The Gospel of Unbelief

[Nuc]

We're just saying. There is a heavy anti-christian bias in large segments of society.

Last time I saw a study I believe it said that something like 95% of the people in this country are Christians and over 80% believe in angels. Where is this large segment coming from?

I'm not a Christian, but I don't attempt to thwart them either. Am I part of this large segment.

 

[MissileMan]

From where do secularists believe government should derive it's morals? As you said, they don't promote the eradication of morals.

The government should be operating based on the Constitution and law. Speaking for myself, I'm quite content with most of the current laws as they stand. What I am opposed to is any new legislation to take away any of my freedoms because they are in conflict with some religious zealot's morality.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

The government should be operating based on the Constitution and law. Speaking for myself, I'm quite content with most of the current laws as they stand. What I am opposed to is any new legislation to take away any of my freedoms because they are in conflict with some religious zealot's morality.

What if someone wanted to undo a law against murder because it's a ten commandment and deemed to be a "zealot's morality"? Would he have a case for violation of separation and church and state?

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Nonsense.

Communists (at least Soviet and Chinese style) are atheists, and atheism is faith based; a religion--secularism is not. Secularism in governemt protects religion, is not "contrary to the "set of beliefs" of ordinary God-fearing citizens," and is about as far from commuism as you can get. Get your facts, and your definitions, straight.

The definition of Secularism can vary. Secularism does have its own set of beliefs:

Secularism is a code of duty pertaining to this life, founded on considerations purely human, and intended mainly for those who find theology indefinite or inadequate, unreliable or unbelievable. Its essential principles are three:

(1) The improvement of this life by material means.
(2) That science is the available Providence of man.
(3) That it is good to do good. Whether there be other good or not, the good of the present life is good, and it is good to seek that good.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secularism

In and of itself secularism per se is not bad. However, do you really think it was the intent of our Founding Fathers to create a "secular society" and stamp out any reference to God or Christian beliefs in our government? Our Constitution just states that government cannot establish a religion. It does NOT say that various religious beliefs cannot exist and express themselves in our laws, in our government representatives, government buildings, public works, etc. -- which is the false propaganda of the Left.

Oh, and BTW, while you're frothing rabidly on "left wing extremists," try reading up a little on your man Jesus--a socialist, a pinko, a left winger from way back.

yah, sure, an atheist communist dream guy, huh?

Because governemt has no business funding religions--1st Amendment.

Again, the first amendment refers to the establishment of a religion.
Hey, I'm all for the government getting out of almost ALL the goodie-giving business, to both secular and religious groups.

So secular government is now a non-Christian agenda? Be careful.

You bet it is...in today's politics. Don't kid yourself.

Yes, and it is also obligated to protecting the minorities from the majorities. Otherwise the mob rules.

Yes, on a rational basis. Just how are atheists prevented from practicing their beliefs these days? Seems they have a much easier time of it today compared to 200 years ago when our country was first founded and all those nasty Christians were carrying around Bibles wherever they went. Does a Christmas tree in the public square today convert them? Or does a cross on the grave of a fallen Christian soldier prevent them from being atheist? Do you consider those things to be "mob rule"? Evidently the atheistic ACLU considers those things to be "dangerous" for some reason. If you figure out that "reason" you will understand the real game that is being played today and maybe you will stop being their puppet and supporting their ridiculous claims.

Christians are NOT the ones to be feared....

 

[MissileMan]

What if someone wanted to undo a law against murder because it's a ten commandment and deemed to be a "zealot's morality"? Would he have a case for violation of separation and church and state?

An absurd question. We have laws that cover murder, theft, perjury. Those three in particular are universally accepted by sane, civilized societies and aren't solely Christian (or religious for that matter) principles. They are coincidently, the only three of the ten commandments that made it into U.S. law.

I've seen lots of posts about man's free will. Here in the U.S., Christians are "free" to follow the bible as they choose in the conduct of their life. The problem lies with those who would impose "their" choice on all of us through legislation.

 

[LOki]

From where do secularists believe government should derive it's morals? As you said, they don't promote the eradication of morals.

The morality of this representative government is derived from the morality of the governed.

As "religious" is certainly no guarantee of "moral," and no one religion can make a greater claim to morality based upon their faith, that another cannot equally make based upon theirs, it falls upon rational examination of reality, and our own humanity, to define the nature of, and what constitutes moral behavior, and then abide by that. Religion and reason, if consistent with reality and humanity, will certainly arrive at broadly the same conclusions to the extent that morality is validly the means to an agreeable end, or the agreeable end.

Since human practice is patently fallible, it neccessarly follows that our religions, unlike our deities, are subject to failure--moral and otherwise. But the saving condition of human failure is that our mistakes are subject to correction. We can question the means of causes and judge their effects to the betterment of posterity. But the certainty of faith, unexamined, unaccountable, and unquestionable, places upon those in religious authority the capacity to dismiss any inquiriry based solely upon their belief alone, without regard to logic, reason, or evidence; an authority to dismiss without recourse outside of exile; an absolute power to judge as God, without the absolute knowledge of God. To marry that with the coercive force of government puts not only reason upon the gibbet, but also other faiths, and ultimately our morality.

 

[MissileMan]

Just how are atheists prevented from practicing their beliefs these days?

You're still confused on the issue. Atheists don't practice anything. At least I don't. Atheism is NOT a religion. I have no deity, I don't belong to or go to a church, I have no ancient, sacred text that I use as a basis for my non-belief in yours or any other religion. And don't start dragging out the secondary definitions of religion reserved for hobbies and the like. Use the exact same definition you would assign Christianity as you are trying to equate them.

As far as the founders go, I do indeed believe their intent was to form a secular government.

 

[Nuc]

As far as the founders go, I do indeed believe their intent was to form a secular government.

Since that's what they did, it's a good assumption.

And all this talk about "This founding father went to church and that founding father said this about God therefore......" If politician of today have to kowtow to the religious vote, think about how much more backwards people were then. Kerry had to practically nail himself on a cross and people still didn't believe he was religious enough to vote for. What about the good ol' days. Of course they talked about God. Either they believed in it or they didn't and talked about it anyway, just like the politicians of today.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

The morality of this representative government is derived from the morality of the governed.

Partially. Our government morality is also defined in the constitution to some degree.

As "religious" is certainly no guarantee of "moral," and no one religion can make a greater claim to morality based upon their faith, that another cannot equally make based upon theirs, it falls upon rational examination of reality, and our own humanity, to define the nature of, and what constitutes moral behavior, and then abide by that.

So we agree there is a public morality, and that defining it is an ongoing process. Religions of all types inform this debate, and so to do various atheist, and secular thought systems. Religion should not be "set aside" as unworthy regarding these discussion of the public morality.

Religion and reason, if consistent with reality and humanity, will certainly arrive at broadly the same conclusions to the extent that morality is validly the means to an agreeable end, or the agreeable end.

You'd think, but the reason of man in absence of the laws of god leads to barbaric practices like eugenics.

Since human practice is patently fallible, it neccessarly follows that our religions, unlike our deities, are subject to failure--moral and otherwise. But the saving condition of human failure is that our mistakes are subject to correction. We can question the means of causes and judge their effects to the betterment of posterity. But the certainty of faith, unexamined, unaccountable, and unquestionable, places upon those in religious authority the capacity to dismiss any inquiriry based solely upon their belief alone, without regard to logic, reason, or evidence; an authority to dismiss without recourse outside of exile; an absolute power to judge as God, without the absolute knowledge of God. To marry that with the coercive force of government puts not only reason upon the gibbet, but also other faiths, and ultimately our morality.

That all sounds nice. But from what I've seen the left is more faithfully and illogically committed to the triumph of socialism, despite it's repeated failure and core ontological misconstruals, than any rabid bible thumper is about jesus.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Those three in particular are universally accepted by sane, civilized societies and aren't solely Christian (or religious for that matter) principles.

Common sense is not as common as you think. What you think is "sane" or "civilied" just indicates your actual judeo christian heritage.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

How *about* Planned Parenthood. It's not a religious organization, nor is it preaching that Christians should be forced to use birth control or have abortions.

OK, let's talk about PP. It is a "secular" group. Thus so-called "fair" people like you think it should get government funding because it is not affiliated with any particular religious group. However, why should the tax dollars of Christian citizens go toward a group that is ANTI-RELIGIOUS in nature? This is how the sneaky secularists (and communist-driven agenda) are getting around the values of MOST Americans. The great majority of Americans have Christian values. If you don't think PP is not "preaching" their own "secular" agenda, take a real good look at them.

Here is a taste of what the Planned Parenthood group is all about:

THE PLANNED PARENTHOOD AGENDA

While Planned Parenthood clearly has a huge and profitable interest in selling abortions, it wouldn't be fair to say that this is their only concern. Like their founder before them, Planned Parenthood has also been long devoted to normalizing and stimulating all manner of sexual behavior, particularly among young people. It is fair to say that Planned Parenthood is aiming at the creation of a sexually-consumed society, without boundary and without restraint. You can come to this conclusion by studying the ideology of their founder, you can come to this conclusion by studying the historic publications of their organization, or you can come to this conclusion by simply examining their current website. It all points to one thing. Planned Parenthood is not just motivated by profit. They have a very clear ideological agenda, and it is not a nice one.

When Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger published her first newsletter Women Rebel, just after leaving her husband, "No Gods and No Masters" was emblazoned across the masthead. When she counseled her 16-year-old granddaughter at the end of her life, she told her that having sex "three times a day" was "just about right".1 Sanger's life, from start to finish, was all about casting off the constraints of God and marriage, and replacing these oppressive devotions with devotion to self and sex. Alan Guttmacher, former vice president of the American Eugenics Society, and the man who succeeded Sanger as Planned Parenthood president said this of the relationship between Planned Parenthood and their founder. "We are merely walking down the path that Mrs. Sanger carved out for us."2 Faye Wattleton, Planned Parenthood president during the 1980's concurred by saying she was proud to be, "walking in the footsteps of Margaret Sanger".3

Today, Planned Parenthood has an entire website devoted to sexualizing America's youth while happily lifting the restraints of God, parents or marriage. It is chalk full of cutesy cartoons and games and movies. It contains a "values-free" sextionary (instead of dictionary), and a massive archive of "Ask the Experts" feedback. Therein you will find the following wisdom. "The only person who can tell if you're ready to have sex is YOU!". Planned Parenthood is happy to usurp parental authority and be a go between for students seeking birth control and abortion.

One student wrote in to say:


I'm ready for sex. I've got these condoms but I don't want to use them, I need some birth control pills. I would like to know [of a] place where I could get some without my parents finding out, or any other adult. Thanks for your time.


Planned Parenthood answers this way.


In general, parental permission is not needed for birth control. However, there may be certain locations where, for one reason or another, the provider will require parental permission. Confidentiality is up to the provider. Planned Parenthood health centers are committed to providing services that are confidential and affordable, especially for teens, who may face special family and financial circumstances. To find a Planned Parenthood health center near you, call 1-800-230-PLAN.


Translation: If you can't get birth control yourself, without parental consent, we'll get it for you. Another student asked, "is it bad to have sex every day?" Planned Parenthood responded:


No, it's not bad. Having a sex drive and being turned on are normal parts of sexuality. Some people have sex every day, and some people have sex much less often than that, or not at all. People have different levels of sex drives — some have higher drives and some have lower. Counselors consider a person to be having "too much sex" if their sex life interferes with the daily activities of their lives — getting to school, to work, meeting friends, etc. Not many people have that problem.


Elsewhere in their teen site, Planned Parenthood proclaims that, "it is normal and healthy to masturbate and have sex play with or without sex toys. Objects commonly used include sex toys — like vibrators and dildos — and other penis-shaped objects." On Planned Parenthood's general website you will find the following pro-sex, anti-abstinence council:


Being sexual — from masturbation to engaging in sex play or intercourse with a partner — can have positive health benefits that you might not expect.


A 1999 study found that U.S. college students who had sex once or twice per week had stronger immune systems than their abstinent peers.


Before you pop your next painkiller, try having an orgasm. Some women masturbate to relieve menstrual cramps, and a 2001 study found that, for women and men, orgasms can ease migraines faster than any medicine. Hormones released during orgasm act on the brain like natural pain relievers and can help relax tight, sore muscles.


One study found that 39 percent of women who masturbate do so to relax. And many people masturbate to fight a night of insomnia — an orgasm may work like a charm to help you fall asleep.


One study showed that women who masturbate have higher self-esteem than those who don't.

As to the moral constraints surrounding sex, Planned Parenthood proclaims:


Our sexuality should be enjoyed and celebrated. It is not something to be ashamed of or embarrassed about. Healthy sexuality allows us to be open, flexible, creative, safe, and responsible as we explore our sexual thoughts, feelings, and desires. It lets us recognize that sex can be fun and can also fulfill many emotional needs.


Most adults, children, and infants enjoy touching their sex organs and other parts of their bodies.


Touching our sex organs for pleasure — masturbation — is a normal, healthy part of life.

Finally, Planned Parenthood chimes in on the "normalcy" of homosexuality and the "intolerance" of the church:

Whether people are gay, straight, or bisexual is usually established before puberty and before they begin having sex. Although sexual orientation may begin to develop before birth, it may shift throughout life. It is not something that people can decide for themselves, or for others.


It is normal for boys and girls to have sex play with friends of either gender.


Religious authorities often encourage negative feelings about sexual orientation and gender identity.

The dark side of all of Planned Parenthood's happy and adolescent-aimed sex-talk is that they often became a haven for predatory men who impregnate underage girls. ChildPredator.com documents Planned Parenthood's willingness to shirk the law and not report abortions that are the result of statutory rape. Abortion, after all, is the natural result of all of Planned Parenthood's sexual indoctrination. Where sex is encouraged and stimulated among the unmarried populace, abortion, en masse, naturally follows. Planned Parenthood's ideology, then, becomes very convenient to their financial bottom line. They feed the frenzy and then get paid to "clean up the mess". According to their own data, Planned Parenthood performed 200,000 abortions in 2000. During that same year, they referred for 2,500 adoptions. This means that for every adoption they referred, 80 abortions were performed. Ninety-eight percent of the women coming to them for counsel choose abortion rather than adoption. Does this sound like an agenda? It is no wonder they are criticized by the National Council on Adoption for being so one-sided in their services. Any honest and unbiased counseling would swing the results the other way, 80 adoptions for every one abortion. Only the most hardened and resolute mother would choose abortion over adoption if the evidence was clearly presented to her. If even one single picture was shown to her of what abortion would do to her child, the likelihood of her continuing through with an abortion become incredibly slim. This kind of counseling, of course, is not the Planned Parenthood way. If they gave you all the facts about abortion, your choice might suddenly conflict with their agenda, and that is a choice for which Planned Parenthood can't tolerate


http://www.abort73.com/HTML/PlainText/I-F-1b-planned_parenthood.html

 

[MissileMan]

Common sense is not as common as you think. What you think is "sane" or "civilied" just indicates your actual judeo christian heritage.

This could be true except you'd be hard pressed to come up with any examples of a society where murder, theft, and perjury are acceptable, including those that have no Judeo-Christian heritage at all.

 

[MissileMan]

OK, let's talk about PP. It is a "secular" group. Thus so-called "fair" people like you think it should get government funding because it is not affiliated with any particular religious group. However, why should the tax dollars of Christian citizens go toward a group that is ANTI-RELIGIOUS in nature? This is how the sneaky secularists (and communist-driven agenda) are getting around the values of MOST Americans. The great majority of Americans have Christian values. If you don't think PP is not "preaching" their own "secular" agenda, take a real good look at them.

Here is a taste of what the Planned Parenthood group is all about:

So any group that isn't affiliated with a religion is in your mind a "secular" group?

 

[Bullypulpit]

But you're only argument is "as if the majority could be oppressed." They can be. And they are. This is the most free nation on earth for anyone of any faith, and you antichristians use this as an opportunity to attack christianity, waging various wars on both christmas and easter.

Your assumption that I'm "anti-christian" is as fallacious as the rest of your reasoning. I don't "wage war" on Christmas, Easter, or any other religious holiday for that matter; nor do I personally know anyone who does.

I am, however, more than happy to take to the mat the pious, self-righteous hypocrites who claim to be Christian without really knowing what it means to be a Christian. People like you.

And BTW, after lengthy discussion with my bretheren, members of your local Masonic Temple will be black-bagging you and taking you to an undisclosed location. There you will be indoctrinated into the Freemason way of life and released home when your conversion is complete. :teeth:

 

[ScreamingEagle]

You're still confused on the issue. Atheists don't practice anything. At least I don't. Atheism is NOT a religion. I have no deity, I don't belong to or go to a church, I have no ancient, sacred text that I use as a basis for my non-belief in yours or any other religion. And don't start dragging out the secondary definitions of religion reserved for hobbies and the like. Use the exact same definition you would assign Christianity as you are trying to equate them.

As far as the founders go, I do indeed believe their intent was to form a secular government.

No, I'm not confused. Atheists like Newdow practice their "don't offend me" stunts in order to get God out of our history books and to rip the crosses off our soldiers' graves.

Yes, I agree with you that our government was meant to be secular in form so that no national religion was imposed. However, not necessarily secular in content.

 

[Nuc]

And BTW, after lengthy discussion with my bretheren, members of your local Masonic Temple will be black-bagging you and taking you to an undisclosed location. There you will be indoctrinated into the Freemason way of life and released home when your conversion is complete. :teeth:

I wonder on the spectrum of evil, where the Masons rank in comparison to the ACLU, NAMBLA and Hillary? :bangheads :baby:

 

[ScreamingEagle]

So any group that isn't affiliated with a religion is in your mind a "secular" group?

Isn't it?

 

[Bullypulpit]

You just don't want the christian church to have any meaningful role in society because you're a paranoid jew.

Ahhh...Now your true colors show. Anti-Semite.

 

[MissileMan]

No, I'm not confused. Atheists like Newdow practice their "don't offend me" stunts in order to get God out of our history books and to rip the crosses off our soldiers' graves.

Yes, I agree with you that our government was meant to be secular in form so that no national religion was imposed. However, not necessarily secular in content.

Secular does not equal atheistic. Secular does not equal liberal. As I've said, there are some secular, conservative Christians who frequent this board.

 

[Nuc]

This could be true except you'd be hard pressed to come up with any examples of a society where murder, theft, and perjury are acceptable, including those that have no Judeo-Christian heritage at all.

Papua New Guinea?