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

You are certainly getting the same treatment you give in this site. Like attracts like, my brother...oops! That was probably a little too religious for you. Peace...oooops! Did it again.

what's with the sudden change of heart, first it seemed you supported my opinion but now that I say I have never been to church the dogs of the leash. I don't think my post was to offensive, just asking that people respect others beliefs. Religions seem to demand respect while looking down at everyone else.
I am just tired of having Christian claim to take pity on athiests or pray for us. I don't have any problem with doing it for yourself, but I don't pity them. Other than the loss of their Sunday morning or what ever day it is for you.
Maybe that's why I don't seem to stress this bs, have a day to relax and spin one up, or get up nice and early and sit in a wood bench. I'll take the first


Oops that probibly rattled your cage again

[edit on 26-5-2010 by GummB]

[edit on 26-5-2010 by GummB]

Originally posted by ManBehindTheMask
All I hear is "religious zealot this, and neocon that, and bible thumper here"

All because someone was pointing out the blatant HYPOCRISY of every single handed down piece of crap law that restricts the majority of people just so the minority can "not be offended"?

Give me a break, have you people lost your minds? If you cant look past your own nose stuck in the air, and your own self righteous behavior, long enough to see that what this person is saying is truth, then you are more intolerant than what you are accusing this "christian" of being.

Tell me how tolerant you want people to be of your "right" to not have anything religious spoken around you, so it doesnt hurt your ears or "corrupt" your children....

Then ill watch as you take people to court, sue school districts, have people fired over saying "god" in a public domain.........THATS NOT TOLERANT! ITS THE EXACT SAME THING YOU ARE ACCUSING EVERYONE ELSE OF BEING BECAUSE THEY HAVE A RELIGION!.

YOU ARE THE INTOLERANT ONES!



Look, I have friends from many many religions.....buhdists, muslims, mormans, catholics.....

Ive gone to dinner at ever single one of these peoples houses , and what do you know, every single one of them prayed to their god of choice.....

Do you think for one second I got offended because im not of that particular religion? Do you think for one second I said "Stop, dont mention Allah , i might turn muslim" or "Mentioning Joseph Smith is against my belief system I would appreciate you not talking about it infront of me"

No......I bowed my head a long with them, and i held the hands of my FRIENDS and THEIR friends and took part in a HUMAN experience.....that brought us all closer together, DESPITE our religions.......

I practiced humility, respect, and REAL tolerance.........

Jesus christ (lol..) Am I ever tired of hearing about all this Religious BS. A sporing event is not the place for any kind of irrelevant information like that, political or religious. Now that we have pretty much proved that there is NO GOD, it is time to take it out of society, at least not forced upon to start. Its bad enough that everyday I see new churches being built (wasted resources), people knocking on my door telling me that im a "lost soul", and people "blessing me" when I DO GOOD/BAD THINGS. PEOPLE WE ARE IN THE 21st Century. We Created ARTIFICIAL LIFE (source: Google artificial life), Bless myself for surviving this long in such a F***ed up world. When can we just drop this BS story. We have bigger fish to fry, like all the dead animals and other sea life we are killing in the Gulf.

The principle should be fired. or at least "suspended". I Would have got angry if I was at the game, especially if I had my kids there. Its not even my job to tell my children about religion, I want them to learn this on their own
There are no Christian, Catholic, Buddhist, Muslim, Morman CHILDREN!
Just Children that happen to be brought if in that lifestyle.

I will no longer just bow my head at another s religious beliefs, I will sit there and just stay silent and respect them as mis/un-informed Human Beings

I am patient with stupidity, but not with those who are proud of it..

Edith Sitwell


[edit on 26-5-2010 by Harrington]

[edit on 26-5-2010 by Harrington]

reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux

Being gay means being a part of a very small portion of the population and is just not the norm.

That makes no sense at all my friend...that is extremely intolerant...I actually think around 10% of the population is gay...you do understand that's actually a pretty large amount...and there are many other minorities out there who study or embrace ways of life you'd find perfectly acceptable, but according to your logic, that isn't normal. If you don't fit in with everyone else you're a blasphemous outsider who should be shunned...that's you logic...well I'm proud of being a unique individual with very defined beliefs and paradigms that not many people would have, I don't follow the crowd, and do something simply because everyone else is doing it or believing it...I know I'm not "normal", and I take pride in that...

Sex was never safe, and a delusional attitude developed with the advent of penicillin, and that delusion found a rude awakening with the advent of AIDS, which was first labeled GRIDS, which stood for Gay Related Immune Deficiency Syndrome.

Sex might not be perfectly safe, but it certainly isn't wrong or unnatural. Kids are going to do it one way or another, and IMO, it's better they be protected and be aware of the consequences of their actions if they choose to engage in the perfectly natural act.

God loves everyone, even Mother Earth.

Then "he" shouldn't mind "her" getting a bit of the praise. eh?

Fundamental Christians are no less religious than the modern day "scientist" who thinks the scientific method is similar to the Catholic's use of the rhythm method, and they just pull out whenever their theory looks as if it might be falsified.

There is a vast difference between science and religion - an extremely vast difference. Religion usually has nothing but a book as a foundation for belief. It isn't updated and modified, because that would be contradictory. The books don't usually contain anything but witness testimony which could be interpreted in a number of ways. Science on the other hand, is using experimentation and observation to build logical and rational theories which can be peer reviewed and confirmed by replication. Old and outdated theories are refined and modified when knew information comes to light. In other words, religion simply believes and claims it already has all the big answers to life, and therefore you need not keep looking, and dare not question the faith...but the beliefs are never verified or updated in any way...whilst all religions claim to be the right one...at least science can admit it was wrong, and constantly seek new information and answers to the get some real God damn answers about this reality we live in.

Public schools are a drain on public funds and should be scrapped altogether, that way no one has to be offended.

I'd be extremely offended if my kids had to go to any of your so-called schools.

[edit on 26/5/10 by CHA0S]

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

~The First Amendment; The Bill of Rights, The Constitution for the United States~

A clear reading of this straightforward Amendment makes perfectly clear who has been denied the authority to Establish a religion and that is Congress. This is what is known as the Establishment Clause, and it in no way speaks to the States or local government. Each state comes with its own constitution, and if that constitution isn't expressly forbidding public facilities the right of prayer, then there is no Constitutional basis to deny any public school the right to openly and publicly pray. It is due to the dubious 14th Amendment that the courts have extended what was expressly intended to be prohibitions on a federal government to become prohibitions on a state and local level as well.

The religiosity of worshiping The SCOTUS as if they are nine Popes who act as implements of a higher power is no different than the religiosity of Christianity. The Bill of Rights are not Amendments intended to act as a prohibition on the people, they are prohibitions on a federal government, and virtually all state constitutions act in the same way, as a prohibition on government, not on the people.

An EXCELLENT analysis, to which I would only add that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" pretty clearly says that Congress shall make NO law - that means neither for nor against, and so they properly have no say in the matter at all. As the role of the SCOTUS is weighing cases against the touchstone of the Constitution, then they properly have no say in the matter whatsoever, either.

You see, when making a law or ruling against prayer, the part that says "or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" is thereby violated.

It seems to be more in the realm of local, or even institutional, policy, not a matter subject to law at all.

reply to post by GummB


If you actually thought my initial post was in support of your position, then you clearly missed the sarcasm. Further, if you were actually in support of what I offered as sarcasm, then brother, you are one scary dude.

reply to post by sirnex


How the enemies of God must rejoice at how your hate filled diatribe that advocates the rape of a child recieves so much approval.

Originally posted by stonergeek
The Federal government has no business here if no one's rights were violated.

This the real issue here. How government increasingly seek to legislate every aspect of peoples lives, pushing the control agenda.

reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux

you opinions like religion so far are only sucessfull at making me laugh

congrats to that
I'm done arguing about the merits of religion. You clearly disagree and have no intentions of making a valid rebuttle, just an attack

reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux

you opinions like religion so far are only sucessfull at making me laugh

congrats to that
I'm done arguing about the merits of religion. You clearly disagree and have no intentions of making a valid rebuttle, just an attack

Originally posted by nunya13
Since when did school football games become an acceptable event for political soap box speeches? Maybe he should spend his time trying to fight against what he sees as an atrocity rather than making everyone listen to his political ramblings.

Also, the constitution does say freedom of religion, not FROM. However, that doesn't mean that it's okay to blurt over a PA system and force everyone to hear your prayer. Just like it wouldn't be okay for someone on the opposite side of the aisle to get on a PA system and tell everyone how there is nothing wrong with homosexuality.

Just like they have a right to say it, others have a right not to hear it and it's nearly impossible to avoid it if your in crowded bleachers and were not forewarned that there was going to be a public prayer. Same as trying to say a prayer over the school PA when the other students do not have the option of NOT hearing it.

If there was a Muslim teacher who wanted to say his/her own prayer, don't you think the Christians would be upset about being forced to listen to it?

Your a complete idiot! This was not a prayer per say, it was a principles attempt to educate those who did not know of the supreme courts ruling. Im an agnostic, but for someone, anyone with the balls to get up and use their voice taking a stand against a court ruling that is unconstitutional is ok by me. This country has gotten so "PC" that we dont want to hurt the feelings of gays, muslims, or any other questionable people or action, but to stand up for ones rights, freedom of religion, and for your information, he was also using the first amendment...you obviously dont know what that one is, so let me edu-micate you! FREEDOM OF SPEECH!
Get over yourself and stop boring us with your incoherent rambling!

reply to post by nenothtu


The Tennessee Constitution has actually been given short shrift in this thread, and this document has far more bearing than the federal Constitution does.

§ 1. Powers of people

That all power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority, and instituted for their peace, safety, and happiness; for the advancement of those ends they have at all times, an unalienable and indefeasible right to alter, reform, or abolish the government in such manner as they may think proper.

§ 2. Doctrine of non-resistance

That government being instituted for the common benefit, the doctrine of non-resistance against arbitrary power and oppression is absurd, slavish, and destructive of the good and happiness of mankind.

§ 3. Freedom of worship

That all men have a natural and indefeasible right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own conscience; that no man can of right be compelled to attend, erect, or support any place of worship, or to maintain any minister against his consent; that no human authority can, in any case whatever, control or interfere with the rights of conscience; and that no preference shall ever be given, by law, to any religious establishment or mode of worship.

§ 4. Political or religious test That no political or religious test, other than an oath to support the Constitution of the United States and of this State, shall never be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under this State.

And this section from Article IX, is particularly interesting:

§ 2. Atheists holding office

No person who denies the being of God, or a future state of rewards and punishments, shall hold any office in the civil department of this State.

Hmmmm....thanks for posting. It is always nice to read like minded posters.

Originally posted by fordrew
God does not belong in school, or sports for that matter. God should not belong in anything except for church.

God belongs where God choses to belong.

My problem with public schools - I pay taxes for kids to learn garbage I don't agree with. However, if I want my kids to go to a private school of my choice, I pay out of my pocket while still paying for the public school garbage.

Attention children, today's curriculum is sex education. As I call your name, come to the front of the class and get your condom and your cucumber. Class... class... settle down, this is very important. Jane... Jane... take that cucumber out of your mouth, we haven't started that lesson yet.

Liberals run a muck.

reply to post by Harrington


Your funny, you obviously dont respect ones freedom of speech! ( Thats the first amendment just in case you didnt know.)
But my question to you is this? Just how did "we" prove that there is no GOD?
Im an agnostic, so Im curious just how we allegedly proved without a reasonable doubt that there is no "higher power"?
You say this and use it as direct evidence to support your claim. But what substantiated evidence to you bring to the table?
You say we created life I believe of some sort, but we also created NUKES, guns, ammo, buildings, cars etc.., does that mean those creations proved the lack of any god or higher power? Please enlighten us with your wisdom that your so freely expressing. Im sure others would like to read your evidence to support your claim, I know I am!

reply to post by nenothtu

Thank you, fellow Constitutionalists at its finest!

reply to post by CHA0S


Ten percent is a fair estimate, it is actually anywhere from 2 to 13% depending upon the area and who is doing the polling, but I accept 10% as a fairly accurate estimate, but in regards to your question, 10% is 90% less than the norm. You do understand that 90% is quite a bit larger than 10% don't you? Also, simply pointing out the relatively small numbers and suggesting this is not the norm, is hardly intolerant, and it is quite hypocritical of you pull out your fake intolerant police badge every time your confronted with a reality you don't like.

No one has ever said sex isn't natural, and I was responding to your naive "safe sex" remark. The safest sex has always been that of carnal knowledge.

Ascribing a male personification to God is your baggage my friend, and God has most certainly lavished praise upon Mother Earth. If you would bother to listen to God once in a while, you would know that.

Galileo was a Catholic and a passionate scientist deeply committed to the scientific method, unlike many of the lazy agenda driven hacks today. His advocacy of a heliocentric solar system put him in a similar situation as the one Jesus found himself in his day, and Galileo gallantly stood trial and never once relinquished his faith in the name of science, and we are far more indebted to Galileo, than humanity will ever be from the likes of Robert Gallo.

Religious texts are usually filled with mythological tales that have survived since time immemorial precisely because they speak to the human soul and offer life lessons that the modern day Shaman, colloquially known as psychiatrist, (boy there is a pseudoscience wholly disinterested in the scientific method), have failed time and time again to offer.

The difference between the old and outdated theories you speak of being updated, and matters of spirituality, is that science can only deal with logic, and logic deals with a middle, beginning and an end, and in terms of matter, energy, space and time, logic is a wonderful tool. In terms of what came before the beginning, and what comes after the end, science has no interest in, and thus, spirituality fills the void.

The beauty of doing away with public schools is you won't have to worry about sending your kids to any of my schools. That's freedom baby, something I wholly advocate, which is something you seem to be greatly offended with.



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

reply to post by SurefireII



They will not try to prove it because they cannot. They will only retaliate with something similar to, " I don't have to prove he doesn't exist, you have to prove that he does exist". To which I would reply. I don't have to prove anything. I have seen so many people on here attack the belief in God that I no longer feel sorry for what is to come. I now see how it is all justified. Glory to God through Christ our savior.


[edit on 26-5-2010 by n0xyia]

Originally posted by GummB
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux

 

you opinions like religion so far are only sucessfull at making me laugh

congrats to that
I'm done arguing about the merits of religion. You clearly disagree and have no intentions of making a valid rebuttle, just an attack

That's odd, your post just a few minutes ago was under the impression I was in agreement with you. You seem a little confused.

Originally posted by SurefireII
This was not a prayer per say, it was a principles attempt to educate those who did not know of the supreme courts ruling. Im an agnostic, but for someone, anyone with the balls to get up and use their voice taking a stand against a court ruling that is unconstitutional is ok by me.

Not only in America but worldwide there is a concerted effort to use national law to castrate Christian voices.

State education systems, media propaganda, ease of access to mind-altering pharma and modern agricultural practices that poison the food we eat all contribute to the growing mindlessness that cries out against public use in western countries of the word God.

Those who support the courts assertion that national and internation law-makers can legislate against the spiritual and moral values of any one group will soon find themselves also silenced.

Make no mistake, TPTB do not want people to have an original thought or a freely expressed personal value that does not support the all pervading system of control and slavery to the state machine.

Originally posted by n0xyia
reply to post by SurefireII

 

They will not try to prove it because they cannot. They will only retaliate with something similar to, " I don't have to prove he doesn't exist, you have to prove that he does exist". To which I would reply. I don't have to prove anything. I have seen so many people on here attack the belief in Zeus that I no longer feel sorry for what is to come. I now see how it is all justified. Glory to Hypnotoad.
[edit on 26-5-2010 by n0xyia]

I like this version better. It's both humerous, and it shows how arbitrary religion can be.

[edit on 5/26/2010 by VneZonyDostupa]