Should atheists be allowed to express their beliefs (or lack thereof) in public?

[rightwinger]

I can see a rationale for declaring atheism or the expressive of immoral and degenerate atheistic beliefs in public places an offense against the state, the public, and our common standards of decency.

Given the interrelation between anti-intellectual atheistic filth, and the moral and ethical vices and degeneracies it promotes and spreads, like a moral plague of sorts - justifying aberrant practices such as rape, murder, child molestation, pornography addiction, anti-intellectualism and cultural philistinism of sorts, not only an offense against God or the Supreme Being, but against society, our Common Law, and its religious principles and morals upon which it is founded and developed, such as the Golden Rule, respect for human's individuality, property, autonomy, family, and so forth.

Since atheists and other intellectual and moral degenerates renounce these things, favoring the moral nihilism and hedonism of evildoers like De Sade and Stirner, I'd argue that the very existence of an atheist, bold and damned enough to express his filty and immoral views and obesity in the public eye, is an offense in and of itself, and no state nor nation which values its own vitality, morality, decency, and power would have any reason to tolerate them at all.

In every 1st world nation, openly identifying as an atheist might very well be made as socially and morally repugnant and unacceptable as openly identifying as a pedophile, a rapist, a Nazi, a racist or racial supremacist, a terrorist.

Merely allowing an atheist to live at all, yet alone have the gall to spread his filth in the vicinity of morally superior men, women and children is more than he arguably even deserves, and more than many nations, past and present, would afford him - by the virtue of his atheism and depravity, he or she more or less renounces his humanity, his claims or factious "right" to even be considered "human" at all by superior members of society, rather being more akin to a feral and odious beast, to be tamed, scurried, shamed, and forced into the bare minimum of socially acceptable standards and behavior which otherwise would not differentiate him and his ilk from any other rapid and postulant beast, debatedly more worthy of being shot or hunted, than allowed to remain alive at all, at the expense of the oxygen of society's betters, let alone God or the Supreme Being itself.

One who claims to be an atheist, yet isn't raping, murdering, tormenting children, simply isn't very good at being one, whereas the opposite of course could be said of a Christian, a Buddhist, or even a Muslim, making one wonder if an atheist should be held on level of contempt beneath even that of an Islamist terrorist, and that the common despisement of such by everyone from good Christian men and women, Buddhist monks, and even said Islamic terrorists, is proof of their ultimate moral worthlessness in the cosmos, akin to feces, maggots, or bacteria in need of sanitation and desposal, more so than anything worth being called "life" to begin with in the hierarchy of God.

Most civilized societies are abandoning Christianity.

Christianity is now becoming a crutch for poorly educated Third World Nations

That is rather silly and naïve an assertion.

It's certainly not the more civilized aspects of said societies which are abandoning it; you'd have to abandon the entire Common Law system and its development from older systems, including religious ones, and I don't see that happening anytime soon, no.

As per the predictions I've seen, it is atheism which naturally and rightfully seems to be dying worldwide.

Organized religion is a thing of the past in Europe
In the United States, young people are abandoning the faith of their parents

As people become more educated, embracing religion becomes unnecessary

But don’t get discouraged. Your Christian beliefs are still going strong in uneducated regions of Africa and South America

Again, you're an idiot, the Common Law system in America and Britian is a "religious" system, developed from older legal systems and incorporating religious principles and "Christian" ones such as the "Golden Rule" as the foundations of modern societies and civilization.

Many atheistic worldviews potentially legitimize rape, murder, child molestation, and things like; being totally at odds with the Common Law and its moral and legal philosophy by default, such as many would rape and murder unabated if not for fear of the law.

"Religion" in that sense, is imposed on you and yours on a daily basis, denying you the freedom to rape, to murder, to plunder, to molest children (things which atheists such as De Sade fantasized about) and were it not I believe many of you would likely do aberrant things, were it not for fear of it.

Oh just stop it...

Our laws are much more compassionate than biblical eye for an eye you advocate

 

[Syriusly]

I can see a rationale for declaring atheism or the expressive of immoral and degenerate atheistic beliefs in public places an offense against the state, the public, and our common standards of decency.

Given the interrelation between anti-intellectual atheistic filth, and the moral and ethical vices and degeneracies it promotes and spreads, like a moral plague of sorts - justifying aberrant practices such as rape, murder, child molestation, pornography addiction, anti-intellectualism and cultural philistinism of sorts, not only an offense against God or the Supreme Being, but against society, our Common Law, and its religious principles and morals upon which it is founded and developed, such as the Golden Rule, respect for human's individuality, property, autonomy, family, and so forth.

Since atheists and other intellectual and moral degenerates renounce these things, favoring the moral nihilism and hedonism of evildoers like De Sade and Stirner, I'd argue that the very existence of an atheist, bold and damned enough to express his filty and immoral views and obesity in the public eye, is an offense in and of itself, and no state nor nation which values its own vitality, morality, decency, and power would have any reason to tolerate them at all.

In every 1st world nation, openly identifying as an atheist might very well be made as socially and morally repugnant and unacceptable as openly identifying as a pedophile, a rapist, a Nazi, a racist or racial supremacist, a terrorist.

Merely allowing an atheist to live at all, yet alone have the gall to spread his filth in the vicinity of morally superior men, women and children is more than he arguably even deserves, and more than many nations, past and present, would afford him - by the virtue of his atheism and depravity, he or she more or less renounces his humanity, his claims or factious "right" to even be considered "human" at all by superior members of society, rather being more akin to a feral and odious beast, to be tamed, scurried, shamed, and forced into the bare minimum of socially acceptable standards and behavior which otherwise would not differentiate him and his ilk from any other rapid and postulant beast, debatedly more worthy of being shot or hunted, than allowed to remain alive at all, at the expense of the oxygen of society's betters, let alone God or the Supreme Being itself.

One who claims to be an atheist, yet isn't raping, murdering, tormenting children, simply isn't very good at being one, whereas the opposite of course could be said of a Christian, a Buddhist, or even a Muslim, making one wonder if an atheist should be held on level of contempt beneath even that of an Islamist terrorist, and that the common despisement of such by everyone from good Christian men and women, Buddhist monks, and even said Islamic terrorists, is proof of their ultimate moral worthlessness in the cosmos, akin to feces, maggots, or bacteria in need of sanitation and desposal, more so than anything worth being called "life" to begin with in the hierarchy of God.

Troll post.

 

[Questioner]

I can see a rationale for declaring atheism or the expressive of immoral and degenerate atheistic beliefs in public places an offense against the state, the public, and our common standards of decency.

Given the interrelation between anti-intellectual atheistic filth, and the moral and ethical vices and degeneracies it promotes and spreads, like a moral plague of sorts - justifying aberrant practices such as rape, murder, child molestation, pornography addiction, anti-intellectualism and cultural philistinism of sorts, not only an offense against God or the Supreme Being, but against society, our Common Law, and its religious principles and morals upon which it is founded and developed, such as the Golden Rule, respect for human's individuality, property, autonomy, family, and so forth.

Since atheists and other intellectual and moral degenerates renounce these things, favoring the moral nihilism and hedonism of evildoers like De Sade and Stirner, I'd argue that the very existence of an atheist, bold and damned enough to express his filty and immoral views and obesity in the public eye, is an offense in and of itself, and no state nor nation which values its own vitality, morality, decency, and power would have any reason to tolerate them at all.

In every 1st world nation, openly identifying as an atheist might very well be made as socially and morally repugnant and unacceptable as openly identifying as a pedophile, a rapist, a Nazi, a racist or racial supremacist, a terrorist.

Merely allowing an atheist to live at all, yet alone have the gall to spread his filth in the vicinity of morally superior men, women and children is more than he arguably even deserves, and more than many nations, past and present, would afford him - by the virtue of his atheism and depravity, he or she more or less renounces his humanity, his claims or factious "right" to even be considered "human" at all by superior members of society, rather being more akin to a feral and odious beast, to be tamed, scurried, shamed, and forced into the bare minimum of socially acceptable standards and behavior which otherwise would not differentiate him and his ilk from any other rapid and postulant beast, debatedly more worthy of being shot or hunted, than allowed to remain alive at all, at the expense of the oxygen of society's betters, let alone God or the Supreme Being itself.

One who claims to be an atheist, yet isn't raping, murdering, tormenting children, simply isn't very good at being one, whereas the opposite of course could be said of a Christian, a Buddhist, or even a Muslim, making one wonder if an atheist should be held on level of contempt beneath even that of an Islamist terrorist, and that the common despisement of such by everyone from good Christian men and women, Buddhist monks, and even said Islamic terrorists, is proof of their ultimate moral worthlessness in the cosmos, akin to feces, maggots, or bacteria in need of sanitation and desposal, more so than anything worth being called "life" to begin with in the hierarchy of God.

Most civilized societies are abandoning Christianity.

Christianity is now becoming a crutch for poorly educated Third World Nations

That is rather silly and naïve an assertion.

It's certainly not the more civilized aspects of said societies which are abandoning it; you'd have to abandon the entire Common Law system and its development from older systems, including religious ones, and I don't see that happening anytime soon, no.

As per the predictions I've seen, it is atheism which naturally and rightfully seems to be dying worldwide.

Organized religion is a thing of the past in Europe
In the United States, young people are abandoning the faith of their parents

As people become more educated, embracing religion becomes unnecessary

But don’t get discouraged. Your Christian beliefs are still going strong in uneducated regions of Africa and South America

Again, you're an idiot, the Common Law system in America and Britian is a "religious" system, developed from older legal systems and incorporating religious principles and "Christian" ones such as the "Golden Rule" as the foundations of modern societies and civilization.

Many atheistic worldviews potentially legitimize rape, murder, child molestation, and things like; being totally at odds with the Common Law and its moral and legal philosophy by default, such as many would rape and murder unabated if not for fear of the law.

"Religion" in that sense, is imposed on you and yours on a daily basis, denying you the freedom to rape, to murder, to plunder, to molest children (things which atheists such as De Sade fantasized about) and were it not I believe many of you would likely do aberrant things, were it not for fear of it.

Oh just stop it...

Our laws are much more compassionate than biblical eye for an eye you advocate

An eye for an eye is not Biblical, it's Babylonian - read up on your history of legal systems; the Iron Age system of Israel was a historical evolution up from more primitivie systems, such as Bablyonian law.

Regardless, the contemporary Common Law is based on religious axioms, such as the Golden Rule; many atheists and atheistic worldviews, which incorporate moral or existential nihilism are not compatible with it, nor cults like LeVayan Satanism which advocate "revenge", or the very "eye for eye" concept you refer to, they should banned.

 

[Act413]

I can see a rationale for declaring atheism or the expressive of immoral and degenerate atheistic beliefs in public places an offense against the state, the public, and our common standards of decency.

Given the interrelation between anti-intellectual atheistic filth, and the moral and ethical vices and degeneracies it promotes and spreads, like a moral plague of sorts - justifying aberrant practices such as rape, murder, child molestation, pornography addiction, anti-intellectualism and cultural philistinism of sorts, not only an offense against God or the Supreme Being, but against society, our Common Law, and its religious principles and morals upon which it is founded and developed, such as the Golden Rule, respect for human's individuality, property, autonomy, family, and so forth.

Since atheists and other intellectual and moral degenerates renounce these things, favoring the moral nihilism and hedonism of evildoers like De Sade and Stirner, I'd argue that the very existence of an atheist, bold and damned enough to express his filty and immoral views and obesity in the public eye, is an offense in and of itself, and no state nor nation which values its own vitality, morality, decency, and power would have any reason to tolerate them at all.

In every 1st world nation, openly identifying as an atheist might very well be made as socially and morally repugnant and unacceptable as openly identifying as a pedophile, a rapist, a Nazi, a racist or racial supremacist, a terrorist.

Merely allowing an atheist to live at all, yet alone have the gall to spread his filth in the vicinity of morally superior men, women and children is more than he arguably even deserves, and more than many nations, past and present, would afford him - by the virtue of his atheism and depravity, he or she more or less renounces his humanity, his claims or factious "right" to even be considered "human" at all by superior members of society, rather being more akin to a feral and odious beast, to be tamed, scurried, shamed, and forced into the bare minimum of socially acceptable standards and behavior which otherwise would not differentiate him and his ilk from any other rapid and postulant beast, debatedly more worthy of being shot or hunted, than allowed to remain alive at all, at the expense of the oxygen of society's betters, let alone God or the Supreme Being itself.

One who claims to be an atheist, yet isn't raping, murdering, tormenting children, simply isn't very good at being one, whereas the opposite of course could be said of a Christian, a Buddhist, or even a Muslim, making one wonder if an atheist should be held on level of contempt beneath even that of an Islamist terrorist, and that the common despisement of such by everyone from good Christian men and women, Buddhist monks, and even said Islamic terrorists, is proof of their ultimate moral worthlessness in the cosmos, akin to feces, maggots, or bacteria in need of sanitation and desposal, more so than anything worth being called "life" to begin with in the hierarchy of God.

Most civilized societies are abandoning Christianity.

Christianity is now becoming a crutch for poorly educated Third World Nations

That is rather silly and naïve an assertion.

It's certainly not the more civilized aspects of said societies which are abandoning it; you'd have to abandon the entire Common Law system and its development from older systems, including religious ones, and I don't see that happening anytime soon, no.

As per the predictions I've seen, it is atheism which naturally and rightfully seems to be dying worldwide.

Organized religion is a thing of the past in Europe
In the United States, young people are abandoning the faith of their parents

As people become more educated, embracing religion becomes unnecessary

But don’t get discouraged. Your Christian beliefs are still going strong in uneducated regions of Africa and South America

Again, you're an idiot, the Common Law system in America and Britian is a "religious" system, developed from older legal systems and incorporating religious principles and "Christian" ones such as the "Golden Rule" as the foundations of modern societies and civilization.

Many atheistic worldviews potentially legitimize rape, murder, child molestation, and things like; being totally at odds with the Common Law and its moral and legal philosophy by default, such as many would rape and murder unabated if not for fear of the law.

"Religion" in that sense, is imposed on you and yours on a daily basis, denying you the freedom to rape, to murder, to plunder, to molest children (things which atheists such as De Sade fantasized about) and were it not I believe many of you would likely do aberrant things, were it not for fear of it.

Oh just stop it...

Our laws are much more compassionate than biblical eye for an eye you advocate

I can see where you are coming from. I believe in free speech and my faith is my faith and your beliefs are your beliefs. I don't really believe that somebody who is atheist would be more likely to perform abhorrent actions like rape or murder. I believe this because even if you don't believe in Jesus, He is still in an atheists life as he is in a christians. My question is where are you coming from on your comment there about compassion?

 

[rightwinger]

Most civilized societies are abandoning Christianity.

Christianity is now becoming a crutch for poorly educated Third World Nations

That is rather silly and naïve an assertion.

It's certainly not the more civilized aspects of said societies which are abandoning it; you'd have to abandon the entire Common Law system and its development from older systems, including religious ones, and I don't see that happening anytime soon, no.

As per the predictions I've seen, it is atheism which naturally and rightfully seems to be dying worldwide.

Organized religion is a thing of the past in Europe
In the United States, young people are abandoning the faith of their parents

As people become more educated, embracing religion becomes unnecessary

But don’t get discouraged. Your Christian beliefs are still going strong in uneducated regions of Africa and South America

Again, you're an idiot, the Common Law system in America and Britian is a "religious" system, developed from older legal systems and incorporating religious principles and "Christian" ones such as the "Golden Rule" as the foundations of modern societies and civilization.

Many atheistic worldviews potentially legitimize rape, murder, child molestation, and things like; being totally at odds with the Common Law and its moral and legal philosophy by default, such as many would rape and murder unabated if not for fear of the law.

"Religion" in that sense, is imposed on you and yours on a daily basis, denying you the freedom to rape, to murder, to plunder, to molest children (things which atheists such as De Sade fantasized about) and were it not I believe many of you would likely do aberrant things, were it not for fear of it.

Oh just stop it...

Our laws are much more compassionate than biblical eye for an eye you advocate

I can see where you are coming from. I believe in free speech and my faith is my faith and your beliefs are your beliefs. I don't really believe that somebody who is atheist would be more likely to perform abhorrent actions like rape or murder. I believe this because even if you don't believe in Jesus, He is still in an atheists life as he is in a christians. My question is where are you coming from on your comment there about compassion?

Compassion in opposing capital punishment
Compassion in supporting gay rights

 

[Act413]

That is rather silly and naïve an assertion.

It's certainly not the more civilized aspects of said societies which are abandoning it; you'd have to abandon the entire Common Law system and its development from older systems, including religious ones, and I don't see that happening anytime soon, no.

As per the predictions I've seen, it is atheism which naturally and rightfully seems to be dying worldwide.

Organized religion is a thing of the past in Europe
In the United States, young people are abandoning the faith of their parents

As people become more educated, embracing religion becomes unnecessary

But don’t get discouraged. Your Christian beliefs are still going strong in uneducated regions of Africa and South America

Again, you're an idiot, the Common Law system in America and Britian is a "religious" system, developed from older legal systems and incorporating religious principles and "Christian" ones such as the "Golden Rule" as the foundations of modern societies and civilization.

Many atheistic worldviews potentially legitimize rape, murder, child molestation, and things like; being totally at odds with the Common Law and its moral and legal philosophy by default, such as many would rape and murder unabated if not for fear of the law.

"Religion" in that sense, is imposed on you and yours on a daily basis, denying you the freedom to rape, to murder, to plunder, to molest children (things which atheists such as De Sade fantasized about) and were it not I believe many of you would likely do aberrant things, were it not for fear of it.

Oh just stop it...

Our laws are much more compassionate than biblical eye for an eye you advocate

I can see where you are coming from. I believe in free speech and my faith is my faith and your beliefs are your beliefs. I don't really believe that somebody who is atheist would be more likely to perform abhorrent actions like rape or murder. I believe this because even if you don't believe in Jesus, He is still in an atheists life as he is in a christians. My question is where are you coming from on your comment there about compassion?

Compassion in opposing capital punishment
Compassion in supporting gay rights

Ok, Compassion is
a sympathetic pity and concern for the sufferings or misfortunes of others. Which if you read what Jesus taught it us full of compassion. Jesus said that we should instead of following, eye for an eye as moral precept(it was a guideline for regulating the procedure of the public magistrate) that we should instead be compassionate and have a more loving approach to those who seek to harm us i.e turn the other cheek. So with this in mind is your negative connotation towards Christian beliefs based on biblical truths or, from media showcasing hate and maybe some personal negative experiences with people?

 

[ding]

Christianity is slowly dying
As a religion, it has been surpassed by Islam

The birth rates of atheists say they will die out.

 

[Lysistrata]

I can see a rationale for declaring atheism or the expressive of immoral and degenerate atheistic beliefs in public places an offense against the state, the public, and our common standards of decency.

Given the interrelation between anti-intellectual atheistic filth, and the moral and ethical vices and degeneracies it promotes and spreads, like a moral plague of sorts - justifying aberrant practices such as rape, murder, child molestation, pornography addiction, anti-intellectualism and cultural philistinism of sorts, not only an offense against God or the Supreme Being, but against society, our Common Law, and its religious principles and morals upon which it is founded and developed, such as the Golden Rule, respect for human's individuality, property, autonomy, family, and so forth.

Since atheists and other intellectual and moral degenerates renounce these things, favoring the moral nihilism and hedonism of evildoers like De Sade and Stirner, I'd argue that the very existence of an atheist, bold and damned enough to express his filty and immoral views and obesity in the public eye, is an offense in and of itself, and no state nor nation which values its own vitality, morality, decency, and power would have any reason to tolerate them at all.

In every 1st world nation, openly identifying as an atheist might very well be made as socially and morally repugnant and unacceptable as openly identifying as a pedophile, a rapist, a Nazi, a racist or racial supremacist, a terrorist.

Merely allowing an atheist to live at all, yet alone have the gall to spread his filth in the vicinity of morally superior men, women and children is more than he arguably even deserves, and more than many nations, past and present, would afford him - by the virtue of his atheism and depravity, he or she more or less renounces his humanity, his claims or factious "right" to even be considered "human" at all by superior members of society, rather being more akin to a feral and odious beast, to be tamed, scurried, shamed, and forced into the bare minimum of socially acceptable standards and behavior which otherwise would not differentiate him and his ilk from any other rapid and postulant beast, debatedly more worthy of being shot or hunted, than allowed to remain alive at all, at the expense of the oxygen of society's betters, let alone God or the Supreme Being itself.

One who claims to be an atheist, yet isn't raping, murdering, tormenting children, simply isn't very good at being one, whereas the opposite of course could be said of a Christian, a Buddhist, or even a Muslim, making one wonder if an atheist should be held on level of contempt beneath even that of an Islamist terrorist, and that the common despisement of such by everyone from good Christian men and women, Buddhist monks, and even said Islamic terrorists, is proof of their ultimate moral worthlessness in the cosmos, akin to feces, maggots, or bacteria in need of sanitation and desposal, more so than anything worth being called "life" to begin with in the hierarchy of God.

We have freedom of religion here in this country. If someone concludes that there is no Supreme Being, they shouldn't be silenced. Moreover, we have heard quite enough already from people who loudly proclaim that they believe in a Supreme Being, but then speak and act like the scum they are. Here this, trump administration???

 

[Vandalshandle]

No Evangelicals should not be allowed to be in politics or be street preachers.

Eventually the false dictomy between "politics" and "religion" should merely be abolished, and religious and moral tests made requirements for holding office.

The Framers and many of their archaic axioms, being a product of that rather old little intellectual movement known as the enlightenment, so often overrated and superstitiously revered - are relics from an archaic day and age, and thankfully they aren't idols to be worship, so of course we can simply amend or change our systems of government and Construction, into something specifically religious and moral.

Christ was looked up to by the Founders themselves; even during the days of ancient Rome, he was ahead of them, and his time, and would have made a far better statemen than any of them, a perfect candidate for a benevolent theocrat if there ever was one.

You are the reason that the founders wrote the 1st amendment. As for the present day, for us, we find your thought processes amusing, combined with a major relief that you are totally dismissible.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I can see a rationale for declaring atheism or the expressive of immoral and degenerate atheistic beliefs in public places an offense against the state, the public, and our common standards of decency.

Given the interrelation between anti-intellectual atheistic filth, and the moral and ethical vices and degeneracies it promotes and spreads, like a moral plague of sorts - justifying aberrant practices such as rape, murder, child molestation, pornography addiction, anti-intellectualism and cultural philistinism of sorts, not only an offense against God or the Supreme Being, but against society, our Common Law, and its religious principles and morals upon which it is founded and developed, such as the Golden Rule, respect for human's individuality, property, autonomy, family, and so forth.

Since atheists and other intellectual and moral degenerates renounce these things, favoring the moral nihilism and hedonism of evildoers like De Sade and Stirner, I'd argue that the very existence of an atheist, bold and damned enough to express his filty and immoral views and obesity in the public eye, is an offense in and of itself, and no state nor nation which values its own vitality, morality, decency, and power would have any reason to tolerate them at all.

In every 1st world nation, openly identifying as an atheist might very well be made as socially and morally repugnant and unacceptable as openly identifying as a pedophile, a rapist, a Nazi, a racist or racial supremacist, a terrorist.

Merely allowing an atheist to live at all, yet alone have the gall to spread his filth in the vicinity of morally superior men, women and children is more than he arguably even deserves, and more than many nations, past and present, would afford him - by the virtue of his atheism and depravity, he or she more or less renounces his humanity, his claims or factious "right" to even be considered "human" at all by superior members of society, rather being more akin to a feral and odious beast, to be tamed, scurried, shamed, and forced into the bare minimum of socially acceptable standards and behavior which otherwise would not differentiate him and his ilk from any other rapid and postulant beast, debatedly more worthy of being shot or hunted, than allowed to remain alive at all, at the expense of the oxygen of society's betters, let alone God or the Supreme Being itself.

One who claims to be an atheist, yet isn't raping, murdering, tormenting children, simply isn't very good at being one, whereas the opposite of course could be said of a Christian, a Buddhist, or even a Muslim, making one wonder if an atheist should be held on level of contempt beneath even that of an Islamist terrorist, and that the common despisement of such by everyone from good Christian men and women, Buddhist monks, and even said Islamic terrorists, is proof of their ultimate moral worthlessness in the cosmos, akin to feces, maggots, or bacteria in need of sanitation and desposal, more so than anything worth being called "life" to begin with in the hierarchy of God.

We have freedom of religion here in this country. If someone concludes that there is no Supreme Being, they shouldn't be silenced. Moreover, we have heard quite enough already from people who loudly proclaim that they believe in a Supreme Being, but then speak and act like the scum they are. Here this, trump administration???

We also have freedom from religion, as codified by the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment – prohibiting government from compelling religious observance, favoring one religion over another, and disallowing those free from religion to dissent.

That the OP and far too many others on the authoritarian right would advocate that those free from religion should be disadvantaged through force of law comes as no surprise.

 

[Lysistrata]

Those who contend that people who don't believe in the existence of a supreme being should somehow be punished for their non-belief completely ignore the fact that the term "religion" is generic.

They don't make any real attempt to disguise their contention that anyone who does not believe in the specific belief system in which they themselves believe should be punished. After all, a person who believes in the God and Goddess, or Thor, or Zeus cannot be deemed an "atheist" in the first place.

The world's religions have been in competition with each other for millennia, which has caused deaths in numbers impossible to count, as we are reminded this Monday on Holocaust Remembrance Day. A person who has decided that this all is a bunch of nonsense in which s/he wishes not to be involved, has every right to do so.

 

[rightwinger]

Atheists should be able to express their beliefs in schools and at sporting events. Teams should say.....We are going to win this without God

Public meetings should begin with a short statement that Jesus does not exist and God is a myth

 

[Lysistrata]

Most civilized societies are abandoning Christianity.

Christianity is now becoming a crutch for poorly educated Third World Nations

That is rather silly and naïve an assertion.

It's certainly not the more civilized aspects of said societies which are abandoning it; you'd have to abandon the entire Common Law system and its development from older systems, including religious ones, and I don't see that happening anytime soon, no.

As per the predictions I've seen, it is atheism which naturally and rightfully seems to be dying worldwide.

Organized religion is a thing of the past in Europe
In the United States, young people are abandoning the faith of their parents

As people become more educated, embracing religion becomes unnecessary

But don’t get discouraged. Your Christian beliefs are still going strong in uneducated regions of Africa and South America

Again, you're an idiot, the Common Law system in America and Britian is a "religious" system, developed from older legal systems and incorporating religious principles and "Christian" ones such as the "Golden Rule" as the foundations of modern societies and civilization.

Many atheistic worldviews potentially legitimize rape, murder, child molestation, and things like; being totally at odds with the Common Law and its moral and legal philosophy by default, such as many would rape and murder unabated if not for fear of the law.

"Religion" in that sense, is imposed on you and yours on a daily basis, denying you the freedom to rape, to murder, to plunder, to molest children (things which atheists such as De Sade fantasized about) and were it not I believe many of you would likely do aberrant things, were it not for fear of it.

Oh just stop it...

Our laws are much more compassionate than biblical eye for an eye you advocate

An eye for an eye is not Biblical, it's Babylonian - read up on your history of legal systems; the Iron Age system of Israel was a historical evolution up from more primitivie systems, such as Bablyonian law.

Regardless, the contemporary Common Law is based on religious axioms, such as the Golden Rule; many atheists and atheistic worldviews, which incorporate moral or existential nihilism are not compatible with it, nor cults like LeVayan Satanism which advocate "revenge", or the very "eye for eye" concept you refer to, they should banned.

I've heard many people who identify themselves as Christians calling for revenge and reciting the "eye for an eye" rationale. Are these people actually in Satanic cults?

 

[Picaro]

Run on sentences are not more convincing.

Which sentences are run ons?

 

[Picaro]

lol Atheism has never been condemned much, as opposed to heresies, which are an entirely different matter, but of course for the ignorant who never actually read any history and think they're the same thing. In fact the NT has several stories meant to discourage lying about being believers. It was also widely accepted that most of the peasantry were still mostly pagans right up to the 19th century, if Catholic priests themselves are to be believed in their writings on the matters, especially re the Irish immigrants to America.

 

[Picaro]

We also have freedom from religion, as codified by the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment – prohibiting government from compelling religious observance, favoring one religion over another, and disallowing those free from religion to dissent.

That the OP and far too many others on the authoritarian right would advocate that those free from religion should be disadvantaged through force of law comes as no surprise.

lol your usual rubbish. You have no such right to freedom from religion. The Establishment Clause restricts the Federal govt. from favoring a particular sect, not the states, many of which had and indeed kept their respective established state favored sects. The last one to do away with theirs was Massachusetts, in 1834 or so. These gradual changes came about because of demographics changes, not any 1st Amendment cases before the SC.

 

[Picaro]

You are the reason that the founders wrote the 1st amendment. .

No, he wasn't; they wrote it because most of the colonies wouldn't have joined, having been founded by different sects, without such a clause restricting the Federal govt. It didn't restrict the states from having a state sponsored sect of their own.

 

[Lysistrata]

lol Atheism has never been condemned much, as opposed to heresies, which are an entirely different matter, but of course for the ignorant who never actually read any history and think they're the same thing. In fact the NT has several stories meant to discourage lying about being believers. It was also widely accepted that most of the peasantry were still mostly pagans right up to the 19th century, if Catholic priests themselves are to be believed in their writings on the matters, especially re the Irish immigrants to America.

Heresies got you roasted alive in Europe. Of course, who is to say what a heresy is besides that it is a Christian religious theory that is at odds with one's own? The Catholics and the protestants certainly went at it during and after the Reformation, both against each other and against people in their individual ranks, and, of course, they both went after Jews and Pagans, who have always been entitled to believe as they wished. Then both Catholics and Protestants arrived in North America, where they brought religious strife to the New World. There is nothing quite like hanging a few Quaker Christians on Boston Common.

But this is the United States of America, where people are supposed to have the freedom to believe what they want. Atheists don't buy into any of it. Agnostics just think that there is no way of knowing. And some practice religions other than Christianity.

The OP is full of it. If the leaders of various religions/sects/cults are permitted to express their views, no matter how hateful or barbaric, atheists should be allowed to express theirs openly. Moreover, remember that, along with all of the variations of Christianity, there are plenty of other religions besides Christianity.

 

[Picaro]

lol Atheism has never been condemned much, as opposed to heresies, which are an entirely different matter, but of course for the ignorant who never actually read any history and think they're the same thing. In fact the NT has several stories meant to discourage lying about being believers. It was also widely accepted that most of the peasantry were still mostly pagans right up to the 19th century, if Catholic priests themselves are to be believed in their writings on the matters, especially re the Irish immigrants to America.

Heresies got you roasted alive in Europe. Of course, who is to say what a heresy is besides that it is a Christian religious theory that is at odds with one's own? The Catholics and the protestants certainly went at it during and after the Reformation, both against each other and against people in their individual ranks, and, of course, they both went after Jews and Pagans, who have always been entitled to believe as they wished. Then both Catholics and Protestants arrived in North America, where they brought religious strife to the New World. There is nothing quite like hanging a few Quaker Christians on Boston Common.

But this is the United States of America, where people are supposed to have the freedom to believe what they want. Atheists don't buy into any of it. Agnostics just think that there is no way of knowing. And some practice religions other than Christianity.

The OP is full of it. If the leaders of various religions/sects/cults are permitted to express their views, no matter how hateful or barbaric, atheists should be allowed to express theirs openly. Moreover, remember that, along with all of the variations of Christianity, there are plenty of other religions besides Christianity.

lol pure rubbish as usual. You know squat about history, troll sock.

 

[Lysistrata]

lol Atheism has never been condemned much, as opposed to heresies, which are an entirely different matter, but of course for the ignorant who never actually read any history and think they're the same thing. In fact the NT has several stories meant to discourage lying about being believers. It was also widely accepted that most of the peasantry were still mostly pagans right up to the 19th century, if Catholic priests themselves are to be believed in their writings on the matters, especially re the Irish immigrants to America.

Heresies got you roasted alive in Europe. Of course, who is to say what a heresy is besides that it is a Christian religious theory that is at odds with one's own? The Catholics and the protestants certainly went at it during and after the Reformation, both against each other and against people in their individual ranks, and, of course, they both went after Jews and Pagans, who have always been entitled to believe as they wished. Then both Catholics and Protestants arrived in North America, where they brought religious strife to the New World. There is nothing quite like hanging a few Quaker Christians on Boston Common.

But this is the United States of America, where people are supposed to have the freedom to believe what they want. Atheists don't buy into any of it. Agnostics just think that there is no way of knowing. And some practice religions other than Christianity.

The OP is full of it. If the leaders of various religions/sects/cults are permitted to express their views, no matter how hateful or barbaric, atheists should be allowed to express theirs openly. Moreover, remember that, along with all of the variations of Christianity, there are plenty of other religions besides Christianity.

lol pure rubbish as usual. You know squat about history, troll sock.

You don't know anything about history, do you? Read up on the history of the colonies. Puritans against Quakers against Catholics against Episcopalians against Calvinists, etc., all imported from Europe. Don't you know that Americans hold a whole spectrum of beliefs? A theocracy will never, ever be permitted in the United States.

You sound like a culthead.