Trump to create religious office in White House, target 'anti-Christian bias'.

[J.S.]

Oh nose, the Christ Killers will have competition. Stop that!

 

[JohnDB]

 

[Pastelli]

He is lying about the purpose. It is not to weed out non existing anti Christian bias. It's to promote Christian Nationalism in violation of the 1st Amendment

He is no fanatical Christian

 

[Mashmont]

Holy shit on a shingle! WHAT! Let;s try for a second to fathum the absurdity of the statement that "If you remove Christianity from government, you have atheism by default. " So you're saying that the only religion is Christianity? You're either Christian or an Atheist? Listen to your self! I will add that even those who do not adhere to a particular religion are not necessarily atheists . Some ate agnostic. Some of the founders of this country were Theists who believed in a higher power but were not Christians''

As far as atheist regimes who killed people. I assume that you are thinking about places like and the former Soviet Union . That has nothing to do with the absence of Christianity and everything to do with the presence of totalitarian regimes that have little regard for human rights and freedom
Christians have killed a lot of people in the name of God

Army of God (terrorist organization) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Loading…

www.amazon.com

I'm talking about officially atheist regimes. They killed 100 million in the last century, more than all religions combined in history.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

I'm talking about officially atheist regimes. They killed 100 million in the last century, more than all religions combined in history.

And I;m talking about the idiocy of saying that absurdity of the statement that "If you remove Christianity from government, you have atheism by default. "

 

[Mashmont]

And I;m talking about the idiocy of saying that absurdity of the statement that "If you remove Christianity from government, you have atheism by default. "

I’ll ask again. What is the secular position on abortion?

 

[Mashmont]

I'm just an ordinary citizen, so we're just talking in generalities. The secular position on abortion might be what the Ninth Amendment details. Though the right to abortion is not enumerated in the founding document, neither are countless other rights. A woman has a right to do as she pleases with her body, no matter how unpleasant any given action might be.

Thank you. That’s the atheist position on abortion. And that’s why if you remove Christianity from government the default is atheism. Killing children in the womb is godless

 

[Moonglow]

No, stupid. It protects the CHURCH from Government, not the other way around.

And mosques and temples and altars?

 

[Moonglow]

I’ll ask again. What is the secular position on abortion?

Depends on the individual not the MAGAT groupthink.

 

[Moonglow]

Thank you. That’s the atheist position on abortion. And that’s why if you remove Christianity from government the default is atheism. Killing children in the womb is godless

Then why has God killed so many children in the wombs?

 

[Mashmont]

Then why has God killed so many children in the wombs?

Anytime someone says "Why does God kill people?" I know they aren't a serious chatter.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

I’ll ask again. What is the secular position on abortion?

First of all you never asked that question of me but I know where you’re going with it so I’ll humor you in due course.

Secondly , there is no “official “ secular position on abortion. We are individuals who think for ourselves, unlike your monolithic theocrats who can only follow the leader

MY SECULAR POSITION on abortion is that it should be rare but available when necessary. Abortion is a very personal matter and people come to believe that they need to terminate a pregnancy for many different reasons Therefor they should be able to as a personal decision un until the point of viability as per the long standing Roe v Wade decision

I also believe that services and programs to 1) prevent unwanted pregnancies and 2) to provide support to women and families that encourage them to carry a child to term-know that they will have the help and support that they need

The list of such services is long and most people who consider themselves to be pro life DO NOT support them and deride as socialism

Lastly , I believe that abortions should be available after the usual point if medically necessary and that decision should be strictly between the patient and doctor. No judge, lawmaker or prosecutor should be second guessing doctors. It’s not enough for the law to read that an abortion is allowed if the life of the woman in in danger.

The point at which a life is in danger is a medical judgement call and doctors should not have to fear that the patient was not quite close enough to death for the abortion to be legal . Women have died because of such delays . The same is true regarding the viability of the fetus. Doctors knw what one is so mal formed that they will not survive birth, but women have been forced to endure the trauma carry to term anyway

Now go ahead. Start bleating about how this is proof that we need Christianity in government while ignoring the fact that many Christians would agree with me. What we need in government is humanity and common sense

 

[Mashmont]

First of all you never asked that question of me but I know where you’re going with it so I’ll humor you in due course.

Secondly , there is no “official “ secular position on abortion. We are individuals who think for ourselves, unlike your monolithic theocrats who can only follow the leader

Ah there you go. Can't have it both ways. Yes, there are indeed government laws allowing abortion. That is the atheist as well as the secular position. The point is the 'secular' argument is a red-herring pile of crap. It's way to be atheist while trying to sound like it's something else.

MY SECULAR POSITION on abortion is that it should be rare but available when necessary. Abortion is a very personal matter and people come to believe that they need to terminate a pregnancy for many different reasons Therefor they should be able to as a personal decision un until the point of viability as per the long standing Roe v Wade decision

Right. You think it's fine to kill little babies in the womb. That is the godless atheist position.

I also believe that services and programs to 1) prevent unwanted pregnancies and 2) to provide support to women and families that encourage them to carry a child to term-know that they will have the help and support that they need

The list of such services is long and most people who consider themselves to be pro life DO NOT support them and deride as socialism

Lastly , I believe that abortions should be available after the usual point if medically necessary and that decision should be strictly between the patient and doctor. No judge, lawmaker or prosecutor should be second guessing doctors. It’s not enough for the law to read that an abortion is allowed if the life of the woman in in danger.

The point at which a life is in danger is a medical judgement call and doctors should not have to fear that the patient was not quite close enough to death for the abortion to be legal . Women have died because of such delays . The same is true regarding the viability of the fetus. Doctors knw what one is so mal formed that they will not survive birth, but women have been forced to endure the trauma carry to term anyway

Now go ahead. Start bleating about how this is proof that we need Christianity in government while ignoring the fact that many Christians would agree with me. What we need in government is humanity and common sense

List all the qualifiers you want. You already said what you are. Pro-abortion. That's the atheist position.

Since it is impossible to have a government that separates out Christian values without having an atheist government, my contention is that we shouldn't even pretend. We should just right now declare the US a Christian country, since that is infinitely superior to an atheist government like we have in five countries today, all horrific dark hell holes.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Maybe,but you could also be reading too much into it. Like you said, on the surface, it appears to be legitimate. Maybe the surface reflects what's underneath.

And maybe not. We shall see

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

But he did make the EO pretty broad in mentioning all religious liberty.

We know that he is good at covering his ass

 

[Tommy Tainant]

People of all faith deserve to be free to practice without a need to suppress their faith, beliefs, special days of worship etc.

Apart from muslims of course.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

He mentioned the religions he feels are currently under attack by our politicians. He mentions the one specifically. Islam is not under attack by anyone in government, but it is included in this EO, even if not named specifically.

But they could always become a target as they have in the past .Remember his own Muslim travel ban? They are vulnerable. I'm still waiting for you to provide examples of the "frequent anti Christian rhetoric" that has been alleged

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

There are a great many things our government does, that the cotus does not extend it the power to do.

We have been over this . The 14th Amendment . Due process and equal protection , The states must abide by it

 

[Mashmont]

Apart from muslims of course.

Islam isn't a real religion like Christianity.

 

[shockedcanadian]

Apart from muslims of course.

Is that how you really feel?