Author Topic: Atheists discriminated against  (Read 2758 times)

Offline RTR

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2915
Atheists discriminated against
« Reply #60 on: December 30, 2005, 03:19:11 PM »
I give up

RTR (still faithless, and athiest)
The Damned

Offline weaselsan

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1147
Atheists discriminated against
« Reply #61 on: December 30, 2005, 03:34:09 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by crowMAW
The "no religous test" is in US Constitution Article VI Section 3.  The above section of the 14th indicates that all rights given in the Consitution are applied to all US citizens regardless of State laws.


The Constitution became a living breathing evolving document after
"Roe v Wade". It does'nt matter what it clearly says. It matters who is interpreting it. Example....No private property will be taken for PUBLIC use without just compensation, could also mean... private property can be taken for private use, See how easy you can twist it. No religous test. Simple if you aren't religious there can be no test. I watch the Left on the Court, you can learn alot on how to twist the Constitution. Up to and including haveing it "emit" or give Vibes. Thats one of the reasons the "right to keep and bear arms" according to some is the right "not to keep and bear arms". A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. Gun control freaks claim that is one of the bill of rights not given to the people, but a right given to the government to maintain the Army reserves The Militia. Get it...abortions in the bill of rights but the right to bear arms is not.
« Last Edit: December 30, 2005, 03:40:19 PM by weaselsan »

Offline Gunslinger

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10084
Atheists discriminated against
« Reply #62 on: December 30, 2005, 03:42:18 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by RTR
I give up

RTR (still faithless, and athiest)


a special place in the camps for you heathen ;)

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
Atheists discriminated against
« Reply #63 on: December 30, 2005, 03:55:38 PM »
sorry RTR but you are wrong...

an agnostic is one who says... 'maybe, maybe not.. the evidince is not strong enough for me to say"

this could apply to the belief in the big bang theory or global warming..

a person who believes in god does so out of nothing more than his faith.

A person who says that there is no god even tho he can not prove that to be true and has no real evidense... is basing his belief in athiesm in nothing more than pure faith.

Now,it has been my experiance that those who profess a belief in athiesm are doing so in order to make a statement.   It is not enough for them to simply say 'there is not enough evidense for me to decide"

No, they are espousing an unreasonble and fanatic viewpoint in order to make an anti religious statement... they are every bit as fanatical in their faith as the most zealous of religious fanatics.  

This manifests itself in their need to constantly combat religious faith with their faith in athiesm.

true agnostics simply do not care either way so long as they are not unduly put upon by either set of fanatics.  True agnostics see athiests as being the exact same fanatics as the religious versions...  two sides of the same coin.

lazs

Offline weaselsan

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1147
Atheists discriminated against
« Reply #64 on: December 30, 2005, 03:56:42 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by crowMAW
The "no religous test" is in US Constitution Article VI Section 3.  The above section of the 14th indicates that all rights given in the Consitution are applied to all US citizens regardless of State laws.


If where to believe the constitution is a valid document Gay marriage is legal in all 50 States.

Section. 1.
Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.

Section. 2.
Clause 1:

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.12

Offline Toad

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18415
Always the confusion and misunderstanding....
« Reply #65 on: December 30, 2005, 04:05:02 PM »
....one more time.

   
Quote
Congress shall make no law respecting an[/u] establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.




   
Quote
January 23, 1808: Thomas Jefferson wrote to Rev. Samuel Miller saying:

    Certainly no power to prescribe any religious exercise, or to assume authority in religious discipline, has been delegated to the general government. It must then rest with the states, as far as it can be in any human authority. . .




   
Quote
Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports...And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion...reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle. It is substantially true, that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government.


    —George Washington, Farewell Address to the United States, 1796




   
Quote
We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion...Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.


    —John Adams, October 11, 1798




   
Quote
In matters of religion I have considered that its free exercise is placed by the Constitution independent of the powers of the General Government. I have therefore undertaken on no occasion to prescribe the religious exercises suited to it, but have left them, as the Constitution found them, under the direction and discipline of the church or state authorities acknowledged by the several religious societies.


    —Thomas Jefferson, Second Inaugural address, March 4, 1805



I think there's more than sufficient evidence that the First wasn't intended to remove all references to God from our government. Seems plain that it was intended to keep our government from controlling and manipulating religious practices.
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!

Offline AKS\/\/ulfe

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4287
Atheists discriminated against
« Reply #66 on: December 30, 2005, 04:20:36 PM »
Still see no valid reason to prohibit an atheist from holding office other than sheer ignorance on the behalf of those who dislike atheists due to their experience with the more vocal ones.
-SW

Offline weaselsan

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1147
Atheists discriminated against
« Reply #67 on: December 30, 2005, 04:46:29 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by lazs2
sorry RTR but you are wrong...

an agnostic is one who says... 'maybe, maybe not.. the evidince is not strong enough for me to say"

this could apply to the belief in the big bang theory or global warming..

a person who believes in god does so out of nothing more than his faith.

A person who says that there is no god even tho he can not prove that to be true and has no real evidense... is basing his belief in athiesm in nothing more than pure faith.

Now,it has been my experiance that those who profess a belief in athiesm are doing so in order to make a statement.   It is not enough for them to simply say 'there is not enough evidense for me to decide"

No, they are espousing an unreasonble and fanatic viewpoint in order to make an anti religious statement... they are every bit as fanatical in their faith as the most zealous of religious fanatics.  

This manifests itself in their need to constantly combat religious faith with their faith in athiesm.

true agnostics simply do not care either way so long as they are not unduly put upon by either set of fanatics.  True agnostics see athiests as being the exact same fanatics as the religious versions...  two sides of the same coin.

lazs



a person who believes in god does so out of nothing more than his faith

Not correct. I believe in God because of the nature of the earth. An example: The maple tree. The seed has a wing that serves as an auto rotating helicopter that flies clear of the parent tree and uses the rotation to bury itself in the earth far enough from the tree to grow. This is clearly engineering and design... That doesn't take faith...it just makes far more sense than "it came from the primordial soup."
« Last Edit: December 30, 2005, 04:49:20 PM by weaselsan »

Offline Gunslinger

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10084
Atheists discriminated against
« Reply #68 on: December 30, 2005, 04:52:40 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by AKS\/\/ulfe
Still see no valid reason to prohibit an atheist from holding office other than sheer ignorance on the behalf of those who dislike atheists due to their experience with the more vocal ones.
-SW


and I don't think anyone in this thread is disagreeing with you.  I beleive somone mentioned those to be "blue laws" such as beating your wife on the courthouse steps at noon on sunday, and getting hung for stealing a horse.  

You are smart.....a camp worker perhaps who will avoid the athiest clensing ;)

Offline Silat

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2536
Atheists discriminated against
« Reply #69 on: December 30, 2005, 04:54:20 PM »
John Ashcroft, Attorney General of the United States, recently repeated an old chestnut about America being a Christian nation whose founders were Christian gentlemen.

The claim is common among the country's fundamentalist Christians, but it is so ignorant of actual history one wonders whether it should not be taken as another serious indictment of American public education. Some readers may not be aware that Mr. Ashcroft's background includes familiarity with such arcane subjects as speaking in tongues. As for Mr. Bush, who touched the same theme in China, perhaps no comment on his grasp of history is required.
The late eighteenth century, following on the Enlightenment and waves of reaction to the violent excesses of the Reformation and counter-Reformation over the previous two centuries, was perhaps the lowest point for Christian influence ever. Virtually all educated people in Europe were deists and many were open skeptics.

America was not free of this influence despite its many Puritan immigrants. Indeed, many of the best educated citizens at this time were educated in Europe, and the small number of good libraries owned by educated people often contained the works of Enlightenment authors. Virtually all the ideas in the Declaration of Independence and even some of the words of the Constitution derive from these European sources. It is due precisely to the unique qualities of the period that we owe America's early embrace of religious tolerance. The immigrant Puritans had displayed no religious tolerance, and in fact were some of the worst fanatics from Europe.

George Washington was a deist. He was a member of the Masons, a then comparatively-new, secretive fraternal organization widely regarded as unfriendly to traditional Christianity and reflecting European secular attitudes. He did attend church regularly, but this was done with the aristocratic notion that it set an example for the lower classes, Washington being very much a planter-aristocrat (he used to refer to the independent-minded Yankee recruits in the revolution, who had had the practice of electing their officers before he was appointed as commander, as "a dirty and nasty people."). This was a time when there was an established church in Virginia, and it functioned as an important quasi-political organization.
Washington always used deistic terms like Great Providence. His writings, other than one brief note as a very young man, do not speak of Jesus, and he died, knowing he was dying, without ever calling for prayer, Bible, or minister. There is a story given by some of his best biographers shedding light on his church-going. He apparently never kneeled for prayer nor would he take communion. When one parson brought this to his attention after the service, Washington gave him the icy stare for which this aloof, emotionally-cold man was famous and never returned to that church.

Thomas Jefferson was accused publicly of being an atheist. More than any other founder, Jefferson was under the spell of European (and particularly French) thought. His writings, and references to him by friends, certainly make him sound like a private skeptic. He belonged to no church. He explicitly denied the divinity of Jesus, viewing him as a great teacher of human values. At best he was a deist referring in his private writings to God as "our god."
Jefferson who, despite high-sounding words, was something of a hypocrite on many aspects of civil liberties and particularly on slavery, was at his best on the need for religious liberty. Despite his free-thinking reputation, he formed alliances with groups like the Baptists, who deeply resented paying taxes to the established church in Virginia and won a long battle for a statute of religious liberty.
Thomas Paine, whose stirring words in _Common Sense_ contributed greatly to the revolution, was often accused of atheism because of his religious writing, but deism is closer to the truth. His later writing done in Europe, _The Age of Reason_, was regarded as scandalous by establishment-types. France, during the terror under Robespierre, turned to a new kind of state religion. This, the very brave Paine, living in Paris, also rejected, writing,

"I do not believe in the creed professed…by the Roman church, by the Greek church, by the Turkish church, by the protestant church, nor any church that I
know of. My own mind is my own church."

The great Dr. Franklin, who incidentally lived about a quarter of his life on diplomatic missions in Europe and who as a very young man had run away from a home where rigid religious principles were imposed, was a typical deist of the period. He was an active member of the first Masonic temple in America. His attitudes were so amicable to French intellectuals and society, he was embraced, as no other American has ever been, as a national figure in that country.
Alexander Hamilton, undoubtedly the most intellectually gifted of the founders other than Franklin, paid lip service to religion, but he was known during the Revolution as a rake. Later, his distinguished career in Washington's cabinet was marred by a great sexual scandal. Generally, Hamilton used religion to promote his political aims, ignoring it whenever it was convenient. In this respect, perhaps he qualifies as a thoroughly modern American version of a Christian.

Gouveneur Morris, who wrote the draft of the Constitution we all recognize from the notes of others, was an extremely worldly and aristocratic man. He was also one of Washington's most trusted confidants. He was perhaps the most rakish, womanizing diplomat America ever sent to Europe, sharing at one point a mistress with Talleyrand, the most amoral ex-cleric who ever practiced statecraft. In general, Europeans were astonished that a man so worldly and so arrogantly patrician in temperament represented the young republic for a period in France.

Abraham Lincoln, while not a founder, is the most beloved of American presidents. Lincoln's closest friend and most interesting biographer, Herndon, said flatly that Lincoln was a religious skeptic. This has always so upset America's establishment historians that Herndon has been accused of writing a distorted book, a rather ridiculous charge in view of a close friendship with his subject and twenty years spent collecting materials.
Lincoln never attended church and when he refers to god in speeches during the Civil War, it is always with words acceptable to secular, educated people who regarded the King James Bible as an important cultural and literary document apart from any claims for its sacredness.
There is reason to believe that as the bloody war continued, Lincoln, who suffered from severe depressions, turned to the Bible for consolation, especially to the story of the struggle of the Hebrews.

Lincoln was also an extremely astute politician who used every means at his command in the great battle with secession, and his references to the Almighty may well have been part of his psychological artillery. He certainly did not invoke the name of Jesus.
Patrick Henry, who incidentally opposed ratification of the Constitution, was a Christian, but he was once described by Jefferson as "an emotional volcano with little guiding intelligence." Just a little brush up on history…

John Chuckman encourages your comments: jchuckman@YellowTimes.org
+Silat
"The first time someone shows you who they are, believe them." — Maya Angelou
"Conservatism offers no redress for the present, and makes no preparation for the future." B. Disraeli
"All that serves labor serves the nation. All that harms labor is treason."

Offline Gunslinger

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10084
Atheists discriminated against
« Reply #70 on: December 30, 2005, 04:58:22 PM »
Silat did you even read the first page of this thread??????

Offline Booz

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 371
Atheists discriminated against
« Reply #71 on: December 30, 2005, 05:07:06 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by weaselsan
a person who believes in god does so out of nothing more than his faith

Not correct. I believe in God because of the nature of the earth. An example: The maple tree. The seed has a wing that serves as an auto rotating helicopter that flies clear of the parent tree and uses the rotation to bury itself in the earth far enough from the tree to grow. This is clearly engineering and design... That doesn't take faith...it just makes far more sense than "it came from the primordial soup."


  Yeah, the bannana, what a wonderful fruit, it fits my hand!!!

 I'll fix it......

   "a person who believes in god does so out of nothing more than either his faith, indoctrination or ignorance"
« Last Edit: December 30, 2005, 05:13:07 PM by Booz »

Offline Samiam

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 498
Atheists discriminated against
« Reply #72 on: December 30, 2005, 05:07:10 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
Lack of evidence does not logically prove non-existance.


ZOUNDS!!!

Could this possibly mean that a Christian can understand the concept that lack of evidence with respect to certain aspects of evolution by no means invalidates the theory and proves the existance an intelligent designer?

This is an astounding development.



Quote
A person who says that there is no god even tho he can not prove that to be true and has no real evidense... is basing his belief in athiesm in nothing more than pure faith.



Methinks that those who base their existance on a particular faith have an extremely difficult time understanding the concept of not basing anything on faith.

Atheism cannot be described as "having faith that there's no god." Atheism is a logical decision to reject any conclusion that is soley based on faith.

The discussion goes like this:

Atheist: Show me proof of your god.
Believer: That's not how it works. God cannot be proven or disproven. To seek proof defies one's faith. You must either accept God or not on faith.
Athiest: Sounds like a bunch of doublespeak to rationalize idiodic behaviour. I'm sorry, you give me no reason to believe in your god.

Notice the similarity to other nutty encounters:

Skeptic: Show me proof that feng shui will align my chi and make me prosperous and healthy.
New Age Wacko: It doesn't really work that way. You just need to feel the positive energy flowing through you. You won't feel it and it won't work if you don't believe it.
Skeptic: You are a nutjob and probably on drugs. Good day.

Is the Skeptic jumping to some alternate, equally unsubstantiatable belief - that feng shui is crap? No, he is simply chosing to guide his actions using only the rational thought that God supposedly gave him.

Offline crowMAW

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1179
Atheists discriminated against
« Reply #73 on: December 30, 2005, 05:07:34 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Gunslinger
Silat did you even read the first page of this thread??????

LOL:rofl

Offline weaselsan

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1147
Atheists discriminated against
« Reply #74 on: December 30, 2005, 05:10:06 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by AKS\/\/ulfe
Where the hell is this "hate Christians" bull**** coming from?
-SW


Actually it's not Christians...It's Extreme right wing Christians. It is one of the groups responsible for the Demise of the Democrats as the Majority party in the U.S. for over 40 years. Again, if you follow the rhetoric of some people the Extreme right wing Christians elected George Bush. How much more proof do you need that they are anti-progressive. While hate may be a little strong how about strongly disliked.