Christians attempt to silence non-religious messages at Christmas

[KittenKoder]

Since when are insults not free speech?

Seems that it's not freedom of speech if it insults the majority now, even though many minority groups have insulted the majority in their fights for equality it was only a matter of time before the atheists adopted this as well. But here's the thing, every time the majority throws a fit about the insult who has won the battle?

 

[Lycurgus]

So then you admit that what I state is logical, it is the fault of those who are so anti-anything-but-christian that have caused this. You so commonly forget that other religions exist, or you deny the fact to yourself. Do you see the sign as anti-christian or anti-religious belief? This time instead of poorly attempting insult try to answer the post.

Kittynip ...........

Where did I mention other religions or different religions at all?

I am GOD, one GOD, the only GOD.

I am the GOD of all religions and I am GOD period, of the human race.

As you can prove no different, I can prove that I hold these qualities.

GOD

 

[KittenKoder]

Oookay ... Lycurgus is completely lost in this topic so anyone still in reality wish to contend my post?

 

[Lycurgus]

No, no Kittynip, I am hopelessly lost in you.

 

[Againsheila]

I can find links on both sides of the fence (atheists and christians) doing the exact same thing. Too bad the rest of us just can't sit by and wait until this happens to the christians and let them whine about it then we can say "told you so" because it won't end if we don't stop all forms of censorship now. The sad thing is that it wasn't a religious issue really, it was a respect issue, but the christian groups so against it turned it into a religious issue and now we have to let it stand (it wasn't christian v atheism until the christians arrogantly ignored all the other religious views ... again). Many of us would have seen it as just plain rude if it had just been let go, but now we see it as another political talking point. Once it becomes political then it must be allowed to protect the freedoms of everyone else. So good going those of you who argue that it should be taken down, now we can't ignore it.

Again, you are ignoring the history. Last year, Olympia put up their holiday tree AND a menorah. A Christian said he'd like to put up a nativity since there was already a menorah. He had to go to court to get the right. Then this year, the Jews decided not to put up the menorah, but the Christian still put up his nativity, a right that had been decided in court. Then the Freedom From Religion Foundation, not even in our state, but clear across the country decides to put up their sign denigrating ALL religions. I've got no problems with a Happy Winter Solstice sign, but when you start saying the religion is myth and superstition which hardens hearts and enslaves minds, you are insulting every religious person in the world. It was meant as hate speech, it was meant to caused problems and they did it on purpose. IMO, the governor should have told them the sign would be allowed ONLY if they took that last sentence off of it. Hate speech shouldn't be tolerated on public property.

 

[Father Time]

Again, you are ignoring the history. Last year, Olympia put up their holiday tree AND a menorah. A Christian said he'd like to put up a nativity since there was already a menorah. He had to go to court to get the right. Then this year, the Jews decided not to put up the menorah, but the Christian still put up his nativity, a right that had been decided in court. Then the Freedom From Religion Foundation, not even in our state, but clear across the country decides to put up their sign denigrating ALL religions. I've got no problems with a Happy Winter Solstice sign, but when you start saying the religion is myth and superstition which hardens hearts and enslaves minds, you are insulting every religious person in the world. It was meant as hate speech, it was meant to caused problems and they did it on purpose. IMO, the governor should have told them the sign would be allowed ONLY if they took that last sentence off of it. Hate speech shouldn't be tolerated on public property.

Hate speech is not insulting a group, or else a LOT of comedians would be charged with hate speech.

 

[YWN666]

Two-Celled Life?
​

​

​

Many single-celled forms of life exist, but no known forms of animal life have 2, 3, 4, or 5 cells (a). Known forms of life with 6–20 cells are parasites, so ...............

You've posted this on a number of other boards where you've already got your answer. Are you going to keep posting it until you get someone to agree? It doesn't even belong in this thread.

 

[garyd]

To the original thread wea ren't telling you you can't post it but that you can't post it on top of ours. By the way the notion that religion is what's wrong world is so singularly retarded as to boggle the mind.

First, if there is no God then religion is just another tool and one that can be used for either Good or evil like every other tool in which case the problem is those who misuse and abuse the tool not the tool itself.

2nd Atheistic communism has killed as many if not more people than all the religions that have ever been.

 

[YWN666]

2nd Atheistic communism has killed as many if not more people than all the religions that have ever been.

An old but lame argument.

 

[FistyTheBadger]

An old but lame argument.

Why is it lame? It is true.

 

[YWN666]

Why is it lame? It is true.

The murders were done for political reasons, NOT in the name of atheism.

Using the same lame reasoning as the original statement, I could say that Ted Bundy was a christian, therefore, he was a christian killer who killed in the name of christianity.
His religious beliefs were incidental.

 

[FistyTheBadger]

The murders were done for political reasons, NOT in the name of atheism.

Using the same lame reasoning as the original statement, I could say that Ted Bundy was a christian, therefore, he was a christian killer who killed in the name of christianity.
His religious beliefs were incidental.

The murders were done against religion. Lack of religion was a driving force in their ideology and was indistinguishable from political policy.

 

[Amanda]

Is this thread still going? OMG, let it die.

 

[Father Time]

The murders were done against religion. Lack of religion was a driving force in their ideology and was indistinguishable from political policy.

Even if, they killed people for a whole host of reasons, whether it be to crush descent or for political reasons. To attribute it all to atheism is silly.

 

[FistyTheBadger]

Is this thread still going? OMG, let it die.

I know it is hypocritical of me, but I think the same thing.

 

[garyd]

Father time the exact same think can be said of most of the murders committed by Jews, Christians, Moslems and most other religions. they were all done as much if not more for temporal political reasons than for religious reasons.

 

[YWN666]

The murders were done against religion.

Were they?

 

[YWN666]

Embryology 1
​

​

​

Evolutionists have taught for over a century that as an embryo develops, it passes through stages that mimic an evolutionary sequence.

The spammer is back.

 

[frazzledgear]

Hate speech is not insulting a group, or else a LOT of comedians would be charged with hate speech.

That "message" amounted to nothing but a statement of anti-religious bigotry -and sorry, but targeting a specific group for insults, ridicule and denigration is where hate speech starts in the first place. That atheist message had no more business being displayed than allowing white supremicists to put up their message of racial hatred and bigotry at a display about the Emancipation or allowing neonazis to put up their anti-semitic message at a display regarding the Holocaust.

It was no more appropriate than if the governor gave some group of Christians permission to exploit a display related to the history of Islam or something - in order to display their OWN message that first insulted and denigrated Islam and then urged Muslims to reject that religion as a false one and turn to Christ instead.

So why do you whacko liberals who surely understand why these other examples would be so outrageously inappropriate to include at a public display - consider it to be just fine and dandy to allow a group of organized atheists to put up their own intolerant bigoted message that first insulted and denigrated religious belief and then tried to convert others to their own belief system instead. A message that targets ALL religions instead of just one doesn't change the fact this was nothing but a statement of bigotry, hatred and intolerance. A public display about CELEBRATING the season being BASTARDIZED as an attack on others for what they believe instead. And because you liberal nutjobs don't mind if THOSE kind of people are the target of an attack, you have the balls to insist this is a free speech issue? LOL

Atheists are always free to say they have no religious beliefs and deny the existence of God -and say whatever they want about how much they despise all religions, that those with religious beliefs have been enslaved, deceived -whatever they want. Free speech ONLY means government may not arrest you for what you said -it does NOT mean government must provide you with a forum and an audience in order to say whatever you want or must in ANY way aid you in how you wish to say it. You liberals sure get that part when it comes to the crap from extremists from any other side. But suddenly are just too dense to understand that concept when it comes to the extremists from YOUR side? LOL This is not a free speech issue because government was not in ANY way preventing atheists from saying whatever they wanted. But it doesn't mean government MUST provide them with a forum to say it. It is only an issue of whether including such a message was APPROPRIATE or not.

Is it appropriate to include some group's racial rants at an Emancipation display or include another group's anti-semitic messages at a display regarding the Holocaust? Of course not. Given the nature of those displays, the inclusions of such messages is totally inappropriate. But oddly enough, you don't hear liberals whining about the "free speech" rights of these groups when it comes to having government provide a forum for those groups to spew their bigoted messages, do you? LOL

THEN they insist that is HATE SPEECH. Which it is -just like THIS was too. Just because it was people from your own political side who said it doesn't make it any less HATEFUL and BIGOTED. And try to understand this: Atheists have no greater free speech rights than neonazis and white supremicists to say what they want. But in NONE of these cases is government OBLIGATED to provide a forum and an audience so they can spew those views. Not EVER. Therefore, this is NOT a free speech issue for ANY of these examples -including the inclusion of the hateful, intolerant atheist message. Only an issue of whether their inclusion was actually appropriate or not given the purpose and nature of the display. And it was NOT appropriate at all.

 

[WhiteLion]

That "message" amounted to nothing but a statement of anti-religious bigotry -and sorry, but targeting a specific group for insults, ridicule and denigration is where hate speech starts in the first place. That atheist message had no more business being displayed than allowing white supremicists to put up their message of racial hatred and bigotry at a display about the Emancipation or allowing neonazis to put up their anti-semitic message at a display regarding the Holocaust.

It was no more appropriate than if the governor gave some group of Christians permission to exploit a display related to the history of Islam or something - in order to display their OWN message that first insulted and denigrated Islam and then urged Muslims to reject that religion as a false one and turn to Christ instead.

So why do you whacko liberals who surely understand why these other examples would be so outrageously inappropriate to include at a public display - consider it to be just fine and dandy to allow a group of organized atheists to put up their own intolerant bigoted message that first insulted and denigrated religious belief and then tried to convert others to their own belief system instead. A message that targets ALL religions instead of just one doesn't change the fact this was nothing but a statement of bigotry, hatred and intolerance. A public display about CELEBRATING the season being BASTARDIZED as an attack on others for what they believe instead. And because you liberal nutjobs don't mind if THOSE kind of people are the target of an attack, you have the balls to insist this is a free speech issue? LOL

Atheists are always free to say they have no religious beliefs and deny the existence of God -and say whatever they want about how much they despise all religions, that those with religious beliefs have been enslaved, deceived -whatever they want. Free speech ONLY means government may not arrest you for what you said -it does NOT mean government must provide you with a forum and an audience in order to say whatever you want or must in ANY way aid you in how you wish to say it. You liberals sure get that part when it comes to the crap from extremists from any other side. But suddenly are just too dense to understand that concept when it comes to the extremists from YOUR side? LOL This is not a free speech issue because government was not in ANY way preventing atheists from saying whatever they wanted. But it doesn't mean government MUST provide them with a forum to say it. It is only an issue of whether including such a message was APPROPRIATE or not.

Is it appropriate to include some group's racial rants at an Emancipation display or include another group's anti-semitic messages at a display regarding the Holocaust? Of course not. Given the nature of those displays, the inclusions of such messages is totally inappropriate. But oddly enough, you don't hear liberals whining about the "free speech" rights of these groups when it comes to having government provide a forum for those groups to spew their bigoted messages, do you? LOL

THEN they insist that is HATE SPEECH. Which it is -just like THIS was too. Just because it was people from your own political side who said it doesn't make it any less HATEFUL and BIGOTED. And try to understand this: Atheists have no greater free speech rights than neonazis and white supremicists to say what they want. But in NONE of these cases is government OBLIGATED to provide a forum and an audience so they can spew those views. Not EVER. Therefore, this is NOT a free speech issue for ANY of these examples -including the inclusion of the hateful, intolerant atheist message. Only an issue of whether their inclusion was actually appropriate or not given the purpose and nature of the display. And it was NOT appropriate at all.

Well Well now heres a link that should wet the appetite of you anti-christ...
CRIMINALIZING CHRISTIANITY