Christianity is a weight dragging all of society down with it

In response to your argument: Firstly, even if we do assume that gay people were pardoned from the death penalty, they were still witnessed and portrayed as criminals and sinners, and the fact they were excluded from society is detestable, and I believe that if people still follow these abhorrent 'rules', then they are affecting society for the worse. This leads some Christians in modern life to believe that all gay people are sinners, and to strictly follow a book that was written in a time when social expectations, equality and principles were very different to what they are today, consequently, the Christians that believe gay people are criminals today are part of the (metaphorical) weight I referred to in the title; they keep us in the times of the bible, preventing, or at least making it considerably more difficult for society to evolve, amending principles and standards to what is right. You then went on to say that the AIDS pandemic would have been less severe if it wasn't for gay men, and while I actually agree with this, it is not a valid reason to justify this religious homophobia because I could say that AIDS pandemic would've been majorly improved if it wasn't for heterosexual couples having intercourse, so yes, the spread of AIDS would be slowed by gay men stopping having sex, but it would also be drastically improved if heterosexual couples stopped having sex. My point is that it is not down to one sexuality, but both. Secondly, I appreciate that gay couples cannot 'naturally' conceive, and this leads to a declining birth rate, however this is not always the case, as increasing numbers of gay couples are getting atrificial conceptions such as off with the help of surrogates, and they also have access, and make use of adoption. I think the question we really need to ask about this point is: "do we really need more people in this world?'. I appreciate that America's birth rate is declining slowly, however I don't believe you should immediately escalate to 'get rid of gay people!' and then use that to justify your point that Christianity teaches beneficial things. There are so many more acceptable, less controversial, convenient solutions to that problem, such as 'have more children?'. Furthermore, assuming that gay marriage will be legalised in all 50 states within the next 5 years, that does not mean Christianity's teachings still don't pose a threat to society. I can fairly reasonably imagine that there would be riots, hate crimes and preachings against gay people and marriage, even when it is legalised. Just because it is made a law, doesn't mean that Christians will suddenly abandon their belief; they will still disagree. I find your sentence about "gay marriage were to lead to milk and honey and dancing unicorns and rainbows" extremely inconsiderate and hypocritical, considering that heterosexual marriages hardly resemble "dancing unicorns and rainbows" and you are clearly mocking my points as well as gay marriage. Now to talk about sexism. Your very opening sentences are teeth-grindingly irrititating, as saying that men were the 'head of the family unit' completely contradicts your first statement, portraying your belief that the bible is not sexist. Saying that "men have a sense of ambition and desire respect and admiration" is completely true, but for ALL members of the human race. These apsirations of respect are not exclusive to men , and just saying that, insults all women, due to the obvious sexism, and some men, due to the fact that you can't classify all men on this generalisation. You then go on to generalise all women, saying that they don't want respect and admiration, when it's clear that everyone in t eWorld wants that, no matter your sex. If your point is that men are more competitive due to their testosterone, then I would agree with you, but even though women lack testosterone levels like men's, it does not mean they don't want respect. Men only 'live for those things' in those times because they are told that's what they do. I respect this quotation about husbands loving their wives, and (presuming that all the men loved their wives) men did still not respect their wives opinions or treat them as equals, but instead as inferior beings. You also seem to have a subtle/not so subtle arrogance around your approach towards talking about the different genders, as you have an aura of self-confidence enveloping you whilst you speak and generalise both sexes, such as when you said "this is not usually the case" and "women are not like that", and, politely, I think you shouldn't assume that you know very thing about all members of each sex. I have also found a recent survey suggesting that '27% of women want mutual respect within their relationship' http://jezebel.com... This is a shocking number, I think you'll agree, and there's no doubt that some Christians still believe that women are meant to be submissive and obedient, and it is these type of people that weigh down society, because they are refusing to move on with society, and they are desperately clinging and obsessing over the past. Finally, I do agree that being in a religious group does make you more charitable, especially Christianity because they preach charitable and selfless morals, however it ultimately comes down to the question 'is it worth the generosity of the Christian church to have people narrow-mindedly clutching on to 3500 year-old social standards?' And I believe that is the question we need to ask ourselves when thinking about this topic. Thanks for reading... Next round :)