[VitaminC]

That Article That Article:

In Texas, a U.S. District judge decreed that any student uttering the word "Jesus" at his school's graduation would be arrested and locked up.

Come on, you don't really believe that a judge said that do you? That web site is BS if you ask me.....

First of all Judges don't "decree" anything.......

In our legal system you can't sentence someone to jail before the so-called offence has been committed....

The idea that a Judge would "decree" that someone be sent to jail based on something they might do is ludicrous......No Judge would say that....

Is that Pat Robertsons site or something?

People need to get a grip and learn to distinguish between news websites and BS like that.......LOL

I can't believe you thought that was a real news site.

[Thematic-Device]

Banff Banff:

like I said before ... I could never figure out why people do not at least read the King James (believer or not ) I at least have taken the time to read the books of other religions and still close their book with opposition but at least I get a little enlightenment and find some good points in all of them .

I read the bible... and its why I can never be a christian of any denomination, if there is a stronger case against christianity I cannot think of one then what is contained in the bible.

Reading the bible, however, is a poor method of gaining understanding of the christian religion (or of any sect) because they all have different interpretations, ignore different passages, and choose to follow other ones. One is far better simply looking at the beliefs of a denomination rather then reading the bible.

[Banff]

It is true the bible can remain complicated no matter how many times it is read . Following a certain denomiation is the way to go

[BartSimpson]

Tricks Tricks:

It is a little different with religion. It is like they are trying to force religion on to you. Part of Freedom of religion is Freedom to not have religion. THat is a violation of that religion. Not only that people can get pissed if they are heavily religious in other religions. If some guy is randomly giving out bibles, and he gives one to a muslim or jewish. How do you think they feel about it?

Conversely, freedom of religion means that religious types should be free from someone else's lack of belief.

Secular atheism these days seems to be acting very much like the organized religions the atheists criticize.

Seriously, if atheists really don't believe in any faith then why do they get so worked up about expressions of faith that, by their own definition, are meaningless?

My being a Christian should have no more effect on an atheist than the fact that I also knit.

[BartSimpson]

VitaminC VitaminC:

First of all Judges don't "decree" anything.......

Dude, that is EXACTLY what judges do. A decision is also known as a decree.

[Tman1]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Seriously, if atheists really don't believe in any faith then why do they get so worked up about expressions of faith that, by their own definition, are meaningless?

Because Atheists don't appreciate people telling them what to believe in, thats why. (not that I am a hardcore one by any definition.)

[BartSimpson]

Tman1 Tman1:

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Seriously, if atheists really don't believe in any faith then why do they get so worked up about expressions of faith that, by their own definition, are meaningless?

Because Atheists don't appreciate people telling them what to believe in, thats why.

Religious people don't appreciate being told what not to believe in. It goes both ways.

One should leave the other alone.

[Tman1]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Tman1 Tman1:

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Seriously, if atheists really don't believe in any faith then why do they get so worked up about expressions of faith that, by their own definition, are meaningless?

Because Atheists don't appreciate people telling them what to believe in, thats why.

One should leave the other alone.

I don't see how that would happen unless people start pinning their respective religions on their breasts. I think Hitler had some sort of plan like that.

[BartSimpson]

Tman1 Tman1:

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Tman1 Tman1:

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Seriously, if atheists really don't believe in any faith then why do they get so worked up about expressions of faith that, by their own definition, are meaningless?

Because Atheists don't appreciate people telling them what to believe in, thats why.

One should leave the other alone.

I don't see how that would happen unless people start pinning their respective religions on their breasts. I think Hitler had some sort of plan like that.

So if atheists and relisiuos people aren't supposed to leave each other alone then what do you expect is going to happen?

[Tricks]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Tricks Tricks:

It is a little different with religion. It is like they are trying to force religion on to you. Part of Freedom of religion is Freedom to not have religion. THat is a violation of that religion. Not only that people can get pissed if they are heavily religious in other religions. If some guy is randomly giving out bibles, and he gives one to a muslim or jewish. How do you think they feel about it?

Conversely, freedom of religion means that religious types should be free from someone else's lack of belief.

Secular atheism these days seems to be acting very much like the organized religions the atheists criticize.

Seriously, if atheists really don't believe in any faith then why do they get so worked up about expressions of faith that, by their own definition, are meaningless?

My being a Christian should have no more effect on an atheist than the fact that I also knit.

I don't tell people anything , it is just people telling me what to believe. I have great respect for people who follow religion. I don't have respect for hardcore followers.

[Zipperfish]

First of all, just becasue you don't belong to any organized religion doesn't mean you're an atheist. An atheist, by defintion, believes in no god. A lot of peoplea re spiritual but don't go to any church.

Secondly, freedom shouldn't mean "freedom from" (as in freedom from having to listen to other people's opinions and beliefs) but "freedom to" (as in freedom to express your own opinions and beliefs).

Separation of church and state does not mean that politicians cannot speak their point of view on matters of morals and conscience, or that they should have to keep their religion (or the religion of thier constituents) out of the political process. It means that the machinery of the state--the courts, the civil service, the police--is not supposed to create a favourable condition for any particular religion or discriminate against another arbitrarily. So it's OK for an MP to say that she objects to abortion on the grounds that she believes it is murder, but it is not OK to post the Ten Commandments outside a courtroom. In my opinion.

[Tman1]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Tman1 Tman1:

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Tman1 Tman1:

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Seriously, if atheists really don't believe in any faith then why do they get so worked up about expressions of faith that, by their own definition, are meaningless?

Because Atheists don't appreciate people telling them what to believe in, thats why.

One should leave the other alone.

I don't see how that would happen unless people start pinning their respective religions on their breasts. I think Hitler had some sort of plan like that.

So if atheists and relisiuos people aren't supposed to leave each other alone then what do you expect is going to happen?

Well, first I never said for them to not leave each other alone, I suggested the idea wouldn't be plausible if people not know whose who. I don't know whose Christian, atheist, do you? Unless of course they actually start hounding people telling them what they are, which is the focal point in this thread.

[NorthCelt]

$1:

Religious people don't appreciate being told what not to believe in. It goes both ways.

One should leave the other alone.

Bart, I never thought I'd ever say this...I agree with you. I need a drink. Good one. I think I'll make it a Glenfiddich...

(speaking of which, I had a new drink yesterday called a 'Car Bomb'...a shot of Ballantines dropped in a pint of Guiness and then gone in one shot. Truly a blast...)

[NorthCelt]

Although I should also say that judges are asked to decide ('rule') on issues of legal importance; that's they're job. If you don't like their decision, you can protest or become an activist to organize a challenge to their ruling. You cannot arbitrarily decide that you're not going to follow their decision. That's 'anarchy'.
The US Constitution is exceedingly clear on the matters of separation of church and state. Thomas Jefferson said "That my neighbour believes in no god or twenty gods affects me not at all; it neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg."
Bush and his hard-right evange-phalangists are seriously screwing up this time-honoured principle.

[Jaime_Souviens]

VitaminC VitaminC:

That Article That Article:

In Texas, a U.S. District judge decreed that any student uttering the word "Jesus" at his school's graduation would be arrested and locked up.

Come on, you don't really believe that a judge said that do you? That web site is BS if you ask me.....

First of all Judges don't "decree" anything.......

In our legal system you can't sentence someone to jail before the so-called offence has been committed....

VitaminC, you're really a stupid person. You should look into that before you post.

Judges issue injunctions all the time. About virtually anything.

VitaminC VitaminC:

The idea that a Judge would "decree" that someone be sent to jail based on something they might do is ludicrous......No Judge would say that....

Is that Pat Robertsons site or something?

People need to get a grip and learn to distinguish between news websites and BS like that.......LOL

I can't believe you thought that was a real news site.

It's more credible than you are. I have a hard time believing you're a real person.