Liberal Atheists are at it again.

[Tassman]

You are completely daft, school prayer does not violate the Constitution - A school having prayer is NOT CONGRESS making a LAW. No matter how leftist courts bastardized the Amendment, the Amendment only prevents congress from establishing a religion by LAW.

You're getting hysterical. Allowing public Christian prayer in schools clearly implies that Christianity is the defacto established religion. This is contrary to the intent of the Constitution...as the Supreme Court appropriately ruled in its 1985 decision in Wallace v. Jaffree.

[Tassman]

Yes, it is.

Atheism is no more a religion than not collecting stamps is a hobby...as has been discussed before.

[Tassman]

It's interesting to me the number of atheists who recognize the inherent depravity and hopelessness of their worldview

I'm sorry MM, but I have no sense of "inherent depravity and hopelessness". I'm sure you wish I did and then you could give me the 'good news' of living eternally with Jesus.

and try to address this deficiency by borrowing from Christianity despite its incompatibility with atheism.

It’s the other way around. Religion borrows from the evolved characteristics shared by all humans such as cooperation, reciprocity, altruism and conformity to the rules of the community. These qualities evolved as a method of restraining individual selfishness and building more cooperative groups and developed before religion did.

[tabibito]

What do you think reading is? I’ll tell you. It is a cognitive process of decoding symbols to derive meaning. What you are pointing to here is the unfortunate fact that trainee Christians cannot read the Bible.

True enough - critical function seems to shut down when a Bible gets opened.

The reason of course is that a special interpretation is required to extract the meaning that Christians want to extract

Hardly: the problem is that people tend to read with other people's tongues. People have to be cajoled into reading with their own eyes, and evaluating with their own intelligence.

and the trainee therefore has to be indoctrinated in that interpretation. The meaning is manufactured by the faith and it can be rejected out of hand for that reason.

Very strange. A lot of time and work is spent on innoculating people against just that kind of thing.

[Cow Poke]

Really, and who is the god that atheists are venerating?

Your own selves.

[Psychic Missile]

Religious minorities might benefit from the protections of the First Amendment, but that's not its express purpose.

You said that the idea that "the establishment clause's purpose is to protect religious minorities" is so absurd so as to render any following argument not worth reading. I'm just trying to figure out your reasoning.

[Cow Poke]

The religioso like to think that we atheists are as bad as they are. We’re not. Something is a religion if it holds a position regarding “the divine” and usually “the afterlife”.

Absolutely. And, on these positions, the atheists are "double negative".

These things are not really part of the atheists lexicon; lacking adequate definition.

So why do atheists come up with all kinds of derogatory terms for the things we hold dear? If you simply don't believe them, ignore them. But to attack them? You are driven by your own religious fervor.

The atheist view tends to be that we have no idea what you religioso are talking about and, by the way, neither do you, despite your protestations to the contrary.

Sorry to butt in.

It's OK, you can pretend you're not part of a religion, while preaching against the "false religion" of Christianity.

Why else are you here?

[Cow Poke]

Atheism is no more a religion than not collecting stamps is a hobby...as has been discussed before.

Unless, of course, the "not collecting stamps" people got together to prevent stamp collectors from pursuing their interests in public.

So, tell me, Tassy.... why are you and your fellow atheists on a Christian website fighting Christianity? Perhaps you should take up a hobby. Collect stamps!

And you seem to be under the goofy impression that just because something has been "discussed here", that means it's settled. That's just downright idiotic.

[seer]

You're getting hysterical. Allowing public Christian prayer in schools clearly implies that Christianity is the defacto established religion. This is contrary to the intent of the Constitution...as the Supreme Court appropriately ruled in its 1985 decision in Wallace v. Jaffree.

No Tass, again, it does not violate the Constitution as written, that Amendment was never meant to prevent such things as school prayer or religious displays on public property. There wasn't even that intent by the Founders given what they allowed and even did. Just because 200 years later liberal unconstitutional judges changed the meaning and intent does not make them right.

[Sparko]

You're getting hysterical. Allowing public Christian prayer in schools clearly implies that Christianity is the defacto established religion. This is contrary to the intent of the Constitution...as the Supreme Court appropriately ruled in its 1985 decision in Wallace v. Jaffree.

I find it hilarious and extremely arrogant that liberals today try to ignore 200 years of history and what the founding fathers and the US government actually showing what they meant by the constitution and bill of rights by allowing prayer in school and religious displays on government property --- and claim they now know what they "really meant" and they really meant that there should be a complete separation of church and state.

If they actually believed that back then, then why did they not implement it that way for 200 years?

[Cow Poke]

I find it hilarious and extremely arrogant that liberals today try to ignore 200 years of history and what the founding fathers and the US government actually showing what they meant by the constitution and bill of rights by allowing prayer in school and religious displays on government property --- and claim they now know what they "really meant" and they really meant that there should be a complete separation of church and state.

If they actually believed that back then, then why did they not implement it that way for 200 years?

I'm just waiting for them to demand that all the Crosses, Stars of David, and other "religious artifacts" be removed from Arlington National Cemetery, and other Veteran's cemeteries.

VetCemeteries.jpg

[Sparko]

I'm just waiting for them to demand that all the Crosses, Stars of David, and other "religious artifacts" be removed from Arlington National Cemetery, and other Veteran's cemeteries.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]24555[/ATTACH]

I believe they already tried that and the supreme court said that since they were individual grave markers and they allowed various religions that it was OK.

At least for now. who knows what the liberal nutjobs will try in the future?They always say "we are not trying to take away your ____ - we merely want to control them. your slippery slope arguments are ridiculous and what you claim will never happen" -- then it happens and if you try to say "we told you so" they say "you bigots!" and move on to the next slope.

[Roy]

Does a State Church, say in England, stop other religions or religious minorities from worshiping as they see fit?

Frequently. When the US declared independence it was illegal to conduct a Catholic mass in England. Saudi Arabia, which has adopted Islam as a state church, currently forbids any other religion.

Those drafting the constitution and the bill of rights knew that state churches could and did stifle other religions.

[JimL]

Your own selves.

Wow, you think of us as gods CP? No, atheists don't venerate gods CP, we are, for the most part, realists, and don't believe in such things as ghosts, spirits or gods.

[Cow Poke]

Wow, you think of us as gods CP?

The fact that you came to that conclusion from what I've said shows how far you are from any form of higher intelligence. So, no worries, Jimmy - nobody thinks you're a god.

No, atheists don't venerate gods CP, we are,

So, you're finally admitting that you've been deceptive about your claim to be an "Agnostic"? You're coming out of the closet, Jimmy?