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.
Can you put a instructional manual on bomb making? Cmon, how about being realistic here? There's a difference between a Bible and harmful material like porn.
Actually, some of us don't think that pictures of people having sex are more harmful than scriptures urging violence against people who don't follow the strictures of that religion.
Actually, some of us don't think that pictures of people having sex are more harmful than scriptures urging violence against people who don't follow the strictures of that religion.
OK forget the scriptures urging violence against people..so how about what Jeff actually said? Do you think the Bible is more harmful than porn?
You're the one that said it endorses religion. I'm asking which one? If you can't say, then I guess your argument is moot.
There is nothing in the Constitution that states that a taxpayer funded organization can't allow any expression of religion. The state is not buying these Bibles. It is not endorsing any religion by placing them in a room. I fail to see why anyone would have an issue with this. It's just a bunch of hot air.
This question has already been answered several times in this thread.
Which one? Any which is based on the Bible. Not all are, you know.
Again, you're not actually reading what people are posting to you. I didn't say anything about vandalizing. Vizio made the point that it wasn't actually vandalism since the Bible remains usable. And I was asking what people though about it, rather than suggesting it would be anything I would ever do.
So basically you're just grasping at straws to have something to say in defense of a corrupt perspective that you prefer. I think you need to step back, read my replies to your comments which I posted above
I can spray paint racial epithets on my neighbors house and, according to you, since the house is still useable, it would not be considered vandalism? We have different interpretations of the meaning of vandalism.
I told you what I thought about it. Doing so is vandalism, but if you feel that your message is more important that respecting other people's property, that is your decision.
I am neither grasping at straws, nor attempting to defend a "corrupt perspective," unless you feel that "live and let live" is a corrupt perspective.
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,922,771 times
Reputation: 4561
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizio
You're the one that said it endorses religion. I'm asking which one? If you can't say, then I guess your argument is moot.
Well it is clear that the New Testament does not indicate that the religion being endorsed is Zorasterism , Buddhist, or Hindu. It's not even Judaism or Muslim for that matter. Gee, let's think really really hard about which religion uses the New Testament exclusively.
Quote:
There is nothing in the Constitution that states that a taxpayer funded organization can't allow any expression of religion. The state is not buying these Bibles. It is not endorsing any religion by placing them in a room. I fail to see why anyone would have an issue with this. It's just a bunch of hot air.
Many people have been over this with you before, and you and others like Jeff, ignore it. The Supreme Court rulings are clear. You may not like them, but that's the way it is.
So then it's endorsing or establishing a religion.
What next? You going to complain that the tv in the room allows someone to watch the Jimmy Swaggart channel? They need to ditch the tv's?
When does it end? Why not just live and let live? Instead of being a victim and complaining about someone else, why not just get on with life?
I could ask you the same. Why fuss because tax dollars may not be used to place Bibles? Why complain about it? Why not just accept that government has no business endorsing religion and get on with life? Just live and let live and stop pretending to be a victim?
Yes, because a severed head is the same thing as the Quran or Satanist Bible or porn. Please.
The Quran isn't a comparable example? The Satanist Bible isn't comparable? The Book or Mormon isn't comparable? The Bhagavad Gita isn't comparable? The Tibetan Book of the Dead is not comparable?
See, your problem is that you seem to think that everyone who doesn't want it there should just ignore it, but when it comes to YOU ignoring something, you shouldn't have to. You guys have one heck of a superiority complex. You don't get special treatment.
The term Allah (Arabic: الله, Allāh) is the standard Arabic word for God and is most likely derived from a contraction of the Arabic article al- and ilāh, which means "deity or god" to al-lāh meaning "the [sole] deity, God." There is another theory that traces the etymology of the word to the Aramaic Alāhā. Today's Arabic speakers from all religious backgrounds (Muslims, Christians, and Jews) use the word Allah to mean God. In pre-Islamic Arabia, pagan Meccans used Allah as a reference to the creator-god, possibly the supreme deity.
There are plenty examples of people killing in the name of God, and if you think there isn't then you should maybe do some research.
Again, if you read my post, I said ASK a jihadist if Allah is the same as God, not, look it up in Wikipedia.
And I have already answered your redundant question about other faith's holy books. There are the same thing. I NEVER compared a severed head to any holy book. The fact that you actually think I did indicates a lack of critical thinking on your part.
I have no idea where you came up with the erroneous understanding that I have a problem with any religion placing their holy books in a hotel room. Why should I care? And who is "you guys" and what "special treatment"? Are you assuming that because I support religious freedom, that I MUST be Christian? Well, here is just another example of just how wrong you can be.
The establishment clause is a deliberate red herring used by anti-God groups to implicate God in what is merely an EQUAL ACCESS issue, period.
Your apologetics pretending to justify Allah as a generic term for God is absurd. It is just as absurd as trying to justify the name Jesus as a generic term for God. God is NOT a religion-specific term and does not in any way establish anything to do with any religion.
It's nice to find people with good reasoning and logic skills on this site!
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.
Please.
It's nice to find people with good reasoning and logic skills on this site!
