Atheists are such tolerant reasonable people, Let's put them in charge

This was the question you posed: "And what parallels exist between the Constitution and the Ten Commandments?"

 

Which is moot if you weren't referring to the Ten Commandments.

 

The first four Commandments are in direct contradiction to the First Amendment. They forbid free expression.
There is no legal condemnation of adultery, and our country is based on the reality that men will covet.
Lying is illegal only when under oath. Otherwise, it is called advertising.

Not much seems to connect these two to me. What am I missing?

 

The parallel is that our Ten Amendments are more supreme than even Ten Commandments of any religion.

 

That is because the government is a demonstrable force.

Religion is not.

 

In some cases, those on the Right cannot always separate their religious morals from the secular morals and legal ethics specifically enumerated by our Founding Fathers, and explained and qualified in Article Six regarding which "solution set" to always employ, ostensibly, for the sake of the rule of law instead of the rule of religion.

 

I don't think an atheist would be that much different. The reason people think they would be is because some people think that slapping the word "Christian" in front of the word "values" means those values are only present in Christian's. Things like no murder, no theft, respect your elders, don't commit adultery, don't worship material things. The illusion is that you won't or can't have those values without religion, which is of course totally bogus.

The reality of the situation would be that it wouldn't be that much different than now. Some issues would likely change, like the social conservative hot button ones like same-sex marriage and abortion. Relations with countries that predominantly have other religions, especially ones at odds with Christianity like Islam is, would also be affected I'm sure. Other than that though, things like domestic spending, defense, energy, would probably not change at all. People would still be greedy, they'd just stop hiding behind the bible as some type of proof that they aren't.

 

In my opinion, public policies regarding social spending my be better without religious forms of morality competing with our temporal and secular ethics, as specifically enumerated and ordained and established for us by our Founding Fathers.

We could have already solved poverty through market friendly means, in my opinion, but for alleged conservatives claiming allegedly, the subjective moral values of Religion.

 

This may be simplistic, but simply one should follow the golden rule. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.
And follow the constitution as ruled upon by the USSC.

 

So, why is it so difficult to convince our elected representatives who may lay some claim to morals, to bear true witness to our own laws, simply for the sake of morals and that form of moral absolutism?

 

They might have to change the Constitution. It wouldn't be one nation under God...

 

We know what atheists do when they're in charge. They draw up long lists of enemies and start murdering them.

 

We worship reason, and of course Charles Darwin.

 

We know what atheists do when they're in charge. They draw up long lists of enemies and start murdering them.

 

Hitler wasn't an atheist..

 

I never said Hitler was an atheist. Ever heard of Communism? They've got the Nazis beat as to number of people they've killed.

 

The Communists had more time and more territory in which to work their magic than Hitler did.

Still, going back farther into history, you can be sure that theists have been far more deadly on the whole than Communists.

Then there's the minor fact that atheism has zilch to do with Communism and the murders they've committed.

 

You're wrong on both points.

The Communists have murdered over 100 million people. You can't find any religion (or all religions combined) that have killed that many people.

Atheism is a foundation principle of Communism. Without belief in God, there is no limit to the atrocities that can be justified in the name of the all powerful state.

 

You may have missed the concept of why the US even exists; after a thirty years war of Religion.

 

You seem so sure.. Oh well, I don't know just how many millions have been killed by religious fools, so I'll leave that alone.

Even if we accept that Atheism is a founding principle of Communism, that doesn't make Atheism responsible for Communist killings. After all, people of all sorts of faiths have killed and do kill, and they find justifications for it in their religions. They find some way to convince themselves that they're doing God's work. The girl in your avatar pic was killed by such people, not by atheists..

 

atheists are libertarian-leaning, not liberal leaning, so no, socialism would not be a result of a pure-atheist society, as atheists are anti-subjectivism, they would be led to anarchy, not big government socialism

 

Water is a fundamental component of nuclear weapons, but I wouldn't blame the Atlantic Ocean for the Hiroshima bomb.

The same is also true WITH belief in God though.

 

How many died in the great flood? As a percent of population, about 99.9%,

 

They make laws their donors want. Nothing to do with what is good for normal citizens.

 

You almost make it seem like our elected representatives can't figure out how to promote the general welfare of the United States, regardless of the amount of capital involved in our capital markets based political-economy.