Judge: School Pledge Is Unconstitutional

so this is a priority for americans?



amazing...

Bah everyday as a kid I recited a similar pledge (and the same one) in canada and the us. It's no big deal. I'm an atheist as well, ponder the existence of god but thats about it pondering ;).

People take separation of church and state too literally sometimes.....If your children are brainwashed by that drivel than your not doing your job as a parent......I find ALL religion personally offensive but do I go out proselytizing about the fallacies and idiocy of religion....nope(although I do enjoy exposing the faults inherent in said religions there's no reason to go out and try to legally enforce your viewpoint, I would never force a catholic school to teach evolution, although no worries there as the pope recognizes it now). Only wacko's do that and im only weird so far. If people want to believe in Santa and the Tooth fairy or invisible Pink Unicorns power to ya unless you start hurting people claiming they(the invisible things) told you too.

Howdy LT,

Well..it looks like ya did yer homework on this,and you make a mighty convincin argument,that appears to pull the rug out from under my argument,that the phrase" under God",is an affirmation of the historical perspective of America. But because this country was and is,more than just the sum of the founding fathers and our presidents,my argument and position,still stands.

I believe that this is also a part of a bigger effort,to deny religious liberty to the religious,to prevent the exercise of religion,which also interferes with freedom of speech,ie,the aetheists can go around denying God all they want-but the religious aren't allowed to affirm God,in the public square.

Christians are still the majority in this country and this country is traditionally Christian,that the majority must be made to bow and scrape,and be silenced, before a fraction of the populace,is wrong.

Aetheists seek to deny not only God,but their own spirituality,therefore,one could argue,that aetheists are only 'moral',because of laws that bind them and hold them accountable if they commit any crimes. If one believes that we are no higher than animals and that we don't have a soul,there's no reason to be 'moral',the Golden Rule,implies karmic action,which is spiritual in nature,a true aetheist would reject such an association with the karmic..because it is counter to their belief's. Just as with the homosexual agenda,the aetheist agenda is to change the nature of America,to suit the whims and desires of a fraction of the populace..directly contrary to the will of the People.

Have a good one ...

PS: the 'homework ' I refer to,is the prepared response at the aetheist org,of Founding Father quotes made to make them look as though they all were really just aetheists pretending to be Christians.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fengzi

Actually the monks I spoke with were referring to whether or not the statue itself was evil, not neccesarily about the fundemantalist Christians who oposed the statue. Nor was ther any discussion about the seperation of church and state as this really wasn't what the controvery was about. Queztacoatl is a symbol from ancient Mayan times and few people took it to have any religious signifigance at all. Just a few hard core Christians who were pissed because hundreds of years ago Mayans would offer sacrifices to it and therefore it was "evil".

What they meant is that an object can be neither evil or good until somebody labels it as so. The fundamentalist Christians labled the statue as evil therebye creating the evil. Kind of like the old "if a tree falls in the woods, and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?" type of idea.

The monks themselves were actually American citizens. I interviewed them at a local temple, not in Thailand itself. So I would consider them qualified to discuss this issue.

Ironically most people in San Jose really hate the statue because it cost thousands of dollars of taxpayers money and literally looks like a pile of shit. See what I mean??

---

Howdy Fengzi,

Yup..it does look like a pile of shit..lol.

Clearly,it is a graven image of a false god,akin to the 'golden calf',and has no place in the public square,because Christianity is the majority religion in the States..I find the statue to be blasphemous,and an attempt to characterize America into something it ain't..a non-Christian society.

Have a good one ...

Howdsy Torog! :D

Nice reply.. here's what I think, though I understand if you ignore me in regards to this subject because, well, i'm not American, but hey, I can try! :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Torog

Well..it looks like ya did yer homework on this,and you make a mighty convincin argument,that appears to pull the rug out from under my argument,that the phrase" under God",is an affirmation of the historical perspective of America. But because this country was and is,more than just the sum of the founding fathers and our presidents,my argument and position,still stands.

---

First of all i'm going to agree with you. Your country is more than the sum of just your founding fathers and presidents. You country is one of the most diverse countries in the world. You have people of every ethnicity living inside your borders, helping to make your country what it is today. To invite such diversity in culture is to invite diversity of religion. I don't think i'm wrong in saying that almost every religion and belief system has an ambassador in America. In a country that teaches patriotism, and tries to instill a belief that every citizen is united under the flag, why then would youwant to alienate a large number of your citizens by claiming it is one nation under God with a capital G?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Torog

I believe that this is also a part of a bigger effort,to deny religious liberty to the religious,to prevent the exercise of religion,which also interferes with freedom of speech,ie,the aetheists can go around denying God all they want-but the religious aren't allowed to affirm God,in the public square.

---

Not so. In fact it is quite the opposite. When every person is given the freedom of speech and expression, than it should be an equal field. One religion should not be given voice over others. If every religion has the right to expression in a country, then one signle religion should not be given precident over others. If you are going to say One Nation Under God, then you should say One Nation Under All Gods.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Torog

Christians are still the majority in this country and this country is traditionally Christian,that the majority must be made to bow and scrape,and be silenced, before a fraction of the populace,is wrong.

---

It is also wrong that the minority be made to bow and scrape and be silence before the majority. Isn't this one of the shining examples of why Democracy is so great? That everybody has an equal voice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Torog

Aetheists seek to deny not only God,but their own spirituality,therefore,one could argue,that aetheists are only 'moral',because of laws that bind them and hold them accountable if they commit any crimes. If one believes that we are no higher than animals and that we don't have a soul,there's no reason to be 'moral',the Golden Rule,implies karmic action,which is spiritual in nature,a true aetheist would reject such an association with the karmic..because it is counter to their belief's.

---

Again i'll have to disagree. You say that atheists deny God, well this may be so but not in the way you imply it. If somebody was to abstain from eating beef because they didn't like it you could say that this person is denying beef, but in actual fact this person would just be choosing against it. Religion and the idea of God does not suit everybody, no matter how much you want it to be so.

Many atheists are extremely spiritual. (Spirituality and religion are not one and the same. In fact, I would say that modern religion has lost most of it's spirituality and has become bogged down in beaurocracy). Take Buddhists for example; they are extremely spiritual people, but do not believe in any God, as such.

The existence of God does not define our morals, neither does religion. To be atheist is not to be led astray. It is simply a lifestyle choice, an assessment of the situation and a drawn conclusion. You'll find that most people these days have some sense of right and wrong, although the finer points are sometimes harder to agree on. You must admit that everybody has a different set or morals, even within one religious organisation. You yourself are a Christian who happens to smoke Cannabis and believes that morally you are doing nothing wrong. One of your Christian counterparts, however, may look down upon the act of smoking and consider it a sin. Your individual morals would be clashing, but both believe that you are right. This shows that everybody can make their own morals, and no matter what religion you belong to (or even if you don't), most of the time everybody drawns the same conclusions in respect to what is morally right or wrong, though of course not everybody agrees on everything. To say that one person's set of morals is wrong and yours is right isd extremely ignorant and narrow-minded. I disagree with certain things but can understand and accept when other people do ot share my belief.

Man, i've typed too much already today! Sorry for the rambling. lol :)

Peace.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Torog

Howdy LT,

Well..it looks like ya did yer homework on this,and you make a mighty convincin argument,that appears to pull the rug out from under my argument,that the phrase" under God",is an affirmation of the historical perspective of America. But because this country was and is,more than just the sum of the founding fathers and our presidents,my argument and position,still stands.

I believe that this is also a part of a bigger effort,to deny religious liberty to the religious,to prevent the exercise of religion,which also interferes with freedom of speech,ie,the aetheists can go around denying God all they want-but the religious aren't allowed to affirm God,in the public square.

I don't know of too many atheists asking Christians for tax dollars to practice their beliefs or lack thereof.

Christians are still the majority in this country and this country is traditionally Christian,that the majority must be made to bow and scrape,and be silenced, before a fraction of the populace,is wrong.

This country used to be traditonally slave-owning. Times change.

And no one is asking Christians to "bow and scrape and be silenced," just keep thy religion to thine own self. It's what Christians have wanted from everyone else by default from the very beginning.

Aetheists seek to deny not only God,but their own spirituality,therefore,one could argue,that aetheists are only 'moral',because of laws that bind them and hold them accountable if they commit any crimes. If one believes that we are no higher than animals and that we don't have a soul,there's no reason to be 'moral',the Golden Rule,implies karmic action,which is spiritual in nature,a true aetheist would reject such an association with the karmic..because it is counter to their belief's. Just as with the homosexual agenda,the aetheist agenda is to change the nature of America,to suit the whims and desires of a fraction of the populace..directly contrary to the will of the People.

I guess one could make the argument that atheists are only moral because of law. But one could also make the argument that Christians aren't moral even with law and religion (see: Pat Robertson, Jimmy Swaggart, Jim Bakker, Oral Roberts, Peter Popoff, Tobert Tilton, Melissa Scott, Benny Hinn, Westboro Baptist Church, pedophile priests, the Inquisition, witch trials, etc). No one group has a monopoly on the lack of morality.

And why do you presume to know what everyone's agenda is? Couldn't it just as easily be that those who don't believe in God want someone to take a hard look at the Establishment Clause and stop the tax-funded imposing of Christian will? Moreover, the Constitution says that everyone is created equal - and has been amended to actually mean it - so why are a non-believer's or homosexual's wants and desires not valid? And how do their wishes interfere with you? Are you going to stop being a Christian if "under God" disappears from a twenty? Is a Christian marriage going to be nullified if a couple of fudge packers tie the knot?

We live in a democracy where everyone should be heard. To simply say that because Christians are the majority and it should be their way or no way implies a desire for tyrannical rule - what we're supposed to be fighting against.

Beyond that, imagine, if you will, if the roles were reversed. Wouldn't you want your side heard?

Have a good one ...

PS: the 'homework ' I refer to,is the prepared response at the aetheist org,of Founding Father quotes made to make them look as though they all were really just aetheists pretending to be Christians.

---

I had to type something here for this to post.

Ok, that just looks ridiculous; like you've been ganged up on.

Ya your post was much better than mine, anyway. I'm hungover. lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GHoSToKeR

Ya your post was much better than mine, anyway. I'm hungover. lol

---

Howdy GhostToker and bhallg2k,

I think that both of your replies were good,I'm trying to be more open-minded,but it ain't easy..because I believe that Christianity is the only true religion and the rest are just wasting their time..for instance,I believe that the final revelation of an enlightened bhuudhist,is to realize-that one can only enter Heaven..through Jesus Christ. I was born and raised,in the Bible Belt,to us folks,people who don't believe in God and Jesus Christ,are strange and not to be trusted much..but I'm trying to come around and be more open-minded..lol.

Have a good one !

Hey Torog,

I completely understand. Nobody would be a part of a religion without believing that their's is the one true religion. But yu have to realise that everybody who believes in a religion believes that their religion is the one true religion, no matter what religion they're a part of. Whether you think you're right or not, the fact of the matter is that everybody believes they are right, and therefore all but one must be wrong, and nobody currently knows which ones are wrong and which is right. So one shouldn't be given precidence over the others. This may be hard to dunderstand, but I believe that all religions are equally wrong and equally right.