Gaytheist To Release "Stealth Beats" On Good To Die Records

[rug]

posted August 1, 2012

GAYTHEIST. Gay. Atheist. Music for gay atheists? Sure. Music written by a gay atheist? Yes. Music for anyone that enjoys flopping about like a wet noodle in a dryer as chunks of concrete are thrown in every 30 seconds? Definitely. The Portland trio is set to release Stealth Beats via Seattle's Good To Die Records on August 21st.

The album is 23 minutes of pummeling yet melodic punk-metal. Despite the heaviness and seriousness of the music, image-wise Gaytheist tends towards the tongue and cheek. For example, the ruler found inside the Stealth Beats album for measuring oneself or partner for a Gaytheist Brand condom. Gaytheist has a string of North West shows in August and September, with more touring in the works.

Audio: Gaytheist - "I'm Procrastinate and I Vote"

Gaytheist Shows
•Aug 10 Portland, OR - Club 21 (w/ Rabbits, Monogamy Party, etc)
•Aug 19 Portland, OR - Alleyway
•Sep 08 Portland, OR - The Tube (w/ Rabbits, Fist Fite)
•Sep 14 Portland, OR - Kenton Club (Portland Record Release Show)
•Sep 15 Seattle, WA - The Comet (Seattle Record Release)

http://www.pluginmusic.com/news/article/gaytheist-to-release-stealth-beats-on-good-to-die-records

Audio at link.

More audio:

http://gaytheist.bandcamp.com/track/condemn-the-condemners

[msongs]

1. is this a paid advertisement? nt

[rug]

3. I wish.

[MineralMan]

2. And your comment is?

Do you like their music, rug? I'm not much for that genre, so I won't go listen to it, I think. A Google search for "gay atheist," I guess, and you come up with this as a worthy post in the Religion Group? It does show up on the first page of that search. Why post this? I'm at a loss to see any connection between a local musical group and the Religion Group, really. Can you explain your reason for posting this? What does it have to do with religion?

You seem to find this amusing. Is your amusement at the "gay" part or the "atheist" part of the band's name?

[rug]

4. Do you think gay atheists are amusing?

Both are inherent to human beings. It shouldn't surprise you that there is music that expresses both.

Educate yourself.

http://www.facebook.com/GaytheistPDX

(I'm not going to go all trumad on you.)

[MineralMan]

5. Amusing? Not at all.

But you brought it up, not me. I know a number of LGBT people. I do not know whether any of them are atheists. My wife's cousin and his partner of 27 years aren't atheists, though. I know them well, and both are active Lutherans. I don't believe I know any gay atheists, though. Some may be, but it isn't a subject that has come up.

[trotsky]

6. Rug has made his position on the treatment of homosexuals quite clear.

Especially within the context of his church and its policies.

[rug]

7. Really? State it.

[trotsky]

8. I don't have to. As I've said, you've made it clear.

Take care, rug!

[rug]

15. No, you prefer to make intimations and scoot away.

Courageous.

[trotsky]

18. Feel free to state your stance for all to see, then.

You can put me in my place. Do you think homosexuals should be able to receive a sacramental marriage in your church? Yes or no.

[rug]

19. Get back to your original obnoxious post.

You say my position is "quite clear". State it rather than make cowardly baseless intimations.

[trotsky]

20. It could very well be that I am mistaken.

You can continue to try and weasel your way out of this, but I think everyone's going to wonder what you have to hide.

Put me in my place, and tell me what you think. I'll admit it if I was wrong in my conclusion.

[rug]

23. I'll tell you if you are.

If I did need anyone to put words in my mouth, it would not be you.

So, are you going to state it or continue to weasel?

[trotsky]

24. At this point, your behavior on this thread has now made it clear to others.

There is no need for me to answer.

Rounds are over.

[rug]

26. Bullshit.

You make a disgusting intimation, squid away, and accuse others of poor behavior.

Shameless.

[trotsky]

28. And you could have put me in my place with a clear "yes" or "no" answer.

Instead, you chose to bully and insult me.

[rug]

30. And you can put me in my place by stating what you think my position is.

Don't even attempt to accuse anyone else of insult.

[trotsky]

32. See #31.

Bye, rug!

[rug]

35. You didn't state it there either.

[Goblinmonger]

34. Dude. Answer the question. It's pretty easy. You can end it all.

Do you think gays should be able to have a sacramental marriage in your church?

The fact that you post on a Progressive website indicates your answer would be yes. The fact that you are trying SO HARD not to answer the question puts some doubt on that yes answer.

On edit: Look how easy it is: Yes, I, Goblinmonger, think that gays should be able to have a sacramental marriage in the RCC, a church in which I was baptized, confirmed, and am still on the membership list at a local parish and get mailings frequently. But, as a result of their homophobic and misogynistic stances as well as their cover up of pedophiles, I have chosen to no longer give them my time or money (I was an active member even after becoming an atheist).

See, that's pretty damn easy. I'd even settle for a simple "Yes."

[rug]

36. You selectively read this thread.

I'm waiting, futilely, for trotsky to state what he thinks my position is.

If and when he does, I may or may not play your game.

[Goblinmonger]

39. The reality is you won't ever answer the question.

We all know that. The fact that you won't answer the question is what puts a shitload of tension on which should be an easy "yes" answer.

[rug]

41. The reality is trotsky won't ever state what he intimated.

I know that.

You know that.

He knows that.

[2ndAmForComputers]

63. If that makes you feel better, I won't demand you state your position.

Because I am now 100% sure of what it is.

[MineralMan]

9. That may be, but I haven't seen his position.

I do know the position of the Roman Catholic Church, though, and it is opposed to equal rights for LGBT people. I call that position unconscionable. But I haven't seen rug's position, so I do not know it.

[cleanhippie]

10. Would it be fair to say that one who gives times, money, and support to an organization...

condones the actions of that organization?

[MineralMan]

11. Yes, it would, in my opinion.

Living in Minnesota, as I do, I'm appalled at the open and public financial and political support the Catholic Church is giving to the proponents of the marriage limitation amendment to the Minnesota Constitution. In fact, that church is the most prominent proponent of that amendment in the state. Most of my Catholic acquaintances have stopped all donations to the Catholic Church as long as they are supporting this amendment. That, in my opinion, is an appropriate reaction. A few have left the church and are attending Lutheran churches in their communities, instead. That, in my opinion, is an even more appropriate reaction. My opposition to the amendment is public, and can be found at the link in my signature line to my DFL precinct website.

That said, I do not know what rug does with regard to all that. He may have said at some point, but I haven't seen it, so I can't say. But, as you say, if someone donates time and money to support an organization, clearly they are funding and facilitating the actions of that organization. It is a choice, and making such a choice indicates one's position, certainly.

[cleanhippie]

12. "It is a choice, and making such a choice indicates one's position, certainly. "

Well, MM, I think you have the answer you were looking for.

[trotsky]

13. True. Perhaps he will state it clearly for you if you ask nicely.

I've figured it out, as other regular readers have, but we did have to piece together a lot of posts that you probably haven't seen.

[MineralMan]

14. I doubt that very much. nt

[rug]

16. Why don't you?

After all, you say it's quite clear.

[trotsky]

17. It's your opinion.

You state it. Apparently it isn't as clear to others as it is to me.

[rug]

21. No it's not my opinion. You intimate, but do not state, that you know what my opinion is.

State it. I'll tell you if you have it right or are simply stirring disruptive bullshit.

[trotsky]

22. We can play this game as long as you want, rug.

Or you can end it by simply declaring your answer to the yes or no question above.

Although the fact that you steadfastly refuse, and continue to attack me personally, perhaps answers the question anyway.

[rug]

25. It's not a game, trotsky.

I know this Group is a playground for you, but I do not consider your disgusting intimations a game.

So do not even attempt to accuse anyone of making personal attacks while you run up and down this thread leaving droppings intimating false things about other DUers.

[trotsky]

27. I have intimated nothing.

I have merely stated that I figured out your opinion to a question based on previous statements you've made.

Why are you attacking me so viciously, as if this is a negative thing?

[rug]

29. Then you can "merely' state what you think my position is

rather than make weaselly intimations and run away.

[trotsky]

31. It should be clear to anyone who reads this thread.

I don't need to say anything, and in fact, I'm done here.

Feel free to put in another snappy last word slamming me. I'm accustomed to your attacks.

[rug]

33. I think it's "quite clear".

You make a snide insinuation.

You get called on it.

You divert, deflect and diffuse.

And you repeat the original, unstated, unproven, insinuation.

It's quite clear.

[cleanhippie]

37. If it is not a game, then answer this. Does giving support to an institution condone its activities?

Yes or no, rug.

But you won't answer yes or no, rug. You will come up with some convoluted nonsense that dodges the question. Prove trotsky and I wrong and answer the question yes or no.

[rug]

38. I'll get back to your defective question as soon as I hear what trotsky thinks my position is.

[cleanhippie]

40. Yeah, sure you will. How expected.

[rug]

42. If it's not a game, state clearly what you intimated.

[cleanhippie]

43. If its not a game, answer the question.

Rugs response: deflection=game, yes or no answer=not a game.



Anyone wanna take bets on what the response will be?

[rug]

44. It's his intimaion, not yours.

He can answer for himself.

Do you want to take overr for him?

[cleanhippie]

45. So it's a game to you. thanks for confirming that.

[rug]

46. Not in the least. It's deadly serious.

Since he won't answer - and you keep chirping in - why don't you recite his intimation?

Surely there can't be two of you here without the courage of your opinions.

[cleanhippie]

47. Oh, it's a game to you alright.

You seem to be the only one lacking courage. But nice try.

[rug]

48. When you have a statement, get back to me.

Enjoy your hideout.

[cleanhippie]

49. When you have an answer, get back to everyone.

[rug]

50. Nope, that's not one.

You're wasting my time. Go get one from "everyone".

[cleanhippie]

51. Yes, everyone knows you have no answer.

Rounds are over.

[rug]

52. You're now making a fool of yourself.

Don't let me stop you.

[cleanhippie]

53. Nah, you got that role well covered.

Rounds are over.

[rug]

54. Carry on.

[cleanhippie]

55. Nah, rounds are over. I'm done with you.

Have a nice day.

[rug]

56. You're done all right.

[cleanhippie]

57. With you.

[rug]

58. Oh, you're not done?

I thought with all that rolling around on the floor you'd have exhausted yourself.

[Heddi]

59. So why isn't this post locked, while Onager's is?

They both have as little to do with religion as the other does

[rug]

60. Probably because one is about a group proud to put their atheism in their music

while the other is about a lurid probate fight.

[Heddi]

61. are you serious?

so it's now okay to post press releases for Christian bands here? The group is banded by atheists. I'd bet a good number of bands are. I'm not seeing how the belief, or non-belief of a musical group (or artist, or fashion designer) just by virtue of their having (or not having) such beliefs makes the topic worthy of being posted, and not locked, in this forum.

I'm not sure why you posted it at all as the article/press release has no bearing or relevance on religious issues in this country, and is only about a very small band in an area of the country (pnw) that is hardly lacking in very small bands


so why the post?

[rug]

62. I told you already.

Take it or leave it.