Vjack of Atheist Revolution has a good post up today. As an atheist who lives in the South, his experiences are very different than mine. Here in suburban Long Island, it is rare for anyone to ask you about your religious beliefs and affiliations. But in that region of the country known as "the Bible Belt," apparently being asked by strangers what church you go to is as much an ice breaker as "did you see the game yesterday?" is up here.
If I were to find myself living in a community where neighbors or parents at the Little League game asked me point blank almost from the outset what church I went to, I am not sure how I would respond to that knowing what ramifications my answer could potentially have. For those of us who are atheists, we reflexively find such questions annoying and intrusive, though the person who asks the question likely does not intend to be rude.
Maybe the best way to respond in a polite and measured fashion would be to turn the question back on the asker. "I am new here, thank you. What church do you go to?" Ask the person to describe the services there, what the pastor is like et cetera. With any luck, the person will get so caught up in singing the praises of his or her church, that person might forget that you never said which church you go to.
142 comments:
Maybe the best way to respond in a polite and measured fashion would be to turn the question back on the asker. "I am new here, thank you. What church do you go to?"
Nope, I would never encourage that. It only shows them that it is okay to go around asking very personal questions of people. When they ask that question, we know what their motives are. If they are just being friendly they would talk about the weather or chat about some general things. But to reverse the question won't work. Been there tried that on occasion. It will only give that person a glimmer of hope of getting you to go to his/her church. They will then want your phone number, or to know where you live, etc. If it is someone who casually knows you, they will bother you until you have to say something they aren't going to want to hear. Like "I don't want to go to your's or any church", which is what has happened with me in the past when I was trying to be nice.
Really? I will have to keep that in mind. Thanks for the advice.
While I tend to be rather firm in the blogosphere, face to face I am more the diplomatic type who tries to smooth things over.
Alternatively, I could say to the person "I stopped going to church because the holy water was burning my skin." :-)
Alternatively, I could say to the person "I stopped going to church because the holy water was burning my skin." :-)
That is a good one. Humor often works well.
My husband always asks with an evil grin on his face..."are you SURE you want me to come to your church? Do you even know what you are asking?"
" I am not sure how I would respond .."
Yet another problem with being an athiest,see?
In many small towns the churches are still the community centers. Sunday school and church on Sunday, Wednesday night suppers, church league softball and basketball teams, etc.
Left out. Countin' flowers on the wall, smoking cigarettes and watchin' Captain Kangaroo-now don't tell me I got nothin' to do...
lol - that would probably work with some, Tommy.
bedrock, so you are admitting that church-going is merely for social club activities because you cannot think of anything to do on your own and have to have things organized and planned out for you.
I have always said that church is for the social club part. A place for the bored and boring to come together and have pity parties together, cry on each other's shoulders and give each other the moral support that your silent imaginary sky daddy does not.
What a very uncreative and pathetic way to live.
First of all dusty, I don't go to church more than 2 or 3 times a year and it's never been about me in the first place.
But you're demonstrating some pretty deep ignorance about the church's role in a community.
Later...
Oh sheesh, I hate these kinds of questions.
I was recently approached by a fundie with a "100,000 prayer marathon" to bless that many people in my country.
When I told him I was an atheist, he looked stunned. It was as if atheists never existed!
Which Church to go to? Let me see......how about the Church of Satanism???
it's never been about me in the first place
Oh, but it is about you. Religion is all about what it does for the individual. If there wasn't anything in it for the self, theists wouldn't bother.
But you're demonstrating some pretty deep ignorance about the church's role in a community
rubbleofbedrock - you are exhibiting some pretty deep ignorance about me and my knowledge of social needs of many, many people. I was a xian and quite involved in church life for more than 30 years. I know that throughout history that the church was the center of communities. I also know that there can be a social center without the sky daddy parts. But those who want so badly to believe they are being protected by some supernatural entity need other people around to reinforce the fantasy...along with the other social aspects.
I studied Anthropology and have a minor in Psychology and know all about societal practices based on those social needs and support of other humans.
Okay now kids, let's try to tone down the name calling! ;-)
This thread is getting a bit off tangent.
I have no doubt Bedrock that churches play wonderful roles as social and support centers for many communities.
But if you actually read the post that I linked to and the comments that followed in that post, you will see that the issue here is that in certain places, when a person is asked "What church do you go to?", it is essentially a screening process.
An honest answer "I don't go to church" or "I'm an atheist" marks that person as a pariah. Once hearing such a response, the church-going questioner has written the newcomer off. It doesn't matter what hobbies or interests the atheist has. What matters is that the believer thinks the atheist is going to burn in hell and "Lawdy lawdy keep him away from the childrun, lest he corrupt their souls!"
I don't make a person's religious belief or lack thereof a factor in determining whether I want to befriend that person.
Just a little bit about where I'm coming from on the atheist thing.
First of all I know there are plenty of fine, moral people that choose to declare their non beliefs-Tommy being one of them and my retired professor brother in law being another that I'm familiar with.
And I guess there wouldn't be any controversy at all for me to get involved in if atheists just atheisted away, blogging together in their isolated little support groups and such and quit trying to impose their gospel of non belief on the laws, the mores and the traditions of this country that I grew up with. Leaving off smarmy little epithets like "Jeebus freak" for those who do believe in a higher power wouldn't hurt their non belief "crusade" either.
But, like most Americans, I'm pretty sick and tired of seeing "uncomfortable" atheists head for their fainting couches clutching their pearls when a child says grace before a meal or draws a picture of Jesus in kindergarten, when a non sectarian prayer is delivered before a high school football game, when a student mentions the word "God" in a valedictorian speech or when a school choir chooses to sing "God Bless America".
And those are just the passive ones.
The militants, of course, run screaming for their allies at the ACLU citing ridiculous atheist mantras such as "church state", "my little Maynard was sooo upset when he seen this poinsettia glaring at him in the school library" and such
As background, I was brought up by my grandmother whose house and all her possessions burned to the ground shortly after her sorry husband ran off and left her with 3 small children back in the depression days. It was the church-a bunch of self serving, hypocritical "Jeebus freaks"- that saw to it that she had food ,shelter and support until she could get back on her feet.
My wife is a practicing Christian; a lovely woman in body and spirit, that I've had the privilege of being married to for over 51 years now.Our son is a counselor and director for Youth for Christ who deals with youngsters from broken homes suffering every kind of physical and mental abuse you can imagine. He just returned from a mission trip to India where he and about 20 teen agers spent almost two weeks rebuilding homes in an area that was devastated by a tsunami.
So let me hear it--"ooh but he was probably PROSelytizing!!".
I knew I didn't belong here when Tommy invited me, but I do have a lot of respect for him, and for other atheists who simply choose not to believe, or to see the spiritual value in having belief in a higher power without denigrating those who do.
Oh, and about the ludicrous "church-state" canard promulgated by the buck shilling moonbats at the ACLU and the "Freedom from Religion" Foundation....
Theocraphobia: A persistent, abnormal, and irrational fear of a theocracy that compels one to vote for Democrats despite the awareness, reassurance and historical evidence that it is not present.
http://moonbatabattoir.blogspot.com/2004/11/thinking-mans-guide-to-dealing-with.html
I don't make a person's religious belief or lack thereof a factor in determining whether I want to befriend that person.
ditto.
And I guess there wouldn't be any controversy at all for me to get involved in if atheists just atheisted away, blogging together in their isolated little support groups and such and quit trying to impose their gospel of non belief on the laws, the mores and the traditions of this country that I grew up with.
Say what? This is a secular nation founded on separation of church and state and people from all walks of life and all kinds of belief systems live here. Not just your own little family with your own little traditions. Atheists and secular humanists are just trying to uphold the constitution to protect the rights of all people, not just yours and how you want things to be. The Separation of Church and state is supported by many more god believers than atheists since they outnumber us greatly. We can thank reasonable theists who help support and maintain this separation and the freedoms of ALL citizens, not just you and yours' Bedrock.
Well and good dusty.
Now maybe you can tell me why the preamble to the constitution of every state in the Union recognizes a higher power.
Or why the mention of the word "God" in the pledge of allegiance, the post of chaplain in the Armed Services, a lonely cross in a desert memorial, a crucifix in a state seal or grace before meals at West Point or Annapolis threatens the emergence of the 8 percenters' dreaded "church state" in this country.
It didn't happen in the 200 plus years before the ACLU started sucking up moonbat bucks for their relentless assault on freedom of religion in this country.
What evidence do you have that it's any kind of threat now?
That is a good question, bedrock, considering that this is a secular nation. God does not belong in our government at all.
The words "Under god" were added to the Pledge in 1954.
The post of chaplain in our military is there to accommodate the large number of soldiers in need of an invisible sky daddy crutch. The majority gets to decide these things and all too often separation of church and state is ignored and pushed aside, forgetting what the founding fathers have established at the birth of this nation. People came here for religious freedom, not to start a theocracy.
The ACLU is a group that was formed to protect our freedoms, and if laws weren't in place which protect separation of church and state, the ACLU would be losing instead of winning case after case. The law of the land is the final word.
"Now maybe you can tell me why the preamble to the constitution of every state in the Union recognizes a higher power."
I missed your answer to this one.
And if your vaunted "law of the land" were actually the case, why did the founders open deliberative sessions with prayer or openly-and publicly as public servants (George Washington is one of many examples)-profess belief in a higher power?
Were they then, constitutional criminals-violating the very Constitution and Bill of Rights that they themselves authored?
And if your vaunted "law of the land" were actually the case, why did the founders open deliberative sessions with prayer or openly-and publicly as public servants (George Washington is one of many examples)-profess belief in a higher power?
Same reason politicians today use god and religion now...to appease the mass of superstitious folks who vote them into office. If you read the writings of the founding fathers, you will find their real opinion about god beliefs, and most did not believe that a personal god existed who was pulling their puppet strings. I was just at Mount Vernon this past May, and George Washington was not a believer in a personal god. His wife, Martha was, and he attended church on occasion with her, and even paid for a church box for her and her children, however he didn't go very often at all. His writings indicate he while he referred to "Divine Providence" in a rhetorical sense, he was not much of a god botherer. Looking through his personal artifacts, there were NO religious possessions of any sort that belonged to George Washington.
As for the state preambles...mentioning god is merely a formality to appease the masses...meaning nothing really. The states must still uphold separation between government and state.
" appeasing the masses".
Say isn't that what a democratic government is all about?
Or maybe we ought to rethink the whole premise.
As in-appeasing the 8 percenters, as the ACLU is trying to do at the expense of the 90 plus percent of Americans
That smacks of totalitaranism in and of itself does it not?
Maybe George Bush is behind the whole ACLU thing...
And by the way, what were doing rifling through George Washington's personal possessions?
"It is the duty of all Nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey his will, to be grateful for his benefits, and humbly to implore his protection and favors."
George Washington
Liar in chief according to atheist dogma.
It is written...
Bedrock, for an entrance fee, you and all who have the money can go rifle through George Washington's personal belongings and take a tour of his home and plantation, see his book collections in the museum, etc.
Let's cherry pick some more Washington quotes, even though this is straying way off-topic:
If they are good workmen, they may be from Asia, Africa or Europe; they may be Mahometans, Jews, Christians of any sect, or they may be Atheists.... [George Washington, to Tench Tighman, March 24, 1784, when asked what type of workman to get for Mount Vernon, from The Washington papers edited by Saul Padover]
Of all the animosities which have existed among mankind, those which are caused by difference of sentiments in religion appear to be the most inveterate and distressing, and ought most to be deprecated. I was in hopes that the enlightened and liberal policy, which has marked the present age, would at least have reconciled Christians of every denomination so far that we should never again see the religious disputes carried to such a pitch as to endanger the peace of society. [George Washington, letter to Edward Newenham, October 20, 1792; from George Seldes, ed., The Great Quotations, Secaucus, New Jersey: Citadel Press, 1983, p. 726]
There is nothing which can better deserve our patronage than the promotion of science and literature. Knowledge is in every country the surest basis of public happiness. [George Washington, address to Congress, 8 January, 1790]
Religious controversies are always productive of more acrimony and irreconcilable hatreds than thsoe which spring from any other cause. [George Washington, letter to Sir Edward Newenham, June 22, 1792]
To give opinions unsupported by reasons might appear dogmatical. [George Washington, to Alexander Spotswood, November 22, 1798, from The Washington papers edited by Saul Padover]
The blessed Religion revealed in the word of God will remain an eternal and awful monument to prove that the best Institutions may be abused by human depravity; and that they may even, in some instances, be made subservient to the vilest of purposes.
...That he was not just striking a popular attitude as a politician is revealed by the absence of of the usual Christian terms: he did not mention Christ or even use the word "God." Following the phraseology of the philosophical Deism he professed, he referred to "the invisible hand which conducts the affairs of men," to "the benign parent of the human race." [James Thomas Flexner, on Washington's first inaugural speech in April 1789, in George Washington and the New Nation [1783-1793], Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1970, p. 184.]
I was in hopes that the enlightened and liberal policy, which has marked the present age, would at least have reconciled Christians of every denomination so far that we should never again see the religious disputes carried to such a pitch as to endanger the peace of society.
And have Christians yet to come to some reconciliation and agreement amongst themselves? Have god botherers come to any kind of reconciliation and agreement as to who has the "true god"? Absolutely not.
A good response to the question "which church do you go to?" would be "which god do you follow?" Let's see them stumble and stutter over that one.
Godchecker.com
You're pretty good at "cherry picking" yourself dusty.
The difference is that Washington used the quote(s) supporting a solid place for religion in the affairs of Americans in his inaugural address and other public, as in on the public record, documents-as befits and reflects the thinking of the founding leader of this country speaking in support of those founding documents and the "law of the land" at least as the people who wrote those laws discerned it at the time, a couple of centuries before the addle pated liberal judges decided it meant something else entirely.
What the hell is a "god botherer" anyway? Guess I'm just not tuned into the latest catch phrases in the atheist lexicon...
America has come a long way since the days of the Founding Fathers, and we owe much of our country's greatness and success to them.
Religious liberty is an important component of our system, and I have read that because we lacked a state church, we have had a free market in religion which helps to explain why the United States is more religious than just about any Western industrialized democracy.
The majority of atheists are mainstream Americans and nothing we advocate in any way threatens the free practice of religion in this country. Protecting the religious freedom of others protects my right not to believe. And in case you haven't noticed Bedrock, I did a post in support of a Malaysian woman who converted from Islam to Christianity but whose conversion is not recognized by the Malaysian government.
What we oppose, and for which we will not remain silent, is those who would use religious dogma as a justification to infringe upon or deny the rights of others. No woman should be denied access to birth control because the pharmacist at the dispensary considers birth control to be against the Bible. No one who believes in and looks forward to Armageddon should be allowed to have influence over our foreign policy. And anti-science zealots have no place trying to dictate what gets taught in our science classes.
Don't you agree Bedrock that public policy should be dictated by evidence and facts instead of a handful of phrases in the Old Testament?
Should doctors who oppose abortion be forced to perform them? Should taxpayers who oppose abortion be forced to pay for something they consider immoral?
Should parents who believe that homosexual behavior be allowed to opt out their 6 year old children from public classroom discussions where homosexual couples are depicted as mainstream and normal?
Jay, as I understand it, doctors who perform abortions have to undergo special training for it. As for funding it, there's bound to be something in every budget that people vehemently oppose. I was against the war in Iraq and the hundreds of billions of dollars it is costing us. But I still pay my taxes.
As for homosexuals, it looks like you left out a word or two. Should parents be allowed to have their 6 year old children opt out of school discussions that portray homosexuals as mainstream and normal? Well, no, because then the parents are reinforcing attitudes that seek to legitimize bigotry towards gays.
From Theocracywatch.comThe word "God" does not appear within the text of the Constitution of the United States. After spending three-and-a-half months debating and negotiating about what should go into the document that would govern the land, the framers drafted a constitution that is secular. The U.S. Constitution is often confused with the Declaration of Independence, and it's important to understand the difference.
The Declaration of Independence is seen as that document that established the new nation of the United States. It was written by Thomas Jefferson in 1776. It was signed by the Continental Congress and sent to King George III of England. It is a very eloquent document that is celebrated every July 4, but it is not the law of the land. It is a statement of sentiments directed to King George III in reaction to unfair taxation. The U.S. Constitution was ratified on March 4, 1789 -- thirteen years after the signing of the Declaration of Independence.
The Declaration of Independence refers to "the Creator:"
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
The Declaration of Independence is not a legal document; it is not the U.S. Constitution. Foes of the principle of separation of church and state often refer to the word "Creator" in the Declaration of Independence as proof that the framers of the U.S. Constitution intended for the United States to be ruled by a soveriegn being. Nothing could be further from the truth. The United States Constitution was written and ratified by elected officials representing a coalition of Enlightenment rationalists and evangelical Christians who were deeply concerned about entanglements between religion and government.
The Godless Constitution was written by two professors of government and history at Cornell University. Isaac Kramnick and R. Laurence Moore have spent their careers studying religion in American life. Some quotes from their book:
The preamble of the Constitution invokes the people of the United States. It does not invoke any sort of God
The Constitution forbids any religious test to hold office. A godless person is just as eligible as a godly one! (Article 6, Paragraph 3)
At the Constitutional Convention of 1787, Benjamin Franklin strongly suggested on June 28 that the convention have prayers said there. Evangelists take this as proof that the convention then went on with prayers. But, in fact, the convention did not accept the suggestion, and the convention went on without prayers.
Also, you theists can read this for yourselves by obtaining your own copy of the U.S. Constitutions. Though the preamble of state constitutions might make references to a god, the actual constitutions themselves are secular.
From Theocracywatch.com
"What the Religious Right doesn't tell people, and what, tragically, many Americans apparently don't know, is that when it comes to determining what the laws of the United States mean, the only document that matters is the Constitution. The Constitution, a completely secular document, contains no references to God, Jesus or Christianity. It says absolutely nothing about the United States being officially Christian. The Religious Right's constant appeals to documents like the Declaration of Independence, which contains a deistic reference to "the Creator," cloud the issue and make some people believe their rights spring from these other documents."
tommy,
There is no special training for doctors who perform abortion, and no board certification as there is in all the myriad other physician specialties. But should a doctor, who understands embryology and recognizes that an embryo is simply a stage of development of a human being, should that intern be forced to perform an abortion as part of physician training, and if that intern refuses, that intern will not be granted a doctors license in that State?
jayg, my daughter's best friend is doing her residency right now. Yes, abortion is part of her training and yes, they need to know this in order to pass medical school since oftentimes an abortion must be performed to save a mother's life. If a doctor has problems with this, he or she is not bound by any law to perform the abortion and another doctor will be referred to. Same for pharmacists and the dispensing of the abortion pill. If that doctor works for a company, that doctor may have another person at the pharmacy dispense such a drug, and if that pharmacist owns his own practice, he or she retains the right to not dispense the drug and the patient can do his or her business elsewhere where their prescription will be honored. It's not as complicated as you are making it out to be. Christians make it complicated because they are stipulating that ALL doctors should not perform abortions and ALL doctors should not dispense abortion drugs or birth control. It's still a choice for the individual doctor. No law is saying they MUST perform an abortion.
There is no special training for doctors who perform abortion, and no board certification as there is in all the myriad other physician specialties.
And I also must point out that this is untrue. A doctor who performs abortions is a licensed OBGYN with special training in reproductive organs and operations of women, including pregnancy, childbirth, miscarriage (god abortion), surgical delivery, surgery in womb to repair a intelligently designed defect, abortion, cancer of any of the female organs, problems with menstuation, etc. etc. Do some research before making such claims. It shows that you are just repeating some kind of church pro-life propaganda.
This has never been about this country being a religious state dusty, so all those deflective rollouts are a waste of time and space. The founders came here to escape from an oppressive religious state so it would make no sense at all that they would want to establish one here.
What they DID establish however, contrary to atheist dogma, was a country that was tolerate to religion and, indeed, embraced by their words in founding documents and their deeds and practices
which extended for over 200 years without egregious secularist backed ACLU lawsuits designed to unravel the role of religion in the public arena that has been woven into the traditional/cultural tapestry of this country for more than 200 years.
During those first 200 years it was common practice to open deliberative sessions with prayer, to invoke the name of God in public speeches, to place crosses and biblical references in and on public buildings, on our currency, in public parks and in and around every tax payer supported edifice and institution in the country.
Are atheists and their ACLU allies trying to claim that every president and every public official from George Washington on were violating their own laws regarding the separation of church and state?
Please don't skip over this legitimate question. It's an important one to any meaningful discussion of the subject.
The First Amendment is very specific as regards religious freedom in this country:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech..."
While atheists and their secular allies would have us believe that saying a prayer before a football game, as one small example, is tantamount to Congress making(passing) a law, most common sense Americans know that to prohibit that prayer is both "prohibiting the free exercise (of religion) AND abridging the freedom of speech..."
And please don't even start with the absurd notion that a football coach, choir director or high school teacher is "Congress'". It's ludicrous on the face of it and God only knows how many beers it took for the liberal courts to come up with that tergiversate addle pated interpretation of original intent in establishing the First Amendment.
All I do know is that some mindless liberal revisionists have managed to make a mockery of the founders' intent regarding what actually constitutes "free exercise of religion and freedom of speech" for the 90% of Americans who, like every president since Washington and the authors of the preamble to every state constitution in the country, recognize a higher power.
bedrock, have you read the Constitution? I don't think you have.
You simply want things your way and wish to disregard the established law.
Preambles to the state constitutions were added afterwards...and are NOT legal and binding. Just an intro...a superstitious incantation but not part of the Constitutions themselves.
Separation of church and state is protected and upheld through careful watchdogging of those who would abuse and disregard the laws which protects the rights of ALL citizens of this nation. You are merely disgruntled because you cannot have your way.
Yes, I've read it but that's totally beside the point.
I've also read the First Amendment, very carefully, many times. And I note that you chose to ignore this question/comment....
"Are atheists and their ACLU allies trying to claim that every president and every public official from George Washington on were violating their own laws regarding the separation of church and state?
Please don't skip over this legitimate question. It's an important one to any meaningful discussion of the subject."
Further, I'd like to have your take, and others', on the question of whether or not a choir director or football coach is "Congress" in the warped minds of the secularists, the religion hating ACLU and their chowder headed liberal court minions
bedrock, you are disregarding the law of the land and replacing it with what people do according to their own freedom of religious expression. You are confusing that freedom with law which protect other people's freedoms to express their personal beliefs. You are overlooking that this is a diverse nation where the rights of all people must be protected.
"Are atheists and their ACLU allies trying to claim that every president and every public official from George Washington on were violating their own laws regarding the separation of church and state?
I would say, yes to that to greater or lesser degrees depending on the president. And why? Because the people allow them to get away with it. George W. Bush has gotten away with way too much of that.
You really have an obsession and an extreme vendetta against the ACLU but would be crying for their help should Muslims become the majority and wish to force you to start imposing Islamic laws on you.
.
And George Washington, Franklin Roosevelt, and every other president this country has ever had.
Did they "get away" with too much also?
Or could it possibly be that they were operating, speaking and legislating as the Constitution and the Bill of Rights very clearly permitted-else why was no case brought against them for some 200 years?
Far from "disregarding" the law of the land, sane and rational Americans are demanding that the modern day liberal revisionists either pass some law that countermands the one that's been on the books for some 230 years now or by God quit screwing with it and mangling the "original intent" of it to suit their secularist purposes...
It is one thing for presidents to express their religious views, and freedom of expressing one's religious views is also a president's freedom...however as long as those beliefs are not being imposed upon the people or government funds being used to promote their religious views. If you want church, and god belief you are free to go to any church you choose to attend, and you even have the freedom to start your own church.
However, a government or president cannot "SPONSOR" or favor one religion over another. Period.
Bedrock...first read my comment above this one...before reading this one.
It is the fundamentalist christians who want to "screw" with things and to interject their own particular version of Christianity on a very diverse public. God beliefs vary from person to person. Your god is not the same as your neighbor's god. Which god did the founding fathers believe in? Which one does GW Bush believe in? Which one does Mitt Romney believe in? Which one does muslim Ralph Ellison believe in? Certainly not the same "allah" as many radical muslims.
There is no one god...there are many gods, according to the individual beliefs.
Most xians choose to uphold the Separation of Church and State.
Get over it...it is a SECULAR NATION with a SECULAR government. I am done talking to bedrockforbrains.
In a few years people in the Bible Belt will ask you which Wal-Mart you go to. It will be an improvement, of some sort...
I found this at an etiquette site. Questions that are considered impolite to ask strangers:
Are you married?
Where are you from?
What do you do?
How much money do you make?
Do you have children?
Where do you work?
How old are you
Do you go to church?
I used to be very hurt when people asked me "do you have children?" after our first baby died, and then the miscarriage. It would make me break out in tears.
My sister got the same way when people would ask her "are you married?" in the years following her husband's death.
The question "where do you work" puts the unemployed person in an embarrassing position of having to explain or lie.
There are just things strangers should not ask. If you don't know someone, keep the topic to the weather.
"If you don't know someone, keep the topic to the weather."
So what's the "etiquette" when they tell you they just lost three relatives, their cat and all their possessions in a tornado?
Click your red slippers together and repeat "There's no place like home! There's no place like home!"
I hope you don't think I'm try to pick on you dusty,
You just seem to be the only one willing to wade into the non debate over what the ACLU has done to relegate the traditional religious heritage of this country to the dust bin of secular humanism and cultural debasement history.
I guess I'd be "done talking" too dusty, if I couldn't put forth any better argument than "that's just the way it is so shut up about it".
Granted that's the way the liberal courts SAY it is, totally ignoring over 200 years of religious freedom in this country when a veteran's group could erect a cross in a public cemetery, a child could mention the word "God' in a valedictorian speech, a school choir could sing "Joy to the World" or a kid could give his teacher a Christmas card without hair lipping half of the atheist and nut root moonbat world in the process.
You see, some of us remember when we actually had those First Amendment guaranteed religious freedoms in this country, and they were precious ones indeed.
The baby boomer generations' "multi-cultural" canard, as distorted by the ACLU to mean that every reference to a higher power in every public utterance must meet the test of every religion on the planet, has achieved it's sub rosa mission, which is of course to make it impossible for the citizens of this country to express their religious views in the schools and other public arenas that they pay for with their tax dollars.
As you just did in your own post, ACLU types will also tell you that Americans already have their precious Freedom of Religion--just as long as they practice in their own homes and churches and keep it out of the public area.
That's not nearly good enough.
Most Americans believe that Freedom of Religion as guaranteed in the Bill of Rights should be permitted in the public arenas they pay for with their tax dollars - not relegated to the privacy of their homes, putting it in the same category with sodomy or sex with a goat.
And it's interesting that you mentioned Muslims as some kind of scare tactic to intimidate discussion and steer it away from the real injustice that's been done here. First of all I have no problem with Muslims taking part in a prayer service or facing Mecca during recess at any public school in the land. But it's worth keeping in mind that the religion you're alluding to is the most dogmatic and oppressive one on earth.
And while we're on the subject, can you, in your wildest atheistic fantasy, imagine a Muslim country changing their traditions over thousands of years to accommodate Christian,Jews or Buddhists who might feel "uncomfortable" by banning any reference to Allah in the public arena?
I've said many times that I'm not much of Christian myself, but that doesn't mean that I don't understand or appreciate the vast majority of Americans that are, the founding principles of this country, the traditional values that have served as the moral anchor for making it one of the most powerful and the most generous on the face of the earth, or that I'm a closet atheist, an illiterate, a red neck, or a damned fool who can't see what's happening to this country as a result.
But my basic point was and is that the laws and governance of this country have legitimate roots in Judeo Christian teachings and values, that it operated in complete respect of those rights and roots for nearly 200 years without any hint of ever becoming a theocratic state, that the ACLU and other atheist/secularist organizations for the past couple of decades have egregiously mangled the so called "Establishment Clause" of the First Amendment to suit their own goals and ambitions, to fill their financial coffers with bucks from the "oh, so" political correcties in this country, and to justify their raison d' entre-in the name and purpose of turning this country into an atheistic, secular state(similar to the former Soviet Union if you want an example) while turning it into a hedonistic "situational ethics" touting crime ridden moral/cultural sewer in the process.
bedrock needs to learn how to read and listen to what the other side is saying otherwise there is absolutely no point for anyone anywhere to engage in dialogue with him.
"listening" is a two way street dusty, et al.
Unfortunately I've yet to see anyone here address the Bill of Rights and First Amendment issues I've raised in any substantive way, unless "shut up and live with it" can be considered a reasonable response.
I can only take that to mean that no one can...
I have had an idea for a book I am interested in writing that I would title "Religion Is Not The Problem... And Neither Is Atheism: A Call for an End to the Culture War in America".
The problem is that I don't have the time to write it unless I took an extended leave from work, and I'm a nobody, so who would read it?
Anyway, as I wrote somewhere above (I'm too damned lazy to scroll around and look for it), religious freedom is very vital to the success and integrity of our nation. Though I am an atheist, I personally don't feel the need to eradicate every public expression of religious faith. I feel it is counterproductive, because like poking a stick in a hornet's nest, it tends to annoy a lot of religious people and does not make an atheist's life noticeably better.
I do want to see relegated to the margins of society people like Pat Robertson and other diarrhea mouths who proclaim that a hurricane will strike Disneyland because of Gay Day or that Ariel Sharon was struck down by God for evacuating Jewish settlements from the Gaza Strip. What kind of a message does it send when politicians suck up to people like him?
As demonstrated by the post by Vjack that I linked to, religious dogmatism distorts the way people think. Atheists shouldn't have to be told they are going to burn in hell by strangers who turn from friendly to livid in the bat of an eye because the answer to the question "What church do you go to?" is "Well, I don't go to church." An atheist teenager should not be made to feel ostracized or demonized because she does not want to participate in the reciting of "The Lord's Prayer" before the game, as if a God in heaven really gives a rats ass which team wins the game.
I also take issue with Bedrock's claim that atheists want to turn America into the Soviet Union or some amoral hedonist society. One of my most basic beliefs is the right of the freedom of the individual against the state. Most atheists are just as moral and law abiding as religious people. The big difference between us is the reasons why we behave morally. I behave morally because it is clearly better both for myself and for society, whereas a religious person believes that some deity in the heavens commands that he act a certain way.
And while Bedrock talks about atheist/secular organizations trying to fill their coffers, he is noticeably silent about the religious hucksters who try to fill their own coffers from the ranks of the gullible and the desperate.
Barney:
"Now maybe you can tell me why the preamble to the constitution of every state in the Union recognizes a higher power."
I missed your answer to this one.
I'll give you 1:
They were wrong.
Surely you've heard of politicians pandering to their constituency?
I'll also point you to article 11 of the Treaty of Tripoli. 1792. Passed unanimously in the Senate. Nobody got their dander up either.
Reads, 'the US is in no way based on Christian values' (paraphrased)
And if your vaunted "law of the land" were actually the case, why did the founders open deliberative sessions with prayer or openly-and publicly as public servants (George Washington is one of many examples)-profess belief in a higher power?
It's by far more complex than that. Washington was rather non-committal in his 'religious' devotions, Paine LOATHED xtianity, Franklin said contradictory things on multiple occasions, & many of the private letters of these men rarely echoed their PR.
We can play the 'original intent' game, but you'll lose - big time.
Were they then, constitutional criminals-violating the very Constitution and Bill of Rights that they themselves authored?
Ah, the monochromatic POV. Chuckle, snort.
Do you really live in a bubble?
They were playing to their constituency.
You need to also realize a few things:
It was a white man's country. There were NO schools where black children, Chinese children, Hindi kids mixed w/the white folk, it simply wasn't done. Not until the mid 20th CE.
You can dismiss that lightly, but it's a major factor in the way things were done.
Exclusion is the enemy of liberty.
I got quotes from some of the Founders, if you like, but you'll probably whine about 'cherry-picking'.
You wingnuts usually do.
Oh, a few more things:
Most Americans believe that Freedom of Religion as guaranteed in the Bill of Rights should be permitted in the public arenas they pay for with their tax dollars - not relegated to the privacy of their homes, putting it in the same category with sodomy or sex with a goat.
Utter non sequitor.
You worship on your own time, not my dime, buddy boy.
I'm not paying 1 red cent for something I don't subscribe to.
& neither should you.
And it's interesting that you mentioned Muslims as some kind of scare tactic to intimidate discussion and steer it away from the real injustice that's been done here. First of all I have no problem with Muslims taking part in a prayer service or facing Mecca during recess at any public school in the land. But it's worth keeping in mind that the religion you're alluding to is the most dogmatic and oppressive one on earth.
The only reason it outclasses xtianity in this regard, is because we as a nation were founded on secular values, not religious ones.
You should thank your imaginary friend for THAT one.
And while we're on the subject, can you, in your wildest atheistic fantasy, imagine a Muslim country changing their traditions over thousands of years to accommodate Christian,Jews or Buddhists who might feel "uncomfortable" by banning any reference to Allah in the public arena?
Ummm...Turkey? Secular country w/a large Muslim constituency? Maybe they don't ban references to Allah, but it's far more progressive than you'd lead us to believe.
So's Israel, for that matter.
Sweden, Denmark, England...did I miss any?
Oh yeah. Crime's a lot lower in secular countries than it is here, a primarily religious demographic.
Wonder why that is? Maybe because religion isn't the silver bullet you claim it to be? That it doesn't elevate anyone onto a higher moral plane?
I think your Atheist/ACLU conspiracy theory is pretty hysterical, BTW.
I can only hope that someday, YOUR rights get violated. Then you can call them, & find out how wrong you really are.
First of all Krys you're straw manning again with your" Treaty of Tripoli" reference. I never claimed that this country was founded as a christian nation, rather that "the laws and governance of this country have legitimate roots in Judeo Christian teachings and values, that it operated in complete respect of those rights and roots for nearly 200 years without any hint of ever becoming a theocratic state"
My contention, clearly supported by the facts, is that it was founded as a nation that embraced religion, guaranteed religious freedom, was friendly to religion in the public arena, allowed religious symbols and biblical references and invoked a higher power in public discourse, on public buildings, in public parks and schools.
When I mentioned the fact that all state constitutions, for example, contained references to a higher power your response was, as is typical for atheists who practice their own religion of deflection and denial, simply that "they were wrong".
If they were "wrong" as you claim, maybe you can supply some instances where prayer was not allowed in public schools, school Christmas plays were banned, a school choir was advised not to sing"God Bless America", crosses were banned from public cemeteries or creches weren't allowed on court house lawns at any time during the first 200 years of this country's existence.
Until you can do that, your red herring arguments have no credibility at all.
And that is the crux of the matter for about 90% of the American people. The free practice of religion in our public schools and legislative deliberations which clearly reflected the desires of the founders and the will of the American people for more than two centuries has been stifled, smothered and damned near eradicated by the atheists, secularists and their ACLU hired guns over the past 30 years or so.
To claim that the kind of despotic government censorship and the relentless trampling on the religious freedoms of Americans that is taking place today was the "original intent" of the founders is beyond absurd to the point of laughable misstatement of the facts.
As far as your Treaty of Tripoli claim is concerned, it's a perfect example of politicians doing and saying what's necessary to get a deal done.
From a website that puts the affair into proper context..
FIRST...consider the foreign policy considerations behind this treaty (which were many). The US government was not interested in fueling a religious war with the Muslim states of North Africa. We remember George W. Bush's unfortunate use of the word "crusade" shortly after 9/11/01, and how that inflamed Muslim opinion against the United States.
In addition, we know from present-day experience that certain belligerents in Muslim countries make NO distinction between political and religious policy - and all wars with non-Muslim countries (for these belligerents) are religious wars. (Again, this does not describe all Muslims - but it does apply to some).
The United States was trying to make clear that this dispute between the US and Tripoli was NOT about religion. It was about shipping and commerce - and concerns over territorial waters. It was in America's interests to keep religion OUT of the equation - and that's what the Treaty of Tripoli tried to do.
SECOND...the Treaty says nothing about the American people or the American culture. It specifies the American "government." By using that word, the authors of the Treaty of Tripoli could thread the needle and be honest about it. The U.S. Constitution - the foundation of our GOVERNMENT (but not our nation overall) - is a secular document.
It was written as a contract between the states, defining in careful terms of the scope and extent of the authority and responsibilities of the US national government. One of the areas of sensitivity was religion.
Most of the states had established religious denominations, so the US Constitution steered clear of religious issues - even religious language - to avoid offending these state interests. Thus, it can be stated (correctly) that the United States government was not "in any way founded on the Christian religion.
" Broaden that to include the states, and the treaty's language would have been dishonest."
And as long as we're discussing secularist canards such as the unholy grail of atheistic "faith"-the "Treaty of Tripoli"- let's talk about other treaties and documents as well.....
"For example, a 1786 treaty between the United States and Morocco (another Barbary state) is signed "In the Name of Almighty God" and, in the very first Article, it says the parties are "trusting in God it will remain permanent."
Most of the colonial charters (starting as early as the Mayflower Compact) and the state constitutions cited God in general. In many cases, they cited Jesus Christ specifically.
Maryland's Constitution, for example (and it's just one of MANY), required its officials to make a "declaration of a belief in the Christian religion."
The Declaration of Independence made it very clear that our "unalienable rights" come from God. It refers to Him alternatively as "Nature's God," "the Creator," and the "Supreme Judge."
By the end of the founding era, a consensus had emerged that the national government not mandate an official religious denomination or specific test of office (although states remained free to do so). It's clear that the Treaty of Tripoli had this in mind when it threaded the needle in Article Eleven.
It is a historical fact that the United States of America was founded on Judeo-Christian principles and that a clear majority of the American people at the time of the nation's founding considered themselves Christian. The Treaty of Tripoli does not contradict this.
Secularists who read too much into the Treaty of Tripoli are either showing their ignorance or their dishonesty."
http://protestantism.suite101.com/blog.cfm/treaty_of_tripoli
The Declaration of Independence made it very clear that our "unalienable rights" come from God. It refers to Him alternatively as "Nature's God," "the Creator," and the "Supreme Judge."
I have stated this before, the Declaration of Independence is not a legal document. People often confuse the Declaration of Independence with the U.S. Constitution.
Sirkowski was right when he stated that arguing with bedrock is pointless. He chooses to disregard the U.S. Constitution of the United States of America and the rights of all U.S. citizens as a whole.
The thing about using the 200 years worth of religion crap is that just because something has been done in the past doesn't make it right for the world today.
The founding fathers had slaves too, should that be ok?
I personally as an atheist don't want to get rid of peoples right to their delusions. Feel free to be as crazy and ignorant as you want to.
I don't want to do away with churches. I don't want to take away peoples rights to pray. Feel free to walk into a courthouse drop to your knees and waste your time all you want to. Just don't base the laws in that courthouse on your delusion.
However, out of respect for every member of this country don't force your choices on me or anyone else, and I promise to agree to protect your christian ass from any muslims, hindus, wiccans etc. who might want their gods prayed to in school, before the senate or any other government endorsed and sanctioned event. I also promise to protect you from people who might want to make abortions mandatory.
When christians act like little pick on babies I just want to remind them that the laws are there to protect their religious rights too. I bet they wouldn't want a government making laws based on the fact that they are all muslims and believe that it is their duty to impose those beliefs on all the christians in the country.
I'm beginning to see how you came about the name for your blog Tommy.
It's not a matter of being "picked on", poodles. It's a matter of having the fundamental rights of freedom of religion and freedom of speech stripped away by some gross modern day atheist/secularist misinterpretation of the Bill of Rights.
Period.
I'm sure you're all right with that since it means that bad old Jeebus won't be turning your home town into a church state as the ACLU has been hallucinating about for years-or at least as often as they need to drum up some phony excuse for bilking the "faithful" so to speak.
By the way, freedom of religion is a very wide tent.
If I had my way Muslims, Buddhists, Taoists, Hindus, Wiccans, et al could join Christians, Jews and other faiths in one giant display of religious symbols and celebrations of America's religious freedom on court house lawns all over the country.
There would be plenty of room for everybody to display and celebrate-and lots of empty blank spaces for atheists as well......
Bedrock, all that means is that the authors and signatories of the Declaration of Independence claimed to believe or really did believe that our rights came from a supreme being. You also surely understand that the Declaration of Independence was not a legal document, but a way for the the leadership of the independence movement in the 13 colonies to say to the world "This is what we are doing and why." It is a document meant to make a moral case to the nations of the world (or at least Europe) and to stir emotional support for the cause of independence.
Tommy please quit with the "legal document" stuff will you? I've addressed that several times now in response to dusty and others.
Once again....
"It's a matter of having the fundamental rights of freedom of religion and freedom of speech stripped away by some gross modern day atheist/secularist misinterpretation of the Bill of Rights.
Period."
The so called "Establishment Clause" hasn't changed one iota in 230 plus years and everybody in this country including the founders knew exactly what it meant-as in "original intent"- for the first 200 years or so of our history.
What changed is/was exactly what I said...
"some gross modern day atheist/secularist misinterpretation of the Bill of Rights..."
Funny thing, yesterday morning I was walking from the town parking garage to the train station. Stopped underneath the train station overpass was a public bus waiting to take on passengers.
The electronic display at the top of the front of the bus read in big capital letters "GOD BLESS AMERICA". Of course, inwardly I groaned a bit. To me it is a meaningless slogan. How exactly does God "bless" America? Does he make the crops grow more abundant? Does he moderate the weather? Does he cause our armies to ever victorious in battle? At the same though, I basically just shrugged it off. However, if it read "FOLLOW JESUS OR BURN IN HELL!", that would be a different story.
Hey Bedrock!
LEGAL DOCUMENT! LEGAL DOCUMENT!
Ha-ha!!
Sorry, but I'm a bit of a smart ass too! :-)
"How exactly does God "bless" America?"
Well he could start by condemning the traditional values wrecking latte sipping gray suit weasels at the ACLU to burn in hell for one thing...
And there's your proof that God doesn't exist. Because if he does exist, he is unable to defeat those "traditional values wrecking latte sipping gray suit weasels at the ACLU"!
On a side note, Michelle Goldberg, who wrote "Kingdom Coming", visited many megachurches while doing research for her book. She noted the irony that alot of these tradishnul valyas folks railed against latte sipping liberals from the big cities, when some of these megachurches had their own Starbucks in them.
Ours is a tolerant God, Tommy.
Else you and the entire heathen tribe here would be low grade charcoal by now......:+)
Test.....
Is this the same ACLU that is defending the Univ of West VA mormon student because he is losing his scholarship to go on a mission?
WHAT PIGS!
Bed:
First of all Krys you're straw manning again with your" Treaty of Tripoli" reference. I never claimed that this country was founded as a christian nation, rather that "the laws and governance of this country have legitimate roots in Judeo Christian teachings and values, that it operated in complete respect of those rights and roots for nearly 200 years without any hint of ever becoming a theocratic state"
Roots? Which roots? Jefferson's letter to Fortescue completely dismisses the 10 C's as being the backbone of US law. What values? Racism? Slavery? Certainly not the 'all men are created equal' clause: for xtians, that only applies to other xtians.
My contention, clearly supported by the facts, is that it was founded as a nation that embraced religion, guaranteed religious freedom, was friendly to religion in the public arena, allowed religious symbols and biblical references and invoked a higher power in public discourse, on public buildings, in public parks and schools.
No argument.
When I mentioned the fact that all state constitutions, for example, contained references to a higher power your response was, as is typical for atheists who practice their own religion of deflection and denial, simply that "they were wrong".
They were wrong about there being a 'higher power'.
If they were "wrong" as you claim, maybe you can supply some instances where prayer was not allowed in public schools, school Christmas plays were banned, a school choir was advised not to sing"God Bless America", crosses were banned from public cemeteries or creches weren't allowed on court house lawns at any time during the first 200 years of this country's existence.
Those were all clear violations of the Establishment clause. Jefferson & Madison were both in favor of the SOCAS, though Madison referred to it as a 'line'. Madison was against exempting churches from tax, but it got thru anyways.
They were just men, brilliant men to be sure, but just as prone to error as anyone else.
As to your mangling of the Tripoli treaty, it states fairly unequivocally:
"As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Mussulmen; and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties, that no pretext arising from religious opinions, shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries."
So, all those good folk LIED to mollify the Muslim population? & the population of the US never ever even said 'Boo'?
I've heard this argument before. Of course, it's in writing, & no amount of allegorical reading will change it.
The Mayflower Compact has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on the topic.
& yes, even Virginia has some nod to on high, but the fact that the Constitution stipulates that no religious oaths are necessary to take office is a damning point.
While I consider the DOI a founding document, it is by no means a legal document.
I would expect any country that was 'founded on Judeo-xtian' principles to contain the following pivotal points in their main law of the land:
A. A direct reference to YHVH
B. A direct comment on Iesus's divinity, &
C. A direct (or even INDIRECT) inference of the the resurrection.
It's not a matter of being "picked on", poodles. It's a matter of having the fundamental rights of freedom of religion and freedom of speech stripped away by some gross modern day atheist/secularist misinterpretation of the Bill of Rights.
Nobody's stripping anything away.
What's fair for 1 is fair for all.
Worship if you please, pray as you like, do whatever makes you happy.
I ain't paying for it, however.
You want a parade for jebus? Fine, the churches that aren't paying for taxes can pay for them.
They got enough money, & get to use the facilities that the taxpayers PAID for.
I've ranted elsewhere on this ridiculous crap about 'stripping America bare of religion' elsewhere, so I'll assume you have the reading comprehension & retention to recall it.
If I had my way Muslims, Buddhists, Taoists, Hindus, Wiccans, et al could join Christians, Jews and other faiths in one giant display of religious symbols and celebrations of America's religious freedom on court house lawns all over the country.
Now that, I'd PAY to see. I wouldn't even object.
Maybe then we could put some sutras, a few suras, maybe a choice quote or 2 from Lao Tze (Taoism isn't a religion anyways) on courthouse walls, & perhaps a few witches jumping naked over fires, just to make things interesting?
The AFA would go absolutely BUGSHIT over that.
Good one for bedrock
Jefferson vs Hannity
If I had my way Muslims, Buddhists, Taoists, Hindus, Wiccans, et al could join Christians, Jews and other faiths in one giant display of religious symbols and celebrations of America's religious freedom on court house lawns all over the country.
Hindus? Would you be willing to include these Hindu sex gods on the White House Lawn?
Oooh, stardust, you naughty, naughty girl.
I don't think beddy-boy's going to flee, though.
He fancies himself some dim shadow of cowboy Wayne, 2 fisted straight shooter.
Truth is, he's been sold a false bill of goods - & when he finds out about it, BOY, will he be pissed.
"If they were "wrong" as you claim, maybe you can supply some instances where prayer was not allowed in public schools, school Christmas plays were banned, a school choir was advised not to sing"God Bless America", crosses were banned from public cemeteries or creches weren't allowed on court house lawns at any time during the first 200 years of this country's existence.
Those were all clear violations of the Establishment clause. Jefferson & Madison were both in favor of the SOCAS, though Madison referred to it as a 'line'. Madison was against exempting churches from tax, but it got thru anyways. They were just men, brilliant men to be sure, but just as prone to error as anyone else."
Thanks for providing a wonderful example of atheist denial Krys.
So these people-Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, George Washington to name just a few-were all constitutional criminals, living and legislating in "clear violations of the Establishment clause" that they themselves authored and were charged with enforcing.
But they were far from alone in their ignorance and their malfeasace in office. They were joined in their outrageous derelection of duty by every single president, every supreme court justice, every attorney general, every governor and every congressman in this country for over 200 years-excused only by the fact that they were all "just as prone to error as anyone else".
I can't imagine anything being worth adding to that.
I wouldn't have a problem allowing any legitimate religious symbol to the display dusty-let it all hang out for the American people to see and judge for themselves the rich religious/cultural brew served up from this country's melting pot.
I'm serious. If Satanists want in,for exanple, fine with me. After all we deal with the results of their religious philosophy every day in hip hop and heavy metal music, in television programming and in the detox centers, prisons and mental wards all over the country.
My only real concern is equal treatment for agnostics and atheists.
I suppose a giant question mark would do for the agnostics .
Would you folks would satisfied with a tiny, cold, empty blank space somewhere on the outer fringes-well removed from the heavy traffic?
bedrock, your suggestion to allow all religions to display their ooogie boogie shit on public and government property is ABSURD. The government buildings and property would be obscured from view and replaced by a circus environment.
How about leave the fucked up religions in their own respective places and let government do it's job. By arguing whose ooogie booogie sky daddy is real, and being distracted with who's imaginary friend is real and who has the best version of supernatural truth and which version of ooogie boogie xianity to allow to be mentioned in our SECULAR government meetings, there are MUCH MUCH MUCH bigger issues to deal with in the world. All this god shit gets in the way of working on real problems.
See, the problem is that 90% of Americans don't think of religion as "god shit", dusty.
That's 90% of the taxpayers and the voters in this country. Don't you think they should have a say in matters of this kind?
By the way, I wasn't talking about a standing display on court house lawns, just an annual
celebration of what most Americans consider as important as, say, Arbor Day or war protest pukeouts for example.
But if you and kris really want to get worked up about the prospect, also consider that I'd recommend display space be alloted on the same basis as most everything else is in a democratic society.
That is to say that city, county, state and national census records should show what the most dominant religions are in the various parts of the county and display space could alloted on that basis.
While the Christian faiths would have by far the most space, in communities where the Muslim ,Buddhist or other faiths were stronger, they would ,of course, have a higher percentage of the space alloted.
Sound reasonable and equitable?
And while there wouldn't be much blank space left for atheists not to fill in the red states, California should be a blast, like one gigantic empty whiffle ball...
bedrock, that 90% is still varied and quite diverse. There are over 2000 sects of Christianity. There are many forms of God belief even about the God of Abraham. There are many other forms of god belief. You are only concerned about YOUR VERSION. That is why we must remain a secular nation and uphold the Constitution.
Bedrock, you forget those 90% have the same vote as everyone else and a majority of that 90% thankfully choose to uphold the laws set forth in our Constitution.
dusty you seem like a very nice person, certainly intelligent, but no doubt turned off by something(s) that alienated you toward religion during your Lutheran days.
Still, dealing with "2000 sects of Christianity" is a piece of cake compared to finding just one atheist-any atheist- with any discernible degree of justice and common sense.
The laws set forth in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights have been continually and judiciously upheld for more than 200 years, just as the framers intended.
The only thing that's changed, despite the complete disenfranchisement of those 90% of voters and taxpayers,is that left wing secularists and historical revisionists have egregiously and irresponsibly misinterpreted and misstated the meaning and the blindingly obvious original intent in those founding documents in their own self interests.
It just isn't useful to continue reciting the hundreds of outrageous examples of that disenfranchisement for people who can't even seem to grasp the simple fact that the founders, authors and enforcers of those documents had to be in prime face criminal violation of those documents for more than two centuries if the liberal courts' so called "interpretation" of them is to be accepted.
Honestly I've always known that atheists were denial central in this country since they're continually and masochistically hoisting themselves on their own self inflicted "ooh butt, NObuddy can SEE God, so he/she/it just cain't eXEyust, uh huhhhh..." petard.
I guess I'm just now beginning to realize though, that most atheists can't even recognize elementary school level logic and facts, let alone muster up the common sense and the good will toward honest people whose sweat and sacrifices forged this country into one of the greatest on the face of the earth to begin to deal with them.
bedrock, you sound like my old grandfather who lived in North Carolina. LOL! I am sure you are a nice person, too.
You keep ignoring the fact that it is because this country has remained a secular nation, though many are religious, and that is why you can enjoy the freedoms you personally have. I don't think there is any more we can say about this matter.
Bedrock, I don't see why I should have any good will towards people who claim that 9/11 was the fault of atheists, feminists and gays.
And if you want to talk about elementary school logic and facts, any adult who espouses a belief that the Earth is only about 6,000 years old and that there were dinosaurs on Noah's Ark is clearly lacking in that department.
The majority of atheists are not trying to do away with religious freedoms in this country, what we have a problem with is when people with power and influence try to stand in the way of civil rights for gay americans, threaten science education or prevent single women from having access to birth control.
And btw, when my son was in kindergarten a few months ago, the sign language teacher taught the class to sign God Bless America. I didn't utter a peep about it.
Beddy:
"If they were "wrong" as you claim, maybe you can supply some instances where prayer was not allowed in public schools, school Christmas plays were banned, a school choir was advised not to sing"God Bless America", crosses were banned from public cemeteries or creches weren't allowed on court house lawns at any time during the first 200 years of this country's existence.
"If a million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing" -Anatole France.
Lovely strawman. I said they were wrong about there being a higher power, which of course you twist to your own purposes.
Of course all these things went on. It doesn't make them correct. Dimly veiled appeal to tradition.
Tradition be damned, I say.
Thanks for providing a wonderful example of atheist denial Krys.
WTF? These are all FACTS, carefully researched.
I tend to be extremely honest - I don't practice self-deception much.
So these people-Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, George Washington to name just a few-were all constitutional criminals, living and legislating in "clear violations of the Establishment clause" that they themselves authored and were charged with enforcing.
No, because of the 14th amendment. States were given free reign until 1868.
But they were far from alone in their ignorance and their malfeasace in office. They were joined in their outrageous derelection of duty by every single president, every supreme court justice, every attorney general, every governor and every congressman in this country for over 200 years-excused only by the fact that they were all "just as prone to error as anyone else".
Noone probably could foresee that there'd be an issue w/someone objecting to religious overtones in various facets of govt.
& again, it ain't as monochromatic as you make it sound. The subject is far more complex than you play it out to be, this 'us vs. them' mentality.
White children didn't mix w/the 'heathens' or anyone else. It wasn't until the latter 1/2 of the 20th CE that diversity made an issue of it. Chalk it up to a lack of sensitivity to the issue. Hell, most US citizenry were anti-Semitic till post WWII.
What's right for 1 is right for all, & vice versa.
You can pine for the 'good ole days', but they're long gone, gramps.
I'm middle-aged, but I'm glad all that shit's behind us.
I'm serious. If Satanists want in,for exanple, fine with me. After all we deal with the results of their religious philosophy every day in hip hop and heavy metal music, in television programming and in the detox centers, prisons and mental wards all over the country.
So now we see the real face behind the mask.
It's all some GIGANTIC SATANIC CONSPIRACY. Shee-it. What, do you poke under rocks looking for old scratch?
That's just plain nuts.
I suppose you also think that the majority defines morality?
Talk about lacking common sense, or even logic.
It just isn't useful to continue reciting the hundreds of outrageous examples of that disenfranchisement for people who can't even seem to grasp the simple fact that the founders, authors and enforcers of those documents had to be in prime face criminal violation of those documents for more than two centuries if the liberal courts' so called "interpretation" of them is to be accepted.
Oh, so we play the 'radical activist judge' card - yeesh, talk about parroting talking points. Talk about an argument from tradition (a logical fallacy no less).
None of these things were meant to be 'written in stone', you daft twit. Otherwise, you couldn't amend an amendment. There wouldn't be an open-ended possibility of repealing or 'amending'. The Founders were aware they could be mistaken, & thus prepared for it.
Here's the quote, in full:
"My country, right or wrong: right to keep right, wrong to MAKE right."
Honestly I've always known that atheists were denial central in this country since they're continually and masochistically hoisting themselves on their own self inflicted "ooh butt, NObuddy can SEE God, so he/she/it just cain't eXEyust, uh huhhhh..." petard.
"Duh, thass right, Jebediah, I dunt believe in nothing I don't see, yuh-huh, there's gotta be a gawd, even if'n I can't prove it no how no way."
You bring proof, or piss off.
Onus is on the believer. Sell me that car.
Or drive off in it.
You won't get very far.
Wow! 80 comments, and I loved every bit of it! Gotta love that stardust. I learned something here today about the Constitution and the Declaration...thanks.
I guess the only way to get my point across here is to come up with some Carvillesque shibboleth for non thinkers such as "It's the censorship, stupid!" in discussing the current state of so called religious freedoms in this country.
Briefly and directly:
1776-1976: THE FOUNDING MORAL/TRADITIONAL VALUES YEARS
Americans openly invoke a higher power in deliberative sessions in Congress, in the preamble to the constitutions of every state in the union, in the Declaration of Independence, in speeches by every sitting president , place biblical references and religious symbols in public parks and auditoriums, in cemeteries,city halls, county, state and national government chambers,on our currency, in city, county and state seals and proclamations, on edifices such as the Supreme Court building and on national memorials. Presidents, governors and mayors openly hold "Prayer Breakfasts", citizens build Christmas displays on court house lawns, children openly participate in high school and grammar school Christmas plays, sing Christmas hymns and carols, stand for prayer before sports events and in dozens of other types of public gatherings,
All of these activities are sanctioned under the aegis and protection of the First Amendment as drafted and interpreted by this country's founders and enforced by every sitting mayor, governor and president, attorneys general and supreme court justice in every city, town, county and state in the Union for more than 200 years.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech...
1976-2006: THE MOONBAT YEARS:
Otherwise known as "The dawning of Aquarius years", "The Festivas Years", "The assault on the First Amendment years," "The 'situational ethics' replaces 'right and wrong' years", "The collapse of the culture years"."The age of protest and pukeout".
Under pressure from every liberal/atheist/secular organization in the country, liberal judges manage to channel the "original intent" of the founders and reach the conclusion that each and every one of them, individually and collectively, were Constitutional criminals- setting free religious expression precedents that continued for over 200 years in direct violation of the spirit and intent of the very documents they authored.
The term "Congress", dictionary defined for over two centuries as "The national legislative body of the U.S., consisting of the Senate, or upper house, and the House of Representatives, or lower house, as a continuous institution." was reinterpreted to mean" Each and every employe of any tax dollar supported institution including, but not limited to, school teachers, principals, choir directors, football coaches, librarians, counselors, police patrolmen, city, state, county and federal bureaucrats, grounds keepers, cooks and bottle washers.
The term "make law" formerly interpreted to mean a legislative act of city, county, state or federal duly elected representatives was reinterpreted to mean "make a public utterance".
"prohibiting the free exercise of religion and abridging the freedom of speech", formerly
interpreted to mean that government officials were mandated to allow the free exercise of religion and free speech in public arenas and institutions such public schools, parks, auditoriums, cemeteries, city, state and federal buildings was reinterpreted to mean "as long as such free exercise of religion and speech takes place in the home or other private institutions".
Thus: A teacher who utters the word "God" in a classroom, a choir director who leads the choir in singing "God Bless America" and a football coach who leads a team in prayer is "making law".
The law isn't clear on whether or not the teacher is "making law" when he/she discusses crochet patterns, brake linings, lottery results or favorite recipes,
Thus: A high school principal who prohibits a student from saying the word "Jesus" in a valediction speech is not abridging the student's free exercise of religion or freedom of speech since his/her utterance was proposed to take place outside the home or other private institution.
I hope I don't need to point out any further how utterly ridiculous the entire atheist/secularist/ACLU charade is.
I could spend a lot of time pointing out the damage this kind of thinking has done in creating the moral/cultural swamp this country has become in the past 30 years. And most likely will :+)
In the meantime, I just updated my blog for the first time in many months if you'd like to comment on just one small example
http://moonbatabattoir.blogspot.com/
Bedrock, my son's kindergarten teacher was a Christian and she wore a crucifix openly. And to provide some more context, the town I live in has a large Jewish population and tends to vote for those darn libruls you like to rail against, and yet here is this lady kindergarten teacher wearing a crucifix. Gosh, what a shock!
To tell you the truth, I had absolutely no problem with her wearing her crucifix while teaching my son, even though I had told her that I was an atheist and that if my son omitted the word "God" when reciting the pledge, that was the reason why. And, though you might find it hard to believe, if anyone had tried to make an issue out of her wearing a cross necklace, I would have defended my son's teacher's right to wear it.
So, you are really off base in oversimplifying the issue as a monolithic atheism activism banishing all manifestations of religious expression from the public square. That certainly does not represent what I stand for.
One thing to keep in mind, Tommy, is that I'm not talking about atheists who respect the rights of Christians and other religions and aren't filing law suits or running screaming to the ACLU when some airline attendant puts a cocktail napkin in front of them that has a bible verse on it or some private business postal outlet also sells Christmas cards (actual cases)
So you and probably some others here shouldn't take most of my comments personally.
Respect is a two-way street. I have people who email me with their bible verses in their signatures, and I ignore them...it's their email so they can put whatever they want on it. However, if I put a quote by an atheist, they have asked me to remove it because it offends them.
Oftentimes in the news we read about christians who don't simply file a lawsuit if they are offended by something, they can get downright violent...destroying cars because of a Darwin fish, beating people up because they are gay, and in some instances killing the "heathen" because they openly reject their god beliefs. Madelyn Murray Ohair's body, along with family members was found chopped up in little pieces and buried on a Texas ranch.
All too religious fanatics appoint themselves god's exterminators to get rid of "evil". A lot of evil is done by god believers in the name of their invisible sky daddy.
And speaking of religion in the schools. When we first moved to this town, there was a teacher that everyone nicknamed "Preacher Teacher" who would NOT stop preaching in the science classes he taught. The community was really getting frustrated and angry, and this community is mostly Christian people. However, the people wanted to keep religious training on a personal level and they simply wanted their children to learn about SCIENCE...not Preacher Teacher's religious brand of brainwashing.
After it was taken to court by RELIGIOUS FOLKS...Preacher Teacher was removed.
Every religion and non religion has it's extremists dusty, just as atheists have their extremists in organizations like "Freedom From Religion" and the ACLU and on left wing sites all over the
blogosphere.
You're wrong to blame main stream Christians or any other religion in this country with the possible exceptions of Satanism or Islam that either sanction violence or tolerate it at significant levels. Note too that news accounts often use the description "religious zealot", "clergyman", "priest" and such in their reports to single out people of faith-never "atheist", "agnostic" or "secularist"
I've never advocated teaching creationism in schools although I understand that some enlightened ( read "very brave")school systems are beginning to recognize the value of teaching courses on The Bible in a historical context.
But then I've never collapsed on my fainting couch or dialed the ACLU's 9 11 number when I overheard a child praying in the lunch room either.
All of this is beside the point, however-which was and is the liberal court sanctioned abrogation of the fundamental Constitutionally guaranteed freedoms of religion and speech in the public arena.
By the way, Madelyn Murray O'Hair and her family were held hostage for weeks, slaughtered and buried on that Texas ranch by a fellow atheist and associate in her own office.
bedrock -
The teacher wasn't teaching creationism in his classroom, he was trying to "convert" kids to the "correct" form of Xianity. He was giving semonettes about "being born again" and if they didn't get on their knees and beg for forgiveness, they would burn in hell. He was a real loonie who had total disregard and respect for any other religion but his own brand ov Xianity.
As for children praying in lunchrooms and people "collapsing", I have never heard of that in the Chicagoland area. People continue to proseltyze to others on the job, and in schools, and having their school group prayers, and their prayers before sports events, forcing those who are not believers, or believers in other religions to be in a position of having to tolerate their religious practices.
Religion permeates this society, our government and the workplace and everywhere we turn, and we are in a war in this Iraq mess because our fearful leader believes gawd told him to go there, so stop crying and boo-hooing about the "persecuted" Christians.
Note too that news accounts often use the description "religious zealot", "clergyman", "priest" and such in their reports to single out people of faith-never "atheist", "agnostic" or "secularist"
That is because most people are christians who commit these crimes, rarely an atheist, agnostic or secularists. The prisons are full of mostly religious people. And religious people are supposed too be somehow better and that is not the case at all. There are more crimes done in the name of religion than there ever has been in the name of atheism.
Then again Star, there may be fewer atheists in prison because they are smarter criminals and are less likely to be caught!
:-)
tommy...that's possible. ;)
tommy...how high will this thread go? What's your record with that last insanely long thread here?
"That is because most people are christians who commit these crimes, rarely an atheist, agnostic or secularists."
Hahahaha! That's truly hilarious dusty.
But I think you meant to post it in "Friday Funnies" along with your claim that Christians killed Madelyn Murray O'Hair-4 or 5 threads higher up.
Look at the stats bedrock. There are far fewer atheists and so many more Christians...90% in this country, yet the crime rate is astronomically high...committed by Christians.
As for the criminal who killed Ohair...it was premeditated. He was a professional criminal and his murder of O'hair was premeditated.
Now, what about the people who commit atrocities on a daily basis in the name of their great sky daddies?
You never commented on our president invading Iraq because his god told him to.
KKK ring a bell? That religious-based hate group still exists in large numbers.
Most death penalty supporters are Christians.
That is just a few examples. Don't tell me that religion makes the world a better place. It doesn't.
Going back to the O'hair case, the Austin police department was totally uncooperative in the case because she was an atheist.
From Wikipedia "There was some criticism of the Austin Police Department's apparent apathy about the case. Austin reporter Robert Bryce wrote: "Despite pleas from O'Hair's son, William J. Murray, several briefings from federal agents, and solid leads developed by members of the press, the Austin Police Department (APD) sat on the sidelines of the O'Hair investigation..
Star, I believe my comments record is 233 for the Get Right With Jesus or Get Left in Hell post.
Star, I believe my comments record is 233 for the Get Right With Jesus or Get Left in Hell post.
Oh yeah...how could I forget that one. Even GIFS doesn't break 200 comments for one thread very often, even with 10,000 visitors a week!
"Look at the stats bedrock. There are far fewer atheists and so many more Christians...90% in this country, yet the crime rate is astronomically high...committed by Christians."
There are far more tomatoes in this country than there are diesel engines, power plants or metal smelters.
Tomatoes are the cause of global warming.
Total U.S. population is about 301 million. The latest prison incarceration figures I could find were from the Department of Justice published in 2005-some 2,267,787 prisoners in federal, state, city and county prisons and jails-about 0.77 percent of the U.S. population.
Actually those figures should be pretty encouraging as regards the incarceration rate for atheists and other godless heathens.
With about 30 million of them in this country and only 2.3 million of them in prison (7.7 per cent)that leaves a full 92 per cent of them free to wander the streets and quote ridiculous extrapolations such as "most crime is committed by Christians" and "tomatoes cause global warming".
Incidentally that was a nice pirouette on Madelyn O'Hair dusty; from "Christians done it" to "well, some of them didn't seem to give a damn".
"Most death penalty supporters are Christians."
That's primarily because most serial killers are atheists dusty.
But you don't want to get me started on the outrageous liberal hypocrisy in pleading for lifetime room, board and workout rooms for confessed serial killers while nodding off as millions of innocent children are slaughtered-sometimes only minutes away for being allowed to enjoy the God given life they're entitled to.
rubblehead, If you read what people write, you would see that I never said Christians killed madalyn murray Ohair...however I clarified that Christians were not helpful in the investigation and even tried to hinder the investigation.
Statistics show that most people in prison are Christians. Again I am asking, don't Christians claim to be morally superior?
You are the one tap-dancing around the questions here and facts that you choose to ignore.
Pedophile priests who manage to escape jail because of the power of the church. The Catholics are not the only ones who sexually abuse little children. It's the Baptists, Jehovah's Witnesses and others.
Look at how many people abuse their kids in the name of religion. Look how many sleep around and have affairs when they are "married in the sight of god". Look how many steal, kill and commit hate crimes. It's mind boggling! You all are supposed to be above that. But you aren't.
Religion does not make one a better person. A person is going to be good or bad regardless of religion. It's more of how a person is raised than what they believe. All too often, people use their religion to justify doing bad things.
You are absolutely wrong about atheists in prison and the number of atheists being serial killers. Here are the statistics of prisoners according to their beliefs. Atheists are quite low on the list...and most serial killers are not atheists. Many serial killers were raised in abusive, dysfunctional, god-bothering homes. Many went on killing sprees because they believed they were "cleansing the world" of "evil". You can look this stuff up for yourself, and study the backgrounds of serial killers and the families they were raised in.
The results of the Christians vs atheists
in prison investigation. from the The Federal Bureau of Prisons
Note that atheists, being a moderate proportion of the USA population (about 8-16%) are disproportionately less in the prison populations (0.21%).
And don't get me started on this abortion crap. I would never choose an abortion for myself, nor would I want my children to choose that option...however, one cannot help natural abortions which happen far more often than ones humans perform on themselves.
I was told my first child was "taken back" to god via stillbirth (a little girl) after a full pregnancy and 26 hours of hard labor because "god felt we weren't ready to have a child yet and changed his mind." She would be 30 years old now and every year I think of the woman she might have been.
Our second child was "spontaneously aborted" by mother nature at the 4th month...a little boy.
Our middle son's twin died in the womb.
Therefore since most babies are lost via "spontaneous" or "natural abortion", your god commits by far the largest percentage of abortions that occur.
However, since leaving all the oogie boogie religion behind, I am able to think more clearly and accept the fact that no god has a hand in anything. What happens happens. I had a malfunctioning uterus (so much for intelligent design) and needed high-risk doctors to save my three beautiful live children I now have.
sometimes only minutes away for being allowed to enjoy the God given life they're entitled to.
Again, this shows just how you god believers make shit up as you go along. Where is the logic in this when so many lose children to spontaneous abortion, stillbirth, deformities, cancer, conjoined twins, muscular dystrophy, cystic fibrosis, starvation, abuse, murder...shall I go on?
I know you are an old guy, and it's hard for old people to change their minds, but you really need to stop and think things through some more instead of clinging to old ideas and years of brainwashing that is inside your head.
The problem you people have in dealing with Christianity is that you seem to think that just because he/she is a "Christian" that automatically means they're supposed to be better than anyone else morally and spiritually.
The whole concept of Jesus Christ is that he came to offer salvation and redemption to sinners, as a savior. Every good practicing Christian knows that. And they know that attending church doesn't mean they're better than anyone else morally or spiritually, only that they're trying-and depending on God's grace and forgiveness through Christ when they fail.. Beyond that, their faith and the support of other church members in times of family crisis is an important underpinning of any church "family".
Your prison figures are highly suspect since an inmate is unlikely to declare him or herself an atheist knowing that it's yet another finger in the face of the society they abused by committing the acts that got them there in the first place. In short, most who declare themselves "Christians" or members of other faiths are probably lying.
I'm very sorry about your personal tragedies and admire the way you've handled them.
Your prison figures are highly suspect since an inmate is unlikely to declare him or herself an atheist knowing that it's yet another finger in the face of the society they abused by committing the acts that got them there in the first place. In short, most who declare themselves "Christians" or members of other faiths are probably lying.
My figures? These aren't mine, they are from The Federal Bureau of Prisons. Didn't you click on the link and read there?
Where are your official sources for your claims?
You are basing what you say on assumptions and in true god-believer form, making stuff up as you go along in an attempt to make yourself appear right.
And you have also just proven my point that religion does nothing to make a person better. It simply gives people a ticket to do bad things because they will be "forgiven" and "saved" no matter what they do. Atheists are good without bribes and promised rewards of going to a magic kingdom somewhere over the rainbow when they die.
Barney:
So you and probably some others here shouldn't take most of my comments personally.
It's hard to believe that you think the way you do: it's just...ridiculous. Things like
That's primarily because most serial killers are atheists dusty.
When it's known fact that quite a few serial killers are of the 'visionary' variety - they receive word from 'on high' to do their dreadful deeds.
In fact, name me 1 who's an atheist. No, NOT a Satanist, an atheist.
Fact is, this anti-ACLU bias stems mostly from upper-class white folk, who're sniveling & whining about how they don't get their precious little special privileges any more.
'Waah! We don't get to impose on other people any more! We can't get our way!' Accompanied by hissy fits rolling on the floor, pounding it with fists & feet.
The free lunch is over. You want special privileges? Unlimber your own damn wallet.
The problem you people have in dealing with Christianity is that you seem to think that just because he/she is a "Christian" that automatically means they're supposed to be better than anyone else morally and spiritually.
Oh honky please.
The lack of humility is suffocating. I can point fingers at most of what you've blathered, & SHOW you how arrogant your statements are, but I'm guessing your self-awareness is somewhere bordering at nil.
Most xtians I've engaged on the blogosphere are pretty much dripping w/self-importance & elitism.
Can't abide snobs. Never could.
I've never advocated teaching creationism in schools although I understand that some enlightened ( read "very brave")school systems are beginning to recognize the value of teaching courses on The Bible in a historical context.
Ummm...no, they're bringing it in via literature courses. The bibble is anything but historical. In fact, its 'historical' batting average is somewhere near the zero range.
What evidence do you have that it's any kind of threat now?
Are you JOKING? Shrubbie was told by gawd to invade Iraq, we got all sorts of freak shows planning to turn the US into a theocracy (look up Dominionists), we got Muslims who want to push Israelis into the sea (I'm gonna generalize here: religious folk are just plain fucking NUTS), & we got wingnuts who want to dismantle the ACLU just because they object to 1 group getting special privileges.
Buy your own fucking lunch, Barney. I ain't paying for it.
"Most xtians I've engaged on the blogosphere are pretty much dripping w/self-importance & elitism. Can't abide snobs. Never could."
Don't know those people, Krys. As I've said before I've been married to a Christian woman for nearly 52 years now and one of our children is a director for Youth for Christ. They and their friends I've gotten to know over the years are anything but "elitists" or "snobs". The ones I know are all about giving of themselves and their financial support, caring and sharing in times of crisis, going out of their way to help those in need and, in general, spreading the love, concern and healing graces of their faith. As for myself I grew up in a lower middle class family, started working odd jobs when I was nine years old and am working now, in my 75th year, 6 days a week. Nothing will knock the "snob" starch out of you like an honest day's labor.
Yes those people you describe do exist but if they didn't I'm sure atheists would invent them as some sort of whipping boy to justify their non faith.
"Shrubbie was told by gawd to invade Iraq"
You've have to pull out the quote you're using to justify that statement for me. I'm well aware of the left wing take that it was all about lying, about oil, about Halliburton, about lining his pockets and enriching his buddies, about trying to please "daddy", about inventing an excuse to establish a despotic, rights stripping regime but this is the only sect I've run into yet that blames God for it. But I suppose that's what floats the atheist boat.
"Buy your own fucking lunch, Barney. I ain't paying for it."
I'm not sure I understand this one either. I remember you whining about not wanting to pay for roads you don't use and such but what makes you think you're paying for religion in this country any more than you're paying for worthless boondoggles, multi layered bureaucratic mismanagement or the burgeoning crime, teen age pregnancy, suicide and drug rehabilitation rates created by the liberal forces that have been grinding away at the moral foundation of this country for several decades now?
But if you want to hear some justified outrage on that subject, talk to people of faith who totally resent their tax dollars going to fund asinine ACLU law suits over creches on court house lawns, Bible verses and crosses in cemeteries, a cross on a city seal, a national park or a policeman's lapel.
The list is legion and in every case when they're able to push the decision through liberal courts, lurching along under the total misrepresentation of "original intent" in the First Amendment, they're awarded expenses, sometimes damages, incurred in their relentless efforts to rip apart the moral/traditional values foundation of this country.
That's the "fucking lunch" nobody but the atheists and the secularist ten percenters should have to pay for....
barneyrubble says: You've have to pull out the quote you're using to justify that statement for me.
This is from the 'horse's mouth'...as the saying goes. (KA if I may):
"President Bush said to all of us: 'I am driven with a mission from God'. God would tell me, 'George go and fight these terrorists in Afghanistan'. And I did. And then God would tell me 'George, go and end the tyranny in Iraq'. And I did."
Mr Bush went on: "And now, again, I feel God's words coming to me, 'Go get the Palestinians their state and get the Israelis their security, and get peace in the Middle East'. And, by God, I'm gonna do it."
Back to the topic of Christians not being elitists and snobs, just by coming to an atheist site and insisting how wrong we are, while ignoring our very legitimate comments and supporting facts, you are showing just how elitist and snobbish xians can be. Most xians think they are special.
I see that you continue to side-step the fact that religion doesn't make one a better person. You have no comment about pedophile priests and clergy? You have no comment about the fact that xianity is supposed to make you a better person but doesn't? God believers are some of the most selfish people I know. It's all about them and what their god can do for them...me me me... Nothing is done without the prospect of imagined rewards.
Now, back to the U.S. Constitution. It is a document that speaks for itself.
Cases are won repeatedly in support of the separation of church and state because the Constitution makes it perfectly clear. Like it or not, bedrock, this country never was, nor ever shall be the theocracy you wish it to be as long as the Constitution and the rights of ALL people continue to be upheld. Your beliefs are only one of millions of individual beliefs. Everyone has their own way to float their own little boat when it comes to whatever supernatural crutch one needs to float their own boat. Separation of church and state must be withheld to ensure the rights to float that boat of your's.
You need to break out of that little bubble you have kept yourself in and take off the blinders of xian elitism. You are not the only person in the world, and this world doesn't revolve around you.
discussing with bedrock...
"Round, like a circle in a spiral
Like a wheel within a wheel.
Never ending or beginning,
On an ever spinning wheel
Like a snowball down a mountain
Or a carnaval balloon
Like a carousel that's turning
Running rings around the moon"
Like a circle in a spiral
Like a wheel within a wheel
Never ending or beginning,
On an ever spinning wheel
As the images unwind
Like the circles that you find
In the windmills of his mind"
I've been keeping largely aloof from this debate the last day or two. But as the god of this blog, I would like to ask everyone to stop with the name calling.
Let's try to keep these things civil. We are not going to change each other's opinions here, but the expression of different view points helps us to understand why we disagree with each other and that all have strongly held beliefs that we are passionate about.
That being said, it might be best to put this thread to rest. Besides, I just put up a new post that I would like to hear everyone's opinion on.
Bedrock:
You've have to pull out the quote you're using to justify that statement for me. I'm well aware of the left wing take that it was all about lying, about oil, about Halliburton, about lining his pockets and enriching his buddies, about trying to please "daddy", about inventing an excuse to establish a despotic, rights stripping regime but this is the only sect I've run into yet that blames God for it. But I suppose that's what floats the atheist boat.
Let's straighten out this crooked trail: we're not a sect, we're concerned citizenry detecting a distinct pattern in the way things are going.
Stardust supplied your quote for ya.
So let me ask you this - do you dismiss something said based on the speaker, or on the facts surrounding it?
I could give a flying rat's ass if I'm told something by a wingnut or a moonbat: I care about whether it's TRUE or not.
I'm not sure I understand this one either. I remember you whining about not wanting to pay for roads you don't use and such but what makes you think you're paying for religion in this country any more than you're paying for worthless boondoggles, multi layered bureaucratic mismanagement or the burgeoning crime, teen age pregnancy, suicide and drug rehabilitation rates created by the liberal forces that have been grinding away at the moral foundation of this country for several decades now?
Oy gevalt, ridiculous.
I wasn't 'whining' about any such thing. Has age shattered your retention?
I was bitching about churches being exempt. Way to strawman.
Of course, that paved the way for your ludicrous tangent on them 'evul libruls' assiduously slaving away at destroying our precious 'way of life' - monochromia ill becomes any thinking being. Again - the subjects you raise are far, far from being quite as black 'n white as you paint them.
But if you want to hear some justified outrage on that subject, talk to people of faith who totally resent their tax dollars going to fund asinine ACLU law suits over creches on court house lawns, Bible verses and crosses in cemeteries, a cross on a city seal, a national park or a policeman's lapel.
I'm aware of all this. You keep mentioning this ad nauseum. As per any strict constructionist's blinkered POV, you leave out all the details involved.
I'll nutshell it for you: you folks don't know how to share. You bulldoze, you shout down the opposition, you demand special privileges. THAT'S what I mean by a 'free lunch'.
This is America. Where an individual has as much rights as the majority.
You don't like? Move.
The list is legion and in every case when they're able to push the decision through liberal courts, lurching along under the total misrepresentation of "original intent" in the First Amendment, they're awarded expenses, sometimes damages, incurred in their relentless efforts to rip apart the moral/traditional values foundation of this country.
'Original intent' can go fuck itself. We don't live in the late 18th CE anymore. Moral values? Traditional values? Which ones? For each shiny penny you display, I can pull out at least ten quarters covered in shit.
Don't mistake me: I love this country. But don't show me melanoma & pretend it's beauty marks.
You people revised history to suit yourselves, lay claim to all sorts of folderol, deify ordinary men (the Founders), & play this Polyanna horse manure (as Billy Joel says, 'The good ole days weren't always so good').
This isn't YOUR country. This isn't MY country. It's OUR country.
I've got just as much say & just as many rights as you do. No more, no less.
(Sorry Tommy - I have indeed refrained from cruder language in deference to you.)
Predictably the moonbats seized on this statement to blame God for everything from Iraq to chill bains and jungle rot.
And when they do this kind of thing they load up search engines to the point that most people just give up and accept the statement as factual unless they're willing to keep wading through the left wing bull shit to get to a reliable report.
That's the way I came to this account in the Washington Post, after slogging through about 4 pages of hysterical tripe from such unbiased sources as "Sink Progress" wetdreams.orgasm, democratic undertow and ilk.
"President Bush said to all of us: 'I'm driven with a mission from God. God would tell me, George, go and fight those terrorists in Afghanistan. And I did, and then God would tell me, George, go and end the tyranny in Iraq. . . . And I did."
This sounds much like the original Haaretz version. Bush then allegedly said God had now told him to "go get the Palestinians their state."
This time there is a response: "We checked contemporaneous notes from the meeting with President Abbas and did not find a single reference to God," a senior administration official told us. "The closest thing we could find that the president said is: 'My government and I personally are committed to the vision of a Palestinian state.'
Granted Bush said things that came mighty close but, basically, the above statement smacks of
yet another of the left wing lies that people who hate Bush almost as much as they hate God
keep babbling all over the blogosphere.....
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/13/AR2005101301688.html
And kris really I appreciate your "refraining from cruder language" for a change.
Maybe next time maybe you can try to refrain from sounding like a dumb ass.
Speaking of hating or blaming God -- just to clarify, we cannot blame or hate something that does not exist.
We don't even hate the president. But we do hate the mess in Iraq that he got us into and his lies and incompetence. He has been a failure at everything he has tried to do in his life. My fundamentalist xian aunt, and most of my fundie relatives who voted for Bush and believed in him are quite disappointed and now admit he is a piss poor president.
"Speaking of hating or blaming God -- just to clarify, we cannot blame or hate something that does not exist"
Sounds good dusty, but you folks seem to do a pretty good job of that from the posts I've seen here. I can dig 'em up if you'd like.
One of the reasons Bush's popularity is so low is that he hasn't done enough to appease his conservative base (read trying to get reasonable immigration legisation through Congress and resisting the firing of decent people like Alberto Gonzales out of hand).
Of course the Democrat controlled Congress is even less popular since they apparently haven't done enough to appease the left wing idiots that are standing on each other's wingtips at the "Kos" convention right now, breathing martini fumes in each others' faces and railing about the pressing need to abandon the Iraqi people to the tender mercies of Al Qaeda.
Sounds good dusty, but you folks seem to do a pretty good job of that from the posts I've seen here. I can dig 'em up if you'd like.
What I for one was doing was responding to the absurd excuses god believers make up as to why bad things happen. Then I point out how absurd those beliefs are, and emphasize that there is no god pulling our strings, and things happen in nature that we have no control over and all we can do is "roll with it."
Bedrock:
This time there is a response: "We checked contemporaneous notes from the meeting with President Abbas and did not find a single reference to God," a senior administration official told us. "The closest thing we could find that the president said is: 'My government and I personally are committed to the vision of a Palestinian state.'
Really? That's not the way I read it:
"President George W Bush told Palestinian ministers that God had told him to invade Afghanistan and Iraq - and create a Palestinian State, a new BBC series reveals.
"In Elusive Peace: Israel and the Arabs, a major three-part series on BBC TWO (at 9.00pm on Monday 10, Monday 17 and Monday 24 October), Abu Mazen, Palestinian Prime Minister, and Nabil Shaath, his Foreign Minister, describe their first meeting with President Bush in June 2003.
"Nabil Shaath says: "President Bush said to all of us: 'I'm driven with a mission from God. God would tell me, "George, go and fight those terrorists in Afghanistan." And I did, and then God would tell me, "George, go and end the tyranny in Iraq …" And I did. And now, again, I feel God's words coming to me, "Go get the Palestinians their state and get the Israelis their security, and get peace in the Middle East." And by God I'm gonna do it.'"
Maybe next time maybe you can try to refrain from sounding like a dumb ass.
Oh WOW, I mean OW, I mean OUCH, that really stings!
/sarcasm off.
Sour grapes, along w/monchromia, is really unattractive: that's an ad hominem, mein freund, & a pretty poor 1 at that.
Your consistent efforts to call any & all criticizers of your POV 'moonbats' or whatever is a common logical fallacy: poisoning the well.
F'rex: I have no doubt you'll carry on about how the BBC is a 'leftie moonbat' organization. The effort to soft-pedal Shrubbie-boy's own words is another standard tactic. "Oh, that's outta context!" Standard fare, for reality deniers.
I'll put it to you in Latin:
'Res ipsa loquitor'.
The thing speaks for itself.
Masticate on that, get back to me.
Thanks for a great example of what I meant with my "dumb ass" statement krys.
The rollout you posted was plucked from the first four pages of left wing tripe that come up when you Google the words.
The one I posted, buried under the lies, was a story from The Washington Post-not exactly
a house organ for Bush lovers.
Si hoc non legere potes tu asinus es
"I see that you continue to side-step the fact that religion doesn't make one a better person."
I addressed it dusty. You just ignored it as usual.
"The problem you people have in dealing with Christianity is that you seem to think that just because he/she is a "Christian" that automatically means they're supposed to be better than anyone else morally and spiritually.
The whole concept of Jesus Christ is that he came to offer salvation and redemption to sinners, as a savior. Every good practicing Christian knows that. And they know that attending church doesn't mean they're better than anyone else morally or spiritually, only that they're trying-and depending on God's grace and forgiveness through Christ when they fail"
"Like it or not, bedrock, this country never was, nor ever shall be the theocracy you wish it to be"
Just as you've completely ignored my repeated posts that your "theocracy" deflections are a rote athesist/secularist canard perfected over the past 30 years of liberal court mangling of the language in the First Amendment . I wouldn't want to live in a theocracy either, as I've said many times.
Again.
This country operated for over 200 years allowing the free and open practice of religion in the public arena-just as the founders intended and the First Amendment mandated-with never the slightest hint of becoming a theocratic state.
Evah!
It's a boogey man scare tactic used by the ACLU and the nuts at FFR to gin up bucks from their paranoid "don't let that bad ole Jeebus git me" constituents.
*sigh*
Lighten up dusty. It's SUNDAY girl!
Why not give ole krys a jingle, join him and Tommy at church, sing some soul restoring hymns, listen to the message of Christs' unconditional love and join the congregation for a fried chicken dinner on the ground?
Softly and tenderly, Jesus is calling,..
Fried chicken and all those fat-laden church dinners is what makes Xians fat.
There are doctors who might be able to help with the aural hallucinations. ;)
Bedrock:
Thanks for a great example of what I meant with my "dumb ass" statement krys.
The rollout you posted was plucked from the first four pages of left wing tripe that come up when you Google the words.
I did it! I made an accurate prediction. You, of course, responded right on cue.
Si hoc non legere potes tu asinus es
& the water table's laced w/arsenic.
I can go find Latin phrases too. Thanks to the Internet, I too can make myself look more educated than I truly am.
The whole concept of Jesus Christ is that he came to offer salvation and redemption to sinners, as a savior. Every good practicing Christian knows that. And they know that attending church doesn't mean they're better than anyone else morally or spiritually, only that they're trying-and depending on God's grace and forgiveness through Christ when they fail"
Sorry, I don't 'believe' that ole JC ever existed.
So that drooling drivel has no power over me whatsoever.
It's a boogey man scare tactic used by the ACLU and the nuts at FFR to gin up bucks from their paranoid "don't let that bad ole Jeebus git me" constituents.
Wait: what?
You carry on AT LENGTH about your caricature 'boogey-man' (the 'ay-vul librul athe-IST conspiracy'), & we're supposed to dismiss any & all of our sources outta hand in favor of yours?
Newsflash: you & yours have a pronounced TRACK RECORD of doing exactly what we've discussed.
Some 20 centuries' worth, if I recall rightly.
So, to quote Judge Judy, 'don't piss on my leg & tell me it's raining.'
Yeesh - clueless AND predictable.
Who sounds like a dumbass now?
Hint - not moi.
Tommy ducked telling me how to post a link here, claiming he just didn't know :+)
I really can't blame him, but if you'd care to step back a bit and see how things were in this country when freedom of religion was actually a protected Constitutional right, when youngsters could go to a Saturday matinee without hearing the MF word every 10 seconds and we actually won our wars, I just reposted a 3 part (yawn) series on lifestyles in the 30's-50's, as least from the perspective of 90% of Americans, you're certainly welcome to.
http://bwthdik.blogspot.com/
bedrock. You must not get out much. All kinds of mythology temples are being built everywhere. When I moved to this town in 1987 there were a total of six churches. Now there are more than 30 and more are being built. You must not get out in the world much if you believe that religion doesn't permeate our society. And if you are an invalid, and don't get out much, I am truly sorry about that.
Some old people want to cling to their past lives and pine away because the world has changed when in fact it is them who have changed...they have become old and crotchety in their minds. I hope I never become like you, bedrock. I prefer to be like my 93-year-old aunt who sees the world in a positive light, with many good neighbors and friends and enjoys the new inventions and the energy of young people instead of finding fault with them. And this old aunt is an agnostic. *gasp* Never sick a day in her life, good-hearted, a great woman who is loving and an admirable matriarch of quite a close-knit, positive family that has all the values and goodness that you say is missing in today's world.
I think you want to argue about everything just because you want to be disagreeable. I don't intend this to be mean, but you sound like a very unhappy and miserable person who would argue the ears off a brass monkey. Why not try doing some positive things with whatever time you have left? Cheer up! This country is not as bad as you think it is.
Bedrock, suggesting that I am dishonest is not the best way to get in my good graces on this blog.
When it comes to posting links (or those blue thingeys as you like to call them), I don't know how to do that. I know how to copy and paste the url address, as you did above.
Bedrock:
Here's how to do the 'blue thingies'
A HREF="insert weblink here" REL="nofollow">insert text here./A
Note that you'll have to insert the < at the beginning, & a <> at the end.
You're welcome.
Tommy, you've got to know I was kidding.
Thanks krys...
I get out a lot dusty and I'm very happy about 92% of the time. We both know by now where the other 8% is coming from :+).
I probably won't live as long as your aunt who has no doubt taken a lot better care of herself than I have, and good for her.
Some 55 years of a 2 plus daily cigarette pack habit, 10 to 12 cups of coffee and 2 to 5 scotches (only after 5 which is about the only discipline I practice in that matter) takes it's toll. Still I feel good most of the time, work 40-50 hours a week, still play golf 5 or 6 months out of the year, exercise, do yard work and take hunting and fishing trips out of country a couple of times a year.
The anger I do harbor isn't really directed toward atheists like most of the ones I'm seeing here or even to well intended, though I believe pollyannic and uninformed, opposers of the war we're engaged in, but to the root causes of the complete moral/cultural collapse in this country that I've been witness to over these past 75 years, or at least since the time I was old enough and experienced enough to really understand what was happening to this country and why.
More later...
bedrock, You mean your god couldn't keep you from drinking, smoking and messing up your body? ;) (kidding)
Things haven't really changed, and there is no moral/cultural "collapse". It's just that over the past several decades, because of advances in technology, we could see more and more of what is really going on, and we can communicate fast and easily now to exchange viewpoints and get our news on a minute by minute basis, 24-7.
Going way back there has always been something new fad, fashion, technology, etc. going on to make the older generations shake their heads and long for the days they imagined were better. But things weren't better or worse, only different. As for crime, pornography, profanity, drinking, drugs, prostitution etc...that stuff has have been around forever. Coca Cola used to contain real cocaine in the early part of the 20th century. People have always had to have their liquor. Men have always cheated on their wives. The bible itself is full of some pretty sexy stuff (and much of it is perverted).
Vaudeville used to be blamed for the "moral decline" of the country. Then it was oooo "evil television". Even the first silent films had many older folks in a tizzy about sinking family values. Music too...Jazz was thought of as evil, and Blues...then all the Xians got their panties in a knot over rock and roll and went out and burned albums in protest. My Baptist grandmother would not allow my aunt to have an Elvis Presley record. Ironically, now many churches use the same type of music in their churches and megachurches in order to appeal to the youth. (Apparently god isn't enough to attract people.)
So, my point is that you are pining away for days long gone thinking that they were somehow better when they were not. Even in the days of our founding fathers there were the same types of stuff going on as nowadays, and then you had slavery, racial discrimination and oppression, oppression and discrimination of women, and I could go on and on and if you are a smart man, which you appear to be, you will know I am right.
Yeah, I know Bedrock. The smiley face should have given it away.
Regarding the war on "terrah", or bin Ladenism as I call it, you have to understand and acept that there are plenty of people such as myself who oppose Islamic fundamentalism and the terrorist threat as you do. I think it is more a case of a clash of method as to how to do with it.
I think I have made it pretty clear on my blog what I think of Islam, and I will eventually get to the Quran after I am done fisking the Bible.
As for whether things are better or worse than the "good old days", I've only been around for 38 years. In some areas we have made tremendous progress and advancements, and in others we have suffered setbacks. That's the way things always will be I suppose.
Bedrock:
The anger I do harbor isn't really directed toward atheists like most of the ones I'm seeing here or even to well intended, though I believe pollyannic and uninformed, opposers of the war we're engaged in, but to the root causes of the complete moral/cultural collapse in this country that I've been witness to over these past 75 years, or at least since the time I was old enough and experienced enough to really understand what was happening to this country and why.
Y'see, I think a variety of our differences, is that I'm able to accept that my forefathers (& my heroes) had feet of clay. We tend to overdo the idolization thing. So it comes as a shock when we find our idols were just plain folk in exceptional circumstance. Then, it's either denial or acceptance.
This is a great country. It's rich, it's powerful, it's got amenities other places can only dream of.
But it's hard to stomach, for moral folks like you or me, to conceive that some of these luxuries we enjoy are anything but ill-gotten. & so we walk the road of 'say it ain't so!'.
I wish I could indeed say that my ancestors were shining beacons, but likelihood is, they were just people. Some good, some bad, some middling.
Since I'm a realist, I don't play the 'blessing' game. Pragmatism demands the eyes wide open: some of our freedom was fought for, worked for, & yes, slaved for (literally as well as figuratively).
But to proclaim that all was well before, & all is shit now, is simple denial.
"The Earth is degenerating today. Bribery and corruption abound. Children no longer obey their parents, every man wants to write a book, and it is evident that the end of the world is fast approaching." This warning came from an Assyrian tablet, written in 2800 BC.
So you see, your pontifications are as old as dust. Every generation comes along, & the elderly pronounce judgment, point their fingers, & proclaim that the 'traditional' methods were better.
It's a sad song, much sadder because it just isn't so.
I don't think you can even begin to compare the violent crime, rampant debauchery, drug use, political corruption and open pornography that dominates this society today with 2,800 BC, the "Lady Chatterley's Love" era, or even the 70's krys.
To say "it's always been that way" is to serve as an unwitting, or perhaps witting. apologist for the atheist/secular forces that have successfully cut the last strand of rope on the moral anchor that kept this country from drifiting over the edge for 200 plus years.
If you think not, then maybe you could tell me just what's left for the amoral "anything goes" envelope pushers to accomplish-burning Christians as witches? Lacing McDonald's milkshakes with metamphetamine? Child pornography on postage stamps?
That's about all that's left.
The world contains a majority of god-botherers who make up 90% of this "immoral" society in our own country and it is this 90% who set the standards and elect our leaders and support the things he says are the cause of our "moral decay", yet bedrock blames the atheist. Absurd.
It's not the "god botherers" who approve of the ACLU's attack on the freedom of religious expression, the teaching of "situation ethics", the lack of discipline, the right of a child not to tell her parents she's pregnant or the passing out of condoms in schools, the "freedom" of the pornograpy merchants to weave it into movies, music and other forms of what used to be family entertainment or the wide spread debasement and ridicule of Christian values in this country dusty.
I don't think you can even begin to compare the violent crime, rampant debauchery, drug use, political corruption and open pornography that dominates this society today with 2,800 BC, the "Lady Chatterley's Love" era, or even the 70's krys.
You can't be serious. But I don't see a smiley face, so I assume you are.
For starters, let's consider drug use and how it has been around for centuries upon centuries, and only has been regulated in recent times.
Link from Wikipedia:
Drug use is a practice that dates to prehistoric times. There is archaeological evidence of the use of psychoactive substances dating back at least 10,000 years, and historical evidence of cultural use over the past 5,000 years.[1] While medicinal use seems to have played a very large role, it has been suggested that the urge to alter one's consciousness is as primary as the drive to satiate thirst, hunger or sexual desire.[2] Others suggest that marketing, availability or the pressures of modern life are why humans use so many psychoactives in their daily lives. However, the long history of drug use and even children's desire for spinning, swinging, or sliding indicates that the drive to alter one's state of mind is universal.[3]
Also:
Historical Research on Drug Policy
Ancient History
We can find historical information about prostitution, quite easily, and historical information about all kind of "immorality" that you believe to be so much more prominent than it was in the past. And much of this permeates your ancient holy texts. Your bible is full of stories about he Christian god flooding the earth and killing off a mass of people because of their "evilness" and "corruption."
Now let's jump to alcoholism...There was no treatment for alcoholism in the ancient times, or even in your Golden-Olden Days, no help for the sex offender -- nor the victims of sex offenders. Women were the ones to be blamed if a man raped them right up into your "golden era" so much so that they were afraid to even report these crimes.
I could do all the research for you, but somehow I think I would be wasting my time, as we have done here already with you. Stop deluding yourself. You just want a reason to hate the world for whatever reason you want to make up.
It sounds like I have a topic for a new post! :-)
But I can't get to it just yet.
It's not the "god botherers" who approve of the ACLU's attack on the freedom of religious expression,
Many god botherers are ACLU supporters and again for the umpteenth time...upholding the separation of church and state. Public schools continue to be closed in observance of xian holidays, kids can pray anytime they want, under gawd is still said in the pledge of allegiance, and so on. Your "persecution" is imagined.
the teaching of "situation ethics", the lack of discipline, the right of a child not to tell her parents she's pregnant or the passing out of condoms in schools,
wouldn't be a need for this if the xian majority would teach their children sexual responsibility. The biggest problem with promiscuity and unwed mothers comes from the fundamentalist xian communities and states. As for lack of discipline, in my experience, the Pastors kids are some of the worst behaved.
>the "freedom" of the pornograpy merchants to weave it into movies,
of which xians are the biggest supporters...have to be since there are so many more of them. If it were only atheists attending these films and buying the dirty magazines, the pornography industry and Hollywood wouldn't be making millions now, would they?
music and other forms of what used to be family entertainment or the wide spread debasement and ridicule of Christian values in this country dusty.
Again, who buys most of this? XIANS! You are the majority...and you blame us for your lack of family values. That is pathetic.
A lot of wasted space (breath) on drug use and prostitution dusty. I'm surprised you didn't trot out some 1930s flapper film depicting wild marijuana parties to support your argument.
Other than a degree of nose on your face common sense, the only response I can offer is that in my teen years; 1945-1951 * NObody in my high school class, neighborhood or Air Force unit used drugs of any kind. Try to find a public school, typical neighborhood, military unit or any other organization or population center where that statement can be made today.
Yes there was some beer drinking and partying in high school but nothing like the drunken orgies that take place on campus and during Spring break among teen agers today, let alone rampant drug use and sex in grammar school where "MF" is now a common word and in out of control bus burning brawls when a college team loses a basketball game.
I hope we're finished with that ridiculous red herring without someone dredging up some anecdotal or isolated examples of that kind of activity during the period I'm talking about. The statistics on current day teen age crime, drinking, pregnancy,suicide and drug use will NOT bear that out.
And when you talk about "X"tians being responsible for not teaching their children sexual responsibility, supporting pornography and such , you're again using a statistical canard to brand an entire group with the actions of a relative few . To get the terminology right, first I'm talking about PRACTICING Christians, not agnostics afraid to label themselves as such or "lip service" Christians who don't really know what the basic tenets of the faith are, let alone try to conduct their lives in accordance with them.
If you want some examples, * just try to find a practicing Christian in the mass media world of newspapers, television, movies, music and other information and entertainment sources that dump this kind of swill into the public viewing habits and lexicon on a daily basis.
The Christians I know try to arm their children against the kind of cultural debasement forces they're going to be confronted with in the public school system and in every social activity that takes place outside the home-the foul language, the pre-teen sex, the cheating, the crime and drug use, the alcoholism, the "whatever's right for YOU hon!" teaching and practice of "situational ethics" , the ridicule of their faith and the daily bombardment of salacious filth in sex and violence in books, music, movies, video games and on the school playgrounds. And, please, spare me the typical mindless secularist "Ooh, but don't you remember those little cartoon books that used to circulate on school grounds 50 years ago?" response.
That is why a large and growing number of Christians resort to home schooling or spending the money to send their kids to private schools where atheists and other assorted religion phobes don't dictate the curriculum.
To blame Christians for the moral/cultural swamp that this country has become is tantamount to blaming the victim for the criminal assault.
* Standard common sense caveat, "one swallow doth not a summer make"
NObody in my high school class, neighborhood or Air Force unit used drugs of any kind.
Haha...that is so naiive for an old guy.
Yes there was some beer drinking and partying in high school but nothing like the drunken orgies that take place on campus and during Spring break among teen agers today,
Partying to varying degrees have been going on at college and universities for decades. Colleges and universities have always had their groups and cliques. The churchies, the bookworms, the nerds, the party animals, the prissy ones, the preppies, and so on, and so forth...these cliques have always existed in college life. You must not know many people who went to college or been on many college campuses (I have been on many college campuses and am friends with teachers from the "old days" who would tell you that it's no worse now than it was before except that every now and then you have a mentally unstable person who is made fun of by religious freaks like what happened in Virginia and they go off the deep end with a gun, unfortunately. Then we hear all about the poor xian honor students who were shot down for no reason. There was a reason...the xian kids are bigots and didn't like foreigners, and they made relentless fun of him. It doesn't justify what he did, but it was not a very xian way of treating someone who was different and probably unstable and depressed.
I was telling my husband's brother about you and your pining away about how the old days were so much better. He is a republican xian, and he is a retired professor from Indiana University and has taught at Northwestern in Chicago and also at Minnesota University...he is 73 this year and does not make the claims you have made. (He is still teaching at University of Louisville, part time). He says partying has always been a part of college life for many "good" kids. Doesn't matter if they are xian or not. Kids get all party-hearty when they get away from mom and dad.
Toga parties were huge in the 40s and 50s. Kids going down to wild beach vacation on spring break in Florida is not new. My aunt and uncle who live in Orlando have been complaining about that since I was little back in the 50s. All the ruckus, and mess and wild drivers and huge crowds of drunken teenagers. Drinking, wild escapades, drag racing and motorcycle gangs, all kinds of crap going on in the 40s and 50s. There are even Hollywood films from decades ago which reflect this. You are so in denial of the reality of how things were. You must have lived on a pig farm in the middle of rural Kansas if you never saw any of this.
If you want some examples, * just try to find a practicing Christian in the mass media world of newspapers, television, movies, music and other information and entertainment sources that dump this kind of swill into the public viewing habits and lexicon on a daily basis.
No one has to watch this "swill". I don't. But most of my xian friends do and panic when their cable goes out for any reason. My Baptist aunt and uncle who never miss a church service have a great love of movies and watch it all no matter what kind of language is in it.
I heard a tape not that long ago, uncensored of some of the old comedians, uncut, uncensored and they had pretty foul mouths. Dean Martin, George Burns, Milton Beryl, and others. In their live acts, people heard it, but it was censored for broadcast and therefore not brought into everyone's livingroom. But to say
that people were more "pure" back then is naiive.
Most actors and actresses are god believers, and most people who pay money to see them and support the entertainment industry are god believers. The entertainment industry would be a total failure without xian money.
The Christians I know try to arm their children against the kind of cultural debasement forces
You can try to "arm" them, but to teach kids that the world is a big bad place to be afraid of is wrong and so pessimistic. We can teach kids our own values and hope they stick, but to send them off as if they are fighting a battle is instilling negativity and fear.
My niece and her husband have isolated themselves on an island in Alaska. They teach their kids how xians are persecuted. They have told them how xians are taken away from their families in some places and killed because of what they believe. One day a cop showed up at their door simply to ask them about an abandoned car that was parked on the road, and their little girl started screaming and crying "Please don't take my daddy! Please!" she was hysterical. At 5 years old she is already terrified of the world.
The youth group they work with there are isolated from the world..on an island. Those kids are into meth, sex and all sorts of things because they are freakin' bored out of their skull. And religion or not, when kids get bored, they find other forms of "recreation".
I spend two years attending a Baptist church when my mother insisted on going there after my grandmother died. Apparently she couldn't find comfort in the Lutheran god belief, so she tried my father's family's god and my siblings and I LOVED it because they were wild and crazy. We drove around in cars, and while pretending to be good little xians in front of parents, during youth meetings kids were sleeping around in cars, and three girls got pregnant from that group, and one had a secret abortion that she couldn't keep to herself much to her mother's dismay.
My brother went to a Lutheran school and what went on inside there sometimes was something else.
There were just as many troublemakers and punks in that school as any public school.
My baptist aunt and uncle in Mississippi raised two daughters with "godly values" and they both became pregnant more than once, and their children are all by different fathers. Church-goers in rural areas away from the influence of "heathen" city life have more of a problem with recreational sex and underage drinking than those who live in the city. I can dig up the stats if you like.
To blame Christians for the moral/cultural swamp that this country has become is tantamount to blaming the victim for the criminal assault.
Again, you all support this society with your money, and your time. Making people like Mel Gibson richer when you help him exploit your own religion for his own profit and vanity. Xians love television, beer, and all kinds of heathenistic fun. And xians especially love sex. When we drive down to the south there are "adult" bookstores, topless dancer bars, peep shows, advertised on billboards right there alongside signs that say "ACCEPT JEEBUS OR YOU ARE GOING TO HELL" Jesus, booze, sex and drugs all go hand in hand. Meth production and use is high amongst southern xian youth.
Some friends of ours who we met in the military are strict evangelicals, and when they were first married and away from the farm, the woman who was a young girl at the time was addicted to valium because Jeebus didn't help her cope with life I guess. Then they raised their kids and homeschooled them and taught them that the world is a bad place. They ended up leaving and not looking back.
As for homeschooling, we homeschooled our kids for their high-school years. But it was for academic reasons, not moral reasons. I agree that public schools are not the best place to educate your kids. However, kids can't be isolated against the world, either. They must learn to be part of it. Our three went to college early, had their 2 year degrees when all their friends were graduating from high school. Then they went to university early and earned their Bachelors and then our daughter went on further for her masters at quite a young age. ATHEISTS...who never got in trouble and worked hard and carried with them the values we taught them into the REAL WORLD. Like I said, you can teach them values and hope they stick. They usually do no matter what your beliefs about the supernatural.
Our daughter got a full scholarship to YALE and earned her Masters there after doing her undergrad at a Philadelphia music conservatory. Our one son got an art degree, and our other son a degree in Physics. Did they party? Yes, I am sure they did their share of partying and were not corrupted by "evil society"
We have easier and faster access to things nowadays. Language has changed, and technology has improved our lives tremendously though it is often misused by creeps and criminals. But to say that these bad people never existed until recent times is so untrue and naiive.
I know you will come back with a pre-programmed rebuttal...so believe what you want. This is my last comment to you for real this time. It's not even worth trying with you anymore. Go ahead and wallow in your self-pity and pine away for the good old days of your imagination. Who am I to take that away from you?
I'm sure you're proud of your family dusty, they appear to be very bright, nice people.
You didn't read what I sent but that's all right since we'll never see eye to eye anyway.
It's been a long hard day and I haven't had a chance to read your response thoroughly but
I'm sure you addressed these statements in your comments since they were the essence of what I had to say...
1. * NObody in my high school class, neighborhood or Air Force unit used drugs of any kind. Try to find a public school, typical neighborhood, military unit or any other organization or population center where that statement can be made today.
2. "I hope we're finished with that ridiculous red herring without someone dredging up some anecdotal or isolated examples of that kind of activity during the period I'm talking about( The 1940s-1950s).
The statistics on current day teen age crime, drinking, pregnancy,suicide and drug use will NOT bear that out."
3. * just try to find a practicing Christian in the mass media world of newspapers, television, movies, music and other information and entertainment sources that dump this kind of swill into the public viewing habits and lexicon on a daily basis.
Later...
I have to agree in part with Bedrock. From the late 1960's onward, there was a steep rise in out of wedlock births, crime, drug use and a host of other social pathologies.
However, go back to the earlier decades of the 20th century, and you had tremendous racial discrimination and segregation, women didn't get the right to vote until 1920 and it took WWII to open up opportunities for women to participate in the labor force. Immigrant and poor native born Americans worked in dangerous and appalling conditions in factories. The Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire in New York City in 1911 is one incident that comes to mind.
So, while some of the pathologies that Bedrock cites as increasing, and rightly so, from the late 60's onward, such criteria do not measure the fact that for a large segment of America's population in the "good ole days", the plight they suffered under "the system" was itself a crime.
Yes, America has made great strides in providing opportunity and freedom for women, gays, and racial minorities. And that America as a nation has done so is evidence of her greatness.
Bedrock:
1 final go-around, & it's time to put it to bed (our host has asked us to stop some time ago - apologies)
To say "it's always been that way" is to serve as an unwitting, or perhaps witting. apologist for the atheist/secular forces that have successfully cut the last strand of rope on the moral anchor that kept this country from drifiting over the edge for 200 plus years.
No, y'see, people have always been that way. You say things are worse than that quote from 2800 BCE?
No, many of these problems existed. Rome had its orgies, there were bacchanalias galore. Many, many countries had hedonistic periods (these swung on a pendulum, like fashion).
& the stats you draw on, the personal anecdotes, were most likely from a white-bred suburbanite culture. No 1 took censuses or population statistics for black, hispanic, or any other neighborhood. Nobody checked to see if teen suicide, abortion, sexual abuse or excess flourished in any other part of the world.
I advise you read the book, 'Lies My Teacher Told Me' - that is, if you don't mind getting really irate.
Your version is the White Man's hunky-dory rose-colored glasses 2.0.
You can't turn back the clock. Even if you can, you'd find that life back then wasn't as great as you recall.
'Leave It To Beaver' & 'Ozzie & Harriet' were TV shows, not reality shows.
Bedrock, I have a new post up top that might interest you. It certainly is a change of pace from the debate that has been raging here.
I'm about ready to drop the discussion too since there's really no way that people who weren't around in the 30s -50s can identify with the societal conditions and attitudes of the times.
Just a couple of clarifications- "last words" if you will, for the record.
Tommy acknowledged the facts behind my contentions and I appreciate that. But I have to say that societal warts such as sex discrimination and segregation could and would have been removed over time anyway without tossing out this country's religious /moral standards that I maintain were jettisoned during the period.
It should be noted that the Christian churches were the one of the prime opponents of slavery in the first place and served as a strong base of activism against segregation in the 50s-witness the genesis of the movement at Ebeneezer Baptist Church under Martin Luther King and the active support of church leaders,including pastors of white churches, all over the South.
As far as my personal attitude and involvement were concerned Tommy knows from my postings that I took a lot heat and damned near lost my job as personnel manager of a newspaper in the South for aggressively integrating the work force there against the wishes of just about every manager other than the news editor and, thankfully and most importantly, the publisher.
I served on the board of the Urban League in that city, later as a director of the Urban League, co founder of an organization called "The Cadre" formed to bring business, civic, political and education leaders together in efforts to foster a better understanding and working relationship between black and white leaders, and as a director and campaign chairman for the annual NAACP drive in a major midwestern metropolitan area.
dusty, I agree with your brother in law that partying has always been a part of college life. Both my kids went to college, one has her Masters, I got 3 years in after my service hitch and I have no illusions about the celebration atmosphere that's always prevailed on college campuses where most young people get away from home for the first time.
However the rampant, pernicious and wide open sex, drugs, kill yourself jumping off motel balconies drinking binges and burning busses and trashing cars after losing a basketball game are most definitely a post moonbat takeover phenomenon. My brother in law is also a retired college professor, served in the Marines for four years and knows exactly what I'm talking about in comparing the two eras. He's an atheist by the way and neither of us grew up on a farm in Kansas.
But please note that my post was focused on language, sex, violence and drugs at the grammar school and high school level. You skipped over that and responded by going off on colleges.
I stand by my statement that no one I knew in high school or in the Air Force units I served in for four years used drugs and, as I've said many times before, I'm far from being a prude.
I moved my original post on the subject up to the top of my "But what the hell do I know" blog and hopefully you, kris and the others can respond to it there since Tommy wants to move discussion off this thread.
How's that for blog whoring and getting the last word in on the same thread :+)
http://bwthdik.blogspot.com/
Post a Comment