It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by nathraq
No offense Faisca, but how could a Christian not take the old testament literally? The 10 commandments are from the OT, not to mention the whole creation/evolution debate is based on Christian belief in God's creation of Adam/Eve.
That's what I meant by pick and choose.
No offense Faisca
Originally posted by Joseph Knecht
The point is TRUTH, the news that was encouraged to be spread is divisive in its nature. 'Your either with us or with the terrorists'. 'Your either with God or with the Devil'. Are you familiar with the Crusades, the Spanish Inquisition, Manifest Destiny, etc..? Don't think for a second brother that you have a monopoly on the truth.
Originally posted by AF1
Do you believe it is right then for these people to push their beliefs on the general populace?
Originally posted by Esoterica
Originally posted by Joseph Knecht
Do you then claim to know the truth? If christianity isn't truth, what is? The truth of things is exclusive, meaning whatever it is, it's by itself. There can't be more than one truth. 2 + 2 = 4 is truth. There is no room for another. So, tell me, what is it? Is it so hard to believe that everything was created by God? And is it so hard to believe that He has established how He wants His own creations (namely, us) to live? Wouldn't His commandments, laws, teachings, and desires be the truth?
Yes. I know the truth. The truth is that I don't know, AND I DON'T PRETEND TO.
I am constantly amazed at the infinitely many realities that are eternally present. But this is where you are misguided Simple Truth: the truth of things is not always 'exclusive'. Truths come in many forms and fashions and are relative, elusive, and dependent on much pomp and circumstance. To express that you know the 'real truth' is always going to be to the detriment of someone else's 'real truth'. It's not hard at all for me to believe in a God. I do. Though The God I believe in abhors the wrathful, all loving God that you so believe. There are many roads. So then, let x = x.
Preventing same-sex marriage based on religious doctrine. Attempting to display the 10 Commandments on public property. Knocking on my door with tracts and pamphlets in-hand. "Under God" in the pledge of allegiance. Should I continue?
Originally posted by Valhall .back your accusation that the christians of the US are "pushing their beliefs" ont he general populace.
You have a misguided perception of me, and especially atheism. Your belief that those "without faith" are inherently evil is biased and incorrect. Morality should not be based on dogma, but what is "right". Throughout the ages, we've seen how dogma-based morality has only caused problems for those not of your exact-same-dogma. Oh... and yes, I am judged... by myself and my peers, every day.
Originally posted by Truth You see if you think like athiesm, then your living for this world only, and it don't maatter who you step on or hurt to get to the top because nobody will judge you, you will never pay for evil, you just live for this world and die. Im afraid of people who think like this. Im afraid to imagine the whole world believing like this.
Originally posted by Valhall
AF...back your accusation that the christians of the US are "pushing their beliefs" ont he general populace.
I won't hold my breath waiting, ok?
Also, what about us "old-found" christians? Have you anything to say concerning us?
We now have activist judges, mayors, governors, etc., who go against the will of the great majority of citizens in this nation (forget that it is against the law in most of the nation!) and declare that it is the "right" of homosexual men and women to "marry."
Christians need to come up with some ammunition against this grievous sin, and soon. As it stands now, our heads are, as it were, spinning with all the degrading developments that have taken place in the past few weeks.
Where will we get this ammunition to fight against "spiritual wickedness in high places"? From the Word of God - the only place that, in the end, will matter.
President Bush's decision to replace two members of his bioethics panel with three appointees whose beliefs are closer to his own has sparked a new round of criticism on how the administration handles science.
"Elizabeth Blackburn is one of the most respected senior scientists who have looked carefully at this issue, and it would seem to be prudent to replace her with somebody who has that level of skill and experience in science," said Laurie Zoloth, director of bioethics at the center for genetic medicine at Northwestern University in Chicago, Illinois, and board member of the International Society for Stem Cell Research. "And William May is one of America's most thoughtful scholars of religion and Christian ethics. What's notable is that both of them have been strong supporters of stem-cell research."
The Council on Bioethics is charged with advising the president on moral and ethical issues surrounding advances in biomedical science and technology. The panel has authored four reports thus far, but has had difficulty finding a consensus opinion, in part due to dissent from Blackburn and May.
In a series of recent decisions, the National Park Service has approved the display of religious symbols and Bible verses, as well as the sale of creationist books giving a biblical explanation for the Grand Canyon and other natural wonders.
These moves all emanate from top Park Service political appointees over the objections of park superintendents, agency lawyers and scientists. A number of fundamentalist Christian and socially conservative groups are claiming credit for these actions and touting their new direct and personal access to Bush Administration officials
What happened to the "commonly held moral code" that this nation was founded upon the belief of freedom and liberty? How is your freedom and/or liberty harmed by two people of the same sex entering a committed union? "Morality" is not, and should not, be based on the dogma of religious teachings alone (as the theists seem to think). Morality is bigger than that, it should be a symbol of selflessness, not a sword of righteousness. I propose that it is inherently immoral to impose my version of morality on someone else.
Originally posted by Valhall Now YOU are confusing things. That there are controversial issues in which the MAJORITY of the people are voting against what you want, doesn’t equate to a certain religious belief forcing anything. It equates to the MAJORITY having some common view or some commonly held moral code…
That a obnoxious vocal minority is trying to force its anti-religious lack of moral code on the greater percent of the US population is what ought to be concerning everybody.
Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
Originally posted by Valhall
I propose that it is inherently immoral to impose my version of morality on someone else.
No...it isn't...not when you are the majority.