wow - if i based my faith on you guys i'd be an atheist.
Hey Kristeejo If you were to base your faith on the guys and what they believe in and so on, you would not be considerd an Atheist, (unless none of them believe in 'God' or have doubts about 'God' existing). Debating about religions and not accepting other religions and so on does not make you an Atheist, pluss there are 2 types of Atheists but that's beyond the point, its not a lack of belief born out of simple ignorance of religious teachings.
SO yeah, i just wanted to point out that you would not be considerd an Atheist had you based you faith simpley on other peoples views on religions and so on.
__________________ Design Pride- A Breast Cancer Awareness Theme <-- Check it out!! A guy, a girl, and a blog - My new fav blog to read, so funny in a nasty way!!!
Thank you for the link to the totally hysterical website. That adds so much value to the discussion. MAybe I should post a link to some whack job saying that we should rip the right ball off of everybody who plays golf - it would carry as much weight and add just as much value to the discussion, if not more, than your link.
Actually, John, the thread started with you making fun of Islam. So, if you consider this funny, then it totally fits with the original topic of the thread.
The thread didn't really warrant a serious response from you until you blasted Ferre for his "intolerance of religion". Please feel free to return to doing just that.
P.S. You know Bush doesn't like homosexuals and it's because of the bible. So he doesn't execute them. So what?
Calvin Burdine, who is openly homosexual, was sentenced to death in Texas after a trial at which he was represented by Joe Cannon. Joe Cannon, who at an earlier court hearing referred to homosexuals as "queers" and "fairies", did not object to a statement by the prosecutor that: "sending a homosexual to the penitentiary certainly isn't a very bad punishment for a homosexual".
Hey Kristeejo If you were to base your faith on the guys and what they believe in and so on, you would not be considerd an Atheist, (unless none of them believe in 'God' or have doubts about 'God' existing). Debating about religions and not accepting other religions and so on does not make you an Atheist, pluss there are 2 types of Atheists but that's beyond the point, its not a lack of belief born out of simple ignorance of religious teachings.
SO yeah, i just wanted to point out that you would not be considerd an Atheist had you based you faith simpley on other peoples views on religions and so on.
My point, Tanya, is there is a way to properly debate religion and this is not it IMO. Religion is based on love and I see none of that in this thread.
My point, Tanya, is there is a way to properly debate religion and this is not it IMO. Religion is based on love and I see none of that in this thread.
Why do you not wish to discuss modern Christianity? Not enough bloodthirsty Christians beheading and raping children for you? Does the lack of thousands of murders in the name of Christianity today spoil your argument that Christians are just as bloodthirsty as Muslims?
Christians have done their dirty job allready, 'modern christianity' is sitting on a well prepared seat, they whiped out entire cultures the past 400 years, one of the main reasons they are not going around killing as they used to is because there's hardly anyone left for them to kill, they have converted entire populations into their 'program' and rule them via christian infested politics, that's what 'modern christianity is today.
Zap, seriously, when was the last time you saw Bush order the execution of a man for being homosexual? When did Bush ban divorce? When did Bush put people in boiling water for engaging in extra-marital sex?
Yeah, that would be a tad too much foir a president to do in a western democracy, he does however oppose gay marriage because of his personal believe system, and what to think on how he feels about atheists?
Quote:
When George Bush was campaigning for the presidency, as incumbent vice-president, one of his stops was in Chicago, Illinois, on August 27, 1987. At O'Hare Airport he held a formal outdoor news conference. There Robert I. Sherman, a reporter for the American Atheist news journal, fully accredited by the state of Illinois and by invitation a participating member of the press corps covering the national candidates, had the following exchange with then-Vice-President Bush.
Sherman: What will you do to win the votes of the Americans who are atheists?
Bush: I guess I'm pretty weak in the atheist community. Faith in God is important to me.
Sherman: Surely you recognize the equal citizenship and patriotism of Americans who are atheists?
Bush:No, I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered patriots. This is one nation under God.
Sherman (somewhat taken aback): Do you support as a sound constitutional principle the separation of state and church?
Bush: Yes, I support the separation of church and state. I'm just not very high on atheists.
On October 29, 1988, Mr. Sherman had a confrontation with Ed Murnane, cochairman of the Bush-Quayle '88 Illinois campaign. This concerned a lawsuit Mr. Sherman had filed to stop the Community Consolidated School District 21 (Chicago, Illinois, suburb) from forcing his first-grade atheist son to pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States "one nation under God" (Bush's phrase). The following conversation took place.
Sherman: American Atheists filed the Pledge of Allegiance lawsuit yesterday. Does the Bush campaign have an official response to this filing?
Murnane: It's bullshit.
Sherman: What is bullshit?
Murnane: Everything that American Atheists does, Rob, is bullshit.
Sherman: Thank you for telling me what the official position of the Bush campaign is on this issue.
Murnane: You're welcome
This suit, now in federal district court for over three years, is not considered to be bullshit by the federal judge before whom it is pending. During the time it has been in the federal court, Robert Sherman's son, now age nine, has been physically and psychologically brutalized in his school for refusing to pledge to a "nation under God."
After Bush's election but before his taking office, American Atheists wrote to Bush asking that he consider being sworn into office on the Constitution instead of the Bible and also asking him to retract his August 1987 statement. Bush had his White House buddy, C. Boyden Gray, counsel to the president, reply on White House stationery on February 21, 1989, stating that substantively Bush stood by his original statement.
My point, Tanya, is there is a way to properly debate religion and this is not it IMO. Religion is based on love and I see none of that in this thread.
Agreed. The religion discussion here resemble rants more than discussions. I don't know why I keep getting pulled into them.
But we're not really discussing religion here, but the politics behind religion. You can find intolerance in both Christianity and Islam. People tend to judge them unfairly based on the extremists. Islamists in America have spoken out against extremist Islam in the Middle East. They aren't taking up arms here. If they were we'd know about it, because the United States has millions of Muslims. The American Muslim. So far, all of them I've known have been appalled at the extremism elsewhere.
You know Bush doesn't like homosexuals and it's because of the bible. So he doesn't execute them. So what?
Beautiful statement. I love it. So you think, as a Liberal, that people should not have the right to like or dislike certain practices. I love it. The mind police.
The point of tolerance is not to like everybody, but to not force people to like something. I can be perfectly within my rights to not like somebody or some group. But tolerance dictates that I do not force them to act inline with my own rules. I don't like marriage, but I am not going to cut off the heads of those people who marry. I don't like people who listen to heavy metal, but I am not going to chop off their right hands. That is tolerance.
You seem to want to force people to like homosexuals. Why do you want to
force your own morality on others?
Maybe you should take a lesson from the Christians and learn to agree to disagree, without creating laws forcing one group to follow the morality of another.
The point of tolerance is not to like everybody, but to not force people to like something. I can be perfectly within my rights to not like somebody or some group. But tolerance dictates that I do not force them to act inline with my own rules. I don't like marriage, but I am not going to cut off the heads of those people who marry. I don't like people who listen to heavy metal, but I am not going to chop off their right hands. That is tolerance.
True that. And Bush has little tolerance, it's not enough for him to just not like homosexuals, he uses his powers to prevent homosexuals to enter a marriage agreement, and thus disciminating them compared to heterosexuals because he doesn't like them. That goes a little further than just not liking them.
Beautiful statement. I love it. So you think, as a Liberal, that people should not have the right to like or dislike certain practices. I love it. The mind police.
The point of tolerance is not to like everybody, but to not force people to like something. I can be perfectly within my rights to not like somebody or some group. But tolerance dictates that I do not force them to act inline with my own rules. I don't like marriage, but I am not going to cut off the heads of those people who marry. I don't like people who listen to heavy metal, but I am not going to chop off their right hands. That is tolerance.
There's a big difference between you and George Bush. One of you is the president of the US and needs to set an example for Americans as their leader, the other is not the president so it doesn't matter so much for them.
And, it wouldn't be so bad if GWB were scared of homosexuality and that's where it ended, but, as Ferre has pointed out, that is not the case. He is letting his fear of homosexuality dictate public policy on marriage and he is hiding behind the bible to do it. His very definition for marriage (you know, the one he has repeated ad infinitum) is the union between a man and a woman.
He may not like homosexuals, and that is his right, but he is charged with the responsibility of serving them. You know the game of politics. It would be stupid of him to even let on that he is afraid of homosexuality, but, then again, when has he shown that he is brilliant?
You mistakenly think that George Bush is banning same sex marriage. He isn't. The states decided for themselves who whether to allow same sex marriage or not. Some states do allow same sex marriage. Some states don't. George Bush is irrelevant.
And for those states that do not allow same sex marriage, it isn't necessarily a religious decision. Some people think that marriage is the union of a man and a woman. It has nothing to do with religion. Some states ban smoking. Some states ban gambling. Some states ban public nudity. It has nothing to do with Christianity.
I don't like people who listen to heavy metal, but I am not going to chop off their right hands. That is tolerance.
That's not tolerance. That's complete ignorance in human physiology. To deal with those listening to heavy metal one pops their ear drums It also makes sense to destroy their CD collection. Just in case
There's a big difference between you and George Bush. One of you is the president of the US and needs to set an example for Americans as their leader, the other is not the president so it doesn't matter so much for them.
I'm thinking of running for president, who's gonna vote for me?
__________________ Design Pride- A Breast Cancer Awareness Theme <-- Check it out!! A guy, a girl, and a blog - My new fav blog to read, so funny in a nasty way!!!
Bush doesn't hide behind the Bible. He has openly displayed it as his guide for public policy (see "The Jesus Factor" a great documentary about Bush's religious background The Jesus Factor - and yes, it's PBS, but I'd like to see what detractors of PBS think of it). As far as religiosity goes, Bush doesn't hide it whatsoever. No secrets there. Now, as for other things that remain hidden...
If you were to base your faith on the guys and what they believe in and so on, you would not be considerd an Atheist, (unless none of them believe in 'God' or have doubts about 'God' existing). Debating about religions and not accepting other religions and so on does not make you an Atheist, pluss there are 2 types of Atheists but that's beyond the point, its not a lack of belief born out of simple ignorance of religious teachings.
