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.

 

Fox News Viewers Threaten Atheists Over 9/11 Cross Lawsuit

page: 15
9
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 22 2011 @ 01:26 AM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 


I agree the government should be secular. I just don't think it's a big deal to have religious symbols in government funded buildings, schools, courthouses. As long as there isn't a man standing beside it preaching its fine.




posted on Aug, 22 2011 @ 01:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by DrChuck
Demographics does not mean a building or a institution where people congregate, where did you get that? Demographics is the statistical study of populations. Such as....What percent of the population make more than a million a year, or what percent of the population own cars, or what percent of the population claim atheism.


I know what it is. I know how it is used in advertising. A statistic where a certain group of same belief congregate matters if you are trying to sell something targeting that group.

So your point is the percentage of population who are Atheists.

OK. And . . . . . why is that important to this discussion?



posted on Aug, 22 2011 @ 01:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kitilani
OK someone just tell me why these particular Christians are being so petty?
What are the facts?
Atheists simply asked to be included.
Christians said no, sue us!
Christians took the facebook to spew hate and violence.
Christians are blaming the Atheists who just want to be included for the actions taken by the Christians.

So why can't they just include the atheists and be done with it?
Why do they have to say such horribly unChristian things all over facebook in support of their religion?


Because it is the perfect set up

You can be an $hitty as possible in this life, because you are told that your $hitty conduct can be absolved
by virtue of belief, not action. (kinda sounds like American conservatism)



posted on Aug, 22 2011 @ 01:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by DrChuck

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by DrChuck
Atheism requires faith to believe that there is no God.


No it doesn't.

I have my own beliefs. My beliefs lack belief in a deity.

It does not require faith for me to lack belief in a deity.



I also have my own beliefs. My beliefs lack belief in non-theism.

It does require faith for me to lack belief in non-theism.

Either way both you and I have beliefs. If one of our beliefs were proven, it would be fact. But neither are. Both are unproven, hence both beliefs are founded on faith.


My belief is everything is energy.

It does not require faith - - it requires science.




I also hold belief that everything is energy, it has to be. Einsteins theory proves that matter can transform into energy, the atomic model shows that every matter is in a constant state of vibrations. I am also a man of sciences. But I cannot in good conscience, as a man of science, deny the existence of a deity without it being verified and proven.

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. And unless the existence of a deity is proven or disproven, to deny or concede to the existence of God is purely faith based.



posted on Aug, 22 2011 @ 01:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by Janky Red

Originally posted by fooks
reply to post by Janky Red
 


represents lots of stuff, dude.

pain and suffering, everlasting life, respect for the dead, you know, christians took that for their own like the word certain races can't say but certain others can.

it's a symbol of faith.

don't like faith or can't see it when it hits you in the face?

walk away.



I still think it is a strange, sadistic symbol to worship.

Whatever, there are tons of them about... I don't see why they should become a national symbol, relationships with god are completely singular as far as I can tell. You cannot score me a place in heaven can you???
edit on 22-8-2011 by Janky Red because: (no reason given)


i can put in a good word for ya.



so will any religious person.



posted on Aug, 22 2011 @ 01:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by Annee
 


I agree the government should be secular. I just don't think it's a big deal to have religious symbols in government funded buildings, schools, courthouses. As long as there isn't a man standing beside it preaching its fine.


Ok - - suppose there had been a cross beam in the shape of an A (instead of a cross) - - and Atheists claimed it represented them.

Only the Atheist symbol would be placed at the memorial.



posted on Aug, 22 2011 @ 01:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by DrChuck
Demographics does not mean a building or a institution where people congregate, where did you get that? Demographics is the statistical study of populations. Such as....What percent of the population make more than a million a year, or what percent of the population own cars, or what percent of the population claim atheism.


I know what it is. I know how it is used in advertising. A statistic where a certain group of same belief congregate matters if you are trying to sell something targeting that group.

So your point is the percentage of population who are Atheists.

OK. And . . . . . why is that important to this discussion?



It has nothing to do with the discussion, other than the fact that you kept saying that atheists are not a demographic group of a population. Lets put an end to the demographics. I think we became sidetracked in the heat of our debate.



posted on Aug, 22 2011 @ 01:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by DrChuck
It has nothing to do with the discussion, other than the fact that you kept saying that atheists are not a demographic group of a population. Lets put an end to the demographics. I think we became sidetracked in the heat of our debate.


OK - - you're the one who brought it into the discussion.

I figured you meant for it to apply in some way.



posted on Aug, 22 2011 @ 01:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by DrChuck

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by DrChuck

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by DrChuck
Atheism requires faith to believe that there is no God.


No it doesn't.

I have my own beliefs. My beliefs lack belief in a deity.

It does not require faith for me to lack belief in a deity.



I also have my own beliefs. My beliefs lack belief in non-theism.

It does require faith for me to lack belief in non-theism.

Either way both you and I have beliefs. If one of our beliefs were proven, it would be fact. But neither are. Both are unproven, hence both beliefs are founded on faith.


My belief is everything is energy.

It does not require faith - - it requires science.




I also hold belief that everything is energy, it has to be. Einsteins theory proves that matter can transform into energy, the atomic model shows that every matter is in a constant state of vibrations. I am also a man of sciences. But I cannot in good conscience, as a man of science, deny the existence of a deity without it being verified and proven.

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. And unless the existence of a deity is proven or disproven, to deny or concede to the existence of God is purely faith based.


The thing is Doc, faith is an act...

Disbelief is a state of being...

Do you believe I will send you $1,000,000,000?

Can any bit of reasoning from my end change your particular belief?



posted on Aug, 22 2011 @ 01:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Janky Red

Originally posted by DrChuck

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by DrChuck

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by DrChuck
Atheism requires faith to believe that there is no God.


No it doesn't.

I have my own beliefs. My beliefs lack belief in a deity.

It does not require faith for me to lack belief in a deity.



I also have my own beliefs. My beliefs lack belief in non-theism.

It does require faith for me to lack belief in non-theism.

Either way both you and I have beliefs. If one of our beliefs were proven, it would be fact. But neither are. Both are unproven, hence both beliefs are founded on faith.


My belief is everything is energy.

It does not require faith - - it requires science.




I also hold belief that everything is energy, it has to be. Einsteins theory proves that matter can transform into energy, the atomic model shows that every matter is in a constant state of vibrations. I am also a man of sciences. But I cannot in good conscience, as a man of science, deny the existence of a deity without it being verified and proven.

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. And unless the existence of a deity is proven or disproven, to deny or concede to the existence of God is purely faith based.


The thing is Doc, faith is an act...

Disbelief is a state of being...

Do you believe I will send you $1,000,000,000?

Can any bit of reasoning from my end change your particular belief?



Faith is belief without proof, a trust or confidence in something that has not been verified or is unverifiable.

I certainly would like to believe you would, but I have no confidence in it.
edit on 22-8-2011 by DrChuck because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 22 2011 @ 01:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by DrChuck
I certainly would like to believe you would, but I have no confidence in it.
Yea, that's close to what I'm saying.



posted on Aug, 22 2011 @ 01:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by DrChuck
It has nothing to do with the discussion, other than the fact that you kept saying that atheists are not a demographic group of a population. Lets put an end to the demographics. I think we became sidetracked in the heat of our debate.


OK - - you're the one who brought it into the discussion.

I figured you meant for it to apply in some way.



I did apply it, you just didn't understand it. I said atheists are a demographical group just as any other religious group. And all groups are subject to representation by the government, which separation of Church and State would deny.



posted on Aug, 22 2011 @ 01:46 AM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 


first of all, where did it say the cross was the only symbol to be erected?



what the christians hear is that the atheists just want that cross not there.

they are using taxpayer money to bring the law suit.


hypocrittes? old world spelling.

get your tish together and get something of your own!

wtf is the problem? drop the suit and go through the channels to get what you want.


flowers, poppies is a nice one.

lovely orange color and tall.

no, you rather hear yourself flapping your gums.

at this point, i would be po'd if the christians pay for your spot. oooooooooh, that's what you want!

pay your own way or pray for a miracle.




posted on Aug, 22 2011 @ 04:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by fooks
what the christians hear is that the atheists just want that cross not there.


What Christians are hearing that?
Since that is not what the suit is about or what the Atheists are saying you must mean the Christians who cannot read or understand spoken English?

Hey, if anyone is too stupid to even understand what is being opposed or proposed then they do not really deserve the care offered them anyway. Obviously they do not care.



posted on Aug, 22 2011 @ 04:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by Annee
 


It is a belief. They believe there is no god of any sort with no evidence to support it. That's a leap of faith.


You do not really believe that.

Tell me it is a leap of faith to not believe in monsters under the bed.
Tell me it is a leap of faith to not believe in the Easter Bunny.
Tell me why these are any different.



posted on Aug, 22 2011 @ 04:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by fooks
reply to post by Kitilani
 


i don't want what you are taking.


I never offered.


i think it is strychnine.


Um...good one?


jumbled logic, the compartmentalizing of "words", that whole "i didn't say that" thing and "i am right" attitude and "you are ignorant" singular focus on bizarre ideas and a very healthy dose of righteousness.

lol!

head wound.


You really need to buy a coherent thought and jam that in there somewhere. I must admit I do love watching the Christian brain completely melt down like this though.



posted on Aug, 22 2011 @ 04:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kitilani

Originally posted by fooks
what the christians hear is that the atheists just want that cross not there.


What Christians are hearing that?
Since that is not what the suit is about or what the Atheists are saying you must mean the Christians who cannot read or understand spoken English?

Hey, if anyone is too stupid to even understand what is being opposed or proposed then they do not really deserve the care offered them anyway. Obviously they do not care.


the ones on facebook chumly.

or did you forget the op in your blind rant?

where is rockdisjoint?

you forget to log it in?



posted on Aug, 22 2011 @ 04:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by Annee
 


I agree the government should be secular. I just don't think it's a big deal to have religious symbols in government funded buildings, schools, courthouses. As long as there isn't a man standing beside it preaching its fine.


I am still waiting for just one good reason why one single tax cent should be spent on any religious symbols anywhere.



posted on Aug, 22 2011 @ 04:34 AM
link   
reply to post by Kitilani
 


just hold your breath and see what happens.

the gov has no moral code or law to recognize any religion, i guess.

but the federal gov can bow to the citizens requests.

afterall, they do work for us, right?



posted on Aug, 22 2011 @ 05:29 AM
link   
George Carlin always told it like it is.





top topics



 
9
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join