women. Men and women are meant to be together. If God said that homosexuality wasn't a sin, He would have never condemned it but he did.
Do you use a car sir? Do you use a mircowave? Have you ever been in a plane?
How can you use this as an argument when half the things that humans do in this day and age is "not natural". There are many other species on this planet that are homosexual are they sinners? Will they be sent to hell fire? or does it scare men thinking that some dude may stick his dick in their arse?
I do apologies for my bluntness (and possible rudeness) towards you but I personally fucking despise people who say its wrong. Because its not. Its two people in love doing their day to day things, living a normal life, they go to work they pay taxes. You know what they are exactly the same as you trying to live their fucking lives with out having some dicks judge them.
How can you use this as an argument when half the things that humans do in this day and age is "not natural". There are many other species on this planet that are homosexual are they sinners? Will they be sent to hell fire? or does it scare men thinking that some dude may stick his dick in their arse?
Animals aren't valued as humans are. God created us in His own image and He wants us to follow His rules and commandments. So no animals wouldn't really go to hell because God cares about us humans and we are more intelligent then animals. Animals weren't the ones that sinned and Jesus didn't die for the animals. He died for us so that we can a relationship with Him and also have a chance to believe in Him and go to Heaven.
I do apologies for my bluntness (and possible rudeness) towards you but I personally fucking despise people who say its wrong. Because its not. Its two people in love doing their day to day things, living a normal life, they go to work they pay taxes. You know what they are exactly the same as you trying to live their fucking lives with out having some dicks judge them
No need to apologize. You're the one using that vulgar language not me. I'm not judging them. I'm only restating what someone else said about homosexuality being wrong. It's not judging if I restate what someone else said. If you have a problem with what I say, please take it up with Jesus. Jesus was the one who established that homosexuality is wrong not me. I am only the messenger who is only restating what Jesus said and that is homosexuality is wrong and is a sin.
Animals aren't valued as humans are. God created us in His own image and He wants us to follow His rules and commandments. So no animals wouldn't really go to hell because God cares about us humans and we are more intelligent then animals. Animals weren't the ones that sinned and Jesus didn't die for the animals. He died for us so that we can a relationship with Him and also have a chance to believe in Him and go to Heaven.
It is irrelevant to say animals are a lower value. How do you determine if something is natural. We see homosexuality in animals which is natural. We see homosexuality in humans which is natural. You can't claim the unnatural argument because that would make using a microwave a sin. Is it a sin to use a microwave?
No need to apologize. You're the one using that vulgar language not me.
People apologize when they do something wrong. If she is the one cussing, she would have something to apologize for in your belief system. What you wrote doesn't make sense.
I'm not judging them. I'm only restating what someone else said about homosexuality being wrong. It's not judging if I restate what someone else said. If you have a problem with what I say, please take it up with Jesus. Jesus was the one who established that homosexuality is wrong not me. I am only the messenger who is only restating what Jesus said and that is homosexuality is wrong and is a sin.
First, it wasn't Jesus. Paul is the one who established that homosexuality was bad. Second, we can't take it up with Jesus, so suggesting that is silly. Third, claiming that gay marriage shouldn't be allowed by the US government is not simply restating God's opinion.
It is irrelevant to say animals are a lower value. How do you determine if something is natural. We see homosexuality in animals which is natural. We see homosexuality in humans which is natural. You can't claim the unnatural argument because that would make using a microwave a sin. Is it a sin to use a microwave?
I determine what God says is natural and what isn't natural. A microwave isn't a living. It doesn't have a soul. So using it in this argument is pointless.
People apologize when they do something wrong. If she is the one cussing, she would have something to apologize for in your belief system. What you wrote doesn't make sense.
A lot of people who do cuss in front of me in real life know that I'm a Christian. They automatically apologize because they think it offends me but really it doesn't. That's why I said, "No need to apologize when you're the one using the vulgar language."
First, it wasn't Jesus. Paul is the one who established that homosexuality was bad. Second, we can't take it up with Jesus, so suggesting that is silly. Third, claiming that gay marriage shouldn't be allowed by the US government is not simply restating God's opinion.
Actually it is the inspired Word of God so it counts as what God said. Yes, you can take it up with God if you really want to ask him why He think homosexuality is a sin. What has the U.S government have to do with restating God's opinion?
I determine what God says is natural and what isn't natural. A microwave isn't a living. It doesn't have a soul. So using it in this argument is pointless.
YOU determine what God believes? I am sure God loves to hear that. ;) You using the argument that homosexuality is not natural is pointless if you are going to say that other unnatural things are ok.
A lot of people who do cuss in front of me in real life know that I'm a Christian. They automatically apologize because they think it offends me but really it doesn't. That's why I said, "No need to apologize when you're the one using the vulgar language."
Yeah, repeating what you said doesn't make it make any sense. Maybe if you said no need to apologize to you.
Actually it is the inspired Word of God so it counts as what God said. Yes, you can take it up with God if you really want to ask him why He think homosexuality is a sin. What has the U.S government have to do with restating God's opinion?
You went from it being directly what Jesus said to what Paul was told by God. You misrepresent God's message. This debate was created because the Pennsylvania government recognizes gay marriage. Claiming God doesn't like gay marriage is one thing. Claiming Pennsylvania shouldn't recognize gay marriage is another.
First, this is my first post in about 6 months, so thank you for posting something so egregiously offensive and ignorant that I was inspired to reply to you.
Now.
That's why he made women for a reason, it was for men.
What the actual fuck is telling you that women were made for men? Women, like men, are independent agents that may or may not interact with other independent agents. They may marry men (if they want), cook for men (if they want), work for men (if they want). The key thing is that they can choose, like any other independent agent, to do so; they're not a pack animal to be bartered off and told to do things because others own them.
How kind of your god to make women such that men, in their infinite wisdom and compassion, could love women. And the ways they show their love! Such as the unequal pay, the constant harassment and misogyny, the spousal abuse, the sexual assaults. Because clearly every man deserves a woman to love (and love him back) because that's what God ordained.
It's pigs who think like this -- that women are objects to fulfill their sexual desire, that women have an obligation to fulfill men's desires and wishes -- that cause so much strife in society because no one challenges their view. Please, go up to a women and say "You are mine. Go make me a sandwich" and see if you won't get broken nose.
"It's not natural and it's now how God wanted us to be from the very beginning."
That's false. Unless you believe that the Earth was created 6,000 years ago, then we may have a whole new set of problems. God didn't fucking care. Humans have been around for far longer, and homosexual behavior even longer still.
Let's take intelligent design to be a valid theory (it's not). So don't you think, when God decided to make those final few gene changes in the embryo to make the first few human beings, God would've said -- if he actually cared about homosexuality -- "Hm, I want to make sure none of that filthy homosexual behavior all those animals are partaking in is not done by my perfect creations. I better not give them that gene/inclination because that would be pretty fucked up of me to make someone born that way, and then require them to change the very fundamentals of who they are in order to get into Heaven."
Clearly there are enough human beings on the planet, and homosexuality in no way makes heterosexual couples less inclined to have children. It's not like humans are in danger of dying out because heterosexuals aren't having sex anymore.
So thanks Srom, for being so fantastically obtuse, to bring me back after half a year of absence. I hope some day you won't be such a tool with regards to women and sexuality.
What the actual fuck is telling you that women were made for men?
The Bible.
It's pigs who think like this -- that women are objects to fulfill their sexual desire, that women have an obligation to fulfill men's desires and wishes -- that cause so much strife in society because no one challenges their view. Please, go up to a women and say "You are mine. Go make me a sandwich" and see if you won't get broken nose.
You are blowing what he said out of proportion. It has led to those conclusions, but this guy doesn't mean it that way.
Unless you believe that the Earth was created 6,000 years ago, then we may have a whole new set of problems.
Well, actually his statement is still at least half false even if the Earth is 6,000 years old. Just saying.
"Hm, I want to make sure none of that filthy homosexual behavior all those animals are partaking in is not done by my perfect creations. I better not give them that gene/inclination because that would be pretty fucked up of me to make someone born that way, and then require them to change the very fundamentals of who they are in order to get into Heaven."
His belief system says that God gave us freedom including choosing to partake in gay sex. Lots of people want to sin in other areas and he would group homosexual acts in the same way. Your scenario wouldn't be applicable.
So thanks Srom, for being so fantastically obtuse, to bring me back after half a year of absence. I hope some day you won't be such a tool with regards to women and sexuality.
I am pretty sure this approach won't work on him, hehe.
wow, I didn't even have to read your argument. I read the title of the side you decided to post your argument on. I gotta say, you're not convincing me that you're sincere in your Christian beliefs. Not saying that you have to though.
I am sincere in my beliefs, but of course if I say things like that I get down-voted because people don't want to hear that kind of stuff coming out of somewho who is a Christian. It's no surprise that on this site that if you're an atheist all of you guys gather around and upvote each other and down-vote all the Christians.
That's why this site is mostly biased towards atheists and agnostics.
You hardly ever get downvoted, stop complaining. I am pretty sure 80% of the downvotes you get is from the trolls on here who downvote everybody. I don't know why this one was so bad. You shouldn't have been downvoted here. It might be because you think it is persecution to eliminate persecution. Did you ever think the position that restricting the expression of Christianity being persecution and the restricting of non Christians not being persecution was a bad position to take?
Most of the time, I do. And then I downvote. And then I downvote copy-paste posts or arguments which pretty much say the exact same thing in different vocabulary.