City must pay atheists group for violating Constitution

Status
Not open for further replies.

LovesTruth

Well-Known Member
May 22, 2006
1,493
81
✟2,092.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
You have dreamt up your very own special idea on what freedom of religion means. The govt. is a neutral body.

And do not forget that Canada is also a country not founded on any religious principals. Works great here!:thumbsup:
Religious freedom as defined in the United States is very much what I have described it. I did not make this up.

The US Gov't and state and local gov'ts are not forced to be NEUTRAL toward God or toward religious faith. As I have said before there are many, many examples throughout US legal history to prove this. See my earlier posts to prove the point.

US Gov't is neutral toward state churches and to sectarian beliefs but not to two general religious beliefs: The existence of God and our accountability to God.

As for Canada, how ironic that you don't know that Canada has a state church and supports it financially! And what is worse, the Canadian gov't censorships religious free speech about homosexuality! They actually fined pastors for preaching the truth that homosexual sex is a sin and for publishing the truth by quoting Bible verses! So much for so-called "religious freedom" Canadian-style.

I prefer to live in land following God's Word.
 
Upvote 0

crazyfingers

Well-Known Member
May 17, 2002
8,733
329
Massachusetts
Visit site
✟18,923.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
Religious freedom as defined in the United States is very much what I have described it. I did not make this up.

The US Gov't and state and local gov'ts are not forced to be NEUTRAL toward God or toward religious faith. As I have said before there are many, many examples throughout US legal history to prove this. See my earlier posts to prove the point.

US Gov't is neutral toward state churches and to sectarian beliefs but not to two general religious beliefs: The existence of God and our accountability to God.

Equal religious freedom requires that no one is required to support a government that supports a religious position that one disagrees with.

I prefer to live in land following God's Word.

You do not have the right to use the government to support your religious opinions.
 
Upvote 0

DhaliClone

Well-Known Member
Oct 28, 2004
1,204
158
✟17,207.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
Faith in Christ and even devout faith in other religions have proven successful in protecting marriages, lowering crime, and transforming alcoholics and drug addicts into law-abiding citizens.


The Bible Belt has a 50% HIGHER rate of divorce than the rest of the country....
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvss/mar&div.pdf

The Bible Belt has the highest onset of teen pregnancy...
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr52/nvsr52_10.pdf

The Bible Belt has the highest onset of STDs...
http://www.cdc.gov/std/stats00/2000SFSouth.htm

The Bible Belt has the highest murder rates in the country....
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1355/is_n12_v94/ai_21020057

And faith-based programs are not evidence because...
1) they are actually less successful, and
2) inmates who were involved in InnerChange were actually more likely to be rearrested and reimprisoned.

Do you see a trend here?

Do you see a trend here?

We have a common national belief that there is a God, and that God intervenes in the affairs of mortal men, and that our blessings and our civil rights come from God, not from the government.

The Founding Fathers did not share that view. The Preamble to the Constitution says, "We the people... establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity." The founding fathers held that the PEOPLE did all of these things, not God.

Most were Christians, that's true, but ALL of them understood the need of the both religion and government to be completely separate.
 
Upvote 0

Bulldog

Don't Tread on Me
Jan 19, 2004
7,122
176
22 Acacia Avenue
✟8,212.00
Faith
Protestant
Politics
US-Libertarian
Equal religious freedom requires that no one is required to support a government that supports a religious position that one disagrees with.

This is a good point and I agree. However, I'm curious do you just believes that this applies to religion? Would you apply this to other situations? If I disagree with our social security system or public schools, shouldn't I not be forced to give the government my taxes?
 
Upvote 0

Dannager

Back in Town
May 5, 2005
9,025
475
38
✟11,819.00
Faith
Catholic
Politics
US-Democrat
The Bible Belt has a 50% HIGHER rate of divorce than the rest of the country....
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvss/mar&div.pdf

The Bible Belt has the highest onset of teen pregnancy...
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr52/nvsr52_10.pdf

The Bible Belt has the highest onset of STDs...
http://www.cdc.gov/std/stats00/2000SFSouth.htm

The Bible Belt has the highest murder rates in the country....
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1355/is_n12_v94/ai_21020057

And faith-based programs are not evidence because...
1) they are actually less successful, and
2) inmates who were involved in InnerChange were actually more likely to be rearrested and reimprisoned.

Do you see a trend here?
Holy moly.

Owned.
 
Upvote 0

crazyfingers

Well-Known Member
May 17, 2002
8,733
329
Massachusetts
Visit site
✟18,923.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
"We the people... establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity." The founding fathers held that the PEOPLE did all of these things, not God.

Every time I read the preamble to the Constitution I think, what a great place to put God-talk IF the founders had wanted God-talk in the constitution. It's clear that they did not. All the authority is in The People, not any god.
 
Upvote 0

crazyfingers

Well-Known Member
May 17, 2002
8,733
329
Massachusetts
Visit site
✟18,923.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
This is a good point and I agree. However, I'm curious do you just believes that this applies to religion? Would you apply this to other situations? If I disagree with our social security system or public schools, shouldn't I not be forced to give the government my taxes?

Freedom of religion is guaranteed in the constitution. Equal protection of the law is guaranteed in the constitution. Freedom from taxes is not.
 
Upvote 0

Bulldog

Don't Tread on Me
Jan 19, 2004
7,122
176
22 Acacia Avenue
✟8,212.00
Faith
Protestant
Politics
US-Libertarian
Freedom of religion is guaranteed in the constitution. Equal protection of the law is guaranteed in the constitution. Freedom from taxes is not.

So than we can only argue that principle if it's in the constitution?

If freedom of religion wasn't in the constitution would the argument be void?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

crazyfingers

Well-Known Member
May 17, 2002
8,733
329
Massachusetts
Visit site
✟18,923.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
Then it's an argument from principle, no? Which begs the question, shouldn't the principle be consistent?

I regard freedom of religion as a basic human right. I regard equal protection of the law to be a basic human right.

I do not regard freedom from taxation to be a basic human right.
 
Upvote 0

Bulldog

Don't Tread on Me
Jan 19, 2004
7,122
176
22 Acacia Avenue
✟8,212.00
Faith
Protestant
Politics
US-Libertarian
I regard freedom of religion as a basic human right. I regard equal protection of the law to be a basic human right.

You were arguing that people shouldn't have to support something which they disagree with. The examples I brought up go along with this, no?

I do not regard freedom from taxation to be a basic human right.

I didn't even say "freedom from taxation." I believe that freedom from taxation is a right in the sense that freedom from coersion is a natural right. Rights don't impose obligations on others or force/ coersion.
 
Upvote 0

crazyfingers

Well-Known Member
May 17, 2002
8,733
329
Massachusetts
Visit site
✟18,923.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
You were arguing that people shouldn't have to support something which they disagree with.

No. That's way over generalizing what I've been saying. I'm saying that it's a violation of freedom of religion to force someone to support a religious view that one does not support.

I didn't even say "freedom from taxation." I believe that freedom from taxation is a right in the sense that freedom from coersion is a natural right. Rights don't impose obligations on others or force/ coersion.

I'm not interested in talking about basic libertarian stuff. I was a libertarian once, back in the late 1970's. I rejected a lot of it, though I am a civil libertarian.

In any case, I'm not interested and this line of discussion is off-topic.
 
Upvote 0

Bulldog

Don't Tread on Me
Jan 19, 2004
7,122
176
22 Acacia Avenue
✟8,212.00
Faith
Protestant
Politics
US-Libertarian
No. That's way over generalizing what I've been saying. I'm saying that it's a violation of freedom of religion to force someone to support a religious view that one does not support.

But why only religion? What makes religion so special? Why not other aspects of belief?


I'm not interested in talking about basic libertarian stuff. I was a libertarian once, back in the late 1970's. I rejected a lot of it, though I am a civil libertarian.

Fun.

In any case, I'm not interested and this line of discussion is off-topic.

Alright.
 
Upvote 0

LovesTruth

Well-Known Member
May 22, 2006
1,493
81
✟2,092.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
No. That's way over generalizing what I've been saying. I'm saying that it's a violation of freedom of religion to force someone to support a religious view that one does not support.

I don't consider gov't's acknowledging the EXISTENCE of God to be supporting a religious view. It is a foundational fact. Ditto for calling a National Day of Prayer or declaring our dependence upon God. These are universal truths. A religious view would be to decare Allah God or to outlaw criticism of Islam for example. Or to give gov't money to support the religious work of a church.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Voegelin
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Donkeytron

Veteran
Oct 24, 2005
1,443
139
43
✟9,874.00
Faith
Non-Denom


I don't consider gov't's acknowledging the EXISTENCE of God to be supporting a religious view. It is a foundational fact. Ditto for calling a National Day of Prayer or declaring our dependence upon God. These are universal truths. A religious view would be to decare Allah God or to outlaw criticism of Islam for example. Or to give gov't money to support the religious work of a church.
Somehow, I think that atheists, agnostics, etc. would take differ on whether god exists and we are dependent on an all-knowing sky-father who must be appeased with yearly fundraisers errr.....prayer breakfasts.
 
Upvote 0

LovesTruth

Well-Known Member
May 22, 2006
1,493
81
✟2,092.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Quote:
Originally Posted by LovesTruth
Faith in Christ and even devout faith in other religions have proven successful in protecting marriages, lowering crime, and transforming alcoholics and drug addicts into law-abiding citizens.

Blatant lies, which you've been called on many times before, but you seem to ignore.

I do not lie. You accusation has no place on this forum. May I invite you to read the rules if you want to continue on this forum. A modicum of common courtesy is necessary for civil dialog.

The Bible Belt has a 50% HIGHER rate of divorce than the rest of the country....
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvss/mar&div.pdf

The Bible Belt has the highest onset of teen pregnancy...
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr52/nvsr52_10.pdf

The Bible Belt has the highest onset of STDs...
http://www.cdc.gov/std/stats00/2000SFSouth.htm

The Bible Belt has the highest murder rates in the country....
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articl...94/ai_21020057

The above are not worth comment, but for the sake of the uninitiated, let me refute the implications. There is no more Bible Belt. People in all areas of the USA are subjected to the same public education, television, films, and fake or false christian churches. What you will find if you were to do the work is that people who are bornagain (not just church members) all across the world live transformed lives, obeying laws, staying married, raising children in love, earning honest livings and donating generously to help others. Why? Jesus Christ!

God through Jesus Christ transforms lives. He turns sinners 180 degrees. He sets addicts free. He makes honest men and women out of criminals. And he builds life long loving marriages and families. That is the real story of evangelical faith... the story of Jesus Christ at work in people.


And faith-based programs are not evidence because...
1) they are actually less successful, and
2) inmates who were involved in InnerChange were actually more likely to be rearrested and reimprisoned.

The above is untrue. Studies show the opposite. The recidivism rate is about 13% for those who complete the faith-based Innerchange program managed by Prison Fellowship. There are others. God is at work everywhere. Jesus Christ set prisoners free from sin and crime... and gives them new lives and new starts.

May I invite you to check out this ministry for yourself at http://unshackled.org/ This is one of thousands of such groups bringing the power of Christ to criminals and addicts.





Quote:
Originally Posted by LovesTruth
Do you see a trend here?

Do you see a trend here? You come into these threads all the time with the same exact quotes and information, and your misinformation and lies are exposed every single time, yet you continue to say them.

No, I do not lie. And my information is truthful. You should not make personal attacks. Read the forum rules.


Quote:
Originally Posted by LovesTruth
We have a common national belief that there is a God, and that God intervenes in the affairs of mortal men, and that our blessings and our civil rights come from God, not from the government.

The Founding Fathers did not share your view.
I share their view.

The Preamble to the Constitution says, "We the people... establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity." The founding fathers held that the PEOPLE did all of these things, not God.
You might care to read all their writings and study copies of the minutes of their deliberations and discussions. Did you know they believed that rights came from God, not the government? Did you know that the founding fathers devoted an entire day to prayer to God for wisdom in creating the US Constitution? There are many sources you ought to check out. The First Amendment Center would be a good start.

Most were Christians, that's true, but ALL of them understood the need of the both religion and government to be completely separate.

Let me clarify. I am glad you admit they were mostly Christian. (42 of the 44 were. Some were ministers and nearly all had religious education.) They believed that
"establishment of religion" should be separate from government. So do I. So does Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson. Yet they did not believe that religious faith should have no part in the deliberations of lawmakers. No do I. Nor does Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson. In that sense religious faith should not be entirely separate. And that is why the founding fathers didn't keep them separate in their own deliberations and debates. They argued from Christian values and from the Bible as well as from secular sources. And so do I.


I'm guessing you'll come in here again with your "the myth of the separation of church and state" stuff, which has ALSO been debunked and refuted dozens of times (and, again, you'll ignore it).

I hadn't planned to discuss it, but since you opened the topic of the MYTH of SEPARATION of Church and State, I will correct your mistakes. It is a myth. A few have tried and failed to prove it exists. I have challenged them with facts that they could not answer. And the US Supreme Court agrees. The phrase was used only once in 1947 and was never used again by the Supreme Court and was never defined. In fact several Supreme Court justices don't believe it exists either and say so. That MYTH is only a MYTH. It has no legal basis.

What does the ACLU have to do to prove the MYTH exists as TRUTH? All it has to do is appeal the lawsuit the ACLU LOST in federal court over the state motto of Ohio which declares, "With God all things are possible." The ACLU invoked the MYTH and lost, because the federal judge told the ACLU that their understanding of the separation of church and state was "frivilous and utterly without legal foundation." I agree.

So why doesn't the ACLU take that to the US Supreme Court? I'll tell you why. They know they haven't got a legal leg to stand on... only a MYTH.
 
Upvote 0

LovesTruth

Well-Known Member
May 22, 2006
1,493
81
✟2,092.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Somehow, I think that atheists, agnostics, etc. would take differ on whether god exists and we are dependent on an all-knowing sky-father who must be appeased with yearly fundraisers errr.....prayer breakfasts.
It doesn't matter if they disagree about a foundational fact. They are wrong. So what about their error? They are free to be wrong. But we are free to define our country as we wish. We did.

As for fundraisers, you are mistaken. There is none of that at the prayer meetings. But there is very much a whole lot of praying going on! Atheists don't like it? So what? They didn't start this country. We did.

A common set of values doesn't need to be 100% unanimous. The vast majority of our nation has always believed in God (from 1620 and ever since). That is why we are free to define the system this way.

Maybe you would like to tackle this question:

What does the ACLU have to do to prove the MYTH of SEPARATION of Chruch and State exists as TRUTH? All it has to do is appeal the lawsuit the ACLU LOST in federal court over the state motto of Ohio which declares, "With God all things are possible." The ACLU invoked the MYTH and lost, because the federal judge told the ACLU that their understanding of the separation of church and state was "frivilous and utterly without legal foundation." I agree.

So why doesn't the ACLU take that to the US Supreme Court? I'll tell you why. They know they haven't got a legal leg to stand on... only a MYTH.
 
Upvote 0

crazyfingers

Well-Known Member
May 17, 2002
8,733
329
Massachusetts
Visit site
✟18,923.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat


I don't consider gov't's acknowledging the EXISTENCE of God to be supporting a religious view. It is a foundational fact. Ditto for calling a National Day of Prayer or declaring our dependence upon God. These are universal truths. A religious view would be to decare Allah God or to outlaw criticism of Islam for example. Or to give gov't money to support the religious work of a church.

What a load of nonsense. You keep claiming that it's a fact that a god exists. I keep challenging you to provide evidence to support that claim. You continue to fail to provide evidence and repeatedly make the claim.

Get a clue. The only fact is that you have faith that a god exists. Do not confuse faith with fact.

Every day in public school my kids' principal tells my kid that a god exists. I am forced to pay taxes to the town and so I am forced to finance the teaching of my kid that a god exists. That is not equal religious freedom.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

crazyfingers

Well-Known Member
May 17, 2002
8,733
329
Massachusetts
Visit site
✟18,923.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
It doesn't matter if they disagree about a foundational fact. They are wrong.

Really? Care to back up that claim with evidence that a god exists?

So what about their error? They are free to be wrong. But we are free to define our country as we wish. We did.

Care to prove that atheists are wrong to disbelieve in a god?

As for fundraisers, you are mistaken. There is none of that at the prayer meetings. But there is very much a whole lot of praying going on! Atheists don't like it? So what? They didn't start this country. We did.

So, you do not believe in equal freedom of religion I see. Get a clue. I'm a US Citizen too and the rights of US Citizens are by the individual, not by the group.

A common set of values doesn't need to be 100% unanimous. The vast majority of our nation has always believed in God (from 1620 and ever since). That is why we are free to define the system this way.

In other words, you do not believe in equal freedom of religion.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.