Bionic Dance repostin of Some things I will not put up with YouTube comments

All comments (120)







Share your thoughts












Top comments









Stream







P Dav1 day ago







This guy says morality is absolute. Then, I say, all of the horrendous acts done by or sanctioned by god in the bible, such as murder, slavery, rape, genocide, cannibalism, and treatment of women as property are absolutely immoral.

Reply
 · 




















BionicDance1 week ago









Reply
 · 
12







Hide replies








Mundus Novus Ordo
1 week ago


+LegendaryAsshole which one



Reply
 · 








1140Cecile
1 week ago


Nicely done, Keight.



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


Thanks! :)



Reply
 · 
2






Lance Zimmerman
1 week ago


You forgot temple. XD Funny how xtians enjoy to blame others for what they are doing. He also does not seem to realize that marriage is a law, not a god thing.
LOL on the lightning.
LOL Faith, he believes in wishful thinking = easy answers that agrees with one's own thinking.
3500 years ago, where did he get that? Also, what rewrite/translation is he talking about? More like centuries.
Good video.
Show less

Reply
 · 
2






Julia Reed
1 week ago


How many times did you have to do that flailing during the smiting before you finally got it right? That awesomely hilarious! I'm still smirking from it.



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


Believe it or not, that took one take.
There were other shots, tho...



Reply
 · 
1






Julia Reed
1 week ago


I applaud you, I really do, I'd probably have a bloopers reel at the end of a video due to ADD tangents, stuttering and my mild lisp



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


Believe me, I've been tempted to make a bloopers vid. :)



Reply
 · 
3






Julia Reed
1 week ago


Oh I'd watch that in a heart beat! 



Reply
 · 
2






Lance Zimmerman
1 week ago


+BionicDance oh you so should make a bloopers video! After all this time you should have lots of good stuff to chose from.



Reply
 · 








VinnyMonster1
5 days ago


+BionicDance A Bloopers vid would go viral! 



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
5 days ago


Well, it'll probably be a few months to gather enough GOOD blooper footage, but I've started collecting some...



Reply
 · 
1






VinnyMonster1
5 days ago


Damn but the struck by lightning bit was funny!  I was half expecting you to end the video with a long fade to black then.



Reply
 · 
1







ThomasTrue5 days ago







Within my own lifetime it was once 'moral' to punish children in school by striking them across the hands with a leather strap or a cane (or across the buttocks with a paddle in US schools) and a man could not rape his wife but was merely exercising his 'moral' conjugal 'rights'.  Go back less than a century and a husband had the 'moral right' to strike his wife with a rod 'no thicker than his thumb' (hence, "rule of thumb").  These 'morals' were based upon Biblical teaching and yet we now look upon them as examples of a barbaric past we have since thankfully rejected.  If this fool thinks that the Bible has 'stood the test of time', then he is so sadly deluded I frankly feel sorry for him.

Reply
 · 
1


















Chris Cunningham1 week ago (edited)







You mean: one man, many wives... :p

Reply
 · 
5







Hide replies








Heiner Lilje
1 week ago


Totaly fine with me. Same as vice-versa, or something in between. Unless someone is forced into it, like in the bible. But besides that, it should absolutly be recogniced under the law.



Reply
 · 
2






Steve Harvey
1 week ago


There are good reasons why this is illegal in all modern Western countries. It causes a lot of crime and problems in society. It shallows the gene pool, hoards women, creates a lot of single men which leads to genocide because they cannot get even a single wife, it leads to going after young girls and child brides, and systematic paedophiles who prey upon children. It also leads to beastiality because young men cannot get mates. Have you never visited Yemen? Saudi Arabia? The Middle East? Ever? It also leads to murder, rape, torture, sodomy, and sadism. http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2012/01/the_problem_with_polygamy.html It damages men, women, and children.
Show less

Reply
 · 








Heiner Lilje
1 week ago (edited)


+Steve Harvey
What the fuck are you talking about? Can a women marry many men in yemen? Can 5 men marry 5 women?
Also, it isnt illegal in any civilised country. Its just not recogniced by the state.



Reply
 · 








Steve Harvey
1 week ago


+Heiner Lilje United States: Polygamy is illegal in all 50 states.
In fact, it's easier just to list the countries where it is legal. Mostly in Africa and the Middle East.
Also, what part about the practice and Yemen as an example of how bad it is to society do you not understand?
http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/09/13/20476580-outrage-over-death-of-yemeni-child-bride-8-on-wedding-night?lite
http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2012/01/the_problem_with_polygamy.html
There is ample research and books, reports from the UN, and a good way to begin to understand is to pick a country where polygamy is legal and look at its index.
This level of ignorance in the 21st century is unacceptable. Polygamy is illegal in its entirety of the Americas from Canada to all South American countries. Illegal in China, Russia, Europe, Australia. You would have a harder time finding countries where it is legal.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_status_of_polygamy
http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2012/05/5338/
"Faced with high levels of intra-sexual competition and little chance of obtaining even one long-term mate, unmarried, low-status men will heavily discount the future and more readily engage in risky status-elevating and sex-seeking behaviors. This will result in higher rates of murder, theft, rape, social disruption, kidnapping (especially of females), sexual slavery and prostitution."
The research is in. Gay people are not a threat to our society, but polygamy is.
Show less

Reply
 · 








Heiner Lilje
1 week ago


+Steve Harvey
What IS illegal in those places is to marry more then one person. Not to live with more then one person in a similar arrangment.
What you brought up is an issue with to less freedom, not to much of it - i.e. only one men and many wives, not both ways or more then 1 of each gender.
Wether the US is civilised of course is up for debate...
Show less

Reply
 · 








Steve Harvey
1 week ago


+Heiner Lilje
Oh did I call the savages civil? My bad. Hahaha! Seriously though please read the research.



Reply
 · 








Heiner Lilje
1 week ago


+Steve Harvey
See, the research is on polygynous societies, i.e. those that only allow one male and multiple females. Of course that will lead to problems, thats obvious.
But to claim that all polygamous/polyamorous arangements would lead to similar results is unwarrented.
Also, i live in Europe. Germany to be precise. Polygamy is perfectly legal unless you somehow have a legal marriage with more then one person. The same appears to be true for most (40 States) of the US.
Read more

Reply
 · 








Steve Harvey
6 days ago


+Heiner Lilje
Yes and I do actually understand the differences you bring up. I knew you were German due to your name.
The problem is the society does pay for its cost and ends up indirectly subsidizing its own costs and detriments to the society.
For example, the FLDS cult does not formally marry, each man has 10 wives and 20 kids all on welfare, and so the state pays for this one man to have more kids then he can afford. In addition, it throws out young boys called the lost boys and then the states have to pay for them also. So everyone pays for these people to spread their inferior shallow genes faster than anyone else.
I'm not talking about 10 people having an orgy. I'm talking about a single retarded male having 100 retarded kids. Causing humanity to devolve.
Show less

Reply
 · 








Heiner Lilje
6 days ago


I fail to see this issue. Quite the opposite actualy. If there are 3, 4, maybe 10 people in a relationship, not only would it increase the diversity of the genpool, but also mean more family ties so they wouldnt have to rely on the state if someone is in a rough spot but on each other. Not allways, but its more likely then in a case where there is just one other party involved.



Reply
 · 








Jackson Heathen
4 days ago


What about 1 wife & many husbands ??? Me & some of my degenerated male friends have double teamed (& even triple teamed) complete willing girls. In fact, I have little interest in fulfilling my traditional male gender role of being monogamous to an overweight stay at home wife. So is there a place in society for my kind of depravity ??? 



Reply
 · 








Heiner Lilje
4 days ago


+Jackson Heathen
Again, i dont think any state recognizes this yet. But thats what i was saying, go for it.



Reply
 · 








Jackson Heathen
4 days ago


Personally, (as long as nobody is underage or trapped in a compound) I think polygamy should be completely legal. In fact (despite popular opinion) I think such relationship are actually more discriminating against the males. Since it's the young men that are expelled from such communities to allow for a surplus of wives.



Reply
 · 








Heiner Lilje
4 days ago (edited)


+Jackson Heathen
Allthough the party im a member off here in germany would want it to be recognised. Not close to the main issue, main issues are things like privacy, corruption in politics and the like. Despite the fact that its still small and regularly bashed by the media (how dare we bring up the constitution anyways), we got a few things done. One thing I was suprised to hear myself where unisex restrooms in public buildings in one german federal state - as not to discriminate against transgenders and the like. Of course, genderspecific ones still are there as well. Also, no costs, just one relabled if there where more then 2.
Show less

Reply
 · 








Steve Harvey
4 days ago


+Jackson Heathen
Having multiple wives is hoarding. Period. It's not good for the women either because it oppresses them. It's not good for the community either because of all the single males it creates who cannot find mates. It's more about power and domination and control and it damages the society financially and criminally.



Reply
 · 








Heiner Lilje
4 days ago


+Steve Harvey
You are a sexist. Period.
Otherwise having multiple husbands would also be hoarding.



Reply
 · 








Steve Harvey
4 days ago


+Heiner Lilje
It is.



Reply
 · 








Heiner Lilje
4 days ago


+Steve Harvey
Okay. Well, i still dont see anything wrong with it. Unless you can back up your other claims with some societies in which neither sex is dominant and either marriages between 1 female and multiple males are similarly common as the opposite in similar proportions or alternativly societies where people marry more then one male and one female for one male and one female each (i.e. 3 males and 3 females)
Show less

Reply
 · 








Heiner Lilje
4 days ago


In fact, the latter couldnt even be called hoarding.



Reply
 · 









Star Laughter1 week ago







"I believe in absolute truth!" He says, while munching on shellfish that was harvested on the Sabbath...

Reply
 · 
1


















Dragnauct Sylvas1 week ago







I love how they want to dissolve the negative connotations of terms used against them. Can't wait till they do it to the word "Faith."

Reply
 · 




















Inannalu1 week ago







Harmful to an ideology is not the same thing as harmful to people.
Behaviors and activities which do the former, but do not do the latter, are perfectly okay ethically, so far as I'm concerned.
In fact, if some behavior or activity harms an ideology which is responsible for much harm to people, so much the better.

Reply
 · 
5


















Charles Kunkle1 week ago







and we're totally ignoring the fact that God does NOT define marriage as one man and one woman...
Otherwise, many of the patriarchs of the Christian religion were violating God's law. Solomon had 300 wives and 700 concubines? Excatly how is that "one man and one woman"

Reply
 · 
2


















themplar1 week ago







Another great video from you. And again very right.
I personally cannot understand the objections people have against gays and gay marriage.  Sadly its not just religious biggots i've been in many discussions with non theist who were still absolute biggots.
Its funny how they Always accuse me of intolerance when i call their arguments absolute bogus and them biggots.  Every time the arguments are.. its not natural.. well obviously it is..  what if everybody turned gay the human species would end... wouldnt happen and if so what? They still can get children by In Vitro.
In the end all their arguments are invalid. and only one real arguments is left over they wont pronounce.
They suffer from imagination and see two gays going at it and they think its Icky. And thats all it is for them.. they think its icky.. well then stop fantasizing about it.
Towards religious biggotry.... i whish it was allowed to smack them around with their own bibles...
Read more (13 lines)
Reply
 · 
1

















DoctorScarlet
1 week ago


Not to mention that there's also the ridiculous idea that gays want to recruit children for the sole purpose of making them gay.
People don't just become gay. Usually a person has a predisposition to being gay, but this is something many people will deny. I myself, a person who grew up in a Christian home, had a predisposition to being pansexual, but it's easier to deny something than to actually own up to it. I'm so glad I grew out of that horseshit though, I'm much happier.
Show less

Reply
 · 
1







Red Cloud1 week ago







You can't just re-define words to fit your own ends. Start doing that all willy-nilly, and you ruin the foundation of language itself, the fact that we can understand it. You can't just destroy an entire language, because you don't like how some of the words coming together make you feel, that's bullshit. Words like Tolerance are there, because we need them, if we didn't need them, we wouldn't have them. 

Reply
 · 




















CarefulAtheist1 week ago







WTF moment @7:05. Gold!

Reply
 · 




















Moor Letoh1 week ago







Epic.

Reply
 · 




















mikeyvester1 week ago







Speaking from experience living in a country where gay marriage has been legal for almost 9 years, I haven't noticed anything different. I would have never known the law changed except it was on the news.  The only reason I can see why a person would be against gay marriage, they are fucking assholes and they like to hurt people.

Reply
 · 
1


















markedfang1 week ago







What if god was true? What would actually change?
He'd still have to come up with good arguments to justify his demands. I would see god as no more then another human with another opinion and unless he can convince me of his case I still wouldn't feel any obligation towards him.
Worship blinds you to attrociaties.

Reply
 · 
2


















Griffin98571 week ago







7:03 I nearly jumped out of my own skin shakes fist at Kate.

Reply
 · 
1







Hide replies








BionicDance
1 week ago


Neener. ;)



Reply
 · 
1






Griffin9857
1 week ago


Any more surprises? :P



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


+Griffin9857 If I told you, they wouldn't be surprises, now would they? :D



Reply
 · 
1






Griffin9857
1 week ago


+BionicDance *Glares*



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


+Griffin9857 *sticks out tongue*



Reply
 · 
1






christopher9000p
6 days ago


Hey, blame "god", not Kate for that one. :P



Reply
 · 









Felhaven1 week ago (edited)







You really shouldn't quote old testament based definitions of marriage while wearing a polyblend shirt.  

Reply
 · 
2

















DoctorScarlet
1 week ago


Gives a whole new meaning to "don't throw stones while standing in a glass house".



Reply
 · 









RRoocckkyy501 week ago







Nice new intro! : )

Reply
 · 
1

















BionicDance
1 week ago


Thanks! I was going for a kind of 80s look. :)



Reply
 · 
1







VGatheist1 week ago (edited)







well the moral argument against abortion is that you are killing a baby. A mother does not have a right to kill her new born baby, so the question then comes about, at what point does a baby have the right to live. But the trick in proving abortion immoral within a real world sense is to prove that the fetus is being harmed. Big argument and I am not going to go through the whole case for abortion, but I just don't find your "if you do not agree with abortion don't have one." as a valid point because the whole reason there is any argument is the attempt to demonstrate that the fetus should have rights. I think the laws for abortion are very close to taking all of this in account. But the Christians idea of egg + sperm = no abortion is just not valid. I think the laws very, but right now all states at least use viability and not birth as the starting point for fetus rights. Allot of laws will use the trimester to determine if an abortion as legal. But you know as a Lesbian you likely will never have to worry about it. If you have a baby, you'd have to choose it.
Read more
Reply
 · 




















Justin Atheist via Google+1 week ago







Love you Bionic!!! 

Reply
 · 



















BionicDance
1 week ago


D'awww, shucks. *blush*



Reply
 · 








Justin Atheist
1 week ago


On a less creepy note. The style you bring and the voice you express is great. Always great to watch one of your videos.



Reply
 · 









TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







@7:05- Nice green cross.  Faded in a bit early but still nice.

Reply
 · 



















BionicDance
1 week ago


Heh. It's a chromakey guide mark to keep CGI elements in place relative to the camera.



Reply
 · 








TheRealPaulMarshall
1 week ago


I figgered.  Still nice given the context.



Reply
 · 





Show more




































All comments (120)







Share your thoughts












Top comments









Stream







P Dav1 day ago







This guy says morality is absolute. Then, I say, all of the horrendous acts done by or sanctioned by god in the bible, such as murder, slavery, rape, genocide, cannibalism, and treatment of women as property are absolutely immoral.

Reply
 · 




















BionicDance1 week ago









Reply
 · 
12







Hide replies








Mundus Novus Ordo
1 week ago


+LegendaryAsshole which one



Reply
 · 








1140Cecile
1 week ago


Nicely done, Keight.



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


Thanks! :)



Reply
 · 
2






Lance Zimmerman
1 week ago


You forgot temple. XD Funny how xtians enjoy to blame others for what they are doing. He also does not seem to realize that marriage is a law, not a god thing.
LOL on the lightning.
LOL Faith, he believes in wishful thinking = easy answers that agrees with one's own thinking.
3500 years ago, where did he get that? Also, what rewrite/translation is he talking about? More like centuries.
Good video.
Show less

Reply
 · 
2






Julia Reed
1 week ago


How many times did you have to do that flailing during the smiting before you finally got it right? That awesomely hilarious! I'm still smirking from it.



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


Believe it or not, that took one take.
There were other shots, tho...



Reply
 · 
1






Julia Reed
1 week ago


I applaud you, I really do, I'd probably have a bloopers reel at the end of a video due to ADD tangents, stuttering and my mild lisp



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


Believe me, I've been tempted to make a bloopers vid. :)



Reply
 · 
3






Julia Reed
1 week ago


Oh I'd watch that in a heart beat! 



Reply
 · 
2






Lance Zimmerman
1 week ago


+BionicDance oh you so should make a bloopers video! After all this time you should have lots of good stuff to chose from.



Reply
 · 








VinnyMonster1
5 days ago


+BionicDance A Bloopers vid would go viral! 



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
5 days ago


Well, it'll probably be a few months to gather enough GOOD blooper footage, but I've started collecting some...



Reply
 · 
1






VinnyMonster1
5 days ago


Damn but the struck by lightning bit was funny!  I was half expecting you to end the video with a long fade to black then.



Reply
 · 
1







ThomasTrue5 days ago







Within my own lifetime it was once 'moral' to punish children in school by striking them across the hands with a leather strap or a cane (or across the buttocks with a paddle in US schools) and a man could not rape his wife but was merely exercising his 'moral' conjugal 'rights'.  Go back less than a century and a husband had the 'moral right' to strike his wife with a rod 'no thicker than his thumb' (hence, "rule of thumb").  These 'morals' were based upon Biblical teaching and yet we now look upon them as examples of a barbaric past we have since thankfully rejected.  If this fool thinks that the Bible has 'stood the test of time', then he is so sadly deluded I frankly feel sorry for him.

Reply
 · 
1


















Chris Cunningham1 week ago (edited)







You mean: one man, many wives... :p

Reply
 · 
5







Hide replies








Heiner Lilje
1 week ago


Totaly fine with me. Same as vice-versa, or something in between. Unless someone is forced into it, like in the bible. But besides that, it should absolutly be recogniced under the law.



Reply
 · 
2






Steve Harvey
1 week ago


There are good reasons why this is illegal in all modern Western countries. It causes a lot of crime and problems in society. It shallows the gene pool, hoards women, creates a lot of single men which leads to genocide because they cannot get even a single wife, it leads to going after young girls and child brides, and systematic paedophiles who prey upon children. It also leads to beastiality because young men cannot get mates. Have you never visited Yemen? Saudi Arabia? The Middle East? Ever? It also leads to murder, rape, torture, sodomy, and sadism. http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2012/01/the_problem_with_polygamy.html It damages men, women, and children.
Show less

Reply
 · 








Heiner Lilje
1 week ago (edited)


+Steve Harvey
What the fuck are you talking about? Can a women marry many men in yemen? Can 5 men marry 5 women?
Also, it isnt illegal in any civilised country. Its just not recogniced by the state.



Reply
 · 








Steve Harvey
1 week ago


+Heiner Lilje United States: Polygamy is illegal in all 50 states.
In fact, it's easier just to list the countries where it is legal. Mostly in Africa and the Middle East.
Also, what part about the practice and Yemen as an example of how bad it is to society do you not understand?
http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/09/13/20476580-outrage-over-death-of-yemeni-child-bride-8-on-wedding-night?lite
http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2012/01/the_problem_with_polygamy.html
There is ample research and books, reports from the UN, and a good way to begin to understand is to pick a country where polygamy is legal and look at its index.
This level of ignorance in the 21st century is unacceptable. Polygamy is illegal in its entirety of the Americas from Canada to all South American countries. Illegal in China, Russia, Europe, Australia. You would have a harder time finding countries where it is legal.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_status_of_polygamy
http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2012/05/5338/
"Faced with high levels of intra-sexual competition and little chance of obtaining even one long-term mate, unmarried, low-status men will heavily discount the future and more readily engage in risky status-elevating and sex-seeking behaviors. This will result in higher rates of murder, theft, rape, social disruption, kidnapping (especially of females), sexual slavery and prostitution."
The research is in. Gay people are not a threat to our society, but polygamy is.
Show less

Reply
 · 








Heiner Lilje
1 week ago


+Steve Harvey
What IS illegal in those places is to marry more then one person. Not to live with more then one person in a similar arrangment.
What you brought up is an issue with to less freedom, not to much of it - i.e. only one men and many wives, not both ways or more then 1 of each gender.
Wether the US is civilised of course is up for debate...
Show less

Reply
 · 








Steve Harvey
1 week ago


+Heiner Lilje
Oh did I call the savages civil? My bad. Hahaha! Seriously though please read the research.



Reply
 · 








Heiner Lilje
1 week ago


+Steve Harvey
See, the research is on polygynous societies, i.e. those that only allow one male and multiple females. Of course that will lead to problems, thats obvious.
But to claim that all polygamous/polyamorous arangements would lead to similar results is unwarrented.
Also, i live in Europe. Germany to be precise. Polygamy is perfectly legal unless you somehow have a legal marriage with more then one person. The same appears to be true for most (40 States) of the US.
Read more

Reply
 · 








Steve Harvey
6 days ago


+Heiner Lilje
Yes and I do actually understand the differences you bring up. I knew you were German due to your name.
The problem is the society does pay for its cost and ends up indirectly subsidizing its own costs and detriments to the society.
For example, the FLDS cult does not formally marry, each man has 10 wives and 20 kids all on welfare, and so the state pays for this one man to have more kids then he can afford. In addition, it throws out young boys called the lost boys and then the states have to pay for them also. So everyone pays for these people to spread their inferior shallow genes faster than anyone else.
I'm not talking about 10 people having an orgy. I'm talking about a single retarded male having 100 retarded kids. Causing humanity to devolve.
Show less

Reply
 · 








Heiner Lilje
6 days ago


I fail to see this issue. Quite the opposite actualy. If there are 3, 4, maybe 10 people in a relationship, not only would it increase the diversity of the genpool, but also mean more family ties so they wouldnt have to rely on the state if someone is in a rough spot but on each other. Not allways, but its more likely then in a case where there is just one other party involved.



Reply
 · 








Jackson Heathen
4 days ago


What about 1 wife & many husbands ??? Me & some of my degenerated male friends have double teamed (& even triple teamed) complete willing girls. In fact, I have little interest in fulfilling my traditional male gender role of being monogamous to an overweight stay at home wife. So is there a place in society for my kind of depravity ??? 



Reply
 · 








Heiner Lilje
4 days ago


+Jackson Heathen
Again, i dont think any state recognizes this yet. But thats what i was saying, go for it.



Reply
 · 








Jackson Heathen
4 days ago


Personally, (as long as nobody is underage or trapped in a compound) I think polygamy should be completely legal. In fact (despite popular opinion) I think such relationship are actually more discriminating against the males. Since it's the young men that are expelled from such communities to allow for a surplus of wives.



Reply
 · 








Heiner Lilje
4 days ago (edited)


+Jackson Heathen
Allthough the party im a member off here in germany would want it to be recognised. Not close to the main issue, main issues are things like privacy, corruption in politics and the like. Despite the fact that its still small and regularly bashed by the media (how dare we bring up the constitution anyways), we got a few things done. One thing I was suprised to hear myself where unisex restrooms in public buildings in one german federal state - as not to discriminate against transgenders and the like. Of course, genderspecific ones still are there as well. Also, no costs, just one relabled if there where more then 2.
Show less

Reply
 · 








Steve Harvey
4 days ago


+Jackson Heathen
Having multiple wives is hoarding. Period. It's not good for the women either because it oppresses them. It's not good for the community either because of all the single males it creates who cannot find mates. It's more about power and domination and control and it damages the society financially and criminally.



Reply
 · 








Heiner Lilje
4 days ago


+Steve Harvey
You are a sexist. Period.
Otherwise having multiple husbands would also be hoarding.



Reply
 · 








Steve Harvey
4 days ago


+Heiner Lilje
It is.



Reply
 · 








Heiner Lilje
4 days ago


+Steve Harvey
Okay. Well, i still dont see anything wrong with it. Unless you can back up your other claims with some societies in which neither sex is dominant and either marriages between 1 female and multiple males are similarly common as the opposite in similar proportions or alternativly societies where people marry more then one male and one female for one male and one female each (i.e. 3 males and 3 females)
Show less

Reply
 · 








Heiner Lilje
4 days ago


In fact, the latter couldnt even be called hoarding.



Reply
 · 









Star Laughter1 week ago







"I believe in absolute truth!" He says, while munching on shellfish that was harvested on the Sabbath...

Reply
 · 
1


















Dragnauct Sylvas1 week ago







I love how they want to dissolve the negative connotations of terms used against them. Can't wait till they do it to the word "Faith."

Reply
 · 




















Inannalu1 week ago







Harmful to an ideology is not the same thing as harmful to people.
Behaviors and activities which do the former, but do not do the latter, are perfectly okay ethically, so far as I'm concerned.
In fact, if some behavior or activity harms an ideology which is responsible for much harm to people, so much the better.

Reply
 · 
5


















Charles Kunkle1 week ago







and we're totally ignoring the fact that God does NOT define marriage as one man and one woman...
Otherwise, many of the patriarchs of the Christian religion were violating God's law. Solomon had 300 wives and 700 concubines? Excatly how is that "one man and one woman"

Reply
 · 
2


















themplar1 week ago







Another great video from you. And again very right.
I personally cannot understand the objections people have against gays and gay marriage.  Sadly its not just religious biggots i've been in many discussions with non theist who were still absolute biggots.
Its funny how they Always accuse me of intolerance when i call their arguments absolute bogus and them biggots.  Every time the arguments are.. its not natural.. well obviously it is..  what if everybody turned gay the human species would end... wouldnt happen and if so what? They still can get children by In Vitro.
In the end all their arguments are invalid. and only one real arguments is left over they wont pronounce.
They suffer from imagination and see two gays going at it and they think its Icky. And thats all it is for them.. they think its icky.. well then stop fantasizing about it.
Towards religious biggotry.... i whish it was allowed to smack them around with their own bibles...
Read more (13 lines)
Reply
 · 
1

















DoctorScarlet
1 week ago


Not to mention that there's also the ridiculous idea that gays want to recruit children for the sole purpose of making them gay.
People don't just become gay. Usually a person has a predisposition to being gay, but this is something many people will deny. I myself, a person who grew up in a Christian home, had a predisposition to being pansexual, but it's easier to deny something than to actually own up to it. I'm so glad I grew out of that horseshit though, I'm much happier.
Show less

Reply
 · 
1







Red Cloud1 week ago







You can't just re-define words to fit your own ends. Start doing that all willy-nilly, and you ruin the foundation of language itself, the fact that we can understand it. You can't just destroy an entire language, because you don't like how some of the words coming together make you feel, that's bullshit. Words like Tolerance are there, because we need them, if we didn't need them, we wouldn't have them. 

Reply
 · 




















CarefulAtheist1 week ago







WTF moment @7:05. Gold!

Reply
 · 




















Moor Letoh1 week ago







Epic.

Reply
 · 




















mikeyvester1 week ago







Speaking from experience living in a country where gay marriage has been legal for almost 9 years, I haven't noticed anything different. I would have never known the law changed except it was on the news.  The only reason I can see why a person would be against gay marriage, they are fucking assholes and they like to hurt people.

Reply
 · 
1


















markedfang1 week ago







What if god was true? What would actually change?
He'd still have to come up with good arguments to justify his demands. I would see god as no more then another human with another opinion and unless he can convince me of his case I still wouldn't feel any obligation towards him.
Worship blinds you to attrociaties.

Reply
 · 
2


















Griffin98571 week ago







7:03 I nearly jumped out of my own skin shakes fist at Kate.

Reply
 · 
1







Hide replies








BionicDance
1 week ago


Neener. ;)



Reply
 · 
1






Griffin9857
1 week ago


Any more surprises? :P



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


+Griffin9857 If I told you, they wouldn't be surprises, now would they? :D



Reply
 · 
1






Griffin9857
1 week ago


+BionicDance *Glares*



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


+Griffin9857 *sticks out tongue*



Reply
 · 
1






christopher9000p
6 days ago


Hey, blame "god", not Kate for that one. :P



Reply
 · 









Felhaven1 week ago (edited)







You really shouldn't quote old testament based definitions of marriage while wearing a polyblend shirt.  

Reply
 · 
2

















DoctorScarlet
1 week ago


Gives a whole new meaning to "don't throw stones while standing in a glass house".



Reply
 · 









RRoocckkyy501 week ago







Nice new intro! : )

Reply
 · 
1

















BionicDance
1 week ago


Thanks! I was going for a kind of 80s look. :)



Reply
 · 
1







VGatheist1 week ago (edited)







well the moral argument against abortion is that you are killing a baby. A mother does not have a right to kill her new born baby, so the question then comes about, at what point does a baby have the right to live. But the trick in proving abortion immoral within a real world sense is to prove that the fetus is being harmed. Big argument and I am not going to go through the whole case for abortion, but I just don't find your "if you do not agree with abortion don't have one." as a valid point because the whole reason there is any argument is the attempt to demonstrate that the fetus should have rights. I think the laws for abortion are very close to taking all of this in account. But the Christians idea of egg + sperm = no abortion is just not valid. I think the laws very, but right now all states at least use viability and not birth as the starting point for fetus rights. Allot of laws will use the trimester to determine if an abortion as legal. But you know as a Lesbian you likely will never have to worry about it. If you have a baby, you'd have to choose it.
Read more
Reply
 · 




















Justin Atheist via Google+1 week ago







Love you Bionic!!! 

Reply
 · 



















BionicDance
1 week ago


D'awww, shucks. *blush*



Reply
 · 








Justin Atheist
1 week ago


On a less creepy note. The style you bring and the voice you express is great. Always great to watch one of your videos.



Reply
 · 









TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







@7:05- Nice green cross.  Faded in a bit early but still nice.

Reply
 · 



















BionicDance
1 week ago


Heh. It's a chromakey guide mark to keep CGI elements in place relative to the camera.



Reply
 · 








TheRealPaulMarshall
1 week ago


I figgered.  Still nice given the context.



Reply
 · 





Show more





































All comments (120)







Share your thoughts












Top comments









Stream







P Dav1 day ago







This guy says morality is absolute. Then, I say, all of the horrendous acts done by or sanctioned by god in the bible, such as murder, slavery, rape, genocide, cannibalism, and treatment of women as property are absolutely immoral.

Reply
 · 




















BionicDance1 week ago









Reply
 · 
12







Hide replies








Mundus Novus Ordo
1 week ago


+LegendaryAsshole which one



Reply
 · 








1140Cecile
1 week ago


Nicely done, Keight.



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


Thanks! :)



Reply
 · 
2






Lance Zimmerman
1 week ago


You forgot temple. XD Funny how xtians enjoy to blame others for what they are doing. He also does not seem to realize that marriage is a law, not a god thing.
LOL on the lightning.
LOL Faith, he believes in wishful thinking = easy answers that agrees with one's own thinking.
3500 years ago, where did he get that? Also, what rewrite/translation is he talking about? More like centuries.
Good video.
Show less

Reply
 · 
2






Julia Reed
1 week ago


How many times did you have to do that flailing during the smiting before you finally got it right? That awesomely hilarious! I'm still smirking from it.



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


Believe it or not, that took one take.
There were other shots, tho...



Reply
 · 
1






Julia Reed
1 week ago


I applaud you, I really do, I'd probably have a bloopers reel at the end of a video due to ADD tangents, stuttering and my mild lisp



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


Believe me, I've been tempted to make a bloopers vid. :)



Reply
 · 
3






Julia Reed
1 week ago


Oh I'd watch that in a heart beat! 



Reply
 · 
2






Lance Zimmerman
1 week ago


+BionicDance oh you so should make a bloopers video! After all this time you should have lots of good stuff to chose from.



Reply
 · 








VinnyMonster1
5 days ago


+BionicDance A Bloopers vid would go viral! 



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
5 days ago


Well, it'll probably be a few months to gather enough GOOD blooper footage, but I've started collecting some...



Reply
 · 
1






VinnyMonster1
5 days ago


Damn but the struck by lightning bit was funny!  I was half expecting you to end the video with a long fade to black then.



Reply
 · 
1







ThomasTrue5 days ago







Within my own lifetime it was once 'moral' to punish children in school by striking them across the hands with a leather strap or a cane (or across the buttocks with a paddle in US schools) and a man could not rape his wife but was merely exercising his 'moral' conjugal 'rights'.  Go back less than a century and a husband had the 'moral right' to strike his wife with a rod 'no thicker than his thumb' (hence, "rule of thumb").  These 'morals' were based upon Biblical teaching and yet we now look upon them as examples of a barbaric past we have since thankfully rejected.  If this fool thinks that the Bible has 'stood the test of time', then he is so sadly deluded I frankly feel sorry for him.

Reply
 · 
1


















Chris Cunningham1 week ago (edited)







You mean: one man, many wives... :p

Reply
 · 
5







Hide replies








Heiner Lilje
1 week ago


Totaly fine with me. Same as vice-versa, or something in between. Unless someone is forced into it, like in the bible. But besides that, it should absolutly be recogniced under the law.



Reply
 · 
2






Steve Harvey
1 week ago


There are good reasons why this is illegal in all modern Western countries. It causes a lot of crime and problems in society. It shallows the gene pool, hoards women, creates a lot of single men which leads to genocide because they cannot get even a single wife, it leads to going after young girls and child brides, and systematic paedophiles who prey upon children. It also leads to beastiality because young men cannot get mates. Have you never visited Yemen? Saudi Arabia? The Middle East? Ever? It also leads to murder, rape, torture, sodomy, and sadism. http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2012/01/the_problem_with_polygamy.html It damages men, women, and children.
Show less

Reply
 · 








Heiner Lilje
1 week ago (edited)


+Steve Harvey
What the fuck are you talking about? Can a women marry many men in yemen? Can 5 men marry 5 women?
Also, it isnt illegal in any civilised country. Its just not recogniced by the state.



Reply
 · 








Steve Harvey
1 week ago


+Heiner Lilje United States: Polygamy is illegal in all 50 states.
In fact, it's easier just to list the countries where it is legal. Mostly in Africa and the Middle East.
Also, what part about the practice and Yemen as an example of how bad it is to society do you not understand?
http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/09/13/20476580-outrage-over-death-of-yemeni-child-bride-8-on-wedding-night?lite
http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2012/01/the_problem_with_polygamy.html
There is ample research and books, reports from the UN, and a good way to begin to understand is to pick a country where polygamy is legal and look at its index.
This level of ignorance in the 21st century is unacceptable. Polygamy is illegal in its entirety of the Americas from Canada to all South American countries. Illegal in China, Russia, Europe, Australia. You would have a harder time finding countries where it is legal.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_status_of_polygamy
http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2012/05/5338/
"Faced with high levels of intra-sexual competition and little chance of obtaining even one long-term mate, unmarried, low-status men will heavily discount the future and more readily engage in risky status-elevating and sex-seeking behaviors. This will result in higher rates of murder, theft, rape, social disruption, kidnapping (especially of females), sexual slavery and prostitution."
The research is in. Gay people are not a threat to our society, but polygamy is.
Show less

Reply
 · 








Heiner Lilje
1 week ago


+Steve Harvey
What IS illegal in those places is to marry more then one person. Not to live with more then one person in a similar arrangment.
What you brought up is an issue with to less freedom, not to much of it - i.e. only one men and many wives, not both ways or more then 1 of each gender.
Wether the US is civilised of course is up for debate...
Show less

Reply
 · 








Steve Harvey
1 week ago


+Heiner Lilje
Oh did I call the savages civil? My bad. Hahaha! Seriously though please read the research.



Reply
 · 








Heiner Lilje
1 week ago


+Steve Harvey
See, the research is on polygynous societies, i.e. those that only allow one male and multiple females. Of course that will lead to problems, thats obvious.
But to claim that all polygamous/polyamorous arangements would lead to similar results is unwarrented.
Also, i live in Europe. Germany to be precise. Polygamy is perfectly legal unless you somehow have a legal marriage with more then one person. The same appears to be true for most (40 States) of the US.
Read more

Reply
 · 








Steve Harvey
6 days ago


+Heiner Lilje
Yes and I do actually understand the differences you bring up. I knew you were German due to your name.
The problem is the society does pay for its cost and ends up indirectly subsidizing its own costs and detriments to the society.
For example, the FLDS cult does not formally marry, each man has 10 wives and 20 kids all on welfare, and so the state pays for this one man to have more kids then he can afford. In addition, it throws out young boys called the lost boys and then the states have to pay for them also. So everyone pays for these people to spread their inferior shallow genes faster than anyone else.
I'm not talking about 10 people having an orgy. I'm talking about a single retarded male having 100 retarded kids. Causing humanity to devolve.
Show less

Reply
 · 








Heiner Lilje
6 days ago


I fail to see this issue. Quite the opposite actualy. If there are 3, 4, maybe 10 people in a relationship, not only would it increase the diversity of the genpool, but also mean more family ties so they wouldnt have to rely on the state if someone is in a rough spot but on each other. Not allways, but its more likely then in a case where there is just one other party involved.



Reply
 · 








Jackson Heathen
4 days ago


What about 1 wife & many husbands ??? Me & some of my degenerated male friends have double teamed (& even triple teamed) complete willing girls. In fact, I have little interest in fulfilling my traditional male gender role of being monogamous to an overweight stay at home wife. So is there a place in society for my kind of depravity ??? 



Reply
 · 








Heiner Lilje
4 days ago


+Jackson Heathen
Again, i dont think any state recognizes this yet. But thats what i was saying, go for it.



Reply
 · 








Jackson Heathen
4 days ago


Personally, (as long as nobody is underage or trapped in a compound) I think polygamy should be completely legal. In fact (despite popular opinion) I think such relationship are actually more discriminating against the males. Since it's the young men that are expelled from such communities to allow for a surplus of wives.



Reply
 · 








Heiner Lilje
4 days ago (edited)


+Jackson Heathen
Allthough the party im a member off here in germany would want it to be recognised. Not close to the main issue, main issues are things like privacy, corruption in politics and the like. Despite the fact that its still small and regularly bashed by the media (how dare we bring up the constitution anyways), we got a few things done. One thing I was suprised to hear myself where unisex restrooms in public buildings in one german federal state - as not to discriminate against transgenders and the like. Of course, genderspecific ones still are there as well. Also, no costs, just one relabled if there where more then 2.
Show less

Reply
 · 








Steve Harvey
4 days ago


+Jackson Heathen
Having multiple wives is hoarding. Period. It's not good for the women either because it oppresses them. It's not good for the community either because of all the single males it creates who cannot find mates. It's more about power and domination and control and it damages the society financially and criminally.



Reply
 · 








Heiner Lilje
4 days ago


+Steve Harvey
You are a sexist. Period.
Otherwise having multiple husbands would also be hoarding.



Reply
 · 








Steve Harvey
4 days ago


+Heiner Lilje
It is.



Reply
 · 








Heiner Lilje
4 days ago


+Steve Harvey
Okay. Well, i still dont see anything wrong with it. Unless you can back up your other claims with some societies in which neither sex is dominant and either marriages between 1 female and multiple males are similarly common as the opposite in similar proportions or alternativly societies where people marry more then one male and one female for one male and one female each (i.e. 3 males and 3 females)
Show less

Reply
 · 








Heiner Lilje
4 days ago


In fact, the latter couldnt even be called hoarding.



Reply
 · 









Star Laughter1 week ago







"I believe in absolute truth!" He says, while munching on shellfish that was harvested on the Sabbath...

Reply
 · 
1


















Dragnauct Sylvas1 week ago







I love how they want to dissolve the negative connotations of terms used against them. Can't wait till they do it to the word "Faith."

Reply
 · 




















Inannalu1 week ago







Harmful to an ideology is not the same thing as harmful to people.
Behaviors and activities which do the former, but do not do the latter, are perfectly okay ethically, so far as I'm concerned.
In fact, if some behavior or activity harms an ideology which is responsible for much harm to people, so much the better.

Reply
 · 
5


















Charles Kunkle1 week ago







and we're totally ignoring the fact that God does NOT define marriage as one man and one woman...
Otherwise, many of the patriarchs of the Christian religion were violating God's law. Solomon had 300 wives and 700 concubines? Excatly how is that "one man and one woman"

Reply
 · 
2


















themplar1 week ago







Another great video from you. And again very right.
I personally cannot understand the objections people have against gays and gay marriage.  Sadly its not just religious biggots i've been in many discussions with non theist who were still absolute biggots.
Its funny how they Always accuse me of intolerance when i call their arguments absolute bogus and them biggots.  Every time the arguments are.. its not natural.. well obviously it is..  what if everybody turned gay the human species would end... wouldnt happen and if so what? They still can get children by In Vitro.
In the end all their arguments are invalid. and only one real arguments is left over they wont pronounce.
They suffer from imagination and see two gays going at it and they think its Icky. And thats all it is for them.. they think its icky.. well then stop fantasizing about it.
Towards religious biggotry.... i whish it was allowed to smack them around with their own bibles...
Read more (13 lines)
Reply
 · 
1

















DoctorScarlet
1 week ago


Not to mention that there's also the ridiculous idea that gays want to recruit children for the sole purpose of making them gay.
People don't just become gay. Usually a person has a predisposition to being gay, but this is something many people will deny. I myself, a person who grew up in a Christian home, had a predisposition to being pansexual, but it's easier to deny something than to actually own up to it. I'm so glad I grew out of that horseshit though, I'm much happier.
Show less

Reply
 · 
1







Red Cloud1 week ago







You can't just re-define words to fit your own ends. Start doing that all willy-nilly, and you ruin the foundation of language itself, the fact that we can understand it. You can't just destroy an entire language, because you don't like how some of the words coming together make you feel, that's bullshit. Words like Tolerance are there, because we need them, if we didn't need them, we wouldn't have them. 

Reply
 · 




















CarefulAtheist1 week ago







WTF moment @7:05. Gold!

Reply
 · 




















Moor Letoh1 week ago







Epic.

Reply
 · 




















mikeyvester1 week ago







Speaking from experience living in a country where gay marriage has been legal for almost 9 years, I haven't noticed anything different. I would have never known the law changed except it was on the news.  The only reason I can see why a person would be against gay marriage, they are fucking assholes and they like to hurt people.

Reply
 · 
1


















markedfang1 week ago







What if god was true? What would actually change?
He'd still have to come up with good arguments to justify his demands. I would see god as no more then another human with another opinion and unless he can convince me of his case I still wouldn't feel any obligation towards him.
Worship blinds you to attrociaties.

Reply
 · 
2


















Griffin98571 week ago







7:03 I nearly jumped out of my own skin shakes fist at Kate.

Reply
 · 
1







Hide replies








BionicDance
1 week ago


Neener. ;)



Reply
 · 
1






Griffin9857
1 week ago


Any more surprises? :P



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


+Griffin9857 If I told you, they wouldn't be surprises, now would they? :D



Reply
 · 
1






Griffin9857
1 week ago


+BionicDance *Glares*



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


+Griffin9857 *sticks out tongue*



Reply
 · 
1






christopher9000p
6 days ago


Hey, blame "god", not Kate for that one. :P



Reply
 · 









Felhaven1 week ago (edited)







You really shouldn't quote old testament based definitions of marriage while wearing a polyblend shirt.  

Reply
 · 
2

















DoctorScarlet
1 week ago


Gives a whole new meaning to "don't throw stones while standing in a glass house".



Reply
 · 









RRoocckkyy501 week ago







Nice new intro! : )

Reply
 · 
1

















BionicDance
1 week ago


Thanks! I was going for a kind of 80s look. :)



Reply
 · 
1







VGatheist1 week ago (edited)







well the moral argument against abortion is that you are killing a baby. A mother does not have a right to kill her new born baby, so the question then comes about, at what point does a baby have the right to live. But the trick in proving abortion immoral within a real world sense is to prove that the fetus is being harmed. Big argument and I am not going to go through the whole case for abortion, but I just don't find your "if you do not agree with abortion don't have one." as a valid point because the whole reason there is any argument is the attempt to demonstrate that the fetus should have rights. I think the laws for abortion are very close to taking all of this in account. But the Christians idea of egg + sperm = no abortion is just not valid. I think the laws very, but right now all states at least use viability and not birth as the starting point for fetus rights. Allot of laws will use the trimester to determine if an abortion as legal. But you know as a Lesbian you likely will never have to worry about it. If you have a baby, you'd have to choose it.
Read more
Reply
 · 




















Justin Atheist via Google+1 week ago







Love you Bionic!!! 

Reply
 · 



















BionicDance
1 week ago


D'awww, shucks. *blush*



Reply
 · 








Justin Atheist
1 week ago


On a less creepy note. The style you bring and the voice you express is great. Always great to watch one of your videos.



Reply
 · 









TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







@7:05- Nice green cross.  Faded in a bit early but still nice.

Reply
 · 



















BionicDance
1 week ago


Heh. It's a chromakey guide mark to keep CGI elements in place relative to the camera.



Reply
 · 








TheRealPaulMarshall
1 week ago


I figgered.  Still nice given the context.



Reply
 · 





Show more






































All comments (120)







Share your thoughts












Top comments









Stream







P Dav1 day ago







This guy says morality is absolute. Then, I say, all of the horrendous acts done by or sanctioned by god in the bible, such as murder, slavery, rape, genocide, cannibalism, and treatment of women as property are absolutely immoral.

Reply
 · 




















BionicDance1 week ago









Reply
 · 
12







Hide replies








Mundus Novus Ordo
1 week ago


+LegendaryAsshole which one



Reply
 · 








1140Cecile
1 week ago


Nicely done, Keight.



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


Thanks! :)



Reply
 · 
2






Lance Zimmerman
1 week ago


You forgot temple. XD Funny how xtians enjoy to blame others for what they are doing. He also does not seem to realize that marriage is a law, not a god thing.
LOL on the lightning.
LOL Faith, he believes in wishful thinking = easy answers that agrees with one's own thinking.
3500 years ago, where did he get that? Also, what rewrite/translation is he talking about? More like centuries.
Good video.
Show less

Reply
 · 
2






Julia Reed
1 week ago


How many times did you have to do that flailing during the smiting before you finally got it right? That awesomely hilarious! I'm still smirking from it.



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


Believe it or not, that took one take.
There were other shots, tho...



Reply
 · 
1






Julia Reed
1 week ago


I applaud you, I really do, I'd probably have a bloopers reel at the end of a video due to ADD tangents, stuttering and my mild lisp



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


Believe me, I've been tempted to make a bloopers vid. :)



Reply
 · 
3






Julia Reed
1 week ago


Oh I'd watch that in a heart beat! 



Reply
 · 
2






Lance Zimmerman
1 week ago


+BionicDance oh you so should make a bloopers video! After all this time you should have lots of good stuff to chose from.



Reply
 · 








VinnyMonster1
5 days ago


+BionicDance A Bloopers vid would go viral! 



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
5 days ago


Well, it'll probably be a few months to gather enough GOOD blooper footage, but I've started collecting some...



Reply
 · 
1






VinnyMonster1
5 days ago


Damn but the struck by lightning bit was funny!  I was half expecting you to end the video with a long fade to black then.



Reply
 · 
1







ThomasTrue5 days ago







Within my own lifetime it was once 'moral' to punish children in school by striking them across the hands with a leather strap or a cane (or across the buttocks with a paddle in US schools) and a man could not rape his wife but was merely exercising his 'moral' conjugal 'rights'.  Go back less than a century and a husband had the 'moral right' to strike his wife with a rod 'no thicker than his thumb' (hence, "rule of thumb").  These 'morals' were based upon Biblical teaching and yet we now look upon them as examples of a barbaric past we have since thankfully rejected.  If this fool thinks that the Bible has 'stood the test of time', then he is so sadly deluded I frankly feel sorry for him.

Reply
 · 
1


















Chris Cunningham1 week ago (edited)







You mean: one man, many wives... :p

Reply
 · 
5







Hide replies








Heiner Lilje
1 week ago


Totaly fine with me. Same as vice-versa, or something in between. Unless someone is forced into it, like in the bible. But besides that, it should absolutly be recogniced under the law.



Reply
 · 
2






Steve Harvey
1 week ago


There are good reasons why this is illegal in all modern Western countries. It causes a lot of crime and problems in society. It shallows the gene pool, hoards women, creates a lot of single men which leads to genocide because they cannot get even a single wife, it leads to going after young girls and child brides, and systematic paedophiles who prey upon children. It also leads to beastiality because young men cannot get mates. Have you never visited Yemen? Saudi Arabia? The Middle East? Ever? It also leads to murder, rape, torture, sodomy, and sadism. http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2012/01/the_problem_with_polygamy.html It damages men, women, and children.
Show less

Reply
 · 








Heiner Lilje
1 week ago (edited)


+Steve Harvey
What the fuck are you talking about? Can a women marry many men in yemen? Can 5 men marry 5 women?
Also, it isnt illegal in any civilised country. Its just not recogniced by the state.



Reply
 · 








Steve Harvey
1 week ago


+Heiner Lilje United States: Polygamy is illegal in all 50 states.
In fact, it's easier just to list the countries where it is legal. Mostly in Africa and the Middle East.
Also, what part about the practice and Yemen as an example of how bad it is to society do you not understand?
http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/09/13/20476580-outrage-over-death-of-yemeni-child-bride-8-on-wedding-night?lite
http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2012/01/the_problem_with_polygamy.html
There is ample research and books, reports from the UN, and a good way to begin to understand is to pick a country where polygamy is legal and look at its index.
This level of ignorance in the 21st century is unacceptable. Polygamy is illegal in its entirety of the Americas from Canada to all South American countries. Illegal in China, Russia, Europe, Australia. You would have a harder time finding countries where it is legal.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_status_of_polygamy
http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2012/05/5338/
"Faced with high levels of intra-sexual competition and little chance of obtaining even one long-term mate, unmarried, low-status men will heavily discount the future and more readily engage in risky status-elevating and sex-seeking behaviors. This will result in higher rates of murder, theft, rape, social disruption, kidnapping (especially of females), sexual slavery and prostitution."
The research is in. Gay people are not a threat to our society, but polygamy is.
Show less

Reply
 · 








Heiner Lilje
1 week ago


+Steve Harvey
What IS illegal in those places is to marry more then one person. Not to live with more then one person in a similar arrangment.
What you brought up is an issue with to less freedom, not to much of it - i.e. only one men and many wives, not both ways or more then 1 of each gender.
Wether the US is civilised of course is up for debate...
Show less

Reply
 · 








Steve Harvey
1 week ago


+Heiner Lilje
Oh did I call the savages civil? My bad. Hahaha! Seriously though please read the research.



Reply
 · 








Heiner Lilje
1 week ago


+Steve Harvey
See, the research is on polygynous societies, i.e. those that only allow one male and multiple females. Of course that will lead to problems, thats obvious.
But to claim that all polygamous/polyamorous arangements would lead to similar results is unwarrented.
Also, i live in Europe. Germany to be precise. Polygamy is perfectly legal unless you somehow have a legal marriage with more then one person. The same appears to be true for most (40 States) of the US.
Read more

Reply
 · 








Steve Harvey
6 days ago


+Heiner Lilje
Yes and I do actually understand the differences you bring up. I knew you were German due to your name.
The problem is the society does pay for its cost and ends up indirectly subsidizing its own costs and detriments to the society.
For example, the FLDS cult does not formally marry, each man has 10 wives and 20 kids all on welfare, and so the state pays for this one man to have more kids then he can afford. In addition, it throws out young boys called the lost boys and then the states have to pay for them also. So everyone pays for these people to spread their inferior shallow genes faster than anyone else.
I'm not talking about 10 people having an orgy. I'm talking about a single retarded male having 100 retarded kids. Causing humanity to devolve.
Show less

Reply
 · 








Heiner Lilje
6 days ago


I fail to see this issue. Quite the opposite actualy. If there are 3, 4, maybe 10 people in a relationship, not only would it increase the diversity of the genpool, but also mean more family ties so they wouldnt have to rely on the state if someone is in a rough spot but on each other. Not allways, but its more likely then in a case where there is just one other party involved.



Reply
 · 








Jackson Heathen
4 days ago


What about 1 wife & many husbands ??? Me & some of my degenerated male friends have double teamed (& even triple teamed) complete willing girls. In fact, I have little interest in fulfilling my traditional male gender role of being monogamous to an overweight stay at home wife. So is there a place in society for my kind of depravity ??? 



Reply
 · 








Heiner Lilje
4 days ago


+Jackson Heathen
Again, i dont think any state recognizes this yet. But thats what i was saying, go for it.



Reply
 · 








Jackson Heathen
4 days ago


Personally, (as long as nobody is underage or trapped in a compound) I think polygamy should be completely legal. In fact (despite popular opinion) I think such relationship are actually more discriminating against the males. Since it's the young men that are expelled from such communities to allow for a surplus of wives.



Reply
 · 








Heiner Lilje
4 days ago (edited)


+Jackson Heathen
Allthough the party im a member off here in germany would want it to be recognised. Not close to the main issue, main issues are things like privacy, corruption in politics and the like. Despite the fact that its still small and regularly bashed by the media (how dare we bring up the constitution anyways), we got a few things done. One thing I was suprised to hear myself where unisex restrooms in public buildings in one german federal state - as not to discriminate against transgenders and the like. Of course, genderspecific ones still are there as well. Also, no costs, just one relabled if there where more then 2.
Show less

Reply
 · 








Steve Harvey
4 days ago


+Jackson Heathen
Having multiple wives is hoarding. Period. It's not good for the women either because it oppresses them. It's not good for the community either because of all the single males it creates who cannot find mates. It's more about power and domination and control and it damages the society financially and criminally.



Reply
 · 








Heiner Lilje
4 days ago


+Steve Harvey
You are a sexist. Period.
Otherwise having multiple husbands would also be hoarding.



Reply
 · 








Steve Harvey
4 days ago


+Heiner Lilje
It is.



Reply
 · 








Heiner Lilje
4 days ago


+Steve Harvey
Okay. Well, i still dont see anything wrong with it. Unless you can back up your other claims with some societies in which neither sex is dominant and either marriages between 1 female and multiple males are similarly common as the opposite in similar proportions or alternativly societies where people marry more then one male and one female for one male and one female each (i.e. 3 males and 3 females)
Show less

Reply
 · 








Heiner Lilje
4 days ago


In fact, the latter couldnt even be called hoarding.



Reply
 · 









Star Laughter1 week ago







"I believe in absolute truth!" He says, while munching on shellfish that was harvested on the Sabbath...

Reply
 · 
1


















Dragnauct Sylvas1 week ago







I love how they want to dissolve the negative connotations of terms used against them. Can't wait till they do it to the word "Faith."

Reply
 · 




















Inannalu1 week ago







Harmful to an ideology is not the same thing as harmful to people.
Behaviors and activities which do the former, but do not do the latter, are perfectly okay ethically, so far as I'm concerned.
In fact, if some behavior or activity harms an ideology which is responsible for much harm to people, so much the better.

Reply
 · 
5


















Charles Kunkle1 week ago







and we're totally ignoring the fact that God does NOT define marriage as one man and one woman...
Otherwise, many of the patriarchs of the Christian religion were violating God's law. Solomon had 300 wives and 700 concubines? Excatly how is that "one man and one woman"

Reply
 · 
2


















themplar1 week ago







Another great video from you. And again very right.
I personally cannot understand the objections people have against gays and gay marriage.  Sadly its not just religious biggots i've been in many discussions with non theist who were still absolute biggots.
Its funny how they Always accuse me of intolerance when i call their arguments absolute bogus and them biggots.  Every time the arguments are.. its not natural.. well obviously it is..  what if everybody turned gay the human species would end... wouldnt happen and if so what? They still can get children by In Vitro.
In the end all their arguments are invalid. and only one real arguments is left over they wont pronounce.
They suffer from imagination and see two gays going at it and they think its Icky. And thats all it is for them.. they think its icky.. well then stop fantasizing about it.
Towards religious biggotry.... i whish it was allowed to smack them around with their own bibles...
Read more (13 lines)
Reply
 · 
1

















DoctorScarlet
1 week ago


Not to mention that there's also the ridiculous idea that gays want to recruit children for the sole purpose of making them gay.
People don't just become gay. Usually a person has a predisposition to being gay, but this is something many people will deny. I myself, a person who grew up in a Christian home, had a predisposition to being pansexual, but it's easier to deny something than to actually own up to it. I'm so glad I grew out of that horseshit though, I'm much happier.
Show less

Reply
 · 
1







Red Cloud1 week ago







You can't just re-define words to fit your own ends. Start doing that all willy-nilly, and you ruin the foundation of language itself, the fact that we can understand it. You can't just destroy an entire language, because you don't like how some of the words coming together make you feel, that's bullshit. Words like Tolerance are there, because we need them, if we didn't need them, we wouldn't have them. 

Reply
 · 




















CarefulAtheist1 week ago







WTF moment @7:05. Gold!

Reply
 · 




















Moor Letoh1 week ago







Epic.

Reply
 · 




















mikeyvester1 week ago







Speaking from experience living in a country where gay marriage has been legal for almost 9 years, I haven't noticed anything different. I would have never known the law changed except it was on the news.  The only reason I can see why a person would be against gay marriage, they are fucking assholes and they like to hurt people.

Reply
 · 
1


















markedfang1 week ago







What if god was true? What would actually change?
He'd still have to come up with good arguments to justify his demands. I would see god as no more then another human with another opinion and unless he can convince me of his case I still wouldn't feel any obligation towards him.
Worship blinds you to attrociaties.

Reply
 · 
2


















Griffin98571 week ago







7:03 I nearly jumped out of my own skin shakes fist at Kate.

Reply
 · 
1







Hide replies








BionicDance
1 week ago


Neener. ;)



Reply
 · 
1






Griffin9857
1 week ago


Any more surprises? :P



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


+Griffin9857 If I told you, they wouldn't be surprises, now would they? :D



Reply
 · 
1






Griffin9857
1 week ago


+BionicDance *Glares*



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


+Griffin9857 *sticks out tongue*



Reply
 · 
1






christopher9000p
6 days ago


Hey, blame "god", not Kate for that one. :P



Reply
 · 









Felhaven1 week ago (edited)







You really shouldn't quote old testament based definitions of marriage while wearing a polyblend shirt.  

Reply
 · 
2

















DoctorScarlet
1 week ago


Gives a whole new meaning to "don't throw stones while standing in a glass house".



Reply
 · 









RRoocckkyy501 week ago







Nice new intro! : )

Reply
 · 
1

















BionicDance
1 week ago


Thanks! I was going for a kind of 80s look. :)



Reply
 · 
1







VGatheist1 week ago (edited)







well the moral argument against abortion is that you are killing a baby. A mother does not have a right to kill her new born baby, so the question then comes about, at what point does a baby have the right to live. But the trick in proving abortion immoral within a real world sense is to prove that the fetus is being harmed. Big argument and I am not going to go through the whole case for abortion, but I just don't find your "if you do not agree with abortion don't have one." as a valid point because the whole reason there is any argument is the attempt to demonstrate that the fetus should have rights. I think the laws for abortion are very close to taking all of this in account. But the Christians idea of egg + sperm = no abortion is just not valid. I think the laws very, but right now all states at least use viability and not birth as the starting point for fetus rights. Allot of laws will use the trimester to determine if an abortion as legal. But you know as a Lesbian you likely will never have to worry about it. If you have a baby, you'd have to choose it.
Read more
Reply
 · 




















Justin Atheist via Google+1 week ago







Love you Bionic!!! 

Reply
 · 



















BionicDance
1 week ago


D'awww, shucks. *blush*



Reply
 · 








Justin Atheist
1 week ago


On a less creepy note. The style you bring and the voice you express is great. Always great to watch one of your videos.



Reply
 · 









TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







@7:05- Nice green cross.  Faded in a bit early but still nice.

Reply
 · 



















BionicDance
1 week ago


Heh. It's a chromakey guide mark to keep CGI elements in place relative to the camera.



Reply
 · 








TheRealPaulMarshall
1 week ago


I figgered.  Still nice given the context.



Reply
 · 









Jesse Sisolack1 week ago (edited)







New Planet? looks rather...wet. I only saw one little area of land.
Does this fellow need a book shelf? Maybe we should pitch in and get him one of those particle board ones from Wal-Mart. Seriously, concrete bricks and boards?

Reply
 · 




















Robert Roman1 week ago







This fucktard says all that special pleading in the name of the god of intolerance Yahweh. He sure fights hard for intolerance what a hypocritical bigot.

Reply
 · 



















yadabub
1 week ago


That was what struck me as well.  His Christian privilege allows him to spew what he likes with few consequences.  No doubt, he would be singing another tune if he had experienced real persecution for being a Christian, being a believer, or for being an a-hole.



Reply
 · 
1







BohemianBlasphemy1 week ago







2:34
I have a Bible. If god wrote that book, god intended marriage to be between a man and a woman; but also between a man and all the women that man can afford to rape.
What is this idiot even talking about?

Reply
 · 
3


















Peter Baxter1 week ago







Thanks for making great videos and calling out nutjobs like this guy, Bionic. His alleged point made so little sense, it was like he was okay with slavery because it was in the Bible, too.. not to mention that old tired "God intended marriage" argument when marriage was around long before the Bible as a business transaction of sorts. Le sigh.

Reply
 · 




















TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







Someone needs to explain to this dude that Gahwd's "absolute definition of marriage" involves one man and as many females as he can afford to buy including his sister, his half-sister, his half-sister's slaves, his aunts, his own slaves, as many concubines as he can purchase or coerce by threat of violence, any female of any age taken in war, any un-affianced female of any age that he can manage to rape and then pay for, and - if we allow for a certain reading of Genesis chapter 2 verse 20 - pretty much any animal (or maybe even any plant) into which he might possibly stick his penis.  [Note: That list is not meant to be exhaustive.  I'm sure there are some that I missed.]

Reply
 · 




















Len H2 days ago







BTW I love ya KATE no matter what your incorrect opinion of me....a ASSUMPTION is just that...those first 3 letters ...
 Love ya KATE now how about a great big wet KISS...dont hate because I am male lol what you afraid it might make you get COOTIES lol
BTW I liked the video as always

Reply
 · 




















TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







Did you abscond with Boehner's tanning bed?

Reply
 · 
1

















BionicDance
1 week ago (edited)


Naw...my camera was just acting like a little bitch, lighting-wise.



Reply
 · 









Packard Sonic1 week ago







I have had similar arguments with guys like him. He is a serious douche bag.  

Reply
 · 




















Len H2 days ago







Kate called me a Homophobic when i asked her question ...I ask a question and get called a name. But that is okay  I possed that dame question to my niece who is gay and she was like Uncle let that doesnt make you homophobic anyone who calls you that has a problem and they are lucky they didnt say it to you face  then we looked at a girl and both said  DAMN nice ass and laughed I love my niece she is awesome.
As for a Bigot....every single human is ....proud to be a bigot.
 My fist doesn't have to stop at the tip of any-ones nose and hasn't many times.
  In fact many time have not stopped with my feet to peoples noses over and over.
  Never bothered me before to put someone in their place...though these days it hurts...getting old lol.
   Values and morals suck, I would prefer busting more heads and not no damn BS law in my way...PISH but so far I have stayed many steps away of these moral laws of though shall not kill.
 The Qu'ran القرآن الكريم is the answer and oh how they enforce their rules.
  LOL
    Remember if you want  a law changed no matter how vile and disgusting it is  get the right wing out and the left wing in to make it legal....


 
Read more (17 lines)
Reply
 · 




















TheAtheistPaladin .1 week ago







In societies where there is no difference between private morality and a public morality, that would be a totalitarian society.  Why can't they realize that?

Reply
 · 
2


















DBeetleeater Doug1 week ago







Is this guy using the English language?  He uses words I have heard before but his meaning for those words are just plain different from what I think they mean.  Good job BionicDance.

Reply
 · 




















Mark Susskind1 week ago







I am smitten. :3

Reply
 · 




















Mel Rhomberg1 week ago







God didn't give a definition of marriage. Some people don't actually read the bible. le sigh

Reply
 · 




















TheAmulli1 week ago







I clicked thumbs up immediately after god struck you down midsentence. 

Reply
 · 




















angryhairpeice6 days ago







Isn't it funny how they always say that the book stands the test of time, then when you point out things like slavery, and working on the sabbath, they say 'That was a different time.'? That is why I am a gnostic antitheist. I know I am for a complete obliteration of religion. If we could get them to think, it could be possible. 

Reply
 · 




















beirirangu1 week ago (edited)







I think you missed a great oppertunity: he said that if it's in the bible, no matter when or in what context it was written, it's true. Meaning that he believes slavery should still be enforced as well as the death penalty for worshiping other gods, worshiping things that resemble anything from heaven, anything from earth, and anything from below the earth, using god's name in vain, working on the sabbath, not honoring your parents, ex... unless he thinks that when god said (roughly) , it is a permanent law that anyone who does any work on the sabbath is to be put to death, oh and here are the (first) ten commandments that I wrote with my finger. [ex 31 :12-18]

Reply
 · 









View all 4 replies








BionicDance
1 week ago


+beirirangu I'm pretty sure I mentioned that too.



Reply
 · 








beirirangu
1 week ago


+BionicDance plus, I did post it before finishing the video... having typed it up after the first volley of the bible's infallibility



Reply
 · 









amoscarmel1 week ago







Great clip, thank  you. Loved the lightening strike lol...

Reply
 · 




















pauldhoff1 week ago







Their so-called objective laws are subjectively interpreted by them all the time. 
Paul

Reply
 · 




















Pat MaCrotch1 week ago







Somebody needs to see the South Park episode about "tolerance" ?

Reply
 · 




















Emigdiosback1 week ago







was the title intentional?

Reply
 · 









View all 8 replies








TheRealPaulMarshall
1 week ago


I thought that number was the same in both phrasings and that the difference was only in whether the elided object of the preposition should have been explicit.



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+TheRealPaulMarshall When I parse your rephrasing into more colloquial speech, what I get is, "Some things I will not put up with," meaning the video is listing off some things I find intolerable.
But what the title is really saying is, "There are some things I will not put up with," being rather more ambiguous.



Reply
 · 





Show more





































All comments (120)







Share your thoughts












Top comments









Stream







P Dav1 day ago







This guy says morality is absolute. Then, I say, all of the horrendous acts done by or sanctioned by god in the bible, such as murder, slavery, rape, genocide, cannibalism, and treatment of women as property are absolutely immoral.

Reply
 · 




















BionicDance1 week ago









Reply
 · 
12







Hide replies








Mundus Novus Ordo
1 week ago


+LegendaryAsshole which one



Reply
 · 








1140Cecile
1 week ago


Nicely done, Keight.



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


Thanks! :)



Reply
 · 
2






Lance Zimmerman
1 week ago


You forgot temple. XD Funny how xtians enjoy to blame others for what they are doing. He also does not seem to realize that marriage is a law, not a god thing.
LOL on the lightning.
LOL Faith, he believes in wishful thinking = easy answers that agrees with one's own thinking.
3500 years ago, where did he get that? Also, what rewrite/translation is he talking about? More like centuries.
Good video.
Show less

Reply
 · 
2






Julia Reed
1 week ago


How many times did you have to do that flailing during the smiting before you finally got it right? That awesomely hilarious! I'm still smirking from it.



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


Believe it or not, that took one take.
There were other shots, tho...



Reply
 · 
1






Julia Reed
1 week ago


I applaud you, I really do, I'd probably have a bloopers reel at the end of a video due to ADD tangents, stuttering and my mild lisp



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


Believe me, I've been tempted to make a bloopers vid. :)



Reply
 · 
3






Julia Reed
1 week ago


Oh I'd watch that in a heart beat! 



Reply
 · 
2






Lance Zimmerman
1 week ago


+BionicDance oh you so should make a bloopers video! After all this time you should have lots of good stuff to chose from.



Reply
 · 








VinnyMonster1
5 days ago


+BionicDance A Bloopers vid would go viral! 



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
5 days ago


Well, it'll probably be a few months to gather enough GOOD blooper footage, but I've started collecting some...



Reply
 · 
1






VinnyMonster1
5 days ago


Damn but the struck by lightning bit was funny!  I was half expecting you to end the video with a long fade to black then.



Reply
 · 
1







ThomasTrue5 days ago







Within my own lifetime it was once 'moral' to punish children in school by striking them across the hands with a leather strap or a cane (or across the buttocks with a paddle in US schools) and a man could not rape his wife but was merely exercising his 'moral' conjugal 'rights'.  Go back less than a century and a husband had the 'moral right' to strike his wife with a rod 'no thicker than his thumb' (hence, "rule of thumb").  These 'morals' were based upon Biblical teaching and yet we now look upon them as examples of a barbaric past we have since thankfully rejected.  If this fool thinks that the Bible has 'stood the test of time', then he is so sadly deluded I frankly feel sorry for him.

Reply
 · 
1


















Chris Cunningham1 week ago (edited)







You mean: one man, many wives... :p

Reply
 · 
5







Hide replies








Heiner Lilje
1 week ago


Totaly fine with me. Same as vice-versa, or something in between. Unless someone is forced into it, like in the bible. But besides that, it should absolutly be recogniced under the law.



Reply
 · 
2






Steve Harvey
1 week ago


There are good reasons why this is illegal in all modern Western countries. It causes a lot of crime and problems in society. It shallows the gene pool, hoards women, creates a lot of single men which leads to genocide because they cannot get even a single wife, it leads to going after young girls and child brides, and systematic paedophiles who prey upon children. It also leads to beastiality because young men cannot get mates. Have you never visited Yemen? Saudi Arabia? The Middle East? Ever? It also leads to murder, rape, torture, sodomy, and sadism. http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2012/01/the_problem_with_polygamy.html It damages men, women, and children.
Show less

Reply
 · 








Heiner Lilje
1 week ago (edited)


+Steve Harvey
What the fuck are you talking about? Can a women marry many men in yemen? Can 5 men marry 5 women?
Also, it isnt illegal in any civilised country. Its just not recogniced by the state.



Reply
 · 








Steve Harvey
1 week ago


+Heiner Lilje United States: Polygamy is illegal in all 50 states.
In fact, it's easier just to list the countries where it is legal. Mostly in Africa and the Middle East.
Also, what part about the practice and Yemen as an example of how bad it is to society do you not understand?
http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/09/13/20476580-outrage-over-death-of-yemeni-child-bride-8-on-wedding-night?lite
http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2012/01/the_problem_with_polygamy.html
There is ample research and books, reports from the UN, and a good way to begin to understand is to pick a country where polygamy is legal and look at its index.
This level of ignorance in the 21st century is unacceptable. Polygamy is illegal in its entirety of the Americas from Canada to all South American countries. Illegal in China, Russia, Europe, Australia. You would have a harder time finding countries where it is legal.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_status_of_polygamy
http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2012/05/5338/
"Faced with high levels of intra-sexual competition and little chance of obtaining even one long-term mate, unmarried, low-status men will heavily discount the future and more readily engage in risky status-elevating and sex-seeking behaviors. This will result in higher rates of murder, theft, rape, social disruption, kidnapping (especially of females), sexual slavery and prostitution."
The research is in. Gay people are not a threat to our society, but polygamy is.
Show less

Reply
 · 








Heiner Lilje
1 week ago


+Steve Harvey
What IS illegal in those places is to marry more then one person. Not to live with more then one person in a similar arrangment.
What you brought up is an issue with to less freedom, not to much of it - i.e. only one men and many wives, not both ways or more then 1 of each gender.
Wether the US is civilised of course is up for debate...
Show less

Reply
 · 








Steve Harvey
1 week ago


+Heiner Lilje
Oh did I call the savages civil? My bad. Hahaha! Seriously though please read the research.



Reply
 · 








Heiner Lilje
1 week ago


+Steve Harvey
See, the research is on polygynous societies, i.e. those that only allow one male and multiple females. Of course that will lead to problems, thats obvious.
But to claim that all polygamous/polyamorous arangements would lead to similar results is unwarrented.
Also, i live in Europe. Germany to be precise. Polygamy is perfectly legal unless you somehow have a legal marriage with more then one person. The same appears to be true for most (40 States) of the US.
Read more

Reply
 · 








Steve Harvey
6 days ago


+Heiner Lilje
Yes and I do actually understand the differences you bring up. I knew you were German due to your name.
The problem is the society does pay for its cost and ends up indirectly subsidizing its own costs and detriments to the society.
For example, the FLDS cult does not formally marry, each man has 10 wives and 20 kids all on welfare, and so the state pays for this one man to have more kids then he can afford. In addition, it throws out young boys called the lost boys and then the states have to pay for them also. So everyone pays for these people to spread their inferior shallow genes faster than anyone else.
I'm not talking about 10 people having an orgy. I'm talking about a single retarded male having 100 retarded kids. Causing humanity to devolve.
Show less

Reply
 · 








Heiner Lilje
6 days ago


I fail to see this issue. Quite the opposite actualy. If there are 3, 4, maybe 10 people in a relationship, not only would it increase the diversity of the genpool, but also mean more family ties so they wouldnt have to rely on the state if someone is in a rough spot but on each other. Not allways, but its more likely then in a case where there is just one other party involved.



Reply
 · 








Jackson Heathen
4 days ago


What about 1 wife & many husbands ??? Me & some of my degenerated male friends have double teamed (& even triple teamed) complete willing girls. In fact, I have little interest in fulfilling my traditional male gender role of being monogamous to an overweight stay at home wife. So is there a place in society for my kind of depravity ??? 



Reply
 · 








Heiner Lilje
4 days ago


+Jackson Heathen
Again, i dont think any state recognizes this yet. But thats what i was saying, go for it.



Reply
 · 








Jackson Heathen
4 days ago


Personally, (as long as nobody is underage or trapped in a compound) I think polygamy should be completely legal. In fact (despite popular opinion) I think such relationship are actually more discriminating against the males. Since it's the young men that are expelled from such communities to allow for a surplus of wives.



Reply
 · 








Heiner Lilje
4 days ago (edited)


+Jackson Heathen
Allthough the party im a member off here in germany would want it to be recognised. Not close to the main issue, main issues are things like privacy, corruption in politics and the like. Despite the fact that its still small and regularly bashed by the media (how dare we bring up the constitution anyways), we got a few things done. One thing I was suprised to hear myself where unisex restrooms in public buildings in one german federal state - as not to discriminate against transgenders and the like. Of course, genderspecific ones still are there as well. Also, no costs, just one relabled if there where more then 2.
Show less

Reply
 · 








Steve Harvey
4 days ago


+Jackson Heathen
Having multiple wives is hoarding. Period. It's not good for the women either because it oppresses them. It's not good for the community either because of all the single males it creates who cannot find mates. It's more about power and domination and control and it damages the society financially and criminally.



Reply
 · 








Heiner Lilje
4 days ago


+Steve Harvey
You are a sexist. Period.
Otherwise having multiple husbands would also be hoarding.



Reply
 · 








Steve Harvey
4 days ago


+Heiner Lilje
It is.



Reply
 · 








Heiner Lilje
4 days ago


+Steve Harvey
Okay. Well, i still dont see anything wrong with it. Unless you can back up your other claims with some societies in which neither sex is dominant and either marriages between 1 female and multiple males are similarly common as the opposite in similar proportions or alternativly societies where people marry more then one male and one female for one male and one female each (i.e. 3 males and 3 females)
Show less

Reply
 · 








Heiner Lilje
4 days ago


In fact, the latter couldnt even be called hoarding.



Reply
 · 









Star Laughter1 week ago







"I believe in absolute truth!" He says, while munching on shellfish that was harvested on the Sabbath...

Reply
 · 
1


















Dragnauct Sylvas1 week ago







I love how they want to dissolve the negative connotations of terms used against them. Can't wait till they do it to the word "Faith."

Reply
 · 




















Inannalu1 week ago







Harmful to an ideology is not the same thing as harmful to people.
Behaviors and activities which do the former, but do not do the latter, are perfectly okay ethically, so far as I'm concerned.
In fact, if some behavior or activity harms an ideology which is responsible for much harm to people, so much the better.

Reply
 · 
5


















Charles Kunkle1 week ago







and we're totally ignoring the fact that God does NOT define marriage as one man and one woman...
Otherwise, many of the patriarchs of the Christian religion were violating God's law. Solomon had 300 wives and 700 concubines? Excatly how is that "one man and one woman"

Reply
 · 
2


















themplar1 week ago







Another great video from you. And again very right.
I personally cannot understand the objections people have against gays and gay marriage.  Sadly its not just religious biggots i've been in many discussions with non theist who were still absolute biggots.
Its funny how they Always accuse me of intolerance when i call their arguments absolute bogus and them biggots.  Every time the arguments are.. its not natural.. well obviously it is..  what if everybody turned gay the human species would end... wouldnt happen and if so what? They still can get children by In Vitro.
In the end all their arguments are invalid. and only one real arguments is left over they wont pronounce.
They suffer from imagination and see two gays going at it and they think its Icky. And thats all it is for them.. they think its icky.. well then stop fantasizing about it.
Towards religious biggotry.... i whish it was allowed to smack them around with their own bibles...
Read more (13 lines)
Reply
 · 
1

















DoctorScarlet
1 week ago


Not to mention that there's also the ridiculous idea that gays want to recruit children for the sole purpose of making them gay.
People don't just become gay. Usually a person has a predisposition to being gay, but this is something many people will deny. I myself, a person who grew up in a Christian home, had a predisposition to being pansexual, but it's easier to deny something than to actually own up to it. I'm so glad I grew out of that horseshit though, I'm much happier.
Show less

Reply
 · 
1







Red Cloud1 week ago







You can't just re-define words to fit your own ends. Start doing that all willy-nilly, and you ruin the foundation of language itself, the fact that we can understand it. You can't just destroy an entire language, because you don't like how some of the words coming together make you feel, that's bullshit. Words like Tolerance are there, because we need them, if we didn't need them, we wouldn't have them. 

Reply
 · 




















CarefulAtheist1 week ago







WTF moment @7:05. Gold!

Reply
 · 




















Moor Letoh1 week ago







Epic.

Reply
 · 




















mikeyvester1 week ago







Speaking from experience living in a country where gay marriage has been legal for almost 9 years, I haven't noticed anything different. I would have never known the law changed except it was on the news.  The only reason I can see why a person would be against gay marriage, they are fucking assholes and they like to hurt people.

Reply
 · 
1


















markedfang1 week ago







What if god was true? What would actually change?
He'd still have to come up with good arguments to justify his demands. I would see god as no more then another human with another opinion and unless he can convince me of his case I still wouldn't feel any obligation towards him.
Worship blinds you to attrociaties.

Reply
 · 
2


















Griffin98571 week ago







7:03 I nearly jumped out of my own skin shakes fist at Kate.

Reply
 · 
1







Hide replies








BionicDance
1 week ago


Neener. ;)



Reply
 · 
1






Griffin9857
1 week ago


Any more surprises? :P



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


+Griffin9857 If I told you, they wouldn't be surprises, now would they? :D



Reply
 · 
1






Griffin9857
1 week ago


+BionicDance *Glares*



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


+Griffin9857 *sticks out tongue*



Reply
 · 
1






christopher9000p
6 days ago


Hey, blame "god", not Kate for that one. :P



Reply
 · 









Felhaven1 week ago (edited)







You really shouldn't quote old testament based definitions of marriage while wearing a polyblend shirt.  

Reply
 · 
2

















DoctorScarlet
1 week ago


Gives a whole new meaning to "don't throw stones while standing in a glass house".



Reply
 · 









RRoocckkyy501 week ago







Nice new intro! : )

Reply
 · 
1

















BionicDance
1 week ago


Thanks! I was going for a kind of 80s look. :)



Reply
 · 
1







VGatheist1 week ago (edited)







well the moral argument against abortion is that you are killing a baby. A mother does not have a right to kill her new born baby, so the question then comes about, at what point does a baby have the right to live. But the trick in proving abortion immoral within a real world sense is to prove that the fetus is being harmed. Big argument and I am not going to go through the whole case for abortion, but I just don't find your "if you do not agree with abortion don't have one." as a valid point because the whole reason there is any argument is the attempt to demonstrate that the fetus should have rights. I think the laws for abortion are very close to taking all of this in account. But the Christians idea of egg + sperm = no abortion is just not valid. I think the laws very, but right now all states at least use viability and not birth as the starting point for fetus rights. Allot of laws will use the trimester to determine if an abortion as legal. But you know as a Lesbian you likely will never have to worry about it. If you have a baby, you'd have to choose it.
Read more
Reply
 · 




















Justin Atheist via Google+1 week ago







Love you Bionic!!! 

Reply
 · 



















BionicDance
1 week ago


D'awww, shucks. *blush*



Reply
 · 








Justin Atheist
1 week ago


On a less creepy note. The style you bring and the voice you express is great. Always great to watch one of your videos.



Reply
 · 









TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







@7:05- Nice green cross.  Faded in a bit early but still nice.

Reply
 · 



















BionicDance
1 week ago


Heh. It's a chromakey guide mark to keep CGI elements in place relative to the camera.



Reply
 · 








TheRealPaulMarshall
1 week ago


I figgered.  Still nice given the context.



Reply
 · 









Jesse Sisolack1 week ago (edited)







New Planet? looks rather...wet. I only saw one little area of land.
Does this fellow need a book shelf? Maybe we should pitch in and get him one of those particle board ones from Wal-Mart. Seriously, concrete bricks and boards?

Reply
 · 




















Robert Roman1 week ago







This fucktard says all that special pleading in the name of the god of intolerance Yahweh. He sure fights hard for intolerance what a hypocritical bigot.

Reply
 · 



















yadabub
1 week ago


That was what struck me as well.  His Christian privilege allows him to spew what he likes with few consequences.  No doubt, he would be singing another tune if he had experienced real persecution for being a Christian, being a believer, or for being an a-hole.



Reply
 · 
1







BohemianBlasphemy1 week ago







2:34
I have a Bible. If god wrote that book, god intended marriage to be between a man and a woman; but also between a man and all the women that man can afford to rape.
What is this idiot even talking about?

Reply
 · 
3


















Peter Baxter1 week ago







Thanks for making great videos and calling out nutjobs like this guy, Bionic. His alleged point made so little sense, it was like he was okay with slavery because it was in the Bible, too.. not to mention that old tired "God intended marriage" argument when marriage was around long before the Bible as a business transaction of sorts. Le sigh.

Reply
 · 




















TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







Someone needs to explain to this dude that Gahwd's "absolute definition of marriage" involves one man and as many females as he can afford to buy including his sister, his half-sister, his half-sister's slaves, his aunts, his own slaves, as many concubines as he can purchase or coerce by threat of violence, any female of any age taken in war, any un-affianced female of any age that he can manage to rape and then pay for, and - if we allow for a certain reading of Genesis chapter 2 verse 20 - pretty much any animal (or maybe even any plant) into which he might possibly stick his penis.  [Note: That list is not meant to be exhaustive.  I'm sure there are some that I missed.]

Reply
 · 




















Len H2 days ago







BTW I love ya KATE no matter what your incorrect opinion of me....a ASSUMPTION is just that...those first 3 letters ...
 Love ya KATE now how about a great big wet KISS...dont hate because I am male lol what you afraid it might make you get COOTIES lol
BTW I liked the video as always

Reply
 · 




















TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







Did you abscond with Boehner's tanning bed?

Reply
 · 
1

















BionicDance
1 week ago (edited)


Naw...my camera was just acting like a little bitch, lighting-wise.



Reply
 · 









Packard Sonic1 week ago







I have had similar arguments with guys like him. He is a serious douche bag.  

Reply
 · 




















Len H2 days ago







Kate called me a Homophobic when i asked her question ...I ask a question and get called a name. But that is okay  I possed that dame question to my niece who is gay and she was like Uncle let that doesnt make you homophobic anyone who calls you that has a problem and they are lucky they didnt say it to you face  then we looked at a girl and both said  DAMN nice ass and laughed I love my niece she is awesome.
As for a Bigot....every single human is ....proud to be a bigot.
 My fist doesn't have to stop at the tip of any-ones nose and hasn't many times.
  In fact many time have not stopped with my feet to peoples noses over and over.
  Never bothered me before to put someone in their place...though these days it hurts...getting old lol.
   Values and morals suck, I would prefer busting more heads and not no damn BS law in my way...PISH but so far I have stayed many steps away of these moral laws of though shall not kill.
 The Qu'ran القرآن الكريم is the answer and oh how they enforce their rules.
  LOL
    Remember if you want  a law changed no matter how vile and disgusting it is  get the right wing out and the left wing in to make it legal....


 
Read more (17 lines)
Reply
 · 




















TheAtheistPaladin .1 week ago







In societies where there is no difference between private morality and a public morality, that would be a totalitarian society.  Why can't they realize that?

Reply
 · 
2


















DBeetleeater Doug1 week ago







Is this guy using the English language?  He uses words I have heard before but his meaning for those words are just plain different from what I think they mean.  Good job BionicDance.

Reply
 · 




















Mark Susskind1 week ago







I am smitten. :3

Reply
 · 




















Mel Rhomberg1 week ago







God didn't give a definition of marriage. Some people don't actually read the bible. le sigh

Reply
 · 




















TheAmulli1 week ago







I clicked thumbs up immediately after god struck you down midsentence. 

Reply
 · 




















angryhairpeice6 days ago







Isn't it funny how they always say that the book stands the test of time, then when you point out things like slavery, and working on the sabbath, they say 'That was a different time.'? That is why I am a gnostic antitheist. I know I am for a complete obliteration of religion. If we could get them to think, it could be possible. 

Reply
 · 




















beirirangu1 week ago (edited)







I think you missed a great oppertunity: he said that if it's in the bible, no matter when or in what context it was written, it's true. Meaning that he believes slavery should still be enforced as well as the death penalty for worshiping other gods, worshiping things that resemble anything from heaven, anything from earth, and anything from below the earth, using god's name in vain, working on the sabbath, not honoring your parents, ex... unless he thinks that when god said (roughly) , it is a permanent law that anyone who does any work on the sabbath is to be put to death, oh and here are the (first) ten commandments that I wrote with my finger. [ex 31 :12-18]

Reply
 · 









View all 4 replies








BionicDance
1 week ago


+beirirangu I'm pretty sure I mentioned that too.



Reply
 · 








beirirangu
1 week ago


+BionicDance plus, I did post it before finishing the video... having typed it up after the first volley of the bible's infallibility



Reply
 · 









amoscarmel1 week ago







Great clip, thank  you. Loved the lightening strike lol...

Reply
 · 




















pauldhoff1 week ago







Their so-called objective laws are subjectively interpreted by them all the time. 
Paul

Reply
 · 




















Pat MaCrotch1 week ago







Somebody needs to see the South Park episode about "tolerance" ?

Reply
 · 




















Emigdiosback1 week ago







was the title intentional?

Reply
 · 









View all 8 replies








TheRealPaulMarshall
1 week ago


I thought that number was the same in both phrasings and that the difference was only in whether the elided object of the preposition should have been explicit.



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+TheRealPaulMarshall When I parse your rephrasing into more colloquial speech, what I get is, "Some things I will not put up with," meaning the video is listing off some things I find intolerable.
But what the title is really saying is, "There are some things I will not put up with," being rather more ambiguous.



Reply
 · 





Show more














































































All comments (98)







Share your thoughts












Top comments









Stream







P Dav1 day ago







This guy says morality is absolute. Then, I say, all of the horrendous acts done by or sanctioned by god in the bible, such as murder, slavery, rape, genocide, cannibalism, and treatment of women as property are absolutely immoral.

Reply
 · 




















BionicDance1 week ago









Reply
 · 
12







Hide replies








Mundus Novus Ordo
1 week ago


+LegendaryAsshole which one



Reply
 · 








1140Cecile
1 week ago


Nicely done, Keight.



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


Thanks! :)



Reply
 · 
2






Lance Zimmerman
1 week ago


You forgot temple. XD Funny how xtians enjoy to blame others for what they are doing. He also does not seem to realize that marriage is a law, not a god thing.
LOL on the lightning.
LOL Faith, he believes in wishful thinking = easy answers that agrees with one's own thinking.
3500 years ago, where did he get that? Also, what rewrite/translation is he talking about? More like centuries.
Good video.
Show less

Reply
 · 
2






Julia Reed
1 week ago


How many times did you have to do that flailing during the smiting before you finally got it right? That awesomely hilarious! I'm still smirking from it.



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


Believe it or not, that took one take.
There were other shots, tho...



Reply
 · 
1






Julia Reed
1 week ago


I applaud you, I really do, I'd probably have a bloopers reel at the end of a video due to ADD tangents, stuttering and my mild lisp



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


Believe me, I've been tempted to make a bloopers vid. :)



Reply
 · 
3






Julia Reed
1 week ago


Oh I'd watch that in a heart beat! 



Reply
 · 
2






Lance Zimmerman
1 week ago


+BionicDance oh you so should make a bloopers video! After all this time you should have lots of good stuff to chose from.



Reply
 · 








VinnyMonster1
5 days ago


+BionicDance A Bloopers vid would go viral! 



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
5 days ago


Well, it'll probably be a few months to gather enough GOOD blooper footage, but I've started collecting some...



Reply
 · 
1






VinnyMonster1
5 days ago


Damn but the struck by lightning bit was funny!  I was half expecting you to end the video with a long fade to black then.



Reply
 · 
1







ThomasTrue5 days ago







Within my own lifetime it was once 'moral' to punish children in school by striking them across the hands with a leather strap or a cane (or across the buttocks with a paddle in US schools) and a man could not rape his wife but was merely exercising his 'moral' conjugal 'rights'.  Go back less than a century and a husband had the 'moral right' to strike his wife with a rod 'no thicker than his thumb' (hence, "rule of thumb").  These 'morals' were based upon Biblical teaching and yet we now look upon them as examples of a barbaric past we have since thankfully rejected.  If this fool thinks that the Bible has 'stood the test of time', then he is so sadly deluded I frankly feel sorry for him.

Reply
 · 
1


















Star Laughter1 week ago







"I believe in absolute truth!" He says, while munching on shellfish that was harvested on the Sabbath...

Reply
 · 
1


















Dragnauct Sylvas1 week ago







I love how they want to dissolve the negative connotations of terms used against them. Can't wait till they do it to the word "Faith."

Reply
 · 




















Inannalu1 week ago







Harmful to an ideology is not the same thing as harmful to people.
Behaviors and activities which do the former, but do not do the latter, are perfectly okay ethically, so far as I'm concerned.
In fact, if some behavior or activity harms an ideology which is responsible for much harm to people, so much the better.

Reply
 · 
5


















Charles Kunkle1 week ago







and we're totally ignoring the fact that God does NOT define marriage as one man and one woman...
Otherwise, many of the patriarchs of the Christian religion were violating God's law. Solomon had 300 wives and 700 concubines? Excatly how is that "one man and one woman"

Reply
 · 
2


















themplar1 week ago







Another great video from you. And again very right.
I personally cannot understand the objections people have against gays and gay marriage.  Sadly its not just religious biggots i've been in many discussions with non theist who were still absolute biggots.
Its funny how they Always accuse me of intolerance when i call their arguments absolute bogus and them biggots.  Every time the arguments are.. its not natural.. well obviously it is..  what if everybody turned gay the human species would end... wouldnt happen and if so what? They still can get children by In Vitro.
In the end all their arguments are invalid. and only one real arguments is left over they wont pronounce.
They suffer from imagination and see two gays going at it and they think its Icky. And thats all it is for them.. they think its icky.. well then stop fantasizing about it.
Towards religious biggotry.... i whish it was allowed to smack them around with their own bibles...
Show less
Reply
 · 
1

















DoctorScarlet
1 week ago


Not to mention that there's also the ridiculous idea that gays want to recruit children for the sole purpose of making them gay.
People don't just become gay. Usually a person has a predisposition to being gay, but this is something many people will deny. I myself, a person who grew up in a Christian home, had a predisposition to being pansexual, but it's easier to deny something than to actually own up to it. I'm so glad I grew out of that horseshit though, I'm much happier.
Read more

Reply
 · 
1







Red Cloud1 week ago







You can't just re-define words to fit your own ends. Start doing that all willy-nilly, and you ruin the foundation of language itself, the fact that we can understand it. You can't just destroy an entire language, because you don't like how some of the words coming together make you feel, that's bullshit. Words like Tolerance are there, because we need them, if we didn't need them, we wouldn't have them. 

Reply
 · 




















CarefulAtheist1 week ago







WTF moment @7:05. Gold!

Reply
 · 




















Moor Letoh1 week ago







Epic.

Reply
 · 




















mikeyvester1 week ago







Speaking from experience living in a country where gay marriage has been legal for almost 9 years, I haven't noticed anything different. I would have never known the law changed except it was on the news.  The only reason I can see why a person would be against gay marriage, they are fucking assholes and they like to hurt people.

Reply
 · 
1


















markedfang1 week ago







What if god was true? What would actually change?
He'd still have to come up with good arguments to justify his demands. I would see god as no more then another human with another opinion and unless he can convince me of his case I still wouldn't feel any obligation towards him.
Worship blinds you to attrociaties.

Reply
 · 
2


















Griffin98571 week ago







7:03 I nearly jumped out of my own skin shakes fist at Kate.

Reply
 · 
1







Hide replies








BionicDance
1 week ago


Neener. ;)



Reply
 · 
1






Griffin9857
1 week ago


Any more surprises? :P



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


+Griffin9857 If I told you, they wouldn't be surprises, now would they? :D



Reply
 · 
1






Griffin9857
1 week ago


+BionicDance *Glares*



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


+Griffin9857 *sticks out tongue*



Reply
 · 
1






christopher9000p
6 days ago


Hey, blame "god", not Kate for that one. :P



Reply
 · 









Felhaven1 week ago (edited)







You really shouldn't quote old testament based definitions of marriage while wearing a polyblend shirt.  

Reply
 · 
2

















DoctorScarlet
1 week ago


Gives a whole new meaning to "don't throw stones while standing in a glass house".



Reply
 · 









RRoocckkyy501 week ago







Nice new intro! : )

Reply
 · 
1

















BionicDance
1 week ago


Thanks! I was going for a kind of 80s look. :)



Reply
 · 
1







VGatheist1 week ago (edited)







well the moral argument against abortion is that you are killing a baby. A mother does not have a right to kill her new born baby, so the question then comes about, at what point does a baby have the right to live. But the trick in proving abortion immoral within a real world sense is to prove that the fetus is being harmed. Big argument and I am not going to go through the whole case for abortion, but I just don't find your "if you do not agree with abortion don't have one." as a valid point because the whole reason there is any argument is the attempt to demonstrate that the fetus should have rights. I think the laws for abortion are very close to taking all of this in account. But the Christians idea of egg + sperm = no abortion is just not valid. I think the laws very, but right now all states at least use viability and not birth as the starting point for fetus rights. Allot of laws will use the trimester to determine if an abortion as legal. But you know as a Lesbian you likely will never have to worry about it. If you have a baby, you'd have to choose it.
Read more
Reply
 · 




















TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







@7:05- Nice green cross.  Faded in a bit early but still nice.

Reply
 · 



















BionicDance
1 week ago


Heh. It's a chromakey guide mark to keep CGI elements in place relative to the camera.



Reply
 · 








TheRealPaulMarshall
1 week ago


I figgered.  Still nice given the context.



Reply
 · 









Jesse Sisolack1 week ago (edited)







New Planet? looks rather...wet. I only saw one little area of land.
Does this fellow need a book shelf? Maybe we should pitch in and get him one of those particle board ones from Wal-Mart. Seriously, concrete bricks and boards?

Reply
 · 




















Robert Roman1 week ago







This fucktard says all that special pleading in the name of the god of intolerance Yahweh. He sure fights hard for intolerance what a hypocritical bigot.

Reply
 · 



















yadabub
1 week ago


That was what struck me as well.  His Christian privilege allows him to spew what he likes with few consequences.  No doubt, he would be singing another tune if he had experienced real persecution for being a Christian, being a believer, or for being an a-hole.



Reply
 · 
1



Show more



















All comments (98)







Share your thoughts












Top comments









Stream







P Dav1 day ago







This guy says morality is absolute. Then, I say, all of the horrendous acts done by or sanctioned by god in the bible, such as murder, slavery, rape, genocide, cannibalism, and treatment of women as property are absolutely immoral.

Reply
 · 




















BionicDance1 week ago









Reply
 · 
12







Hide replies








Mundus Novus Ordo
1 week ago


+LegendaryAsshole which one



Reply
 · 








1140Cecile
1 week ago


Nicely done, Keight.



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


Thanks! :)



Reply
 · 
2






Lance Zimmerman
1 week ago


You forgot temple. XD Funny how xtians enjoy to blame others for what they are doing. He also does not seem to realize that marriage is a law, not a god thing.
LOL on the lightning.
LOL Faith, he believes in wishful thinking = easy answers that agrees with one's own thinking.
3500 years ago, where did he get that? Also, what rewrite/translation is he talking about? More like centuries.
Good video.
Show less

Reply
 · 
2






Julia Reed
1 week ago


How many times did you have to do that flailing during the smiting before you finally got it right? That awesomely hilarious! I'm still smirking from it.



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


Believe it or not, that took one take.
There were other shots, tho...



Reply
 · 
1






Julia Reed
1 week ago


I applaud you, I really do, I'd probably have a bloopers reel at the end of a video due to ADD tangents, stuttering and my mild lisp



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


Believe me, I've been tempted to make a bloopers vid. :)



Reply
 · 
3






Julia Reed
1 week ago


Oh I'd watch that in a heart beat! 



Reply
 · 
2






Lance Zimmerman
1 week ago


+BionicDance oh you so should make a bloopers video! After all this time you should have lots of good stuff to chose from.



Reply
 · 








VinnyMonster1
5 days ago


+BionicDance A Bloopers vid would go viral! 



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
5 days ago


Well, it'll probably be a few months to gather enough GOOD blooper footage, but I've started collecting some...



Reply
 · 
1






VinnyMonster1
5 days ago


Damn but the struck by lightning bit was funny!  I was half expecting you to end the video with a long fade to black then.



Reply
 · 
1







ThomasTrue5 days ago







Within my own lifetime it was once 'moral' to punish children in school by striking them across the hands with a leather strap or a cane (or across the buttocks with a paddle in US schools) and a man could not rape his wife but was merely exercising his 'moral' conjugal 'rights'.  Go back less than a century and a husband had the 'moral right' to strike his wife with a rod 'no thicker than his thumb' (hence, "rule of thumb").  These 'morals' were based upon Biblical teaching and yet we now look upon them as examples of a barbaric past we have since thankfully rejected.  If this fool thinks that the Bible has 'stood the test of time', then he is so sadly deluded I frankly feel sorry for him.

Reply
 · 
1


















Star Laughter1 week ago







"I believe in absolute truth!" He says, while munching on shellfish that was harvested on the Sabbath...

Reply
 · 
1


















Dragnauct Sylvas1 week ago







I love how they want to dissolve the negative connotations of terms used against them. Can't wait till they do it to the word "Faith."

Reply
 · 




















Inannalu1 week ago







Harmful to an ideology is not the same thing as harmful to people.
Behaviors and activities which do the former, but do not do the latter, are perfectly okay ethically, so far as I'm concerned.
In fact, if some behavior or activity harms an ideology which is responsible for much harm to people, so much the better.

Reply
 · 
5


















Charles Kunkle1 week ago







and we're totally ignoring the fact that God does NOT define marriage as one man and one woman...
Otherwise, many of the patriarchs of the Christian religion were violating God's law. Solomon had 300 wives and 700 concubines? Excatly how is that "one man and one woman"

Reply
 · 
2


















themplar1 week ago







Another great video from you. And again very right.
I personally cannot understand the objections people have against gays and gay marriage.  Sadly its not just religious biggots i've been in many discussions with non theist who were still absolute biggots.
Its funny how they Always accuse me of intolerance when i call their arguments absolute bogus and them biggots.  Every time the arguments are.. its not natural.. well obviously it is..  what if everybody turned gay the human species would end... wouldnt happen and if so what? They still can get children by In Vitro.
In the end all their arguments are invalid. and only one real arguments is left over they wont pronounce.
They suffer from imagination and see two gays going at it and they think its Icky. And thats all it is for them.. they think its icky.. well then stop fantasizing about it.
Towards religious biggotry.... i whish it was allowed to smack them around with their own bibles...
Show less
Reply
 · 
1

















DoctorScarlet
1 week ago


Not to mention that there's also the ridiculous idea that gays want to recruit children for the sole purpose of making them gay.
People don't just become gay. Usually a person has a predisposition to being gay, but this is something many people will deny. I myself, a person who grew up in a Christian home, had a predisposition to being pansexual, but it's easier to deny something than to actually own up to it. I'm so glad I grew out of that horseshit though, I'm much happier.
Read more

Reply
 · 
1







Red Cloud1 week ago







You can't just re-define words to fit your own ends. Start doing that all willy-nilly, and you ruin the foundation of language itself, the fact that we can understand it. You can't just destroy an entire language, because you don't like how some of the words coming together make you feel, that's bullshit. Words like Tolerance are there, because we need them, if we didn't need them, we wouldn't have them. 

Reply
 · 




















CarefulAtheist1 week ago







WTF moment @7:05. Gold!

Reply
 · 




















Moor Letoh1 week ago







Epic.

Reply
 · 




















mikeyvester1 week ago







Speaking from experience living in a country where gay marriage has been legal for almost 9 years, I haven't noticed anything different. I would have never known the law changed except it was on the news.  The only reason I can see why a person would be against gay marriage, they are fucking assholes and they like to hurt people.

Reply
 · 
1


















markedfang1 week ago







What if god was true? What would actually change?
He'd still have to come up with good arguments to justify his demands. I would see god as no more then another human with another opinion and unless he can convince me of his case I still wouldn't feel any obligation towards him.
Worship blinds you to attrociaties.

Reply
 · 
2


















Griffin98571 week ago







7:03 I nearly jumped out of my own skin shakes fist at Kate.

Reply
 · 
1







Hide replies








BionicDance
1 week ago


Neener. ;)



Reply
 · 
1






Griffin9857
1 week ago


Any more surprises? :P



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


+Griffin9857 If I told you, they wouldn't be surprises, now would they? :D



Reply
 · 
1






Griffin9857
1 week ago


+BionicDance *Glares*



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


+Griffin9857 *sticks out tongue*



Reply
 · 
1






christopher9000p
6 days ago


Hey, blame "god", not Kate for that one. :P



Reply
 · 









Felhaven1 week ago (edited)







You really shouldn't quote old testament based definitions of marriage while wearing a polyblend shirt.  

Reply
 · 
2

















DoctorScarlet
1 week ago


Gives a whole new meaning to "don't throw stones while standing in a glass house".



Reply
 · 









RRoocckkyy501 week ago







Nice new intro! : )

Reply
 · 
1

















BionicDance
1 week ago


Thanks! I was going for a kind of 80s look. :)



Reply
 · 
1







VGatheist1 week ago (edited)







well the moral argument against abortion is that you are killing a baby. A mother does not have a right to kill her new born baby, so the question then comes about, at what point does a baby have the right to live. But the trick in proving abortion immoral within a real world sense is to prove that the fetus is being harmed. Big argument and I am not going to go through the whole case for abortion, but I just don't find your "if you do not agree with abortion don't have one." as a valid point because the whole reason there is any argument is the attempt to demonstrate that the fetus should have rights. I think the laws for abortion are very close to taking all of this in account. But the Christians idea of egg + sperm = no abortion is just not valid. I think the laws very, but right now all states at least use viability and not birth as the starting point for fetus rights. Allot of laws will use the trimester to determine if an abortion as legal. But you know as a Lesbian you likely will never have to worry about it. If you have a baby, you'd have to choose it.
Read more
Reply
 · 




















TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







@7:05- Nice green cross.  Faded in a bit early but still nice.

Reply
 · 



















BionicDance
1 week ago


Heh. It's a chromakey guide mark to keep CGI elements in place relative to the camera.



Reply
 · 








TheRealPaulMarshall
1 week ago


I figgered.  Still nice given the context.



Reply
 · 









Jesse Sisolack1 week ago (edited)







New Planet? looks rather...wet. I only saw one little area of land.
Does this fellow need a book shelf? Maybe we should pitch in and get him one of those particle board ones from Wal-Mart. Seriously, concrete bricks and boards?

Reply
 · 




















Robert Roman1 week ago







This fucktard says all that special pleading in the name of the god of intolerance Yahweh. He sure fights hard for intolerance what a hypocritical bigot.

Reply
 · 



















yadabub
1 week ago


That was what struck me as well.  His Christian privilege allows him to spew what he likes with few consequences.  No doubt, he would be singing another tune if he had experienced real persecution for being a Christian, being a believer, or for being an a-hole.



Reply
 · 
1



Show more















































All comments (98)







Share your thoughts












Top comments









Stream







P Dav1 day ago







This guy says morality is absolute. Then, I say, all of the horrendous acts done by or sanctioned by god in the bible, such as murder, slavery, rape, genocide, cannibalism, and treatment of women as property are absolutely immoral.

Reply
 · 




















BionicDance1 week ago









Reply
 · 
12







Hide replies








Mundus Novus Ordo
1 week ago


+LegendaryAsshole which one



Reply
 · 








1140Cecile
1 week ago


Nicely done, Keight.



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


Thanks! :)



Reply
 · 
2






Lance Zimmerman
1 week ago


You forgot temple. XD Funny how xtians enjoy to blame others for what they are doing. He also does not seem to realize that marriage is a law, not a god thing.
LOL on the lightning.
LOL Faith, he believes in wishful thinking = easy answers that agrees with one's own thinking.
3500 years ago, where did he get that? Also, what rewrite/translation is he talking about? More like centuries.
Good video.
Show less

Reply
 · 
2






Julia Reed
1 week ago


How many times did you have to do that flailing during the smiting before you finally got it right? That awesomely hilarious! I'm still smirking from it.



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


Believe it or not, that took one take.
There were other shots, tho...



Reply
 · 
1






Julia Reed
1 week ago


I applaud you, I really do, I'd probably have a bloopers reel at the end of a video due to ADD tangents, stuttering and my mild lisp



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


Believe me, I've been tempted to make a bloopers vid. :)



Reply
 · 
3






Julia Reed
1 week ago


Oh I'd watch that in a heart beat! 



Reply
 · 
2






Lance Zimmerman
1 week ago


+BionicDance oh you so should make a bloopers video! After all this time you should have lots of good stuff to chose from.



Reply
 · 








VinnyMonster1
5 days ago


+BionicDance A Bloopers vid would go viral! 



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
5 days ago


Well, it'll probably be a few months to gather enough GOOD blooper footage, but I've started collecting some...



Reply
 · 
1






VinnyMonster1
5 days ago


Damn but the struck by lightning bit was funny!  I was half expecting you to end the video with a long fade to black then.



Reply
 · 
1







ThomasTrue5 days ago







Within my own lifetime it was once 'moral' to punish children in school by striking them across the hands with a leather strap or a cane (or across the buttocks with a paddle in US schools) and a man could not rape his wife but was merely exercising his 'moral' conjugal 'rights'.  Go back less than a century and a husband had the 'moral right' to strike his wife with a rod 'no thicker than his thumb' (hence, "rule of thumb").  These 'morals' were based upon Biblical teaching and yet we now look upon them as examples of a barbaric past we have since thankfully rejected.  If this fool thinks that the Bible has 'stood the test of time', then he is so sadly deluded I frankly feel sorry for him.

Reply
 · 
1


















Star Laughter1 week ago







"I believe in absolute truth!" He says, while munching on shellfish that was harvested on the Sabbath...

Reply
 · 
1


















Dragnauct Sylvas1 week ago







I love how they want to dissolve the negative connotations of terms used against them. Can't wait till they do it to the word "Faith."

Reply
 · 




















Inannalu1 week ago







Harmful to an ideology is not the same thing as harmful to people.
Behaviors and activities which do the former, but do not do the latter, are perfectly okay ethically, so far as I'm concerned.
In fact, if some behavior or activity harms an ideology which is responsible for much harm to people, so much the better.

Reply
 · 
5


















Charles Kunkle1 week ago







and we're totally ignoring the fact that God does NOT define marriage as one man and one woman...
Otherwise, many of the patriarchs of the Christian religion were violating God's law. Solomon had 300 wives and 700 concubines? Excatly how is that "one man and one woman"

Reply
 · 
2


















themplar1 week ago







Another great video from you. And again very right.
I personally cannot understand the objections people have against gays and gay marriage.  Sadly its not just religious biggots i've been in many discussions with non theist who were still absolute biggots.
Its funny how they Always accuse me of intolerance when i call their arguments absolute bogus and them biggots.  Every time the arguments are.. its not natural.. well obviously it is..  what if everybody turned gay the human species would end... wouldnt happen and if so what? They still can get children by In Vitro.
In the end all their arguments are invalid. and only one real arguments is left over they wont pronounce.
They suffer from imagination and see two gays going at it and they think its Icky. And thats all it is for them.. they think its icky.. well then stop fantasizing about it.
Towards religious biggotry.... i whish it was allowed to smack them around with their own bibles...
Show less
Reply
 · 
1

















DoctorScarlet
1 week ago


Not to mention that there's also the ridiculous idea that gays want to recruit children for the sole purpose of making them gay.
People don't just become gay. Usually a person has a predisposition to being gay, but this is something many people will deny. I myself, a person who grew up in a Christian home, had a predisposition to being pansexual, but it's easier to deny something than to actually own up to it. I'm so glad I grew out of that horseshit though, I'm much happier.
Read more

Reply
 · 
1







Red Cloud1 week ago







You can't just re-define words to fit your own ends. Start doing that all willy-nilly, and you ruin the foundation of language itself, the fact that we can understand it. You can't just destroy an entire language, because you don't like how some of the words coming together make you feel, that's bullshit. Words like Tolerance are there, because we need them, if we didn't need them, we wouldn't have them. 

Reply
 · 




















CarefulAtheist1 week ago







WTF moment @7:05. Gold!

Reply
 · 




















Moor Letoh1 week ago







Epic.

Reply
 · 




















mikeyvester1 week ago







Speaking from experience living in a country where gay marriage has been legal for almost 9 years, I haven't noticed anything different. I would have never known the law changed except it was on the news.  The only reason I can see why a person would be against gay marriage, they are fucking assholes and they like to hurt people.

Reply
 · 
1


















markedfang1 week ago







What if god was true? What would actually change?
He'd still have to come up with good arguments to justify his demands. I would see god as no more then another human with another opinion and unless he can convince me of his case I still wouldn't feel any obligation towards him.
Worship blinds you to attrociaties.

Reply
 · 
2


















Griffin98571 week ago







7:03 I nearly jumped out of my own skin shakes fist at Kate.

Reply
 · 
1







Hide replies








BionicDance
1 week ago


Neener. ;)



Reply
 · 
1






Griffin9857
1 week ago


Any more surprises? :P



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


+Griffin9857 If I told you, they wouldn't be surprises, now would they? :D



Reply
 · 
1






Griffin9857
1 week ago


+BionicDance *Glares*



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


+Griffin9857 *sticks out tongue*



Reply
 · 
1






christopher9000p
6 days ago


Hey, blame "god", not Kate for that one. :P



Reply
 · 









Felhaven1 week ago (edited)







You really shouldn't quote old testament based definitions of marriage while wearing a polyblend shirt.  

Reply
 · 
2

















DoctorScarlet
1 week ago


Gives a whole new meaning to "don't throw stones while standing in a glass house".



Reply
 · 









RRoocckkyy501 week ago







Nice new intro! : )

Reply
 · 
1

















BionicDance
1 week ago


Thanks! I was going for a kind of 80s look. :)



Reply
 · 
1







VGatheist1 week ago (edited)







well the moral argument against abortion is that you are killing a baby. A mother does not have a right to kill her new born baby, so the question then comes about, at what point does a baby have the right to live. But the trick in proving abortion immoral within a real world sense is to prove that the fetus is being harmed. Big argument and I am not going to go through the whole case for abortion, but I just don't find your "if you do not agree with abortion don't have one." as a valid point because the whole reason there is any argument is the attempt to demonstrate that the fetus should have rights. I think the laws for abortion are very close to taking all of this in account. But the Christians idea of egg + sperm = no abortion is just not valid. I think the laws very, but right now all states at least use viability and not birth as the starting point for fetus rights. Allot of laws will use the trimester to determine if an abortion as legal. But you know as a Lesbian you likely will never have to worry about it. If you have a baby, you'd have to choose it.
Read more
Reply
 · 




















TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







@7:05- Nice green cross.  Faded in a bit early but still nice.

Reply
 · 



















BionicDance
1 week ago


Heh. It's a chromakey guide mark to keep CGI elements in place relative to the camera.



Reply
 · 








TheRealPaulMarshall
1 week ago


I figgered.  Still nice given the context.



Reply
 · 









Jesse Sisolack1 week ago (edited)







New Planet? looks rather...wet. I only saw one little area of land.
Does this fellow need a book shelf? Maybe we should pitch in and get him one of those particle board ones from Wal-Mart. Seriously, concrete bricks and boards?

Reply
 · 




















Robert Roman1 week ago







This fucktard says all that special pleading in the name of the god of intolerance Yahweh. He sure fights hard for intolerance what a hypocritical bigot.

Reply
 · 



















yadabub
1 week ago


That was what struck me as well.  His Christian privilege allows him to spew what he likes with few consequences.  No doubt, he would be singing another tune if he had experienced real persecution for being a Christian, being a believer, or for being an a-hole.



Reply
 · 
1



Show more








































All comments (98)







Share your thoughts












Top comments









Stream







P Dav1 day ago







This guy says morality is absolute. Then, I say, all of the horrendous acts done by or sanctioned by god in the bible, such as murder, slavery, rape, genocide, cannibalism, and treatment of women as property are absolutely immoral.

Reply
 · 




















BionicDance1 week ago









Reply
 · 
12







Hide replies








Mundus Novus Ordo
1 week ago


+LegendaryAsshole which one



Reply
 · 








1140Cecile
1 week ago


Nicely done, Keight.



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


Thanks! :)



Reply
 · 
2






Lance Zimmerman
1 week ago


You forgot temple. XD Funny how xtians enjoy to blame others for what they are doing. He also does not seem to realize that marriage is a law, not a god thing.
LOL on the lightning.
LOL Faith, he believes in wishful thinking = easy answers that agrees with one's own thinking.
3500 years ago, where did he get that? Also, what rewrite/translation is he talking about? More like centuries.
Good video.
Show less

Reply
 · 
2






Julia Reed
1 week ago


How many times did you have to do that flailing during the smiting before you finally got it right? That awesomely hilarious! I'm still smirking from it.



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


Believe it or not, that took one take.
There were other shots, tho...



Reply
 · 
1






Julia Reed
1 week ago


I applaud you, I really do, I'd probably have a bloopers reel at the end of a video due to ADD tangents, stuttering and my mild lisp



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


Believe me, I've been tempted to make a bloopers vid. :)



Reply
 · 
3






Julia Reed
1 week ago


Oh I'd watch that in a heart beat! 



Reply
 · 
2






Lance Zimmerman
1 week ago


+BionicDance oh you so should make a bloopers video! After all this time you should have lots of good stuff to chose from.



Reply
 · 








VinnyMonster1
5 days ago


+BionicDance A Bloopers vid would go viral! 



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
5 days ago


Well, it'll probably be a few months to gather enough GOOD blooper footage, but I've started collecting some...



Reply
 · 
1






VinnyMonster1
5 days ago


Damn but the struck by lightning bit was funny!  I was half expecting you to end the video with a long fade to black then.



Reply
 · 
1







ThomasTrue5 days ago







Within my own lifetime it was once 'moral' to punish children in school by striking them across the hands with a leather strap or a cane (or across the buttocks with a paddle in US schools) and a man could not rape his wife but was merely exercising his 'moral' conjugal 'rights'.  Go back less than a century and a husband had the 'moral right' to strike his wife with a rod 'no thicker than his thumb' (hence, "rule of thumb").  These 'morals' were based upon Biblical teaching and yet we now look upon them as examples of a barbaric past we have since thankfully rejected.  If this fool thinks that the Bible has 'stood the test of time', then he is so sadly deluded I frankly feel sorry for him.

Reply
 · 
1


















Star Laughter1 week ago







"I believe in absolute truth!" He says, while munching on shellfish that was harvested on the Sabbath...

Reply
 · 
1


















Dragnauct Sylvas1 week ago







I love how they want to dissolve the negative connotations of terms used against them. Can't wait till they do it to the word "Faith."

Reply
 · 




















Inannalu1 week ago







Harmful to an ideology is not the same thing as harmful to people.
Behaviors and activities which do the former, but do not do the latter, are perfectly okay ethically, so far as I'm concerned.
In fact, if some behavior or activity harms an ideology which is responsible for much harm to people, so much the better.

Reply
 · 
5


















Charles Kunkle1 week ago







and we're totally ignoring the fact that God does NOT define marriage as one man and one woman...
Otherwise, many of the patriarchs of the Christian religion were violating God's law. Solomon had 300 wives and 700 concubines? Excatly how is that "one man and one woman"

Reply
 · 
2


















themplar1 week ago







Another great video from you. And again very right.
I personally cannot understand the objections people have against gays and gay marriage.  Sadly its not just religious biggots i've been in many discussions with non theist who were still absolute biggots.
Its funny how they Always accuse me of intolerance when i call their arguments absolute bogus and them biggots.  Every time the arguments are.. its not natural.. well obviously it is..  what if everybody turned gay the human species would end... wouldnt happen and if so what? They still can get children by In Vitro.
In the end all their arguments are invalid. and only one real arguments is left over they wont pronounce.
They suffer from imagination and see two gays going at it and they think its Icky. And thats all it is for them.. they think its icky.. well then stop fantasizing about it.
Towards religious biggotry.... i whish it was allowed to smack them around with their own bibles...
Show less
Reply
 · 
1

















DoctorScarlet
1 week ago


Not to mention that there's also the ridiculous idea that gays want to recruit children for the sole purpose of making them gay.
People don't just become gay. Usually a person has a predisposition to being gay, but this is something many people will deny. I myself, a person who grew up in a Christian home, had a predisposition to being pansexual, but it's easier to deny something than to actually own up to it. I'm so glad I grew out of that horseshit though, I'm much happier.
Read more

Reply
 · 
1







Red Cloud1 week ago







You can't just re-define words to fit your own ends. Start doing that all willy-nilly, and you ruin the foundation of language itself, the fact that we can understand it. You can't just destroy an entire language, because you don't like how some of the words coming together make you feel, that's bullshit. Words like Tolerance are there, because we need them, if we didn't need them, we wouldn't have them. 

Reply
 · 




















CarefulAtheist1 week ago







WTF moment @7:05. Gold!

Reply
 · 




















Moor Letoh1 week ago







Epic.

Reply
 · 




















mikeyvester1 week ago







Speaking from experience living in a country where gay marriage has been legal for almost 9 years, I haven't noticed anything different. I would have never known the law changed except it was on the news.  The only reason I can see why a person would be against gay marriage, they are fucking assholes and they like to hurt people.

Reply
 · 
1


















markedfang1 week ago







What if god was true? What would actually change?
He'd still have to come up with good arguments to justify his demands. I would see god as no more then another human with another opinion and unless he can convince me of his case I still wouldn't feel any obligation towards him.
Worship blinds you to attrociaties.

Reply
 · 
2


















Griffin98571 week ago







7:03 I nearly jumped out of my own skin shakes fist at Kate.

Reply
 · 
1







Hide replies








BionicDance
1 week ago


Neener. ;)



Reply
 · 
1






Griffin9857
1 week ago


Any more surprises? :P



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


+Griffin9857 If I told you, they wouldn't be surprises, now would they? :D



Reply
 · 
1






Griffin9857
1 week ago


+BionicDance *Glares*



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


+Griffin9857 *sticks out tongue*



Reply
 · 
1






christopher9000p
6 days ago


Hey, blame "god", not Kate for that one. :P



Reply
 · 









Felhaven1 week ago (edited)







You really shouldn't quote old testament based definitions of marriage while wearing a polyblend shirt.  

Reply
 · 
2

















DoctorScarlet
1 week ago


Gives a whole new meaning to "don't throw stones while standing in a glass house".



Reply
 · 









RRoocckkyy501 week ago







Nice new intro! : )

Reply
 · 
1

















BionicDance
1 week ago


Thanks! I was going for a kind of 80s look. :)



Reply
 · 
1







VGatheist1 week ago (edited)







well the moral argument against abortion is that you are killing a baby. A mother does not have a right to kill her new born baby, so the question then comes about, at what point does a baby have the right to live. But the trick in proving abortion immoral within a real world sense is to prove that the fetus is being harmed. Big argument and I am not going to go through the whole case for abortion, but I just don't find your "if you do not agree with abortion don't have one." as a valid point because the whole reason there is any argument is the attempt to demonstrate that the fetus should have rights. I think the laws for abortion are very close to taking all of this in account. But the Christians idea of egg + sperm = no abortion is just not valid. I think the laws very, but right now all states at least use viability and not birth as the starting point for fetus rights. Allot of laws will use the trimester to determine if an abortion as legal. But you know as a Lesbian you likely will never have to worry about it. If you have a baby, you'd have to choose it.
Read more
Reply
 · 




















TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







@7:05- Nice green cross.  Faded in a bit early but still nice.

Reply
 · 



















BionicDance
1 week ago


Heh. It's a chromakey guide mark to keep CGI elements in place relative to the camera.



Reply
 · 








TheRealPaulMarshall
1 week ago


I figgered.  Still nice given the context.



Reply
 · 









Jesse Sisolack1 week ago (edited)







New Planet? looks rather...wet. I only saw one little area of land.
Does this fellow need a book shelf? Maybe we should pitch in and get him one of those particle board ones from Wal-Mart. Seriously, concrete bricks and boards?

Reply
 · 




















Robert Roman1 week ago







This fucktard says all that special pleading in the name of the god of intolerance Yahweh. He sure fights hard for intolerance what a hypocritical bigot.

Reply
 · 



















yadabub
1 week ago


That was what struck me as well.  His Christian privilege allows him to spew what he likes with few consequences.  No doubt, he would be singing another tune if he had experienced real persecution for being a Christian, being a believer, or for being an a-hole.



Reply
 · 
1







BohemianBlasphemy1 week ago







2:34
I have a Bible. If god wrote that book, god intended marriage to be between a man and a woman; but also between a man and all the women that man can afford to rape.
What is this idiot even talking about?

Reply
 · 
3


















Peter Baxter1 week ago







Thanks for making great videos and calling out nutjobs like this guy, Bionic. His alleged point made so little sense, it was like he was okay with slavery because it was in the Bible, too.. not to mention that old tired "God intended marriage" argument when marriage was around long before the Bible as a business transaction of sorts. Le sigh.

Reply
 · 




















TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







Someone needs to explain to this dude that Gahwd's "absolute definition of marriage" involves one man and as many females as he can afford to buy including his sister, his half-sister, his half-sister's slaves, his aunts, his own slaves, as many concubines as he can purchase or coerce by threat of violence, any female of any age taken in war, any un-affianced female of any age that he can manage to rape and then pay for, and - if we allow for a certain reading of Genesis chapter 2 verse 20 - pretty much any animal (or maybe even any plant) into which he might possibly stick his penis.  [Note: That list is not meant to be exhaustive.  I'm sure there are some that I missed.]

Reply
 · 




















Len H2 days ago







BTW I love ya KATE no matter what your incorrect opinion of me....a ASSUMPTION is just that...those first 3 letters ...
 Love ya KATE now how about a great big wet KISS...dont hate because I am male lol what you afraid it might make you get COOTIES lol
BTW I liked the video as always

Reply
 · 




















TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







Did you abscond with Boehner's tanning bed?

Reply
 · 
1

















BionicDance
1 week ago (edited)


Naw...my camera was just acting like a little bitch, lighting-wise.



Reply
 · 









Packard Sonic1 week ago







I have had similar arguments with guys like him. He is a serious douche bag.  

Reply
 · 




















Len H2 days ago







Kate called me a Homophobic when i asked her question ...I ask a question and get called a name. But that is okay  I possed that dame question to my niece who is gay and she was like Uncle let that doesnt make you homophobic anyone who calls you that has a problem and they are lucky they didnt say it to you face  then we looked at a girl and both said  DAMN nice ass and laughed I love my niece she is awesome.
As for a Bigot....every single human is ....proud to be a bigot.
 My fist doesn't have to stop at the tip of any-ones nose and hasn't many times.
  In fact many time have not stopped with my feet to peoples noses over and over.
  Never bothered me before to put someone in their place...though these days it hurts...getting old lol.
   Values and morals suck, I would prefer busting more heads and not no damn BS law in my way...PISH but so far I have stayed many steps away of these moral laws of though shall not kill.
 The Qu'ran القرآن الكريم is the answer and oh how they enforce their rules.
  LOL
    Remember if you want  a law changed no matter how vile and disgusting it is  get the right wing out and the left wing in to make it legal....


 
Read more (17 lines)
Reply
 · 




















TheAtheistPaladin .1 week ago







In societies where there is no difference between private morality and a public morality, that would be a totalitarian society.  Why can't they realize that?

Reply
 · 
2


















DBeetleeater Doug1 week ago







Is this guy using the English language?  He uses words I have heard before but his meaning for those words are just plain different from what I think they mean.  Good job BionicDance.

Reply
 · 




















Mark Susskind1 week ago







I am smitten. :3

Reply
 · 




















Mel Rhomberg1 week ago







God didn't give a definition of marriage. Some people don't actually read the bible. le sigh

Reply
 · 




















TheAmulli1 week ago







I clicked thumbs up immediately after god struck you down midsentence. 

Reply
 · 




















angryhairpeice6 days ago







Isn't it funny how they always say that the book stands the test of time, then when you point out things like slavery, and working on the sabbath, they say 'That was a different time.'? That is why I am a gnostic antitheist. I know I am for a complete obliteration of religion. If we could get them to think, it could be possible. 

Reply
 · 




















beirirangu1 week ago (edited)







I think you missed a great oppertunity: he said that if it's in the bible, no matter when or in what context it was written, it's true. Meaning that he believes slavery should still be enforced as well as the death penalty for worshiping other gods, worshiping things that resemble anything from heaven, anything from earth, and anything from below the earth, using god's name in vain, working on the sabbath, not honoring your parents, ex... unless he thinks that when god said (roughly) , it is a permanent law that anyone who does any work on the sabbath is to be put to death, oh and here are the (first) ten commandments that I wrote with my finger. [ex 31 :12-18]

Reply
 · 









View all 4 replies








BionicDance
1 week ago


+beirirangu I'm pretty sure I mentioned that too.



Reply
 · 








beirirangu
1 week ago


+BionicDance plus, I did post it before finishing the video... having typed it up after the first volley of the bible's infallibility



Reply
 · 









amoscarmel1 week ago







Great clip, thank  you. Loved the lightening strike lol...

Reply
 · 




















pauldhoff1 week ago







Their so-called objective laws are subjectively interpreted by them all the time. 
Paul

Reply
 · 




















Pat MaCrotch1 week ago







Somebody needs to see the South Park episode about "tolerance" ?

Reply
 · 




















Emigdiosback1 week ago







was the title intentional?

Reply
 · 









View all 8 replies








TheRealPaulMarshall
1 week ago


I thought that number was the same in both phrasings and that the difference was only in whether the elided object of the preposition should have been explicit.



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+TheRealPaulMarshall When I parse your rephrasing into more colloquial speech, what I get is, "Some things I will not put up with," meaning the video is listing off some things I find intolerable.
But what the title is really saying is, "There are some things I will not put up with," being rather more ambiguous.



Reply
 · 









zarkoff451 week ago







Sum things down with BionicDance: Intolerance comes through law or vigilante justice, nothing else.

Reply
 · 




















RetroFanaminna1 week ago







How did this guy confuse being tolerant with not agreeing with someones opinion and values?

Reply
 · 
















Show more









































All comments (98)







Share your thoughts












Top comments









Stream







P Dav1 day ago







This guy says morality is absolute. Then, I say, all of the horrendous acts done by or sanctioned by god in the bible, such as murder, slavery, rape, genocide, cannibalism, and treatment of women as property are absolutely immoral.

Reply
 · 




















BionicDance1 week ago









Reply
 · 
12







Hide replies








Mundus Novus Ordo
1 week ago


+LegendaryAsshole which one



Reply
 · 








1140Cecile
1 week ago


Nicely done, Keight.



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


Thanks! :)



Reply
 · 
2






Lance Zimmerman
1 week ago


You forgot temple. XD Funny how xtians enjoy to blame others for what they are doing. He also does not seem to realize that marriage is a law, not a god thing.
LOL on the lightning.
LOL Faith, he believes in wishful thinking = easy answers that agrees with one's own thinking.
3500 years ago, where did he get that? Also, what rewrite/translation is he talking about? More like centuries.
Good video.
Show less

Reply
 · 
2






Julia Reed
1 week ago


How many times did you have to do that flailing during the smiting before you finally got it right? That awesomely hilarious! I'm still smirking from it.



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


Believe it or not, that took one take.
There were other shots, tho...



Reply
 · 
1






Julia Reed
1 week ago


I applaud you, I really do, I'd probably have a bloopers reel at the end of a video due to ADD tangents, stuttering and my mild lisp



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


Believe me, I've been tempted to make a bloopers vid. :)



Reply
 · 
3






Julia Reed
1 week ago


Oh I'd watch that in a heart beat! 



Reply
 · 
2






Lance Zimmerman
1 week ago


+BionicDance oh you so should make a bloopers video! After all this time you should have lots of good stuff to chose from.



Reply
 · 








VinnyMonster1
5 days ago


+BionicDance A Bloopers vid would go viral! 



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
5 days ago


Well, it'll probably be a few months to gather enough GOOD blooper footage, but I've started collecting some...



Reply
 · 
1






VinnyMonster1
5 days ago


Damn but the struck by lightning bit was funny!  I was half expecting you to end the video with a long fade to black then.



Reply
 · 
1







ThomasTrue5 days ago







Within my own lifetime it was once 'moral' to punish children in school by striking them across the hands with a leather strap or a cane (or across the buttocks with a paddle in US schools) and a man could not rape his wife but was merely exercising his 'moral' conjugal 'rights'.  Go back less than a century and a husband had the 'moral right' to strike his wife with a rod 'no thicker than his thumb' (hence, "rule of thumb").  These 'morals' were based upon Biblical teaching and yet we now look upon them as examples of a barbaric past we have since thankfully rejected.  If this fool thinks that the Bible has 'stood the test of time', then he is so sadly deluded I frankly feel sorry for him.

Reply
 · 
1


















Star Laughter1 week ago







"I believe in absolute truth!" He says, while munching on shellfish that was harvested on the Sabbath...

Reply
 · 
1


















Dragnauct Sylvas1 week ago







I love how they want to dissolve the negative connotations of terms used against them. Can't wait till they do it to the word "Faith."

Reply
 · 




















Inannalu1 week ago







Harmful to an ideology is not the same thing as harmful to people.
Behaviors and activities which do the former, but do not do the latter, are perfectly okay ethically, so far as I'm concerned.
In fact, if some behavior or activity harms an ideology which is responsible for much harm to people, so much the better.

Reply
 · 
5


















Charles Kunkle1 week ago







and we're totally ignoring the fact that God does NOT define marriage as one man and one woman...
Otherwise, many of the patriarchs of the Christian religion were violating God's law. Solomon had 300 wives and 700 concubines? Excatly how is that "one man and one woman"

Reply
 · 
2


















themplar1 week ago







Another great video from you. And again very right.
I personally cannot understand the objections people have against gays and gay marriage.  Sadly its not just religious biggots i've been in many discussions with non theist who were still absolute biggots.
Its funny how they Always accuse me of intolerance when i call their arguments absolute bogus and them biggots.  Every time the arguments are.. its not natural.. well obviously it is..  what if everybody turned gay the human species would end... wouldnt happen and if so what? They still can get children by In Vitro.
In the end all their arguments are invalid. and only one real arguments is left over they wont pronounce.
They suffer from imagination and see two gays going at it and they think its Icky. And thats all it is for them.. they think its icky.. well then stop fantasizing about it.
Towards religious biggotry.... i whish it was allowed to smack them around with their own bibles...
Show less
Reply
 · 
1

















DoctorScarlet
1 week ago


Not to mention that there's also the ridiculous idea that gays want to recruit children for the sole purpose of making them gay.
People don't just become gay. Usually a person has a predisposition to being gay, but this is something many people will deny. I myself, a person who grew up in a Christian home, had a predisposition to being pansexual, but it's easier to deny something than to actually own up to it. I'm so glad I grew out of that horseshit though, I'm much happier.
Read more

Reply
 · 
1







Red Cloud1 week ago







You can't just re-define words to fit your own ends. Start doing that all willy-nilly, and you ruin the foundation of language itself, the fact that we can understand it. You can't just destroy an entire language, because you don't like how some of the words coming together make you feel, that's bullshit. Words like Tolerance are there, because we need them, if we didn't need them, we wouldn't have them. 

Reply
 · 




















CarefulAtheist1 week ago







WTF moment @7:05. Gold!

Reply
 · 




















Moor Letoh1 week ago







Epic.

Reply
 · 




















mikeyvester1 week ago







Speaking from experience living in a country where gay marriage has been legal for almost 9 years, I haven't noticed anything different. I would have never known the law changed except it was on the news.  The only reason I can see why a person would be against gay marriage, they are fucking assholes and they like to hurt people.

Reply
 · 
1


















markedfang1 week ago







What if god was true? What would actually change?
He'd still have to come up with good arguments to justify his demands. I would see god as no more then another human with another opinion and unless he can convince me of his case I still wouldn't feel any obligation towards him.
Worship blinds you to attrociaties.

Reply
 · 
2


















Griffin98571 week ago







7:03 I nearly jumped out of my own skin shakes fist at Kate.

Reply
 · 
1







Hide replies








BionicDance
1 week ago


Neener. ;)



Reply
 · 
1






Griffin9857
1 week ago


Any more surprises? :P



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


+Griffin9857 If I told you, they wouldn't be surprises, now would they? :D



Reply
 · 
1






Griffin9857
1 week ago


+BionicDance *Glares*



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


+Griffin9857 *sticks out tongue*



Reply
 · 
1






christopher9000p
6 days ago


Hey, blame "god", not Kate for that one. :P



Reply
 · 









Felhaven1 week ago (edited)







You really shouldn't quote old testament based definitions of marriage while wearing a polyblend shirt.  

Reply
 · 
2

















DoctorScarlet
1 week ago


Gives a whole new meaning to "don't throw stones while standing in a glass house".



Reply
 · 









RRoocckkyy501 week ago







Nice new intro! : )

Reply
 · 
1

















BionicDance
1 week ago


Thanks! I was going for a kind of 80s look. :)



Reply
 · 
1







VGatheist1 week ago (edited)







well the moral argument against abortion is that you are killing a baby. A mother does not have a right to kill her new born baby, so the question then comes about, at what point does a baby have the right to live. But the trick in proving abortion immoral within a real world sense is to prove that the fetus is being harmed. Big argument and I am not going to go through the whole case for abortion, but I just don't find your "if you do not agree with abortion don't have one." as a valid point because the whole reason there is any argument is the attempt to demonstrate that the fetus should have rights. I think the laws for abortion are very close to taking all of this in account. But the Christians idea of egg + sperm = no abortion is just not valid. I think the laws very, but right now all states at least use viability and not birth as the starting point for fetus rights. Allot of laws will use the trimester to determine if an abortion as legal. But you know as a Lesbian you likely will never have to worry about it. If you have a baby, you'd have to choose it.
Read more
Reply
 · 




















TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







@7:05- Nice green cross.  Faded in a bit early but still nice.

Reply
 · 



















BionicDance
1 week ago


Heh. It's a chromakey guide mark to keep CGI elements in place relative to the camera.



Reply
 · 








TheRealPaulMarshall
1 week ago


I figgered.  Still nice given the context.



Reply
 · 









Jesse Sisolack1 week ago (edited)







New Planet? looks rather...wet. I only saw one little area of land.
Does this fellow need a book shelf? Maybe we should pitch in and get him one of those particle board ones from Wal-Mart. Seriously, concrete bricks and boards?

Reply
 · 




















Robert Roman1 week ago







This fucktard says all that special pleading in the name of the god of intolerance Yahweh. He sure fights hard for intolerance what a hypocritical bigot.

Reply
 · 



















yadabub
1 week ago


That was what struck me as well.  His Christian privilege allows him to spew what he likes with few consequences.  No doubt, he would be singing another tune if he had experienced real persecution for being a Christian, being a believer, or for being an a-hole.



Reply
 · 
1







BohemianBlasphemy1 week ago







2:34
I have a Bible. If god wrote that book, god intended marriage to be between a man and a woman; but also between a man and all the women that man can afford to rape.
What is this idiot even talking about?

Reply
 · 
3


















Peter Baxter1 week ago







Thanks for making great videos and calling out nutjobs like this guy, Bionic. His alleged point made so little sense, it was like he was okay with slavery because it was in the Bible, too.. not to mention that old tired "God intended marriage" argument when marriage was around long before the Bible as a business transaction of sorts. Le sigh.

Reply
 · 




















TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







Someone needs to explain to this dude that Gahwd's "absolute definition of marriage" involves one man and as many females as he can afford to buy including his sister, his half-sister, his half-sister's slaves, his aunts, his own slaves, as many concubines as he can purchase or coerce by threat of violence, any female of any age taken in war, any un-affianced female of any age that he can manage to rape and then pay for, and - if we allow for a certain reading of Genesis chapter 2 verse 20 - pretty much any animal (or maybe even any plant) into which he might possibly stick his penis.  [Note: That list is not meant to be exhaustive.  I'm sure there are some that I missed.]

Reply
 · 




















Len H2 days ago







BTW I love ya KATE no matter what your incorrect opinion of me....a ASSUMPTION is just that...those first 3 letters ...
 Love ya KATE now how about a great big wet KISS...dont hate because I am male lol what you afraid it might make you get COOTIES lol
BTW I liked the video as always

Reply
 · 




















TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







Did you abscond with Boehner's tanning bed?

Reply
 · 
1

















BionicDance
1 week ago (edited)


Naw...my camera was just acting like a little bitch, lighting-wise.



Reply
 · 









Packard Sonic1 week ago







I have had similar arguments with guys like him. He is a serious douche bag.  

Reply
 · 




















Len H2 days ago







Kate called me a Homophobic when i asked her question ...I ask a question and get called a name. But that is okay  I possed that dame question to my niece who is gay and she was like Uncle let that doesnt make you homophobic anyone who calls you that has a problem and they are lucky they didnt say it to you face  then we looked at a girl and both said  DAMN nice ass and laughed I love my niece she is awesome.
As for a Bigot....every single human is ....proud to be a bigot.
 My fist doesn't have to stop at the tip of any-ones nose and hasn't many times.
  In fact many time have not stopped with my feet to peoples noses over and over.
  Never bothered me before to put someone in their place...though these days it hurts...getting old lol.
   Values and morals suck, I would prefer busting more heads and not no damn BS law in my way...PISH but so far I have stayed many steps away of these moral laws of though shall not kill.
 The Qu'ran القرآن الكريم is the answer and oh how they enforce their rules.
  LOL
    Remember if you want  a law changed no matter how vile and disgusting it is  get the right wing out and the left wing in to make it legal....


 
Read more (17 lines)
Reply
 · 




















TheAtheistPaladin .1 week ago







In societies where there is no difference between private morality and a public morality, that would be a totalitarian society.  Why can't they realize that?

Reply
 · 
2


















DBeetleeater Doug1 week ago







Is this guy using the English language?  He uses words I have heard before but his meaning for those words are just plain different from what I think they mean.  Good job BionicDance.

Reply
 · 




















Mark Susskind1 week ago







I am smitten. :3

Reply
 · 




















Mel Rhomberg1 week ago







God didn't give a definition of marriage. Some people don't actually read the bible. le sigh

Reply
 · 




















TheAmulli1 week ago







I clicked thumbs up immediately after god struck you down midsentence. 

Reply
 · 




















angryhairpeice6 days ago







Isn't it funny how they always say that the book stands the test of time, then when you point out things like slavery, and working on the sabbath, they say 'That was a different time.'? That is why I am a gnostic antitheist. I know I am for a complete obliteration of religion. If we could get them to think, it could be possible. 

Reply
 · 




















beirirangu1 week ago (edited)







I think you missed a great oppertunity: he said that if it's in the bible, no matter when or in what context it was written, it's true. Meaning that he believes slavery should still be enforced as well as the death penalty for worshiping other gods, worshiping things that resemble anything from heaven, anything from earth, and anything from below the earth, using god's name in vain, working on the sabbath, not honoring your parents, ex... unless he thinks that when god said (roughly) , it is a permanent law that anyone who does any work on the sabbath is to be put to death, oh and here are the (first) ten commandments that I wrote with my finger. [ex 31 :12-18]

Reply
 · 









View all 4 replies








BionicDance
1 week ago


+beirirangu I'm pretty sure I mentioned that too.



Reply
 · 








beirirangu
1 week ago


+BionicDance plus, I did post it before finishing the video... having typed it up after the first volley of the bible's infallibility



Reply
 · 









amoscarmel1 week ago







Great clip, thank  you. Loved the lightening strike lol...

Reply
 · 




















pauldhoff1 week ago







Their so-called objective laws are subjectively interpreted by them all the time. 
Paul

Reply
 · 




















Pat MaCrotch1 week ago







Somebody needs to see the South Park episode about "tolerance" ?

Reply
 · 




















Emigdiosback1 week ago







was the title intentional?

Reply
 · 









View all 8 replies








TheRealPaulMarshall
1 week ago


I thought that number was the same in both phrasings and that the difference was only in whether the elided object of the preposition should have been explicit.



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+TheRealPaulMarshall When I parse your rephrasing into more colloquial speech, what I get is, "Some things I will not put up with," meaning the video is listing off some things I find intolerable.
But what the title is really saying is, "There are some things I will not put up with," being rather more ambiguous.



Reply
 · 









zarkoff451 week ago







Sum things down with BionicDance: Intolerance comes through law or vigilante justice, nothing else.

Reply
 · 




















RetroFanaminna1 week ago







How did this guy confuse being tolerant with not agreeing with someones opinion and values?

Reply
 · 
















Show more





































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































All comments (97)







Share your thoughts












Top comments









Stream







P Dav1 day ago







This guy says morality is absolute. Then, I say, all of the horrendous acts done by or sanctioned by god in the bible, such as murder, slavery, rape, genocide, cannibalism, and treatment of women as property are absolutely immoral.

Reply
 · 




















BionicDance1 week ago









Reply
 · 
12







Hide replies








Mundus Novus Ordo
1 week ago


+LegendaryAsshole which one



Reply
 · 








1140Cecile
1 week ago


Nicely done, Keight.



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


Thanks! :)



Reply
 · 
2






Lance Zimmerman
1 week ago


You forgot temple. XD Funny how xtians enjoy to blame others for what they are doing. He also does not seem to realize that marriage is a law, not a god thing.
LOL on the lightning.
LOL Faith, he believes in wishful thinking = easy answers that agrees with one's own thinking.
3500 years ago, where did he get that? Also, what rewrite/translation is he talking about? More like centuries.
Good video.
Show less

Reply
 · 
2






Julia Reed
1 week ago


How many times did you have to do that flailing during the smiting before you finally got it right? That awesomely hilarious! I'm still smirking from it.



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


Believe it or not, that took one take.
There were other shots, tho...



Reply
 · 
1






Julia Reed
1 week ago


I applaud you, I really do, I'd probably have a bloopers reel at the end of a video due to ADD tangents, stuttering and my mild lisp



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


Believe me, I've been tempted to make a bloopers vid. :)



Reply
 · 
3






Julia Reed
1 week ago


Oh I'd watch that in a heart beat! 



Reply
 · 
2






Lance Zimmerman
1 week ago


+BionicDance oh you so should make a bloopers video! After all this time you should have lots of good stuff to chose from.



Reply
 · 








VinnyMonster1
5 days ago


+BionicDance A Bloopers vid would go viral! 



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
5 days ago


Well, it'll probably be a few months to gather enough GOOD blooper footage, but I've started collecting some...



Reply
 · 
1






VinnyMonster1
5 days ago


Damn but the struck by lightning bit was funny!  I was half expecting you to end the video with a long fade to black then.



Reply
 · 
1







ThomasTrue5 days ago







Within my own lifetime it was once 'moral' to punish children in school by striking them across the hands with a leather strap or a cane (or across the buttocks with a paddle in US schools) and a man could not rape his wife but was merely exercising his 'moral' conjugal 'rights'.  Go back less than a century and a husband had the 'moral right' to strike his wife with a rod 'no thicker than his thumb' (hence, "rule of thumb").  These 'morals' were based upon Biblical teaching and yet we now look upon them as examples of a barbaric past we have since thankfully rejected.  If this fool thinks that the Bible has 'stood the test of time', then he is so sadly deluded I frankly feel sorry for him.

Reply
 · 
1


















Star Laughter1 week ago







"I believe in absolute truth!" He says, while munching on shellfish that was harvested on the Sabbath...

Reply
 · 
1


















Dragnauct Sylvas1 week ago







I love how they want to dissolve the negative connotations of terms used against them. Can't wait till they do it to the word "Faith."

Reply
 · 




















Charles Kunkle1 week ago







and we're totally ignoring the fact that God does NOT define marriage as one man and one woman...
Otherwise, many of the patriarchs of the Christian religion were violating God's law. Solomon had 300 wives and 700 concubines? Excatly how is that "one man and one woman"

Reply
 · 
2


















themplar1 week ago







Another great video from you. And again very right.
I personally cannot understand the objections people have against gays and gay marriage.  Sadly its not just religious biggots i've been in many discussions with non theist who were still absolute biggots.
Its funny how they Always accuse me of intolerance when i call their arguments absolute bogus and them biggots.  Every time the arguments are.. its not natural.. well obviously it is..  what if everybody turned gay the human species would end... wouldnt happen and if so what? They still can get children by In Vitro.
In the end all their arguments are invalid. and only one real arguments is left over they wont pronounce.
They suffer from imagination and see two gays going at it and they think its Icky. And thats all it is for them.. they think its icky.. well then stop fantasizing about it.
Towards religious biggotry.... i whish it was allowed to smack them around with their own bibles...
Read more (13 lines)
Reply
 · 
1

















DoctorScarlet
1 week ago


Not to mention that there's also the ridiculous idea that gays want to recruit children for the sole purpose of making them gay.
People don't just become gay. Usually a person has a predisposition to being gay, but this is something many people will deny. I myself, a person who grew up in a Christian home, had a predisposition to being pansexual, but it's easier to deny something than to actually own up to it. I'm so glad I grew out of that horseshit though, I'm much happier.
Show less

Reply
 · 
1







Red Cloud1 week ago







You can't just re-define words to fit your own ends. Start doing that all willy-nilly, and you ruin the foundation of language itself, the fact that we can understand it. You can't just destroy an entire language, because you don't like how some of the words coming together make you feel, that's bullshit. Words like Tolerance are there, because we need them, if we didn't need them, we wouldn't have them. 

Reply
 · 




















CarefulAtheist1 week ago







WTF moment @7:05. Gold!

Reply
 · 




















Moor Letoh1 week ago







Epic.

Reply
 · 




















mikeyvester1 week ago







Speaking from experience living in a country where gay marriage has been legal for almost 9 years, I haven't noticed anything different. I would have never known the law changed except it was on the news.  The only reason I can see why a person would be against gay marriage, they are fucking assholes and they like to hurt people.

Reply
 · 
1


















markedfang1 week ago







What if god was true? What would actually change?
He'd still have to come up with good arguments to justify his demands. I would see god as no more then another human with another opinion and unless he can convince me of his case I still wouldn't feel any obligation towards him.
Worship blinds you to attrociaties.

Reply
 · 
2


















Griffin98571 week ago







7:03 I nearly jumped out of my own skin shakes fist at Kate.

Reply
 · 
1







Hide replies








BionicDance
1 week ago


Neener. ;)



Reply
 · 
1






Griffin9857
1 week ago


Any more surprises? :P



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


+Griffin9857 If I told you, they wouldn't be surprises, now would they? :D



Reply
 · 
1






Griffin9857
1 week ago


+BionicDance *Glares*



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


+Griffin9857 *sticks out tongue*



Reply
 · 
1






christopher9000p
6 days ago


Hey, blame "god", not Kate for that one. :P



Reply
 · 









Felhaven1 week ago (edited)







You really shouldn't quote old testament based definitions of marriage while wearing a polyblend shirt.  

Reply
 · 
2

















DoctorScarlet
1 week ago


Gives a whole new meaning to "don't throw stones while standing in a glass house".



Reply
 · 









RRoocckkyy501 week ago







Nice new intro! : )

Reply
 · 
1

















BionicDance
1 week ago


Thanks! I was going for a kind of 80s look. :)



Reply
 · 
1







VGatheist1 week ago (edited)







well the moral argument against abortion is that you are killing a baby. A mother does not have a right to kill her new born baby, so the question then comes about, at what point does a baby have the right to live. But the trick in proving abortion immoral within a real world sense is to prove that the fetus is being harmed. Big argument and I am not going to go through the whole case for abortion, but I just don't find your "if you do not agree with abortion don't have one." as a valid point because the whole reason there is any argument is the attempt to demonstrate that the fetus should have rights. I think the laws for abortion are very close to taking all of this in account. But the Christians idea of egg + sperm = no abortion is just not valid. I think the laws very, but right now all states at least use viability and not birth as the starting point for fetus rights. Allot of laws will use the trimester to determine if an abortion as legal. But you know as a Lesbian you likely will never have to worry about it. If you have a baby, you'd have to choose it.
Read more
Reply
 · 




















TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







@7:05- Nice green cross.  Faded in a bit early but still nice.

Reply
 · 



















BionicDance
1 week ago


Heh. It's a chromakey guide mark to keep CGI elements in place relative to the camera.



Reply
 · 








TheRealPaulMarshall
1 week ago


I figgered.  Still nice given the context.



Reply
 · 









Jesse Sisolack1 week ago (edited)







New Planet? looks rather...wet. I only saw one little area of land.
Does this fellow need a book shelf? Maybe we should pitch in and get him one of those particle board ones from Wal-Mart. Seriously, concrete bricks and boards?

Reply
 · 




















Robert Roman1 week ago







This fucktard says all that special pleading in the name of the god of intolerance Yahweh. He sure fights hard for intolerance what a hypocritical bigot.

Reply
 · 



















yadabub
1 week ago


That was what struck me as well.  His Christian privilege allows him to spew what he likes with few consequences.  No doubt, he would be singing another tune if he had experienced real persecution for being a Christian, being a believer, or for being an a-hole.



Reply
 · 
1







BohemianBlasphemy1 week ago







2:34
I have a Bible. If god wrote that book, god intended marriage to be between a man and a woman; but also between a man and all the women that man can afford to rape.
What is this idiot even talking about?

Reply
 · 
3


















Inannalu1 week ago







Harmful to an ideology is not the same thing as harmful to people.
Behaviors and activities which do the former, but do not do the latter, are perfectly okay ethically, so far as I'm concerned.
In fact, if some behavior or activity harms an ideology which is responsible for much harm to people, so much the better.

Reply
 · 
5


















Peter Baxter1 week ago







Thanks for making great videos and calling out nutjobs like this guy, Bionic. His alleged point made so little sense, it was like he was okay with slavery because it was in the Bible, too.. not to mention that old tired "God intended marriage" argument when marriage was around long before the Bible as a business transaction of sorts. Le sigh.

Reply
 · 




















TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







Someone needs to explain to this dude that Gahwd's "absolute definition of marriage" involves one man and as many females as he can afford to buy including his sister, his half-sister, his half-sister's slaves, his aunts, his own slaves, as many concubines as he can purchase or coerce by threat of violence, any female of any age taken in war, any un-affianced female of any age that he can manage to rape and then pay for, and - if we allow for a certain reading of Genesis chapter 2 verse 20 - pretty much any animal (or maybe even any plant) into which he might possibly stick his penis.  [Note: That list is not meant to be exhaustive.  I'm sure there are some that I missed.]

Reply
 · 




















Len H2 days ago







BTW I love ya KATE no matter what your incorrect opinion of me....a ASSUMPTION is just that...those first 3 letters ...
 Love ya KATE now how about a great big wet KISS...dont hate because I am male lol what you afraid it might make you get COOTIES lol
BTW I liked the video as always

Reply
 · 




















TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







Did you abscond with Boehner's tanning bed?

Reply
 · 
1

















BionicDance
1 week ago (edited)


Naw...my camera was just acting like a little bitch, lighting-wise.



Reply
 · 









Packard Sonic1 week ago







I have had similar arguments with guys like him. He is a serious douche bag.  

Reply
 · 




















Len H2 days ago







Kate called me a Homophobic when i asked her question ...I ask a question and get called a name. But that is okay  I possed that dame question to my niece who is gay and she was like Uncle let that doesnt make you homophobic anyone who calls you that has a problem and they are lucky they didnt say it to you face  then we looked at a girl and both said  DAMN nice ass and laughed I love my niece she is awesome.
As for a Bigot....every single human is ....proud to be a bigot.
 My fist doesn't have to stop at the tip of any-ones nose and hasn't many times.
  In fact many time have not stopped with my feet to peoples noses over and over.
  Never bothered me before to put someone in their place...though these days it hurts...getting old lol.
   Values and morals suck, I would prefer busting more heads and not no damn BS law in my way...PISH but so far I have stayed many steps away of these moral laws of though shall not kill.
 The Qu'ran القرآن الكريم is the answer and oh how they enforce their rules.
  LOL
    Remember if you want  a law changed no matter how vile and disgusting it is  get the right wing out and the left wing in to make it legal....


 
Show less
Reply
 · 




















TheAtheistPaladin .1 week ago







In societies where there is no difference between private morality and a public morality, that would be a totalitarian society.  Why can't they realize that?

Reply
 · 
2


















DBeetleeater Doug1 week ago







Is this guy using the English language?  He uses words I have heard before but his meaning for those words are just plain different from what I think they mean.  Good job BionicDance.

Reply
 · 




















Mark Susskind1 week ago







I am smitten. :3

Reply
 · 




















Mel Rhomberg1 week ago







God didn't give a definition of marriage. Some people don't actually read the bible. le sigh

Reply
 · 




















TheAmulli1 week ago







I clicked thumbs up immediately after god struck you down midsentence. 

Reply
 · 




















angryhairpeice6 days ago







Isn't it funny how they always say that the book stands the test of time, then when you point out things like slavery, and working on the sabbath, they say 'That was a different time.'? That is why I am a gnostic antitheist. I know I am for a complete obliteration of religion. If we could get them to think, it could be possible. 

Reply
 · 




















beirirangu1 week ago (edited)







I think you missed a great oppertunity: he said that if it's in the bible, no matter when or in what context it was written, it's true. Meaning that he believes slavery should still be enforced as well as the death penalty for worshiping other gods, worshiping things that resemble anything from heaven, anything from earth, and anything from below the earth, using god's name in vain, working on the sabbath, not honoring your parents, ex... unless he thinks that when god said (roughly) , it is a permanent law that anyone who does any work on the sabbath is to be put to death, oh and here are the (first) ten commandments that I wrote with my finger. [ex 31 :12-18]

Reply
 · 









Hide replies








BionicDance
1 week ago


I'm, uh, pretty darn sure I brought up the bible condoning slavery...



Reply
 · 








beirirangu
1 week ago


+BionicDance you mentioned it in the meaning that it was a fad, an opinion that faded in time... much like how he thought the acceptance of homosexuality would... I meant it as in that he's picking and choosing what is 100% true and ignoring what's also in there



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+beirirangu I'm pretty sure I mentioned that too.



Reply
 · 








beirirangu
1 week ago


+BionicDance plus, I did post it before finishing the video... having typed it up after the first volley of the bible's infallibility



Reply
 · 









amoscarmel1 week ago







Great clip, thank  you. Loved the lightening strike lol...

Reply
 · 




















pauldhoff1 week ago







Their so-called objective laws are subjectively interpreted by them all the time. 
Paul

Reply
 · 




















Pat MaCrotch1 week ago







Somebody needs to see the South Park episode about "tolerance" ?

Reply
 · 




















Emigdiosback1 week ago







was the title intentional?

Reply
 · 









Hide replies








BionicDance
1 week ago


...I'm not sure I understand the question.



Reply
 · 








Emigdiosback
1 week ago


+BionicDance it sorta doesn't look right. like if written incorrectly. sorry, it's sorta bugging me.



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+Emigdiosback Actually, it's grammatically correct.
Had I written it, "Some Things I Will Not Put Up With," I'd be ending it with a preposition.



Reply
 · 
1






Emigdiosback
1 week ago (edited)


ohh! Sorry. I'm obsessive compulsive, and things like that catch my attention.



Reply
 · 








TheRealPaulMarshall
1 week ago


Should it not be "Some Things Up With Which I Will [Or 'Shall' given that the once considered incorrect 'will' was used, at the time, for emphasis.   Perhaps turn about is fair play.] Not Put"?



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+TheRealPaulMarshall No. Because your phrasing assumes that this is a list of intolerable things, rather than a statement of being unwilling to tolerate an unspecified set/number of things.



Reply
 · 








TheRealPaulMarshall
1 week ago


I thought that number was the same in both phrasings and that the difference was only in whether the elided object of the preposition should have been explicit.



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+TheRealPaulMarshall When I parse your rephrasing into more colloquial speech, what I get is, "Some things I will not put up with," meaning the video is listing off some things I find intolerable.
But what the title is really saying is, "There are some things I will not put up with," being rather more ambiguous.



Reply
 · 









zarkoff451 week ago







Sum things down with BionicDance: Intolerance comes through law or vigilante justice, nothing else.

Reply
 · 




















RetroFanaminna1 week ago







How did this guy confuse being tolerant with not agreeing with someones opinion and values?

Reply
 · 
















Show more








































All comments (97)







Share your thoughts












Top comments









Stream







P Dav1 day ago







This guy says morality is absolute. Then, I say, all of the horrendous acts done by or sanctioned by god in the bible, such as murder, slavery, rape, genocide, cannibalism, and treatment of women as property are absolutely immoral.

Reply
 · 




















BionicDance1 week ago









Reply
 · 
12







Hide replies








Mundus Novus Ordo
1 week ago


+LegendaryAsshole which one



Reply
 · 








1140Cecile
1 week ago


Nicely done, Keight.



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


Thanks! :)



Reply
 · 
2






Lance Zimmerman
1 week ago


You forgot temple. XD Funny how xtians enjoy to blame others for what they are doing. He also does not seem to realize that marriage is a law, not a god thing.
LOL on the lightning.
LOL Faith, he believes in wishful thinking = easy answers that agrees with one's own thinking.
3500 years ago, where did he get that? Also, what rewrite/translation is he talking about? More like centuries.
Good video.
Show less

Reply
 · 
2






Julia Reed
1 week ago


How many times did you have to do that flailing during the smiting before you finally got it right? That awesomely hilarious! I'm still smirking from it.



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


Believe it or not, that took one take.
There were other shots, tho...



Reply
 · 
1






Julia Reed
1 week ago


I applaud you, I really do, I'd probably have a bloopers reel at the end of a video due to ADD tangents, stuttering and my mild lisp



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


Believe me, I've been tempted to make a bloopers vid. :)



Reply
 · 
3






Julia Reed
1 week ago


Oh I'd watch that in a heart beat! 



Reply
 · 
2






Lance Zimmerman
1 week ago


+BionicDance oh you so should make a bloopers video! After all this time you should have lots of good stuff to chose from.



Reply
 · 








VinnyMonster1
5 days ago


+BionicDance A Bloopers vid would go viral! 



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
5 days ago


Well, it'll probably be a few months to gather enough GOOD blooper footage, but I've started collecting some...



Reply
 · 
1






VinnyMonster1
5 days ago


Damn but the struck by lightning bit was funny!  I was half expecting you to end the video with a long fade to black then.



Reply
 · 
1







ThomasTrue5 days ago







Within my own lifetime it was once 'moral' to punish children in school by striking them across the hands with a leather strap or a cane (or across the buttocks with a paddle in US schools) and a man could not rape his wife but was merely exercising his 'moral' conjugal 'rights'.  Go back less than a century and a husband had the 'moral right' to strike his wife with a rod 'no thicker than his thumb' (hence, "rule of thumb").  These 'morals' were based upon Biblical teaching and yet we now look upon them as examples of a barbaric past we have since thankfully rejected.  If this fool thinks that the Bible has 'stood the test of time', then he is so sadly deluded I frankly feel sorry for him.

Reply
 · 
1


















Star Laughter1 week ago







"I believe in absolute truth!" He says, while munching on shellfish that was harvested on the Sabbath...

Reply
 · 
1


















Dragnauct Sylvas1 week ago







I love how they want to dissolve the negative connotations of terms used against them. Can't wait till they do it to the word "Faith."

Reply
 · 




















Charles Kunkle1 week ago







and we're totally ignoring the fact that God does NOT define marriage as one man and one woman...
Otherwise, many of the patriarchs of the Christian religion were violating God's law. Solomon had 300 wives and 700 concubines? Excatly how is that "one man and one woman"

Reply
 · 
2


















themplar1 week ago







Another great video from you. And again very right.
I personally cannot understand the objections people have against gays and gay marriage.  Sadly its not just religious biggots i've been in many discussions with non theist who were still absolute biggots.
Its funny how they Always accuse me of intolerance when i call their arguments absolute bogus and them biggots.  Every time the arguments are.. its not natural.. well obviously it is..  what if everybody turned gay the human species would end... wouldnt happen and if so what? They still can get children by In Vitro.
In the end all their arguments are invalid. and only one real arguments is left over they wont pronounce.
They suffer from imagination and see two gays going at it and they think its Icky. And thats all it is for them.. they think its icky.. well then stop fantasizing about it.
Towards religious biggotry.... i whish it was allowed to smack them around with their own bibles...
Read more (13 lines)
Reply
 · 
1

















DoctorScarlet
1 week ago


Not to mention that there's also the ridiculous idea that gays want to recruit children for the sole purpose of making them gay.
People don't just become gay. Usually a person has a predisposition to being gay, but this is something many people will deny. I myself, a person who grew up in a Christian home, had a predisposition to being pansexual, but it's easier to deny something than to actually own up to it. I'm so glad I grew out of that horseshit though, I'm much happier.
Show less

Reply
 · 
1







Red Cloud1 week ago







You can't just re-define words to fit your own ends. Start doing that all willy-nilly, and you ruin the foundation of language itself, the fact that we can understand it. You can't just destroy an entire language, because you don't like how some of the words coming together make you feel, that's bullshit. Words like Tolerance are there, because we need them, if we didn't need them, we wouldn't have them. 

Reply
 · 




















CarefulAtheist1 week ago







WTF moment @7:05. Gold!

Reply
 · 




















Moor Letoh1 week ago







Epic.

Reply
 · 




















mikeyvester1 week ago







Speaking from experience living in a country where gay marriage has been legal for almost 9 years, I haven't noticed anything different. I would have never known the law changed except it was on the news.  The only reason I can see why a person would be against gay marriage, they are fucking assholes and they like to hurt people.

Reply
 · 
1


















markedfang1 week ago







What if god was true? What would actually change?
He'd still have to come up with good arguments to justify his demands. I would see god as no more then another human with another opinion and unless he can convince me of his case I still wouldn't feel any obligation towards him.
Worship blinds you to attrociaties.

Reply
 · 
2


















Griffin98571 week ago







7:03 I nearly jumped out of my own skin shakes fist at Kate.

Reply
 · 
1







Hide replies








BionicDance
1 week ago


Neener. ;)



Reply
 · 
1






Griffin9857
1 week ago


Any more surprises? :P



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


+Griffin9857 If I told you, they wouldn't be surprises, now would they? :D



Reply
 · 
1






Griffin9857
1 week ago


+BionicDance *Glares*



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


+Griffin9857 *sticks out tongue*



Reply
 · 
1






christopher9000p
6 days ago


Hey, blame "god", not Kate for that one. :P



Reply
 · 









Felhaven1 week ago (edited)







You really shouldn't quote old testament based definitions of marriage while wearing a polyblend shirt.  

Reply
 · 
2

















DoctorScarlet
1 week ago


Gives a whole new meaning to "don't throw stones while standing in a glass house".



Reply
 · 









RRoocckkyy501 week ago







Nice new intro! : )

Reply
 · 
1

















BionicDance
1 week ago


Thanks! I was going for a kind of 80s look. :)



Reply
 · 
1







VGatheist1 week ago (edited)







well the moral argument against abortion is that you are killing a baby. A mother does not have a right to kill her new born baby, so the question then comes about, at what point does a baby have the right to live. But the trick in proving abortion immoral within a real world sense is to prove that the fetus is being harmed. Big argument and I am not going to go through the whole case for abortion, but I just don't find your "if you do not agree with abortion don't have one." as a valid point because the whole reason there is any argument is the attempt to demonstrate that the fetus should have rights. I think the laws for abortion are very close to taking all of this in account. But the Christians idea of egg + sperm = no abortion is just not valid. I think the laws very, but right now all states at least use viability and not birth as the starting point for fetus rights. Allot of laws will use the trimester to determine if an abortion as legal. But you know as a Lesbian you likely will never have to worry about it. If you have a baby, you'd have to choose it.
Read more
Reply
 · 




















TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







@7:05- Nice green cross.  Faded in a bit early but still nice.

Reply
 · 



















BionicDance
1 week ago


Heh. It's a chromakey guide mark to keep CGI elements in place relative to the camera.



Reply
 · 








TheRealPaulMarshall
1 week ago


I figgered.  Still nice given the context.



Reply
 · 









Jesse Sisolack1 week ago (edited)







New Planet? looks rather...wet. I only saw one little area of land.
Does this fellow need a book shelf? Maybe we should pitch in and get him one of those particle board ones from Wal-Mart. Seriously, concrete bricks and boards?

Reply
 · 




















Robert Roman1 week ago







This fucktard says all that special pleading in the name of the god of intolerance Yahweh. He sure fights hard for intolerance what a hypocritical bigot.

Reply
 · 



















yadabub
1 week ago


That was what struck me as well.  His Christian privilege allows him to spew what he likes with few consequences.  No doubt, he would be singing another tune if he had experienced real persecution for being a Christian, being a believer, or for being an a-hole.



Reply
 · 
1







BohemianBlasphemy1 week ago







2:34
I have a Bible. If god wrote that book, god intended marriage to be between a man and a woman; but also between a man and all the women that man can afford to rape.
What is this idiot even talking about?

Reply
 · 
3


















Inannalu1 week ago







Harmful to an ideology is not the same thing as harmful to people.
Behaviors and activities which do the former, but do not do the latter, are perfectly okay ethically, so far as I'm concerned.
In fact, if some behavior or activity harms an ideology which is responsible for much harm to people, so much the better.

Reply
 · 
5


















Peter Baxter1 week ago







Thanks for making great videos and calling out nutjobs like this guy, Bionic. His alleged point made so little sense, it was like he was okay with slavery because it was in the Bible, too.. not to mention that old tired "God intended marriage" argument when marriage was around long before the Bible as a business transaction of sorts. Le sigh.

Reply
 · 




















TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







Someone needs to explain to this dude that Gahwd's "absolute definition of marriage" involves one man and as many females as he can afford to buy including his sister, his half-sister, his half-sister's slaves, his aunts, his own slaves, as many concubines as he can purchase or coerce by threat of violence, any female of any age taken in war, any un-affianced female of any age that he can manage to rape and then pay for, and - if we allow for a certain reading of Genesis chapter 2 verse 20 - pretty much any animal (or maybe even any plant) into which he might possibly stick his penis.  [Note: That list is not meant to be exhaustive.  I'm sure there are some that I missed.]

Reply
 · 




















Len H2 days ago







BTW I love ya KATE no matter what your incorrect opinion of me....a ASSUMPTION is just that...those first 3 letters ...
 Love ya KATE now how about a great big wet KISS...dont hate because I am male lol what you afraid it might make you get COOTIES lol
BTW I liked the video as always

Reply
 · 




















TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







Did you abscond with Boehner's tanning bed?

Reply
 · 
1

















BionicDance
1 week ago (edited)


Naw...my camera was just acting like a little bitch, lighting-wise.



Reply
 · 









Packard Sonic1 week ago







I have had similar arguments with guys like him. He is a serious douche bag.  

Reply
 · 




















Len H2 days ago







Kate called me a Homophobic when i asked her question ...I ask a question and get called a name. But that is okay  I possed that dame question to my niece who is gay and she was like Uncle let that doesnt make you homophobic anyone who calls you that has a problem and they are lucky they didnt say it to you face  then we looked at a girl and both said  DAMN nice ass and laughed I love my niece she is awesome.
As for a Bigot....every single human is ....proud to be a bigot.
 My fist doesn't have to stop at the tip of any-ones nose and hasn't many times.
  In fact many time have not stopped with my feet to peoples noses over and over.
  Never bothered me before to put someone in their place...though these days it hurts...getting old lol.
   Values and morals suck, I would prefer busting more heads and not no damn BS law in my way...PISH but so far I have stayed many steps away of these moral laws of though shall not kill.
 The Qu'ran القرآن الكريم is the answer and oh how they enforce their rules.
  LOL
    Remember if you want  a law changed no matter how vile and disgusting it is  get the right wing out and the left wing in to make it legal....


 
Show less
Reply
 · 




















TheAtheistPaladin .1 week ago







In societies where there is no difference between private morality and a public morality, that would be a totalitarian society.  Why can't they realize that?

Reply
 · 
2


















DBeetleeater Doug1 week ago







Is this guy using the English language?  He uses words I have heard before but his meaning for those words are just plain different from what I think they mean.  Good job BionicDance.

Reply
 · 




















Mark Susskind1 week ago







I am smitten. :3

Reply
 · 




















Mel Rhomberg1 week ago







God didn't give a definition of marriage. Some people don't actually read the bible. le sigh

Reply
 · 




















TheAmulli1 week ago







I clicked thumbs up immediately after god struck you down midsentence. 

Reply
 · 




















angryhairpeice6 days ago







Isn't it funny how they always say that the book stands the test of time, then when you point out things like slavery, and working on the sabbath, they say 'That was a different time.'? That is why I am a gnostic antitheist. I know I am for a complete obliteration of religion. If we could get them to think, it could be possible. 

Reply
 · 




















beirirangu1 week ago (edited)







I think you missed a great oppertunity: he said that if it's in the bible, no matter when or in what context it was written, it's true. Meaning that he believes slavery should still be enforced as well as the death penalty for worshiping other gods, worshiping things that resemble anything from heaven, anything from earth, and anything from below the earth, using god's name in vain, working on the sabbath, not honoring your parents, ex... unless he thinks that when god said (roughly) , it is a permanent law that anyone who does any work on the sabbath is to be put to death, oh and here are the (first) ten commandments that I wrote with my finger. [ex 31 :12-18]

Reply
 · 









Hide replies








BionicDance
1 week ago


I'm, uh, pretty darn sure I brought up the bible condoning slavery...



Reply
 · 








beirirangu
1 week ago


+BionicDance you mentioned it in the meaning that it was a fad, an opinion that faded in time... much like how he thought the acceptance of homosexuality would... I meant it as in that he's picking and choosing what is 100% true and ignoring what's also in there



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+beirirangu I'm pretty sure I mentioned that too.



Reply
 · 








beirirangu
1 week ago


+BionicDance plus, I did post it before finishing the video... having typed it up after the first volley of the bible's infallibility



Reply
 · 









amoscarmel1 week ago







Great clip, thank  you. Loved the lightening strike lol...

Reply
 · 




















pauldhoff1 week ago







Their so-called objective laws are subjectively interpreted by them all the time. 
Paul

Reply
 · 




















Pat MaCrotch1 week ago







Somebody needs to see the South Park episode about "tolerance" ?

Reply
 · 




















Emigdiosback1 week ago







was the title intentional?

Reply
 · 









Hide replies








BionicDance
1 week ago


...I'm not sure I understand the question.



Reply
 · 








Emigdiosback
1 week ago


+BionicDance it sorta doesn't look right. like if written incorrectly. sorry, it's sorta bugging me.



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+Emigdiosback Actually, it's grammatically correct.
Had I written it, "Some Things I Will Not Put Up With," I'd be ending it with a preposition.



Reply
 · 
1






Emigdiosback
1 week ago (edited)


ohh! Sorry. I'm obsessive compulsive, and things like that catch my attention.



Reply
 · 








TheRealPaulMarshall
1 week ago


Should it not be "Some Things Up With Which I Will [Or 'Shall' given that the once considered incorrect 'will' was used, at the time, for emphasis.   Perhaps turn about is fair play.] Not Put"?



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+TheRealPaulMarshall No. Because your phrasing assumes that this is a list of intolerable things, rather than a statement of being unwilling to tolerate an unspecified set/number of things.



Reply
 · 








TheRealPaulMarshall
1 week ago


I thought that number was the same in both phrasings and that the difference was only in whether the elided object of the preposition should have been explicit.



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+TheRealPaulMarshall When I parse your rephrasing into more colloquial speech, what I get is, "Some things I will not put up with," meaning the video is listing off some things I find intolerable.
But what the title is really saying is, "There are some things I will not put up with," being rather more ambiguous.



Reply
 · 









zarkoff451 week ago







Sum things down with BionicDance: Intolerance comes through law or vigilante justice, nothing else.

Reply
 · 




















RetroFanaminna1 week ago







How did this guy confuse being tolerant with not agreeing with someones opinion and values?

Reply
 · 
















Show more








































All comments (97)







Share your thoughts












Top comments









Stream







P Dav1 day ago







This guy says morality is absolute. Then, I say, all of the horrendous acts done by or sanctioned by god in the bible, such as murder, slavery, rape, genocide, cannibalism, and treatment of women as property are absolutely immoral.

Reply
 · 




















BionicDance1 week ago









Reply
 · 
12







Hide replies








Mundus Novus Ordo
1 week ago


+LegendaryAsshole which one



Reply
 · 








1140Cecile
1 week ago


Nicely done, Keight.



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


Thanks! :)



Reply
 · 
2






Lance Zimmerman
1 week ago


You forgot temple. XD Funny how xtians enjoy to blame others for what they are doing. He also does not seem to realize that marriage is a law, not a god thing.
LOL on the lightning.
LOL Faith, he believes in wishful thinking = easy answers that agrees with one's own thinking.
3500 years ago, where did he get that? Also, what rewrite/translation is he talking about? More like centuries.
Good video.
Show less

Reply
 · 
2






Julia Reed
1 week ago


How many times did you have to do that flailing during the smiting before you finally got it right? That awesomely hilarious! I'm still smirking from it.



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


Believe it or not, that took one take.
There were other shots, tho...



Reply
 · 
1






Julia Reed
1 week ago


I applaud you, I really do, I'd probably have a bloopers reel at the end of a video due to ADD tangents, stuttering and my mild lisp



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


Believe me, I've been tempted to make a bloopers vid. :)



Reply
 · 
3






Julia Reed
1 week ago


Oh I'd watch that in a heart beat! 



Reply
 · 
2






Lance Zimmerman
1 week ago


+BionicDance oh you so should make a bloopers video! After all this time you should have lots of good stuff to chose from.



Reply
 · 








VinnyMonster1
5 days ago


+BionicDance A Bloopers vid would go viral! 



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
5 days ago


Well, it'll probably be a few months to gather enough GOOD blooper footage, but I've started collecting some...



Reply
 · 
1






VinnyMonster1
5 days ago


Damn but the struck by lightning bit was funny!  I was half expecting you to end the video with a long fade to black then.



Reply
 · 
1







ThomasTrue5 days ago







Within my own lifetime it was once 'moral' to punish children in school by striking them across the hands with a leather strap or a cane (or across the buttocks with a paddle in US schools) and a man could not rape his wife but was merely exercising his 'moral' conjugal 'rights'.  Go back less than a century and a husband had the 'moral right' to strike his wife with a rod 'no thicker than his thumb' (hence, "rule of thumb").  These 'morals' were based upon Biblical teaching and yet we now look upon them as examples of a barbaric past we have since thankfully rejected.  If this fool thinks that the Bible has 'stood the test of time', then he is so sadly deluded I frankly feel sorry for him.

Reply
 · 
1


















Star Laughter1 week ago







"I believe in absolute truth!" He says, while munching on shellfish that was harvested on the Sabbath...

Reply
 · 
1


















Dragnauct Sylvas1 week ago







I love how they want to dissolve the negative connotations of terms used against them. Can't wait till they do it to the word "Faith."

Reply
 · 




















Charles Kunkle1 week ago







and we're totally ignoring the fact that God does NOT define marriage as one man and one woman...
Otherwise, many of the patriarchs of the Christian religion were violating God's law. Solomon had 300 wives and 700 concubines? Excatly how is that "one man and one woman"

Reply
 · 
2


















themplar1 week ago







Another great video from you. And again very right.
I personally cannot understand the objections people have against gays and gay marriage.  Sadly its not just religious biggots i've been in many discussions with non theist who were still absolute biggots.
Its funny how they Always accuse me of intolerance when i call their arguments absolute bogus and them biggots.  Every time the arguments are.. its not natural.. well obviously it is..  what if everybody turned gay the human species would end... wouldnt happen and if so what? They still can get children by In Vitro.
In the end all their arguments are invalid. and only one real arguments is left over they wont pronounce.
They suffer from imagination and see two gays going at it and they think its Icky. And thats all it is for them.. they think its icky.. well then stop fantasizing about it.
Towards religious biggotry.... i whish it was allowed to smack them around with their own bibles...
Read more (13 lines)
Reply
 · 
1

















DoctorScarlet
1 week ago


Not to mention that there's also the ridiculous idea that gays want to recruit children for the sole purpose of making them gay.
People don't just become gay. Usually a person has a predisposition to being gay, but this is something many people will deny. I myself, a person who grew up in a Christian home, had a predisposition to being pansexual, but it's easier to deny something than to actually own up to it. I'm so glad I grew out of that horseshit though, I'm much happier.
Show less

Reply
 · 
1







Red Cloud1 week ago







You can't just re-define words to fit your own ends. Start doing that all willy-nilly, and you ruin the foundation of language itself, the fact that we can understand it. You can't just destroy an entire language, because you don't like how some of the words coming together make you feel, that's bullshit. Words like Tolerance are there, because we need them, if we didn't need them, we wouldn't have them. 

Reply
 · 




















CarefulAtheist1 week ago







WTF moment @7:05. Gold!

Reply
 · 




















Moor Letoh1 week ago







Epic.

Reply
 · 




















mikeyvester1 week ago







Speaking from experience living in a country where gay marriage has been legal for almost 9 years, I haven't noticed anything different. I would have never known the law changed except it was on the news.  The only reason I can see why a person would be against gay marriage, they are fucking assholes and they like to hurt people.

Reply
 · 
1


















markedfang1 week ago







What if god was true? What would actually change?
He'd still have to come up with good arguments to justify his demands. I would see god as no more then another human with another opinion and unless he can convince me of his case I still wouldn't feel any obligation towards him.
Worship blinds you to attrociaties.

Reply
 · 
2


















Griffin98571 week ago







7:03 I nearly jumped out of my own skin shakes fist at Kate.

Reply
 · 
1







Hide replies








BionicDance
1 week ago


Neener. ;)



Reply
 · 
1






Griffin9857
1 week ago


Any more surprises? :P



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


+Griffin9857 If I told you, they wouldn't be surprises, now would they? :D



Reply
 · 
1






Griffin9857
1 week ago


+BionicDance *Glares*



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


+Griffin9857 *sticks out tongue*



Reply
 · 
1






christopher9000p
6 days ago


Hey, blame "god", not Kate for that one. :P



Reply
 · 









Felhaven1 week ago (edited)







You really shouldn't quote old testament based definitions of marriage while wearing a polyblend shirt.  

Reply
 · 
2

















DoctorScarlet
1 week ago


Gives a whole new meaning to "don't throw stones while standing in a glass house".



Reply
 · 









RRoocckkyy501 week ago







Nice new intro! : )

Reply
 · 
1

















BionicDance
1 week ago


Thanks! I was going for a kind of 80s look. :)



Reply
 · 
1







VGatheist1 week ago (edited)







well the moral argument against abortion is that you are killing a baby. A mother does not have a right to kill her new born baby, so the question then comes about, at what point does a baby have the right to live. But the trick in proving abortion immoral within a real world sense is to prove that the fetus is being harmed. Big argument and I am not going to go through the whole case for abortion, but I just don't find your "if you do not agree with abortion don't have one." as a valid point because the whole reason there is any argument is the attempt to demonstrate that the fetus should have rights. I think the laws for abortion are very close to taking all of this in account. But the Christians idea of egg + sperm = no abortion is just not valid. I think the laws very, but right now all states at least use viability and not birth as the starting point for fetus rights. Allot of laws will use the trimester to determine if an abortion as legal. But you know as a Lesbian you likely will never have to worry about it. If you have a baby, you'd have to choose it.
Read more
Reply
 · 




















TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







@7:05- Nice green cross.  Faded in a bit early but still nice.

Reply
 · 



















BionicDance
1 week ago


Heh. It's a chromakey guide mark to keep CGI elements in place relative to the camera.



Reply
 · 








TheRealPaulMarshall
1 week ago


I figgered.  Still nice given the context.



Reply
 · 









Jesse Sisolack1 week ago (edited)







New Planet? looks rather...wet. I only saw one little area of land.
Does this fellow need a book shelf? Maybe we should pitch in and get him one of those particle board ones from Wal-Mart. Seriously, concrete bricks and boards?

Reply
 · 




















Robert Roman1 week ago







This fucktard says all that special pleading in the name of the god of intolerance Yahweh. He sure fights hard for intolerance what a hypocritical bigot.

Reply
 · 



















yadabub
1 week ago


That was what struck me as well.  His Christian privilege allows him to spew what he likes with few consequences.  No doubt, he would be singing another tune if he had experienced real persecution for being a Christian, being a believer, or for being an a-hole.



Reply
 · 
1







BohemianBlasphemy1 week ago







2:34
I have a Bible. If god wrote that book, god intended marriage to be between a man and a woman; but also between a man and all the women that man can afford to rape.
What is this idiot even talking about?

Reply
 · 
3


















Inannalu1 week ago







Harmful to an ideology is not the same thing as harmful to people.
Behaviors and activities which do the former, but do not do the latter, are perfectly okay ethically, so far as I'm concerned.
In fact, if some behavior or activity harms an ideology which is responsible for much harm to people, so much the better.

Reply
 · 
5


















Peter Baxter1 week ago







Thanks for making great videos and calling out nutjobs like this guy, Bionic. His alleged point made so little sense, it was like he was okay with slavery because it was in the Bible, too.. not to mention that old tired "God intended marriage" argument when marriage was around long before the Bible as a business transaction of sorts. Le sigh.

Reply
 · 




















TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







Someone needs to explain to this dude that Gahwd's "absolute definition of marriage" involves one man and as many females as he can afford to buy including his sister, his half-sister, his half-sister's slaves, his aunts, his own slaves, as many concubines as he can purchase or coerce by threat of violence, any female of any age taken in war, any un-affianced female of any age that he can manage to rape and then pay for, and - if we allow for a certain reading of Genesis chapter 2 verse 20 - pretty much any animal (or maybe even any plant) into which he might possibly stick his penis.  [Note: That list is not meant to be exhaustive.  I'm sure there are some that I missed.]

Reply
 · 




















Len H2 days ago







BTW I love ya KATE no matter what your incorrect opinion of me....a ASSUMPTION is just that...those first 3 letters ...
 Love ya KATE now how about a great big wet KISS...dont hate because I am male lol what you afraid it might make you get COOTIES lol
BTW I liked the video as always

Reply
 · 




















TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







Did you abscond with Boehner's tanning bed?

Reply
 · 
1

















BionicDance
1 week ago (edited)


Naw...my camera was just acting like a little bitch, lighting-wise.



Reply
 · 









Packard Sonic1 week ago







I have had similar arguments with guys like him. He is a serious douche bag.  

Reply
 · 




















Len H2 days ago







Kate called me a Homophobic when i asked her question ...I ask a question and get called a name. But that is okay  I possed that dame question to my niece who is gay and she was like Uncle let that doesnt make you homophobic anyone who calls you that has a problem and they are lucky they didnt say it to you face  then we looked at a girl and both said  DAMN nice ass and laughed I love my niece she is awesome.
As for a Bigot....every single human is ....proud to be a bigot.
 My fist doesn't have to stop at the tip of any-ones nose and hasn't many times.
  In fact many time have not stopped with my feet to peoples noses over and over.
  Never bothered me before to put someone in their place...though these days it hurts...getting old lol.
   Values and morals suck, I would prefer busting more heads and not no damn BS law in my way...PISH but so far I have stayed many steps away of these moral laws of though shall not kill.
 The Qu'ran القرآن الكريم is the answer and oh how they enforce their rules.
  LOL
    Remember if you want  a law changed no matter how vile and disgusting it is  get the right wing out and the left wing in to make it legal....


 
Show less
Reply
 · 




















TheAtheistPaladin .1 week ago







In societies where there is no difference between private morality and a public morality, that would be a totalitarian society.  Why can't they realize that?

Reply
 · 
2


















DBeetleeater Doug1 week ago







Is this guy using the English language?  He uses words I have heard before but his meaning for those words are just plain different from what I think they mean.  Good job BionicDance.

Reply
 · 




















Mark Susskind1 week ago







I am smitten. :3

Reply
 · 




















Mel Rhomberg1 week ago







God didn't give a definition of marriage. Some people don't actually read the bible. le sigh

Reply
 · 




















TheAmulli1 week ago







I clicked thumbs up immediately after god struck you down midsentence. 

Reply
 · 




















angryhairpeice6 days ago







Isn't it funny how they always say that the book stands the test of time, then when you point out things like slavery, and working on the sabbath, they say 'That was a different time.'? That is why I am a gnostic antitheist. I know I am for a complete obliteration of religion. If we could get them to think, it could be possible. 

Reply
 · 




















beirirangu1 week ago (edited)







I think you missed a great oppertunity: he said that if it's in the bible, no matter when or in what context it was written, it's true. Meaning that he believes slavery should still be enforced as well as the death penalty for worshiping other gods, worshiping things that resemble anything from heaven, anything from earth, and anything from below the earth, using god's name in vain, working on the sabbath, not honoring your parents, ex... unless he thinks that when god said (roughly) , it is a permanent law that anyone who does any work on the sabbath is to be put to death, oh and here are the (first) ten commandments that I wrote with my finger. [ex 31 :12-18]

Reply
 · 









Hide replies








BionicDance
1 week ago


I'm, uh, pretty darn sure I brought up the bible condoning slavery...



Reply
 · 








beirirangu
1 week ago


+BionicDance you mentioned it in the meaning that it was a fad, an opinion that faded in time... much like how he thought the acceptance of homosexuality would... I meant it as in that he's picking and choosing what is 100% true and ignoring what's also in there



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+beirirangu I'm pretty sure I mentioned that too.



Reply
 · 








beirirangu
1 week ago


+BionicDance plus, I did post it before finishing the video... having typed it up after the first volley of the bible's infallibility



Reply
 · 









amoscarmel1 week ago







Great clip, thank  you. Loved the lightening strike lol...

Reply
 · 




















pauldhoff1 week ago







Their so-called objective laws are subjectively interpreted by them all the time. 
Paul

Reply
 · 




















Pat MaCrotch1 week ago







Somebody needs to see the South Park episode about "tolerance" ?

Reply
 · 




















Emigdiosback1 week ago







was the title intentional?

Reply
 · 









Hide replies








BionicDance
1 week ago


...I'm not sure I understand the question.



Reply
 · 








Emigdiosback
1 week ago


+BionicDance it sorta doesn't look right. like if written incorrectly. sorry, it's sorta bugging me.



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+Emigdiosback Actually, it's grammatically correct.
Had I written it, "Some Things I Will Not Put Up With," I'd be ending it with a preposition.



Reply
 · 
1






Emigdiosback
1 week ago (edited)


ohh! Sorry. I'm obsessive compulsive, and things like that catch my attention.



Reply
 · 








TheRealPaulMarshall
1 week ago


Should it not be "Some Things Up With Which I Will [Or 'Shall' given that the once considered incorrect 'will' was used, at the time, for emphasis.   Perhaps turn about is fair play.] Not Put"?



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+TheRealPaulMarshall No. Because your phrasing assumes that this is a list of intolerable things, rather than a statement of being unwilling to tolerate an unspecified set/number of things.



Reply
 · 








TheRealPaulMarshall
1 week ago


I thought that number was the same in both phrasings and that the difference was only in whether the elided object of the preposition should have been explicit.



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+TheRealPaulMarshall When I parse your rephrasing into more colloquial speech, what I get is, "Some things I will not put up with," meaning the video is listing off some things I find intolerable.
But what the title is really saying is, "There are some things I will not put up with," being rather more ambiguous.



Reply
 · 









zarkoff451 week ago







Sum things down with BionicDance: Intolerance comes through law or vigilante justice, nothing else.

Reply
 · 




















RetroFanaminna1 week ago







How did this guy confuse being tolerant with not agreeing with someones opinion and values?

Reply
 · 
















Show more



































All comments (97)







Share your thoughts












Top comments









Stream







P Dav1 day ago







This guy says morality is absolute. Then, I say, all of the horrendous acts done by or sanctioned by god in the bible, such as murder, slavery, rape, genocide, cannibalism, and treatment of women as property are absolutely immoral.

Reply
 · 




















BionicDance1 week ago









Reply
 · 
12







Hide replies








Mundus Novus Ordo
1 week ago


+LegendaryAsshole which one



Reply
 · 








1140Cecile
1 week ago


Nicely done, Keight.



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


Thanks! :)



Reply
 · 
2






Lance Zimmerman
1 week ago


You forgot temple. XD Funny how xtians enjoy to blame others for what they are doing. He also does not seem to realize that marriage is a law, not a god thing.
LOL on the lightning.
LOL Faith, he believes in wishful thinking = easy answers that agrees with one's own thinking.
3500 years ago, where did he get that? Also, what rewrite/translation is he talking about? More like centuries.
Good video.
Show less

Reply
 · 
2






Julia Reed
1 week ago


How many times did you have to do that flailing during the smiting before you finally got it right? That awesomely hilarious! I'm still smirking from it.



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


Believe it or not, that took one take.
There were other shots, tho...



Reply
 · 
1






Julia Reed
1 week ago


I applaud you, I really do, I'd probably have a bloopers reel at the end of a video due to ADD tangents, stuttering and my mild lisp



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


Believe me, I've been tempted to make a bloopers vid. :)



Reply
 · 
3






Julia Reed
1 week ago


Oh I'd watch that in a heart beat! 



Reply
 · 
2






Lance Zimmerman
1 week ago


+BionicDance oh you so should make a bloopers video! After all this time you should have lots of good stuff to chose from.



Reply
 · 








VinnyMonster1
5 days ago


+BionicDance A Bloopers vid would go viral! 



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
5 days ago


Well, it'll probably be a few months to gather enough GOOD blooper footage, but I've started collecting some...



Reply
 · 
1






VinnyMonster1
5 days ago


Damn but the struck by lightning bit was funny!  I was half expecting you to end the video with a long fade to black then.



Reply
 · 
1







ThomasTrue5 days ago







Within my own lifetime it was once 'moral' to punish children in school by striking them across the hands with a leather strap or a cane (or across the buttocks with a paddle in US schools) and a man could not rape his wife but was merely exercising his 'moral' conjugal 'rights'.  Go back less than a century and a husband had the 'moral right' to strike his wife with a rod 'no thicker than his thumb' (hence, "rule of thumb").  These 'morals' were based upon Biblical teaching and yet we now look upon them as examples of a barbaric past we have since thankfully rejected.  If this fool thinks that the Bible has 'stood the test of time', then he is so sadly deluded I frankly feel sorry for him.

Reply
 · 
1


















Star Laughter1 week ago







"I believe in absolute truth!" He says, while munching on shellfish that was harvested on the Sabbath...

Reply
 · 
1


















Dragnauct Sylvas1 week ago







I love how they want to dissolve the negative connotations of terms used against them. Can't wait till they do it to the word "Faith."

Reply
 · 




















Charles Kunkle1 week ago







and we're totally ignoring the fact that God does NOT define marriage as one man and one woman...
Otherwise, many of the patriarchs of the Christian religion were violating God's law. Solomon had 300 wives and 700 concubines? Excatly how is that "one man and one woman"

Reply
 · 
2


















themplar1 week ago







Another great video from you. And again very right.
I personally cannot understand the objections people have against gays and gay marriage.  Sadly its not just religious biggots i've been in many discussions with non theist who were still absolute biggots.
Its funny how they Always accuse me of intolerance when i call their arguments absolute bogus and them biggots.  Every time the arguments are.. its not natural.. well obviously it is..  what if everybody turned gay the human species would end... wouldnt happen and if so what? They still can get children by In Vitro.
In the end all their arguments are invalid. and only one real arguments is left over they wont pronounce.
They suffer from imagination and see two gays going at it and they think its Icky. And thats all it is for them.. they think its icky.. well then stop fantasizing about it.
Towards religious biggotry.... i whish it was allowed to smack them around with their own bibles...
Read more (13 lines)
Reply
 · 
1

















DoctorScarlet
1 week ago


Not to mention that there's also the ridiculous idea that gays want to recruit children for the sole purpose of making them gay.
People don't just become gay. Usually a person has a predisposition to being gay, but this is something many people will deny. I myself, a person who grew up in a Christian home, had a predisposition to being pansexual, but it's easier to deny something than to actually own up to it. I'm so glad I grew out of that horseshit though, I'm much happier.
Show less

Reply
 · 
1







Red Cloud1 week ago







You can't just re-define words to fit your own ends. Start doing that all willy-nilly, and you ruin the foundation of language itself, the fact that we can understand it. You can't just destroy an entire language, because you don't like how some of the words coming together make you feel, that's bullshit. Words like Tolerance are there, because we need them, if we didn't need them, we wouldn't have them. 

Reply
 · 




















CarefulAtheist1 week ago







WTF moment @7:05. Gold!

Reply
 · 




















Moor Letoh1 week ago







Epic.

Reply
 · 




















mikeyvester1 week ago







Speaking from experience living in a country where gay marriage has been legal for almost 9 years, I haven't noticed anything different. I would have never known the law changed except it was on the news.  The only reason I can see why a person would be against gay marriage, they are fucking assholes and they like to hurt people.

Reply
 · 
1


















markedfang1 week ago







What if god was true? What would actually change?
He'd still have to come up with good arguments to justify his demands. I would see god as no more then another human with another opinion and unless he can convince me of his case I still wouldn't feel any obligation towards him.
Worship blinds you to attrociaties.

Reply
 · 
2


















Griffin98571 week ago







7:03 I nearly jumped out of my own skin shakes fist at Kate.

Reply
 · 
1







Hide replies








BionicDance
1 week ago


Neener. ;)



Reply
 · 
1






Griffin9857
1 week ago


Any more surprises? :P



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


+Griffin9857 If I told you, they wouldn't be surprises, now would they? :D



Reply
 · 
1






Griffin9857
1 week ago


+BionicDance *Glares*



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


+Griffin9857 *sticks out tongue*



Reply
 · 
1






christopher9000p
6 days ago


Hey, blame "god", not Kate for that one. :P



Reply
 · 









Felhaven1 week ago (edited)







You really shouldn't quote old testament based definitions of marriage while wearing a polyblend shirt.  

Reply
 · 
2

















DoctorScarlet
1 week ago


Gives a whole new meaning to "don't throw stones while standing in a glass house".



Reply
 · 









RRoocckkyy501 week ago







Nice new intro! : )

Reply
 · 
1

















BionicDance
1 week ago


Thanks! I was going for a kind of 80s look. :)



Reply
 · 
1







VGatheist1 week ago (edited)







well the moral argument against abortion is that you are killing a baby. A mother does not have a right to kill her new born baby, so the question then comes about, at what point does a baby have the right to live. But the trick in proving abortion immoral within a real world sense is to prove that the fetus is being harmed. Big argument and I am not going to go through the whole case for abortion, but I just don't find your "if you do not agree with abortion don't have one." as a valid point because the whole reason there is any argument is the attempt to demonstrate that the fetus should have rights. I think the laws for abortion are very close to taking all of this in account. But the Christians idea of egg + sperm = no abortion is just not valid. I think the laws very, but right now all states at least use viability and not birth as the starting point for fetus rights. Allot of laws will use the trimester to determine if an abortion as legal. But you know as a Lesbian you likely will never have to worry about it. If you have a baby, you'd have to choose it.
Read more
Reply
 · 




















TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







@7:05- Nice green cross.  Faded in a bit early but still nice.

Reply
 · 



















BionicDance
1 week ago


Heh. It's a chromakey guide mark to keep CGI elements in place relative to the camera.



Reply
 · 








TheRealPaulMarshall
1 week ago


I figgered.  Still nice given the context.



Reply
 · 









Jesse Sisolack1 week ago (edited)







New Planet? looks rather...wet. I only saw one little area of land.
Does this fellow need a book shelf? Maybe we should pitch in and get him one of those particle board ones from Wal-Mart. Seriously, concrete bricks and boards?

Reply
 · 




















Robert Roman1 week ago







This fucktard says all that special pleading in the name of the god of intolerance Yahweh. He sure fights hard for intolerance what a hypocritical bigot.

Reply
 · 



















yadabub
1 week ago


That was what struck me as well.  His Christian privilege allows him to spew what he likes with few consequences.  No doubt, he would be singing another tune if he had experienced real persecution for being a Christian, being a believer, or for being an a-hole.



Reply
 · 
1







BohemianBlasphemy1 week ago







2:34
I have a Bible. If god wrote that book, god intended marriage to be between a man and a woman; but also between a man and all the women that man can afford to rape.
What is this idiot even talking about?

Reply
 · 
3


















Inannalu1 week ago







Harmful to an ideology is not the same thing as harmful to people.
Behaviors and activities which do the former, but do not do the latter, are perfectly okay ethically, so far as I'm concerned.
In fact, if some behavior or activity harms an ideology which is responsible for much harm to people, so much the better.

Reply
 · 
5


















Peter Baxter1 week ago







Thanks for making great videos and calling out nutjobs like this guy, Bionic. His alleged point made so little sense, it was like he was okay with slavery because it was in the Bible, too.. not to mention that old tired "God intended marriage" argument when marriage was around long before the Bible as a business transaction of sorts. Le sigh.

Reply
 · 




















TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







Someone needs to explain to this dude that Gahwd's "absolute definition of marriage" involves one man and as many females as he can afford to buy including his sister, his half-sister, his half-sister's slaves, his aunts, his own slaves, as many concubines as he can purchase or coerce by threat of violence, any female of any age taken in war, any un-affianced female of any age that he can manage to rape and then pay for, and - if we allow for a certain reading of Genesis chapter 2 verse 20 - pretty much any animal (or maybe even any plant) into which he might possibly stick his penis.  [Note: That list is not meant to be exhaustive.  I'm sure there are some that I missed.]

Reply
 · 




















Len H2 days ago







BTW I love ya KATE no matter what your incorrect opinion of me....a ASSUMPTION is just that...those first 3 letters ...
 Love ya KATE now how about a great big wet KISS...dont hate because I am male lol what you afraid it might make you get COOTIES lol
BTW I liked the video as always

Reply
 · 




















TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







Did you abscond with Boehner's tanning bed?

Reply
 · 
1

















BionicDance
1 week ago (edited)


Naw...my camera was just acting like a little bitch, lighting-wise.



Reply
 · 









Packard Sonic1 week ago







I have had similar arguments with guys like him. He is a serious douche bag.  

Reply
 · 




















Len H2 days ago







Kate called me a Homophobic when i asked her question ...I ask a question and get called a name. But that is okay  I possed that dame question to my niece who is gay and she was like Uncle let that doesnt make you homophobic anyone who calls you that has a problem and they are lucky they didnt say it to you face  then we looked at a girl and both said  DAMN nice ass and laughed I love my niece she is awesome.
As for a Bigot....every single human is ....proud to be a bigot.
 My fist doesn't have to stop at the tip of any-ones nose and hasn't many times.
  In fact many time have not stopped with my feet to peoples noses over and over.
  Never bothered me before to put someone in their place...though these days it hurts...getting old lol.
   Values and morals suck, I would prefer busting more heads and not no damn BS law in my way...PISH but so far I have stayed many steps away of these moral laws of though shall not kill.
 The Qu'ran القرآن الكريم is the answer and oh how they enforce their rules.
  LOL
    Remember if you want  a law changed no matter how vile and disgusting it is  get the right wing out and the left wing in to make it legal....


 
Show less
Reply
 · 




















TheAtheistPaladin .1 week ago







In societies where there is no difference between private morality and a public morality, that would be a totalitarian society.  Why can't they realize that?

Reply
 · 
2


















DBeetleeater Doug1 week ago







Is this guy using the English language?  He uses words I have heard before but his meaning for those words are just plain different from what I think they mean.  Good job BionicDance.

Reply
 · 




















Mark Susskind1 week ago







I am smitten. :3

Reply
 · 




















Mel Rhomberg1 week ago







God didn't give a definition of marriage. Some people don't actually read the bible. le sigh

Reply
 · 




















TheAmulli1 week ago







I clicked thumbs up immediately after god struck you down midsentence. 

Reply
 · 




















angryhairpeice6 days ago







Isn't it funny how they always say that the book stands the test of time, then when you point out things like slavery, and working on the sabbath, they say 'That was a different time.'? That is why I am a gnostic antitheist. I know I am for a complete obliteration of religion. If we could get them to think, it could be possible. 

Reply
 · 




















beirirangu1 week ago (edited)







I think you missed a great oppertunity: he said that if it's in the bible, no matter when or in what context it was written, it's true. Meaning that he believes slavery should still be enforced as well as the death penalty for worshiping other gods, worshiping things that resemble anything from heaven, anything from earth, and anything from below the earth, using god's name in vain, working on the sabbath, not honoring your parents, ex... unless he thinks that when god said (roughly) , it is a permanent law that anyone who does any work on the sabbath is to be put to death, oh and here are the (first) ten commandments that I wrote with my finger. [ex 31 :12-18]

Reply
 · 









Hide replies








BionicDance
1 week ago


I'm, uh, pretty darn sure I brought up the bible condoning slavery...



Reply
 · 








beirirangu
1 week ago


+BionicDance you mentioned it in the meaning that it was a fad, an opinion that faded in time... much like how he thought the acceptance of homosexuality would... I meant it as in that he's picking and choosing what is 100% true and ignoring what's also in there



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+beirirangu I'm pretty sure I mentioned that too.



Reply
 · 








beirirangu
1 week ago


+BionicDance plus, I did post it before finishing the video... having typed it up after the first volley of the bible's infallibility



Reply
 · 









amoscarmel1 week ago







Great clip, thank  you. Loved the lightening strike lol...

Reply
 · 




















pauldhoff1 week ago







Their so-called objective laws are subjectively interpreted by them all the time. 
Paul

Reply
 · 




















Pat MaCrotch1 week ago







Somebody needs to see the South Park episode about "tolerance" ?

Reply
 · 




















Emigdiosback1 week ago







was the title intentional?

Reply
 · 









Hide replies








BionicDance
1 week ago


...I'm not sure I understand the question.



Reply
 · 








Emigdiosback
1 week ago


+BionicDance it sorta doesn't look right. like if written incorrectly. sorry, it's sorta bugging me.



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+Emigdiosback Actually, it's grammatically correct.
Had I written it, "Some Things I Will Not Put Up With," I'd be ending it with a preposition.



Reply
 · 
1






Emigdiosback
1 week ago (edited)


ohh! Sorry. I'm obsessive compulsive, and things like that catch my attention.



Reply
 · 








TheRealPaulMarshall
1 week ago


Should it not be "Some Things Up With Which I Will [Or 'Shall' given that the once considered incorrect 'will' was used, at the time, for emphasis.   Perhaps turn about is fair play.] Not Put"?



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+TheRealPaulMarshall No. Because your phrasing assumes that this is a list of intolerable things, rather than a statement of being unwilling to tolerate an unspecified set/number of things.



Reply
 · 








TheRealPaulMarshall
1 week ago


I thought that number was the same in both phrasings and that the difference was only in whether the elided object of the preposition should have been explicit.



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+TheRealPaulMarshall When I parse your rephrasing into more colloquial speech, what I get is, "Some things I will not put up with," meaning the video is listing off some things I find intolerable.
But what the title is really saying is, "There are some things I will not put up with," being rather more ambiguous.



Reply
 · 









zarkoff451 week ago







Sum things down with BionicDance: Intolerance comes through law or vigilante justice, nothing else.

Reply
 · 




















RetroFanaminna1 week ago







How did this guy confuse being tolerant with not agreeing with someones opinion and values?

Reply
 · 
















Show more







































All comments (97)







Share your thoughts












Top comments









Stream







P Dav1 day ago







This guy says morality is absolute. Then, I say, all of the horrendous acts done by or sanctioned by god in the bible, such as murder, slavery, rape, genocide, cannibalism, and treatment of women as property are absolutely immoral.

Reply
 · 




















BionicDance1 week ago









Reply
 · 
12







Hide replies








Mundus Novus Ordo
1 week ago


+LegendaryAsshole which one



Reply
 · 








1140Cecile
1 week ago


Nicely done, Keight.



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


Thanks! :)



Reply
 · 
2






Lance Zimmerman
1 week ago


You forgot temple. XD Funny how xtians enjoy to blame others for what they are doing. He also does not seem to realize that marriage is a law, not a god thing.
LOL on the lightning.
LOL Faith, he believes in wishful thinking = easy answers that agrees with one's own thinking.
3500 years ago, where did he get that? Also, what rewrite/translation is he talking about? More like centuries.
Good video.
Show less

Reply
 · 
2






Julia Reed
1 week ago


How many times did you have to do that flailing during the smiting before you finally got it right? That awesomely hilarious! I'm still smirking from it.



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


Believe it or not, that took one take.
There were other shots, tho...



Reply
 · 
1






Julia Reed
1 week ago


I applaud you, I really do, I'd probably have a bloopers reel at the end of a video due to ADD tangents, stuttering and my mild lisp



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


Believe me, I've been tempted to make a bloopers vid. :)



Reply
 · 
3






Julia Reed
1 week ago


Oh I'd watch that in a heart beat! 



Reply
 · 
2






Lance Zimmerman
1 week ago


+BionicDance oh you so should make a bloopers video! After all this time you should have lots of good stuff to chose from.



Reply
 · 








VinnyMonster1
5 days ago


+BionicDance A Bloopers vid would go viral! 



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
5 days ago


Well, it'll probably be a few months to gather enough GOOD blooper footage, but I've started collecting some...



Reply
 · 
1






VinnyMonster1
5 days ago


Damn but the struck by lightning bit was funny!  I was half expecting you to end the video with a long fade to black then.



Reply
 · 
1







ThomasTrue5 days ago







Within my own lifetime it was once 'moral' to punish children in school by striking them across the hands with a leather strap or a cane (or across the buttocks with a paddle in US schools) and a man could not rape his wife but was merely exercising his 'moral' conjugal 'rights'.  Go back less than a century and a husband had the 'moral right' to strike his wife with a rod 'no thicker than his thumb' (hence, "rule of thumb").  These 'morals' were based upon Biblical teaching and yet we now look upon them as examples of a barbaric past we have since thankfully rejected.  If this fool thinks that the Bible has 'stood the test of time', then he is so sadly deluded I frankly feel sorry for him.

Reply
 · 
1


















Star Laughter1 week ago







"I believe in absolute truth!" He says, while munching on shellfish that was harvested on the Sabbath...

Reply
 · 
1


















Dragnauct Sylvas1 week ago







I love how they want to dissolve the negative connotations of terms used against them. Can't wait till they do it to the word "Faith."

Reply
 · 




















Charles Kunkle1 week ago







and we're totally ignoring the fact that God does NOT define marriage as one man and one woman...
Otherwise, many of the patriarchs of the Christian religion were violating God's law. Solomon had 300 wives and 700 concubines? Excatly how is that "one man and one woman"

Reply
 · 
2


















themplar1 week ago







Another great video from you. And again very right.
I personally cannot understand the objections people have against gays and gay marriage.  Sadly its not just religious biggots i've been in many discussions with non theist who were still absolute biggots.
Its funny how they Always accuse me of intolerance when i call their arguments absolute bogus and them biggots.  Every time the arguments are.. its not natural.. well obviously it is..  what if everybody turned gay the human species would end... wouldnt happen and if so what? They still can get children by In Vitro.
In the end all their arguments are invalid. and only one real arguments is left over they wont pronounce.
They suffer from imagination and see two gays going at it and they think its Icky. And thats all it is for them.. they think its icky.. well then stop fantasizing about it.
Towards religious biggotry.... i whish it was allowed to smack them around with their own bibles...
Read more (13 lines)
Reply
 · 
1

















DoctorScarlet
1 week ago


Not to mention that there's also the ridiculous idea that gays want to recruit children for the sole purpose of making them gay.
People don't just become gay. Usually a person has a predisposition to being gay, but this is something many people will deny. I myself, a person who grew up in a Christian home, had a predisposition to being pansexual, but it's easier to deny something than to actually own up to it. I'm so glad I grew out of that horseshit though, I'm much happier.
Show less

Reply
 · 
1







Red Cloud1 week ago







You can't just re-define words to fit your own ends. Start doing that all willy-nilly, and you ruin the foundation of language itself, the fact that we can understand it. You can't just destroy an entire language, because you don't like how some of the words coming together make you feel, that's bullshit. Words like Tolerance are there, because we need them, if we didn't need them, we wouldn't have them. 

Reply
 · 




















CarefulAtheist1 week ago







WTF moment @7:05. Gold!

Reply
 · 




















Moor Letoh1 week ago







Epic.

Reply
 · 




















mikeyvester1 week ago







Speaking from experience living in a country where gay marriage has been legal for almost 9 years, I haven't noticed anything different. I would have never known the law changed except it was on the news.  The only reason I can see why a person would be against gay marriage, they are fucking assholes and they like to hurt people.

Reply
 · 
1


















markedfang1 week ago







What if god was true? What would actually change?
He'd still have to come up with good arguments to justify his demands. I would see god as no more then another human with another opinion and unless he can convince me of his case I still wouldn't feel any obligation towards him.
Worship blinds you to attrociaties.

Reply
 · 
2


















Griffin98571 week ago







7:03 I nearly jumped out of my own skin shakes fist at Kate.

Reply
 · 
1







Hide replies








BionicDance
1 week ago


Neener. ;)



Reply
 · 
1






Griffin9857
1 week ago


Any more surprises? :P



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


+Griffin9857 If I told you, they wouldn't be surprises, now would they? :D



Reply
 · 
1






Griffin9857
1 week ago


+BionicDance *Glares*



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


+Griffin9857 *sticks out tongue*



Reply
 · 
1






christopher9000p
6 days ago


Hey, blame "god", not Kate for that one. :P



Reply
 · 









Felhaven1 week ago (edited)







You really shouldn't quote old testament based definitions of marriage while wearing a polyblend shirt.  

Reply
 · 
2

















DoctorScarlet
1 week ago


Gives a whole new meaning to "don't throw stones while standing in a glass house".



Reply
 · 









RRoocckkyy501 week ago







Nice new intro! : )

Reply
 · 
1

















BionicDance
1 week ago


Thanks! I was going for a kind of 80s look. :)



Reply
 · 
1







VGatheist1 week ago (edited)







well the moral argument against abortion is that you are killing a baby. A mother does not have a right to kill her new born baby, so the question then comes about, at what point does a baby have the right to live. But the trick in proving abortion immoral within a real world sense is to prove that the fetus is being harmed. Big argument and I am not going to go through the whole case for abortion, but I just don't find your "if you do not agree with abortion don't have one." as a valid point because the whole reason there is any argument is the attempt to demonstrate that the fetus should have rights. I think the laws for abortion are very close to taking all of this in account. But the Christians idea of egg + sperm = no abortion is just not valid. I think the laws very, but right now all states at least use viability and not birth as the starting point for fetus rights. Allot of laws will use the trimester to determine if an abortion as legal. But you know as a Lesbian you likely will never have to worry about it. If you have a baby, you'd have to choose it.
Read more
Reply
 · 




















TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







@7:05- Nice green cross.  Faded in a bit early but still nice.

Reply
 · 



















BionicDance
1 week ago


Heh. It's a chromakey guide mark to keep CGI elements in place relative to the camera.



Reply
 · 








TheRealPaulMarshall
1 week ago


I figgered.  Still nice given the context.



Reply
 · 









Jesse Sisolack1 week ago (edited)







New Planet? looks rather...wet. I only saw one little area of land.
Does this fellow need a book shelf? Maybe we should pitch in and get him one of those particle board ones from Wal-Mart. Seriously, concrete bricks and boards?

Reply
 · 




















Robert Roman1 week ago







This fucktard says all that special pleading in the name of the god of intolerance Yahweh. He sure fights hard for intolerance what a hypocritical bigot.

Reply
 · 



















yadabub
1 week ago


That was what struck me as well.  His Christian privilege allows him to spew what he likes with few consequences.  No doubt, he would be singing another tune if he had experienced real persecution for being a Christian, being a believer, or for being an a-hole.



Reply
 · 
1







BohemianBlasphemy1 week ago







2:34
I have a Bible. If god wrote that book, god intended marriage to be between a man and a woman; but also between a man and all the women that man can afford to rape.
What is this idiot even talking about?

Reply
 · 
3


















Inannalu1 week ago







Harmful to an ideology is not the same thing as harmful to people.
Behaviors and activities which do the former, but do not do the latter, are perfectly okay ethically, so far as I'm concerned.
In fact, if some behavior or activity harms an ideology which is responsible for much harm to people, so much the better.

Reply
 · 
5


















Peter Baxter1 week ago







Thanks for making great videos and calling out nutjobs like this guy, Bionic. His alleged point made so little sense, it was like he was okay with slavery because it was in the Bible, too.. not to mention that old tired "God intended marriage" argument when marriage was around long before the Bible as a business transaction of sorts. Le sigh.

Reply
 · 




















TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







Someone needs to explain to this dude that Gahwd's "absolute definition of marriage" involves one man and as many females as he can afford to buy including his sister, his half-sister, his half-sister's slaves, his aunts, his own slaves, as many concubines as he can purchase or coerce by threat of violence, any female of any age taken in war, any un-affianced female of any age that he can manage to rape and then pay for, and - if we allow for a certain reading of Genesis chapter 2 verse 20 - pretty much any animal (or maybe even any plant) into which he might possibly stick his penis.  [Note: That list is not meant to be exhaustive.  I'm sure there are some that I missed.]

Reply
 · 




















Len H2 days ago







BTW I love ya KATE no matter what your incorrect opinion of me....a ASSUMPTION is just that...those first 3 letters ...
 Love ya KATE now how about a great big wet KISS...dont hate because I am male lol what you afraid it might make you get COOTIES lol
BTW I liked the video as always

Reply
 · 




















TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







Did you abscond with Boehner's tanning bed?

Reply
 · 
1

















BionicDance
1 week ago (edited)


Naw...my camera was just acting like a little bitch, lighting-wise.



Reply
 · 









Packard Sonic1 week ago







I have had similar arguments with guys like him. He is a serious douche bag.  

Reply
 · 




















Len H2 days ago







Kate called me a Homophobic when i asked her question ...I ask a question and get called a name. But that is okay  I possed that dame question to my niece who is gay and she was like Uncle let that doesnt make you homophobic anyone who calls you that has a problem and they are lucky they didnt say it to you face  then we looked at a girl and both said  DAMN nice ass and laughed I love my niece she is awesome.
As for a Bigot....every single human is ....proud to be a bigot.
 My fist doesn't have to stop at the tip of any-ones nose and hasn't many times.
  In fact many time have not stopped with my feet to peoples noses over and over.
  Never bothered me before to put someone in their place...though these days it hurts...getting old lol.
   Values and morals suck, I would prefer busting more heads and not no damn BS law in my way...PISH but so far I have stayed many steps away of these moral laws of though shall not kill.
 The Qu'ran القرآن الكريم is the answer and oh how they enforce their rules.
  LOL
    Remember if you want  a law changed no matter how vile and disgusting it is  get the right wing out and the left wing in to make it legal....


 
Show less
Reply
 · 































































TheAtheistPaladin .1 week ago







In societies where there is no difference between private morality and a public morality, that would be a totalitarian society.  Why can't they realize that?

Reply
 · 
2


















DBeetleeater Doug1 week ago







Is this guy using the English language?  He uses words I have heard before but his meaning for those words are just plain different from what I think they mean.  Good job BionicDance.

Reply
 · 




















Mark Susskind1 week ago







I am smitten. :3

Reply
 · 




















Mel Rhomberg1 week ago







God didn't give a definition of marriage. Some people don't actually read the bible. le sigh

Reply
 · 




















TheAmulli1 week ago







I clicked thumbs up immediately after god struck you down midsentence. 

Reply
 · 




















angryhairpeice6 days ago







Isn't it funny how they always say that the book stands the test of time, then when you point out things like slavery, and working on the sabbath, they say 'That was a different time.'? That is why I am a gnostic antitheist. I know I am for a complete obliteration of religion. If we could get them to think, it could be possible. 

Reply
 · 




















beirirangu1 week ago (edited)







I think you missed a great oppertunity: he said that if it's in the bible, no matter when or in what context it was written, it's true. Meaning that he believes slavery should still be enforced as well as the death penalty for worshiping other gods, worshiping things that resemble anything from heaven, anything from earth, and anything from below the earth, using god's name in vain, working on the sabbath, not honoring your parents, ex... unless he thinks that when god said (roughly) , it is a permanent law that anyone who does any work on the sabbath is to be put to death, oh and here are the (first) ten commandments that I wrote with my finger. [ex 31 :12-18]

Reply
 · 









Hide replies








BionicDance
1 week ago


I'm, uh, pretty darn sure I brought up the bible condoning slavery...



Reply
 · 








beirirangu
1 week ago


+BionicDance you mentioned it in the meaning that it was a fad, an opinion that faded in time... much like how he thought the acceptance of homosexuality would... I meant it as in that he's picking and choosing what is 100% true and ignoring what's also in there



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+beirirangu I'm pretty sure I mentioned that too.



Reply
 · 








beirirangu
1 week ago


+BionicDance plus, I did post it before finishing the video... having typed it up after the first volley of the bible's infallibility



Reply
 · 









amoscarmel1 week ago







Great clip, thank  you. Loved the lightening strike lol...

Reply
 · 




















pauldhoff1 week ago







Their so-called objective laws are subjectively interpreted by them all the time. 
Paul

Reply
 · 




















Pat MaCrotch1 week ago







Somebody needs to see the South Park episode about "tolerance" ?

Reply
 · 




















Emigdiosback1 week ago







was the title intentional?

Reply
 · 









Hide replies








BionicDance
1 week ago


...I'm not sure I understand the question.



Reply
 · 








Emigdiosback
1 week ago


+BionicDance it sorta doesn't look right. like if written incorrectly. sorry, it's sorta bugging me.



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+Emigdiosback Actually, it's grammatically correct.
Had I written it, "Some Things I Will Not Put Up With," I'd be ending it with a preposition.



Reply
 · 
1






Emigdiosback
1 week ago (edited)


ohh! Sorry. I'm obsessive compulsive, and things like that catch my attention.



Reply
 · 








TheRealPaulMarshall
1 week ago


Should it not be "Some Things Up With Which I Will [Or 'Shall' given that the once considered incorrect 'will' was used, at the time, for emphasis.   Perhaps turn about is fair play.] Not Put"?



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+TheRealPaulMarshall No. Because your phrasing assumes that this is a list of intolerable things, rather than a statement of being unwilling to tolerate an unspecified set/number of things.



Reply
 · 








TheRealPaulMarshall
1 week ago


I thought that number was the same in both phrasings and that the difference was only in whether the elided object of the preposition should have been explicit.



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+TheRealPaulMarshall When I parse your rephrasing into more colloquial speech, what I get is, "Some things I will not put up with," meaning the video is listing off some things I find intolerable.
But what the title is really saying is, "There are some things I will not put up with," being rather more ambiguous.



Reply
 · 









zarkoff451 week ago







Sum things down with BionicDance: Intolerance comes through law or vigilante justice, nothing else.

Reply
 · 




















RetroFanaminna1 week ago







How did this guy confuse being tolerant with not agreeing with someones opinion and values?

Reply
 · 
















Show more
































































































































































































































































































































































































Len H2 days ago







Kate called me a Homophobic when i asked her question ...I ask a question and get called a name. But that is okay  I possed that dame question to my niece who is gay and she was like Uncle let that doesnt make you homophobic anyone who calls you that has a problem and they are lucky they didnt say it to you face  then we looked at a girl and both said  DAMN nice ass and laughed I love my niece she is awesome.
As for a Bigot....every single human is ....proud to be a bigot.
 My fist doesn't have to stop at the tip of any-ones nose and hasn't many times.
  In fact many time have not stopped with my feet to peoples noses over and over.
  Never bothered me before to put someone in their place...though these days it hurts...getting old lol.
   Values and morals suck, I would prefer busting more heads and not no damn BS law in my way...PISH but so far I have stayed many steps away of these moral laws of though shall not kill.
 The Qu'ran القرآن الكريم is the answer and oh how they enforce their rules.
  LOL
    Remember if you want  a law changed no matter how vile and disgusting it is  get the right wing out and the left wing in to make it legal

























Len H2 days ago







Kate called me a Homophobic when i asked her question ...I ask a question and get called a name. But that is okay  I possed that dame question to my niece who is gay and she was like Uncle let that doesnt make you homophobic anyone who calls you that has a problem and they are lucky they didnt say it to you face  then we looked at a girl and both said  DAMN nice ass and laughed I love my niece she is awesome.
As for a Bigot....every single human is ....proud to be a bigot.
 My fist doesn't have to stop at the tip of any-ones nose and hasn't many times.
  In fact many time have not stopped with my feet to peoples noses over and over.
  Never bothered me before to put someone in their place...though these days it hurts...getting old lol.
   Values and morals suck, I would prefer busting more heads and not no damn BS law in my way...PISH but so far I have stayed many steps away of these moral laws of though shall not kill.
 The Qu'ran القرآن الكريم is the answer and oh how they enforce their rules.
  LOL
    Remember if you want  a law changed no matter how vile and disgusting it is  get the right wing out and the left wing in to make it legal....




























All comments (98)







Share your thoughts












Top comments









Stream







P Dav1 day ago







This guy says morality is absolute. Then, I say, all of the horrendous acts done by or sanctioned by god in the bible, such as murder, slavery, rape, genocide, cannibalism, and treatment of women as property are absolutely immoral.

Reply
 · 




















BionicDance1 week ago









Reply
 · 
12







Hide replies








Mundus Novus Ordo
1 week ago


+LegendaryAsshole which one



Reply
 · 








1140Cecile
1 week ago


Nicely done, Keight.



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


Thanks! :)



Reply
 · 
2






Lance Zimmerman
1 week ago


You forgot temple. XD Funny how xtians enjoy to blame others for what they are doing. He also does not seem to realize that marriage is a law, not a god thing.
LOL on the lightning.
LOL Faith, he believes in wishful thinking = easy answers that agrees with one's own thinking.
3500 years ago, where did he get that? Also, what rewrite/translation is he talking about? More like centuries.
Good video.
Show less

Reply
 · 
2






Julia Reed
1 week ago


How many times did you have to do that flailing during the smiting before you finally got it right? That awesomely hilarious! I'm still smirking from it.



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


Believe it or not, that took one take.
There were other shots, tho...



Reply
 · 
1






Julia Reed
1 week ago


I applaud you, I really do, I'd probably have a bloopers reel at the end of a video due to ADD tangents, stuttering and my mild lisp



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


Believe me, I've been tempted to make a bloopers vid. :)



Reply
 · 
3






Julia Reed
1 week ago


Oh I'd watch that in a heart beat! 



Reply
 · 
2






Lance Zimmerman
1 week ago


+BionicDance oh you so should make a bloopers video! After all this time you should have lots of good stuff to chose from.



Reply
 · 








VinnyMonster1
5 days ago


+BionicDance A Bloopers vid would go viral! 



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
5 days ago


Well, it'll probably be a few months to gather enough GOOD blooper footage, but I've started collecting some...



Reply
 · 
1






VinnyMonster1
5 days ago


Damn but the struck by lightning bit was funny!  I was half expecting you to end the video with a long fade to black then.



Reply
 · 
1







ThomasTrue5 days ago







Within my own lifetime it was once 'moral' to punish children in school by striking them across the hands with a leather strap or a cane (or across the buttocks with a paddle in US schools) and a man could not rape his wife but was merely exercising his 'moral' conjugal 'rights'.  Go back less than a century and a husband had the 'moral right' to strike his wife with a rod 'no thicker than his thumb' (hence, "rule of thumb").  These 'morals' were based upon Biblical teaching and yet we now look upon them as examples of a barbaric past we have since thankfully rejected.  If this fool thinks that the Bible has 'stood the test of time', then he is so sadly deluded I frankly feel sorry for him.

Reply
 · 
1


















Star Laughter1 week ago







"I believe in absolute truth!" He says, while munching on shellfish that was harvested on the Sabbath...

Reply
 · 
1


















Dragnauct Sylvas1 week ago







I love how they want to dissolve the negative connotations of terms used against them. Can't wait till they do it to the word "Faith."

Reply
 · 




















Inannalu1 week ago







Harmful to an ideology is not the same thing as harmful to people.
Behaviors and activities which do the former, but do not do the latter, are perfectly okay ethically, so far as I'm concerned.
In fact, if some behavior or activity harms an ideology which is responsible for much harm to people, so much the better.

Reply
 · 
5


















Charles Kunkle1 week ago







and we're totally ignoring the fact that God does NOT define marriage as one man and one woman...
Otherwise, many of the patriarchs of the Christian religion were violating God's law. Solomon had 300 wives and 700 concubines? Excatly how is that "one man and one woman"

Reply
 · 
2


















themplar1 week ago







Another great video from you. And again very right.
I personally cannot understand the objections people have against gays and gay marriage.  Sadly its not just religious biggots i've been in many discussions with non theist who were still absolute biggots.
Its funny how they Always accuse me of intolerance when i call their arguments absolute bogus and them biggots.  Every time the arguments are.. its not natural.. well obviously it is..  what if everybody turned gay the human species would end... wouldnt happen and if so what? They still can get children by In Vitro.
In the end all their arguments are invalid. and only one real arguments is left over they wont pronounce.
They suffer from imagination and see two gays going at it and they think its Icky. And thats all it is for them.. they think its icky.. well then stop fantasizing about it.
Towards religious biggotry.... i whish it was allowed to smack them around with their own bibles...
Show less
Reply
 · 
1

















DoctorScarlet
1 week ago


Not to mention that there's also the ridiculous idea that gays want to recruit children for the sole purpose of making them gay.
People don't just become gay. Usually a person has a predisposition to being gay, but this is something many people will deny. I myself, a person who grew up in a Christian home, had a predisposition to being pansexual, but it's easier to deny something than to actually own up to it. I'm so glad I grew out of that horseshit though, I'm much happier.
Show less

Reply
 · 
1







Red Cloud1 week ago







You can't just re-define words to fit your own ends. Start doing that all willy-nilly, and you ruin the foundation of language itself, the fact that we can understand it. You can't just destroy an entire language, because you don't like how some of the words coming together make you feel, that's bullshit. Words like Tolerance are there, because we need them, if we didn't need them, we wouldn't have them. 

Reply
 · 




















CarefulAtheist1 week ago







WTF moment @7:05. Gold!

Reply
 · 




















Moor Letoh1 week ago







Epic.

Reply
 · 




















mikeyvester1 week ago







Speaking from experience living in a country where gay marriage has been legal for almost 9 years, I haven't noticed anything different. I would have never known the law changed except it was on the news.  The only reason I can see why a person would be against gay marriage, they are fucking assholes and they like to hurt people.

Reply
 · 
1


















markedfang1 week ago







What if god was true? What would actually change?
He'd still have to come up with good arguments to justify his demands. I would see god as no more then another human with another opinion and unless he can convince me of his case I still wouldn't feel any obligation towards him.
Worship blinds you to attrociaties.

Reply
 · 
2


















Griffin98571 week ago







7:03 I nearly jumped out of my own skin shakes fist at Kate.

Reply
 · 
1







Hide replies








BionicDance
1 week ago


Neener. ;)



Reply
 · 
1






Griffin9857
1 week ago


Any more surprises? :P



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


+Griffin9857 If I told you, they wouldn't be surprises, now would they? :D



Reply
 · 
1






Griffin9857
1 week ago


+BionicDance *Glares*



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


+Griffin9857 *sticks out tongue*



Reply
 · 
1






christopher9000p
6 days ago


Hey, blame "god", not Kate for that one. :P



Reply
 · 









Felhaven1 week ago (edited)







You really shouldn't quote old testament based definitions of marriage while wearing a polyblend shirt.  

Reply
 · 
2

















DoctorScarlet
1 week ago


Gives a whole new meaning to "don't throw stones while standing in a glass house".



Reply
 · 









RRoocckkyy501 week ago







Nice new intro! : )

Reply
 · 
1

















BionicDance
1 week ago


Thanks! I was going for a kind of 80s look. :)



Reply
 · 
1







VGatheist1 week ago (edited)







well the moral argument against abortion is that you are killing a baby. A mother does not have a right to kill her new born baby, so the question then comes about, at what point does a baby have the right to live. But the trick in proving abortion immoral within a real world sense is to prove that the fetus is being harmed. Big argument and I am not going to go through the whole case for abortion, but I just don't find your "if you do not agree with abortion don't have one." as a valid point because the whole reason there is any argument is the attempt to demonstrate that the fetus should have rights. I think the laws for abortion are very close to taking all of this in account. But the Christians idea of egg + sperm = no abortion is just not valid. I think the laws very, but right now all states at least use viability and not birth as the starting point for fetus rights. Allot of laws will use the trimester to determine if an abortion as legal. But you know as a Lesbian you likely will never have to worry about it. If you have a baby, you'd have to choose it.
Show less
Reply
 · 




















TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







@7:05- Nice green cross.  Faded in a bit early but still nice.

Reply
 · 



















BionicDance
1 week ago


Heh. It's a chromakey guide mark to keep CGI elements in place relative to the camera.



Reply
 · 








TheRealPaulMarshall
1 week ago


I figgered.  Still nice given the context.



Reply
 · 









Jesse Sisolack1 week ago (edited)







New Planet? looks rather...wet. I only saw one little area of land.
Does this fellow need a book shelf? Maybe we should pitch in and get him one of those particle board ones from Wal-Mart. Seriously, concrete bricks and boards?

Reply
 · 




















Robert Roman1 week ago







This fucktard says all that special pleading in the name of the god of intolerance Yahweh. He sure fights hard for intolerance what a hypocritical bigot.

Reply
 · 



















yadabub
1 week ago


That was what struck me as well.  His Christian privilege allows him to spew what he likes with few consequences.  No doubt, he would be singing another tune if he had experienced real persecution for being a Christian, being a believer, or for being an a-hole.



Reply
 · 
1







BohemianBlasphemy1 week ago







2:34
I have a Bible. If god wrote that book, god intended marriage to be between a man and a woman; but also between a man and all the women that man can afford to rape.
What is this idiot even talking about?

Reply
 · 
3


















Peter Baxter1 week ago







Thanks for making great videos and calling out nutjobs like this guy, Bionic. His alleged point made so little sense, it was like he was okay with slavery because it was in the Bible, too.. not to mention that old tired "God intended marriage" argument when marriage was around long before the Bible as a business transaction of sorts. Le sigh.

Reply
 · 




















TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







Someone needs to explain to this dude that Gahwd's "absolute definition of marriage" involves one man and as many females as he can afford to buy including his sister, his half-sister, his half-sister's slaves, his aunts, his own slaves, as many concubines as he can purchase or coerce by threat of violence, any female of any age taken in war, any un-affianced female of any age that he can manage to rape and then pay for, and - if we allow for a certain reading of Genesis chapter 2 verse 20 - pretty much any animal (or maybe even any plant) into which he might possibly stick his penis.  [Note: That list is not meant to be exhaustive.  I'm sure there are some that I missed.]

Reply
 · 




















Len H2 days ago







BTW I love ya KATE no matter what your incorrect opinion of me....a ASSUMPTION is just that...those first 3 letters ...
 Love ya KATE now how about a great big wet KISS...dont hate because I am male lol what you afraid it might make you get COOTIES lol
BTW I liked the video as always

Reply
 · 




















TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







Did you abscond with Boehner's tanning bed?

Reply
 · 
1

















BionicDance
1 week ago (edited)


Naw...my camera was just acting like a little bitch, lighting-wise.



Reply
 · 









Packard Sonic1 week ago







I have had similar arguments with guys like him. He is a serious douche bag.  

Reply
 · 




















Len H2 days ago







Kate called me a Homophobic when i asked her question ...I ask a question and get called a name. But that is okay  I possed that dame question to my niece who is gay and she was like Uncle let that doesnt make you homophobic anyone who calls you that has a problem and they are lucky they didnt say it to you face  then we looked at a girl and both said  DAMN nice ass and laughed I love my niece she is awesome.
As for a Bigot....every single human is ....proud to be a bigot.
 My fist doesn't have to stop at the tip of any-ones nose and hasn't many times.
  In fact many time have not stopped with my feet to peoples noses over and over.
  Never bothered me before to put someone in their place...though these days it hurts...getting old lol.
   Values and morals suck, I would prefer busting more heads and not no damn BS law in my way...PISH but so far I have stayed many steps away of these moral laws of though shall not kill.
 The Qu'ran القرآن الكريم is the answer and oh how they enforce their rules.
  LOL
    Remember if you want  a law changed no matter how vile and disgusting it is  get the right wing out and the left wing in to make it legal....


 
Show less
Reply
 · 




















TheAtheistPaladin .1 week ago







In societies where there is no difference between private morality and a public morality, that would be a totalitarian society.  Why can't they realize that?

Reply
 · 
2


















DBeetleeater Doug1 week ago







Is this guy using the English language?  He uses words I have heard before but his meaning for those words are just plain different from what I think they mean.  Good job BionicDance.

Reply
 · 




















Mark Susskind1 week ago







I am smitten. :3

Reply
 · 




















Mel Rhomberg1 week ago







God didn't give a definition of marriage. Some people don't actually read the bible. le sigh

Reply
 · 




















TheAmulli1 week ago







I clicked thumbs up immediately after god struck you down midsentence. 

Reply
 · 




















angryhairpeice6 days ago







Isn't it funny how they always say that the book stands the test of time, then when you point out things like slavery, and working on the sabbath, they say 'That was a different time.'? That is why I am a gnostic antitheist. I know I am for a complete obliteration of religion. If we could get them to think, it could be possible. 

Reply
 · 




















beirirangu1 week ago (edited)







I think you missed a great oppertunity: he said that if it's in the bible, no matter when or in what context it was written, it's true. Meaning that he believes slavery should still be enforced as well as the death penalty for worshiping other gods, worshiping things that resemble anything from heaven, anything from earth, and anything from below the earth, using god's name in vain, working on the sabbath, not honoring your parents, ex... unless he thinks that when god said (roughly) , it is a permanent law that anyone who does any work on the sabbath is to be put to death, oh and here are the (first) ten commandments that I wrote with my finger. [ex 31 :12-18]

Reply
 · 









Hide replies








BionicDance
1 week ago


I'm, uh, pretty darn sure I brought up the bible condoning slavery...



Reply
 · 








beirirangu
1 week ago


+BionicDance you mentioned it in the meaning that it was a fad, an opinion that faded in time... much like how he thought the acceptance of homosexuality would... I meant it as in that he's picking and choosing what is 100% true and ignoring what's also in there



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+beirirangu I'm pretty sure I mentioned that too.



Reply
 · 








beirirangu
1 week ago


+BionicDance plus, I did post it before finishing the video... having typed it up after the first volley of the bible's infallibility



Reply
 · 









amoscarmel1 week ago







Great clip, thank  you. Loved the lightening strike lol...

Reply
 · 




















pauldhoff1 week ago







Their so-called objective laws are subjectively interpreted by them all the time. 
Paul

Reply
 · 




















Pat MaCrotch1 week ago







Somebody needs to see the South Park episode about "tolerance" ?

Reply
 · 




















Emigdiosback1 week ago







was the title intentional?

Reply
 · 









Hide replies








BionicDance
1 week ago


...I'm not sure I understand the question.



Reply
 · 








Emigdiosback
1 week ago


+BionicDance it sorta doesn't look right. like if written incorrectly. sorry, it's sorta bugging me.



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+Emigdiosback Actually, it's grammatically correct.
Had I written it, "Some Things I Will Not Put Up With," I'd be ending it with a preposition.



Reply
 · 
1






Emigdiosback
1 week ago (edited)


ohh! Sorry. I'm obsessive compulsive, and things like that catch my attention.



Reply
 · 








TheRealPaulMarshall
1 week ago


Should it not be "Some Things Up With Which I Will [Or 'Shall' given that the once considered incorrect 'will' was used, at the time, for emphasis.   Perhaps turn about is fair play.] Not Put"?



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+TheRealPaulMarshall No. Because your phrasing assumes that this is a list of intolerable things, rather than a statement of being unwilling to tolerate an unspecified set/number of things.



Reply
 · 








TheRealPaulMarshall
1 week ago


I thought that number was the same in both phrasings and that the difference was only in whether the elided object of the preposition should have been explicit.



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+TheRealPaulMarshall When I parse your rephrasing into more colloquial speech, what I get is, "Some things I will not put up with," meaning the video is listing off some things I find intolerable.
But what the title is really saying is, "There are some things I will not put up with," being rather more ambiguous.



Reply
 · 









zarkoff451 week ago







Sum things down with BionicDance: Intolerance comes through law or vigilante justice, nothing else.

Reply
 · 




















RetroFanaminna1 week ago







How did this guy confuse being tolerant with not agreeing with someones opinion and values?

Reply
 · 
















Show more









































All comments (98)







Share your thoughts












Top comments









Stream







P Dav1 day ago







This guy says morality is absolute. Then, I say, all of the horrendous acts done by or sanctioned by god in the bible, such as murder, slavery, rape, genocide, cannibalism, and treatment of women as property are absolutely immoral.

Reply
 · 




















BionicDance1 week ago









Reply
 · 
12







Hide replies








Mundus Novus Ordo
1 week ago


+LegendaryAsshole which one



Reply
 · 








1140Cecile
1 week ago


Nicely done, Keight.



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


Thanks! :)



Reply
 · 
2






Lance Zimmerman
1 week ago


You forgot temple. XD Funny how xtians enjoy to blame others for what they are doing. He also does not seem to realize that marriage is a law, not a god thing.
LOL on the lightning.
LOL Faith, he believes in wishful thinking = easy answers that agrees with one's own thinking.
3500 years ago, where did he get that? Also, what rewrite/translation is he talking about? More like centuries.
Good video.
Show less

Reply
 · 
2






Julia Reed
1 week ago


How many times did you have to do that flailing during the smiting before you finally got it right? That awesomely hilarious! I'm still smirking from it.



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


Believe it or not, that took one take.
There were other shots, tho...



Reply
 · 
1






Julia Reed
1 week ago


I applaud you, I really do, I'd probably have a bloopers reel at the end of a video due to ADD tangents, stuttering and my mild lisp



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


Believe me, I've been tempted to make a bloopers vid. :)



Reply
 · 
3






Julia Reed
1 week ago


Oh I'd watch that in a heart beat! 



Reply
 · 
2






Lance Zimmerman
1 week ago


+BionicDance oh you so should make a bloopers video! After all this time you should have lots of good stuff to chose from.



Reply
 · 








VinnyMonster1
5 days ago


+BionicDance A Bloopers vid would go viral! 



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
5 days ago


Well, it'll probably be a few months to gather enough GOOD blooper footage, but I've started collecting some...



Reply
 · 
1






VinnyMonster1
5 days ago


Damn but the struck by lightning bit was funny!  I was half expecting you to end the video with a long fade to black then.



Reply
 · 
1







ThomasTrue5 days ago







Within my own lifetime it was once 'moral' to punish children in school by striking them across the hands with a leather strap or a cane (or across the buttocks with a paddle in US schools) and a man could not rape his wife but was merely exercising his 'moral' conjugal 'rights'.  Go back less than a century and a husband had the 'moral right' to strike his wife with a rod 'no thicker than his thumb' (hence, "rule of thumb").  These 'morals' were based upon Biblical teaching and yet we now look upon them as examples of a barbaric past we have since thankfully rejected.  If this fool thinks that the Bible has 'stood the test of time', then he is so sadly deluded I frankly feel sorry for him.

Reply
 · 
1


















Star Laughter1 week ago







"I believe in absolute truth!" He says, while munching on shellfish that was harvested on the Sabbath...

Reply
 · 
1


















Dragnauct Sylvas1 week ago







I love how they want to dissolve the negative connotations of terms used against them. Can't wait till they do it to the word "Faith."

Reply
 · 




















Inannalu1 week ago







Harmful to an ideology is not the same thing as harmful to people.
Behaviors and activities which do the former, but do not do the latter, are perfectly okay ethically, so far as I'm concerned.
In fact, if some behavior or activity harms an ideology which is responsible for much harm to people, so much the better.

Reply
 · 
5


















Charles Kunkle1 week ago







and we're totally ignoring the fact that God does NOT define marriage as one man and one woman...
Otherwise, many of the patriarchs of the Christian religion were violating God's law. Solomon had 300 wives and 700 concubines? Excatly how is that "one man and one woman"

Reply
 · 
2


















themplar1 week ago







Another great video from you. And again very right.
I personally cannot understand the objections people have against gays and gay marriage.  Sadly its not just religious biggots i've been in many discussions with non theist who were still absolute biggots.
Its funny how they Always accuse me of intolerance when i call their arguments absolute bogus and them biggots.  Every time the arguments are.. its not natural.. well obviously it is..  what if everybody turned gay the human species would end... wouldnt happen and if so what? They still can get children by In Vitro.
In the end all their arguments are invalid. and only one real arguments is left over they wont pronounce.
They suffer from imagination and see two gays going at it and they think its Icky. And thats all it is for them.. they think its icky.. well then stop fantasizing about it.
Towards religious biggotry.... i whish it was allowed to smack them around with their own bibles...
Show less
Reply
 · 
1

















DoctorScarlet
1 week ago


Not to mention that there's also the ridiculous idea that gays want to recruit children for the sole purpose of making them gay.
People don't just become gay. Usually a person has a predisposition to being gay, but this is something many people will deny. I myself, a person who grew up in a Christian home, had a predisposition to being pansexual, but it's easier to deny something than to actually own up to it. I'm so glad I grew out of that horseshit though, I'm much happier.
Show less

Reply
 · 
1







Red Cloud1 week ago







You can't just re-define words to fit your own ends. Start doing that all willy-nilly, and you ruin the foundation of language itself, the fact that we can understand it. You can't just destroy an entire language, because you don't like how some of the words coming together make you feel, that's bullshit. Words like Tolerance are there, because we need them, if we didn't need them, we wouldn't have them. 

Reply
 · 




















CarefulAtheist1 week ago







WTF moment @7:05. Gold!

Reply
 · 




















Moor Letoh1 week ago







Epic.

Reply
 · 




















mikeyvester1 week ago







Speaking from experience living in a country where gay marriage has been legal for almost 9 years, I haven't noticed anything different. I would have never known the law changed except it was on the news.  The only reason I can see why a person would be against gay marriage, they are fucking assholes and they like to hurt people.

Reply
 · 
1


















markedfang1 week ago







What if god was true? What would actually change?
He'd still have to come up with good arguments to justify his demands. I would see god as no more then another human with another opinion and unless he can convince me of his case I still wouldn't feel any obligation towards him.
Worship blinds you to attrociaties.

Reply
 · 
2


















Griffin98571 week ago







7:03 I nearly jumped out of my own skin shakes fist at Kate.

Reply
 · 
1







Hide replies








BionicDance
1 week ago


Neener. ;)



Reply
 · 
1






Griffin9857
1 week ago


Any more surprises? :P



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


+Griffin9857 If I told you, they wouldn't be surprises, now would they? :D



Reply
 · 
1






Griffin9857
1 week ago


+BionicDance *Glares*



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


+Griffin9857 *sticks out tongue*



Reply
 · 
1






christopher9000p
6 days ago


Hey, blame "god", not Kate for that one. :P



Reply
 · 









Felhaven1 week ago (edited)







You really shouldn't quote old testament based definitions of marriage while wearing a polyblend shirt.  

Reply
 · 
2

















DoctorScarlet
1 week ago


Gives a whole new meaning to "don't throw stones while standing in a glass house".



Reply
 · 









RRoocckkyy501 week ago







Nice new intro! : )

Reply
 · 
1

















BionicDance
1 week ago


Thanks! I was going for a kind of 80s look. :)



Reply
 · 
1







VGatheist1 week ago (edited)







well the moral argument against abortion is that you are killing a baby. A mother does not have a right to kill her new born baby, so the question then comes about, at what point does a baby have the right to live. But the trick in proving abortion immoral within a real world sense is to prove that the fetus is being harmed. Big argument and I am not going to go through the whole case for abortion, but I just don't find your "if you do not agree with abortion don't have one." as a valid point because the whole reason there is any argument is the attempt to demonstrate that the fetus should have rights. I think the laws for abortion are very close to taking all of this in account. But the Christians idea of egg + sperm = no abortion is just not valid. I think the laws very, but right now all states at least use viability and not birth as the starting point for fetus rights. Allot of laws will use the trimester to determine if an abortion as legal. But you know as a Lesbian you likely will never have to worry about it. If you have a baby, you'd have to choose it.
Show less
Reply
 · 




















TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







@7:05- Nice green cross.  Faded in a bit early but still nice.

Reply
 · 



















BionicDance
1 week ago


Heh. It's a chromakey guide mark to keep CGI elements in place relative to the camera.



Reply
 · 








TheRealPaulMarshall
1 week ago


I figgered.  Still nice given the context.



Reply
 · 









Jesse Sisolack1 week ago (edited)







New Planet? looks rather...wet. I only saw one little area of land.
Does this fellow need a book shelf? Maybe we should pitch in and get him one of those particle board ones from Wal-Mart. Seriously, concrete bricks and boards?

Reply
 · 




















Robert Roman1 week ago







This fucktard says all that special pleading in the name of the god of intolerance Yahweh. He sure fights hard for intolerance what a hypocritical bigot.

Reply
 · 



















yadabub
1 week ago


That was what struck me as well.  His Christian privilege allows him to spew what he likes with few consequences.  No doubt, he would be singing another tune if he had experienced real persecution for being a Christian, being a believer, or for being an a-hole.



Reply
 · 
1







BohemianBlasphemy1 week ago







2:34
I have a Bible. If god wrote that book, god intended marriage to be between a man and a woman; but also between a man and all the women that man can afford to rape.
What is this idiot even talking about?

Reply
 · 
3


















Peter Baxter1 week ago







Thanks for making great videos and calling out nutjobs like this guy, Bionic. His alleged point made so little sense, it was like he was okay with slavery because it was in the Bible, too.. not to mention that old tired "God intended marriage" argument when marriage was around long before the Bible as a business transaction of sorts. Le sigh.

Reply
 · 




















TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







Someone needs to explain to this dude that Gahwd's "absolute definition of marriage" involves one man and as many females as he can afford to buy including his sister, his half-sister, his half-sister's slaves, his aunts, his own slaves, as many concubines as he can purchase or coerce by threat of violence, any female of any age taken in war, any un-affianced female of any age that he can manage to rape and then pay for, and - if we allow for a certain reading of Genesis chapter 2 verse 20 - pretty much any animal (or maybe even any plant) into which he might possibly stick his penis.  [Note: That list is not meant to be exhaustive.  I'm sure there are some that I missed.]

Reply
 · 




















Len H2 days ago







BTW I love ya KATE no matter what your incorrect opinion of me....a ASSUMPTION is just that...those first 3 letters ...
 Love ya KATE now how about a great big wet KISS...dont hate because I am male lol what you afraid it might make you get COOTIES lol
BTW I liked the video as always

Reply
 · 




















TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







Did you abscond with Boehner's tanning bed?

Reply
 · 
1

















BionicDance
1 week ago (edited)


Naw...my camera was just acting like a little bitch, lighting-wise.



Reply
 · 









Packard Sonic1 week ago







I have had similar arguments with guys like him. He is a serious douche bag.  

Reply
 · 




















Len H2 days ago







Kate called me a Homophobic when i asked her question ...I ask a question and get called a name. But that is okay  I possed that dame question to my niece who is gay and she was like Uncle let that doesnt make you homophobic anyone who calls you that has a problem and they are lucky they didnt say it to you face  then we looked at a girl and both said  DAMN nice ass and laughed I love my niece she is awesome.
As for a Bigot....every single human is ....proud to be a bigot.
 My fist doesn't have to stop at the tip of any-ones nose and hasn't many times.
  In fact many time have not stopped with my feet to peoples noses over and over.
  Never bothered me before to put someone in their place...though these days it hurts...getting old lol.
   Values and morals suck, I would prefer busting more heads and not no damn BS law in my way...PISH but so far I have stayed many steps away of these moral laws of though shall not kill.
 The Qu'ran القرآن الكريم is the answer and oh how they enforce their rules.
  LOL
    Remember if you want  a law changed no matter how vile and disgusting it is  get the right wing out and the left wing in to make it legal....


 
Show less
Reply
 · 




















TheAtheistPaladin .1 week ago







In societies where there is no difference between private morality and a public morality, that would be a totalitarian society.  Why can't they realize that?

Reply
 · 
2


















DBeetleeater Doug1 week ago







Is this guy using the English language?  He uses words I have heard before but his meaning for those words are just plain different from what I think they mean.  Good job BionicDance.

Reply
 · 




















Mark Susskind1 week ago







I am smitten. :3

Reply
 · 




















Mel Rhomberg1 week ago







God didn't give a definition of marriage. Some people don't actually read the bible. le sigh

Reply
 · 




















TheAmulli1 week ago







I clicked thumbs up immediately after god struck you down midsentence. 

Reply
 · 




















angryhairpeice6 days ago







Isn't it funny how they always say that the book stands the test of time, then when you point out things like slavery, and working on the sabbath, they say 'That was a different time.'? That is why I am a gnostic antitheist. I know I am for a complete obliteration of religion. If we could get them to think, it could be possible. 

Reply
 · 




















beirirangu1 week ago (edited)







I think you missed a great oppertunity: he said that if it's in the bible, no matter when or in what context it was written, it's true. Meaning that he believes slavery should still be enforced as well as the death penalty for worshiping other gods, worshiping things that resemble anything from heaven, anything from earth, and anything from below the earth, using god's name in vain, working on the sabbath, not honoring your parents, ex... unless he thinks that when god said (roughly) , it is a permanent law that anyone who does any work on the sabbath is to be put to death, oh and here are the (first) ten commandments that I wrote with my finger. [ex 31 :12-18]

Reply
 · 









Hide replies








BionicDance
1 week ago


I'm, uh, pretty darn sure I brought up the bible condoning slavery...



Reply
 · 








beirirangu
1 week ago


+BionicDance you mentioned it in the meaning that it was a fad, an opinion that faded in time... much like how he thought the acceptance of homosexuality would... I meant it as in that he's picking and choosing what is 100% true and ignoring what's also in there



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+beirirangu I'm pretty sure I mentioned that too.



Reply
 · 








beirirangu
1 week ago


+BionicDance plus, I did post it before finishing the video... having typed it up after the first volley of the bible's infallibility



Reply
 · 









amoscarmel1 week ago







Great clip, thank  you. Loved the lightening strike lol...

Reply
 · 




















pauldhoff1 week ago







Their so-called objective laws are subjectively interpreted by them all the time. 
Paul

Reply
 · 




















Pat MaCrotch1 week ago







Somebody needs to see the South Park episode about "tolerance" ?

Reply
 · 




















Emigdiosback1 week ago







was the title intentional?

Reply
 · 









Hide replies








BionicDance
1 week ago


...I'm not sure I understand the question.



Reply
 · 








Emigdiosback
1 week ago


+BionicDance it sorta doesn't look right. like if written incorrectly. sorry, it's sorta bugging me.



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+Emigdiosback Actually, it's grammatically correct.
Had I written it, "Some Things I Will Not Put Up With," I'd be ending it with a preposition.



Reply
 · 
1






Emigdiosback
1 week ago (edited)


ohh! Sorry. I'm obsessive compulsive, and things like that catch my attention.



Reply
 · 








TheRealPaulMarshall
1 week ago


Should it not be "Some Things Up With Which I Will [Or 'Shall' given that the once considered incorrect 'will' was used, at the time, for emphasis.   Perhaps turn about is fair play.] Not Put"?



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+TheRealPaulMarshall No. Because your phrasing assumes that this is a list of intolerable things, rather than a statement of being unwilling to tolerate an unspecified set/number of things.



Reply
 · 








TheRealPaulMarshall
1 week ago


I thought that number was the same in both phrasings and that the difference was only in whether the elided object of the preposition should have been explicit.



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+TheRealPaulMarshall When I parse your rephrasing into more colloquial speech, what I get is, "Some things I will not put up with," meaning the video is listing off some things I find intolerable.
But what the title is really saying is, "There are some things I will not put up with," being rather more ambiguous.



Reply
 · 









zarkoff451 week ago







Sum things down with BionicDance: Intolerance comes through law or vigilante justice, nothing else.

Reply
 · 




















RetroFanaminna1 week ago







How did this guy confuse being tolerant with not agreeing with someones opinion and values?

Reply
 · 
















Show more






























All comments (98)







Share your thoughts












Top comments









Stream







P Dav1 day ago







This guy says morality is absolute. Then, I say, all of the horrendous acts done by or sanctioned by god in the bible, such as murder, slavery, rape, genocide, cannibalism, and treatment of women as property are absolutely immoral.

Reply
 · 




















BionicDance1 week ago









Reply
 · 
12







Hide replies








Mundus Novus Ordo
1 week ago


+LegendaryAsshole which one



Reply
 · 








1140Cecile
1 week ago


Nicely done, Keight.



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


Thanks! :)



Reply
 · 
2






Lance Zimmerman
1 week ago


You forgot temple. XD Funny how xtians enjoy to blame others for what they are doing. He also does not seem to realize that marriage is a law, not a god thing.
LOL on the lightning.
LOL Faith, he believes in wishful thinking = easy answers that agrees with one's own thinking.
3500 years ago, where did he get that? Also, what rewrite/translation is he talking about? More like centuries.
Good video.
Show less

Reply
 · 
2






Julia Reed
1 week ago


How many times did you have to do that flailing during the smiting before you finally got it right? That awesomely hilarious! I'm still smirking from it.



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


Believe it or not, that took one take.
There were other shots, tho...



Reply
 · 
1






Julia Reed
1 week ago


I applaud you, I really do, I'd probably have a bloopers reel at the end of a video due to ADD tangents, stuttering and my mild lisp



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


Believe me, I've been tempted to make a bloopers vid. :)



Reply
 · 
3






Julia Reed
1 week ago


Oh I'd watch that in a heart beat! 



Reply
 · 
2






Lance Zimmerman
1 week ago


+BionicDance oh you so should make a bloopers video! After all this time you should have lots of good stuff to chose from.



Reply
 · 








VinnyMonster1
5 days ago


+BionicDance A Bloopers vid would go viral! 



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
5 days ago


Well, it'll probably be a few months to gather enough GOOD blooper footage, but I've started collecting some...



Reply
 · 
1






VinnyMonster1
5 days ago


Damn but the struck by lightning bit was funny!  I was half expecting you to end the video with a long fade to black then.



Reply
 · 
1







ThomasTrue5 days ago







Within my own lifetime it was once 'moral' to punish children in school by striking them across the hands with a leather strap or a cane (or across the buttocks with a paddle in US schools) and a man could not rape his wife but was merely exercising his 'moral' conjugal 'rights'.  Go back less than a century and a husband had the 'moral right' to strike his wife with a rod 'no thicker than his thumb' (hence, "rule of thumb").  These 'morals' were based upon Biblical teaching and yet we now look upon them as examples of a barbaric past we have since thankfully rejected.  If this fool thinks that the Bible has 'stood the test of time', then he is so sadly deluded I frankly feel sorry for him.

Reply
 · 
1


















Star Laughter1 week ago







"I believe in absolute truth!" He says, while munching on shellfish that was harvested on the Sabbath...

Reply
 · 
1


















Dragnauct Sylvas1 week ago







I love how they want to dissolve the negative connotations of terms used against them. Can't wait till they do it to the word "Faith."

Reply
 · 




















Inannalu1 week ago







Harmful to an ideology is not the same thing as harmful to people.
Behaviors and activities which do the former, but do not do the latter, are perfectly okay ethically, so far as I'm concerned.
In fact, if some behavior or activity harms an ideology which is responsible for much harm to people, so much the better.

Reply
 · 
5


















Charles Kunkle1 week ago







and we're totally ignoring the fact that God does NOT define marriage as one man and one woman...
Otherwise, many of the patriarchs of the Christian religion were violating God's law. Solomon had 300 wives and 700 concubines? Excatly how is that "one man and one woman"

Reply
 · 
2


















themplar1 week ago







Another great video from you. And again very right.
I personally cannot understand the objections people have against gays and gay marriage.  Sadly its not just religious biggots i've been in many discussions with non theist who were still absolute biggots.
Its funny how they Always accuse me of intolerance when i call their arguments absolute bogus and them biggots.  Every time the arguments are.. its not natural.. well obviously it is..  what if everybody turned gay the human species would end... wouldnt happen and if so what? They still can get children by In Vitro.
In the end all their arguments are invalid. and only one real arguments is left over they wont pronounce.
They suffer from imagination and see two gays going at it and they think its Icky. And thats all it is for them.. they think its icky.. well then stop fantasizing about it.
Towards religious biggotry.... i whish it was allowed to smack them around with their own bibles...
Show less
Reply
 · 
1

















DoctorScarlet
1 week ago


Not to mention that there's also the ridiculous idea that gays want to recruit children for the sole purpose of making them gay.
People don't just become gay. Usually a person has a predisposition to being gay, but this is something many people will deny. I myself, a person who grew up in a Christian home, had a predisposition to being pansexual, but it's easier to deny something than to actually own up to it. I'm so glad I grew out of that horseshit though, I'm much happier.
Show less

Reply
 · 
1







Red Cloud1 week ago







You can't just re-define words to fit your own ends. Start doing that all willy-nilly, and you ruin the foundation of language itself, the fact that we can understand it. You can't just destroy an entire language, because you don't like how some of the words coming together make you feel, that's bullshit. Words like Tolerance are there, because we need them, if we didn't need them, we wouldn't have them. 

Reply
 · 




















CarefulAtheist1 week ago







WTF moment @7:05. Gold!

Reply
 · 




















Moor Letoh1 week ago







Epic.

Reply
 · 




















mikeyvester1 week ago







Speaking from experience living in a country where gay marriage has been legal for almost 9 years, I haven't noticed anything different. I would have never known the law changed except it was on the news.  The only reason I can see why a person would be against gay marriage, they are fucking assholes and they like to hurt people.

Reply
 · 
1


















markedfang1 week ago







What if god was true? What would actually change?
He'd still have to come up with good arguments to justify his demands. I would see god as no more then another human with another opinion and unless he can convince me of his case I still wouldn't feel any obligation towards him.
Worship blinds you to attrociaties.

Reply
 · 
2


















Griffin98571 week ago







7:03 I nearly jumped out of my own skin shakes fist at Kate.

Reply
 · 
1







Hide replies








BionicDance
1 week ago


Neener. ;)



Reply
 · 
1






Griffin9857
1 week ago


Any more surprises? :P



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


+Griffin9857 If I told you, they wouldn't be surprises, now would they? :D



Reply
 · 
1






Griffin9857
1 week ago


+BionicDance *Glares*



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


+Griffin9857 *sticks out tongue*



Reply
 · 
1






christopher9000p
6 days ago


Hey, blame "god", not Kate for that one. :P



Reply
 · 









Felhaven1 week ago (edited)







You really shouldn't quote old testament based definitions of marriage while wearing a polyblend shirt.  

Reply
 · 
2

















DoctorScarlet
1 week ago


Gives a whole new meaning to "don't throw stones while standing in a glass house".



Reply
 · 









RRoocckkyy501 week ago







Nice new intro! : )

Reply
 · 
1

















BionicDance
1 week ago


Thanks! I was going for a kind of 80s look. :)



Reply
 · 
1







VGatheist1 week ago (edited)







well the moral argument against abortion is that you are killing a baby. A mother does not have a right to kill her new born baby, so the question then comes about, at what point does a baby have the right to live. But the trick in proving abortion immoral within a real world sense is to prove that the fetus is being harmed. Big argument and I am not going to go through the whole case for abortion, but I just don't find your "if you do not agree with abortion don't have one." as a valid point because the whole reason there is any argument is the attempt to demonstrate that the fetus should have rights. I think the laws for abortion are very close to taking all of this in account. But the Christians idea of egg + sperm = no abortion is just not valid. I think the laws very, but right now all states at least use viability and not birth as the starting point for fetus rights. Allot of laws will use the trimester to determine if an abortion as legal. But you know as a Lesbian you likely will never have to worry about it. If you have a baby, you'd have to choose it.
Show less
Reply
 · 




















TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







@7:05- Nice green cross.  Faded in a bit early but still nice.

Reply
 · 



















BionicDance
1 week ago


Heh. It's a chromakey guide mark to keep CGI elements in place relative to the camera.



Reply
 · 








TheRealPaulMarshall
1 week ago


I figgered.  Still nice given the context.



Reply
 · 









Jesse Sisolack1 week ago (edited)







New Planet? looks rather...wet. I only saw one little area of land.
Does this fellow need a book shelf? Maybe we should pitch in and get him one of those particle board ones from Wal-Mart. Seriously, concrete bricks and boards?

Reply
 · 




















Robert Roman1 week ago







This fucktard says all that special pleading in the name of the god of intolerance Yahweh. He sure fights hard for intolerance what a hypocritical bigot.

Reply
 · 



















yadabub
1 week ago


That was what struck me as well.  His Christian privilege allows him to spew what he likes with few consequences.  No doubt, he would be singing another tune if he had experienced real persecution for being a Christian, being a believer, or for being an a-hole.



Reply
 · 
1







BohemianBlasphemy1 week ago







2:34
I have a Bible. If god wrote that book, god intended marriage to be between a man and a woman; but also between a man and all the women that man can afford to rape.
What is this idiot even talking about?

Reply
 · 
3


















Peter Baxter1 week ago







Thanks for making great videos and calling out nutjobs like this guy, Bionic. His alleged point made so little sense, it was like he was okay with slavery because it was in the Bible, too.. not to mention that old tired "God intended marriage" argument when marriage was around long before the Bible as a business transaction of sorts. Le sigh.

Reply
 · 




















TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







Someone needs to explain to this dude that Gahwd's "absolute definition of marriage" involves one man and as many females as he can afford to buy including his sister, his half-sister, his half-sister's slaves, his aunts, his own slaves, as many concubines as he can purchase or coerce by threat of violence, any female of any age taken in war, any un-affianced female of any age that he can manage to rape and then pay for, and - if we allow for a certain reading of Genesis chapter 2 verse 20 - pretty much any animal (or maybe even any plant) into which he might possibly stick his penis.  [Note: That list is not meant to be exhaustive.  I'm sure there are some that I missed.]

Reply
 · 




















Len H2 days ago







BTW I love ya KATE no matter what your incorrect opinion of me....a ASSUMPTION is just that...those first 3 letters ...
 Love ya KATE now how about a great big wet KISS...dont hate because I am male lol what you afraid it might make you get COOTIES lol
BTW I liked the video as always

Reply
 · 




















TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







Did you abscond with Boehner's tanning bed?

Reply
 · 
1

















BionicDance
1 week ago (edited)


Naw...my camera was just acting like a little bitch, lighting-wise.



Reply
 · 









Packard Sonic1 week ago







I have had similar arguments with guys like him. He is a serious douche bag.  

Reply
 · 




















Len H2 days ago







Kate called me a Homophobic when i asked her question ...I ask a question and get called a name. But that is okay  I possed that dame question to my niece who is gay and she was like Uncle let that doesnt make you homophobic anyone who calls you that has a problem and they are lucky they didnt say it to you face  then we looked at a girl and both said  DAMN nice ass and laughed I love my niece she is awesome.
As for a Bigot....every single human is ....proud to be a bigot.
 My fist doesn't have to stop at the tip of any-ones nose and hasn't many times.
  In fact many time have not stopped with my feet to peoples noses over and over.
  Never bothered me before to put someone in their place...though these days it hurts...getting old lol.
   Values and morals suck, I would prefer busting more heads and not no damn BS law in my way...PISH but so far I have stayed many steps away of these moral laws of though shall not kill.
 The Qu'ran القرآن الكريم is the answer and oh how they enforce their rules.
  LOL
    Remember if you want  a law changed no matter how vile and disgusting it is  get the right wing out and the left wing in to make it legal....


 
Show less
Reply
 · 




















TheAtheistPaladin .1 week ago







In societies where there is no difference between private morality and a public morality, that would be a totalitarian society.  Why can't they realize that?

Reply
 · 
2


















DBeetleeater Doug1 week ago







Is this guy using the English language?  He uses words I have heard before but his meaning for those words are just plain different from what I think they mean.  Good job BionicDance.

Reply
 · 




















Mark Susskind1 week ago







I am smitten. :3

Reply
 · 




















Mel Rhomberg1 week ago







God didn't give a definition of marriage. Some people don't actually read the bible. le sigh

Reply
 · 




















TheAmulli1 week ago







I clicked thumbs up immediately after god struck you down midsentence. 

Reply
 · 




















angryhairpeice6 days ago







Isn't it funny how they always say that the book stands the test of time, then when you point out things like slavery, and working on the sabbath, they say 'That was a different time.'? That is why I am a gnostic antitheist. I know I am for a complete obliteration of religion. If we could get them to think, it could be possible. 

Reply
 · 




















beirirangu1 week ago (edited)







I think you missed a great oppertunity: he said that if it's in the bible, no matter when or in what context it was written, it's true. Meaning that he believes slavery should still be enforced as well as the death penalty for worshiping other gods, worshiping things that resemble anything from heaven, anything from earth, and anything from below the earth, using god's name in vain, working on the sabbath, not honoring your parents, ex... unless he thinks that when god said (roughly) , it is a permanent law that anyone who does any work on the sabbath is to be put to death, oh and here are the (first) ten commandments that I wrote with my finger. [ex 31 :12-18]

Reply
 · 









Hide replies








BionicDance
1 week ago


I'm, uh, pretty darn sure I brought up the bible condoning slavery...



Reply
 · 








beirirangu
1 week ago


+BionicDance you mentioned it in the meaning that it was a fad, an opinion that faded in time... much like how he thought the acceptance of homosexuality would... I meant it as in that he's picking and choosing what is 100% true and ignoring what's also in there



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+beirirangu I'm pretty sure I mentioned that too.



Reply
 · 








beirirangu
1 week ago


+BionicDance plus, I did post it before finishing the video... having typed it up after the first volley of the bible's infallibility



Reply
 · 









amoscarmel1 week ago







Great clip, thank  you. Loved the lightening strike lol...

Reply
 · 




















pauldhoff1 week ago







Their so-called objective laws are subjectively interpreted by them all the time. 
Paul

Reply
 · 




















Pat MaCrotch1 week ago







Somebody needs to see the South Park episode about "tolerance" ?

Reply
 · 




















Emigdiosback1 week ago







was the title intentional?

Reply
 · 









Hide replies








BionicDance
1 week ago


...I'm not sure I understand the question.



Reply
 · 








Emigdiosback
1 week ago


+BionicDance it sorta doesn't look right. like if written incorrectly. sorry, it's sorta bugging me.



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+Emigdiosback Actually, it's grammatically correct.
Had I written it, "Some Things I Will Not Put Up With," I'd be ending it with a preposition.



Reply
 · 
1






Emigdiosback
1 week ago (edited)


ohh! Sorry. I'm obsessive compulsive, and things like that catch my attention.



Reply
 · 








TheRealPaulMarshall
1 week ago


Should it not be "Some Things Up With Which I Will [Or 'Shall' given that the once considered incorrect 'will' was used, at the time, for emphasis.   Perhaps turn about is fair play.] Not Put"?



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+TheRealPaulMarshall No. Because your phrasing assumes that this is a list of intolerable things, rather than a statement of being unwilling to tolerate an unspecified set/number of things.



Reply
 · 








TheRealPaulMarshall
1 week ago


I thought that number was the same in both phrasings and that the difference was only in whether the elided object of the preposition should have been explicit.



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+TheRealPaulMarshall When I parse your rephrasing into more colloquial speech, what I get is, "Some things I will not put up with," meaning the video is listing off some things I find intolerable.
But what the title is really saying is, "There are some things I will not put up with," being rather more ambiguous.



Reply
 · 









zarkoff451 week ago







Sum things down with BionicDance: Intolerance comes through law or vigilante justice, nothing else.

Reply
 · 




















RetroFanaminna1 week ago







How did this guy confuse being tolerant with not agreeing with someones opinion and values?

Reply
 · 
















Show more




































All comments (98)







Share your thoughts












Top comments









Stream







P Dav1 day ago







This guy says morality is absolute. Then, I say, all of the horrendous acts done by or sanctioned by god in the bible, such as murder, slavery, rape, genocide, cannibalism, and treatment of women as property are absolutely immoral.

Reply
 · 




















BionicDance1 week ago









Reply
 · 
12







Hide replies








Mundus Novus Ordo
1 week ago


+LegendaryAsshole which one



Reply
 · 








1140Cecile
1 week ago


Nicely done, Keight.



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


Thanks! :)



Reply
 · 
2






Lance Zimmerman
1 week ago


You forgot temple. XD Funny how xtians enjoy to blame others for what they are doing. He also does not seem to realize that marriage is a law, not a god thing.
LOL on the lightning.
LOL Faith, he believes in wishful thinking = easy answers that agrees with one's own thinking.
3500 years ago, where did he get that? Also, what rewrite/translation is he talking about? More like centuries.
Good video.
Show less

Reply
 · 
2






Julia Reed
1 week ago


How many times did you have to do that flailing during the smiting before you finally got it right? That awesomely hilarious! I'm still smirking from it.



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


Believe it or not, that took one take.
There were other shots, tho...



Reply
 · 
1






Julia Reed
1 week ago


I applaud you, I really do, I'd probably have a bloopers reel at the end of a video due to ADD tangents, stuttering and my mild lisp



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


Believe me, I've been tempted to make a bloopers vid. :)



Reply
 · 
3






Julia Reed
1 week ago


Oh I'd watch that in a heart beat! 



Reply
 · 
2






Lance Zimmerman
1 week ago


+BionicDance oh you so should make a bloopers video! After all this time you should have lots of good stuff to chose from.



Reply
 · 








VinnyMonster1
5 days ago


+BionicDance A Bloopers vid would go viral! 



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
5 days ago


Well, it'll probably be a few months to gather enough GOOD blooper footage, but I've started collecting some...



Reply
 · 
1






VinnyMonster1
5 days ago


Damn but the struck by lightning bit was funny!  I was half expecting you to end the video with a long fade to black then.



Reply
 · 
1







ThomasTrue5 days ago







Within my own lifetime it was once 'moral' to punish children in school by striking them across the hands with a leather strap or a cane (or across the buttocks with a paddle in US schools) and a man could not rape his wife but was merely exercising his 'moral' conjugal 'rights'.  Go back less than a century and a husband had the 'moral right' to strike his wife with a rod 'no thicker than his thumb' (hence, "rule of thumb").  These 'morals' were based upon Biblical teaching and yet we now look upon them as examples of a barbaric past we have since thankfully rejected.  If this fool thinks that the Bible has 'stood the test of time', then he is so sadly deluded I frankly feel sorry for him.

Reply
 · 
1


















Star Laughter1 week ago







"I believe in absolute truth!" He says, while munching on shellfish that was harvested on the Sabbath...

Reply
 · 
1


















Dragnauct Sylvas1 week ago







I love how they want to dissolve the negative connotations of terms used against them. Can't wait till they do it to the word "Faith."

Reply
 · 




















Inannalu1 week ago







Harmful to an ideology is not the same thing as harmful to people.
Behaviors and activities which do the former, but do not do the latter, are perfectly okay ethically, so far as I'm concerned.
In fact, if some behavior or activity harms an ideology which is responsible for much harm to people, so much the better.

Reply
 · 
5


















Charles Kunkle1 week ago







and we're totally ignoring the fact that God does NOT define marriage as one man and one woman...
Otherwise, many of the patriarchs of the Christian religion were violating God's law. Solomon had 300 wives and 700 concubines? Excatly how is that "one man and one woman"

Reply
 · 
2


















themplar1 week ago







Another great video from you. And again very right.
I personally cannot understand the objections people have against gays and gay marriage.  Sadly its not just religious biggots i've been in many discussions with non theist who were still absolute biggots.
Its funny how they Always accuse me of intolerance when i call their arguments absolute bogus and them biggots.  Every time the arguments are.. its not natural.. well obviously it is..  what if everybody turned gay the human species would end... wouldnt happen and if so what? They still can get children by In Vitro.
In the end all their arguments are invalid. and only one real arguments is left over they wont pronounce.
They suffer from imagination and see two gays going at it and they think its Icky. And thats all it is for them.. they think its icky.. well then stop fantasizing about it.
Towards religious biggotry.... i whish it was allowed to smack them around with their own bibles...
Show less
Reply
 · 
1

















DoctorScarlet
1 week ago


Not to mention that there's also the ridiculous idea that gays want to recruit children for the sole purpose of making them gay.
People don't just become gay. Usually a person has a predisposition to being gay, but this is something many people will deny. I myself, a person who grew up in a Christian home, had a predisposition to being pansexual, but it's easier to deny something than to actually own up to it. I'm so glad I grew out of that horseshit though, I'm much happier.
Show less

Reply
 · 
1







Red Cloud1 week ago







You can't just re-define words to fit your own ends. Start doing that all willy-nilly, and you ruin the foundation of language itself, the fact that we can understand it. You can't just destroy an entire language, because you don't like how some of the words coming together make you feel, that's bullshit. Words like Tolerance are there, because we need them, if we didn't need them, we wouldn't have them. 

Reply
 · 




















CarefulAtheist1 week ago







WTF moment @7:05. Gold!

Reply
 · 




















Moor Letoh1 week ago







Epic.

Reply
 · 




















mikeyvester1 week ago







Speaking from experience living in a country where gay marriage has been legal for almost 9 years, I haven't noticed anything different. I would have never known the law changed except it was on the news.  The only reason I can see why a person would be against gay marriage, they are fucking assholes and they like to hurt people.

Reply
 · 
1


















markedfang1 week ago







What if god was true? What would actually change?
He'd still have to come up with good arguments to justify his demands. I would see god as no more then another human with another opinion and unless he can convince me of his case I still wouldn't feel any obligation towards him.
Worship blinds you to attrociaties.

Reply
 · 
2


















Griffin98571 week ago







7:03 I nearly jumped out of my own skin shakes fist at Kate.

Reply
 · 
1







Hide replies








BionicDance
1 week ago


Neener. ;)



Reply
 · 
1






Griffin9857
1 week ago


Any more surprises? :P



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


+Griffin9857 If I told you, they wouldn't be surprises, now would they? :D



Reply
 · 
1






Griffin9857
1 week ago


+BionicDance *Glares*



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


+Griffin9857 *sticks out tongue*



Reply
 · 
1






christopher9000p
6 days ago


Hey, blame "god", not Kate for that one. :P



Reply
 · 









Felhaven1 week ago (edited)







You really shouldn't quote old testament based definitions of marriage while wearing a polyblend shirt.  

Reply
 · 
2

















DoctorScarlet
1 week ago


Gives a whole new meaning to "don't throw stones while standing in a glass house".



Reply
 · 









RRoocckkyy501 week ago







Nice new intro! : )

Reply
 · 
1

















BionicDance
1 week ago


Thanks! I was going for a kind of 80s look. :)



Reply
 · 
1







VGatheist1 week ago (edited)







well the moral argument against abortion is that you are killing a baby. A mother does not have a right to kill her new born baby, so the question then comes about, at what point does a baby have the right to live. But the trick in proving abortion immoral within a real world sense is to prove that the fetus is being harmed. Big argument and I am not going to go through the whole case for abortion, but I just don't find your "if you do not agree with abortion don't have one." as a valid point because the whole reason there is any argument is the attempt to demonstrate that the fetus should have rights. I think the laws for abortion are very close to taking all of this in account. But the Christians idea of egg + sperm = no abortion is just not valid. I think the laws very, but right now all states at least use viability and not birth as the starting point for fetus rights. Allot of laws will use the trimester to determine if an abortion as legal. But you know as a Lesbian you likely will never have to worry about it. If you have a baby, you'd have to choose it.
Show less
Reply
 · 




















TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







@7:05- Nice green cross.  Faded in a bit early but still nice.

Reply
 · 



















BionicDance
1 week ago


Heh. It's a chromakey guide mark to keep CGI elements in place relative to the camera.



Reply
 · 








TheRealPaulMarshall
1 week ago


I figgered.  Still nice given the context.



Reply
 · 









Jesse Sisolack1 week ago (edited)







New Planet? looks rather...wet. I only saw one little area of land.
Does this fellow need a book shelf? Maybe we should pitch in and get him one of those particle board ones from Wal-Mart. Seriously, concrete bricks and boards?

Reply
 · 




















Robert Roman1 week ago







This fucktard says all that special pleading in the name of the god of intolerance Yahweh. He sure fights hard for intolerance what a hypocritical bigot.

Reply
 · 



















yadabub
1 week ago


That was what struck me as well.  His Christian privilege allows him to spew what he likes with few consequences.  No doubt, he would be singing another tune if he had experienced real persecution for being a Christian, being a believer, or for being an a-hole.



Reply
 · 
1







BohemianBlasphemy1 week ago







2:34
I have a Bible. If god wrote that book, god intended marriage to be between a man and a woman; but also between a man and all the women that man can afford to rape.
What is this idiot even talking about?

Reply
 · 
3


















Peter Baxter1 week ago







Thanks for making great videos and calling out nutjobs like this guy, Bionic. His alleged point made so little sense, it was like he was okay with slavery because it was in the Bible, too.. not to mention that old tired "God intended marriage" argument when marriage was around long before the Bible as a business transaction of sorts. Le sigh.

Reply
 · 




















TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







Someone needs to explain to this dude that Gahwd's "absolute definition of marriage" involves one man and as many females as he can afford to buy including his sister, his half-sister, his half-sister's slaves, his aunts, his own slaves, as many concubines as he can purchase or coerce by threat of violence, any female of any age taken in war, any un-affianced female of any age that he can manage to rape and then pay for, and - if we allow for a certain reading of Genesis chapter 2 verse 20 - pretty much any animal (or maybe even any plant) into which he might possibly stick his penis.  [Note: That list is not meant to be exhaustive.  I'm sure there are some that I missed.]

Reply
 · 




















Len H2 days ago







BTW I love ya KATE no matter what your incorrect opinion of me....a ASSUMPTION is just that...those first 3 letters ...
 Love ya KATE now how about a great big wet KISS...dont hate because I am male lol what you afraid it might make you get COOTIES lol
BTW I liked the video as always

Reply
 · 




















TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







Did you abscond with Boehner's tanning bed?

Reply
 · 
1

















BionicDance
1 week ago (edited)


Naw...my camera was just acting like a little bitch, lighting-wise.



Reply
 · 









Packard Sonic1 week ago







I have had similar arguments with guys like him. He is a serious douche bag.  

Reply
 · 




















Len H2 days ago







Kate called me a Homophobic when i asked her question ...I ask a question and get called a name. But that is okay  I possed that dame question to my niece who is gay and she was like Uncle let that doesnt make you homophobic anyone who calls you that has a problem and they are lucky they didnt say it to you face  then we looked at a girl and both said  DAMN nice ass and laughed I love my niece she is awesome.
As for a Bigot....every single human is ....proud to be a bigot.
 My fist doesn't have to stop at the tip of any-ones nose and hasn't many times.
  In fact many time have not stopped with my feet to peoples noses over and over.
  Never bothered me before to put someone in their place...though these days it hurts...getting old lol.
   Values and morals suck, I would prefer busting more heads and not no damn BS law in my way...PISH but so far I have stayed many steps away of these moral laws of though shall not kill.
 The Qu'ran القرآن الكريم is the answer and oh how they enforce their rules.
  LOL
    Remember if you want  a law changed no matter how vile and disgusting it is  get the right wing out and the left wing in to make it legal....


 
Show less
Reply
 · 




















TheAtheistPaladin .1 week ago







In societies where there is no difference between private morality and a public morality, that would be a totalitarian society.  Why can't they realize that?

Reply
 · 
2


















DBeetleeater Doug1 week ago







Is this guy using the English language?  He uses words I have heard before but his meaning for those words are just plain different from what I think they mean.  Good job BionicDance.

Reply
 · 




















Mark Susskind1 week ago







I am smitten. :3

Reply
 · 




















Mel Rhomberg1 week ago







God didn't give a definition of marriage. Some people don't actually read the bible. le sigh

Reply
 · 




















TheAmulli1 week ago







I clicked thumbs up immediately after god struck you down midsentence. 

Reply
 · 




















angryhairpeice6 days ago







Isn't it funny how they always say that the book stands the test of time, then when you point out things like slavery, and working on the sabbath, they say 'That was a different time.'? That is why I am a gnostic antitheist. I know I am for a complete obliteration of religion. If we could get them to think, it could be possible. 

Reply
 · 




















beirirangu1 week ago (edited)







I think you missed a great oppertunity: he said that if it's in the bible, no matter when or in what context it was written, it's true. Meaning that he believes slavery should still be enforced as well as the death penalty for worshiping other gods, worshiping things that resemble anything from heaven, anything from earth, and anything from below the earth, using god's name in vain, working on the sabbath, not honoring your parents, ex... unless he thinks that when god said (roughly) , it is a permanent law that anyone who does any work on the sabbath is to be put to death, oh and here are the (first) ten commandments that I wrote with my finger. [ex 31 :12-18]

Reply
 · 









Hide replies








BionicDance
1 week ago


I'm, uh, pretty darn sure I brought up the bible condoning slavery...



Reply
 · 








beirirangu
1 week ago


+BionicDance you mentioned it in the meaning that it was a fad, an opinion that faded in time... much like how he thought the acceptance of homosexuality would... I meant it as in that he's picking and choosing what is 100% true and ignoring what's also in there



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+beirirangu I'm pretty sure I mentioned that too.



Reply
 · 








beirirangu
1 week ago


+BionicDance plus, I did post it before finishing the video... having typed it up after the first volley of the bible's infallibility



Reply
 · 









amoscarmel1 week ago







Great clip, thank  you. Loved the lightening strike lol...

Reply
 · 




















pauldhoff1 week ago







Their so-called objective laws are subjectively interpreted by them all the time. 
Paul

Reply
 · 




















Pat MaCrotch1 week ago







Somebody needs to see the South Park episode about "tolerance" ?

Reply
 · 




















Emigdiosback1 week ago







was the title intentional?

Reply
 · 









Hide replies








BionicDance
1 week ago


...I'm not sure I understand the question.



Reply
 · 








Emigdiosback
1 week ago


+BionicDance it sorta doesn't look right. like if written incorrectly. sorry, it's sorta bugging me.



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+Emigdiosback Actually, it's grammatically correct.
Had I written it, "Some Things I Will Not Put Up With," I'd be ending it with a preposition.



Reply
 · 
1






Emigdiosback
1 week ago (edited)


ohh! Sorry. I'm obsessive compulsive, and things like that catch my attention.



Reply
 · 








TheRealPaulMarshall
1 week ago


Should it not be "Some Things Up With Which I Will [Or 'Shall' given that the once considered incorrect 'will' was used, at the time, for emphasis.   Perhaps turn about is fair play.] Not Put"?



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+TheRealPaulMarshall No. Because your phrasing assumes that this is a list of intolerable things, rather than a statement of being unwilling to tolerate an unspecified set/number of things.



Reply
 · 








TheRealPaulMarshall
1 week ago


I thought that number was the same in both phrasings and that the difference was only in whether the elided object of the preposition should have been explicit.



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+TheRealPaulMarshall When I parse your rephrasing into more colloquial speech, what I get is, "Some things I will not put up with," meaning the video is listing off some things I find intolerable.
But what the title is really saying is, "There are some things I will not put up with," being rather more ambiguous.



Reply
 · 









zarkoff451 week ago







Sum things down with BionicDance: Intolerance comes through law or vigilante justice, nothing else.

Reply
 · 




















RetroFanaminna1 week ago







How did this guy confuse being tolerant with not agreeing with someones opinion and values?

Reply
 · 
















Show more


































All comments (98)







Share your thoughts












Top comments









Stream







P Dav1 day ago







This guy says morality is absolute. Then, I say, all of the horrendous acts done by or sanctioned by god in the bible, such as murder, slavery, rape, genocide, cannibalism, and treatment of women as property are absolutely immoral.

Reply
 · 




















BionicDance1 week ago









Reply
 · 
12







Hide replies








Mundus Novus Ordo
1 week ago


+LegendaryAsshole which one



Reply
 · 








1140Cecile
1 week ago


Nicely done, Keight.



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


Thanks! :)



Reply
 · 
2






Lance Zimmerman
1 week ago


You forgot temple. XD Funny how xtians enjoy to blame others for what they are doing. He also does not seem to realize that marriage is a law, not a god thing.
LOL on the lightning.
LOL Faith, he believes in wishful thinking = easy answers that agrees with one's own thinking.
3500 years ago, where did he get that? Also, what rewrite/translation is he talking about? More like centuries.
Good video.
Show less

Reply
 · 
2






Julia Reed
1 week ago


How many times did you have to do that flailing during the smiting before you finally got it right? That awesomely hilarious! I'm still smirking from it.



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


Believe it or not, that took one take.
There were other shots, tho...



Reply
 · 
1






Julia Reed
1 week ago


I applaud you, I really do, I'd probably have a bloopers reel at the end of a video due to ADD tangents, stuttering and my mild lisp



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


Believe me, I've been tempted to make a bloopers vid. :)



Reply
 · 
3






Julia Reed
1 week ago


Oh I'd watch that in a heart beat! 



Reply
 · 
2






Lance Zimmerman
1 week ago


+BionicDance oh you so should make a bloopers video! After all this time you should have lots of good stuff to chose from.



Reply
 · 








VinnyMonster1
5 days ago


+BionicDance A Bloopers vid would go viral! 



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
5 days ago


Well, it'll probably be a few months to gather enough GOOD blooper footage, but I've started collecting some...



Reply
 · 
1






VinnyMonster1
5 days ago


Damn but the struck by lightning bit was funny!  I was half expecting you to end the video with a long fade to black then.



Reply
 · 
1







ThomasTrue5 days ago







Within my own lifetime it was once 'moral' to punish children in school by striking them across the hands with a leather strap or a cane (or across the buttocks with a paddle in US schools) and a man could not rape his wife but was merely exercising his 'moral' conjugal 'rights'.  Go back less than a century and a husband had the 'moral right' to strike his wife with a rod 'no thicker than his thumb' (hence, "rule of thumb").  These 'morals' were based upon Biblical teaching and yet we now look upon them as examples of a barbaric past we have since thankfully rejected.  If this fool thinks that the Bible has 'stood the test of time', then he is so sadly deluded I frankly feel sorry for him.

Reply
 · 
1


















Star Laughter1 week ago







"I believe in absolute truth!" He says, while munching on shellfish that was harvested on the Sabbath...

Reply
 · 
1


















Dragnauct Sylvas1 week ago







I love how they want to dissolve the negative connotations of terms used against them. Can't wait till they do it to the word "Faith."

Reply
 · 




















Inannalu1 week ago







Harmful to an ideology is not the same thing as harmful to people.
Behaviors and activities which do the former, but do not do the latter, are perfectly okay ethically, so far as I'm concerned.
In fact, if some behavior or activity harms an ideology which is responsible for much harm to people, so much the better.

Reply
 · 
5


















Charles Kunkle1 week ago







and we're totally ignoring the fact that God does NOT define marriage as one man and one woman...
Otherwise, many of the patriarchs of the Christian religion were violating God's law. Solomon had 300 wives and 700 concubines? Excatly how is that "one man and one woman"

Reply
 · 
2


















themplar1 week ago







Another great video from you. And again very right.
I personally cannot understand the objections people have against gays and gay marriage.  Sadly its not just religious biggots i've been in many discussions with non theist who were still absolute biggots.
Its funny how they Always accuse me of intolerance when i call their arguments absolute bogus and them biggots.  Every time the arguments are.. its not natural.. well obviously it is..  what if everybody turned gay the human species would end... wouldnt happen and if so what? They still can get children by In Vitro.
In the end all their arguments are invalid. and only one real arguments is left over they wont pronounce.
They suffer from imagination and see two gays going at it and they think its Icky. And thats all it is for them.. they think its icky.. well then stop fantasizing about it.
Towards religious biggotry.... i whish it was allowed to smack them around with their own bibles...
Show less
Reply
 · 
1

















DoctorScarlet
1 week ago


Not to mention that there's also the ridiculous idea that gays want to recruit children for the sole purpose of making them gay.
People don't just become gay. Usually a person has a predisposition to being gay, but this is something many people will deny. I myself, a person who grew up in a Christian home, had a predisposition to being pansexual, but it's easier to deny something than to actually own up to it. I'm so glad I grew out of that horseshit though, I'm much happier.
Show less

Reply
 · 
1







Red Cloud1 week ago







You can't just re-define words to fit your own ends. Start doing that all willy-nilly, and you ruin the foundation of language itself, the fact that we can understand it. You can't just destroy an entire language, because you don't like how some of the words coming together make you feel, that's bullshit. Words like Tolerance are there, because we need them, if we didn't need them, we wouldn't have them. 

Reply
 · 




















CarefulAtheist1 week ago







WTF moment @7:05. Gold!

Reply
 · 




















Moor Letoh1 week ago







Epic.

Reply
 · 




















mikeyvester1 week ago







Speaking from experience living in a country where gay marriage has been legal for almost 9 years, I haven't noticed anything different. I would have never known the law changed except it was on the news.  The only reason I can see why a person would be against gay marriage, they are fucking assholes and they like to hurt people.

Reply
 · 
1


















markedfang1 week ago







What if god was true? What would actually change?
He'd still have to come up with good arguments to justify his demands. I would see god as no more then another human with another opinion and unless he can convince me of his case I still wouldn't feel any obligation towards him.
Worship blinds you to attrociaties.

Reply
 · 
2


















Griffin98571 week ago







7:03 I nearly jumped out of my own skin shakes fist at Kate.

Reply
 · 
1







Hide replies








BionicDance
1 week ago


Neener. ;)



Reply
 · 
1






Griffin9857
1 week ago


Any more surprises? :P



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


+Griffin9857 If I told you, they wouldn't be surprises, now would they? :D



Reply
 · 
1






Griffin9857
1 week ago


+BionicDance *Glares*



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


+Griffin9857 *sticks out tongue*



Reply
 · 
1






christopher9000p
6 days ago


Hey, blame "god", not Kate for that one. :P



Reply
 · 









Felhaven1 week ago (edited)







You really shouldn't quote old testament based definitions of marriage while wearing a polyblend shirt.  

Reply
 · 
2

















DoctorScarlet
1 week ago


Gives a whole new meaning to "don't throw stones while standing in a glass house".



Reply
 · 









RRoocckkyy501 week ago







Nice new intro! : )

Reply
 · 
1

















BionicDance
1 week ago


Thanks! I was going for a kind of 80s look. :)



Reply
 · 
1







VGatheist1 week ago (edited)







well the moral argument against abortion is that you are killing a baby. A mother does not have a right to kill her new born baby, so the question then comes about, at what point does a baby have the right to live. But the trick in proving abortion immoral within a real world sense is to prove that the fetus is being harmed. Big argument and I am not going to go through the whole case for abortion, but I just don't find your "if you do not agree with abortion don't have one." as a valid point because the whole reason there is any argument is the attempt to demonstrate that the fetus should have rights. I think the laws for abortion are very close to taking all of this in account. But the Christians idea of egg + sperm = no abortion is just not valid. I think the laws very, but right now all states at least use viability and not birth as the starting point for fetus rights. Allot of laws will use the trimester to determine if an abortion as legal. But you know as a Lesbian you likely will never have to worry about it. If you have a baby, you'd have to choose it.
Show less
Reply
 · 




















TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







@7:05- Nice green cross.  Faded in a bit early but still nice.

Reply
 · 



















BionicDance
1 week ago


Heh. It's a chromakey guide mark to keep CGI elements in place relative to the camera.



Reply
 · 








TheRealPaulMarshall
1 week ago


I figgered.  Still nice given the context.



Reply
 · 









Jesse Sisolack1 week ago (edited)







New Planet? looks rather...wet. I only saw one little area of land.
Does this fellow need a book shelf? Maybe we should pitch in and get him one of those particle board ones from Wal-Mart. Seriously, concrete bricks and boards?

Reply
 · 




















Robert Roman1 week ago







This fucktard says all that special pleading in the name of the god of intolerance Yahweh. He sure fights hard for intolerance what a hypocritical bigot.

Reply
 · 



















yadabub
1 week ago


That was what struck me as well.  His Christian privilege allows him to spew what he likes with few consequences.  No doubt, he would be singing another tune if he had experienced real persecution for being a Christian, being a believer, or for being an a-hole.



Reply
 · 
1







BohemianBlasphemy1 week ago







2:34
I have a Bible. If god wrote that book, god intended marriage to be between a man and a woman; but also between a man and all the women that man can afford to rape.
What is this idiot even talking about?

Reply
 · 
3


















Peter Baxter1 week ago







Thanks for making great videos and calling out nutjobs like this guy, Bionic. His alleged point made so little sense, it was like he was okay with slavery because it was in the Bible, too.. not to mention that old tired "God intended marriage" argument when marriage was around long before the Bible as a business transaction of sorts. Le sigh.

Reply
 · 




















TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







Someone needs to explain to this dude that Gahwd's "absolute definition of marriage" involves one man and as many females as he can afford to buy including his sister, his half-sister, his half-sister's slaves, his aunts, his own slaves, as many concubines as he can purchase or coerce by threat of violence, any female of any age taken in war, any un-affianced female of any age that he can manage to rape and then pay for, and - if we allow for a certain reading of Genesis chapter 2 verse 20 - pretty much any animal (or maybe even any plant) into which he might possibly stick his penis.  [Note: That list is not meant to be exhaustive.  I'm sure there are some that I missed.]

Reply
 · 




















Len H2 days ago







BTW I love ya KATE no matter what your incorrect opinion of me....a ASSUMPTION is just that...those first 3 letters ...
 Love ya KATE now how about a great big wet KISS...dont hate because I am male lol what you afraid it might make you get COOTIES lol
BTW I liked the video as always

Reply
 · 




















TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







Did you abscond with Boehner's tanning bed?

Reply
 · 
1

















BionicDance
1 week ago (edited)


Naw...my camera was just acting like a little bitch, lighting-wise.



Reply
 · 









Packard Sonic1 week ago







I have had similar arguments with guys like him. He is a serious douche bag.  

Reply
 · 




















Len H2 days ago







Kate called me a Homophobic when i asked her question ...I ask a question and get called a name. But that is okay  I possed that dame question to my niece who is gay and she was like Uncle let that doesnt make you homophobic anyone who calls you that has a problem and they are lucky they didnt say it to you face  then we looked at a girl and both said  DAMN nice ass and laughed I love my niece she is awesome.
As for a Bigot....every single human is ....proud to be a bigot.
 My fist doesn't have to stop at the tip of any-ones nose and hasn't many times.
  In fact many time have not stopped with my feet to peoples noses over and over.
  Never bothered me before to put someone in their place...though these days it hurts...getting old lol.
   Values and morals suck, I would prefer busting more heads and not no damn BS law in my way...PISH but so far I have stayed many steps away of these moral laws of though shall not kill.
 The Qu'ran القرآن الكريم is the answer and oh how they enforce their rules.
  LOL
    Remember if you want  a law changed no matter how vile and disgusting it is  get the right wing out and the left wing in to make it legal....


 
Show less
Reply
 · 




















TheAtheistPaladin .1 week ago







In societies where there is no difference between private morality and a public morality, that would be a totalitarian society.  Why can't they realize that?

Reply
 · 
2


















DBeetleeater Doug1 week ago







Is this guy using the English language?  He uses words I have heard before but his meaning for those words are just plain different from what I think they mean.  Good job BionicDance.

Reply
 · 




















Mark Susskind1 week ago







I am smitten. :3

Reply
 · 




















Mel Rhomberg1 week ago







God didn't give a definition of marriage. Some people don't actually read the bible. le sigh

Reply
 · 




















TheAmulli1 week ago







I clicked thumbs up immediately after god struck you down midsentence. 

Reply
 · 




















angryhairpeice6 days ago







Isn't it funny how they always say that the book stands the test of time, then when you point out things like slavery, and working on the sabbath, they say 'That was a different time.'? That is why I am a gnostic antitheist. I know I am for a complete obliteration of religion. If we could get them to think, it could be possible. 

Reply
 · 




















beirirangu1 week ago (edited)







I think you missed a great oppertunity: he said that if it's in the bible, no matter when or in what context it was written, it's true. Meaning that he believes slavery should still be enforced as well as the death penalty for worshiping other gods, worshiping things that resemble anything from heaven, anything from earth, and anything from below the earth, using god's name in vain, working on the sabbath, not honoring your parents, ex... unless he thinks that when god said (roughly) , it is a permanent law that anyone who does any work on the sabbath is to be put to death, oh and here are the (first) ten commandments that I wrote with my finger. [ex 31 :12-18]

Reply
 · 









Hide replies








BionicDance
1 week ago


I'm, uh, pretty darn sure I brought up the bible condoning slavery...



Reply
 · 








beirirangu
1 week ago


+BionicDance you mentioned it in the meaning that it was a fad, an opinion that faded in time... much like how he thought the acceptance of homosexuality would... I meant it as in that he's picking and choosing what is 100% true and ignoring what's also in there



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+beirirangu I'm pretty sure I mentioned that too.



Reply
 · 








beirirangu
1 week ago


+BionicDance plus, I did post it before finishing the video... having typed it up after the first volley of the bible's infallibility



Reply
 · 









amoscarmel1 week ago







Great clip, thank  you. Loved the lightening strike lol...

Reply
 · 




















pauldhoff1 week ago







Their so-called objective laws are subjectively interpreted by them all the time. 
Paul

Reply
 · 




















Pat MaCrotch1 week ago







Somebody needs to see the South Park episode about "tolerance" ?

Reply
 · 




















Emigdiosback1 week ago







was the title intentional?

Reply
 · 









Hide replies








BionicDance
1 week ago


...I'm not sure I understand the question.



Reply
 · 








Emigdiosback
1 week ago


+BionicDance it sorta doesn't look right. like if written incorrectly. sorry, it's sorta bugging me.



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+Emigdiosback Actually, it's grammatically correct.
Had I written it, "Some Things I Will Not Put Up With," I'd be ending it with a preposition.



Reply
 · 
1






Emigdiosback
1 week ago (edited)


ohh! Sorry. I'm obsessive compulsive, and things like that catch my attention.



Reply
 · 








TheRealPaulMarshall
1 week ago


Should it not be "Some Things Up With Which I Will [Or 'Shall' given that the once considered incorrect 'will' was used, at the time, for emphasis.   Perhaps turn about is fair play.] Not Put"?



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+TheRealPaulMarshall No. Because your phrasing assumes that this is a list of intolerable things, rather than a statement of being unwilling to tolerate an unspecified set/number of things.



Reply
 · 








TheRealPaulMarshall
1 week ago


I thought that number was the same in both phrasings and that the difference was only in whether the elided object of the preposition should have been explicit.



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+TheRealPaulMarshall When I parse your rephrasing into more colloquial speech, what I get is, "Some things I will not put up with," meaning the video is listing off some things I find intolerable.
But what the title is really saying is, "There are some things I will not put up with," being rather more ambiguous.



Reply
 · 









zarkoff451 week ago







Sum things down with BionicDance: Intolerance comes through law or vigilante justice, nothing else.

Reply
 · 




















RetroFanaminna1 week ago







How did this guy confuse being tolerant with not agreeing with someones opinion and values?

Reply
 · 
















Show more













































All comments (98)







Share your thoughts












Top comments









Stream







P Dav1 day ago







This guy says morality is absolute. Then, I say, all of the horrendous acts done by or sanctioned by god in the bible, such as murder, slavery, rape, genocide, cannibalism, and treatment of women as property are absolutely immoral.

Reply
 · 




















BionicDance1 week ago









Reply
 · 
12







Hide replies








Mundus Novus Ordo
1 week ago


+LegendaryAsshole which one



Reply
 · 








1140Cecile
1 week ago


Nicely done, Keight.



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


Thanks! :)



Reply
 · 
2






Lance Zimmerman
1 week ago


You forgot temple. XD Funny how xtians enjoy to blame others for what they are doing. He also does not seem to realize that marriage is a law, not a god thing.
LOL on the lightning.
LOL Faith, he believes in wishful thinking = easy answers that agrees with one's own thinking.
3500 years ago, where did he get that? Also, what rewrite/translation is he talking about? More like centuries.
Good video.
Show less

Reply
 · 
2






Julia Reed
1 week ago


How many times did you have to do that flailing during the smiting before you finally got it right? That awesomely hilarious! I'm still smirking from it.



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


Believe it or not, that took one take.
There were other shots, tho...



Reply
 · 
1






Julia Reed
1 week ago


I applaud you, I really do, I'd probably have a bloopers reel at the end of a video due to ADD tangents, stuttering and my mild lisp



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


Believe me, I've been tempted to make a bloopers vid. :)



Reply
 · 
3






Julia Reed
1 week ago


Oh I'd watch that in a heart beat! 



Reply
 · 
2






Lance Zimmerman
1 week ago


+BionicDance oh you so should make a bloopers video! After all this time you should have lots of good stuff to chose from.



Reply
 · 








VinnyMonster1
5 days ago


+BionicDance A Bloopers vid would go viral! 



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
5 days ago


Well, it'll probably be a few months to gather enough GOOD blooper footage, but I've started collecting some...



Reply
 · 
1






VinnyMonster1
5 days ago


Damn but the struck by lightning bit was funny!  I was half expecting you to end the video with a long fade to black then.



Reply
 · 
1







ThomasTrue5 days ago







Within my own lifetime it was once 'moral' to punish children in school by striking them across the hands with a leather strap or a cane (or across the buttocks with a paddle in US schools) and a man could not rape his wife but was merely exercising his 'moral' conjugal 'rights'.  Go back less than a century and a husband had the 'moral right' to strike his wife with a rod 'no thicker than his thumb' (hence, "rule of thumb").  These 'morals' were based upon Biblical teaching and yet we now look upon them as examples of a barbaric past we have since thankfully rejected.  If this fool thinks that the Bible has 'stood the test of time', then he is so sadly deluded I frankly feel sorry for him.

Reply
 · 
1


















Star Laughter1 week ago







"I believe in absolute truth!" He says, while munching on shellfish that was harvested on the Sabbath...

Reply
 · 
1


















Dragnauct Sylvas1 week ago







I love how they want to dissolve the negative connotations of terms used against them. Can't wait till they do it to the word "Faith."

Reply
 · 




















Inannalu1 week ago







Harmful to an ideology is not the same thing as harmful to people.
Behaviors and activities which do the former, but do not do the latter, are perfectly okay ethically, so far as I'm concerned.
In fact, if some behavior or activity harms an ideology which is responsible for much harm to people, so much the better.

Reply
 · 
5


















Charles Kunkle1 week ago







and we're totally ignoring the fact that God does NOT define marriage as one man and one woman...
Otherwise, many of the patriarchs of the Christian religion were violating God's law. Solomon had 300 wives and 700 concubines? Excatly how is that "one man and one woman"

Reply
 · 
2


















themplar1 week ago







Another great video from you. And again very right.
I personally cannot understand the objections people have against gays and gay marriage.  Sadly its not just religious biggots i've been in many discussions with non theist who were still absolute biggots.
Its funny how they Always accuse me of intolerance when i call their arguments absolute bogus and them biggots.  Every time the arguments are.. its not natural.. well obviously it is..  what if everybody turned gay the human species would end... wouldnt happen and if so what? They still can get children by In Vitro.
In the end all their arguments are invalid. and only one real arguments is left over they wont pronounce.
They suffer from imagination and see two gays going at it and they think its Icky. And thats all it is for them.. they think its icky.. well then stop fantasizing about it.
Towards religious biggotry.... i whish it was allowed to smack them around with their own bibles...
Show less
Reply
 · 
1

















DoctorScarlet
1 week ago


Not to mention that there's also the ridiculous idea that gays want to recruit children for the sole purpose of making them gay.
People don't just become gay. Usually a person has a predisposition to being gay, but this is something many people will deny. I myself, a person who grew up in a Christian home, had a predisposition to being pansexual, but it's easier to deny something than to actually own up to it. I'm so glad I grew out of that horseshit though, I'm much happier.
Show less

Reply
 · 
1







Red Cloud1 week ago







You can't just re-define words to fit your own ends. Start doing that all willy-nilly, and you ruin the foundation of language itself, the fact that we can understand it. You can't just destroy an entire language, because you don't like how some of the words coming together make you feel, that's bullshit. Words like Tolerance are there, because we need them, if we didn't need them, we wouldn't have them. 

Reply
 · 




















CarefulAtheist1 week ago







WTF moment @7:05. Gold!

Reply
 · 




















Moor Letoh1 week ago







Epic.

Reply
 · 




















mikeyvester1 week ago







Speaking from experience living in a country where gay marriage has been legal for almost 9 years, I haven't noticed anything different. I would have never known the law changed except it was on the news.  The only reason I can see why a person would be against gay marriage, they are fucking assholes and they like to hurt people.

Reply
 · 
1


















markedfang1 week ago







What if god was true? What would actually change?
He'd still have to come up with good arguments to justify his demands. I would see god as no more then another human with another opinion and unless he can convince me of his case I still wouldn't feel any obligation towards him.
Worship blinds you to attrociaties.

Reply
 · 
2


















Griffin98571 week ago







7:03 I nearly jumped out of my own skin shakes fist at Kate.

Reply
 · 
1







Hide replies








BionicDance
1 week ago


Neener. ;)



Reply
 · 
1






Griffin9857
1 week ago


Any more surprises? :P



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


+Griffin9857 If I told you, they wouldn't be surprises, now would they? :D



Reply
 · 
1






Griffin9857
1 week ago


+BionicDance *Glares*



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


+Griffin9857 *sticks out tongue*



Reply
 · 
1






christopher9000p
6 days ago


Hey, blame "god", not Kate for that one. :P



Reply
 · 









Felhaven1 week ago (edited)







You really shouldn't quote old testament based definitions of marriage while wearing a polyblend shirt.  

Reply
 · 
2

















DoctorScarlet
1 week ago


Gives a whole new meaning to "don't throw stones while standing in a glass house".



Reply
 · 









RRoocckkyy501 week ago







Nice new intro! : )

Reply
 · 
1

















BionicDance
1 week ago


Thanks! I was going for a kind of 80s look. :)



Reply
 · 
1







VGatheist1 week ago (edited)







well the moral argument against abortion is that you are killing a baby. A mother does not have a right to kill her new born baby, so the question then comes about, at what point does a baby have the right to live. But the trick in proving abortion immoral within a real world sense is to prove that the fetus is being harmed. Big argument and I am not going to go through the whole case for abortion, but I just don't find your "if you do not agree with abortion don't have one." as a valid point because the whole reason there is any argument is the attempt to demonstrate that the fetus should have rights. I think the laws for abortion are very close to taking all of this in account. But the Christians idea of egg + sperm = no abortion is just not valid. I think the laws very, but right now all states at least use viability and not birth as the starting point for fetus rights. Allot of laws will use the trimester to determine if an abortion as legal. But you know as a Lesbian you likely will never have to worry about it. If you have a baby, you'd have to choose it.
Show less
Reply
 · 




















TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







@7:05- Nice green cross.  Faded in a bit early but still nice.

Reply
 · 



















BionicDance
1 week ago


Heh. It's a chromakey guide mark to keep CGI elements in place relative to the camera.



Reply
 · 








TheRealPaulMarshall
1 week ago


I figgered.  Still nice given the context.



Reply
 · 









Jesse Sisolack1 week ago (edited)







New Planet? looks rather...wet. I only saw one little area of land.
Does this fellow need a book shelf? Maybe we should pitch in and get him one of those particle board ones from Wal-Mart. Seriously, concrete bricks and boards?

Reply
 · 




















Robert Roman1 week ago







This fucktard says all that special pleading in the name of the god of intolerance Yahweh. He sure fights hard for intolerance what a hypocritical bigot.

Reply
 · 



















yadabub
1 week ago


That was what struck me as well.  His Christian privilege allows him to spew what he likes with few consequences.  No doubt, he would be singing another tune if he had experienced real persecution for being a Christian, being a believer, or for being an a-hole.



Reply
 · 
1







BohemianBlasphemy1 week ago







2:34
I have a Bible. If god wrote that book, god intended marriage to be between a man and a woman; but also between a man and all the women that man can afford to rape.
What is this idiot even talking about?

Reply
 · 
3


















Peter Baxter1 week ago







Thanks for making great videos and calling out nutjobs like this guy, Bionic. His alleged point made so little sense, it was like he was okay with slavery because it was in the Bible, too.. not to mention that old tired "God intended marriage" argument when marriage was around long before the Bible as a business transaction of sorts. Le sigh.

Reply
 · 




















TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







Someone needs to explain to this dude that Gahwd's "absolute definition of marriage" involves one man and as many females as he can afford to buy including his sister, his half-sister, his half-sister's slaves, his aunts, his own slaves, as many concubines as he can purchase or coerce by threat of violence, any female of any age taken in war, any un-affianced female of any age that he can manage to rape and then pay for, and - if we allow for a certain reading of Genesis chapter 2 verse 20 - pretty much any animal (or maybe even any plant) into which he might possibly stick his penis.  [Note: That list is not meant to be exhaustive.  I'm sure there are some that I missed.]

Reply
 · 




















Len H2 days ago







BTW I love ya KATE no matter what your incorrect opinion of me....a ASSUMPTION is just that...those first 3 letters ...
 Love ya KATE now how about a great big wet KISS...dont hate because I am male lol what you afraid it might make you get COOTIES lol
BTW I liked the video as always

Reply
 · 




















TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







Did you abscond with Boehner's tanning bed?

Reply
 · 
1

















BionicDance
1 week ago (edited)


Naw...my camera was just acting like a little bitch, lighting-wise.



Reply
 · 









Packard Sonic1 week ago







I have had similar arguments with guys like him. He is a serious douche bag.  

Reply
 · 




















Len H2 days ago







Kate called me a Homophobic when i asked her question ...I ask a question and get called a name. But that is okay  I possed that dame question to my niece who is gay and she was like Uncle let that doesnt make you homophobic anyone who calls you that has a problem and they are lucky they didnt say it to you face  then we looked at a girl and both said  DAMN nice ass and laughed I love my niece she is awesome.
As for a Bigot....every single human is ....proud to be a bigot.
 My fist doesn't have to stop at the tip of any-ones nose and hasn't many times.
  In fact many time have not stopped with my feet to peoples noses over and over.
  Never bothered me before to put someone in their place...though these days it hurts...getting old lol.
   Values and morals suck, I would prefer busting more heads and not no damn BS law in my way...PISH but so far I have stayed many steps away of these moral laws of though shall not kill.
 The Qu'ran القرآن الكريم is the answer and oh how they enforce their rules.
  LOL
    Remember if you want  a law changed no matter how vile and disgusting it is  get the right wing out and the left wing in to make it legal....


 
Show less
Reply
 · 




















TheAtheistPaladin .1 week ago







In societies where there is no difference between private morality and a public morality, that would be a totalitarian society.  Why can't they realize that?

Reply
 · 
2


















DBeetleeater Doug1 week ago







Is this guy using the English language?  He uses words I have heard before but his meaning for those words are just plain different from what I think they mean.  Good job BionicDance.

Reply
 · 




















Mark Susskind1 week ago







I am smitten. :3

Reply
 · 




















Mel Rhomberg1 week ago







God didn't give a definition of marriage. Some people don't actually read the bible. le sigh

Reply
 · 




















TheAmulli1 week ago







I clicked thumbs up immediately after god struck you down midsentence. 

Reply
 · 




















angryhairpeice6 days ago







Isn't it funny how they always say that the book stands the test of time, then when you point out things like slavery, and working on the sabbath, they say 'That was a different time.'? That is why I am a gnostic antitheist. I know I am for a complete obliteration of religion. If we could get them to think, it could be possible. 

Reply
 · 




















beirirangu1 week ago (edited)







I think you missed a great oppertunity: he said that if it's in the bible, no matter when or in what context it was written, it's true. Meaning that he believes slavery should still be enforced as well as the death penalty for worshiping other gods, worshiping things that resemble anything from heaven, anything from earth, and anything from below the earth, using god's name in vain, working on the sabbath, not honoring your parents, ex... unless he thinks that when god said (roughly) , it is a permanent law that anyone who does any work on the sabbath is to be put to death, oh and here are the (first) ten commandments that I wrote with my finger. [ex 31 :12-18]

Reply
 · 









Hide replies








BionicDance
1 week ago


I'm, uh, pretty darn sure I brought up the bible condoning slavery...



Reply
 · 








beirirangu
1 week ago


+BionicDance you mentioned it in the meaning that it was a fad, an opinion that faded in time... much like how he thought the acceptance of homosexuality would... I meant it as in that he's picking and choosing what is 100% true and ignoring what's also in there



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+beirirangu I'm pretty sure I mentioned that too.



Reply
 · 








beirirangu
1 week ago


+BionicDance plus, I did post it before finishing the video... having typed it up after the first volley of the bible's infallibility



Reply
 · 









amoscarmel1 week ago







Great clip, thank  you. Loved the lightening strike lol...

Reply
 · 




















pauldhoff1 week ago







Their so-called objective laws are subjectively interpreted by them all the time. 
Paul

Reply
 · 




















Pat MaCrotch1 week ago







Somebody needs to see the South Park episode about "tolerance" ?

Reply
 · 




















Emigdiosback1 week ago







was the title intentional?

Reply
 · 









Hide replies








BionicDance
1 week ago


...I'm not sure I understand the question.



Reply
 · 








Emigdiosback
1 week ago


+BionicDance it sorta doesn't look right. like if written incorrectly. sorry, it's sorta bugging me.



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+Emigdiosback Actually, it's grammatically correct.
Had I written it, "Some Things I Will Not Put Up With," I'd be ending it with a preposition.



Reply
 · 
1






Emigdiosback
1 week ago (edited)


ohh! Sorry. I'm obsessive compulsive, and things like that catch my attention.



Reply
 · 








TheRealPaulMarshall
1 week ago


Should it not be "Some Things Up With Which I Will [Or 'Shall' given that the once considered incorrect 'will' was used, at the time, for emphasis.   Perhaps turn about is fair play.] Not Put"?



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+TheRealPaulMarshall No. Because your phrasing assumes that this is a list of intolerable things, rather than a statement of being unwilling to tolerate an unspecified set/number of things.



Reply
 · 








TheRealPaulMarshall
1 week ago


I thought that number was the same in both phrasings and that the difference was only in whether the elided object of the preposition should have been explicit.



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+TheRealPaulMarshall When I parse your rephrasing into more colloquial speech, what I get is, "Some things I will not put up with," meaning the video is listing off some things I find intolerable.
But what the title is really saying is, "There are some things I will not put up with," being rather more ambiguous.



Reply
 · 









zarkoff451 week ago







Sum things down with BionicDance: Intolerance comes through law or vigilante justice, nothing else.

Reply
 · 




















RetroFanaminna1 week ago







How did this guy confuse being tolerant with not agreeing with someones opinion and values?

Reply
 · 
















Show more































































































All comments (98)







Share your thoughts












Top comments









Stream







P Dav1 day ago







This guy says morality is absolute. Then, I say, all of the horrendous acts done by or sanctioned by god in the bible, such as murder, slavery, rape, genocide, cannibalism, and treatment of women as property are absolutely immoral.

Reply
 · 




















BionicDance1 week ago









Reply
 · 
12







Hide replies








Mundus Novus Ordo
1 week ago


+LegendaryAsshole which one



Reply
 · 








1140Cecile
1 week ago


Nicely done, Keight.



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


Thanks! :)



Reply
 · 
2






Lance Zimmerman
1 week ago


You forgot temple. XD Funny how xtians enjoy to blame others for what they are doing. He also does not seem to realize that marriage is a law, not a god thing.
LOL on the lightning.
LOL Faith, he believes in wishful thinking = easy answers that agrees with one's own thinking.
3500 years ago, where did he get that? Also, what rewrite/translation is he talking about? More like centuries.
Good video.
Show less

Reply
 · 
2






Julia Reed
1 week ago


How many times did you have to do that flailing during the smiting before you finally got it right? That awesomely hilarious! I'm still smirking from it.



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


Believe it or not, that took one take.
There were other shots, tho...



Reply
 · 
1






Julia Reed
1 week ago


I applaud you, I really do, I'd probably have a bloopers reel at the end of a video due to ADD tangents, stuttering and my mild lisp



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


Believe me, I've been tempted to make a bloopers vid. :)



Reply
 · 
3






Julia Reed
1 week ago


Oh I'd watch that in a heart beat! 



Reply
 · 
2






Lance Zimmerman
1 week ago


+BionicDance oh you so should make a bloopers video! After all this time you should have lots of good stuff to chose from.



Reply
 · 








VinnyMonster1
5 days ago


+BionicDance A Bloopers vid would go viral! 



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
5 days ago


Well, it'll probably be a few months to gather enough GOOD blooper footage, but I've started collecting some...



Reply
 · 
1






VinnyMonster1
5 days ago


Damn but the struck by lightning bit was funny!  I was half expecting you to end the video with a long fade to black then.



Reply
 · 
1







ThomasTrue5 days ago







Within my own lifetime it was once 'moral' to punish children in school by striking them across the hands with a leather strap or a cane (or across the buttocks with a paddle in US schools) and a man could not rape his wife but was merely exercising his 'moral' conjugal 'rights'.  Go back less than a century and a husband had the 'moral right' to strike his wife with a rod 'no thicker than his thumb' (hence, "rule of thumb").  These 'morals' were based upon Biblical teaching and yet we now look upon them as examples of a barbaric past we have since thankfully rejected.  If this fool thinks that the Bible has 'stood the test of time', then he is so sadly deluded I frankly feel sorry for him.

Reply
 · 
1


















Star Laughter1 week ago







"I believe in absolute truth!" He says, while munching on shellfish that was harvested on the Sabbath...

Reply
 · 
1


















Dragnauct Sylvas1 week ago







I love how they want to dissolve the negative connotations of terms used against them. Can't wait till they do it to the word "Faith."

Reply
 · 




















Inannalu1 week ago







Harmful to an ideology is not the same thing as harmful to people.
Behaviors and activities which do the former, but do not do the latter, are perfectly okay ethically, so far as I'm concerned.
In fact, if some behavior or activity harms an ideology which is responsible for much harm to people, so much the better.

Reply
 · 
5


















Charles Kunkle1 week ago







and we're totally ignoring the fact that God does NOT define marriage as one man and one woman...
Otherwise, many of the patriarchs of the Christian religion were violating God's law. Solomon had 300 wives and 700 concubines? Excatly how is that "one man and one woman"

Reply
 · 
2


















themplar1 week ago







Another great video from you. And again very right.
I personally cannot understand the objections people have against gays and gay marriage.  Sadly its not just religious biggots i've been in many discussions with non theist who were still absolute biggots.
Its funny how they Always accuse me of intolerance when i call their arguments absolute bogus and them biggots.  Every time the arguments are.. its not natural.. well obviously it is..  what if everybody turned gay the human species would end... wouldnt happen and if so what? They still can get children by In Vitro.
In the end all their arguments are invalid. and only one real arguments is left over they wont pronounce.
They suffer from imagination and see two gays going at it and they think its Icky. And thats all it is for them.. they think its icky.. well then stop fantasizing about it.
Towards religious biggotry.... i whish it was allowed to smack them around with their own bibles...
Show less
Reply
 · 
1

















DoctorScarlet
1 week ago


Not to mention that there's also the ridiculous idea that gays want to recruit children for the sole purpose of making them gay.
People don't just become gay. Usually a person has a predisposition to being gay, but this is something many people will deny. I myself, a person who grew up in a Christian home, had a predisposition to being pansexual, but it's easier to deny something than to actually own up to it. I'm so glad I grew out of that horseshit though, I'm much happier.
Show less

Reply
 · 
1







Red Cloud1 week ago







You can't just re-define words to fit your own ends. Start doing that all willy-nilly, and you ruin the foundation of language itself, the fact that we can understand it. You can't just destroy an entire language, because you don't like how some of the words coming together make you feel, that's bullshit. Words like Tolerance are there, because we need them, if we didn't need them, we wouldn't have them. 

Reply
 · 




















CarefulAtheist1 week ago







WTF moment @7:05. Gold!

Reply
 · 




















Moor Letoh1 week ago







Epic.

Reply
 · 




















mikeyvester1 week ago







Speaking from experience living in a country where gay marriage has been legal for almost 9 years, I haven't noticed anything different. I would have never known the law changed except it was on the news.  The only reason I can see why a person would be against gay marriage, they are fucking assholes and they like to hurt people.

Reply
 · 
1


















markedfang1 week ago







What if god was true? What would actually change?
He'd still have to come up with good arguments to justify his demands. I would see god as no more then another human with another opinion and unless he can convince me of his case I still wouldn't feel any obligation towards him.
Worship blinds you to attrociaties.

Reply
 · 
2


















Griffin98571 week ago







7:03 I nearly jumped out of my own skin shakes fist at Kate.

Reply
 · 
1







Hide replies








BionicDance
1 week ago


Neener. ;)



Reply
 · 
1






Griffin9857
1 week ago


Any more surprises? :P



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


+Griffin9857 If I told you, they wouldn't be surprises, now would they? :D



Reply
 · 
1






Griffin9857
1 week ago


+BionicDance *Glares*



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


+Griffin9857 *sticks out tongue*



Reply
 · 
1






christopher9000p
6 days ago


Hey, blame "god", not Kate for that one. :P



Reply
 · 









Felhaven1 week ago (edited)







You really shouldn't quote old testament based definitions of marriage while wearing a polyblend shirt.  

Reply
 · 
2

















DoctorScarlet
1 week ago


Gives a whole new meaning to "don't throw stones while standing in a glass house".



Reply
 · 









RRoocckkyy501 week ago







Nice new intro! : )

Reply
 · 
1

















BionicDance
1 week ago


Thanks! I was going for a kind of 80s look. :)



Reply
 · 
1







VGatheist1 week ago (edited)







well the moral argument against abortion is that you are killing a baby. A mother does not have a right to kill her new born baby, so the question then comes about, at what point does a baby have the right to live. But the trick in proving abortion immoral within a real world sense is to prove that the fetus is being harmed. Big argument and I am not going to go through the whole case for abortion, but I just don't find your "if you do not agree with abortion don't have one." as a valid point because the whole reason there is any argument is the attempt to demonstrate that the fetus should have rights. I think the laws for abortion are very close to taking all of this in account. But the Christians idea of egg + sperm = no abortion is just not valid. I think the laws very, but right now all states at least use viability and not birth as the starting point for fetus rights. Allot of laws will use the trimester to determine if an abortion as legal. But you know as a Lesbian you likely will never have to worry about it. If you have a baby, you'd have to choose it.
Show less
Reply
 · 




















TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







@7:05- Nice green cross.  Faded in a bit early but still nice.

Reply
 · 



















BionicDance
1 week ago


Heh. It's a chromakey guide mark to keep CGI elements in place relative to the camera.



Reply
 · 








TheRealPaulMarshall
1 week ago


I figgered.  Still nice given the context.



Reply
 · 









Jesse Sisolack1 week ago (edited)







New Planet? looks rather...wet. I only saw one little area of land.
Does this fellow need a book shelf? Maybe we should pitch in and get him one of those particle board ones from Wal-Mart. Seriously, concrete bricks and boards?

Reply
 · 




















Robert Roman1 week ago







This fucktard says all that special pleading in the name of the god of intolerance Yahweh. He sure fights hard for intolerance what a hypocritical bigot.

Reply
 · 



















yadabub
1 week ago


That was what struck me as well.  His Christian privilege allows him to spew what he likes with few consequences.  No doubt, he would be singing another tune if he had experienced real persecution for being a Christian, being a believer, or for being an a-hole.



Reply
 · 
1







BohemianBlasphemy1 week ago







2:34
I have a Bible. If god wrote that book, god intended marriage to be between a man and a woman; but also between a man and all the women that man can afford to rape.
What is this idiot even talking about?

Reply
 · 
3


















Peter Baxter1 week ago







Thanks for making great videos and calling out nutjobs like this guy, Bionic. His alleged point made so little sense, it was like he was okay with slavery because it was in the Bible, too.. not to mention that old tired "God intended marriage" argument when marriage was around long before the Bible as a business transaction of sorts. Le sigh.

Reply
 · 




















TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







Someone needs to explain to this dude that Gahwd's "absolute definition of marriage" involves one man and as many females as he can afford to buy including his sister, his half-sister, his half-sister's slaves, his aunts, his own slaves, as many concubines as he can purchase or coerce by threat of violence, any female of any age taken in war, any un-affianced female of any age that he can manage to rape and then pay for, and - if we allow for a certain reading of Genesis chapter 2 verse 20 - pretty much any animal (or maybe even any plant) into which he might possibly stick his penis.  [Note: That list is not meant to be exhaustive.  I'm sure there are some that I missed.]

Reply
 · 




















Len H2 days ago







BTW I love ya KATE no matter what your incorrect opinion of me....a ASSUMPTION is just that...those first 3 letters ...
 Love ya KATE now how about a great big wet KISS...dont hate because I am male lol what you afraid it might make you get COOTIES lol
BTW I liked the video as always

Reply
 · 




















TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







Did you abscond with Boehner's tanning bed?

Reply
 · 
1

















BionicDance
1 week ago (edited)


Naw...my camera was just acting like a little bitch, lighting-wise.



Reply
 · 









Packard Sonic1 week ago







I have had similar arguments with guys like him. He is a serious douche bag.  

Reply
 · 




















Len H2 days ago







Kate called me a Homophobic when i asked her question ...I ask a question and get called a name. But that is okay  I possed that dame question to my niece who is gay and she was like Uncle let that doesnt make you homophobic anyone who calls you that has a problem and they are lucky they didnt say it to you face  then we looked at a girl and both said  DAMN nice ass and laughed I love my niece she is awesome.
As for a Bigot....every single human is ....proud to be a bigot.
 My fist doesn't have to stop at the tip of any-ones nose and hasn't many times.
  In fact many time have not stopped with my feet to peoples noses over and over.
  Never bothered me before to put someone in their place...though these days it hurts...getting old lol.
   Values and morals suck, I would prefer busting more heads and not no damn BS law in my way...PISH but so far I have stayed many steps away of these moral laws of though shall not kill.
 The Qu'ran القرآن الكريم is the answer and oh how they enforce their rules.
  LOL
    Remember if you want  a law changed no matter how vile and disgusting it is  get the right wing out and the left wing in to make it legal....


 
Show less
Reply
 · 




















TheAtheistPaladin .1 week ago







In societies where there is no difference between private morality and a public morality, that would be a totalitarian society.  Why can't they realize that?

Reply
 · 
2


















DBeetleeater Doug1 week ago







Is this guy using the English language?  He uses words I have heard before but his meaning for those words are just plain different from what I think they mean.  Good job BionicDance.

Reply
 · 




















Mark Susskind1 week ago







I am smitten. :3

Reply
 · 




















Mel Rhomberg1 week ago







God didn't give a definition of marriage. Some people don't actually read the bible. le sigh

Reply
 · 




















TheAmulli1 week ago







I clicked thumbs up immediately after god struck you down midsentence. 

Reply
 · 




















angryhairpeice6 days ago







Isn't it funny how they always say that the book stands the test of time, then when you point out things like slavery, and working on the sabbath, they say 'That was a different time.'? That is why I am a gnostic antitheist. I know I am for a complete obliteration of religion. If we could get them to think, it could be possible. 

Reply
 · 




















beirirangu1 week ago (edited)







I think you missed a great oppertunity: he said that if it's in the bible, no matter when or in what context it was written, it's true. Meaning that he believes slavery should still be enforced as well as the death penalty for worshiping other gods, worshiping things that resemble anything from heaven, anything from earth, and anything from below the earth, using god's name in vain, working on the sabbath, not honoring your parents, ex... unless he thinks that when god said (roughly) , it is a permanent law that anyone who does any work on the sabbath is to be put to death, oh and here are the (first) ten commandments that I wrote with my finger. [ex 31 :12-18]

Reply
 · 









Hide replies








BionicDance
1 week ago


I'm, uh, pretty darn sure I brought up the bible condoning slavery...



Reply
 · 








beirirangu
1 week ago


+BionicDance you mentioned it in the meaning that it was a fad, an opinion that faded in time... much like how he thought the acceptance of homosexuality would... I meant it as in that he's picking and choosing what is 100% true and ignoring what's also in there



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+beirirangu I'm pretty sure I mentioned that too.



Reply
 · 








beirirangu
1 week ago


+BionicDance plus, I did post it before finishing the video... having typed it up after the first volley of the bible's infallibility



Reply
 · 









amoscarmel1 week ago







Great clip, thank  you. Loved the lightening strike lol...

Reply
 · 




















pauldhoff1 week ago







Their so-called objective laws are subjectively interpreted by them all the time. 
Paul

Reply
 · 




















Pat MaCrotch1 week ago







Somebody needs to see the South Park episode about "tolerance" ?

Reply
 · 




















Emigdiosback1 week ago







was the title intentional?

Reply
 · 









Hide replies








BionicDance
1 week ago


...I'm not sure I understand the question.



Reply
 · 








Emigdiosback
1 week ago


+BionicDance it sorta doesn't look right. like if written incorrectly. sorry, it's sorta bugging me.



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+Emigdiosback Actually, it's grammatically correct.
Had I written it, "Some Things I Will Not Put Up With," I'd be ending it with a preposition.



Reply
 · 
1






Emigdiosback
1 week ago (edited)


ohh! Sorry. I'm obsessive compulsive, and things like that catch my attention.



Reply
 · 








TheRealPaulMarshall
1 week ago


Should it not be "Some Things Up With Which I Will [Or 'Shall' given that the once considered incorrect 'will' was used, at the time, for emphasis.   Perhaps turn about is fair play.] Not Put"?



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+TheRealPaulMarshall No. Because your phrasing assumes that this is a list of intolerable things, rather than a statement of being unwilling to tolerate an unspecified set/number of things.



Reply
 · 








TheRealPaulMarshall
1 week ago


I thought that number was the same in both phrasings and that the difference was only in whether the elided object of the preposition should have been explicit.



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+TheRealPaulMarshall When I parse your rephrasing into more colloquial speech, what I get is, "Some things I will not put up with," meaning the video is listing off some things I find intolerable.
But what the title is really saying is, "There are some things I will not put up with," being rather more ambiguous.



Reply
 · 









zarkoff451 week ago







Sum things down with BionicDance: Intolerance comes through law or vigilante justice, nothing else.

Reply
 · 




















RetroFanaminna1 week ago







How did this guy confuse being tolerant with not agreeing with someones opinion and values?

Reply
 · 
















Show more








































All comments (98)







Share your thoughts












Top comments









Stream







P Dav1 day ago







This guy says morality is absolute. Then, I say, all of the horrendous acts done by or sanctioned by god in the bible, such as murder, slavery, rape, genocide, cannibalism, and treatment of women as property are absolutely immoral.

Reply
 · 




















BionicDance1 week ago









Reply
 · 
12







Hide replies








Mundus Novus Ordo
1 week ago


+LegendaryAsshole which one



Reply
 · 








1140Cecile
1 week ago


Nicely done, Keight.



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


Thanks! :)



Reply
 · 
2






Lance Zimmerman
1 week ago


You forgot temple. XD Funny how xtians enjoy to blame others for what they are doing. He also does not seem to realize that marriage is a law, not a god thing.
LOL on the lightning.
LOL Faith, he believes in wishful thinking = easy answers that agrees with one's own thinking.
3500 years ago, where did he get that? Also, what rewrite/translation is he talking about? More like centuries.
Good video.
Show less

Reply
 · 
2






Julia Reed
1 week ago


How many times did you have to do that flailing during the smiting before you finally got it right? That awesomely hilarious! I'm still smirking from it.



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


Believe it or not, that took one take.
There were other shots, tho...



Reply
 · 
1






Julia Reed
1 week ago


I applaud you, I really do, I'd probably have a bloopers reel at the end of a video due to ADD tangents, stuttering and my mild lisp



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


Believe me, I've been tempted to make a bloopers vid. :)



Reply
 · 
3






Julia Reed
1 week ago


Oh I'd watch that in a heart beat! 



Reply
 · 
2






Lance Zimmerman
1 week ago


+BionicDance oh you so should make a bloopers video! After all this time you should have lots of good stuff to chose from.



Reply
 · 








VinnyMonster1
5 days ago


+BionicDance A Bloopers vid would go viral! 



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
5 days ago


Well, it'll probably be a few months to gather enough GOOD blooper footage, but I've started collecting some...



Reply
 · 
1






VinnyMonster1
5 days ago


Damn but the struck by lightning bit was funny!  I was half expecting you to end the video with a long fade to black then.



Reply
 · 
1







ThomasTrue5 days ago







Within my own lifetime it was once 'moral' to punish children in school by striking them across the hands with a leather strap or a cane (or across the buttocks with a paddle in US schools) and a man could not rape his wife but was merely exercising his 'moral' conjugal 'rights'.  Go back less than a century and a husband had the 'moral right' to strike his wife with a rod 'no thicker than his thumb' (hence, "rule of thumb").  These 'morals' were based upon Biblical teaching and yet we now look upon them as examples of a barbaric past we have since thankfully rejected.  If this fool thinks that the Bible has 'stood the test of time', then he is so sadly deluded I frankly feel sorry for him.

Reply
 · 
1


















Star Laughter1 week ago







"I believe in absolute truth!" He says, while munching on shellfish that was harvested on the Sabbath...

Reply
 · 
1


















Dragnauct Sylvas1 week ago







I love how they want to dissolve the negative connotations of terms used against them. Can't wait till they do it to the word "Faith."

Reply
 · 




















Inannalu1 week ago







Harmful to an ideology is not the same thing as harmful to people.
Behaviors and activities which do the former, but do not do the latter, are perfectly okay ethically, so far as I'm concerned.
In fact, if some behavior or activity harms an ideology which is responsible for much harm to people, so much the better.

Reply
 · 
5


















Charles Kunkle1 week ago







and we're totally ignoring the fact that God does NOT define marriage as one man and one woman...
Otherwise, many of the patriarchs of the Christian religion were violating God's law. Solomon had 300 wives and 700 concubines? Excatly how is that "one man and one woman"

Reply
 · 
2


















themplar1 week ago







Another great video from you. And again very right.
I personally cannot understand the objections people have against gays and gay marriage.  Sadly its not just religious biggots i've been in many discussions with non theist who were still absolute biggots.
Its funny how they Always accuse me of intolerance when i call their arguments absolute bogus and them biggots.  Every time the arguments are.. its not natural.. well obviously it is..  what if everybody turned gay the human species would end... wouldnt happen and if so what? They still can get children by In Vitro.
In the end all their arguments are invalid. and only one real arguments is left over they wont pronounce.
They suffer from imagination and see two gays going at it and they think its Icky. And thats all it is for them.. they think its icky.. well then stop fantasizing about it.
Towards religious biggotry.... i whish it was allowed to smack them around with their own bibles...
Show less
Reply
 · 
1

















DoctorScarlet
1 week ago


Not to mention that there's also the ridiculous idea that gays want to recruit children for the sole purpose of making them gay.
People don't just become gay. Usually a person has a predisposition to being gay, but this is something many people will deny. I myself, a person who grew up in a Christian home, had a predisposition to being pansexual, but it's easier to deny something than to actually own up to it. I'm so glad I grew out of that horseshit though, I'm much happier.
Show less

Reply
 · 
1







Red Cloud1 week ago







You can't just re-define words to fit your own ends. Start doing that all willy-nilly, and you ruin the foundation of language itself, the fact that we can understand it. You can't just destroy an entire language, because you don't like how some of the words coming together make you feel, that's bullshit. Words like Tolerance are there, because we need them, if we didn't need them, we wouldn't have them. 

Reply
 · 




















CarefulAtheist1 week ago







WTF moment @7:05. Gold!

Reply
 · 




















Moor Letoh1 week ago







Epic.

Reply
 · 




















mikeyvester1 week ago







Speaking from experience living in a country where gay marriage has been legal for almost 9 years, I haven't noticed anything different. I would have never known the law changed except it was on the news.  The only reason I can see why a person would be against gay marriage, they are fucking assholes and they like to hurt people.

Reply
 · 
1


















markedfang1 week ago







What if god was true? What would actually change?
He'd still have to come up with good arguments to justify his demands. I would see god as no more then another human with another opinion and unless he can convince me of his case I still wouldn't feel any obligation towards him.
Worship blinds you to attrociaties.

Reply
 · 
2


















Griffin98571 week ago







7:03 I nearly jumped out of my own skin shakes fist at Kate.

Reply
 · 
1







Hide replies








BionicDance
1 week ago


Neener. ;)



Reply
 · 
1






Griffin9857
1 week ago


Any more surprises? :P



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


+Griffin9857 If I told you, they wouldn't be surprises, now would they? :D



Reply
 · 
1






Griffin9857
1 week ago


+BionicDance *Glares*



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


+Griffin9857 *sticks out tongue*



Reply
 · 
1






christopher9000p
6 days ago


Hey, blame "god", not Kate for that one. :P



Reply
 · 









Felhaven1 week ago (edited)







You really shouldn't quote old testament based definitions of marriage while wearing a polyblend shirt.  

Reply
 · 
2

















DoctorScarlet
1 week ago


Gives a whole new meaning to "don't throw stones while standing in a glass house".



Reply
 · 









RRoocckkyy501 week ago







Nice new intro! : )

Reply
 · 
1

















BionicDance
1 week ago


Thanks! I was going for a kind of 80s look. :)



Reply
 · 
1







VGatheist1 week ago (edited)







well the moral argument against abortion is that you are killing a baby. A mother does not have a right to kill her new born baby, so the question then comes about, at what point does a baby have the right to live. But the trick in proving abortion immoral within a real world sense is to prove that the fetus is being harmed. Big argument and I am not going to go through the whole case for abortion, but I just don't find your "if you do not agree with abortion don't have one." as a valid point because the whole reason there is any argument is the attempt to demonstrate that the fetus should have rights. I think the laws for abortion are very close to taking all of this in account. But the Christians idea of egg + sperm = no abortion is just not valid. I think the laws very, but right now all states at least use viability and not birth as the starting point for fetus rights. Allot of laws will use the trimester to determine if an abortion as legal. But you know as a Lesbian you likely will never have to worry about it. If you have a baby, you'd have to choose it.
Show less
Reply
 · 




















TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







@7:05- Nice green cross.  Faded in a bit early but still nice.

Reply
 · 



















BionicDance
1 week ago


Heh. It's a chromakey guide mark to keep CGI elements in place relative to the camera.



Reply
 · 








TheRealPaulMarshall
1 week ago


I figgered.  Still nice given the context.



Reply
 · 









Jesse Sisolack1 week ago (edited)







New Planet? looks rather...wet. I only saw one little area of land.
Does this fellow need a book shelf? Maybe we should pitch in and get him one of those particle board ones from Wal-Mart. Seriously, concrete bricks and boards?

Reply
 · 




















Robert Roman1 week ago







This fucktard says all that special pleading in the name of the god of intolerance Yahweh. He sure fights hard for intolerance what a hypocritical bigot.

Reply
 · 



















yadabub
1 week ago


That was what struck me as well.  His Christian privilege allows him to spew what he likes with few consequences.  No doubt, he would be singing another tune if he had experienced real persecution for being a Christian, being a believer, or for being an a-hole.



Reply
 · 
1







BohemianBlasphemy1 week ago







2:34
I have a Bible. If god wrote that book, god intended marriage to be between a man and a woman; but also between a man and all the women that man can afford to rape.
What is this idiot even talking about?

Reply
 · 
3


















Peter Baxter1 week ago







Thanks for making great videos and calling out nutjobs like this guy, Bionic. His alleged point made so little sense, it was like he was okay with slavery because it was in the Bible, too.. not to mention that old tired "God intended marriage" argument when marriage was around long before the Bible as a business transaction of sorts. Le sigh.

Reply
 · 




















TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







Someone needs to explain to this dude that Gahwd's "absolute definition of marriage" involves one man and as many females as he can afford to buy including his sister, his half-sister, his half-sister's slaves, his aunts, his own slaves, as many concubines as he can purchase or coerce by threat of violence, any female of any age taken in war, any un-affianced female of any age that he can manage to rape and then pay for, and - if we allow for a certain reading of Genesis chapter 2 verse 20 - pretty much any animal (or maybe even any plant) into which he might possibly stick his penis.  [Note: That list is not meant to be exhaustive.  I'm sure there are some that I missed.]

Reply
 · 




















Len H2 days ago







BTW I love ya KATE no matter what your incorrect opinion of me....a ASSUMPTION is just that...those first 3 letters ...
 Love ya KATE now how about a great big wet KISS...dont hate because I am male lol what you afraid it might make you get COOTIES lol
BTW I liked the video as always

Reply
 · 




















TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







Did you abscond with Boehner's tanning bed?

Reply
 · 
1

















BionicDance
1 week ago (edited)


Naw...my camera was just acting like a little bitch, lighting-wise.



Reply
 · 









Packard Sonic1 week ago







I have had similar arguments with guys like him. He is a serious douche bag.  

Reply
 · 




















Len H2 days ago







Kate called me a Homophobic when i asked her question ...I ask a question and get called a name. But that is okay  I possed that dame question to my niece who is gay and she was like Uncle let that doesnt make you homophobic anyone who calls you that has a problem and they are lucky they didnt say it to you face  then we looked at a girl and both said  DAMN nice ass and laughed I love my niece she is awesome.
As for a Bigot....every single human is ....proud to be a bigot.
 My fist doesn't have to stop at the tip of any-ones nose and hasn't many times.
  In fact many time have not stopped with my feet to peoples noses over and over.
  Never bothered me before to put someone in their place...though these days it hurts...getting old lol.
   Values and morals suck, I would prefer busting more heads and not no damn BS law in my way...PISH but so far I have stayed many steps away of these moral laws of though shall not kill.
 The Qu'ran القرآن الكريم is the answer and oh how they enforce their rules.
  LOL
    Remember if you want  a law changed no matter how vile and disgusting it is  get the right wing out and the left wing in to make it legal....


 
Show less
Reply
 · 




















TheAtheistPaladin .1 week ago







In societies where there is no difference between private morality and a public morality, that would be a totalitarian society.  Why can't they realize that?

Reply
 · 
2


















DBeetleeater Doug1 week ago







Is this guy using the English language?  He uses words I have heard before but his meaning for those words are just plain different from what I think they mean.  Good job BionicDance.

Reply
 · 




















Mark Susskind1 week ago







I am smitten. :3

Reply
 · 




















Mel Rhomberg1 week ago







God didn't give a definition of marriage. Some people don't actually read the bible. le sigh

Reply
 · 




















TheAmulli1 week ago







I clicked thumbs up immediately after god struck you down midsentence. 

Reply
 · 




















angryhairpeice6 days ago







Isn't it funny how they always say that the book stands the test of time, then when you point out things like slavery, and working on the sabbath, they say 'That was a different time.'? That is why I am a gnostic antitheist. I know I am for a complete obliteration of religion. If we could get them to think, it could be possible. 

Reply
 · 




















beirirangu1 week ago (edited)







I think you missed a great oppertunity: he said that if it's in the bible, no matter when or in what context it was written, it's true. Meaning that he believes slavery should still be enforced as well as the death penalty for worshiping other gods, worshiping things that resemble anything from heaven, anything from earth, and anything from below the earth, using god's name in vain, working on the sabbath, not honoring your parents, ex... unless he thinks that when god said (roughly) , it is a permanent law that anyone who does any work on the sabbath is to be put to death, oh and here are the (first) ten commandments that I wrote with my finger. [ex 31 :12-18]

Reply
 · 









Hide replies








BionicDance
1 week ago


I'm, uh, pretty darn sure I brought up the bible condoning slavery...



Reply
 · 








beirirangu
1 week ago


+BionicDance you mentioned it in the meaning that it was a fad, an opinion that faded in time... much like how he thought the acceptance of homosexuality would... I meant it as in that he's picking and choosing what is 100% true and ignoring what's also in there



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+beirirangu I'm pretty sure I mentioned that too.



Reply
 · 








beirirangu
1 week ago


+BionicDance plus, I did post it before finishing the video... having typed it up after the first volley of the bible's infallibility



Reply
 · 









amoscarmel1 week ago







Great clip, thank  you. Loved the lightening strike lol...

Reply
 · 




















pauldhoff1 week ago







Their so-called objective laws are subjectively interpreted by them all the time. 
Paul

Reply
 · 




















Pat MaCrotch1 week ago







Somebody needs to see the South Park episode about "tolerance" ?

Reply
 · 




















Emigdiosback1 week ago







was the title intentional?

Reply
 · 









Hide replies








BionicDance
1 week ago


...I'm not sure I understand the question.



Reply
 · 








Emigdiosback
1 week ago


+BionicDance it sorta doesn't look right. like if written incorrectly. sorry, it's sorta bugging me.



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+Emigdiosback Actually, it's grammatically correct.
Had I written it, "Some Things I Will Not Put Up With," I'd be ending it with a preposition.



Reply
 · 
1






Emigdiosback
1 week ago (edited)


ohh! Sorry. I'm obsessive compulsive, and things like that catch my attention.



Reply
 · 








TheRealPaulMarshall
1 week ago


Should it not be "Some Things Up With Which I Will [Or 'Shall' given that the once considered incorrect 'will' was used, at the time, for emphasis.   Perhaps turn about is fair play.] Not Put"?



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+TheRealPaulMarshall No. Because your phrasing assumes that this is a list of intolerable things, rather than a statement of being unwilling to tolerate an unspecified set/number of things.



Reply
 · 








TheRealPaulMarshall
1 week ago


I thought that number was the same in both phrasings and that the difference was only in whether the elided object of the preposition should have been explicit.



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+TheRealPaulMarshall When I parse your rephrasing into more colloquial speech, what I get is, "Some things I will not put up with," meaning the video is listing off some things I find intolerable.
But what the title is really saying is, "There are some things I will not put up with," being rather more ambiguous.



Reply
 · 









zarkoff451 week ago







Sum things down with BionicDance: Intolerance comes through law or vigilante justice, nothing else.

Reply
 · 




















RetroFanaminna1 week ago







How did this guy confuse being tolerant with not agreeing with someones opinion and values?

Reply
 · 
















Show more
































All comments (98)







Share your thoughts












Top comments









Stream







P Dav1 day ago







This guy says morality is absolute. Then, I say, all of the horrendous acts done by or sanctioned by god in the bible, such as murder, slavery, rape, genocide, cannibalism, and treatment of women as property are absolutely immoral.

Reply
 · 




















BionicDance1 week ago









Reply
 · 
12







Hide replies








Mundus Novus Ordo
1 week ago


+LegendaryAsshole which one



Reply
 · 








1140Cecile
1 week ago


Nicely done, Keight.



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


Thanks! :)



Reply
 · 
2






Lance Zimmerman
1 week ago


You forgot temple. XD Funny how xtians enjoy to blame others for what they are doing. He also does not seem to realize that marriage is a law, not a god thing.
LOL on the lightning.
LOL Faith, he believes in wishful thinking = easy answers that agrees with one's own thinking.
3500 years ago, where did he get that? Also, what rewrite/translation is he talking about? More like centuries.
Good video.
Show less

Reply
 · 
2






Julia Reed
1 week ago


How many times did you have to do that flailing during the smiting before you finally got it right? That awesomely hilarious! I'm still smirking from it.



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


Believe it or not, that took one take.
There were other shots, tho...



Reply
 · 
1






Julia Reed
1 week ago


I applaud you, I really do, I'd probably have a bloopers reel at the end of a video due to ADD tangents, stuttering and my mild lisp



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


Believe me, I've been tempted to make a bloopers vid. :)



Reply
 · 
3






Julia Reed
1 week ago


Oh I'd watch that in a heart beat! 



Reply
 · 
2






Lance Zimmerman
1 week ago


+BionicDance oh you so should make a bloopers video! After all this time you should have lots of good stuff to chose from.



Reply
 · 








VinnyMonster1
5 days ago


+BionicDance A Bloopers vid would go viral! 



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
5 days ago


Well, it'll probably be a few months to gather enough GOOD blooper footage, but I've started collecting some...



Reply
 · 
1






VinnyMonster1
5 days ago


Damn but the struck by lightning bit was funny!  I was half expecting you to end the video with a long fade to black then.



Reply
 · 
1







ThomasTrue5 days ago







Within my own lifetime it was once 'moral' to punish children in school by striking them across the hands with a leather strap or a cane (or across the buttocks with a paddle in US schools) and a man could not rape his wife but was merely exercising his 'moral' conjugal 'rights'.  Go back less than a century and a husband had the 'moral right' to strike his wife with a rod 'no thicker than his thumb' (hence, "rule of thumb").  These 'morals' were based upon Biblical teaching and yet we now look upon them as examples of a barbaric past we have since thankfully rejected.  If this fool thinks that the Bible has 'stood the test of time', then he is so sadly deluded I frankly feel sorry for him.

Reply
 · 
1


















Star Laughter1 week ago







"I believe in absolute truth!" He says, while munching on shellfish that was harvested on the Sabbath...

Reply
 · 
1


















Dragnauct Sylvas1 week ago







I love how they want to dissolve the negative connotations of terms used against them. Can't wait till they do it to the word "Faith."

Reply
 · 




















Inannalu1 week ago







Harmful to an ideology is not the same thing as harmful to people.
Behaviors and activities which do the former, but do not do the latter, are perfectly okay ethically, so far as I'm concerned.
In fact, if some behavior or activity harms an ideology which is responsible for much harm to people, so much the better.

Reply
 · 
5


















Charles Kunkle1 week ago







and we're totally ignoring the fact that God does NOT define marriage as one man and one woman...
Otherwise, many of the patriarchs of the Christian religion were violating God's law. Solomon had 300 wives and 700 concubines? Excatly how is that "one man and one woman"

Reply
 · 
2


















themplar1 week ago







Another great video from you. And again very right.
I personally cannot understand the objections people have against gays and gay marriage.  Sadly its not just religious biggots i've been in many discussions with non theist who were still absolute biggots.
Its funny how they Always accuse me of intolerance when i call their arguments absolute bogus and them biggots.  Every time the arguments are.. its not natural.. well obviously it is..  what if everybody turned gay the human species would end... wouldnt happen and if so what? They still can get children by In Vitro.
In the end all their arguments are invalid. and only one real arguments is left over they wont pronounce.
They suffer from imagination and see two gays going at it and they think its Icky. And thats all it is for them.. they think its icky.. well then stop fantasizing about it.
Towards religious biggotry.... i whish it was allowed to smack them around with their own bibles...
Show less
Reply
 · 
1

















DoctorScarlet
1 week ago


Not to mention that there's also the ridiculous idea that gays want to recruit children for the sole purpose of making them gay.
People don't just become gay. Usually a person has a predisposition to being gay, but this is something many people will deny. I myself, a person who grew up in a Christian home, had a predisposition to being pansexual, but it's easier to deny something than to actually own up to it. I'm so glad I grew out of that horseshit though, I'm much happier.
Show less

Reply
 · 
1







Red Cloud1 week ago







You can't just re-define words to fit your own ends. Start doing that all willy-nilly, and you ruin the foundation of language itself, the fact that we can understand it. You can't just destroy an entire language, because you don't like how some of the words coming together make you feel, that's bullshit. Words like Tolerance are there, because we need them, if we didn't need them, we wouldn't have them. 

Reply
 · 




















CarefulAtheist1 week ago







WTF moment @7:05. Gold!

Reply
 · 




















Moor Letoh1 week ago







Epic.

Reply
 · 




















mikeyvester1 week ago







Speaking from experience living in a country where gay marriage has been legal for almost 9 years, I haven't noticed anything different. I would have never known the law changed except it was on the news.  The only reason I can see why a person would be against gay marriage, they are fucking assholes and they like to hurt people.

Reply
 · 
1


















markedfang1 week ago







What if god was true? What would actually change?
He'd still have to come up with good arguments to justify his demands. I would see god as no more then another human with another opinion and unless he can convince me of his case I still wouldn't feel any obligation towards him.
Worship blinds you to attrociaties.

Reply
 · 
2


















Griffin98571 week ago







7:03 I nearly jumped out of my own skin shakes fist at Kate.

Reply
 · 
1







Hide replies








BionicDance
1 week ago


Neener. ;)



Reply
 · 
1






Griffin9857
1 week ago


Any more surprises? :P



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


+Griffin9857 If I told you, they wouldn't be surprises, now would they? :D



Reply
 · 
1






Griffin9857
1 week ago


+BionicDance *Glares*



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


+Griffin9857 *sticks out tongue*



Reply
 · 
1






christopher9000p
6 days ago


Hey, blame "god", not Kate for that one. :P



Reply
 · 









Felhaven1 week ago (edited)







You really shouldn't quote old testament based definitions of marriage while wearing a polyblend shirt.  

Reply
 · 
2

















DoctorScarlet
1 week ago


Gives a whole new meaning to "don't throw stones while standing in a glass house".



Reply
 · 









RRoocckkyy501 week ago







Nice new intro! : )

Reply
 · 
1

















BionicDance
1 week ago


Thanks! I was going for a kind of 80s look. :)



Reply
 · 
1







VGatheist1 week ago (edited)







well the moral argument against abortion is that you are killing a baby. A mother does not have a right to kill her new born baby, so the question then comes about, at what point does a baby have the right to live. But the trick in proving abortion immoral within a real world sense is to prove that the fetus is being harmed. Big argument and I am not going to go through the whole case for abortion, but I just don't find your "if you do not agree with abortion don't have one." as a valid point because the whole reason there is any argument is the attempt to demonstrate that the fetus should have rights. I think the laws for abortion are very close to taking all of this in account. But the Christians idea of egg + sperm = no abortion is just not valid. I think the laws very, but right now all states at least use viability and not birth as the starting point for fetus rights. Allot of laws will use the trimester to determine if an abortion as legal. But you know as a Lesbian you likely will never have to worry about it. If you have a baby, you'd have to choose it.
Show less
Reply
 · 




















TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







@7:05- Nice green cross.  Faded in a bit early but still nice.

Reply
 · 



















BionicDance
1 week ago


Heh. It's a chromakey guide mark to keep CGI elements in place relative to the camera.



Reply
 · 








TheRealPaulMarshall
1 week ago


I figgered.  Still nice given the context.



Reply
 · 









Jesse Sisolack1 week ago (edited)







New Planet? looks rather...wet. I only saw one little area of land.
Does this fellow need a book shelf? Maybe we should pitch in and get him one of those particle board ones from Wal-Mart. Seriously, concrete bricks and boards?

Reply
 · 




















Robert Roman1 week ago







This fucktard says all that special pleading in the name of the god of intolerance Yahweh. He sure fights hard for intolerance what a hypocritical bigot.

Reply
 · 



















yadabub
1 week ago


That was what struck me as well.  His Christian privilege allows him to spew what he likes with few consequences.  No doubt, he would be singing another tune if he had experienced real persecution for being a Christian, being a believer, or for being an a-hole.



Reply
 · 
1







BohemianBlasphemy1 week ago







2:34
I have a Bible. If god wrote that book, god intended marriage to be between a man and a woman; but also between a man and all the women that man can afford to rape.
What is this idiot even talking about?

Reply
 · 
3


















Peter Baxter1 week ago







Thanks for making great videos and calling out nutjobs like this guy, Bionic. His alleged point made so little sense, it was like he was okay with slavery because it was in the Bible, too.. not to mention that old tired "God intended marriage" argument when marriage was around long before the Bible as a business transaction of sorts. Le sigh.

Reply
 · 




















TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







Someone needs to explain to this dude that Gahwd's "absolute definition of marriage" involves one man and as many females as he can afford to buy including his sister, his half-sister, his half-sister's slaves, his aunts, his own slaves, as many concubines as he can purchase or coerce by threat of violence, any female of any age taken in war, any un-affianced female of any age that he can manage to rape and then pay for, and - if we allow for a certain reading of Genesis chapter 2 verse 20 - pretty much any animal (or maybe even any plant) into which he might possibly stick his penis.  [Note: That list is not meant to be exhaustive.  I'm sure there are some that I missed.]

Reply
 · 




















Len H2 days ago







BTW I love ya KATE no matter what your incorrect opinion of me....a ASSUMPTION is just that...those first 3 letters ...
 Love ya KATE now how about a great big wet KISS...dont hate because I am male lol what you afraid it might make you get COOTIES lol
BTW I liked the video as always

Reply
 · 




















TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







Did you abscond with Boehner's tanning bed?

Reply
 · 
1

















BionicDance
1 week ago (edited)


Naw...my camera was just acting like a little bitch, lighting-wise.



Reply
 · 









Packard Sonic1 week ago







I have had similar arguments with guys like him. He is a serious douche bag.  

Reply
 · 




















Len H2 days ago







Kate called me a Homophobic when i asked her question ...I ask a question and get called a name. But that is okay  I possed that dame question to my niece who is gay and she was like Uncle let that doesnt make you homophobic anyone who calls you that has a problem and they are lucky they didnt say it to you face  then we looked at a girl and both said  DAMN nice ass and laughed I love my niece she is awesome.
As for a Bigot....every single human is ....proud to be a bigot.
 My fist doesn't have to stop at the tip of any-ones nose and hasn't many times.
  In fact many time have not stopped with my feet to peoples noses over and over.
  Never bothered me before to put someone in their place...though these days it hurts...getting old lol.
   Values and morals suck, I would prefer busting more heads and not no damn BS law in my way...PISH but so far I have stayed many steps away of these moral laws of though shall not kill.
 The Qu'ran القرآن الكريم is the answer and oh how they enforce their rules.
  LOL
    Remember if you want  a law changed no matter how vile and disgusting it is  get the right wing out and the left wing in to make it legal....


 
Show less
Reply
 · 




















TheAtheistPaladin .1 week ago







In societies where there is no difference between private morality and a public morality, that would be a totalitarian society.  Why can't they realize that?

Reply
 · 
2


















DBeetleeater Doug1 week ago







Is this guy using the English language?  He uses words I have heard before but his meaning for those words are just plain different from what I think they mean.  Good job BionicDance.

Reply
 · 




















Mark Susskind1 week ago







I am smitten. :3

Reply
 · 




















Mel Rhomberg1 week ago







God didn't give a definition of marriage. Some people don't actually read the bible. le sigh

Reply
 · 




















TheAmulli1 week ago







I clicked thumbs up immediately after god struck you down midsentence. 

Reply
 · 




















angryhairpeice6 days ago







Isn't it funny how they always say that the book stands the test of time, then when you point out things like slavery, and working on the sabbath, they say 'That was a different time.'? That is why I am a gnostic antitheist. I know I am for a complete obliteration of religion. If we could get them to think, it could be possible. 

Reply
 · 




















beirirangu1 week ago (edited)







I think you missed a great oppertunity: he said that if it's in the bible, no matter when or in what context it was written, it's true. Meaning that he believes slavery should still be enforced as well as the death penalty for worshiping other gods, worshiping things that resemble anything from heaven, anything from earth, and anything from below the earth, using god's name in vain, working on the sabbath, not honoring your parents, ex... unless he thinks that when god said (roughly) , it is a permanent law that anyone who does any work on the sabbath is to be put to death, oh and here are the (first) ten commandments that I wrote with my finger. [ex 31 :12-18]

Reply
 · 









Hide replies








BionicDance
1 week ago


I'm, uh, pretty darn sure I brought up the bible condoning slavery...



Reply
 · 








beirirangu
1 week ago


+BionicDance you mentioned it in the meaning that it was a fad, an opinion that faded in time... much like how he thought the acceptance of homosexuality would... I meant it as in that he's picking and choosing what is 100% true and ignoring what's also in there



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+beirirangu I'm pretty sure I mentioned that too.



Reply
 · 








beirirangu
1 week ago


+BionicDance plus, I did post it before finishing the video... having typed it up after the first volley of the bible's infallibility



Reply
 · 









amoscarmel1 week ago







Great clip, thank  you. Loved the lightening strike lol...

Reply
 · 




















pauldhoff1 week ago







Their so-called objective laws are subjectively interpreted by them all the time. 
Paul

Reply
 · 




















Pat MaCrotch1 week ago







Somebody needs to see the South Park episode about "tolerance" ?

Reply
 · 




















Emigdiosback1 week ago







was the title intentional?

Reply
 · 









Hide replies








BionicDance
1 week ago


...I'm not sure I understand the question.



Reply
 · 








Emigdiosback
1 week ago


+BionicDance it sorta doesn't look right. like if written incorrectly. sorry, it's sorta bugging me.



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+Emigdiosback Actually, it's grammatically correct.
Had I written it, "Some Things I Will Not Put Up With," I'd be ending it with a preposition.



Reply
 · 
1






Emigdiosback
1 week ago (edited)


ohh! Sorry. I'm obsessive compulsive, and things like that catch my attention.



Reply
 · 








TheRealPaulMarshall
1 week ago


Should it not be "Some Things Up With Which I Will [Or 'Shall' given that the once considered incorrect 'will' was used, at the time, for emphasis.   Perhaps turn about is fair play.] Not Put"?



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+TheRealPaulMarshall No. Because your phrasing assumes that this is a list of intolerable things, rather than a statement of being unwilling to tolerate an unspecified set/number of things.



Reply
 · 








TheRealPaulMarshall
1 week ago


I thought that number was the same in both phrasings and that the difference was only in whether the elided object of the preposition should have been explicit.



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+TheRealPaulMarshall When I parse your rephrasing into more colloquial speech, what I get is, "Some things I will not put up with," meaning the video is listing off some things I find intolerable.
But what the title is really saying is, "There are some things I will not put up with," being rather more ambiguous.



Reply
 · 









zarkoff451 week ago







Sum things down with BionicDance: Intolerance comes through law or vigilante justice, nothing else.

Reply
 · 




















RetroFanaminna1 week ago







How did this guy confuse being tolerant with not agreeing with someones opinion and values?

Reply
 · 
















Show more
























































All comments (98)







Share your thoughts












Top comments









Stream







P Dav1 day ago







This guy says morality is absolute. Then, I say, all of the horrendous acts done by or sanctioned by god in the bible, such as murder, slavery, rape, genocide, cannibalism, and treatment of women as property are absolutely immoral.

Reply
 · 




















BionicDance1 week ago









Reply
 · 
12







Hide replies








Mundus Novus Ordo
1 week ago


+LegendaryAsshole which one



Reply
 · 








1140Cecile
1 week ago


Nicely done, Keight.



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


Thanks! :)



Reply
 · 
2






Lance Zimmerman
1 week ago


You forgot temple. XD Funny how xtians enjoy to blame others for what they are doing. He also does not seem to realize that marriage is a law, not a god thing.
LOL on the lightning.
LOL Faith, he believes in wishful thinking = easy answers that agrees with one's own thinking.
3500 years ago, where did he get that? Also, what rewrite/translation is he talking about? More like centuries.
Good video.
Show less

Reply
 · 
2






Julia Reed
1 week ago


How many times did you have to do that flailing during the smiting before you finally got it right? That awesomely hilarious! I'm still smirking from it.



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


Believe it or not, that took one take.
There were other shots, tho...



Reply
 · 
1






Julia Reed
1 week ago


I applaud you, I really do, I'd probably have a bloopers reel at the end of a video due to ADD tangents, stuttering and my mild lisp



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


Believe me, I've been tempted to make a bloopers vid. :)



Reply
 · 
3






Julia Reed
1 week ago


Oh I'd watch that in a heart beat! 



Reply
 · 
2






Lance Zimmerman
1 week ago


+BionicDance oh you so should make a bloopers video! After all this time you should have lots of good stuff to chose from.



Reply
 · 








VinnyMonster1
5 days ago


+BionicDance A Bloopers vid would go viral! 



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
5 days ago


Well, it'll probably be a few months to gather enough GOOD blooper footage, but I've started collecting some...



Reply
 · 
1






VinnyMonster1
5 days ago


Damn but the struck by lightning bit was funny!  I was half expecting you to end the video with a long fade to black then.



Reply
 · 
1







ThomasTrue5 days ago







Within my own lifetime it was once 'moral' to punish children in school by striking them across the hands with a leather strap or a cane (or across the buttocks with a paddle in US schools) and a man could not rape his wife but was merely exercising his 'moral' conjugal 'rights'.  Go back less than a century and a husband had the 'moral right' to strike his wife with a rod 'no thicker than his thumb' (hence, "rule of thumb").  These 'morals' were based upon Biblical teaching and yet we now look upon them as examples of a barbaric past we have since thankfully rejected.  If this fool thinks that the Bible has 'stood the test of time', then he is so sadly deluded I frankly feel sorry for him.

Reply
 · 
1


















Star Laughter1 week ago







"I believe in absolute truth!" He says, while munching on shellfish that was harvested on the Sabbath...

Reply
 · 
1


















Dragnauct Sylvas1 week ago







I love how they want to dissolve the negative connotations of terms used against them. Can't wait till they do it to the word "Faith."

Reply
 · 




















Inannalu1 week ago







Harmful to an ideology is not the same thing as harmful to people.
Behaviors and activities which do the former, but do not do the latter, are perfectly okay ethically, so far as I'm concerned.
In fact, if some behavior or activity harms an ideology which is responsible for much harm to people, so much the better.

Reply
 · 
5


















Charles Kunkle1 week ago







and we're totally ignoring the fact that God does NOT define marriage as one man and one woman...
Otherwise, many of the patriarchs of the Christian religion were violating God's law. Solomon had 300 wives and 700 concubines? Excatly how is that "one man and one woman"

Reply
 · 
2


















themplar1 week ago







Another great video from you. And again very right.
I personally cannot understand the objections people have against gays and gay marriage.  Sadly its not just religious biggots i've been in many discussions with non theist who were still absolute biggots.
Its funny how they Always accuse me of intolerance when i call their arguments absolute bogus and them biggots.  Every time the arguments are.. its not natural.. well obviously it is..  what if everybody turned gay the human species would end... wouldnt happen and if so what? They still can get children by In Vitro.
In the end all their arguments are invalid. and only one real arguments is left over they wont pronounce.
They suffer from imagination and see two gays going at it and they think its Icky. And thats all it is for them.. they think its icky.. well then stop fantasizing about it.
Towards religious biggotry.... i whish it was allowed to smack them around with their own bibles...
Show less
Reply
 · 
1

















DoctorScarlet
1 week ago


Not to mention that there's also the ridiculous idea that gays want to recruit children for the sole purpose of making them gay.
People don't just become gay. Usually a person has a predisposition to being gay, but this is something many people will deny. I myself, a person who grew up in a Christian home, had a predisposition to being pansexual, but it's easier to deny something than to actually own up to it. I'm so glad I grew out of that horseshit though, I'm much happier.
Show less

Reply
 · 
1







Red Cloud1 week ago







You can't just re-define words to fit your own ends. Start doing that all willy-nilly, and you ruin the foundation of language itself, the fact that we can understand it. You can't just destroy an entire language, because you don't like how some of the words coming together make you feel, that's bullshit. Words like Tolerance are there, because we need them, if we didn't need them, we wouldn't have them. 

Reply
 · 




















CarefulAtheist1 week ago







WTF moment @7:05. Gold!

Reply
 · 




















Moor Letoh1 week ago







Epic.

Reply
 · 




















mikeyvester1 week ago







Speaking from experience living in a country where gay marriage has been legal for almost 9 years, I haven't noticed anything different. I would have never known the law changed except it was on the news.  The only reason I can see why a person would be against gay marriage, they are fucking assholes and they like to hurt people.

Reply
 · 
1


















markedfang1 week ago







What if god was true? What would actually change?
He'd still have to come up with good arguments to justify his demands. I would see god as no more then another human with another opinion and unless he can convince me of his case I still wouldn't feel any obligation towards him.
Worship blinds you to attrociaties.

Reply
 · 
2


















Griffin98571 week ago







7:03 I nearly jumped out of my own skin shakes fist at Kate.

Reply
 · 
1







Hide replies








BionicDance
1 week ago


Neener. ;)



Reply
 · 
1






Griffin9857
1 week ago


Any more surprises? :P



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


+Griffin9857 If I told you, they wouldn't be surprises, now would they? :D



Reply
 · 
1






Griffin9857
1 week ago


+BionicDance *Glares*



Reply
 · 
1






BionicDance
1 week ago


+Griffin9857 *sticks out tongue*



Reply
 · 
1






christopher9000p
6 days ago


Hey, blame "god", not Kate for that one. :P



Reply
 · 









Felhaven1 week ago (edited)







You really shouldn't quote old testament based definitions of marriage while wearing a polyblend shirt.  

Reply
 · 
2

















DoctorScarlet
1 week ago


Gives a whole new meaning to "don't throw stones while standing in a glass house".



Reply
 · 









RRoocckkyy501 week ago







Nice new intro! : )

Reply
 · 
1

















BionicDance
1 week ago


Thanks! I was going for a kind of 80s look. :)



Reply
 · 
1







VGatheist1 week ago (edited)







well the moral argument against abortion is that you are killing a baby. A mother does not have a right to kill her new born baby, so the question then comes about, at what point does a baby have the right to live. But the trick in proving abortion immoral within a real world sense is to prove that the fetus is being harmed. Big argument and I am not going to go through the whole case for abortion, but I just don't find your "if you do not agree with abortion don't have one." as a valid point because the whole reason there is any argument is the attempt to demonstrate that the fetus should have rights. I think the laws for abortion are very close to taking all of this in account. But the Christians idea of egg + sperm = no abortion is just not valid. I think the laws very, but right now all states at least use viability and not birth as the starting point for fetus rights. Allot of laws will use the trimester to determine if an abortion as legal. But you know as a Lesbian you likely will never have to worry about it. If you have a baby, you'd have to choose it.
Show less
Reply
 · 




















TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







@7:05- Nice green cross.  Faded in a bit early but still nice.

Reply
 · 



















BionicDance
1 week ago


Heh. It's a chromakey guide mark to keep CGI elements in place relative to the camera.



Reply
 · 








TheRealPaulMarshall
1 week ago


I figgered.  Still nice given the context.



Reply
 · 









Jesse Sisolack1 week ago (edited)







New Planet? looks rather...wet. I only saw one little area of land.
Does this fellow need a book shelf? Maybe we should pitch in and get him one of those particle board ones from Wal-Mart. Seriously, concrete bricks and boards?

Reply
 · 




















Robert Roman1 week ago







This fucktard says all that special pleading in the name of the god of intolerance Yahweh. He sure fights hard for intolerance what a hypocritical bigot.

Reply
 · 



















yadabub
1 week ago


That was what struck me as well.  His Christian privilege allows him to spew what he likes with few consequences.  No doubt, he would be singing another tune if he had experienced real persecution for being a Christian, being a believer, or for being an a-hole.



Reply
 · 
1







BohemianBlasphemy1 week ago







2:34
I have a Bible. If god wrote that book, god intended marriage to be between a man and a woman; but also between a man and all the women that man can afford to rape.
What is this idiot even talking about?

Reply
 · 
3


















Peter Baxter1 week ago







Thanks for making great videos and calling out nutjobs like this guy, Bionic. His alleged point made so little sense, it was like he was okay with slavery because it was in the Bible, too.. not to mention that old tired "God intended marriage" argument when marriage was around long before the Bible as a business transaction of sorts. Le sigh.

Reply
 · 




















TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







Someone needs to explain to this dude that Gahwd's "absolute definition of marriage" involves one man and as many females as he can afford to buy including his sister, his half-sister, his half-sister's slaves, his aunts, his own slaves, as many concubines as he can purchase or coerce by threat of violence, any female of any age taken in war, any un-affianced female of any age that he can manage to rape and then pay for, and - if we allow for a certain reading of Genesis chapter 2 verse 20 - pretty much any animal (or maybe even any plant) into which he might possibly stick his penis.  [Note: That list is not meant to be exhaustive.  I'm sure there are some that I missed.]

Reply
 · 




















Len H2 days ago







BTW I love ya KATE no matter what your incorrect opinion of me....a ASSUMPTION is just that...those first 3 letters ...
 Love ya KATE now how about a great big wet KISS...dont hate because I am male lol what you afraid it might make you get COOTIES lol
BTW I liked the video as always

Reply
 · 




















TheRealPaulMarshall1 week ago







Did you abscond with Boehner's tanning bed?

Reply
 · 
1

















BionicDance
1 week ago (edited)


Naw...my camera was just acting like a little bitch, lighting-wise.



Reply
 · 









Packard Sonic1 week ago







I have had similar arguments with guys like him. He is a serious douche bag.  

Reply
 · 




















Len H2 days ago







Kate called me a Homophobic when i asked her question ...I ask a question and get called a name. But that is okay  I possed that dame question to my niece who is gay and she was like Uncle let that doesnt make you homophobic anyone who calls you that has a problem and they are lucky they didnt say it to you face  then we looked at a girl and both said  DAMN nice ass and laughed I love my niece she is awesome.
As for a Bigot....every single human is ....proud to be a bigot.
 My fist doesn't have to stop at the tip of any-ones nose and hasn't many times.
  In fact many time have not stopped with my feet to peoples noses over and over.
  Never bothered me before to put someone in their place...though these days it hurts...getting old lol.
   Values and morals suck, I would prefer busting more heads and not no damn BS law in my way...PISH but so far I have stayed many steps away of these moral laws of though shall not kill.
 The Qu'ran القرآن الكريم is the answer and oh how they enforce their rules.
  LOL
    Remember if you want  a law changed no matter how vile and disgusting it is  get the right wing out and the left wing in to make it legal....


 
Show less
Reply
 · 




















TheAtheistPaladin .1 week ago







In societies where there is no difference between private morality and a public morality, that would be a totalitarian society.  Why can't they realize that?

Reply
 · 
2


















DBeetleeater Doug1 week ago







Is this guy using the English language?  He uses words I have heard before but his meaning for those words are just plain different from what I think they mean.  Good job BionicDance.

Reply
 · 




















Mark Susskind1 week ago







I am smitten. :3

Reply
 · 




















Mel Rhomberg1 week ago







God didn't give a definition of marriage. Some people don't actually read the bible. le sigh

Reply
 · 




















TheAmulli1 week ago







I clicked thumbs up immediately after god struck you down midsentence. 

Reply
 · 




















angryhairpeice6 days ago







Isn't it funny how they always say that the book stands the test of time, then when you point out things like slavery, and working on the sabbath, they say 'That was a different time.'? That is why I am a gnostic antitheist. I know I am for a complete obliteration of religion. If we could get them to think, it could be possible. 

Reply
 · 




















beirirangu1 week ago (edited)







I think you missed a great oppertunity: he said that if it's in the bible, no matter when or in what context it was written, it's true. Meaning that he believes slavery should still be enforced as well as the death penalty for worshiping other gods, worshiping things that resemble anything from heaven, anything from earth, and anything from below the earth, using god's name in vain, working on the sabbath, not honoring your parents, ex... unless he thinks that when god said (roughly) , it is a permanent law that anyone who does any work on the sabbath is to be put to death, oh and here are the (first) ten commandments that I wrote with my finger. [ex 31 :12-18]

Reply
 · 









Hide replies








BionicDance
1 week ago


I'm, uh, pretty darn sure I brought up the bible condoning slavery...



Reply
 · 








beirirangu
1 week ago


+BionicDance you mentioned it in the meaning that it was a fad, an opinion that faded in time... much like how he thought the acceptance of homosexuality would... I meant it as in that he's picking and choosing what is 100% true and ignoring what's also in there



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+beirirangu I'm pretty sure I mentioned that too.



Reply
 · 








beirirangu
1 week ago


+BionicDance plus, I did post it before finishing the video... having typed it up after the first volley of the bible's infallibility



Reply
 · 









amoscarmel1 week ago







Great clip, thank  you. Loved the lightening strike lol...

Reply
 · 




















pauldhoff1 week ago







Their so-called objective laws are subjectively interpreted by them all the time. 
Paul

Reply
 · 




















Pat MaCrotch1 week ago







Somebody needs to see the South Park episode about "tolerance" ?

Reply
 · 




















Emigdiosback1 week ago







was the title intentional?

Reply
 · 









Hide replies








BionicDance
1 week ago


...I'm not sure I understand the question.



Reply
 · 








Emigdiosback
1 week ago


+BionicDance it sorta doesn't look right. like if written incorrectly. sorry, it's sorta bugging me.



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+Emigdiosback Actually, it's grammatically correct.
Had I written it, "Some Things I Will Not Put Up With," I'd be ending it with a preposition.



Reply
 · 
1






Emigdiosback
1 week ago (edited)


ohh! Sorry. I'm obsessive compulsive, and things like that catch my attention.



Reply
 · 








TheRealPaulMarshall
1 week ago


Should it not be "Some Things Up With Which I Will [Or 'Shall' given that the once considered incorrect 'will' was used, at the time, for emphasis.   Perhaps turn about is fair play.] Not Put"?



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+TheRealPaulMarshall No. Because your phrasing assumes that this is a list of intolerable things, rather than a statement of being unwilling to tolerate an unspecified set/number of things.



Reply
 · 








TheRealPaulMarshall
1 week ago


I thought that number was the same in both phrasings and that the difference was only in whether the elided object of the preposition should have been explicit.



Reply
 · 








BionicDance
1 week ago


+TheRealPaulMarshall When I parse your rephrasing into more colloquial speech, what I get is, "Some things I will not put up with," meaning the video is listing off some things I find intolerable.
But what the title is really saying is, "There are some things I will not put up with," being rather more ambiguous.



Reply
 · 









zarkoff451 week ago







Sum things down with BionicDance: Intolerance comes through law or vigilante justice, nothing else.

Reply
 · 




















RetroFanaminna1 week ago







How did this guy confuse being tolerant with not agreeing with someones opinion and values?

Reply
 · 
















Show more