Prayer complaint puts city in hot seat
Council likely to alter invocation
By Mike Wiggins, The Daily Sentinel
Published June 10, 2008 at 7:17 p.m.
GRAND JUNCTION — The city's long-standing practice of starting meetings with prayers might be challenged in court by an atheist group.
Western Colorado Atheists has asked the City Council to eliminate, or adopt alternatives for, the invocations given at the start of its Monday meetings, alleging they violate the establishment clause of the First Amendment. The group also claims that the prayers are proselytizing and overtly Christian, and discriminate against other faiths.
Grand Junction City Manager Laurie Kadrich said this week that she is "certain" the city will modify the way it conducts prayers at the beginning of City Council meetings, though it remains to be seen what form that change will take.
"It's not a compromise," Kadrich said. "It's 'What's the legal situation we're in today and what's the best recommendation to the council?' "
Western Colorado Atheists has hinted to the city that it may file a lawsuit if the City Council stands pat on its invocation policy.
For more Daily Sentinel coverage, click here.
June 11, 2008
5:30 a.m.
Suggest removal
yaakovwatkins writes:
Congress has had opening prayers since the beginning of the country. The state legislature has opening prayers. In 1983 the Supreme Court ruled it legal. This is not an issue.
June 11, 2008
5:45 a.m.
Suggest removal
jr_mcmillin writes:
Atheist group wants the council to: "Issue a policy letter to the Grand Junction Ministerial Alliance asking that it be as inclusive and multidenominational as possible in selecting clergy for invocations, and that the clergy give only nonsectarian prayers containing no reference to specific deities." In other words, limit your freedom of speech to suit us, or we'll take you to court. Both the council and GJMA should stand pat with their current practice. I fail to see a problem with an organization asking for guidance in making wise decisions. My guess is next they'll want the local AA chapter to modify their program. After all, AA is a Christian based program.
June 11, 2008
7:23 a.m.
Suggest removal
JLS writes:
Seems reasonable to me to ask that the prayer not be focused on a specific religion. It should be general, and not invoke specific deities... BTW that is how the US Congress conducts it's "approved" prayer.
June 11, 2008
7:34 a.m.
Suggest removal
RegusPatoff writes:
The real irony here is that the atheist group is asking the government to step in and make a law against practices (freedom of religion and freedom of speech) that are protected from government interference. See the real problem? Doesn't "free exercise thereof" apply to the citizens serving on the City Council if THEY so choose to pray voluntarily? If there are non-Christians serving on that council, there is NOTHING stopping them from either not participating or offering up prayers consistent with their beliefs.
Amendment I
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."
Folks, this is a democracy, where 50.1% gets to make the rules... and if the folks actually serving on the City Council in Grand Junction are okay with the opening prayers, then outside groups need to sit down and shut up. This, along with most other claims disguised as "imposing Christianity on others" is NOT a violation of the First Amendment, but it is an issue of abusing the First Amendment. To my knowledge, there have never been any laws made by a Federal or State Congress that violate the First Amendment EXCEPT those that say that prayer cannot be conducted by a government group or agency. See, Grunt, THAT works both ways too.
June 11, 2008
7:38 a.m.
Suggest removal
LingLingfor_prez writes:
Atheist groups offend me. Hold the prayer in a side room? Why don't the atheists go to a side room? There can be reasonable guidelines without going overboard here.
June 11, 2008
7:46 a.m.
Suggest removal
Art writes:
RegusPatoff has it wrong. This is not a democracy where 50.1% gets to make the rules. It is a republic where everyone's best interests are to be served. If it were a democracy as RP thinks then we would still have segregated rest rooms and laws against inter racial marriages. We need to remember that we have to protect the minority from the tyranny of the majority. Your religious beliefs can not be forced down my throat.
June 11, 2008
7:48 a.m.
Suggest removal
hogarm writes:
Not only should the Grand Junction city council continue praying, but they also should hire someone knowledgeable about what God wants. Someone like Pastor Hagee. He has taught us that God sent hurricane Katrina to punish New Orleans for a homosexual parade the city had scheduled. "If a man also lie with mankind as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death." Lev. 20:13.
We need knowledgeable God-talkers like Pastor Hagee to know when God is serious and when he will let us slide. "And all that have not fins and scales in the seas … they shall be an abomination unto you: … ye shall not eat of their flesh." Lev. 11:9-11. Even though the sections of New Orleans where many of the homosexuals live was largely untouched, and the fishing industry was virtually wiped out. Shrimp and oyster fishing was once a billion dollar industry in New Orleans. So we need Pastor Hagee to tell us when God is serious and when he is kidding.
I’m sure the City Council members who hear voices in their heads know the difference between God’s voice and Satan’s voice. I wonder if they can recognize when Satan is imitating God’s voice?
This is very serious in this part of the country where so many people eat Rocky Mountain oysters. I’m pretty sure they don’t have fins and scales. If we don’t pray for guidance before city business, how will we know?
June 11, 2008
8:17 a.m.
Suggest removal
TC writes:
Matthew 6:5 - 7
And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites [are]: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward
But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly
June 11, 2008
8:22 a.m.
Suggest removal
TC writes:
Grunt
You may have missed the point.
I'm a non-believer. The point is Jesus didn't support public prayer. Read the scripture.
June 11, 2008
8:42 a.m.
Suggest removal
jr_mcmillin writes:
Marine Grunt writes: "Why can't any of you recognize that there are people who are tired of this christian dominated society and with this being AMERICA, we have the right to say "Enough!" Your group has had a grip on this Country for too long and we want to assert our Rights! Any attempt to show ANY Rights that christians do not believe in get this kind of over-reaction!"
I ask you Devil Dog: Since you do have the right to complain about prayer, does that mean we have to blindly accept your complaint and fore go our rights and beliefs? I think not. This country was founded on Christian principles and values. If people want to pray, it's their God given and constitutionally given right to do so. If the city council wants to start their meetings with prayer, it's their constitutional right (Supreme Court 1984) to do so. If atheist do not want to hear a prayer before a meeting starts, it's their right to delay entering until the prayer is over. Also I wonder if, while receiving in-coming, you had a problem with your fire team members praying for God to keep them and you safe? My experience in fire fights is that prayers were always welcomed and never scoffed at.
June 11, 2008
8:47 a.m.
Suggest removal
uskam writes:
Once again, this land was based on freedom OF religion, not FROM religion. Atheists (a term which means against God - my question - if there is no God, why are you against Him?) only make up 14% of the population. 86% have some sort of faith-based values. Hey - 14% - get over yourselves! Don't tell me what not to believe in and I won't tell you what to believe in. I doubt that you could keep that deal because of your internal anger.
June 11, 2008
8:50 a.m.
Suggest removal
Cowboy63 writes:
Oh, oh.. someone got MarineGrunt going on his "sky fairy" rant again!
Actually, every once in a long while I agree with MarineGrunt!
I do think prayers should be offered, but in a separate chamber before the start of business. Those who want to participate can and those who do not don't have to feel "oppressed".
By all means, stay away from any multi-cultural, ecumenical, all-encompassing "spirit" prayers. If that is what the athiests want, give them a separate chamber as well.
Everyone is happy and it all takes place before gov'ment bid'ness.
June 11, 2008
8:51 a.m.
Suggest removal
jr_mcmillin writes:
My bust! Supreme Court 1983.
June 11, 2008
9 a.m.
Suggest removal
Cowboy63 writes:
I wonder if the Athiests lodging the complaint even live in Grand Junction?
Usually, this is the anti-Christian travelling road show that scours the country looking for small towns with no budget to handle these kind of lawsuits.
They roll in from NY, LA, or Boulder; threaten costly lawsuits; leave after scaring a bunch of little old ladies; then pat themselves on the back for being so "progressive".
Don't these anti-religious-thought-Nazi's have anything better to do with their time?
June 11, 2008
9:02 a.m.
Suggest removal
TC writes:
Actually uskam, Atheist comes from the root theist or God. Atheist literally means without God. I'm not a Atheist because the very word recognizes God. I'm a non-believer. As such I have absolutely no problem with public prayer. Personally I think it's a good thing. And I agree with Cowboy. Please no new-agey crap. If you're going to pray get ahold of an old timey Baptist or something to do it for God's sake.
June 11, 2008
9:11 a.m.
Suggest removal
Cwillyrun1 writes:
Grunt, your beliefs shouldn't be shoved down other's throats as well. Just because you believe in one thing doesn't mean others have to blindly follow. The right to exercise freedom of speech and freedom of religion is just that, a Constitutional right. During the city council meetings, they are not practicing religion or forcing it on anyone. It's a prayer before the city council meeting starts, so it's not an issue of it being during meeting time. Government cannot discriminate and prevent members from saying a prayer since it would violate freedom of speech and freedom of religion. Even the U.S. Supreme Court has determined that discriminating against religious groups or beliefs is unconstitutional. For example, a school that allows clubs to use school property for meetings would also have to allow religious clubs the same freedoms. Grunt, I think you need to learn more about the Constitution and about freedom of speech. Freedom of speech isn't something that only works for you in a way that you want it to. What a friggin' crybaby!
June 11, 2008
9:12 a.m.
Suggest removal
PonchoVia writes:
If you like religion in gvernment go live in a country where the government is a theocracy. The Mideast has lots of them to choose from. Enjoy! But keep your irrational ghost worship out of the US government. Thanks.
June 11, 2008
9:14 a.m.
Suggest removal
Cowboy63 writes:
TC -
I respect your position and admire your post.
I couldn't agree more. Either believe or not and let the other guy do what they want in their own sideroom.
Leave the new-agey stuff behind and get on with the business at hand. These people have better things to deal with.
June 11, 2008
9:25 a.m.
Suggest removal
Cowboy63 writes:
PonchoVia - Do you really think you live in a Theocracy?
Like I've said to every Athiest I talk to - Believe, or don't believe in whatever you want. Just spare me the flailing around about Theocracy and the church running your life.
Why do you guy always have to start in with the ridiculous "sky fairy", "ghost worship" remarks?
It just makes your position look weak and feeble-minded if all you can do is name-calling.
June 11, 2008
9:28 a.m.
Suggest removal
Steph writes:
I, for one, would like to know the point of praying before a meeting? What is that supposed to accomplish? Same thing with swearing on a bible before giving testimony. People are still going to lie and look out for their best interests whether they involve god or not. Besides, if you're asking for guidance from god, why do you have to ask him? Shouldn't he know that already?
IT's incredible what so many people will believe.
June 11, 2008
9:30 a.m.
Suggest removal
sqjnk writes:
i want to start a session of the city council with a prayer to the omniscent one, he whose noodley appendages stretch across time and space. I'm of course speaking of the one and only true deity...the flying spaghetti monster. may he bless us all with noodles cooked just right and may we bask in the glory of his saucy goodness. amen
June 11, 2008
9:35 a.m.
Suggest removal
jr_mcmillin writes:
Cwillyrun1......... Nice post! All I'll add is: DITTO
June 11, 2008
9:36 a.m.
Suggest removal
Cowboy63 writes:
MarineGrunt-
First. It's "pray", not "prey".
Second. I AGREE that prayer should NOT have to take place before the entire assembly, but should be available if desired BEFORE government business in a separate chamber.
As far as falling numbers in church are concerned - you should be dancing with glee! This is a sign of the US moving in a post-Christian direction.
Of course, those church numbers are exploding around the World (China, Africa, South America, even Russia) where they have had their fill of the alternative.
June 11, 2008
9:36 a.m.
Suggest removal
fiesty writes:
Okay, I'm not Christian, but even I think this is ridiculous.
1. The prayer is being conducted BEFORE official business is commenced, so the argument of "tax dollars being used for it" doesn't apply.
2. No one is being "forced" to participate or even listen. There is not even any indication of retaliation for those who don't wish to participate. Therefore the argument of being free "from" religion is null and void.
Are you saying that no one is allowed to pray on government property? Or that you can only do so if it is non-verbal? Either way, that is a clear violation of the freedom of religion.
I may not agree with what these folks are doing, but that doesn't mean I have the "right" to take it away from them. Just like I don't have to like what other folks have to say, but have to support their right to say it.
It's easy to support the rights of others when we agree with what they are doing, but not so easy when you don't, is it?
June 11, 2008
9:39 a.m.
Suggest removal
Cowboy63 writes:
So, the Freedom of Speech only extends to the religious sect?
No, but Freedom of Stupidity extends to everyone.
June 11, 2008
9:40 a.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
pjmama and her ilk state that these folks who don't want superstitious beliefs pushed upon them while in a captive audience are "intolerant".
hypocrisy at its finest.
June 11, 2008
9:41 a.m.
Suggest removal
farsidefan writes:
TC, great post from Matthew. Grunt I agree with some of what you say. My solution would be a minute of silence so those that wish to pray may do so silently and then get on with the meeting. If you want to pray go ahead. If not, you have a moment of silence.
I believe more people have been killed in the name of religion than any other cause. Crusades, Inqusition, etc.
Did you know that Colonel Chivington who led the raid at Sand Creek Massacre here in Colorado was actually a Methodist minister ? How about the massacre that the Mormons completed by wiping out the wagon train of homesteaders that were traveling across Utah ?
This continues today with the Islamic Extremeists.
June 11, 2008
9:43 a.m.
Suggest removal
Steph writes:
You're right MarineGrunt. The knee jerk Christian finds it easy to point to the bible to justify their (frequently) un-Christian behavior but seem to have a tough time with the other (more difficult) parts like taking care of the poor, loving your neighbor, etc. If so many Christians practiced what they preach, you would never see another homeless person on the street. Rich Christians would give up large portions of their wealth to help the less fortunate (instead of swindling more and more money out of their ignorant flocks). It's quite clear that they can't even follow the quote from the BIBLE above about not praying in public.
In all fairness, all people are hypocritical to some extent; it's called being human. But wrapping up your hypocrisy in religion or even patriotism must be the greater sin. Disgusting.
June 11, 2008
9:52 a.m.
Suggest removal
Cowboy63 writes:
Steph says - "seem to have a tough time with the other (more difficult) parts like taking care of the poor, loving your neighbor, etc"
Are you serious?!
The Christian Church has founded more schools, more hospitals, and far more charity organizations than any other movement in history.
How many hospitals have the Athiests founded?
What was the name of the hospital YOU were born in?
June 11, 2008
9:53 a.m.
Suggest removal
Domino writes:
RegusPatoff writes:
"Folks, this is a democracy, where 50.1% gets to make the rules... and if the folks actually serving on the City Council in Grand Junction are okay with the opening prayers, then outside groups need to sit down and shut up. This, along with most other claims disguised as "imposing Christianity on others" is NOT a violation of the First Amendment, but it is an issue of abusing the First Amendment. To my knowledge, there have never been any laws made by a Federal or State Congress that violate the First Amendment EXCEPT those that say that prayer cannot be conducted by a government group or agency. See, Grunt, THAT works both ways too."
You have our government completely wrong. There is no tyranny of the majority. In fact, Madison feared this. The rights of the minority (those of the 49.9%) are protected in the American system of government.
June 11, 2008
9:59 a.m.
Suggest removal
Cowboy63 writes:
Different story... same old positions.
To my Christian brothers and sisters out there; keep the faith.
To my athiest brothers and sisters out there; to believe or not believe is your CHOICE. Good luck with that.
June 11, 2008
10 a.m.
Suggest removal
Steph writes:
Yes, Cowboy63. Do you think all the church-created hospitals, schools, etc. would have been created if they weren't bringing in a LOT of money to the Church? If I remember right, ST. Josephs, St. Lukes, et al. have crucifixes in each room and a chapel in the building. Weren't these hospitals all run by nuns when they were formed? I don't know that answer; maybe you can tell me. The point is, these organizations would never have been built if they weren't giving some benefit to the Church. Where in the Bible does Jesus say that he would never give help to someone unless he got something out of it?
June 11, 2008
10:06 a.m.
Suggest removal
sqjnk writes:
"The Christian Church has founded more schools, more hospitals, and far more charity organizations than any other movement in history."
as long as we're throwing out hyperbole...
the christian church has also caused more genocides, destruction of cultures and racism than any movement in history.
there's the problem, religion is a double edged sword, and depending on whose wielding it, it can be used to defend and stand up for what is right, or used to destroy and enslave. christianity, like most religions has done a lot of both.
June 11, 2008
10:09 a.m.
Suggest removal
fiesty writes:
MG- Let's look at your interpretation of having a right as meaning also having the right FROM. Let's use another example. Someone is on the street corner expounding on his religion's beliefs. Does my right of religion, and being free FROM, mean that he no longer has the right of speech and religion? No, particularly when I have the option to WALK AWAY. No one forces me to stand there and listen to him. My right to being free FROM is not infringed upon if I CHOSE to stay there and listen- I am voluntarily relinquishing that right.
There is no difference. You are interpreting that being free FROM means you have the right to impose your right over anyone, anytime, and anywhere. In other words, that your rights supersede everyone else's. And that simply is not so.
Like I said, it's easy to support the rights of others when you agree with them, but no so easy when you don't.
June 11, 2008
10:17 a.m.
Suggest removal
Cowboy63 writes:
Steph - You didn't answer the question:
What was the name of the hospital you were born in?
What was the name of the last hospital you were in?
What is the name of the organization that shows up at every national disaster? (hint: it has a red cross in it's logo)
Just learn how to graciously concede a point when you know it is true. You'll sound a lot more grown-up that way.
June 11, 2008
10:19 a.m.
Suggest removal
fiesty writes:
We're supposed to be discussing the right to speech, not whether religion is beneficial, but...
Part of the reason I left Christianity was precisely because of what is being mentioned on this board:
1. Hypocrisy of Christians and the Church in general. Most Christians I've met espouse one set of ideals, but live another, yet seem to think they so superior than others. It's worse in the Church- popes consorting with prostitutes, priests abusing children, and so forth.
2. Look at the atrocities committed in the name of religion- Crusades, Inquisition, forcible conversion of "heathens", etc. If I were Christ, I'd be ashamed of what was done in my name.
3. Christianity has historically been used as a tool to control the masses, and a way to raise money. Look at the medieval period- the church basically WAS the government.
4. Christians interfere where they have no business. For example, birth control has nothing to do with salvation!
I think the harm Christianity has done far outstrips the good. It would be the other way around if Christians would allow for the right of others to live the way they wish. It's one thing to minister to those who are receptive, but quite another to force it down the throats of those who are not.
June 11, 2008
10:24 a.m.
Suggest removal
Cowboy63 writes:
Charles_B wrote - "All you have is your Bible as your "proof"."
Here's a little biblical action for you:
"EVERY knee shall bow and EVERY tongue confess..."
that includes you.
June 11, 2008
10:28 a.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
"To my athiest brothers and sisters out there; to believe or not believe is your CHOICE"
you know it, cowboy, but you're not addressing the lack of CHOICE this captive audience has in regards to listening to others chant about their beliefs in the supernatural.
why is it again that these folks can't go to a taxpayer funded meeting and be free from your religion?
June 11, 2008
10:34 a.m.
Suggest removal
Steph writes:
Cowboy63. I was born in Valley View Hospital in Thornton. I have not been in a hospital since having my tonsils out at Children's. Now, maybe you will be so good as to answer my questions.
The Red Cross does much good work but do you remember how corrupt the upper echelons were during Katrina? Do you know how much money they take in as opposed to how much they put out? Are you really so dim to not realize these are BUSINESSES?
Also, please tell me where it says in the Bible that Jesus would not help people if he didn't receive some $$ benefit from it.
ARe you also aware that groups like Salvation Army offer food and shelter to homeless people BUT ONLY after they've sat through a sermon? They have also worked against liberal groups (including gays).
One last question, Cowboy. When was the last time you gave a sizable amount of money or offered food and shelter to someone standing on the corner of an intersection with a cardboard sign? Be honest now.
June 11, 2008
10:36 a.m.
Suggest removal
Cowboy63 writes:
jay, my man - You should read my earlier posts.
I AGREE WITH YOU. Any kind of prayer (Christian or otherwise) should be done BEFORE any government business and on PRIVATE time in a separate area.
I want to hear about all the traumatic Christian oppression non-believers have suffered in their lives?
(Did some mean old churchlady take you by the ear and make you say, "now I lay me down to sleep..."?)
June 11, 2008
10:39 a.m.
Suggest removal
sqjnk writes:
yo cowboy...i'm not bowing or getting down on my knees. here's some counter questions for you
what religion does the klu klux klan align itself with?
What religion was hitler?
which religion has often used "heathen" as an excuse to murder?
which religion has been paying out millions to those children who were abused while it looked the other way?
"Just learn how to graciously concede a point when you know it is true. You'll sound a lot more grown-up that way."
their is light and dark within all.
June 11, 2008
10:41 a.m.
Suggest removal
Heidi writes:
MarineGrunt, " If atheist do not want to hear a prayer before a meeting starts, it's their right to delay entering until the prayer is over."
Your correct. But, could the christians not do the same? Why must the non-believers leave?"
Actually, anyone who doesn't want to pray or doesn't want to hear it, has the option of being late to the meeting! No one is forcing it down anyone's throat. Or better yet, the prayer session should start 5 min before the scheduled meeting time so it won't be during government business time. They can consider it their potty break.
June 11, 2008
10:41 a.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
"Any kind of prayer (Christian or otherwise) should be done BEFORE any government business and on PRIVATE time in a separate area."
yes...like in homes and/or churches, cars, etc. no need to bring superstitious rituals to a public meeting place. simply not necessary. they are more than welcome to indoctrinate their own friends and children on their own time, in their own homes, churches, cars, backyards, etc.
June 11, 2008
10:44 a.m.
Suggest removal
Cowboy63 writes:
yo, sqjnk - "their is light and dark within all"
First. It's "there", not "their".
"What religion was Hitler?" -
If you think he was a Christian; you might want to know the answer before you ask the question.
June 11, 2008
10:48 a.m.
Suggest removal
Heidi writes:
I like farside's suggestion of just having a moment of silence. Silence is golden....
June 11, 2008
10:48 a.m.
Suggest removal
Steph writes:
"I want to hear about all the traumatic Christian oppression non-believers have suffered in their lives?"
How about the last 7.5 years with an idiot who believes god talks to him daily and has run our country into the toilet?
BTW, you haven't answered my questions.
"Just learn how to graciously concede a point when you know it is true. You'll sound a lot more grown-up that way."
That's clever, coming from a person who believes in fairy tales.
June 11, 2008
10:50 a.m.
Suggest removal
Cowboy63 writes:
MarineGrunt - ???
I concede logical points all the time; like EARLIER IN THIS SAME POST where I agreed with the concept that prayer should not be done on government time.
If you bothered to make any sense (as opposed to your usual rant) you might be taken seriously.
June 11, 2008
10:51 a.m.
Suggest removal
Steph writes:
He hasn't answered my questions either MarineGrunt.
June 11, 2008
10:52 a.m.
Suggest removal
Heidi writes:
MarineGrunt,
I see many posters here that probably agree with me. I guess this is an issue for Grand Junction, anyway.
June 11, 2008
10:52 a.m.
Suggest removal
sqjnk writes:
i do know the answer...
Hitler was a Roman Catholic, baptized into that religio-political institution as an infant in Austria. He became a communicant and an altar boy in his youth, and was confirmed as a "soldier of Christ" in that church.
http://www.infidels.org/library/moder...
Hitler seeking power, wrote in Mein Kampf. "... I am convinced that I am acting as the agent of our Creator. By fighting off the Jews. I am doing the Lord's work." Years later, when in power, he quoted those same words in a Reichstag speech in 1938.
Three years later he informed General Gerhart Engel: "I am now as before a Catholic and will always remain so." He never left the church, and the church never left him.
"Just learn how to graciously concede a point when you know it is true. You'll sound a lot more grown-up that way."
you know what i meant, pointing out gramar mistakes is petty.
June 11, 2008
10:52 a.m.
Suggest removal
Cwillyrun1 writes:
Grunt, your simplemindedness about this subject is really getting old. One thing, it's written in the Constitution, not the Bill of Rights, that a person has the right to freedom of speech (one of the many amendments to the Consitution). Maybe you took the social studies class at Overland with the teacher who was actually covering political science instead of geography!
Nowhere did I say that a particular group doesn't have any rights under the Constitution or the Bill of Rights, but twist it how you may, you still lose out. Freedom of speech is absolute for any group, not just those you wish it to be applicable to. For one, you believe it shouldn't be in your government, and as the "government" goes, it's not. But government contains citizens, and their rights do apply whether you agree with it or not. Again, a simpleminded view on this has failed you. If people like you had their way, we could end up like those in the middle east, where Christians are persecuted for their beliefs and they're not allowed to practice their religious beliefs because it doesn't fit with what one group believes. Nobody is stopping you from practicing your religious beliefs, or lack thereof, so get off the horse and quit trying to dictate your beliefs onto others.
By the way, I'm not religious...... so the generic labeling you're trying to apply to everyone who doesn't agree with you isn't working. Quit being so sensitive and whiny!
June 11, 2008
10:55 a.m.
Suggest removal
Cowboy63 writes:
Steph - said "How about the last 7.5 years with an idiot who believes god talks to him daily and has run our country into the toilet?"
That's the extent of the tortuous Christian oppression you have to offer?
(btw: haven't the democrats been in control of the house and senate the last two years?)
June 11, 2008
10:56 a.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
cowboy...are you really trying to say that christians don't oppress folks?
June 11, 2008
11 a.m.
Suggest removal
fiesty writes:
Charles-B/MG: I work for the gov't, so I'm a little more aware of the rules than are you. First, rights aren't solely reserved to private property- which is why prayers can be conducted on gov't property, such as during senate, military functions, etc. Second, you seem to be missing the fact that it is being conducted PRIOR to the conducting of official business.
Your comparison is apples and oranges. So, if I'm sitting in my cubby at work, I'm not allowed to discuss with a co-worker my beliefs (whether religious or not) during my 15-min morning break (mandated by law)? Just because I work on gov't property? Nope, your rationale doesn't fly. Just because I'm a government employee working on government property doesn't mean I automatically lose all my rights (whether speech or religion) as a private citizen. Even in the military we didn't- they were simply restricted to *the minimum necessary* to avoid conflict with our job. Same applies here.
June 11, 2008
11:02 a.m.
Suggest removal
Cwillyrun1 writes:
Steph, your post at 10:48........ can you elaborate more on how you've been oppressed by religion with Bush in power? How has his religious beliefs interrupted your basic rights, and how has his daily conversations with God oppressed you? What's your definition of "oppression"??
June 11, 2008
11:03 a.m.
Suggest removal
Steph writes:
No Cowboy, that's not the only one I can think of. I just thought, wrongly, that you would get the point. Is the last 7.5 years not enough for you?
OK, how about priests telling me when I was 6 years old that I was going to burn in hell for all eternity if I lie to my parents?
How about constantly begging my family to give them money for people in the Phillipines when the pope could sell off one of his gowns and feed hundreds of people?
How about having been told that if I don't follow the teachings of Christ, that I'm less than a human?
How about Christian families not letting their young children play with my young children because we are not "Christians?" Not to mention that 5 year olds have no concept of this and just feel like they are not good or there's something wrong with them because they're not invited to their playmates parties?
Do you want me to go on?
June 11, 2008
11:04 a.m.
Suggest removal
Cowboy63 writes:
I keep hearing about all the vast evils of organized Christian oppression.
All of the churches I've been in lately are busy organizing bake sales, youth rummage sales, car washes, etc. (All of these have to do with things like raising money to feed the poor and boring stuff like that.)
I must have missed the post in my local bulletin that was talking about the beheadings or synagogue burnings happening this week?
June 11, 2008
11:07 a.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
"All of the churches I've been in lately are busy organizing bake sales, youth rummage sales, car washes," teaching bigotry against gays, etc...
no oppression there...
June 11, 2008
11:09 a.m.
Suggest removal
Cowboy63 writes:
jay - did someone not let you into a church because you are gay?
find a different church, you'll be welcome.
June 11, 2008
11:11 a.m.
Suggest removal
Heidi writes:
Steph, I experienced some of the same things you did growing up. That does not mean all Christians are hypocrits or enjoy instilling fear in others. I have overcome the guilt from the church and don't live in the past. Consider yourself a better person if you can rise above all that.
June 11, 2008
11:12 a.m.
Suggest removal
Cwillyrun1 writes:
Steph, just like every race..... just like both genders...... in religion, there's good and bad people. You have a choice to listen to the good people and avoid the bad people or people you don't agree with. But just because there's some bad people in a certain group doesn't mean labeling everyone in that group the same way is fair or just. It's not.
I have a question..... what do you think about John F. Kennedy as a President?
June 11, 2008
11:14 a.m.
Suggest removal
Cwillyrun1 writes:
Heidi, nice post at 11:11. I completely agree with you. :)
June 11, 2008
11:16 a.m.
Suggest removal
Steph writes:
Okay,Cwillyrun1. Are you a complete fool to have to ask this? HOw about he's done such harm to our country by following his Christian "father?"
How about starting a disasterous needless war killing 4000+ Americans (some of whom I knew) who were only trying to fight for their country? They were the best of the best and he sent them to their deaths needlessly.
How about the economy being in the toilet and paying the prices we are paying for food and oil?
How about opening the door for even more ignorant or crooked Christians to make their voices heard or have positions of power?
How about making this great country a laughingstock across the world?
How about not paying attention to so many warnings about 9/11 and not doing anything about it because he was more concerned about giving tax breaks to the rich? Is there any other reason this administration was initially against a commission to find out what happened? As I said before, all people are human but wrapping your hypocrisy up in a flag or religion is the lowest of the low.
How about the money and power that's been given to Christians over the past 7.5 years to fight gay marriage?
Maybe you can tell me, how come Christians are both pro-life and pro-war and guns?
June 11, 2008
11:19 a.m.
Suggest removal
Heidi writes:
cwilly, your following post almost mirrored mine.
June 11, 2008
11:19 a.m.
Suggest removal
Cowboy63 writes:
MarineGrunt -
"I guess we both suffer form the same illness! I am cool with that if you are!"
That will have to do for now, Bro. I bear no ill will towards you or anyone else I disagree with on this string.
June 11, 2008
11:20 a.m.
Suggest removal
Cwillyrun1 writes:
Grunt, you don't have a right to not be offended. Nobody is stopping you from stating your opinions, so your rights aren't being violated. Freedom of speech means that if a citizen in government decides to practice religion, they can without fear of being persecuted. If someone, like you for instance, decides to practice atheism, you can without fear of being persecuted. Your rights on this subject are the same as anyone else.
June 11, 2008
11:20 a.m.
Suggest removal
Heidi writes:
cwilly, I'll share my cookie with you if MarineGrunt will allow it. Do I have a choice, Grunt, on what kind it is?
June 11, 2008
11:27 a.m.
Suggest removal
Steph writes:
CWillyrun1, you are right about being both good and bad people. I just consider people who try to shove religion down other's throats are bad people. You asked me what oppression I suffered. That's why I told you about the lousy Christians I've met. There are, no doubt, good ones but one never hears of them.
As an earlier poster said, Religion has caused more pain in the history of the world than good. If you've studied the history of religion in teh world, you'll see that people have never stopped killing and fighting other people on the basis that THEIRS is the real god. Once catholics finished fighting the other religions, they started fighting each other (Lutherism, Protestantism, CHurch of England, etc.)
JFK, well let's see. He was a progressive, incredibly intelligent president who was taken out before his time. Had to deal with (once again) religious nuts who were salivating anti-communists. He screwed around with Marilyn Monroe. Was brutally murdered and nobody really knows for sure who or why it happened. More?
June 11, 2008
11:29 a.m.
Suggest removal
fiesty writes:
MG-
1. Being an elected official is no different than being a government employee; once again, it does NOT mean the person automatically loses their rights as a private citizen. Let me explain this again, though you should understand it if you were (or are) in the military. Any right that *conflicts* with their duties is restricted *to the minimum necessary*. For example, though I hate it, a military member can be a member of the Klu Klux Klan, they are simply restricted from participating while they are active duty. In this case of prayer, there simply is no conflict between what is being done by these individuals in their private capacity before they start official business in their official capacity. So, unless you can come up with some justified rationale, the fact that these are elected officials on gov't property is completely irrelevant.
2. You asked "where are you rights on this subject"- the better question might be, why should your rights supersede everyone else's? I asked this before, and you didn't answer. Rights are not unlimited. Yours end where others' begin.
June 11, 2008
11:31 a.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
i'm not gay, cowboy...married and expecting our first...i'm just giving an example of some of the hatred, bigotry and oppression so graciously offered the world on behalf of our superstitious brothers and sisters.
June 11, 2008
11:33 a.m.
Suggest removal
fiesty writes:
Cwillyrun1 - good post @ 1120. Put it quite nicely. Constitutionally guaranteed rights and freedoms should not be confused with the "right" not to be offended (under the guise of "freedom _from_ ...").
June 11, 2008
11:38 a.m.
Suggest removal
Marshdale writes:
50.1% makes the rules. Not really. It takes two thirds majority in the senate to over rule a presidents veto. Second, if laws are passed by a senate majority and signed by the president they can still be overturned by the supreme court if deemed unconstitutional. This why we have checks and ballances in this country so the majority does not always rule. Just because the majority wants something does not always mean they will get it.
June 11, 2008
11:41 a.m.
Suggest removal
Cwillyrun1 writes:
Steph, is President Bush the only one to blame for the way our country is right now? And what, other than your opinion, makes you think it's all because of his religious beliefs?
You talk about soldiers dying needlessly, but who forced those soldiers to join the Army, Marines or any service? They knew it was possible they'd actually have to go fight, that serving in the military meant they might have to put their lives on the line. I wonder, how do you feel about the million + Iraqi citizens that died at the hands of Hussein, or the acid baths one family member would endure to keep the rest of the family in line? While I don't want any soldier to die, maybe you should get a better picture of what the soldiers over there fighting think about it. Some like the idea that they're actually helping people to have better lives. For all the reasons why going to war was flawed, there's also legitimate reasons for being over there. I imagine by your logic, that if you were around when Pearl Harbor was attacked, you'd say we shouldn't go to war because servicemen might needlessly die, and why go to war with Germany when they weren't the ones that attacked American soil!
Maybe you didn't know Steph, but in Europe, there's riots over the price of gas. How is Bush responsible for what's happening there? The price of oil is due to OPEC and oil speculators, not the government. By going to alternative fuels using food products, and with the price of food delivery going up due to oil prices, the economony will be affected.
Steph, why didn't Bill Clinton do something about Osama binLaden when he knew many times where he was at? He could've prevented 9/11 as much as the Bush administration could've. Ollie North, in the Iran-Contra hearings in the late 80's, declared before a Congressional hearing that he was fortifying his house because of concerns about him and his family being killed. As he was ridiculed by the Democratic congressman for that statement, a question was asked who could make him that afraid. He said, "Osama binLaden". 8 years of Clinton in power, and Clinton knew binLaden was a danger. Don't lay it all at the feet of the Bush administration when it goes a lot further back than that!
Can you tell me how there's non-Christians that are pro-life, pro-war and pro-guns? Everyone has different beliefs, and if they don't fit yours, deal with it.
June 11, 2008
11:41 a.m.
Suggest removal
Cwillyrun1 writes:
Heidi........ I'll share that cookie with you! :)
June 11, 2008
11:45 a.m.
Suggest removal
Cwillyrun1 writes:
Steph, JFK was a devout Catholic..... one of the Christians you despise. I think he mixed his religious views in with his responsibility as President.
June 11, 2008
11:47 a.m.
Suggest removal
kbmoney08 writes:
Steph,
You've made some of the best points on this thread.
Christianity is a terrible mental disease. Cowboy will keep on praying and keep getting nothing because prayer is absolutely futile. Christianity should have no place in government whatsoever, and those who think it hasn't affected public policy in the country are ignorant in more ways than one.
June 11, 2008
11:52 a.m.
Suggest removal
Cowboy63 writes:
kbmoney08 writes: "Cowboy will keep on praying and keep getting nothing because prayer is absolutely futile."
How big of you to be the judge of what prayer avails one person or another.
June 11, 2008
11:58 a.m.
Suggest removal
kbmoney08 writes:
Cowboy,
Keep on keepin' on with prayer. Guess I'll see you in heaven? Oh, wait... nope, I sure won't. It's NOT REAL.
June 11, 2008
12:06 p.m.
Suggest removal
Acemon writes:
A lot of so-called traditions are slowly being phased out. We no longer keep slaves. We allow women to vote. The signs proclaiming "No Irish" have disappeared. Spitoons in city hall have vanished. Cigars and cigarettes are no longer puffed during public meetings. We don't burn trash in public. Children don't work in factories. Jews aren't segregated or run out of towns. America is slowly becoming a more enlightened country, step by step. Opening civic functions with invocations is another outdated tradition we can do without. We're a nation of mixed beliefs and having a secular government is a recognition of that, as well as a sign of respect for all people.
June 11, 2008
12:14 p.m.
Suggest removal
Steph writes:
Cwillyrun1, The people who joined the military did so to protect and support this country. Fighting in Iraq is not protecting or supporting this country. Many of them joined after 9/11 only to find themselves sent to a different war that didn't have to be fought. Why didn't we keep going after bin Laden?
Regarding 9/11, why don't you read about the August 2001 PDB and see how clear it was that the terrorists were going to use airplanes to crash into American landmarks. 9/11 happened on W's watch, not Clinton. He was in power more than a year and half before it happened. Can you imagine the Repugs if it had happened during Clinton's presidency????
Bush's religion is responsible because he's said (many times) that he only listens to his Christian "father" and knows that everything he does in "his" service. He's convinced he's right because of this. It's a shortcut to thinking. You need more?
Anyone who would support Bush after what he's done has absolutely no credibility and cares more for their fairytale beliefs than the health of this country. The most heartening thought is that history will be extremely unkind to W and his followers/apologists.
June 11, 2008
12:17 p.m.
Suggest removal
Steph writes:
Cowboy, JFK was indeed Catholic (which, if I remember right, caused quite a stir with non-catholic Christians at the time). He was ALSO an intelligent man and his religion was not the primary reason for his decisions. Unlike a very dangerous idiot that we all know.
June 11, 2008
12:55 p.m.
Suggest removal
davies writes:
steph: "As an earlier poster said, Religion has caused more pain in the history of the world than good."
But is religion always the cause, or just the excuse?
When a man gets drunk watching the Broncos lose, and gets mad and smacks his woman around, is it the Broncos fault? Or, was there something in the booze bottle that caused him to want to beat on her?
Or is he just a mean jerk throwing his weight around, and the alcohol lowered his inhibition, while the Broncos became his excuse: "She deserves it because she should know not to irritate me when the Broncos lose a big game like this."
Most wars are about power, getting power and taking away power; religion is generally a tool that is used to get people to fight in a war for power. And that's all I have to say about that.
June 11, 2008
12:56 p.m.
Suggest removal
Steph writes:
I would also recommend The Commission. It's a new book solely about the forming of the 9/11 Commission and the White House's stonewalling and trying to control what was discovered.
June 11, 2008
1:03 p.m.
Suggest removal
Cwillyrun1 writes:
zweebil....... maybe you should post that comment to MarineGrunt, making the same stupid remedial BS rant before you did. He's the one that said the Bill of Rights and the Constitution are NOT the same. What I said is that the amendment guaranteeing our freedom of speech is in the U.S. Constitution specifically. Try reading the posts, and try really hard to remember who wrote what. It's not that difficult! How do you expect to be taken seriously when you're just a level above Alzheimer's?
Just so you know, labeling me as conservative isn't working because I'm moderate. I'm independant, and believe both Democrat and Republican politicians fail Americans. I can't fault you having Alzheimer's for that mistake, so maybe it's schizophrenia? Either way, you're wrong. Fact of the matter is, Bill Clinton could've done something back then and he didn't. Guess he was too busy porking Monica, right?
June 11, 2008
1:10 p.m.
Suggest removal
Cwillyrun1 writes:
Steph, JFK certainly did inject his beliefs into his responsibility as President. It's just that one is okay when it fits your opinion and the other is not when you don't like the person. If you like reading, read up on that part of Kennedy. I have several books on him I can loan you.
I don't agree with everything Busy does, but since the war in Afghanistan and Iraq started, American soil has not been attacked again by terrorists. What explanation do you have for that?
I wonder.... are you one of the people that deludedly believes the government blew up the twin towers?
June 11, 2008
1:14 p.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
bs alert:
"Just so you know, labeling me as conservative isn't working because I'm moderate. I'm independant"
getting deep in here, cwilly...please try to keep the discussion intellectually honest...or just honest if you can't be intellectually valid.
i find these discussions nearly always take the same course. first, the fundamentalists complain that it's always been this way because we're a "christian nation". after this myth is debunked, the discussion inevitably moves on to the american talibanesque whining that it's "intolerant" not to allow them to push their beliefs in the supernatural on others. once that position has been proven invalid, the superstitious among us always try to take another run at making the ridiculous case that there is no separation of church and state in america.
predictably irrelevant.
June 11, 2008
1:19 p.m.
Suggest removal
sldfkd writes:
Ok, this is getting old. First of all, why should this atheist group care? They claim they don't have a religion, so it's not like praying is offending their religion! If anyone should be offended, it's the muslims, or some other religion that's not being treated exactly like Christianity. If it is offending the atheists, then, quite frankly, they are religious, their religion being anti-religion. Second point: All of you here are treating atheism as if it's the universal "neutral" point. Well, Atheism is far from proven, so at the present moment, atheism is simply another religion, and therefore it should not be given rights different from other religions. I suggest that all the different religions can have their own seperate room to pray in at the beginning of the meeting, and since Christianity is the largest religion, I don't see why they shouldn't have the main room!
But I agree, keep away from all the dumb modern spirit universalism crap.
June 11, 2008
1:25 p.m.
Suggest removal
me2 writes:
I think the non-believers in this particular God are being offered the wrong choices. Participate of keep silent leaves out the best choice there is. While the Christians are praying, the others should loudly sing the words from "Louie, Louie".
If asked to shut up or leave, then religion is truly outed in this example. If their singing is taken as a lack of respect to God then the whole thing becomes about forcing folks to respect old Jehovah and his improbable son.
Pray in the parking lot, or better yet pray in your heads.
June 11, 2008
1:28 p.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
sorry...i also forgot the predictably ridiculous cries of "atheism is a religion!!!"
June 11, 2008
1:40 p.m.
Suggest removal
Cowboy63 writes:
jay writes: "sorry...i also forgot the predictably ridiculous cries of "atheism is a religion!!!""
Atheism is a religion - the religion of Self as God.
June 11, 2008
1:51 p.m.
Suggest removal
me2 writes:
For Marinegrunt. Boy you are a glutton for punishment from the religious ones. I admire your stamina.
Many of us, me included, carry a lump of resentment toward Christian behaviors, especially those that effected us personally. I would love to see them driven to worship only in: their homes, churches, cars, schools, private property, heads, closets and all other non public property.
That is never enough for them; so we get public lead or imposed prayers whenever we let them have an inch.
A moment of silence is okay then? Why? As I mentioned, music is so soothing and uplifting. Why not sing an Irish song during the prayer?
Could it be because of the Christian disapproval that we would see on their pinched little faces? Or the shooshing we would get? or the angry remarks to shut up or leave the room?
I think this is funny, the Christians looking for little tiny puffs of persecution.
June 11, 2008
1:55 p.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
nope...atheism is not a religion...no more than the intolerance of bigotry can be defined as bigotry itself.
nice try though
June 11, 2008
1:56 p.m.
Suggest removal
Heidi writes:
zweivierzwei comes on this thread with a vengeance. But he is making perfectly good sense when he is not hurling creative insults! Very entertaining!
June 11, 2008
1:59 p.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
what do you think the american version of the taliban have been trying to do, toenee?
June 11, 2008
2 p.m.
Suggest removal
rgiscard writes:
Sqjnk:
Ramen!
June 11, 2008
2:02 p.m.
Suggest removal
Heidi writes:
zweivierzwei, actually it was the comments directed to NotCharles_B that I was referring to!
June 11, 2008
2:03 p.m.
Suggest removal
Cowboy63 writes:
Atheism is the Religion of Self.
June 11, 2008
2:08 p.m.
Suggest removal
Cowboy63 writes:
Actually, I'll revise that: Atheism is the worship of self.
June 11, 2008
2:12 p.m.
Suggest removal
P_Denver writes:
Question: How do you know someone’s CHARACTER?
Answer: You observe his/her behavior OVER TIME.
Christians are NOT warmongers. They are NOT haters. They are NOT power-seekers in the secular world. ANYONE WHO CONSISTENTLY BEHAVES THAT WAY IS NOT A CHRISTIAN.
Jesus taught us LOVE, not hate. The only time He showed anything approaching anger was when the moneylenders in the temple defiled it – His Father’s house. He showed love to people of all types, including many categorized as sinners. We are to follow His example. We are to live in the world, but maintain our ethics and values. YOUR SECULAR LAW allows us to do that, and allows us to protest what we consider immoral. It also allows us to try and influence others to vote in support of our values. If we get a significant majority, and the courts agree, we can get laws passed the same as you can.
Christians are taught to love the sinner, but hate the sin. It’s hard, but we try. That’s better than most of you do – you hate us just for being Christians. You insult our intelligence, our faith, and our God. That’s bigotry to the max!
For those folks who will start whipping out the Old Testament – forget it. Jesus lives and He eliminated almost all the old laws, except for the 10 Commandments. He superseded them. I won’t argue it with you. You are free to read it differently, and you’ll be wrong. Too bad.
I submit to you:
- There has NEVER, in modern times, been a single war started by a true Christian. There have been a lot of wars started by self-proclaimed Christians for reasons of political power, influence, and – of course – greed. But NEVER for a truly “holy” reason. This includes a so-called Catholic Hitler, the POLITICAL Catholic-Protestant wars in Ireland, and the POLITICAL war called the Crusades. They were all POLITICAL wars.
- Anyone who starts a war “in the name of Christ” is NOT a Christian, by definition.
- There have been true atrocities committed in the name of various religions – absolutely
- There have also been BILLIONS of small acts of kindness and compassion – mostly unnoted and unheralded – provided by compassionate people in churches, mosques, and synagogues over the millennia.
And – before you start off on “a 2000-year-old fairy tale” let’s check YOUR beliefs by answering one simple question:
Where did everything – all matter and energy in the universe – come from?
And, I want an answer that meets the same scientific standards you would hold us to in answering to our beliefs. None of this “It came from nowhere. It was always there and always will be there. “ PROVE IT, the same as you want us to prove the existence of God.
I’ll save you some typing – YOU CAN’T.
You can only respond the same as us: We have faith. So do you, whether you like it or not. We have faith in God, you have faith in whatever.
That’s FINE with us. Believe what you want. But STOP CALLING US NAMES and insulting our God just because we don’t have the same faith you do.
June 11, 2008
2:12 p.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
"Rather, atheism requires a leap of faith that everything in the universe can and will be discovered and understood through reason. "
not so much. i'm an atheist and simply don't believe in the supernatural.
how is that a "leap of faith"?
June 11, 2008
2:21 p.m.
Suggest removal
Cowboy63 writes:
Man! P_Denver -
When you lay it down... you lay it down STRONG!
June 11, 2008
2:22 p.m.
Suggest removal
Reason writes:
"not so much. i'm an atheist and simply don't believe in the supernatural.
how is that a "leap of faith"?"
This is the funniest thing I've read today.
Believe-to have confidence in the truth, the existence, or the reliability of something, although without absolute proof that one is right in doing so.
Faith-belief that is not based on proof.
Discuss.
June 11, 2008
2:23 p.m.
Suggest removal
Heidi writes:
Yes, zweivierzwei, the more I get to know you, the more I understand you. Balance is the key!
June 11, 2008
2:29 p.m.
Suggest removal
me2 writes:
I`m a Lacacluest and I am getting darned tired of being ignored here with my suggestions that those who disapprove of public prayer lead by an elected person, should sing.
Why should nonbelievers be asked to leave the room, stand silently or go along with this?
Why can`t they sing or recite the periodic table of elements.?
Does no one see any humor in this or am I destined to be the only poster who can offer something different to think about?
June 11, 2008
2:34 p.m.
Suggest removal
Heidi writes:
me2 is a person, too! Everyone quit ignoring me2!
"Why can`t they sing or recite the periodic table of elements.?"
Probably because they are agnostic, rather than athiest, as zweivierzwei differentiated above.
June 11, 2008
2:37 p.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
"Atheism requires, by default, a belief that reason will uncover and understand everything in the universe."
really? who says? you? i will certainly lean towards science to explain the unexplained phenomenon in the universe over bedtime stories about supernatural beings...but you're still not making the case that atheism is a religion.
can't be done.
as i said before...being intolerant of bigots does not make one a bigot. not believing in religion does not make one religious.
as i mentioned before, we see this type of desperate rationalization as part of the predictable progression during these type of discussions...by the way...did we skip the obligatory attempt to say that there is no separation of church and state or did someone already debunk that religious right myth today?
June 11, 2008
2:41 p.m.
Suggest removal
Reason writes:
Religion-a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.
June 11, 2008
2:43 p.m.
Suggest removal
me2 writes:
Heidi, thank you, I used to get such insulting remarks thrown my way. Have I become boring or irrelivent lately?
Just kidding, I post, therefore I am. Libra ergo sum.
June 11, 2008
2:43 p.m.
Suggest removal
Cowboy63 writes:
jay writes: "being intolerant of bigots does not make one a bigot."
Maybe not, but it definitely makes you intolerant.
You're equally guilty of the same close-mindedness you acuse others of.
June 11, 2008
2:45 p.m.
Suggest removal
Spencer writes:
An agnostic is simply someone who believes that all these different religious beliefs are "unknowable". How can anyone argue with that? Can you prove your religious beliefs are true? How can they be anything but belief in the "unknowable"?
June 11, 2008
2:52 p.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
lol...cowboy, fantastic example of the kind of pourous argument about which i'm speaking.
June 11, 2008
2:54 p.m.
Suggest removal
Kinetic1 writes:
Why are we praying anyway?! GET TO WORK!!
June 11, 2008
2:57 p.m.
Suggest removal
Cowboy63 writes:
jay - ???
First. It's "porous", not "pourous".
I don't even think you know what the hell you're talking about anymore.
June 11, 2008
2:58 p.m.
Suggest removal
Heidi writes:
me2,
"I used to get such insulting remarks thrown my way."
This is not the time and place to offend you. Be happy.
June 11, 2008
3:01 p.m.
Suggest removal
Cwillyrun1 writes:
zweebil......... here you go, short bus. This is from Grunt at 9:28 am. I don't believe I have to post it, since you're having a hard time with your mental shortcomings, I'll help you!
("Grunt, I think you need to learn more about the Constitution and about freedom of speech."
Bill of Rights! Bill of Rights is what you were looking for here. Maybe you should take a remedial Social Studies class!!)
Does that help? I mean, if you want someone to read it to you, just ask. You want to talk about credibility, how do you have any when you can't even get this small piece of information correct? I don't think it'd be hard for you to get a helmet and a handicap sitcker! Let's try this, the Constitution is separate from the Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights are the first 10 amendments. They are not one and the same, even if they go together. Is that a good enough explanation for you?
Another thing, don't assume what I am since you are truly clueless. I'm more of a Libertarian than anything, and I believe in less taxes and less government. That automatically disqualifies me as Democrat or liberal since I believe people should help themselves out instead of expecting the government and everyone else to bail them out. That's what Democrats believe in! Republicans and conservatives are for big business, and I'm not really for that either.
I wonder, why should anyone be jealous of Bill's BJ, as you put it? Monica's fat and ugly, and that's what Bill's attracted to (See Hillary Clinton). Maybe that's what you like, but not everyone shares that view. What he did was not take the White House and the Presidency seriously. I mean, it's like a little boy his first time trying to get away with it with his parents downstairs. Regardless, Bill Clinton did NOTHING to get binLaden when he knew where he was at, and please stop with the excuses of why he didn't. Blaming the Republicans is pathetic and typical of liberals and Democrats, just like it is on the opposite side of the fence. As I said, both parties are failing America!
About the atheists and their complaint..... get a life.
June 11, 2008
3:04 p.m.
Suggest removal
O_TRAIN writes:
Me2 - I will use the moment of silence suggested earlier to daydream about what song you are singing. ; )
The belief system I use is the "Golden Rule" - all it requires is personal responsibility.
June 11, 2008
3:07 p.m.
Suggest removal
Ashley writes:
I don't believe there should be a prayer. But I also don't believe all religious folks are the root of all evil. Nor do I believe non-religious people are evil. We're all just people, all believing what we choose. I'll continue not believing in God, and you continue not trying to make me believe in God. Then we can all get along and play nice, yes? Right up there with freedom of religion is separation of church and state. I won't encroach on your right to believe in God if you don't encroach on my government. There will always be people who bleat that religion is going to kill us all, just as there will always be people who wail about an overabundance of the stuff. You can't change it, so let's all just step back and take a breath.
June 11, 2008
3:07 p.m.
Suggest removal
P_Denver writes:
Laugh all you want, jay, but it seems to be true.
You are biased against Christians, because you believe that ALL Christians are bigots, who employ "desperate rationalization" to make their case.
Bias is the belief, bigotry is the action.
It follows then that you totally discount any comment, concern, complaint, or suggestion by a Christian.
Are you saying that you don't believe all Christians are superstitious idiots, worshiping some weird phantom in the sky? Therefore, anything they propose is pure lunacy?
That sure sounds like intolerance to me.
June 11, 2008
3:09 p.m.
Suggest removal
Cwillyrun1 writes:
nice post pajama, the same people accusing Bush's people of taking it away would like to do the same to others.
jay, sorry to burst your bubble, but I vote for whoever I think is the best choice, regardless of party affiliation. You be the sheep for your favorite party, and I won't stop you.
June 11, 2008
3:19 p.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
this is an absolutely ridiculous statement, pjmama:
"Why would anyone want to deny a fellow American their 1st Amendment rights?"
i see a lot of folks who believe that they shouldn't have others' superstitious beliefs forced upon them while in a captive, taxpayer funded audience...but i don't see anyone denying a fellow american their 1st amendment rights.
"You are biased against Christians, because you believe that ALL Christians are bigots, who employ "desperate rati