RE: "a religious perspective based on a few thousand years of social experimentation and testing" - it has indeed been that, Bob, and overall, unless one is cherry-picking, it must be said that that perspective has been found seriously wanting.
And yet as theories go, remarkably successful. Far more successful than atheism.
Because the religious perspective tells us about heart warming love-stories about women marrying their rapists and getting taken as booty after war right? Yeah, atheism lacks that.
Quite likely because unlike religion, atheism neither has or seeks a power-base from which to enforce edicts for 2000 years. But are forced achievements really success?
a lot of the comments seem to be geared towards the homosexuality paragraph, i wasted many hours of my youth in bible studies, and the bible does say its a sin. maybe if gay is your thing you might want to find a religion that agrees with you, instead of denying what your 'holy' bible says. idc what your sexual prefrence or religion is, but it seems moronic to claim you follow the bibles teachings when blatantly doing the opposite.
I don' believe that anyone here, Dave, claims to follow the bible's teachings or even wants to - I'm guessing that's what Think Atheist actually means --
i would assume that. yet this is a thread about the pope, which is religion and of course our ancestors 'mother goose' storybook goes hand in hand.
We sometimes tend to wander a bit off-thread - SteveinCO is especially bad about that --
The Pope is a notable official in Catholicism, and in a country like mine, Catholicism remains the largest religious denomination and the largest opposition group to issues such as LGBT rights and abortion. The former is a bit more of a hot topic than the latter.
The fact that I do not believe in Catholicism does not negate the influence Catholicism has on my culture. While even Catholics do not all agree with the Vatican's homophobia, I will continue to disagree with the considerable portion which does.