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.
It means if a state wants to have an official state religion, they can. If a city wants to have a religious expression, they can. If you don't like it, don't live there. The Constitution was put in place to limit the FEDERAL government, and it's silent on the rights of states in this regard. That is, if you want to actually read the rules....
California today tramples the 2nd Amendment by having the toughest gun laws in the country. The city of Chicago is also known for very tough gun laws. If gun ownership is important to a person, they don't move to either place. I know I won't.
And that is wrong. If a city wants to enforce that, they have the right to do so. And you don't have to live or visit there.
You're right. You have the right to worship or not worship as you choose.
The problem with going "by the spirit instead of the letter" is that the spirit of the law is subject to interpretation. You get people that have agendas that decide to interpret it in whatever way they want to. It just so happens that you agree with the courts at this time, for the most part. But what happens if they go hard right and start to implement interpretations you disagree with?
And in the case of places like North Korea, we see tyranny, and oppression in the form of secular atheism.
And the sad thing is you can't seem to grasp that Joe Bob from Missouri voting his conscience is any different than Muslims tossing gay people off buildings or refusing to allow women to drive.
Now we're at the point where you are kind of ranting a bit. I get it...you don't like religion. You don't appreciate it, and you think that religion is the root of all evil. You are neglecting the fact that our founding fathers, many of the were religious, and they implemented checks and balances to allow for religion even *gasp* in local government.
Really? And should I start suggesting that secular atheists would like to gas all Christians as Stalin wanted to wipe out dissidents? I'm bigger than that and realize that it doesn't accomplish anything to toss out attacks like that.
You're right. And the fact that Joe Bob wants to vote his conscience and he doesn't want it in his state doesn't mean he hates gay people or that he wants to toss them off of buildings. Nor is it suggesting that he wants the church to move to DC and start running the country.
Weird how the founding fathers didn't feel the need to mention it.
Again...it was never a right.
The point remains though...you can't read my mind. The Constitution grants us rights as voters, and it really is silent on the idea of motivation for why we vote as we do.
Honestly? I'm not going to get dragged into this deeper than I already have. We can start a thread on this if you want...but I'm guessing there are probably 300 of them already if we choose to dig up an old one.
Perhaps it's because I see people mocking and insulting Christians on this board nonstop. It really has just grown tiresome. Can we just be nice?
So it's ok to act bigoted as long as it's about religion? Is that it?
Again...if it wasn't so one-sided, perhaps I wouldn't have so much issue with it. We don't feel the freedom to make those points, though, and to engage in the same tactics.
I'll be honest. My eyes kind of glazed over there about halfway through. Not to be rude...but that was a LOT of info there. I get it. You feel smart, you feel like you are above religious people, you feel victimized by religion, etc...etc.. Now it's your turn to fight back.
OK. Bottom line is...I'm willing to be nice if you are. Will you take that challenge up?
Merely a response to the torrent of stuff you wrote. Now, I'll be charitable and not propose that you were trying to buy the argument by filliblustering, but just making a very full argument.
(aside, I like the way you Interpret the right of the citizen militia to arm as a reason to object to states that enact gun laws, even if sorely needed, and yet Interpret the constitution to suit the rights of states to buck it if you agree with it (religion in schools, we can bet) and dismiss the persistent and repeated decisions of judges that the constitution stands to separation of church and state and states' right do NOT buck that. But -hell, that's just the opinion of judges..means nothing if you disagree with them).
But you have -so to speak - been called on every point. And rather than address it, you seem to want to make some deals about tone of voice. Frankly in Shirina's place I'd tell you to go deflower yourself. Theist apologists take things too darn personally and play the 'you are being rude' card to get a some kind of angle. I wouldn't trust a theist polemicist on making a deal to be polite any further than I could kick them. Dishonesty and craftiness (I have come to see - and can reference the too easy smearing of Western atheism with North Korea, as just one of a string of examples, while we're at it (1) is always the name of the game and honesty and decency never is.
It's not because they are nasty people or not honest in daily life - it really is what religion seems to do to them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaptistFundie
And in 1776, our nation was also extremely tolerant of all religions. That really has changed only recently that religion is now thought of as a pariah.
Fishbrains, old mate, would you like to field this gobsmackingly impudent lie or shall I
(1) and compound that with the hypocritical patting yourself on the back for not accusing us of wanting gas all Christians, like Stalin. Sorry, No Darwin medal this time.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 11-22-2017 at 09:27 AM..
Merely a response to the torrent of stuff you wrote. Now, I'll be charitable and not propose that you were trying to buy the argument by filliblustering, but just making a very full argument.
ok. If you say so.
Quote:
(aside, I like the way you Interpret the right of the citizen militia to arm as a reason to object to states that enact gun laws, even if sorely needed, and yet Interpret the constitution to suit the rights of states to buck it if you agree with it (religion in schools, we can bet) and dismiss the persistent and repeated decisions of judges that the constitution stands to separation of church and state and states' right do NOT buck that. But -hell, that's just the opinion of judges..means nothing if you disagree with them).
You can choose to interpret the 2nd Amendment that way...ok...so be it. Historically, it has been interpreted another way. I'd suggest checking out Penn and Teller's video analyzing the Amendment wording. I'm guessing you can find it on Youtube. It has some rough language, so I won't post a link here.
In any event, the point remains. Some states may choose to limit freedom, and you can certainly choose to not live there if you don't like it.
Quote:
But you have -so to speak - been called on every point. And rather than address it, you seem to want to make some deals about tone of voice.
Or maybe I grow tired of the hostility.
Quote:
Frankly in Shirina's place I'd tell you to go deflower yourself. Theist apologists take things too darn personally and play the 'you are being rude' card to get a some kind of angle.
THe fact is, I've seen the non-theist side here say some pretty harsh stuff. This forum is really very hostile to religious people--especially those that believe the Bible.
Quote:
I wouldn't trust a theist polemicist on making a deal to be polite any further than I could kick them. Dishonesty and craftiness (I have come to see - and can reference the too easy smearing of Western atheism with North Korea, as just one of a string of examples, while we're at it (1) is always the name of the game and honesty and decency never is.
If you go into a conversation with that preconception, then there really isn't much I can do to change it.
It means if a state wants to have an official state religion, they can. If a city wants to have a religious expression, they can. If you don't like it, don't live there. The Constitution was put in place to limit the FEDERAL government, and it's silent on the rights of states in this regard. That is, if you want to actually read the rules....
Maybe you should go read the Constitution. Particularly the 14th Amendment. It clearly says that all of the Constitutional provisions ascribed to the Congress or the Federal government also apply the all of the state and local governmental entities subservient to that Federal government. Maybe you missed it. It's only been in force since 1868.
Quote:
California today tramples the 2nd Amendment by having the toughest gun laws in the country. The city of Chicago is also known for very tough gun laws. If gun ownership is important to a person, they don't move to either place. I know I won't.
California is not trampling the 2nd Amendment. If they did, the Federal Courts would throw out California's laws. The Supreme Court is specifically empowered to deal with questions about the Constitution.
<snip>
Quote:
And in the case of places like North Korea, we see tyranny, and oppression in the form of secular atheism.
The was I see it is that North Korea is ruled by an oppressive tyrant.
Quote:
And the sad thing is you can't seem to grasp that Joe Bob from Missouri voting his conscience is any different than Muslims tossing gay people off buildings or refusing to allow women to drive.
I must have missed something. Tossing people off of buildings is not anything like voting.
<snip>
Quote:
You're right. And the fact that Joe Bob wants to vote his conscience and he doesn't want it in his state doesn't mean he hates gay people or that he wants to toss them off of buildings. Nor is it suggesting that he wants the church to move to DC and start running the country.
You can't vote on minority rights. The minority looses every time. That's why their "rights" are protected by the Constitution.
Suppose I were to tell you that the basic influence for the founding of this country ( United States of America) was based on the principles of Freemasonry and the Constitution of the Iroquois Confederacy and that no religion of any kind had anything to do with it.
You've already mentioned the bicameral nature of the legislature, and the executive endorsement of laws, as well as the impeachment process as having come from the Iroquois Confederacy, but nobody has mentioned that the concepts of one man, one vote and the separation of powers were lifted almost intact from Anderson's Constitutions of Freemasonry. A substantial number of the Founders were Freemasons and knew those things well. Besides George Washington, Ben Franklin, Paul Revere, Sam Adams, and John Hancock (among others) were all active Freemasons.
Maybe you should go read the Constitution. Particularly the 14th Amendment. It clearly says that all of the Constitutional provisions ascribed to the Congress or the Federal government also apply the all of the state and local governmental entities subservient to that Federal government. Maybe you missed it. It's only been in force since 1868.
It's interesting that the 14th Amendment is not used to provide gun ownership to all states based on one's ownership of guns in one state. Funny how that works.
Quote:
California is not trampling the 2nd Amendment. If they did, the Federal Courts would throw out California's laws. The Supreme Court is specifically empowered to deal with questions about the Constitution.
They severely limit it, compared to other states. As I pointed out, though...it's funny how the 14th Amendment doesn't seem to apply there.
Quote:
<snip>
The was I see it is that North Korea is ruled by an oppressive tyrant.
You're correct. And oppressive tyrants will use whatever they can to oppress. It's what they do. Some use religion, some use secular government.
Quote:
I must have missed something. Tossing people off of buildings is not anything like voting.
Once again, you're correct. Now if the rest of the liberal left would realize that exercising one's right to vote is not bigotry. You should tell Shirina that.
Quote:
<snip>
You can't vote on minority rights. The minority looses every time. That's why their "rights" are protected by the Constitution.
<snip>
Again, we're in agreement. But marriage is not a right. It never was, and the Constitution doesn't mention the right to marriage.
Okay, folks -- this thread has gone waaay off-topic. I'll let it continue, for now, but if off-topic posting continues for much longer, this thread may be closed.
For the record, the original topic was:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Objective Detective
Which religious affiliation do you think had the biggest influence regarding the colonization of the eastern seaboard states of America and also had the largest effect on what caused the American Revolution and the signing of the Declaration of Independence?
It's interesting that the 14th Amendment is not used to provide gun ownership to all states based on one's ownership of guns in one state. Funny how that works.
They severely limit it, compared to other states. As I pointed out, though...it's funny how the 14th Amendment doesn't seem to apply there.
You're correct. And oppressive tyrants will use whatever they can to oppress. It's what they do. Some use religion, some use secular government.
Once again, you're correct. Now if the rest of the liberal left would realize that exercising one's right to vote is not bigotry. You should tell Shirina that.
Again, we're in agreement. But marriage is not a right. It never was, and the Constitution doesn't mention the right to marriage.
I have to agree. religion as weapon, good natured socialism as a weapon, capitalism as a weapon. and conveniently boths side use and dismiss the conston when needed.
bash religion when needed and/or bash atheism religion as needed.
I find it very interesting that our Nation's capital was carved out of the US states of VIRGINia and MARYland (Virgin Mary). We have SEVERAL major cities that are named after saints. Our largest state is full of cities that are named after saints in Spanish; the largest city in Cali is the Angels. The capital of that state is a sacrament.
The official language of our science is Latin. Our most popular sport (NFL) uses Roman Numerals to identify its championship game. The American Express credit card has a Roman Soldier's photo on it. The phrases "God has favored" and "A new order of the ages" are printed in Latin on every US Dollar bill. The English word "Government" comes from the two Latin words Guber Mente (which means mind control in English).
I'm going to take a wild guess and say that Roman Catholicism was behind much of this Nation's colonization.
Okay, folks -- this thread has gone waaay off-topic. I'll let it continue, for now, but if off-topic posting continues for much longer, this thread may be closed.
For the record, the original topic was:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Objective Detective
Which religious affiliation do you think had the biggest influence regarding the colonization of the eastern seaboard states of America and also had the largest effect on what caused the American Revolution and the signing of the Declaration of Independence?
I forgot that the question extended to the Revolution and the Declaration as well as colonization. I would think religion was more overtly a motivation for colonization. I think it's far more debatable WRT the revolution. I'm sure some authoritarian Christian types were arguing against a revolt as being an affront to god's constituted earthly powers, for example.
But the actual colonization ... some of the religious groups were definitely fleeing restrictions on their religious expression across the pond.
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.
back to topic.
