Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The liberals on this board tend to label anyone who disagrees with them on any subject at all as Right wing and then go on a tirade which includes plenty of name-calling and foot-stomping. Here in reality most of those labeled right wingers are centrist.
The degrees of right wing and left wing...
Defined as anyone even slightly leaning one way more than your agenda.
Some are spoiled and some know what it means to not get everything you wish for. You can see the characters play out right here before our eyes, as to who here is what.
Science has evidence to back it up. Religion does not.
try reading the bible then.
also, science is not the end to end all, science changes all the time, plus sometimes science just lies to prove its fact, like the climategate going on right now in UK and elsewhere.
"The best thing is to let Christianity die a natural death.... When understanding of the universe has become widespread... Christian doctrine will be convicted of absurdity....
"Christianity has reached the peak of absurdity.... And that's why someday its structure will collapse....
"...the only way to get rid of Christianity is to allow it to die little by little....
"Christianity <is> the liar....
"We'll see to it that the Churches cannot spread abroad teachings in conflict with the interests of the State." (p 49-52)
also, science is not the end to end all, science changes all the time, plus sometimes science just lies to prove its fact, like the climategate going on right now in UK and elsewhere.
There's a lot of politics behind the global warming debate, and unfortunately some scientists are letting politics get in the way of science.
Atheists can't prove there is NO God, so they must BELIEVE there is NO God, so Atheism IS a religion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ilovemycomputer90
Hitler was Catholic. Stalin and Mao's actions were not driven by atheism. It was driven by their political ideology (communism).
Hitler a Catholic? You should have tried "Lutheran" first, since most Germans would be Lutherans rather than Catholics. Anyways, I provided some quotes showing that he did not like Christianity.
And I'd say you are wrong about Stalin and Mao. Their Ideology AND their atheism drove their actions.
The fact is, in NO atheistic or atheistic leaning country is there a freedom of religious expression.
But in a Christian country, one can practice atheism if they so choose.
The poor regretfully have not the means to flee and so their children are stuck in a government program designed to make them Atheist.
Can you prove how the government is attempting to persuade students to be atheists? This is just ridiculous. Your source isn't very reliable.
Everson v Board of Education:
The 'establishment of religion' clause of the First Amendment means at least this: Neither a state nor the Federal Government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigV
Atheists can't prove there is NO God, so they must BELIEVE there is NO God, so Atheism IS a religion.
Of course. It wouldn't be very logical to claim absolute certainty. Anyone (either Christian or atheist) who claims absolute certainty is probably a radical. But atheism is the most logical position because there simply isn't any evidence that suggests a supernatural power exists. And BTW, the burden of proof is on the one claiming that a god exists. Its like you claiming that unicorns exist, yet you tell me that I have to prove that they don't exist. The burden of proof is on you.
Atheism is simply a non-belief in a god. There is no specific doctrine or religious text that atheists follow.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigV
Hitler a Catholic? You should have tried "Lutheran" first, since most Germans would be Lutherans rather than Catholics. Anyways, I provided some quotes showing that he did not like Christianity.
My mistake. Your source and a couple other sources that I read discussed Hitler acting very Christian in public speeches, but obviously these private writings bring up a lot of questions. Certainly a topic worth studying more indepth.
But it is important to note that the source you provides, along with other sources, indicates that Hitler was probably not an atheist.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigV
And I'd say you are wrong about Stalin and Mao. Their Ideology AND their atheism drove their actions.
Communist ideology and the thirst for power mostly drove their actions.
It's long, but worth the read. Here's an important part:
We saw above that communism as expressed by Marx and Engels included an anti-religious bent. Theistic apologists, in a sleight of hand, conflate this anti-religiosity with atheism, though the connection between the two is tenuous at best. To be sure, atheists are sometimes anti-religious, but their opposition is usually to the type of domineering religion which seeks to force non-believers to adhere to its metaphysical and theological claims. Atheism, which is merely the lack of belief in god(s), does not inevitably and logically lead to anti-religiosity. To buttress the point, consider deism, which has long disparaged organized religion. Today's secular socities, which include significant numbers of atheists, are wholly tolerant of religious believers - as long as these believers keep their faith-based dogmas and conflicts out of the realm of public policy.
Today, we find it difficult to relate to the minds of the 18th and 19th intellectuals, many of whom viewed religion as a force for ill in society. We and our immediate ancestors were not subject to its endless wars, its hostility to libery and democracy, its thought control, and its support for despots and tyrants, when not ruled by the church's version of the same. But centuries ago, in Marx's time, the landscape of recent history was vastly different. Many, including Marx and those who followed him, viewed organized religion with some justification as a reactionary and tyrannical institution, which severly discredited religions metaphysical claims.
Now obviously Stalin and Mao weren't around during the time of Karl Marx, but it is important to point out that anti-religion doesn't automatically correlate with atheism.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigV
The fact is, in NO atheistic or atheistic leaning country is there a freedom of religious expression.
Sweden? Norway? Denmark? Enough said.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigV
But in a Christian country, one can practice atheism if they so choose.
Minimal taxation. Defense and infrastructure at the national level, education and protection at the state and local level. Adherence to the intent of the founders and the Constitution.
Personal responsibility. End the entitlement mentality.
World police is not our job nor do we NEED to do it to preserve our freedom.
This is where I fully agree with libertarians. But this is not the mantra of teh conservative party of today, even though I know you say it was a conservative belief long time ago post ww2. Being 29 though, conservative (to me) equals more world police. Most liberals I know want us to stop policing the world. Funny how labels evolve over time.
DECREASE THE SIZE OF GOVERNMENT AND STOP INTRUDING INTO EVERY SINGLE FACET OF OUR LIVES.
CLEAN UP THE CORRUPTION IN WASHINGTON AND STOP PROTECTING THE CORRUPT POLITICIANS - REMOVE THEM FROM OFFICE.
Let the states and local governments have greater control of their own affairs. Stay out of the classroom. Decrease the tax burden. Stop using the commerce clause for anything except its original intent, which was to keep commerce between the states "regular". Control immigration and keep our borders secure.
PUT AMERICAN INTERESTS FIRST BEFORE THOSE OF OTHER COUNTRIES.
STOP TRYING TO BE THE WORLD'S POLICEMAN.
This is a country of tremendous natural resources. USE THEM!!! I care more about the people who are trying to be productive citizens than I do a minnow in California.
BRING THE JOBS HOME AND LET AMERICANS DO THEM.
It's OK to give a leg up to people who really need help but NO MORE GENERATIONAL WELFARE.
Uh huh, this is a good start. I could also add getting the feds out of our educational systems, that is the purview of states and municipalities, and the feds need to stop using the states National Guard forces as a federal military reserve as well.This obligation to the central authority of DC has gotten out of control. Putting a nix on the out of control spending of tax dollars for entitlement programs, and pet projects of career politicians is another thing to look at. If the feds wan ot control something in the private sector, stop doing it by taxing business to death. especially in the use of our natural resources. Mining and timber in particular. The refining and milling stays here. PERIOD. If Japan, China,etc, wants our ore and timber, they get it finished, not raw to sell our own material back to us refined by slave labor. It's high time to stop the DC aristocracy from pimping our country's resources out, and taxing all of us more to make up for the lost revenue. Oh there is plenty more to say, but, it would get pretty long winded.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
