A two and a half legged stool (pray, grace, freedom)
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.
Not a slippery slope at all unless you are one who feels your status quo is at risk and are not caring about the status quo of others.
50 years ago I felt I did not have the same advantage of someone that had been in the USA for generations. I took that as an incentive to do better. It never crossed my mind that they had to adapt to my needs.
Your views remind me of an old girlfriend I had. She was always unhappy and complaining I did not paid attention to her. I soon realize that she was unhappy and that it was my job to make her happy. I tried my best to make her happy, but in the end there was something extra I could have done. She was not intrinsically happy and was looking for extrinsic happiness 24/7.
If you are an atheist and want others to attend to your needs ------ it is going to be a difficult road. When in Rome do as the Romans and you will be fine.
it seems the older one De-converts the more nasty their reaction. and we have to remember that some people can't do anything but blame others. they don't see their roles in what is happening to them.
I agree, one of the problems of hyper-religion is the inability to have self analysis.
The problem with your statement is that the atheist is the one that decides whether he is treated as a real American or not. This is highly subjective and a very steep slippery slope. IN the same manner Mormons, Jews, Agnostics, Evangelicals, + may feel they are treated less than American.
Obviously this has been hashed out already and as expected there are unhappy campers.
But, what remains disturbing about your post is that you feel the ultimate word is with the offended party.
The part you put in bold (The problem with your statement is that the atheist is the one that decides whether he is treated as a real American or not. ) is obviously not true.
When an atheist objects to a public body performing Christian rituals, he is highly likely to be told that this is a Christian nation and if he doesn't like it he can just leave and go somewhere that isn't a Christian nation. Obviously, that is not the fault of the atheist. These people are routinely told they aren't "real" Americans because they aren't Christians.
This has happened over Christian prayers at city council meetings, football coaches gathering all the players together for prayer, schools distributing gift packs with religious messages inside, and religious exhibits on public property placed their by elected officials.
If you are interested in how Christians object to the enforcement of the 1st Amendment, go follow the Freedom From Religion Foundation on Facebook. Every week they publish the mail they receive, calling it "CrankMail." Most weeks they get at least one thoroughly profane cussing from a Christian.
The part you put in bold (The problem with your statement is that the atheist is the one that decides whether he is treated as a real American or not. ) is obviously not true.
When an atheist objects to a public body performing Christian rituals, he is highly likely to be told that this is a Christian nation and if he doesn't like it he can just leave and go somewhere that isn't a Christian nation. Obviously, that is not the fault of the atheist. These people are routinely told they aren't "real" Americans because they aren't Christians.
This has happened over Christian prayers at city council meetings, football coaches gathering all the players together for prayer, schools distributing gift packs with religious messages inside, and religious exhibits on public property placed their by elected officials.
If you are interested in how Christians object to the enforcement of the 1st Amendment, go follow the Freedom From Religion Foundation on Facebook. Every week they publish the mail they receive, calling it "CrankMail." Most weeks they get at least one thoroughly profane cussing from a Christian.
I do not disagree with what you are saying. I simply stated my opinion: When in Rome do as the Romans.
I understand it causes pain when some atheists have to watch these things. The issue is: Where does it end? What if another party objects to Santa? What if another party objects to the Statue of Liberty? What if Muslims object to Christmas lights? Why should the deciding factor be how a person feels about an issue or an object?
BTW, it is impossible to regulate every single word that is spoken to avoid insult to others. Furthermore what is acceptable today is insulting tomorrow. The word lame is now an expletive in some universities.
We are experiencing tribalism and that is a huge issue since humans evolved in tribes. This is exactly what Phet was describing in a post above. The only way to avoid tribalism is to form a new tribe.
We have separation of state and church. That should take care of the main problem, but I do not expect perfection.
The problem is that they take personally. I could care less when they tell me I am not a real American.
"American" is an idea, of truth for all people, justice for all people, pursuit of happiness for all people, and liberty for all people. Anti-religion and freedom from religion are not American ideas. They are as anti-American as any fundy theism.
Fundy theism and militant atheism use avoiding science, binary thinking, no other beliefs but what we want to address, and deity/no deity only. They are not only not a real American, they are actually anti-freedom to think, anti-learn, and anti-due process in believing in rational ideas.
Last edited by Arach Angle; 12-21-2020 at 01:59 PM..
I do not disagree with what you are saying. I simply stated my opinion: When in Rome do as the Romans.
I understand it causes pain when some atheists have to watch these things. The issue is: Where does it end? What if another party objects to Santa? What if another party objects to the Statue of Liberty? What if Muslims object to Christmas lights? Why should the deciding factor be how a person feels about an issue or an object?
BTW, it is impossible to regulate every single word that is spoken to avoid insult to others. Furthermore what is acceptable today is insulting tomorrow. The word lame is now an expletive in some universities.
We are experiencing tribalism and that is a huge issue since humans evolved in tribes. This is exactly what Phet was describing in a post above. The only way to avoid tribalism is to form a new tribe.
We have separation of state and church. That should take care of the main problem, but I do not expect perfection.
Your post says absolutely nothing to defend your statement that the atheist is responsible for feeling offended when he is being harangued by Christians.
Incidentally, the separation of church and state, well actually the several provisions of the 1st Amendment, must occasionally be interpreted by counts and orders handed down. (That happens with other Constitutional issues as well.) That's how we know that coaches can't lead prayers, manger scenes can't go up on the courthouse lawn, and schools can't sponsor church events. If people didn't try to push their religion into the public sphere, none of those things would ever have gone before a court for an order.
And, you're trying to blame that on the atheists. Sheesh!
I do not disagree with what you are saying. I simply stated my opinion: When in Rome do as the Romans.
I understand it causes pain when some atheists have to watch these things. The issue is: Where does it end? What if another party objects to Santa? What if another party objects to the Statue of Liberty? What if Muslims object to Christmas lights? Why should the deciding factor be how a person feels about an issue or an object?
BTW, it is impossible to regulate every single word that is spoken to avoid insult to others. Furthermore what is acceptable today is insulting tomorrow. The word lame is now an expletive in some universities.
We are experiencing tribalism and that is a huge issue since humans evolved in tribes. This is exactly what Phet was describing in a post above. The only way to avoid tribalism is to form a new tribe.
We have separation of state and church. That should take care of the main problem, but I do not expect perfection.
And if was just about stopping religion over reach we wouldn't see the level of aggressiveness against any and all god claims or spirituality positions. The god claims and spirituality claims that are at least plausible wouldn't be so aggressively dismissed past "plausible by I don't believe".
And holding us to literal definitions of atheism wouldn't even be an issue. I think only people that hold a statement of belief about god very deer have to defend them past what seems rational.
And if was just about stopping religion over reach we wouldn't see the level of aggressiveness against any and all god claims or spirituality positions. The god claims and spirituality claims that are at least plausible wouldn't be so aggressively dismissed past "plausible by I don't believe".
And holding us to literal definitions of atheism wouldn't even be an issue. I think only people that hold a statement of belief about god very deer have to defend them past what seems rational.
I truly believe the separation of state and church is enough. However, it is not possible to disqualify religious people from running for office. By the same token any other nut can run for office. That is one of the dangers of a free society. Plato was critical of this and felt only gifted smart people should run nations. However, the smart are also susceptible to emotional arguments.
Your post says absolutely nothing to defend your statement that the atheist is responsible for feeling offended when he is being harangued by Christians.
Incidentally, the separation of church and state, well actually the several provisions of the 1st Amendment, must occasionally be interpreted by counts and orders handed down. (That happens with other Constitutional issues as well.) That's how we know that coaches can't lead prayers, manger scenes can't go up on the courthouse lawn, and schools can't sponsor church events. If people didn't try to push their religion into the public sphere, none of those things would ever have gone before a court for an order.
And, you're trying to blame that on the atheists. Sheesh!
Nope, atheism is fine, but it is on its infancy. The public at large, even those that are atheists in the closet are afraid to go for it.
Nope, atheism is fine, but it is on its infancy. The public at large, even those that are atheists in the closet are afraid to go for it.
I guess as long as you get responses to your schtick, you'll keep excreting it.
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.
