Keep that Atheism to Yourself

[Hollie]

You suggested it. I am no more interested in your version of a theocracy than anyone else's.

Oh, is that what your going for? Atheism is a "religion".

Then "Off" is a TV Channel.

And Not Collecting Stamps is a Hobby.

does your TV deny there is an "ON"

The TV is not a supernatural object.

It would be to someone who didn't know what it was.

There no reason to accept that as true.

 

[PratchettFan]

You suggested it. I am no more interested in your version of a theocracy than anyone else's.

Oh, is that what your going for? Atheism is a "religion".

Then "Off" is a TV Channel.

And Not Collecting Stamps is a Hobby.

does your TV deny there is an "ON"

The TV is not a supernatural object.

It would be to someone who didn't know what it was.

There no reason to accept that as true.

There is if you pay any attention at all to history.

 

[martybegan]

You suggested it. I am no more interested in your version of a theocracy than anyone else's.

Oh, is that what your going for? Atheism is a "religion".

Then "Off" is a TV Channel.

And Not Collecting Stamps is a Hobby.

Using the TV analogy Agnosticism is turning the TV "off." It is indifference to religion. Atheism is more like a channel saying every other channel is wrong, not because of the exact content, but because of the concept of the content in general.

 

[Hollie]

Oh, is that what your going for? Atheism is a "religion".

Then "Off" is a TV Channel.

And Not Collecting Stamps is a Hobby.

does your TV deny there is an "ON"

The TV is not a supernatural object.

It would be to someone who didn't know what it was.

There no reason to accept that as true.

There is if you pay any attention at all to history.

I do pay attention to history which is why your comment is absurd.

 

[PratchettFan]

does your TV deny there is an "ON"

The TV is not a supernatural object.

It would be to someone who didn't know what it was.

There no reason to accept that as true.

There is if you pay any attention at all to history.

I do pay attention to history which is why your comment is absurd.

Really. So the belief that the sun going across the sky was Apollo riding his chariot would be.... what?

 

[PostmodernProph]

The TV is not a supernatural object.

It would be to someone who didn't know what it was.

There no reason to accept that as true.

There is if you pay any attention at all to history.

I do pay attention to history which is why your comment is absurd.

Really. So the belief that the sun going across the sky was Apollo riding his chariot would be.... what?

PBS......

 

[JoeB131]

You suggested it. I am no more interested in your version of a theocracy than anyone else's.

Oh, is that what your going for? Atheism is a "religion".

Then "Off" is a TV Channel.

And Not Collecting Stamps is a Hobby.

does your TV deny there is an "ON"

Uh, no, but that has nothing to do with Atheism being a religion. Not even a nice try

 

[JoeB131]

For you? Most definitely a religion and you clearly believe only your religion should be allowed. No thank you. I'll use my own blind guess. I don't need yours imposed upon me.

But thank you for the irrelevant bumper stickers.

No, the Constitution clearly says- No Establishment of Religion. Period. Keep your Dogma off my lawn.

 

[JoeB131]

Using the TV analogy Agnosticism is turning the TV "off." It is indifference to religion. Atheism is more like a channel saying every other channel is wrong, not because of the exact content, but because of the concept of the content in general.

No, Agnosticism would be more like leaving the TV on a channel that only broadcasts static.

 

[Hollie]

The TV is not a supernatural object.

It would be to someone who didn't know what it was.

There no reason to accept that as true.

There is if you pay any attention at all to history.

I do pay attention to history which is why your comment is absurd.

Really. So the belief that the sun going across the sky was Apollo riding his chariot would be.... what?

Myth and legend. No different than magical gardens with talking snakes, global floods, etc.

 

[Skull Pilot]

For you? Most definitely a religion and you clearly believe only your religion should be allowed. No thank you. I'll use my own blind guess. I don't need yours imposed upon me.

But thank you for the irrelevant bumper stickers.

No, the Constitution clearly says- No Establishment of Religion. Period. Keep your Dogma off my lawn.

Congress shall make no law respecting an 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.

So now tell me is a law prohibiting a person from engaging in his religious beliefs on public land tantamount to prohibiting the free exercise thereof?

Atheists are funny to me and I happen to identify myself as one. My main difference with most atheists is that I don't care if other people practice their religion or say a prayer on public property. As long as congress passes no law respecting or prohibiting it.

As an example in high school the coaches liked to say the lord's prayer. I stood with the team but didn't recite the words. No big deal.

How can anyone be offended by that which they do not believe anyway?

 

[JoeB131]

What offends me is that they are constantly trying to shove their shit down our throats.

Today it's reciting a prayer on my tax dime, tomorrow it's making me say that ******* prayer.

You gotta stop these fuckers in their tracks, don't give them an inch.

 

[Skull Pilot]

What offends me is that they are constantly trying to shove their shit down our throats.

Today it's reciting a prayer on my tax dime, tomorrow it's making me say that ******* prayer.

You gotta stop these fuckers in their tracks, don't give them an inch.

If a few people are saying a prayer how are you being forced to say it?

I knew when I was a teenager that no one could force me to pray. Shit I refrained from saying the pledge of allegiance in high school and nothing ever happened to me.

So what if a bunch of superstitious people want to practice their crap.

Does passing a law to stop a person from praying on public property violate the first amendment?

I think it does

 

[JoeB131]

If a few people are saying a prayer how are you being forced to say it?

I knew when I was a teenager that no one could force me to pray. Shit I refrained from saying the pledge of allegiance in high school and nothing ever happened to me.

So what if a bunch of superstitious people want to practice their crap.

Does passing a law to stop a person from praying on public property violate the first amendment?

I think it does

I don't think it does. It's asking me to subsidize their religion because I pay for those public places with my tax dollars.

And when your portfolio includes burning witches, torturing heretics and ******* altar boys up the ass, I'm really not terribly inclined to give them even an inch.

 

[Skull Pilot]

If a few people are saying a prayer how are you being forced to say it?

I knew when I was a teenager that no one could force me to pray. Shit I refrained from saying the pledge of allegiance in high school and nothing ever happened to me.

So what if a bunch of superstitious people want to practice their crap.

Does passing a law to stop a person from praying on public property violate the first amendment?

I think it does

I don't think it does. It's asking me to subsidize their religion because I pay for those public places with my tax dollars.

And when your portfolio includes burning witches, torturing heretics and ******* altar boys up the ass, I'm really not terribly inclined to give them even an inch.

Once again we disagree.

The land is being paid for with tax dollars whether people are on it or not. As long as no laws are passed respecting or prohibiting there is no issue with people praying on public property.

 

[JoeB131]

The land is being paid for with tax dollars whether people are on it or not. As long as no laws are passed respecting or prohibiting there is no issue with people praying on public property.

If you guys want to keep fighting the lawsuits to keep it that way, have at it.

You'll lose.

 

[dblack]

The land is being paid for with tax dollars whether people are on it or not. As long as no laws are passed respecting or prohibiting there is no issue with people praying on public property.

If you guys want to keep fighting the lawsuits to keep it that way, have at it.

You'll lose.

To paraphrase Keynes, "In the long run, we all lose."

 

[JoeB131]

The land is being paid for with tax dollars whether people are on it or not. As long as no laws are passed respecting or prohibiting there is no issue with people praying on public property.

If you guys want to keep fighting the lawsuits to keep it that way, have at it.

You'll lose.

To paraphrase Keynes, "In the long run, we all lose."

Religion has never accomplished anything good in the whole of human history, not once, not even by accident.

We need to start treating religion like a mental illness and not a right.

 

[PratchettFan]

For you? Most definitely a religion and you clearly believe only your religion should be allowed. No thank you. I'll use my own blind guess. I don't need yours imposed upon me.

But thank you for the irrelevant bumper stickers.

No, the Constitution clearly says- No Establishment of Religion. Period. Keep your Dogma off my lawn.

Your reading of the Constitution is very limited. This is the actual amendment, and I realize it includes the icky bits you don't like: Congress shall make no law respecting an 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.

Please do note the "free exercise thereof". You can keep it off your lawn if you like, but the public lawn belongs to everyone - not just the people you approve of. As I said, I am no more interested in your theocracy than anyone else's. Of course, that means you are free to include your dogma on the public lawn just like all the other true believers.

 

[PratchettFan]

It would be to someone who didn't know what it was.

There no reason to accept that as true.

There is if you pay any attention at all to history.

I do pay attention to history which is why your comment is absurd.

Really. So the belief that the sun going across the sky was Apollo riding his chariot would be.... what?

Myth and legend. No different than magical gardens with talking snakes, global floods, etc.

So, taking the natural and calling it supernatural because they didn't understand it. Thank you for confirming my point.