It is 2015 , should governments outlaw religion?

Actually, no. The Congress cannot burn the Constitution and start again. They can write a new Constitution and pass it on a 2/3 vote, but for it to supplant the current Constitution they would have to get permission from 3/4 of the state legislatures as well. Please look up simple facts like that before spouting off. I wouldn't spout off about the English parliamentary system without studying it first. I expect the same respect from others. I care about my audience and don't subject them to misinformation.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articlev
https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/overview

 

You can, indeed, try to change the constitution.
To do that, you need to get the people of the US to agree to that change.
Let me know how that goes.

 

I bet you were one of those kids who cried for days when he found out Santa was fake but then went around telling all the other kids that Santa was fake to make himself feel better.

 

So let me get this correct, you are saying if Mr President gave a direct order to burn the constitution, it would be refused ?

 

What a maroon!

 

The right to religious freedom is not just an American right, it's a basic human right per the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 18.

http://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/index.html

 

Santa is more ''real'' than a ''God'' , Santa is based on St Nicolas, God is based on what exactly?

 

If that is what they prefer, they should live that way. Those of us who wish to be religious have that right.

- - - Updated - - -

google is your friend. You can read the U.S. Constitution in less than an hour. It's a fairly short document.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/overview

 

well that says we have the right to change a belief, so therefore we can all choose to not believe in fairies any more and stop being so naive and stupid. And it does not say that the government can't take religions wealth, why would they need it

 

Please show proof that St Nicolas was real.

 

I think you missed the point you may want to look up Syntactic ambiguity

 

Our constitution is defending any and all beliefs, because what I believe is none of your business and who cares what you believe? Yes, we defend Alice, Elmer the Fudd and Satanists as well. Somehow that bothers you. Get used to it. It will bother you for the rest of your life.

 

You hate religion.
We get it.
Why do you think you can impose your hatred for religion on those who disagree with you?

 

Refused and impeached most likely.

 

Of course you can choose to believe what you want. However, you crossed the line when you suggested government should stamp out my right to belief. If you want to encourage people to quit being religious, go for it. That's your right. If you want to encourage the government to not allow people to be religious, then I oppose you 100%. Which is your real choice? Is it the reasonable one, or the tyrannical one.

Stealing my donations to my church in the name of atheism interferes with my right to religious expression, which is guaranteed.

MOD EDIT - Rule 4

 

Interesting, so he would be over thrown out of his job? shame the UK have got no constitution our leader is an idiot.

 

I am quite aware what your point was, I was purposely being obtuse. Speaking of being purposely obtuse, I think Poe's Law may be in affect here.

 

It is a fact that God is not real?
A fact, not a belief?
Facts can be proven. Get busy.

 

You're comparing the brilliance of the Constitution to the Bible ?

 

You're not English. The words you choose and the composition are wrong for an Englishman.

 

I'm defending basic liberty, not my particular religious beliefs. You would be happy to take away rights from people and force them to give up their beliefs. As I have said ad nauseum, I support your right to try to convince people that their religious beliefs are wrong--your right to that is similar to my right to proselytize for my religion (which I have not done in this thread). I only oppose your view that governments should outlaw religion, and I like to point out how you've gotten your facts wrong. Facts are important. You should try looking them up before you post.

- - - Updated - - -

Exactly. The existence (or non-existence) of God cannot be proven. We can only prove natural things. God is supernatural, and by definition cannot be proven or disproven by scientific means.

 

2015 and he as not made an appearance
fact for a God to exist he would need space to exist in so therefore space would come before god so god could of not creating everything.
Fact- all religious books are written by mankind
fact-there is no evidence of a god what so ever ,that is evidence in itself over an extensive period of time by observational evidence.

 

Speaking of "fairy tale land" how's that utopian dream of yours goin?

 

Fact--God is supernatural, and natural rules don't apply. It is impossible to say anything about God scientifically.

Now back to the original premise of the thread, it is inherently wrong for a government to ban (or require) religion.

 

only in your mind does god exist as a thought that as been planted by time and education