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.

 

warning this can offend law abiding citizens - Which I'm not one of.

page: 25
113
<< 22  23  24    26  27  28 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 26 2010 @ 06:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by nixie_nox

Now lets have everyone be honest here and answer the questions that have been avoided.


Well, you DID say 'everyone', so I presume that includes me.



If a Muslim or Atheist prayer was given at a school prior to a game, would there be any issues with this?


I would have no problems with that whatsoever. Matter of fact, I think it would be a great thing. I'm not sure what sort of prayer an atheist would offer, but they should expect me to giggle if they mentioned that 'flying spaghetti monster'. Nothing personal, I just find the mental picture humorous. I'd at least try to hold it in.



Or is this really about wanting a public sanction of Christianity? And if so, why do you need a public sanction of Christianity?


Speaking for myself, this issue is about protection of free speech for everyone, and adherence to the Constitution as the touchstone of what's proper as it's written.

That protection extends to ALL citizens equally, regardless of their religion.

In my mind, a christian sure of his or her faith, and secure in it, shouldn't require public sanction or even recognition, but they SHOULD be allowed to speak their mind wherever they find themselves within the US. I can't find any justification for 'free speech zones' as instituted under the Bush administration.




posted on May, 26 2010 @ 06:40 PM
link   
reply to post by nunya13
 


I have no problem using it as a "soap box." However, I disagree with his assessment that abortion is to be considered by some as a viable form of birth control, that proper stewardship of the environment is about worshiping a spiritual "deity" and that it is somehow contrary to "God's creation," or that there is anything in the Bible dealing with homosexuality THAT DOES NOT deal with the Jewish priests who kept the temple - dealing with spiritual cleanliness. As far as I know, Jesus never touches on homosexuality. HE DOES TOUCH ON USURY, POVERTY, HUNGER...silly "liberal" Jesus.

This issue is that people are angry about stuff...they're not sure what...but they're angry! And of course, people to the left have to be so damn issue-specific. Where is the general consensus on how to fix our social issues. If we only focus on these damn hot button issues (abortion, DADT, prayer in school, etc) when the hell will this NOT BE DERISIVE!?!?!?!?

Let's all get our acts together...it's not Christians vs. Muslims/Atheists/Gays...it's not Liberals vs. Conservatives....

Oh, it's US vs. THEM alright, but the "THEM" I'm referring to are a lot smaller in number than we think...

The principal was fine in execution, wrong on the target villains. We need some more informed people up on that soap box.



posted on May, 26 2010 @ 06:51 PM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 



Speaking for myself, this issue is about protection of free speech for everyone, and adherence to the Constitution as the touchstone of what's proper as it's written.

That protection extends to ALL citizens equally, regardless of their religion.


I'm just going to mention this for the twentieth time for the hell of it.

This is NOT taking away anyone's right to privately practice their religious beliefs. This is NOT in violation of the constitution. This is NOT a Christian nation.

OK, you can now continue spreading ignorant stupidity by repeating over and over what this is NOT about.



posted on May, 26 2010 @ 06:58 PM
link   
reply to post by sirnex
 


I am going to just mention this for the umpteenth time, just for the hell of it.

The right to worship freely has not been restricted in anyway by Constitution. There is no distinction between private and public worship of religion in the First Amendment, and that Amendment is not granting anyone any rights, it is prohibiting Congress from making any laws that would impose a national religion on the people, and prohibiting Congress from making any laws that would restrict the freedom of worship.

Okay, now you can continue spreading ignorance by repeating over and over again what the Constitution is NOT about.



posted on May, 26 2010 @ 07:21 PM
link   
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


I'm also from Texas, and in my opinion the only Texans that say, "that's just the way it is around here", or "we're just that way" are the Texans that were told that same nonsense as children by their parents who were most likely told the same rubbish by theirs. I'm a Texan, and I think for myself. I totally agree with everyone who mentioned that a person has every right to practice which ever religion he subscribes to, just don't assume that everyone shares the same opinions.



posted on May, 26 2010 @ 07:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by nixie_nox

Now lets have everyone be honest here and answer the questions that have been avoided.

If a Muslim or Atheist prayer was given at a school prior to a game, would there be any issues with this?


I answered this question several pages back, within minutes of it being asked.

If the community is Muslim, or even significantly muslim (25% or more), i would not have any problem with it. None at all. The events of a community should reflect the culture of that community.

I believe in tolerance. As i stated, I have happily led the prayer at my Friday Rotary meetings, despite not being Christian. The pleasure in such was the artful phrasing of the prayer to remain true to who i was, yet still remain relevant to what their faith was.

Respect is easy to give. As long as I am not required to follow any beliefs, I am very open and tolerant of any beliefs.



posted on May, 26 2010 @ 07:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by K J Gunderson

Originally posted by nenothtu
I have no problem with publicly admitting when I'm wrong. See my last post above this one.


Yet you cannot admit you are wrong in claiming that I have been attacking religion? Why assert something you know to be false and then stand by it with pride?


Why, because I'm not wrong in this case, of course!



Just like with JP, you have the chance to realize you were wrong and admit it but standing by something that is demonstrably false is lying. Why do you need to lie about what I say?


So I'm a 'liar' now? S'ok, I've been called worse, and I bet that's not hard to believe.



Why do you even have to go there? Why can you not admit to me that you made a mistake accusing me of something I HAVE NOT DONE ONCE? Why can you not admit that??


I already answered that, just above. I thought we were 'done' here, but we're still going to go in circles?




Fair enough. I stand by what I said, and I still won't jump through hoops at your command.

Been nice debating with you. Have a nice day.


Asking you to be honest is asking you to jump through hoops? That is just about the saddest excuse I have ever seen on here.


To my mind - and this is just my opinion mind you - but there is, in my mind, a pretty big difference between 'being honest' and performing tricks on command just to be kept busy.

It should be easy enough to confirm all by yourself. There's a little button at the bottom of each of your posts entitled 'thread'. Clicking on that will pop up all of your posts in this thread. It's not hard, and there are only 3 pages of your posts to wade through.

You really don't need my help for this.

Going through them, and exercising the honesty we both value (whether you think I do or not, I DO), you will see that there are some quite vituperatively condescending comments there, directed primarily at christians, Somewhat at me and a few others (and so not religiously motivated at all, eh?), but I really don't mind that. I have pretty thick skin, and enough self confidence that you can't say much to get under that thick skin. I try to take it in the spirit of the debate.



Was nice with you until you started making up things I said just like that other wonderful poster who did it in the name of Jesus.


Yes it was, wasn't it? But the 'making thing up' part... AHEM...




I WOULD LOVE TO HAVE AN HONEST DEBATE with one of you but the only people that keep coming forward turn out to pull this crap.


I see... or maybe not....



Imagine that, in defense of Christianity, the only way to win is to make things up. That pretty much sums up why you people should not be teaching children anything.


"You people"? You aren't including ME in that, are you? Are we going to go there AGAIN?


No, really, I'm not fit to carry a christian's sandals.

Edit: trying to fix those damnable quote tags again!

[edit on 2010/5/26 by nenothtu]



posted on May, 26 2010 @ 07:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Noetic
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


I'm also from Texas, and in my opinion the only Texans that say, "that's just the way it is around here", or "we're just that way" are the Texans that were told that same nonsense as children by their parents who were most likely told the same rubbish by theirs. I'm a Texan, and I think for myself. I totally agree with everyone who mentioned that a person has every right to practice which ever religion he subscribes to, just don't assume that everyone shares the same opinions.


Are you from Austin?

So you are telling me that the cultural bonds of our predecessors is meaningless? When i say, "That's just the way it is around here", what is meant is, "That is the way it has always been done, and thee is no real catalyst for change as of yet."

I will likely be moving to the San Antonio area. I welcome the change of environment. But I see no reason to try to change 25,000 people here in this town just because i disagree with the culture they have.

Perhaps where you are from, swimming upstream is rewarded. It must surely be the only place of its type on Earth.

Maybe putting your convictions to the test by tackling the illegal immigration debate down at your local barrio is in order?



posted on May, 26 2010 @ 07:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by sirnex
reply to post by nenothtu
 



Speaking for myself, this issue is about protection of free speech for everyone, and adherence to the Constitution as the touchstone of what's proper as it's written.

That protection extends to ALL citizens equally, regardless of their religion.


I'm just going to mention this for the twentieth time for the hell of it.

This is NOT taking away anyone's right to privately practice their religious beliefs. This is NOT in violation of the constitution. This is NOT a Christian nation.


Nor did I say it was, so what's the issue?



OK, you can now continue spreading ignorant stupidity by repeating over and over what this is NOT about.


I repeated that WHEN? I don't recall saying it at all. Be that as it may, thanks for your permission to speak my mind. My ma would be so proud that I managed to gain it...



posted on May, 26 2010 @ 08:22 PM
link   
Matthew 6:

5And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.

6But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly.



posted on May, 26 2010 @ 08:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
reply to post by sirnex
 


I am going to just mention this for the umpteenth time, just for the hell of it.

The right to worship freely has not been restricted in anyway by Constitution. There is no distinction between private and public worship of religion in the First Amendment, and that Amendment is not granting anyone any rights, it is prohibiting Congress from making any laws that would impose a national religion on the people, and prohibiting Congress from making any laws that would restrict the freedom of worship.

Okay, now you can continue spreading ignorance by repeating over and over again what the Constitution is NOT about.



Derr, I don't understand what separation of church and state means.

That's pretty much what I read out of that post.



posted on May, 26 2010 @ 08:40 PM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 


No? Then what was that garbage all about?

"Speaking for myself, this issue is about protection of free speech for everyone, and adherence to the Constitution as the touchstone of what's proper as it's written.

That protection extends to ALL citizens equally, regardless of their religion.
"

You've been defending a government worker for wanting to blast his religious convictions in a government capacity.

What do you not understand about government and it's role with religion? Maybe that's the issue, idk, but if we work together and work this out then perhaps we can come to an agreement on what a government worker can and can't do as a government worker.



posted on May, 26 2010 @ 08:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 


Sure, the guy has the "right" to impose his religious practice during a state event. He shouldn't go to jail, but he should be fired as principal for not doing his job by not keeping church and state separate. Just like I would be fired if I insulted one of my customers at work. I have the right to insult them, but it has consequences.

Also, if you believe that the community should have the right to promote their most popular religion through the state, then why doesn't the President of the United States lead the State of the Union Address with a prayer to Jesus? Christianity is by far the major religion in the U.S. By that logic, you are basically saying there should be no separation of church and state. Is this what you believe?



posted on May, 26 2010 @ 08:45 PM
link   
reply to post by toochaos4u
 



Mark 6:41:

"And when he had taken the five loaves and the two fishes, he looked up to heaven, and blessed, and brake the loaves, and gave them to his disciples to set before them; and the two fishes divided he among them all."



Matthew 14:19:

"...took the five loaves, and the two fishes, and looking up to heaven, he blessed, and brake, and gave the loaves to his disciples, and the disciples to the multitude."



Luke 9:16:

"Then he took the five loaves and the two fishes, and looking up to heaven, he blessed them, and brake, and gave to the disciples to set before the multitude."



John 6:11:

"And Jesus took the loaves; and when he had given thanks, he distributed to the disciples, and the disciples to them that were set down; and likewise of the fishes as much as they would."



John 11:41b to 42:

Jesus lifted up his eyes, and said, Father, I thank thee that thou hast heard me. And I knew that thou hearest me always: but because of the people which stand by I said it, that they may believe that thou hast sent me."


To give thanks for an event, or for community, or for the health and safety of the children about to play is not what Jesus was speaking to when he spoke of the hypocrites who only prayed to be seen praying. Indeed, prayer is an intensely personal matter, but to give thanks to our Creator, openly and publicly is not anything Jesus admonished, and clearly had no problems in doing so himself.



posted on May, 26 2010 @ 08:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Reflection
 





Sure, the guy has the "right" to impose his religious practice during a state event. He shouldn't go to jail, but he should be fired as principal for not doing his job by not keeping church and state separate. Just like I would be fired if I insulted one of my customers at work. I have the right to insult them, but it has consequences.


"The guy" did not impose anything on anyone, and everyone who attended that event was free to act according to their own beliefs, however this is not what you are advocating, is it?

Indeed, just as equivocators do, you rely upon the fallacy of bait and switch, first addressing public worship, and then lamely attempt to compare that to the actions of your own in your employer's private business. The Constitution makes no demand of a private individual keeping church and state separate, and the Establishment Clause speaks to the prohibition of laws being made that would establish a national religion. The ignorant and lazy reference of "separation of church and state" is from a letter written by Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptists, and in no way was codified into federal law.




Also, if you believe that the community should have the right to promote their most popular religion through the state, then why doesn't the President of the United States lead the State of the Union Address with a prayer to Jesus? Christianity is by far the major religion in the U.S. By that logic, you are basically saying there should be no separation of church and state. Is this what you believe?


I never at any time said what you are claiming. I am not a populist, I am an advocate of freedom. Your obfuscations suggest you are for something other than freedom.

[edit on 26-5-2010 by Jean Paul Zodeaux]



posted on May, 26 2010 @ 09:03 PM
link   
reply to post by sirnex
 





Derr, I don't understand what separation of church and state means.


Derr, you obviously don't. Not a single Amendment in the Bill of Rights acts as a prohibition on the people, only the federal government. Are you so ignorant that you are not aware that members of Congress regularly prays before going into session? You don't have a clue what the term "separation of church and state" means, nor do you understand that it was not a phrase written in the Constitution, and your insistence that it was, only shows your own public education upbringing, and what is wrong with public education.



posted on May, 26 2010 @ 09:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 


I'm all for freedom. That's why I believe church and state should be separate. When I go to a state sponsored function that my tax dollars are paying for, I shouldn't have to be subjected to someone's religion as part of the event. I will absolutely tolerate someone or a group praying privately right next to me. My problem is with the state's event, in and of itself, promoting or practicing a particular religion. There's a big difference. One is private the other is the state. Giving the state the right to practice or promote a particular religion is dangerous in my opinion.

You still didn't answer the question. Do you believe there should be separation of church and state?



posted on May, 26 2010 @ 09:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Reflection
 


Then you should have no problems with "the guy" who did not promote any form of religion, and only spoke to the tyranny of a federal government, and did so according to not just his own beliefs, but according the Tennessee Constitution, and the Declaration of Rights contained within that constitution, and did not impose a thing, and only invited those in attendance to privately pray according to their own beliefs, something you claim you are all for, but we both know this is not what you are for, don't we?

As to your disingenuous question; I believe in the rule of law, and the rule of law demands the federal government butt the hell out of peoples right to worship freely. Do you believe in the First Amendment?




[edit on 26-5-2010 by Jean Paul Zodeaux]



posted on May, 26 2010 @ 09:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 


And what is the difference between feeding the hungry and a game? Saying a blessing over food for like believers or praying out loud to a mixed crowd?

That is like me going next door to a church during one of their "reunion services" and them having a prayer over food vs a preacher standing up on a ladder and screaming a prayer over the loudspeaker in the grocery store. I came for the shopping or the game, not the religious service.

Our school district in the 90's handled this another way. They asked what each student's belief was and during public prayer every denomination and every belief represented in the school itself took turns at the podium. The parents of the Christians didn't like having a prayer/speech from Wiccans, Islam, Atheists, other denominations of "Christianity". The matter was dumped for a "silent moment" because the Christians couldn't handle hearing prayers from even other denominations within Christianity much less completely different beliefs represented.

One can always attend a religious school. My parents sent me to one.








[edit on 26/5/10 by toochaos4u]



posted on May, 26 2010 @ 09:35 PM
link   
reply to post by toochaos4u
 


The difference is that unlike Jesus, neither the principal nor the teams that attended this game were claiming Messianic legacy. Further, your disingenuous hypothetical attempts to frame the principal as one who prayed over a loud speaker, of which he did not, but this fact only gets in the way of your own agenda, doesn't it? And that agenda had nothing at all to do with spreading the Gospel did it? The silent moment you spoke of from your own personal experience is precisely what happened at this event, so exactly what is your problem with it?

I also went to a religious school, and was constantly in trouble with the Nuns, and even the Priests for questioning much of the New Testament, and was actually suspended for three days for suggesting that if we were expected to do what Jesus would do, we should all be Jews. I am grateful for the superior education I got in that school, and while I was a constant source of consternation for the administrators and teachers, I was also respected and well liked. I attended a private school that was as equally concerned with teaching young minds to think for themselves, as they were teaching Gospel, and my suspension for questioning a Priest that day, was not for questioning, but for my petulant attitude, and Father Finley spent the rest of my time at that school, encouraging my inquisitive nature and teaching me to do so in a respectful manner.



[edit on 26-5-2010 by Jean Paul Zodeaux]







 
113
<< 22  23  24    26  27  28 >>

log in

join