Trump and religious liberty -- Militant atheists have met their match with our president

and if we knew more about you I'm sure there would be plenty to be ashamed of. Get real.

Those with a clue know different.

 

Glad we got that cleared up.

So you quoted the whole damn post and evidently expect me to try to figure out what the hell you're responding to. Which I won't.

Then I rock, obviously.

Those of us who refuse to suffer fools gladly will often be perceived as such.

I did no such thing, obviously, as no such mind would ever equate the Creator to a muppet.

Didn't read further.

 

Okay, let's put your belief and faith to the test.

Do you BELIEVE that God(s) exists, or do you KNOW that God exists?
Do you BELIEVE that God created man, or do you KNOW that God created man?
Do you BELIEVE that the entire Universe and all existence, was created in 6-10 thousand years, or do you KNOW this?
Do you BELIEVE that there is a heaven and a hell, or do you KNOW that there is a heaven and a hell?
Do you BELIEVE that if you obey the will of God, that you will have everlasting life? Or, do you KNOW this?
Do you BELIEVE that you know God, or do you KNOW that you know God?
Do you BELIEVE that God is all of the OMNI'S, or do you KNOW that God is all of the OMNI'S?
Do you BELIEVE that all humans have committed a sin, or do you KNOW that all humans have committed a sin?

I was not equating Kermit the frog to God. I was equating the EVIDENCE for both. With zero evidence, anything you can imagine, can be real. Also, if you are going to make extraordinary truth claims, then expect to suffer us fools, for asking for you to back them up. Any one who tells you, "it's not my problem", when they ARE the problem, IS being, arrogant, insensitive, apathetic, and an elitist. I suppose you must be use to suffering us fools, rather then providing evidence.

As I've said before, what you believe in has no effect on me. I don't believe in ghost, aliens, time travellers, the paranormal, miracles, Godzilla, fairies, unicorns, Gods, or any violation of natural physical laws. Unless anyone can demonstrate the existence of any of this nonsense, I have no reason to believe otherwise. Why can't we just say, "I don't know", to questions of a religious nature?. Why all the spiritual gap-filling? But hey, in the end we all have to die. And, I've already been there before. I assure you, there is NO heaven or hell. So enjoy the life you've been given. Preparing yourself in life, for death, is truly a fool's errand, and a tragic waste of life.

 

lol

 

First off, you did misquote me I never said an ABSOLUTE RIGHT and I did clarify free speech can't infringe on another person's rights. I did fix a grammar error (oops), but here is what I said:

Now that we have cleared that up, you do bring up valid points I will give you that. The First Amendment states the following:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech, or the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

You're correct someone cannot falsely yell "fire" in a movie theater as that is infringing on the rights of others and disturbing the peace. I stated that already, but thank you for providing an example.

As far as what you stated in regards to cruelty under religious beliefs, that is a violation and exactly what our founding fathers tried to prevent. Our founding fathers wanted to prevent religious persecution and yet does it still go on, yes but not just by Christians. However, what you stated about business owners refusing service to various races and religions falls under the Civil Rights Act of 1964 that protects race, color, religion, and national origin which prohibits discrimination by privately owned places of public accommodation. Nonprofit organizations such as churches are exempt from this law. Speaking on the freedom of religion a florist or baker should not be forced under protection of their religious beliefs to provide their services for same-sex weddings and celebrations. There are plenty of other businesses that would provide that service so they are free to go elsewhere and they are not being denied based on WHO they are but for the service they are requesting. Flip side, a lesbian printer shouldn't be forced to create a flyer for a rally that protests same-sex marriage. There is not compelling enough interest for the government to intervene in both cases. Yet we have Christian bakers who are being dragged through the mud and taken to court for refusing the right to make a cake for a gay weddings. Rather we agree or not is not the case, it is their RIGHT. Jim Crow laws mandated segregation based on racial supremacy and prevented all individuals and businesses from opening their doors and providing their services to African Americans. The government had the right to interfere due to compelling interests.

As far as coming to your door, it is a clash between the First Amendment and homeowner privacy rights. There have been court cases about it, not just religious groups, but businesses, politicians, Girl Scouts, etc ..Is it annoying? My God yes it is and I say that as a Christian. However, while there have been court cases on regulating or prohibiting door-to-door solicitations it mostly has been agreed upon in court that under the First Amendment politicians, girl scouts, religious groups, etc have the right to go door to door. Cities, counties and towns however have the right under police power to license and regulate door-to-door peddlers, solicitors, temporary merchants, and mobile vendors, and to impose reasonable license fees. Such regulations are generally justified if they bear a reasonable relationship to public health, safety, and welfare concerns. Also you have the right to turn them away, and if they don't leave then they are violating your rights.

Now, getting into Evolution vs. Creation being taught in schools. They have a very important thing in common both are THEORIES not FACTS, not be be confused with another. You believe in Evolution, I believe in Creation we both are believers in THEORIES just very different ones. Why can't both be explained and taught? Shouldn't students be taught both since they are theories? Not telling them which way to believe, but merely explain both so that way it encourages free thinking and educating on different theories.

It is worth mentioning you have cited sources from an ATHEIST website, and bashed Christians as a whole so are you not projecting your beliefs on me? I am not saying you're violating my rights you have the right to say everything you're saying and even raise good points that made me think not on my beliefs but just as a whole in regards to religious liberties. I don't agree with you, but you raise good points.

Asking me to PROVE my belief in my religion and belief in God is not on topic to religious liberty, but I can ask you, prove God doesn't exist? Not trying to go on and on as again its not the original topic, but a question you may want to ponder.

Public schools and prayer, school sponsored prayer cannot be done, but anyone who wants to pray has the right to do so privately without intervention or discrimination. Not just Christians, but Jews, Muslims have all felt they have had their religious liberties in terms of praying in school violated.

Abortion is a very hard pressing issue that we could go back and forth on for a VERY long time so I am going to bypass that discussion. I definitely have my arguments for both views, but I do have things to do today. LOL

As far as examples go on religious beliefs being stifled here is one William McLeod, a 9-year-old Utah boy who was forced to remove the cross of ashes from his forehead on Ash Wednesday by his teacher that is a violation.

I could keep going, but this has been a VERY long response to a very long response. We don't agree and your views on Christianity I find to be out of line and misguided, but I certainly defend your right to say it. Someone on here in this thread said, "F your god and the cloud he rode in on..." I personally found it very offensive, but he had the right to say it. Freedom of speech, cuts both ways.

Have a nice weekend...

 

Have you died and been back? Maybe you should consider a book deal and educate the masses.

That is your belief, you can't prove it.

 

A school isn't a church. Pray at home pray or at church I dont care. I would rather not listen to your prayers. That is what I meant by keeping it to yourself.

 

According to the First Amendment one can pray in public not just church or home! Are you serious? Lol A school cannot sponsor prayer or force one to participate but a student has the right to pray. Also, at church or at home? Wow you do realize that's in direct opposition to the First Amendment!? What if it was said for you to keep your atheist views at home? Guess you only agree with freedom when it's in YOUR favor.

 

This from a crowd that dont think Colin Kaepernick have the right to take a knee? How rich.

I dont see anybody peddling their atheist views in public. Ever heard of separation of church and state? Public schools are funded by tax payers. Are you saying I should only have to put up with Christians prayers? What about other religions? Schools are not for learning or practicing religious beliefs.

 

Dumb thumb. I meant "for learning and not for practicing religious beliefs."

 

Public schools can't sponsor a religion or lead a prayer as they are publicly funded. Students should have the right to pray on a voluntary basis, rather you like it or not. Freedom can't be taken because it's something you don't like. There are plenty of views and beliefs I don't agree with or like, but I do believe one has the right to freely practice their religion as our Founders intended. Nobody should have to stifle their beliefs just because you don't agree.

The meaning of separation of church and state is it prevents the government from establishing a religion or interfering with one's right to practice their religion. Individual citizens are free to bring their religious convictions into the public arena. But the government is prohibited from favoring one religious view over another or even favoring religion over non-religion.

Here is the First Amendment:

I don't exclude other religions, more faiths have felt their religious liberties have been violated other than Christians. I believe that people should have the freedom to practice their faith or not practice a faith at all.

 

Thank you, I'll be watching the game with friends. I had to buy my assorted beverages and snacks early, because the majority religious view says, that I should be in church praying and worshiping their deity. And, not buying beer and snacks. I certainly look forward to a discussion on abortion, and a woman's right to privacy/choice. It is one of my favorite topics.

I never said that you said, that our freedom of speech was absolute. Or, implied or insinuated that because I don't like what people utter, that I want to suppress their right to utter it. That is just alarmism. If someone had the cult belief, and uttered that the flying spaghetti monster was sacred and sacrosanct, you would give his belief zero credibility or importance. But if his cult wanted a flying spaghetti monster day, his name added to our pledge of allegiance, wanting you or your loved ones to follow its tenants, or to influence policies because of its form of moral truisms, then I'm sure you would be just as skeptical as me. You would be in the front of the line, demanding evidence.

There is infinitely more evidence to more than suggest that a God, not only does not exist, but CANNOT EXIST. Either physically, philosophically, or logically. There is the problem of Evil, and being All Good. There is the problem of being all-powerful. There is the problem of spacetime. There is the physical problem of occupying space, without detection. There is the problem of definition(only ONE God can exist, not thousands). There is the problem of Divine Utility. There is the failure of ALL arguments for God's existence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Arguments_for_the_existence_of_God . There is the problem of a total lack of any related supernatural, spiritual, paranormal, or metaphysical event, that could at least indicate the possibility of God's existence. There is the problem of having Zero metaphysical tools to measure, observe, explain, or validate any event that defies any of our physical laws. The evidence against the existence of God(s) is overwhelming. In fact if God did exist, it would be impossible for the Universe and time to exist. In other words, if God exists, then we don't. You can't have it both ways. In spite of this, I will still defend your right to believe in God's existence, and to worship whatever belief you want. But, unless you can prove at least 0.000000001% of it, please keep your unsupported beliefs out of my schools, my life, out of my government, out of my sports, and out of my courts. My fear, is that religious encroachment will only get worse.

I agree with you(and stated it in another post) that our founding fathers, wanted to avoid religious persecution. But the opposite of persecution is to oblige, placate, appease, etc. Our founding fathers, did not what to do this either. To avoid both choices, they chose to completely separate church from state. And, to promote religious liberties. I don't understand how you could have read any of the Supreme Court rulings, and NOT see the real examples of intolerance, violence, bigotry, elitism, exclusivity, and persecution of those that did not practice the Christian faith. All SC rulings(regarding Religion) were based on the religious abuses of others freedom from religions. And, YES, their civil liberties/rights.

No rational person thinks that the utterance(speech) of words poses any threat to their liberties. What I am talking about, is how the practices and influences of religion, impacts on my freedoms. And, to the freedoms of others, that choose not to mindlessly jump on the religious belief bandwagon. Do you think, that the 15th and 19th amendments, and the Civil rights Act, did not arise out of conflict and controversy? Do you think there was no push-back, from groups claiming that theirs was the moral and religious truth? No, it was violence, hatred, persecution, and clearly un-Christian-like behaviour, that ensued. If Christians, and other Religions, did not preach ONE thing, and practice another, there would be no court rulings or civil rights acts, necessary. But in reality, the behavior of man, is driven by an even higher authority than God. Greed and Ego.

You are certainly smarter than this. Saying that if I believe that Evolution is a fact and theory, and you believe that Creationism is a fact and theory, that both are equivalent because both are beliefs, is just silly and logically fallacious. Conflating the ToE with Creationism, or anything else, because they have a word in common? The ToE is a "fact" and a "Theory". Creationism is neither. There is nothing practical, significant, or relevant, that either have in common. The ToE is based entirely on the convergence of facts and data(overwhelming, consistent, and indisputable). Creationism is devoid of any facts or data at all. It simply asserts everything entirely on faith. So, do you want your children to learn about real things that they can prove exists. Or, do you believe, that if they believe, obey, and pray long and hard enough, that a God will provide? I prefer my children to live in a perceptual reality, not a conceptual one.

My point in the nutshell is, that everyone has the right to practice and worship whatever, and whomever they want. But the minute their belief claims, become truth claims to justify affecting my reality, then they had better be prepared to backup their claims with evidence. Otherwise, let me live my life, free from the EXPRESSION of your beliefs, on me or my family. I don't mind expressing my patriotism, but not my superstitions. I am not projecting anything, other than my frustration, over the insidious encroachment of religious fantasies into my life. Why can't you stick to your own homes, private schools, religious camps, churches, religious schools, basements, and colleges? Why do your lobby groups need to infect, limit, restrict, and control my way of life? Are you just tired of preaching to the choir?

There are three deaths. I have experienced all three. the first is non-existence(what were you doing in the beginning?). The second is unconsciousness(under anesthetics), the third is physical death(death after life). I have experienced all three. So regardless of what you want to believe is real, there is NO Heaven or Hell. NO pearly gates. NO jolly man in a white suit. NO conscious awareness. And, NO pain or suffering. There is NOTHING but the cessation of time, space, and reality. So enjoy the greatest gift you have been given, Life. Don't squander it away preparing for death.

I've asked you before, what specific religious liberties do you feel are being threatened. I have given you examples of my just cause for worry, so what are yours?






​

 

This tells me that you do not have a clue, what constitutes a scientific Theory(capitalized). The ToE is supported by a mountain of scientific facts and Laws. It is the best scientific explanation of the evolution and speciation, of all biological life. Name just ONE objective fact, or scientific Law that supports Creationism? Just one will do. If the ToE is wrong, then Genetics is wrong, acquired heredity is wrong, gene coding is wrong, natural selection is wrong, all of chemistry and biology is wrong, bacteriology and parasitology is wrong, human physiology and biochemistry is wrong, the inheritability of physical and behavioral traits is wrong, all radiometric dating is wrong, etc. Do you really think that we did not evolve from something less specialized?

So, you are suggesting that we ignore all accepted verifiable objective scientific explanations, and teach young rational minds, that nature, the universe, Earth, life, and humans, originated with a supernatural act of divine creation? Are you serious? Just because you are trying to associate your belief with science, does not make your belief a science. Just because you call another religious belief a scientific theory, does not make your belief a scientific Theory. It takes facts, Laws, data, experiments, observations, and more importantly, it must be falsifiable. The ToE can easily be falsified, but for over 160 years, it hasn't happened. There are scientists trying to disprove the Theory, they haven't so far.

Religion is a flea biting the back of an elephant. Science is the elephant. So no, Creationism is not a science, and is an embarrassment to science. It maybe the science of Religion, but it is NOT the science of science. So, no, teach Creationism in Humanities, Social sciences, or world religions and cultures, but do not teach it in any science class. It has zero scientific credibility or utility. Unless you can provide objective evidence, don't use Creationism as another form of religious indoctrination to infect more young minds. Why do you need to infect others to validate your beliefs? Do you think, that the number of people who believe in your superstitions, has anything to do with the existence of your superstitions? Non-sequitur.

So please no fairy tales, and tales of magic in our science classrooms. Just teach science. What do you tell your children when they ask, why is the sky blue, why do they feel pain, or why do the light turn on? Isn't the truth more beautiful than any fantasy?

 

Trump and religious liberty -- Militant atheists have met their match with our president
Trump is personally not religious, & cares nothing whatsoever about religious liberty. But he DOES care about how religious believers vote, & has made a concentrated effort to convince those believers that he's their best choice. Since he is a practical, practiced & highly successful con man, he's been very successful in getting the religious vote. But those religious voters have paid a heavy price for their conversion to the Trump cult. They've had to politicize their religion & turn their focus more toward politics & less toward morals, values & God. For many, politics has replaced the spiritual aspects entirely, leaving them with nothing more than an empty hull, or exoskeleton from what used to be a living, breathing religion. When I look at American evangelicals or fundamentalists today, I see nothing Godlike or even connecting in any small way with the moral, ethical, or spiritual teachings of Jesus. I see two groups so lost in their own egos, they've converted from Jesus to Trump for their salvation. They do NOT represent me or my values, nor do they represent my vision of America or Americans.

 

Does a religion have any less or more right to sell their product to children than say a sugary cereal maker? Should we place an age restriction on religion peddling like we do with tobacco and alcohol? We would be better served if we put an age restriction on ideological indoctrination.

I am fascinated on how atheists react to religion with a religions like fervor. I figure it comes from a feeling of minority. I stopped being bothered by religion when i came to realize it is a product. While folks can form an addiction to products i think the addiction rate of children to religion is much less than that of adults. Children are way more likely to become addicted to sugar.

 

It is the job of parents to protect their children from both. Eating too much sugar is a health hazard, and one can follow its physiological pathway, and actually see the damage it does to the BODY. Religions, attack the immature and underdeveloped MINDS of children. Religions create an unnecessary conflict between reality and fantasy. Parents should not tell children, that they are sinful, and will go to hell if they disobey God, or not believe in Jesus. Unless, they can prove it. How does a child argue his case to God? Atheist feel like the little girl telling the crowd, that the king is NOT wearing any clothes.

Although, one product is real, and causes physical dependency, while the other is imaginary, and causes cognitive and social dependency, I do agree that children should have a minimum age requirement, before they can become the victims of religious indoctrinations. Of course, religious folk won't have any part of that. They believe that what they are doing is right, and that their belief claims are truth claims. They believe that the sooner they can get to infect a child's innocent vulnerable underdeveloped mind, the better. I think you are comparing apples to chestnuts, in your addiction rates of religion and glucose. I don't see the relevance of any conclusions. I mean, we are more addicted to water and air. Right?

 

I agree it is, or at least should be on the parents. Both in how much sugar they intake as well as moral guidance. The difference is kids like and want sugar. Most kids could care less about religion. As you site, religion falls into the realm of fantasy and make believe to a child. Can parents condition their children into a religious path? Certainly! I had it spoon fed to me up until the time i was 13 years old. I was going to Sunday school as a pre-schooler and as best i recall it was just another thing we did. It was an hour of stories and activities with no real significance to my world. As i grew older it became more of a chore until the day when i was 13 in catechism class and called the teacher, who happened to be the minister that he was a racist. My mother was horrified. The next Sunday when she came to wake me up for church i jumped out of bed got in her face and told her im not going and went back to bed. My actions to my experience might be on the extreme side but i do not find the experience to be far from the norm for most kids. The majority will find their own way.

It may be apples to chestnuts but apples are sweeter and kids will gravitate to them quicker than they will to chestnuts.

 

I don't think parents should guide their children. Guidance tends to create mental clones of yourself. Parents should lead, and inspire children by deeds and by examples, not by authority. Parents should set limits, to allow children to learn from the consequences of their actions. Parents should expose children to a variety of activities, to maximize their child's genetic predispositions and natural talents. The goal of Religion is not the same, as the goal of parents. The goal of parents, is to equip their child with the skills, knowledge, and self-confidence, to become an independent, self-reliant, and confident member of society. Parents, above all, should always express respect, patience, and love for their children. So many children today, lack the ability to express all three.

Calling your minister a "racist" was truly a very bold move at 13, but it certainly is NOT the norm. I doubt if a 7-10 year old would have that much intestinal fortitude. Since over 80% of the population still believes in the existence of some supernatural entity, the norm has not found their own way yet. No matter how much a man may believe that he is a child of God, his body will always be a child of nature. In a perspective that he can never escape.

My religious reality-check came in Jr. High school. When I asked my teacher in a biology class, "Where does the stork come in?". No more religious nonsense after that. Think just how much further a child's natural curiosity would lead them, without the early shackles imposed by religions. We are suppose to be living in an Age of Reason. It was Religion that destroyed the "Golden Age of Islam(7th-13th Century AD)". Religion stifles, and discourages reason and individuality. Religion is not science, and never will be.

 

You say lead, i say guide. We are talking about the same thing. I always encouraged my kids to try new things (within reason) That included religion. I stopped being afraid of religion and its influences when i realized it is nothing more than a creation of man. Just like any creation it can be used for good or not. As you say Religion is not science. Religion is nothing more than God (real or imagined) politics. The way some folks blindly follow their political party i don't see any difference from devote followers of religion. They exhibit the same closed mindedness and lack of rationale.

 

Dumb projection. I don't cheat on my wife while she just had my child. I don't steal from others to get ahead. Thanks for admitting that you can't defend Trump.

This isn't a theocracy no matter how you wish it to be.

 

So you don't cheat on your wife and you just had a child.....well good for you, Now you could use a little humility to go with your pride before you attack a man that has achieved more prosperity for the blue collar than any leader in the last 50 years! If we had alittle honesty from you, I'd bet we'd find some interesting skeletons in your closet.....but you know, so live with it!

 

LOL.... My closet will be boring compared to the adulterous cheating fool in the WH. It would better if you just admit your hypocrisy and say you dont care like the rest of the Trumpers.


The economy have been doing well for a decade now. Trump didn't wave magic wand. Coal mines are going the way of the dodo despite what Trump say. Farmers are on the verge of bankruptcy so he had to prop them up with taxpayers money. And companies continue to operate in China including the ones using sweat shop labor to make Trump clothing lines.

 

So you are wholly justified to pronounce guilt......I see.

 

The difference between guide and lead, is that guiding your child requires setting limits to the thoughts and actions of the child. It is a balancing act, to encourage certain positive behavior, to develop social learning skills, and to understand the consequences of his/her actions. Guiding is an INDIRECT process. Leading your child requires no thought input from the child. It only requires that the child follows your lead. Just do as I say, because I am in charge, not you. It is a DIRECT process. I did said lead by example, not by authority. Anyway, in spite of the semantics, I agree that we are both on the same page.

Humans have a natural instinct to belong to anything that they perceive to be larger than themselves. It is a part of our need to belong, and our herding instinct. Our gift from evolution, if you will. This instinct provides us with emotional/social security, protection, confidence, hope, and purpose. So, whether it is a religious ideology, a political ideology, a cultist ideology, or a gang ideology, if it fills an emotional/security/intelligence void, we you will gravitate towards it. Advertisers are experts at exploiting this evolutionary weakness.

Can you name just ONE thing that is GOOD, in telling a child,

that he/she has sinned, and must repent and seek forgiveness?
that all of his/her actions and thoughts are being judged, whether he/she is awake, asleep, or even dead?
that he/she will be watched forever, by an all-Omni invisible surrogate sky daddy, that must always be loved and obeyed(including priests and other religious leaders)?
that those children(and their parents) who do not believe in God and Jesus, are bad, wrong, immoral, and should not be trusted?
that only your belief is correct, and the thousands of other beliefs are wrong(without evidence)?
That all life and all things, were created by magic?

Atheists are simply the little girl telling the crowd, that the King is really not wearing any clothes. They do not question your right to believe in anything you want. They only question your claim to know anything you want. So, what do you tell a child, who believes that he/she is not responsible for the sins of the Father? Or, wants to know objectively, how and why God is real?

We are all born to be free, naturally just, and naturally curious. Religion, by it religiosity, nature, and practices, tends to erode all three, including our individuality and ability to excel. Please. just leave our most vulnerable, and valuable minds of our children alone.

 

We like to belong and we tend to over value life with the fantasy of never ending existence. Perhaps that isn't necessarily a bad thing as without it we might act out in fear more than we already do. Im speculating. Advertising industry exploits the hell out of our fears.

We are all born. Beyond that nature can take many courses. Some just some not. I don't see religion so much messing with children unless it is with parental complicity. I supposed a case could be made for sending kids to religion based schools. Tho in my experience growing up, the girls who went to the local catholic school were much more fun to party with ... go figure.