Should islam/christianity/other religions be incorporated into the laws of the United States?

[Phil75230]

If God intended the US to be a Christian nation, then why did he allow a bunch of deists to determine the content of our Constitution?

[jacqueg]

Originally Posted by Redshadowz

"Laws which are supported by a majority of the people, but which are also in the bible, are bad."

"Laws which are supported by a majority of the people, but were pulled out of a politicians behind, are good."



Do Athiestcucks even hear themselves? Atheists are easily the dumbest religion on the planet.

You don't have to be an atheist - **** or otherwise - to oppose religiously-based laws.

You ought to look up the writers of the constitution sometime.

[GreenGene]

Originally Posted by Redshadowz

Atheists are easily the dumbest religion on the planet.

I'll bite.

1. "Atheists" are not a religion. Lutherans are not a religion, Methodists are not a religion, etc. ; however, Lutheranism and Methodism *are* religions.

2. Atheism, on the other hand, is not a religion. From wikipedia: "Atheism is, in the broadest sense, the absence of belief in the existence of deities. Less broadly, atheism is the rejection of belief that any deities exist. In an even narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities."

The shortest, clearest definition I know of atheism is the lack of belief in a God or gods.

Therefore, atheists are people who do not believe in a God or gods.

[Redshadowz]

Originally Posted by jacqueg

You don't have to be an atheist - **** or otherwise - to oppose religiously-based laws.

You ought to look up the writers of the constitution sometime.

I know all about the writers of the US Constitution. What you fail to understand is what laws are, why they exist, and where they come from.


There is no difference between laws derived from the pages of the bible, which the majority of the people think are legitimate, and laws derived from the opinions of a majority of atheists, or the opinions of a few men in Congress or on the Supreme Court.

And if your position is that, a law which is supported by the majority of the people, shouldn't be obeyed because it is derived from religion. Fine, I agree with you. But why should any other law be obeyed?


Many atheists will say things like, "You cannot legislate morality."

Do you agree?

But aren't all laws fundamentally nothing but moral laws? Basically, aren't all laws "for the 'good' of society".

And what is good for society anyway? Or really, what is good? Will everyone agree? Who is right?

Should good and evil be subject to the whims of the majority? What if you disagree with the majority? Does that make you evil?


The truth is, if you claim that morality can't be legislated, all you're really saying is, all laws are illegitimate, and that if you do not agree with the law, then you should not obey it, except at the end of a gun.


A society built on atheism is thus inherently and obviously unfree.


You can say that a society built on religion is also unfree, but it isn't obviously unfree. That seemingly trivial difference has profound consequences.

[SeaMaj7]

Originally Posted by Nodpete

I don't want ANY religion having a say in anything BUT their religion ! And I sure as hell don't care or want to hear what any religious 'spokesperson' has to say about anything other than their religion. Separate means separate !!!!!

What if the Religion is AGW?