Atheism and the USA, followup

[FUNKED1]

Originally posted by Nash
The funny thing is... is that you don't see much of that. Or.... any of that.

At least I can't recall seeing the pressure applied to the government for X or Y agenda from the Council of Concerned Athiests.

.... and don't you dare try and lump in the majority of those who share religious values with atheists, just because they are against imposing those values on everyone else.

I was thinking more on a personal level than political.

[Hangtime]

That's beacuse most of us tend to respect the people that practice religion and masturbation in private.

OTOH, either practice conducted under the guise of public government tends to annoy the living crap outta me.

[Captain Virgil Hilts]

Originally posted by Nash
The funny thing is... is that you don't see much of that. Or.... any of that.

At least I can't recall seeing the pressure applied to the government for X or Y agenda from the Council of Concerned Athiests.

.... and don't you dare try and lump in the majority of those who share religious values with atheists, just because they are against imposing those values on everyone else.

That is the biggest pile of steaming B.S. I've ever seen, unless you are blind, deaf, and mute.

The atheists and the ACLU, just in recent history, have sued to have the Ten Commandments removed from any number of buildings, have sued to have the Pledge of Allegiance banned, and have sued to have a Cross removed from a war memorial cemetary. Not to mention having suing to have crosses removed from seals and emblems for cities, towns, counties, and states all across the U.S. We're not talking about suing to prevent forced religious practice, but the removal of all religious symbols and speech from all public display. God has been in government documents since the nation was founded. Suddenly, since Madelyn Murray O'Hare (however you spell it) in the sixties, after nearly 190 years of references to God being all over the government, the atheists and the ACLU have found it necessary, fashionable, and desireable to sue to have God removed from anything and everything at every opportunity. Anyone who denies that is either a fool or a liar.

In near 43 years on this planet and in this country, I have NEVER seen anyone FORCED to pray to or pay homage to any God at any time, in any court, school, or government institution. Not even here in the Bible Belt of the South. In fact, as far back as my pre school years, I've seen all sorts of exceptions and allowances made for those who choose not to acknowledge God, or any diety.

[Nash]

Originally posted by Captain Virgil Hilts
That is the biggest pile of steaming B.S. I've ever seen, unless you are blind, deaf, and mute.

The atheists and the ACLU, just in recent history, have sued...

"The atheists and the ACLU....."

Christ...

I'm willing to bet that most of the folks in the ACLU aint athiests. I sure as hell aint, and godspeed to them.

Anyone who is discomforted by the imposition of our beliefs upon them is probably an "athiest" to you.

That's messed up.... and it's not a good thing for a country to try and absorb. Don't believe me? Read a history book.

[Hangtime]

I've seen all sorts of exceptions and allowances made for those who choose not to acknowledge God, or any diety.

And therin lies the Crux. So nice that you concede that there should be 'allowances' made for those of us who won't utter the secrect passwords.

While I doubt that the ACLU expects to succeed in their suits, I'm reassured that their vigorously opposing the continued erosion of the seperation of your church's views and OUR national governments public policy has annoyed the self-annoited 'holier than thou' pulpit thumpers that wanna impose their beliefs where they don't, by law belong.

Now, I still stand, twice a month and repeat the Pledge of Alliegance, including all it's original lines, as I learned it in the early 1950's. It has meaning to me, and the sentiment of 'under God' affects not one little bit the welling in pride that suffuses myself and everone else in the room.

But, that's not what's at issue; is it? What's at issue is wether or not I'm as worthy as a religionist to suck air and consume the resources of the planet; ain't it? It's about the ugly propensity of religionists to legislate their creed into policy, to influence the public education system to subvert early the minds of our children...

So yeah; I'm glad the ACLU is harrasing the hell outta the religious incursion  into the polity of government and education. I'm pretty sure we need 'em to keep making sure of our 'exceptions and allowances made for those who choose not to acknowledge God, or any diety'.

[indy007]

Originally posted by Gunslinger
While I'm not a strong advocate that the constitution is a wholey "christian" I do beleive it was written specifically for a moral and religious people and based on those judeo christian values.  Not so much in as "Thou shall have no other gods besides Me..." but more or less that it's wrong to murder or lie.  In other words an imoral people would abuse said rights granted to them thus negating the reason entirly to have a constitution.  

Just my 2 pennies on this one... I disagree that it was based on christian values. Morality came first, religion came second. Religion codified moral behavior. The belief is that humans have rights and values in and of themselves. These rights and values are not grounded in religion, or any supernatural force, but in themselves. These rights stand alone. We deserve life, liberty, and happiness, not because God said so, but because we're human. These rights exist because we say they exist, and that's all that's needed.

Here's the inherrent problem, which can be found in Euthyphro's Dilemma... "The point which I should first wish to understand is whether the pious or holy is beloved by the gods because it is holy, or holy because it is beloved of the gods?" The inherrent problem is that most religion state moral principles are and must be linked to a God or gods to be absolute & eternal. A problem exists over whether God embraces moral principles naturally occurring and external to him because they are good (holy), or that these moral principles are good because he created them. It's one or the other. I happen to believe morality transcends religion.

[Captain Virgil Hilts]

Originally posted by Nash
"The atheists and the ACLU....."

Christ...

I'm willing to bet that most of the folks in the ACLU aint athiests. I sure as hell aint, and godspeed to them.

Anyone who is discomforted by the imposition of our beliefs upon them is probably an "athiest" to you.

That's messed up.... and it's not a good thing for a country to try and absorb. Don't believe me? Read a history book.

I never said the ACLU was atheist. I said they sued on behalf of atheists. Learn to read, and read what is written, not what you want to see.

No, just because someone is uncomfortable with what I believe it does not make me think they are atheists. So, again, you are so completely wrong it is not funny. Evidently, and not surprising, you know not of what you speak.

Oh, and I'm no Bible thumper either. I have been inside a church about 5 times in the last ten years. ONCE was strictly of my own choosing, a little more than a year ago, two days after my father died after a long and difficult illness. The other times were funerals and weddings. So no, I'm no holier than thou Bible thumper.


Congratulations on having enough arrogance and ignorance all in one head to completely misjudge me and miss grasping the points of the post.

[Captain Virgil Hilts]

Originally posted by Hangtime
And therin lies the Crux. So nice that you concede that there should be 'allowances' made for those of us who won't utter the secrect passwords.

While I doubt that the ACLU expects to succeed in their suits, I'm reassured that their vigorously opposing the continued erosion of the seperation of your church's views and OUR national governments public policy has annoyed the self-annoited 'holier than thou' pulpit thumpers that wanna impose their beliefs where they don't, by law belong.

Now, I still stand, twice a month and repeat the Pledge of Alliegance, including all it's original lines, as I learned it in the early 1950's. It has meaning to me, and the sentiment of 'under God' affects not one little bit the welling in pride that suffuses myself and everone else in the room.

But, that's not what's at issue; is it? What's at issue is wether or not I'm as worthy as a religionist to suck air and consume the resources of the planet; ain't it? It's about the ugly propensity of religionists to legislate their creed into policy, to influence the public education system to subvert early the minds of our children...

So yeah; I'm glad the ACLU is harrasing the hell outta the religious incursion  into the polity of government and education. I'm pretty sure we need 'em to keep making sure of our 'exceptions and allowances made for those who choose not to acknowledge God, or any diety'.

The position of the ACLU and the people on whose behalf they sue is that religion is forced upon those who are not religious. The fact that no one forces them to do anything religious is evidently irrelevant, to them and you.

I have no church. I have not been a member of any church since the early eighties. As I stated in my reply to Nash, I've been to church ONCE in the past 20 years by my own choice alone, two days after my father died. So again, you are wrong.

I don't give a damn whether you are religious or not. Don't go thinking you are that important to me. You are not. I do give a damn that attempts are made to change the very foundation on which the country was built. Like it or not, the core beliefs of the Judeo Christian religious beliefs are what the laws in this country are based on. And don't go blathering about the Christians of the era hating Jews. It doesn't matter. The difference is that Christians embrace all of the Bible, and Jews only the Old Testament. And Christians who hate Jews are no more Christians than Muslims who hate Jews are Muslims. They are a segment of a group that is wrong, and not the whole group. Nothing more.

The problem with religion isn't religion, it is with some of the people who practice it, and how they do so. Religion is like a firearm. Whether it is used for good or ill depends soley on who is using it.

[indy007]

...I knew I shoulda never mentioned the ACLU.

[lazs2]

sheesh... we are talking about three completely seperate things here...

We are talking athiesm... we are talking a nation that was founded on a belief in godand then.... we are talking christianity.

I agree with Jefferson in that there is a god and that he gave us human rights that no religion or government can take away.   I also agree that religions have acted badly.

I agree that athiests have acted badly...  

I agree that we should not let the government establish any religion but that a belief in god is no more of a "religion" than athiesm is.   Saying that you believe in a god does not make you religious any more than subaru saying he has a strong faith based belief that there is no god makes him religious.

One could argue I suppose that saying that we have god given rights is religous but in that context I don't think Jefferson or any founder would have a problem with it.

I do not know of any founder who was an athiest or even an agnostic.

lazs

[lazs2]

Oh... and subaru.... seems the court agrees with me that athiesm is a religion..

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=45874

lazs

[Jackal1]

Originally posted by Captain Virgil Hilts
In near 43 years on this planet and in this country, I have NEVER seen anyone FORCED to pray to or pay homage to any God at any time, in any court, school, or government institution. Not even here in the Bible Belt of the South. In fact, as far back as my pre school years, I've seen all sorts of exceptions and allowances made for those who choose not to acknowledge God, or any diety.

 Agreed.

[midnight Target]

Originally posted by Captain Virgil Hilts
In near 43 years on this planet and in this country, I have NEVER seen anyone FORCED to pray to or pay homage to any God at any time, in any court, school, or government institution.

1. Epperson v. Arkansas the supreme court considered an Arkansas statute that restricted the teaching of evolution.
2. Indiana, Kansas and many other States prohibit alcohol sales on Sundays.
3. Intelligent Design - nuff said.
4. Nationally funded "Abstinance only until marriage" programs.
5. In Detroit a Catholic man was criminally punished for not completing a Pentecostal drug rehabilitation program.

That took all of 5 minutes.

[Hangtime]

The position of the ACLU and the people on whose behalf they sue is that religion is forced upon those who are not religious. The fact that no one forces them to do anything religious is evidently irrelevant, to them and you.

Virgil, I've got better than a decade on you age-wise. And in the Los Angeles County School system, religion was most definitely crammed down my throat, especially in grammer school.

In 1962 the Supreme Court ruled that mandated prayer be excluded from the curriculum and a few years later excluded bible reading as well. Thank you, ACLU.

Next, if piety and trips to church is a dick measuring contest... mines bigger than yours. Big whoop. Yer right.. who cares? Further.. it's nobodys business; and it ain't part of the debate. The debate remains, 'What place does religion have in government policy'.. and I side with the ACLU and the Court. The fact that religion is being forced outta the governments policy statements is a good thing in my view.. I thorughly support the notion that the freedom to practice religion is guaranteed to the people.. but not to the government.

On that, I'm pretty sure we both agree.

History has demonstrated time, and time again that almost any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so, and will follow it by suppressing opposition, subverting all education to seize early the minds of the young, and by killing, locking up, or driving underground all heretics. Examine the Islamic Fundamentalist nations for modern proof of this.

I firmly believe that without the organized efforts of the ACLU to counter the organized efforts of religion to subvert the government we'd be a lot further down the path of being a 'Christian' nation in arms against others who worship differently.. again; thank you; ACLU.

[Cthen]

For those of you that believe the Ten Commandments belong in courtrooms and the "Cross" is appropriate on government documents please consider this.

Change {God vs. Government} to {Black vs White} just for the sake of arguement.

I see no difference between these 2 lines ...... 10 commandments being ok as the thinking that 12 white male jury members, 1 white male judge, and 1 black defendant is ok.

Scary for the black guy
Scary for the non Believer


This thread is PROOF that Freedom of Religion is nescessary. Can you imagine all  the further violence and bloodshed, that WOULD have occured, all in the name of Jesus?  

Much of the professing of faith and god in earlier times was fear based on the fact you would be harrassed, terrorised, harmed, and economically boycotted by   the good "christians" of Anytown, USA.

What "right wing politicians" are trying to do today with "God" is the reason I believe we should hold near and dear our right to Keep and Bear Arms.

Be ever vigilant my fellow Americans  


Cthen