Atheist prayers can be barred by House chaplain, appeals court says

Since the word has been in use in a religious context. You're welcome.

 

Read my response above about the effect of official rejection of Christianity on the beliefs of the populace. Government is no longer indifferent, it is imposing secularism on society, and not just any secularism, the secularism of the most liberal kind.

I disagree, obviously. If someone wants to offer up a prayer before a football game, before a town meeting, before a session of Congress, it costs us nothing to shut up and let them do their thing.

Your characterization of what we were founded on is incorrect. We were founded by people fleeing the power of government, who wanted to worship freely in the way that they wished to do so. In Massachusetts, it was Puritans; in Maryland, it was Catholics; in Pennsylvania, it was German Amish. In all three states, religion and government were deeply intertwined, so the federal government had to be accommodating to all three states, which is how we got freedom of religion. Only later was the freedom of religion principle extended to the state level. But Christianity was always a big part of the moral fabric of the nation, government included. And while there were atheists in those days, they somehow didn't feel the least bit oppressed.

I don't believe there are any atheist morals. I don't believe there can be any atheist morals. There's nothing to anchor atheist morality to, so there can't be any morality that actually means anything. My morality came from Christianity. I was raised in the church and was a Christian for ~29 years. My becoming atheist didn't change my morality, and it didn't change my belief that Christian morality is good for society. One of the more interesting switchers was Aleksander Solzhenitsyn. Near the end of his life, and just before moving back to Russia after the dissolution of the Soviet Union, Solz attacked the Enlightenment, laying the blame for communism and the 100 million dead at the door of the belief that Godless reason, divorced from faith, could solve all our problems, and he joined the Russian Orthodox church. No less a paper than the New York Times had to respond in defense of the Enlightenment.

There are plenty of atheists who think religion should be stamped out, including Bill Maher. Religious types tend to call them anti-theists to distinguish them from atheists like me who are indifferent to or supportive of religion.

 

I am old enough to remember being force to listen to the reading from the Christian bible every morning in the public schools of new jersey.


The only time I did not need to listen to that force religion nonsense was when I was able to hide the bible from the teacher.

footnote is nice to know that you think that no one would have any morals if it was not for the fear of some nonexistent supernatural being.

Sorry but our morals and behaviors toward each others come from being pack animals.

 

You know now that a group of atheists got the federal government to consider the church of Satan a religion with all the rights of any other religion any attempt to allow the use of the PA before a high school sporting event for a christian statement and or prayer would mean that they would need to allow a similar prayer to the great Satan.

Highly amusing..............

 

So congress would need to allow the church of Satan but not atheists?

Love it.

 

So sad. My heart bleeds.

Yeah, I have no use for the equal treatment business, either. Men are not equal, religions are not equal, cultures are not equal.

No, our morals and behaviors are learned from others, they do not derive from instinct. This is why something that is taboo in one religion can be allowed or required in another religion. In most religions, incest is forbidden, but in Islam, it is encouraged to preserve family wealth. In most religions, cannibalism is forbidden, but in the Aztec religion, cannibalism was promoted. With no religion at all, people will make up their own morals.

Liberals and atheists are not the same people (I'm a prime example), but there is significant overlap. And liberals are far more likely to commit crimes than conservatives, who tend to be religious.



Jails have more Christians than atheists compared to the general population, but church-going Christians commit far fewer crimes than nominal Christians, while atheists tend to be white, upper class, and highly intelligent, all factors that mitigate against being criminal in the first place, regardless of religious belief. Meanwhile, atheists are far more likely to use illegal drugs and abuse alcohol than Christians are, another moral issue.

https://www.christiandrugrehab.com/...s-abuse-substances-more-than-theists-and-why/

Sexual immorality also seems to be more common among atheists than among Christians. (Chicken & egg problem: Are they atheist because they are sexually immoral or are they sexually immoral because they are atheist?)

https://religions.wiki/index.php/Atheism

87% of atheists support abortion rights, which has now killed 50 million children in the US alone. Again we find the atheists being less moral than the Christians.

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-ta...roups-vary-widely-in-their-views-of-abortion/

And it is entirely fair to blame atheism for Communism, which is responsible for 100 million deaths in a single century. Islam has a higher total, 270 million deaths, but that's over 13+ centuries. Christianity doesn't come close to those numbers, not even counting the Crusades and the Protestant Reformation wars.

 

Put the two rulings together that I have cited in the thread and yep.

 

And
Jewish 83%
Buddhist 82%
Episcopal 79%

And I'm a pro-life atheist who debates pro-abortion Christians.

 

How about we settle this by just eliminating any religious invocations, prayers, chaplains or ceremonies anywhere in our government? I work with folks in the Bible Belt and it blows me away that they insist on bringing their religion to work and events where people gather to do business. Just keep it to yourself folks.

 

Can you try to reconcile that? Are you still a person with morals or are you an immoral person?

Do you believe it is right or wrong to steal from another person?

And for some part of that power had to do with the intermingling or the power of government with the power of religion and government dictating religious faith and sanction one religious faith over another. The founding fathers took that out of our government, they broke that bond and insured it would have not part in our government as in the 1st Amendment and the prohibition of a religious test for government service.

And of course most people came here not as a matter of religious faith but for trade and economic opportunity.

And there are plenty of Christians who believe atheists should be stomped out, are either representative of a majority? Even a significant number? No.

Why is it necessary? Should the Satanist get their 1 minute too? Why should Christians be able to take over that public government sponsored event for their religious ceremony? Why should their faith, their religious establishment be given respect by the government? Certain each Christian in the stands is free to bow their head and say their personal prayer, I support their right to do so. But as a religious establishment they have no right to inject their religious faith into the activities nor receive sanction from the government. BUT if that is going to be allowed then ALL the varied religious faiths MUST be given equal opportunity.

 

Agree! Isn't there enough mindless blather and wasted time in government already !!???!

 

I am an atheist with Christian morals because that's what I was brought up with. People brought up without any Christianity are much less moral.

"Kids with religious parents are better behaved and adjusted than other children, according to a new study that is the first to look at the effects of religion on young child development."

https://www.livescience.com/1465-study-religion-good-kids.html

"Metropolitan areas with high rates of congregational membership and areas with high levels of religious homogeneity tend to have lower homicide and suicide rates than other metropolitan areas.1) States with more religious populations tend to have fewer homicides and fewer suicides.2) Religious attendance is associated with direct decreases in both minor and major forms of crime and deviance, to an extent unrivalled by government welfare programs.3) There is a 57 percent decrease in likelihood to deal drugs and a 39 percent decrease in likelihood to commit a crime among the young, black inner city population if they attend religious services regularly.4)"

http://marripedia.org/effects_of_religious_practice_on_crime_rates

Wrong, obviously.

Incorrect. You can find a quote from nearly every one of our founding fathers saying that religion (Christianity specifically) is necessary to a good society. They did not want to sanction one denomination over another, but the freedom of religion was specifically for Christians. Only Thomas Jefferson thought it might apply to the Muslims as well, but then he had to fight a war against the Muslims (the Barbary Coast war), so he may well have changed his mind then. John Adams called himself a Christian and believed in God, but his opinions on Christianity itself were heterodox, to say the least. Thomas Paine is the only example of an anti-theist founding father I can find, and it seems he only came to those beliefs after the Revolution and while wandering Europe.

"Reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can exist apart from religious principle." George Washington

"Suppose a nation in some distant Region should take the Bible for their only law Book, and every member should regulate his conduct by the precepts there exhibited! Every member would be obliged in conscience, to temperance, frugality, and industry; to justice, kindness, and charity towards his fellow men; and to piety, love, and reverence toward Almighty God ... What a Eutopia, what a Paradise would this region be." John Adams

"It is religion and morality alone which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand. The only foundation of a free constitution is pure virtue." John Adams

"God who gave us life gave us liberty. And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are of the Gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with His wrath? Indeed, I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just; that His justice cannot sleep forever..." Thomas Jefferson

"The gospel of Jesus Christ prescribes the wisest rules for just conduct in every situation of life. Happy they who are enabled to obey them in all situations!" Benjamin Rush

"It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religions, but on the gospel of Jesus Christ. For this very reason peoples of other faiths have been afforded asylum, prosperity, and freedom of worship here." Patrick Henry

"In my view, the Christian religion is the most important and one of the first things in which all children, under a free government ought to be instructed." Noah Webster

"Without morals a republic cannot subsist any length of time; they therefore who are decrying the Christian religion, whose morality is so sublime and pure (and) which insures to the good eternal happiness, are undermining the solid foundation of morals, the best security for the duration of free governments." Charles Carroll of Carrollton (US Senator)

"For avoiding the extremes of despotism or anarchy … the only ground of hope must be on the morals of the people. I believe that religion is the only solid base of morals and that morals are the only possible support of free governments." Gouverneur Morris (signer of the Constitution)

If you are referring to the great migration during the late 19th and early 20th centuries, they came to escape the grinding poverty of the Old World, and in the Irish' case, starvation, but a great many of the early settlers came here to escape religious persecution.

I disagree. I find atheists in general (present company excluded) to be a rather arrogant, insufferable lot who would like nothing better than to ban all religion completely. Bill Maher is the most obvious and notable example, but there are plenty of others, and I think they constitute a majority of atheists, even if that number is only 50%+1. And bad news, most Christians take a dim view of atheists and most atheists take a dim view of Christians.

​

Because Christianity is good for society. The same cannot be said for any other religious belief. Only in Christianity is the brotherhood of man preached. Only in Christian nations was the practice of slavery first decided to be immoral and worthy of being stamped out. Only in Christian nations was the belief in the nobility and dignity of the individual first thought of. Only in Christian nations were the rights of man first recognized. Only in Christian nations (Protestant, specifically) was the power of the church over the individual first circumscribed. Only in Christian nations was it first safe to be an atheist. (Ironic, eh?) Only in (Protestant) Christian nations was capitalism first released to better the condition of man. (All other nations, Catholic included, have strong socialistic elements.) If atheism is responsible for modern art, Christianity is responsible for some of the most beautiful and eternal works of art the world has ever known, including most of Michelangelo's work, da Vinci's The Last Supper, Handel's Messiah, plus numerous churches and cathedrals. Freedom itself, while a secular concept, can be said to derive from the (Protestant) Christian belief that no one stands between man and God, not even the government. When you get rid of God, nothing stands between the individual and government, making government supreme. For all these reasons, we should allow Christian prayer (and only Christian prayer) at public events. We should allow crosses and creches on town squares. We should allow Christmas decorations on town halls and on city streets. People in power, judges included, should acknowledge the good effects of Christianity on society. People in power, judges included, should promote Christianity and regular church attendance as good things. The secular countries of Europe are rapidly falling prey to the believers of Islam, while the formerly atheist countries of eastern Europe have turned wholeheartedly back to religion, and as a consequence, are far more resistant to the encroachment of Islam. This should be a warning to us here as well. Secularism leads to cultural collapse. Christianity leads to cultural strength.

 

What are Christian morals compared to my morals as a non-Christian? Where do they differ?

Stealing that is.....so you share that moral belief with the rest of our society including me an atheist.

We are talking government not society.

 

Three more groups being less moral than Christians.

 

Complete nonsense as far as the belief by the majority of US founders that Christianity is needed for the welfare of society.

 

Nice post btw, too bad it will be most likely wasted.



Whatever their beliefs, the Founders came from similar religious backgrounds. Most were Protestants. The largest number were raised in the three largest Christian traditions of colonial America—Anglicanism (as in the cases of John Jay, George Washington, and Edward Rutledge), Presbyterianism (as in the cases of Richard Stockton and the Rev. John Witherspoon), and Congregationalism (as in the cases of John Adams and Samuel Adams). Other Protestant groups included the Society of Friends (Quakers), the Lutherans, and the Dutch Reformed. Three Founders—Charles Carroll and Daniel Carroll of Maryland and Thomas Fitzsimmons of Pennsylvania—were of Roman Catholic heritage.

https://www.britannica.com/topic/The-Founding-Fathers-Deism-and-Christianity-1272214

 

Thanks, I noticed.

I need a small country I can rule to prove my point. Got any ideas? It can be black or Hispanic, but Muslim would be difficult. I even have a flag, see?
<<<<<<<<<<

 

It was, thank you!

I don't think absence of religion from the public square inculcates a disbelief in God anymore than the absence of religion on our cutlery, underwear, lamp posts or any number of other, not traditionally religious parts of our lives does. However, including it in the public square presents it to anyone regardless of whether they believe in God or in that particular version of God. Ten commandments in city hall fails to represent Hindus and Taoists as much as it fails to represent atheists. Secularism is supported precisely because it doesn't benefit anyone, including the non-religious. A City Hall does not fail to serve Christians just because there are no ten commandments on it.

I'm not interested in your ranking of religions, that is why I asked the question specifically from a free exercise point of view. You can argue that the constitution should allow Christianity to be established in the US state, but then it is no longer an argument based on the first amendment in its current form and interpretation.

I'm talking about praying in your family, owning Bibles etc. None of that is disallowed by the Supreme Court. Is banning the ten commandments going to have any negative effect on the public view of God that the establishment clause didn't already have?

Secularism has no moral center, and does not pretend to have one, and it is often paired with other ideas, such as humanism (to create secular humanism). Humanism gives us a reason for moral behaviour, it is basically the idea of human worth (and therefore deserving of moral behaviour). It gives us a reason to reject genocide. What do you consider your basis of morality to be?

In Sweden, many people are brought up with secular humanism (although not quite is dogmatically as you might see in a religious upbringing) and say what you will about many things, but I don't think you could argue that immorality has run rampant in any objective way. I've seen some of the norse resurgence, and it certainly hasn't struck me as morally robust.

It seems to me, "the great mass of humanity" is going to believe what you tell them, regardless of it being religion of a secular morality. I reckon the people who would question some secular morality are approximately the same people (or equivalent) who would question the Bible.

Are you of the opinion that requiring someone in a public school to recite prayer, explicitly affirming a religious view, is not an establishment of that religion?

 

I honestly don't know how you can come to that conclusion. No less a liberal light than Mario Cuomo, former Democratic governor of New York, when asked why he sent his children to private Catholic schools, said, "The public schools inculcate a disbelief in God." Why does Coca-Cola advertise anywhere and everywhere, non-stop, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week? Is it because they are afraid you're going to forget Coca-Cola exists? Is it because they are afraid you've never heard of Coca-Cola? No, it's so that when you think about having something to drink, "Coca-Cola" is the first thing that pops into your head. When God or religion is omnipresent, you think about it constantly. When it disappears from view, you don't think about it anymore. Excising religion from official government presence inculcates a disbelief in God just as surely as excluding Coca-Cola from advertising would precipitate a steep drop in Coke purchases. It wouldn't happen immediately, but it would happen.

http://www.ontheissues.org/Celeb/Mario_Cuomo_Education.htm

I don't think atheists, Hindus, and Taoists need representation. They are minor segments of the population at best, and destructive of Western values at worst. (Seriously, any Hindus who want to get rid of steaks and hamburgers are going to face armed resistance.)

I disagree with your formulation, that secularism doesn't benefit anyone, it benefits a great many people, mainly lawyers and the sexually immoral, but taking your statement at face value, if secularism doesn't benefit anyone, why do we need it? Get rid of it and bring Christianity back in.

Serving Christians is not the issue here, the issue is whether or not a secular city hall serves society. I say it doesn't. I say a Christian city hall serves society in important ways. Why do you think crime exploded in the early 20th century and peaked in the 1970s and again in the 1990s? Do you not think it's because society turned away from God? When we had an overtly religious leader in the 1980s, Reagan, crime dropped, partially because of increased enforcement, but also because GOD was reintroduced to public life.

Its current interpretation is specifically what I am arguing against, that the current interpretation is novel and unsupported by historical practice. I am arguing that we do not have free exercise of religion because the state mandates secularism. You were asking from an alternative religion point of view, asking why ALL religions shouldn't get equal time if Christianity gets to be recognized. Which is why I ranked the religions in terms of desirability of outcomes.

Jordan Peterson discussed a study that found that enmity towards outsiders peaked at an unusual moment of time, and that is when disease is most prevalent. The worse the health situation, the more hostile the natives are to outsiders. I wonder if there's a similar connection between irreligion and peace, that the longer you go without a war, the more irreligious the populace gets. Europe has gone without a major war for 75 years now, while we've had one every generation or two until these last two generations.

Yes. The establishment clause didn't ban religion from the public sphere in nearly the same way that the Supreme Court has been doing since 1947.

Christianity, the Bible, religious instruction. I have serious doubts about the appeal of humanism to man's best, highest nature. When discussing humanism, what is the answer to the question, "What's in it for me?" Christianity has an answer for that, heaven. What is humanism's answer? That other people will treat you well if you treat them well? It doesn't take long for even a child to figure out that's not true, so then where is humanism's appeal?

The number of abortions in Sweden has gone from under 3,000 in 1960 to over 35,000 per year in the last couple of decades. Divorce rates have doubled. Drug and alcohol abuse, while low compared to other parts of Europe, have been climbing in Sweden. Bestiality in Sweden wasn't outlawed until 2014. (Was it just not a problem before?) A lot of the rise in criminal behavior in Sweden can be linked to the immigrant population, so it's difficult to tease out any rise in immorality in that regard. 18% of the people over 20 in Sweden are living together but not married. A majority of children born in Sweden today are born out of wedlock. (This is one statistic where the US is lower than Sweden.) While it may not seem that immorality is running rampant, it certainly seems to be getting worse.

Which is why you need to teach the great mass of humanity Christianity, fill them with the dread of hell and the promise of heaven. This is a most effective strategy because about half the population are people who move away from (they avoid pain) and about half the population are people who move towards (they seek pleasure).

I am. And it isn't true that kids would be required to recite prayer. Since it is always done in unison, one kid not participating or making up his own words wouldn't be an issue. And a simple statement like "I'm Jewish" would excuse that child from participation in any event. You know, when I was a kid, we were forced to recite the Pledge of Allegiance every day like little automatons. I had no idea what most of the words even meant, including "pledge" and "allegiance". But today I'm grateful for that indoctrination. I don't think the US would mean half as much to me as it does if I hadn't gone through that.

Here's an interesting discussion of the stages of the rise and fall of civilizations. The author discusses it from the point of view of Catholicism, but you can ignore that aspect. I believe we're well into in stage 7 at this point, rapidly heading towards stage 8.

https://catholicconvert.com/blog/2019/02/14/the-eight-stages-of-the-rise-and-fall-of-civilizations/

 

I'm an atheist.
I pray to Joe Pesci.
He gets sh-t done.

 

What is an atheist prayer? Who are they praying to? An atheist God?

 

LOL fetuses are not children some of them will become children but they are not children.

 

Yes they are, unborn children.

 

God serves no purpose in society, God is simply an artifact of ancient times of ignorance. Christianity was indeed powerfully present in Western Civilization for over one thousand years, fear of retribution and the power of the state along with widespread illiteracy and poverty will yield results. As for the emergence of reason and science, are some here really trying to claim that Christianity was the source of these advancements in thought? There is no need for God or religion in a truly enlightened age, the very notion of it is an anchor not a sail.

 

Does that go for politics too?