You should take note of those last lines.
Me rolling my eyes is my reaction to that entire spiel.
You haven't made an argument yours are unbiased either.
I don't really have to. Others have already illustrated that the studies you are holding up are obviously biased. Nothing takes away from that.
If you believe no one should stigmatize eating pork and hope no one does, then you would hope no one holds to Jewish Kosher law.
So by your logic, we should all stigmatize eating pork, or we don't want Jews to exist.
Or we could just say that it's cool if Jews want to hold to that belief, but none of the rest of us are, and we don't want you giving us crap over it or trying to legislate it (or socially engineer it) either.
And doing a god awful job of it that literally scripture I went over just a few hours ago dismantles.
Except it didn't. Those parts of the Bible are still there, and the many different groups of Christians all have different parts of the Bible that they decide to follow or not follow. This is part of why there are so many different groups.
That's your own anti-christian biases showing and replacing my actual words and arguments in your head. I never advocated that or made anything indicating that this is any kind of end goal.
You literally came right out and said it. How do you think you're going to socially stigmatize something without adding a legal aspect to it. Your argument stinks of the way a certain other group likes to try to make end-runs around civil liberties and sees it as perfectly okay because it isn't the government doing it.
Purely to point out it was a basic christian tenant. Given this is a very Christian centric argument, that has perfectly legitimate relevance in order to show where this is coming from directly, and doesn't mean I can now no longer ever use a study as if believing in the bible precludes you from ever believing in anything scientific.
It just illustrates your bias and makes it a pretty tough sell for a secular country.
I asked if it should be present at all. If you are fine with it being present among christians, and you don't ideally hope it to be eradicated, then you are accepting of society having christian values.
It means I am accepting of Christians of having Christian values even if I don't agree with all of them. It helps that some of them actually aren't bad, and that the vast majority of you aren't threatening to kill people who don't share in those beliefs.
That it isn't good anymore than couples who have a threesome.
As long as everyone involved is a consenting adult, what would be wrong with that?
And no, I don't see it as that, as I've said husband and wife and spouses. That's once again you not reading what I write and instead inserting your assumptions about my beliefs.
You have to admit, it's a pretty common viewpoint. My bad if you don't actually share this viewpoint and I just assumed that.