• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Pledge Unconstitutional

Originally posted by oncewaslost


evolution is studied way more than creationism. not a word is breathed about creationism. odd, don't you think?

Not at all. Would you replace Sex Ed with "Stork Theory" too?

Read my earlier post. Evolution is a valid scientific theory. If you know any school where they're representing it as scientific fact you should report them. It's a leading theory and as such belongs in any curriculum that has any science in it whatsoever.

   Jeff

 
 
Upvote 0
Originally posted by Not Prince Hamlet
 


Great. Now explain to me how you would interpret "under God" to mean "under no God". (This ought to be good.) 
"

 

I know 2 different atheists who have for many years opted out on the 2  words 'under god' during pledges.  They have no problem doing so, nor are they offended that anyone else says the 2 words.

I don't see a problem with this in the slightest.

 

Or----

 

In a person's own mind, 'under God' could possibly mean 'whatever the origin of the universe is......'      

----------------------------------------

 

Again, I don't care if they change the pledge.  Change away.  it's not going to change my beliefs or threaten me in the slightest.  I am just weighing in with my opinion.
 
Upvote 0

John,

 Yeah, that's not a very convincing interview. I can't determine what exactly happened from that one. Please do post more articles on that, if you can.

 I for one don't think anybody should be forced to march in any parade whose values do not represent your own. If he forced homophobes to march in the parade, then in my opinion, he was wrong to do so.

    Jeff

 
 
Upvote 0
Originally posted by Not Prince Hamlet


I am an atheist. I am excluded by the act. Ergo, the act is disenfranchising at least one person. Q.E.D. 

 

Oh gee, out of millions of people, one may be offended.   When does the constitution ever guarantee that this would not happen?
 
Upvote 0

This is what's called "anecdotal evidence". Your friend may claim to have met Elvis at the supermarket. Doesn't prove a thing.



I don't see a problem with this in the slightest.


And like I said, I can see why. Majority rules is great when you're the majority.



In a person's own mind, 'under God' could possibly mean 'whatever the origin of the universe is......'      


You've got to be kidding me.

   Jeff

 
 
Upvote 0
Originally posted by MyJhongFist


 

Oh gee, out of millions of people, one may be offended.   When does the constitution ever guarantee that this would not happen?

I wasn't making a case for numbers there. I was simply disproving your blanket statement with a counterexample. You said that nobody was disenfrancised and I showed you that at least one was, thus showing your statement to be false.

Now, if you want to start talking numbers, that's an entirely different matter. Have I mentioned that majority rules is great if you happen to be the majority? 

   Jeff

 
 
Upvote 0
Originally posted by Not Prince Hamlet




You've got to be kidding me.

   Jeff

 

 

Once again, you are underestimating the human mind's capability to correlate a pre rehearsed speech into their own ideology.

 

As stated before, I have no problem transferring Buddhist or Taoist koans to Christian prayers.  Does that make me special????  Nope.  Just open minded.
 
Upvote 0
Originally posted by MyJhongFist


 

Once again, you are underestimating the human mind's capability to correlate a pre rehearsed speech into their own ideology.


Once again, I don't have a clue as to what the heck you're saying. Can you please paraphrase this?

 

As stated before, I have no problem transferring Buddhist or Taoist koans to Christian prayers.  Does that make me special????  Nope.  Just open minded.

Well, goody for you. Are you suggesting that because you're so wonderfully open-minded, the rest of the whole world might as well shut up if they feel offended because gosh, you're so wonderfully open-minded, and darn it, if you don't care, why should they?

   Jeff

 

 
 
Upvote 0
Originally posted by Not Prince Hamlet





Now, if you want to start talking numbers, that's an entirely different matter. Have I mentioned that majority rules is great if you happen to be the majority?  


 

 

'Majority Rules'  should be fine, regardless of where you stand, if you personally are still allowed to hold your own beliefs.

the majority can say whatever, but I personally will always believe in Christ without being offended by what others say.

Just as you could proudly declare yourself an atheist regardless of what others say. 

I have always thrived on being 'one of those freaks'.....
 
Upvote 0

So, extending your statement, the Nazis were right to exterminate the Jews. The Jews were outnumbered, after all, and they were never told they couldn't continue to believe as they did.

   Jeff

 
 
Upvote 0
Originally posted by Not Prince Hamlet


This is what's called "anecdotal evidence". Your friend may claim to have met Elvis at the supermarket. Doesn't prove a thing. 


 

 

Ahh.. So your contention is that no atheist would possibly, ever just easy-goingly accept that their beliefs are not the norm?
 
Upvote 0
Originally posted by MyJhongFist


 

Ahh.. So your contention is that no atheist would possibly, ever just easy-goingly accept that their beliefs are not the norm?

No, that is my not contention. My contention is that two atheist buddies of yours is not a sufficient sample size to extrapolate the whole of atheist thought. You have not shown that all atheists or even most atheists feel this way. You have shown is that two atheists claimed that they felt this way.

Anyhoo, it's 2 AM and I got stuff to do in the morning, so I'll resume this fun discussion tomorrow.

   Jeff

 

(edited because the typo suggested the exact opposite of what I was trying to say.)
 
Upvote 0

You are going WAAAAAAYYYY out with this point, Jeff.  You are also showing that you are willing to equate me with a NAZI to keep your own point of view. 

In my hypothetical scenario, people are allowed to believe whatever,  WITHOUT the fear of death or persecution.  However you change that into executing those who disagree?  

How do you draw that correlation? 

Nazis loathed dissention.  I however love people who challenge my point of view.  That's what is so great about America.

 
 
Upvote 0

TheBear

NON-WOKED
Jan 2, 2002
20,653
1,812
✟312,481.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private


Fox News/AP - Friday, March 01, 2002

PROVIDENCE, R.I. — Firefighters who were allegedly forced by the city government to ride in a gay pride parade last year despite religious and moral objections are threatening to sue unless officials make participation in future parades voluntary.
Last June, members of Engine Company No. 7 rode on an engine through downtown Providence as part of the privately-run parade. The fire department's policy is to send personnel and equipment to public events whenever requested to do so, provided they can be spared, according to Fire Chief James Rattigan.

Steven Brown, executive director of the state American Civil Liberties Union, wrote a letter to Rattigan that "[a] number of firefighters apparently objected to this assignment, having sincere moral and religious objections to being in such a parade." Their objections were ignored, according to Brown.

Brown, on behalf of three of the firefighters participating in the parade, demanded a promise from city officials that only willing volunteers would be asked to participate in the future.

"If they're not willing to give that assurance, then we'll have to consider litigation," Brown said later.
City Solicitor Charles Mansolillo sent a reply on Friday, but that reply did not indicate any change in policy.
The firefighters' desire not to participate in the parade should not be interpreted as anti-homosexual prejudice, Brown said.
"The fact that they are not supporters of gay rights doesn't mean that they're not going to put out a fire at a gay person's home," Brown said.
"They're professionals and they're asking to be treated as professionals and not be forced to partake in something that has nothing to do with their jobs.

This June will mark the 27th year the parade has been held. Mayor Vincent Cianci Jr. will serve as its grand marshal.
"The department believes that such regular involvement in local and community celebration adds to the whole of the festivities and fosters a public perspective on the fire department and related public safety issues," Mansolillo wrote in his response to Brown's letter.
"Firefighters' inclusion in the parade is generally an important demonstration of community solidarity," Jennifer Levi of the Boston-based Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders said.

Alexis Gorrianan, the mayor's liaison to the gay community and president of the Rhode Island Pride Committee, which runs the parade, did not return a call for comment. The Associated Press contributed to this report.
 
Upvote 0

 

I never said that my personal experience was a scientific survey.  But if two atheists are mature enough to feel this way, why couldn't it be a decent experience to draw a conclusion from?

 As I stated, if the tables were turned, my beliefs would not suffer in the slightest.  Nor would I be up in arms or trying to change the world.

-------------------------------------------------------

Also, you say 'claimed to feel this way'..... Why would they lie?  Perhaps they truly are mature enough to feel this way. 

Maybe they have reached true zen, or whatever....  Do you believe that all atheists should believe as you on this subject, and if they believe otherwise that they are only 'claiming'  different beliefs, all the while truly believing just like you but secretly hiding their agenda???????
 
Upvote 0

Just as a side note, if the tables were reversed, I would gladly die for my belief in Christ.

But I, nor anyone else has suggested it, as of yet.
 
Upvote 0

seebs

God Made Me A Skeptic
Apr 9, 2002
31,917
1,530
20
Saint Paul, MN
Visit site
✟70,235.00
Faith
Seeker
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Originally posted by MyJhongFist

I never said that my personal experience was a scientific survey.  But if two atheists are mature enough to feel this way, why couldn't it be a decent experience to draw a conclusion from?

"Mature" or "despairing"?

Personally, I think telling people to swear using God's name, when they don't believe, is about as far from good as you can easily get. It's essentially *DEMANDING* that they blaspheme; why not add a couple of crude jokes about Jesus while we're at it?

No one should ever be compelled to make a statement he doesn't believe in. I'd rather see those of us who believe in God remain aware that, not only this country, but this world, and indeed, this *universe* are "under God", and let the people who have doubts swear to the country, alone, if they wish.
 
Upvote 0