Lies the fundies tell

[PratchettFan]

the source?......the imagination of an atheist, I expect.......

So it was a lie. How noble of you.

what a horrible accusation.......is that another example of an atheist's lie about a Christian?......

Yes. It is a wonderful example. You lie, I call you on it, and you accuse me of lying.

 

[PratchettFan]

so if one of my employees comes to me and says I want spousal benefits for my same sex partner am I free to say sorry, I don't believe you?.........if a gay couple comes and tells me that they want me to bake them a wedding cake am I free to say no?........

Yes. I understand you think it is your right to impose your beliefs upon others but others do not have the right to do the same to you. I get that.

ouch....did I step on your toe and make you angry?.....can you deny that the baker who got shut down was forced?....or that wedding photographer in Arizona?......how can you deny that you think its okay to force people to believe what you believe?......

I on the other hand am willing to let people **** whatever they want to **** so long as I'm allowed to ignore them......

Personally, I think the baker and the photographer had the right to refuse service to anyone they wanted. And the people who boycotted their business because of that had the right to do that as well. That is why they were shut down, not because the government did it. So you think it is ok for one side to discriminate but not the other.

As to believing, you can believe whatever you like. But what you actually want to do is enforce that belief upon others by refusing them the same rights you insist upon for yourself. And when you aren't allow to do that, you complain that others are enforcing their beliefs upon you.

 

[PostmodernProph]

So it was a lie. How noble of you.

what a horrible accusation.......is that another example of an atheist's lie about a Christian?......

Yes. It is a wonderful example. You lie, I call you on it, and you accuse me of lying.

and do you have proof that I'm lying?.....

 

[PostmodernProph]

Yes. I understand you think it is your right to impose your beliefs upon others but others do not have the right to do the same to you. I get that.

ouch....did I step on your toe and make you angry?.....can you deny that the baker who got shut down was forced?....or that wedding photographer in Arizona?......how can you deny that you think its okay to force people to believe what you believe?......

I on the other hand am willing to let people **** whatever they want to **** so long as I'm allowed to ignore them......

Personally, I think the baker and the photographer had the right to refuse service to anyone they wanted. And the people who boycotted their business because of that had the right to do that as well. That is why they were shut down, not because the government did it. So you think it is ok for one side to discriminate but not the other.

As to believing, you can believe whatever you like. But what you actually want to do is enforce that belief upon others by refusing them the same rights you insist upon for yourself. And when you aren't allow to do that, you complain that others are enforcing their beliefs upon you.

????....why do you deny the force that you exerted?.....

not because the government did it

are courts "government"?......

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The Persecution Complex: The Religious Right?s Deceptive Rallying Cry | People For the American Way

The tales of horror keep pouring in: Two middle school girls are forced into a lesbian kiss as part of an anti-bullying program; an Air Force sergeant is fired because he opposes same-sex marriage; a high school track team is disqualified from a meet after an athlete thanks God for the team’s victory; a Veterans Affairs hospital bans Christmas cards with religious messages; a man fixing the lights in a Christmas tree falls victim to a wave of War-on-Christmas violence; an elementary school student is punished for praying over his school lunch; a little boy is forced to take a psychological evaluation after drawing a picture of Jesus.

[Links to above lies at the link.]

None of these stories is true. But each has become a stock tale for Religious Right broadcasters, activists, and in some cases elected officials. These myths – which are becoming ever more pervasive in the right-wing media – serve to bolster a larger story, that of a majority religious group in American society becoming a persecuted minority, driven underground in its own country.

Why Do Right-Wing Christians Think 'Religious Freedom' Means Forcing Their Faith on You? | Alternet

The report shows that Christian conservative circles have become awash in legends of being persecuted for their faith, stories that invariably turn out to be nonsense but that “serve to bolster a larger story, that of a majority religious group in American society becoming a persecuted minority, driven underground in its own country.” This sense of persecution, in turn, gives them justification to push their actual agenda of religious repression under the guise that they’re just protecting themselves.

The most obvious and persistent example of this is the issue of creationism in the classroom. Clearly, teaching creationism in a biology classroom is a straightforward violation of the First Amendment, a direct attempt to use taxpayer money to foist a very specific religious teaching on captive students.

Why do so many fall for these lies?

Because they want to hate and if they can believe there's a "war" on christianity, it gives them an excuse to behave in very anti-christian ways.

Most of this has to do with the fact that many theists are ignorant of Establishment Clause jurisprudence, and fail to understand the difference between the Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause, where an un-Constitutional law or measure conjoining church and state prohibited by the former does not violate the latter; respecting the separation of church and state as originally intended by the Framers in no way interferes with religious practice.

The Louisiana Creationism Act advances a religious doctrine by requiring either the banishment of the theory of evolution from public school classrooms or the presentation of a religious viewpoint that rejects evolution in its entirety. The Act violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment because it seeks to employ the symbolic and financial support of government to achieve a religious purpose.

Edwards v. Aguillard | LII / Legal Information Institute

It is common for many Christians to incorrectly infer that this and similar rulings by the courts 'violates' their right to practice their faith, in this case in public schools.

In fact nothing could be further from the truth.

Christians remain at liberty to believe in creationism whether such nonsense is taught in public schools or not; Christians who believe in creationism are in no way subject to punitive measures by the state for doing so – they face neither fines nor imprisonment.

Christians are free to advocate for creationism and practice this belief without fear of government reprisal. Consequently there is no 'violation' of the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment, and Christians' religious liberty and freedom to follow their faith is in no way burdened by the state.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Yes. I understand you think it is your right to impose your beliefs upon others but others do not have the right to do the same to you. I get that.

ouch....did I step on your toe and make you angry?.....can you deny that the baker who got shut down was forced?....or that wedding photographer in Arizona?......how can you deny that you think its okay to force people to believe what you believe?......

I on the other hand am willing to let people **** whatever they want to **** so long as I'm allowed to ignore them......

Personally, I think the baker and the photographer had the right to refuse service to anyone they wanted. And the people who boycotted their business because of that had the right to do that as well. That is why they were shut down, not because the government did it. So you think it is ok for one side to discriminate but not the other.

As to believing, you can believe whatever you like. But what you actually want to do is enforce that belief upon others by refusing them the same rights you insist upon for yourself. And when you aren't allow to do that, you complain that others are enforcing their beliefs upon you.

And you're at liberty to think whatever you wish, provided you understand that this is in fact wrong as a matter of Constitutional law.

 

[Papageorgio]

The Persecution Complex: The Religious Right?s Deceptive Rallying Cry | People For the American Way

The tales of horror keep pouring in: Two middle school girls are forced into a lesbian kiss as part of an anti-bullying program; an Air Force sergeant is fired because he opposes same-sex marriage; a high school track team is disqualified from a meet after an athlete thanks God for the team’s victory; a Veterans Affairs hospital bans Christmas cards with religious messages; a man fixing the lights in a Christmas tree falls victim to a wave of War-on-Christmas violence; an elementary school student is punished for praying over his school lunch; a little boy is forced to take a psychological evaluation after drawing a picture of Jesus.

[Links to above lies at the link.]

None of these stories is true. But each has become a stock tale for Religious Right broadcasters, activists, and in some cases elected officials. These myths – which are becoming ever more pervasive in the right-wing media – serve to bolster a larger story, that of a majority religious group in American society becoming a persecuted minority, driven underground in its own country.

Why Do Right-Wing Christians Think 'Religious Freedom' Means Forcing Their Faith on You? | Alternet

The report shows that Christian conservative circles have become awash in legends of being persecuted for their faith, stories that invariably turn out to be nonsense but that “serve to bolster a larger story, that of a majority religious group in American society becoming a persecuted minority, driven underground in its own country.” This sense of persecution, in turn, gives them justification to push their actual agenda of religious repression under the guise that they’re just protecting themselves.

The most obvious and persistent example of this is the issue of creationism in the classroom. Clearly, teaching creationism in a biology classroom is a straightforward violation of the First Amendment, a direct attempt to use taxpayer money to foist a very specific religious teaching on captive students.

Why do so many fall for these lies?

Because they want to hate and if they can believe there's a "war" on christianity, it gives them an excuse to behave in very anti-christian ways.

All the links are to the same site saying they are lies, no more or less proof than any site saying it is true.

I also know you are afraid of kids with Bibles, so I don't exactly trust you as being honest. Nice try though.


Sent from my iPad using an Android.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

One of the more disturbing zingers they like to claim is the world is so messed up. Curiously the ones who often say that just murdered their children because of how messed up the world is. So do other fundies then use that infanticide as another example of how messed up the world is if it was another fundy? Isn't that then a catch-22? The world's messed up becauyse people at your church keep murdering their kids because they think the world's messed up, then someone else does citing the same thing as their proof of how messed up it is?

 

[koshergrl]

Another stellar thread brought to you by usmb. Divisive, bigoted, unsourced. Nice. [MENTION=23239]westwall[/MENTION] [MENTION=19170]Coyote[/MENTION]

 

[PratchettFan]

ouch....did I step on your toe and make you angry?.....can you deny that the baker who got shut down was forced?....or that wedding photographer in Arizona?......how can you deny that you think its okay to force people to believe what you believe?......

I on the other hand am willing to let people **** whatever they want to **** so long as I'm allowed to ignore them......

Personally, I think the baker and the photographer had the right to refuse service to anyone they wanted. And the people who boycotted their business because of that had the right to do that as well. That is why they were shut down, not because the government did it. So you think it is ok for one side to discriminate but not the other.

As to believing, you can believe whatever you like. But what you actually want to do is enforce that belief upon others by refusing them the same rights you insist upon for yourself. And when you aren't allow to do that, you complain that others are enforcing their beliefs upon you.

And you're at liberty to think whatever you wish, provided you understand that this is in fact wrong as a matter of Constitutional law.

I don't think the SC would agree with you.

 

[PixieStix]

The biggest lie, at least the most popular one these days, is the one Liberals tell about stoning an adulterer.

Go look it up.

No the biggest lie is the so called war on women.

 

[Avatar4321]

The biggest lie, at least the most popular one these days, is the one Liberals tell about stoning an adulterer.

Go look it up.

No the biggest lie is the so called war on women.

Don't you know, all women want to be able to kill their children and force others to pay for their birth control. If you disagree, you are anti woman.

 

[PratchettFan]

The biggest lie, at least the most popular one these days, is the one Liberals tell about stoning an adulterer.

Go look it up.

No the biggest lie is the so called war on women.

Don't you know, all women want to be able to kill their children and force others to pay for their birth control. If you disagree, you are anti woman.

So it is ok enforce your beliefs upon the personal sovereignty of others so long as a percentage of those people don't mind? What about the ones who do mind? Do they not count because they disagree with you?