It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

U.S. Supreme Court Ruling: Atheists Lose...Again.

page: 4
33
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 5 2014 @ 01:30 PM
link   
Doesn't it just come down to a separation of church and state?
I don't care if there is, but i don't think there should be prayer in court.
If you want to say a prayer before court, knock yourself out. But to have an organized prayer, and then a christian one at that. I can see why some will get mad about it.




posted on May, 5 2014 @ 01:36 PM
link   
Seriously rickynews? I don't see how you can be a Christian and still try and say that all atheists are communist or that because someone doesn't want a prayer before official proceedings that they are somehow evil. Isn't the bible kinda fond of the "do unto others thing"? Would you want someone forcing you to sit through a satanic ritual? Would you want someone to make you listen to them pray to George clooney?! The answer is no. I guarantee you want the right to practice your religeon with no persecution, which is what most atheists want, to be atheist without being bombarded with prayers and rituals that they don't believe in.

Things would be different if at the beginning of proceedings they gave a moment of silence for prayer. Instead they chant praise to a CERTAIN God. How does this not click for you man. Your so blind on the matter it's obsurd.



posted on May, 5 2014 @ 01:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: namehere
a reply to: mOjOm

do you mind telling me how prayer at a court or wherever is in any way letting the church dictate the law?


Well, I don't know if I would put it like that exactly. But let me give you an example to illustrate where I think the Non-Religious view is coming from.

Would you still be in favor of this prayer time within the courts and government if you were praying to mecca??? Or if there was maybe a short little "Hail Satan" before they started their session???

Protecting Religious Freedom is about keeping Religious Laws and Constitutional Laws from mixing. Constitutionally you and I and everyone else is Free to practice our Religion or Non Religion in our personal lives as individuals. But the "Law of the Land" is by our Constitutional Laws and Courts. The reason for that is so that NO Religious Laws have the ability to trump the Laws of the Land/Constitutional Laws when establishing what our Government does. Personally, pray to whatever you want, or don't, who cares. But just keep it out of Government.



posted on May, 5 2014 @ 01:40 PM
link   
Good point about "what if it was a prayer to Satan or to Allah" what that be okay too?

Not an Atheist here but certainly not a Christian. Am I a communist then or since I'm not as bad as an Atheist maybe I'm just a socialist or Anarchist or Cannibal or something. LOL



posted on May, 5 2014 @ 01:43 PM
link   
a reply to: rickynews

This is a ruling in favor of prayer which is a violation of the establishment clause. This is the worst supreme court this country has ever seen.



posted on May, 5 2014 @ 01:53 PM
link   
a reply to: rickynews

Good decision and I support it. When things become one sided then we should take a step back and remember why the white man left Europe.... one of the reasons was freedom of religion.....not rule out religion.



posted on May, 5 2014 @ 01:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: DisabledVet1
a reply to: rickynews

Good decision and I support it. When things become one sided then we should take a step back and remember why the white man left Europe.... one of the reasons was freedom of religion.....not rule out religion.


You drew the short stick on history. Many fled to escape religious rule.



posted on May, 5 2014 @ 02:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: mOjOm

originally posted by: rickynews
Atheism, by its very nature and non-belief, is a paradox, and always leads to a Dead End.


Really??? Mind explaining exactly how it's a paradox and/or Dead end???


Sure, I’ll be glad to explain. Let’s first start with the definition of the word paradox:

Definition of paradox:
1. a statement or proposition that seems self-contradictory or absurd but in reality expresses a possible truth.
2. a self-contradictory and false proposition.
3. any person, thing, or situation exhibiting an apparently contradictory nature.
4. an opinion or statement contrary to commonly accepted opinion.

Next, let's consider some insight from Author Neil Shenvi’s article “Three Paradoxes of Atheism”. I have included Only the "Conclusion" aspects of the Article which summarizes the paradoxes. For a complete review of the article, visit here: www.shenvi.org...



Three Paradoxes of Atheism by Author Neil Shenvi

Conclusion - In conclusion, I want to summarize the paradoxes I believe are inherent to the atheism.

I. Truth-seeking
If a truth-loving God doesn't exist, then truth-seeking is neither intrinsically good nor morally obligatory. Therefore, paradoxically, the Christian has grounds to urge all people to seek the truth and to claim it is their moral obligation to seek the truth whereas the atheist has no grounds to urge others to seek the truth or to claim it is their moral obligation to do so.

II. Moral reflection
Suffering and evil in the world is so prolific and horrendous that we instinctively avoid thinking about it to preserve our happiness. If Christianity is true, then all suffering and evil will one day be destroyed and healed. If atheism is true, suffering and evil are pointless and will never be rectified. So, paradoxically, a Christian gains the emotional resources to reflect honestly on suffering by reflecting on reality (as he perceives it) while an atheist gains the emotional resources to reflect honestly on suffering only by ignoring reality (as he perceives it).

III. Moral motivation
If Christianity is true, then all of our moral choices have tremendous, eternal significance. If atheism is true, then none of our moral choices have any eternal significance. So, paradoxically, the Christian gains the motivation to act morally by reflecting on reality (as he perceives it) while the atheist gains the motivation to act morally only by ignoring reality (as he perceives it). None of these observations imply that atheism is necessarily false or that Christianity is true. But I hope that they do cause atheists some serious reflection. At least in these three areas, there is a conflict between the general perception that atheists live a life of realism, facing the truth about reality squarely, and the philosophical and psychological reality of atheism itself… I would like to gently suggest that those who value truth-seeking and realism should consider whether atheism can justify or support either of these ideals.





edit on 5-5-2014 by rickynews because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 5 2014 @ 02:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: DisabledVet1
a reply to: rickynews

Good decision and I support it. When things become one sided then we should take a step back and remember why the white man left Europe.... one of the reasons was freedom of religion.....not rule out religion.


You have it backwards. This is making it more one sided and less free, not the other way around.

You're also confusing where this applies as well. Nobody is ruling out Religion or the Practice of any religion within one's Personal life. Constitutional Laws are there to restrict Governments not people. People are protected from Courts and Gov. dictating their Religious Practice whatever they may be Personally. However, Gov. and Courts aren't ruled by Religious Laws and so shouldn't be following the Practices of ANY Religion.

It's the union of Religion and State which is exactly why they left Europe. So that People could Practice Free Religious Expression while Government and Courts must follow Man's Laws/Constitutional Laws.



posted on May, 5 2014 @ 02:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: andr3w68
Seriously rickynews? I don't see how you can be a Christian and still try and say that all atheists are communist or that because someone doesn't want a prayer before official proceedings that they are somehow evil. Isn't the bible kinda fond of the "do unto others thing"? Would you want someone forcing you to sit through a satanic ritual? Would you want someone to make you listen to them pray to George clooney?! The answer is no. I guarantee you want the right to practice your religeon with no persecution, which is what most atheists want, to be atheist without being bombarded with prayers and rituals that they don't believe in.

Things would be different if at the beginning of proceedings they gave a moment of silence for prayer. Instead they chant praise to a CERTAIN God. How does this not click for you man. Your so blind on the matter it's obsurd.


Bottom line is Freedom of Religion is Absolute. I may not like who somebody prays to, or they may not like who I pray to, but both they and I do have that right regardless. I would add that the majority of Americans are neither Satanists or Atheists.



posted on May, 5 2014 @ 02:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: sheepslayer247
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

What this ruling means is that you are forced to participate in a religious ceremony, even though it's a PUBLIC meeting that has nothing to do with religion.

This is very bad, in my opinion.


No, you're not. Participating would mean you would also have to bow your head and pray with them. If you stand there in defiance with your head up, looking around, who in their right mind would stop you? On the other hand, you're telling people that they cannot apply their right to pray over something.

If they tossed religion in there to make choices and influence the decisions one way or the other, then yes, I can see where this would apply, but that's not the case. They are praying for GUIDANCE - BEFORE the lawmakers do their thing arguing laws and whaterver it is they do.



posted on May, 5 2014 @ 02:16 PM
link   
a reply to: rickynews

so you didn't answer the question, what if the prayer was something other then christian?
Or would you be ok with more then 1 prayer?? Can it be an open mic and who ever is in there can request what prayer?

Your god is different then mine, why should i have to pray to yours?



posted on May, 5 2014 @ 02:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: Woodcarver

originally posted by: StallionDuck
I'm with you guys..

Why in the world should it bother anyone that I want to pray? Is there fear that lightning bolts will come down and smash them? Do they think I will convert them against their will just because I pray? I don't care if they don't pray, so why should anyone care if I do? They'll just laugh and snub me anyways for my beliefs, so why force me to not to do something I'm not forcing them to do?

This is so damn silly... and they call christians crazy and overbearing.
Well. Would it bother you if these officials wanted to pray to Allah, or what if they wanted to pray to Satan? I personally dont want these people who are serving a variety of cultures as an official representative to make any decisions based on any faith. I want them to make decisions based on hard and current data. To allow prayer into the office is to allow all prayer into the office.



It wouldn't bother me. I'd think praying to satan is stupid, but hey.. whatever they want. They're not making me pray to satan... They're not influencing the law making because satan says to kill a dog everytime a law is made, or that every law must include killing a dog every day at noon.

It's silly to even be bothered by someone elses "thing" unless that thing is actually hurting another person or influencing their laws one way or the other.... according to our own seperation of C&S law.



posted on May, 5 2014 @ 02:18 PM
link   
a reply to: rickynews




a truth-loving God


What does that even mean? Do you really think that your God loves truth? That's not what the Bible says!


2 Thessalonians 2:11
And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:



posted on May, 5 2014 @ 02:19 PM
link   
a reply to: StallionDuck

A mass prayer is a religious ceremony, we have separation of church and state, where is the problem here?
How did the judge rule in favor when it is against our constitution...



posted on May, 5 2014 @ 02:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: rickynews

so you didn't answer the question, what if the prayer was something other then christian?
Or would you be ok with more then 1 prayer?? Can it be an open mic and who ever is in there can request what prayer?

Your god is different then mine, why should i have to pray to yours?


Bottom line is Freedom of Religion is Absolute. I may not like who somebody prays to, or they may not like who I pray to, but both they and I do have that right regardless.



posted on May, 5 2014 @ 02:21 PM
link   
a reply to: StallionDuck

And when your religious prayer is sacreligious to mine and vice versa what then? If I lead a prayer on the Senate floor asking Satan for his blessing and guidance what then? Or what about all the superpac videos forthcoming of so and so doesn't bow their head during The Lords Prayer, yadda yadda? This is #ing ridiculous.
edit on 5/5/2014 by Kali74 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 5 2014 @ 02:22 PM
link   
a reply to: rickynews


And I have the right not to have to sit through a religious ceremony that I don't believe in.
If you need to have a mass prayer then go to church, that is why they are there.
I have been in a couple, seems to be what happens in there



posted on May, 5 2014 @ 02:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: StallionDuck

A mass prayer is a religious ceremony, we have separation of church and state, where is the problem here?
How did the judge rule in favor when it is against our constitution...


First you have to show where the prayer ended and the "state" function started. The prayer was before. it is not included durring or in the state function. That's pretty easy for me to understand. I don't see the problem.



posted on May, 5 2014 @ 02:23 PM
link   
a reply to: rickynews

I. Truth-seeking
You don't need a Truth Loving God to see the benefit provided by knowing and seeking the Truth. Logic alone is enough to understand the "Good" that comes from knowing the truth of something rather than a Lie. Knowing the Truth about which plants are edible and which are poison is enough to show the Reason for knowing the Truth about which is which.

II. Moral reflection
Suffering isn't pointless to atheists. Nor do they ignore it to stay happy. It's not a this way or that way kind of thing but a mixture. You don't ignore it, but you don't let it consume all your thoughts either. You just address it in the amounts which you are able to without being overtaken with it.

III. Moral motivation
Moral choices don't need to be eternal to understand the reason for them. Just the fact that my moral choices have an effect in the here and now is enough motivation for me to make them. Even more so probably. After all, if I make a bad moral choice now that hurts the people around me that I actually know and love or even my children after I'm gone is motivation enough to try and act responsibly.




top topics



 
33
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join