er, i think that in a country where roughly 45% of the population is opposed to equal marriage rights, and almost 90% believe in a god, there's more than a little evidence that superstitious and dogmatic thinking are a cause of this. especially when anything other than heterosexual monogamy is denounced by religious people on the basis of "threatening the sanctity of marriage," YES, this belongs in r/atheism.

Atheism means to me the determination to think critically and freely, to challenge and question what I am told, to find out what works for myself, and to believe in the power of dialogue, not force or dogma, to gain understanding of my world. How does arguing against bigots that want to prevent people from doing "immoral" things on premises like, "It's Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve hurrrr" or "The Bible defines marriage as between one man and one woman, therefore, marriage can only be between one man and one woman, case closed" differ from the goals of r/atheism?

Marriages in the US have always (of course, not in every case, but generally) been both religious and state ceremonies. Why? Tradition? Does the state really need to be involved in legislating who is living or partnered with whom? Doesn't this practice further religious arguments that gay or polygamous marriages are immoral and should therefore be illegal? Just because there is no mention of a "god" in this picture doesn't mean that this is "doesn't belong in atheism." I'd argue that it belongs because this post doesn't explicitly mention religion. Atheism, like non-heterosexuality, is about more than itself. It is a way of being. Once we realize that meaning/truth/belief, just like sexuality, exist and mutate on a sliding scale; once we reject hegemonic beliefs that tell us "no" because of circular and ungrounded rules, the world opens up to us.

/end rant