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.
The U.K.? I'm sorry...I don't see the romanticizing there. Can you explain why that would be "romanticizing"...and "In God We Trust" wouldn't be?
<citation missing>It's all completely under a technicality of something called the 'Lemon Test', derived from a supreme court case a long time ago. It has been something that many justices have not liked, because of the utterly pretentious nature of those who push it.
But when, earlier, when you said that it wasn't illegal, you were wrong.They even forewarned schools, out of compassion, to be prepared to be assaulted by atheists.
All it is, is that if a person prays at a school gathering for example, people with other worldviews cannot be barred from also speaking their worldview. A public place cannot endorse a specific religion.
That's all that it is.
Again with the insults.Perpetuated by a bunch of atheists who just want to conflict religions against each other and get off on a persecution complex by claiming things such as 'irreparable damage to their mental health' because they had to pass by a portrait of Jesus.
Complete nonsense. I love when obvious snakes
Now they are helping to make the schools and public places free of religion.try to cover up their intent, saves me the trouble. Even the name 'Freedom From Religion' is ridiculous- YOU ARE FREE FROM RELIGION BRO, AND ALWAYS HAVE BEEN.
Such violent thoughts you have. Where do you get your morality from?Someone needs to put that on a brick and throw it at them, and then they can go cry about their imaginary chains to religion even more.
Look, it is Libertas, the Roman goddess, on US currency:
"In God We Trust" is romanticizing God. George Washington is divinized on the roof of the Capitol, and 'Creator' is used several times in their historic literature.
Having Darwin on the dollar bill of a country virtually dictated by radical atheist liberals tells all.
Last I checked...it's not as if the U.K. is an atheist majority, and if I'm not mistaken they're removing Darwin and replacing him with someone else in a couple years. Regardless though, what makes you think that placing him on their currency was the decision of atheists?
At the most I think I'd consider it a form of propaganda. Would you have another example?
The UK is not "virtually dictated by radical atheist liberals.""In God We Trust" is romanticizing God. George Washington is divinized on the roof of the Capitol, and 'Creator' is used several times in their historic literature.
Having Darwin on the dollar bill of a country virtually dictated by radical atheist liberals tells all.
Yes, we're very non-religious here but that does not make us atheistic or the way the country is run atheistic.When you take into account that 'majority' is only 53%, and many of them are as 'meh' as they come as far as being Christian, you're not really saying much. Christianity over there seems to largely be progressivism with a Persian death stick on top of it.
And as far as your argument, I'm just going to hereby drop everything I said and say that you aren't doing anything but trying to get around the substantiated fact that atheism and science are strongly correlated. This conversation is a waste of time, I'm right.. I don't need to give you examples of jack just so you can swoop and dodge them.
This is sad.The coming of Christ is the most controversial event in human history. Atheists dismiss him in favor of things which are irrelevant. Dawkins is irrelevant, Hawking is irrelevant, science is irrelevant- it's all only serves as a distraction and a blindfold.
Lol.And as far as your argument, I'm just going to hereby drop everything I said and say that you aren't doing anything but trying to get around the substantiated fact that atheism and science are strongly correlated. This conversation is a waste of time, I'm right.. I don't need to give you examples of jack just so you can swoop and dodge them.
When you take into account that 'majority' is only 53%, and many of them are as 'meh' as they come as far as being Christian, you're not really saying much. Christianity over there seems to largely be progressivism with a Persian death stick on top of it.
And as far as your argument, I'm just going to hereby drop everything I said and say that you aren't doing anything but trying to get around the substantiated fact that atheism and science are strongly correlated. This conversation is a waste of time, I'm right.. I don't need to give you examples of jack just so you can swoop and dodge them.
This is sad.
If you regard the entirety of scientific advancement as irrelevant then honestly, by consequence, you must regard most things in life as such. You're just waiting for the apocalypse to start. You appear to disdain living. How you could be considered pro-life in any way astounds me.
How is this evidence? Unfalsifiability isn´t an evidential forte of a claim - it´s a weakness.Some evidence for a creator is atheists like Richard Dawkins admit we can't rule Him, Her or It out.
This argument would only have some merits if we assumed that the way it happened was intended. Which would render it circular.I feel if you consider the kind of odds that would have to play out from the big bang to present time to make DNA just by natural processes is really too hard for it to happen like that.
You are entitled to your metaphysical hopes and wishes - none of my business.There is probably a creator and we are not made to know if there is a Heaven or a Hell, but I definitely hope there is justice in the end for all humans.
So what are your thoughts on this?
Some evidence for a creator is atheists like Richard Dawkins admit we can't rule Him, Her or It out.
I feel if you consider the kind of odds that would have to play out from the big bang to present time to make DNA just by natural processes is really too hard for it to happen like that.
There is probably a creator and we are not made to know if there is a Heaven or a Hell, but I definitely hope there is justice in the end for all humans.
So what are your thoughts on this?
Eh?When it comes to God, it is irrelevant, because science can only deal with the physical universe. What is sad are so many people dismissing God on account of something that is incapable of dismissing Him. What's even sadder is nonsense you just posted intending to be accurate.
Christianity is the one religion atheists aim at. It is what other religions aim at. It is the history of the society you live in. Christ changed the world.
But nice job trying to downplay it to your ordinary, day to day life. You came here to be against Christianity, I don't labor under any delusion that all of you came here out of some interest in Christianity.
That might be true if Christianity were the only form of theism, but it's not.Without Christianity, Atheists wouldn't even exist .....
In line with your reasoning here, perhaps Christians are only there to test Muslim belief, to make it strong? Think about it...?They are there to test Christian belief, to make it strong
I have seen, non-believers convincing believers, that their faith in God is valid
Think about it ..... ?
That is, obviously, false. Just think for a second... I am certain you will find the mistake.Without Christianity, Atheists wouldn't even exist .....
I have to admit that I have never seen it in the way you describe it. Some believers use the "you wouldn't argue against my beliefs if they weren't correct" argument. If such a logic makes you think your faith is valid... well, good luck to you.They are there to test Christian belief, to make it strong
I have seen, non-believers convincing believers, that their faith in God is valid
Think about it ..... ?
Some evidence for a creator is atheists like Richard Dawkins admit we can't rule Him, Her or It out.
I feel if you consider the kind of odds that would have to play out from the big bang to present time to make DNA just by natural processes is really too hard for it to happen like that.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?