Skip to main content

If the Founding Fathers had wanted religion to not be a part of government, they would have not had prayers at the initial confessional meetings. Today, every session of Congress and the Supreme court meetings begins with a prayer. The Founder fathers were not atheist but consisted of a diverse group of different religions who intended to keep religion in government, but you had your choice of which religion you wanted to be affiliated with.

Originally Posted by Bob_White:

If the Founding Fathers had wanted religion to not be a part of government, they would have not had prayers at the initial confessional meetings. Today, every session of Congress and the Supreme court meetings begins with a prayer. The Founder fathers were not atheist but consisted of a diverse group of different religions who intended to keep religion in government, but you had your choice of which religion you wanted to be affiliated with.

_________________________________

 

This is my favorite because the fundies can't try an interpret it to mean something it does not.

 

Treaty of Peace and Friendship Between the United States and the Bey and Subjects of Tripoli of Barbary, 1796-1797

As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion--as it has itself no character of enmity against the law, religion or tranquility of Musselmen [Muslims], ... ("Article 11, Treaty of Peace and Friendship between The United States and the Bey and Subjects of Tripoli of Barbary,"

 

 The Founder fathers were not atheist but consisted of a diverse group of different religions who intended to keep religion in government, but you had your choice of which religion you wanted to be affiliated with.

 

 

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

 

If you "had your choice" but they intended to keep religion in government, who decided which religion was to be kept in government? Just how would that work? They felt, and rightly so, that religion had no place in government.  Sometimes people confuse the argument to think atheists are saying that they wanted NO religion at all. I'd argue that our "founding fathers" were way more tolerant of different religions and non-belief than the christians of today. Why do atheists post on a "religion" forum is the question ask a hundred times and answered a hundred times. This is one reason. We were intended as a country that would practice tolerance but we have/had groups that don't like that so it changed over the years to christians having free reign to use religion to oppress and discriminate against people that didn't believe, or didn't believe the way they think they should. It's time that changed.

Originally Posted by Bob_White:

 

_________________________________

 

Article 11 of that treaty is very controversial. Of course, non believers want to skew it to mean that the US was denouncing religion altogether, when in fact what is means is that religion would not be a basis for war. Good try though.


No that is NOT what non-believers want it to mean. It means that this country, once again, was not founded on religion and even though the people were religious they were saying that they were not so rabid about it that they'd fight wars over it. But we all know where that went.

Originally Posted by DarkAngel:
Originally Posted by Infomercial:
Originally Posted by Not Shallow Not Slim:

The brainwashed fundies like lexum/Rram/Buff cannot imagine the reality that the Universe exists on its own terms, knowable to us all, and is irrespective to the gods we humans have invented.

 

I pity them.  Still, I do not tolerate them, as they are dangerous.  Their eschatological opinions are a serious threat to the survival of mankind and other species.

They are 400 years behind the times, yet enslaved to an even more ancient superstition.  The time is now to break this evil and counterproductive cycle of magic thinking.  There is no magic, just a scam that insists that it's real. 

 

Jeremy Green is more of a prophet than Jesus.  It's time to wake up.  It's time to grasp reality for what it is, not what we'd prefer it to be.  Do it now.

 

DF

 

 

 

From what I've read Jeremy Green is a liar at best who can't hold a job and lives with mommy and daddy. Not a prophet. Yes, I'm a fan of SS, but they really should have checked his "MBA" if she/he wanted to get a scoop. I don't think his latest stunt will win him any jobs in the area.

_____________________________

 

He has a job remember? First SS got the part about his education wrong, then she lied about his employment. Since he does consultant work for Google I seriously doubt his job is in any kind of danger due to the crackpot Christians and their ravings here in our backwards little town. Many people who are educated and work in the web industry work from home. Its called trans-commuting or working remotely. After the worldwide exposure he got from this brave act, I am sure there will be many more opportunities open up to him. If I were him I would not want to work for any local businesses. He can do so much better. 

 

Also I am not so sure about the prophet thing....he said this would be the outcome and he was right!

 

 

I assume that was directed at me. He says he has a job, but we know it isn't with Google, so he lied on his FB page. I know someone who knows him and says he can't hold a job due to his "problems." I think SS or anyone else can just google his job description and see that he is a sub contractor. I suppose he's a friend of yours. Good that you stand up for him, but please don't lie for him.

 

It doesn't take a prophet to know the school board will uphold the law. Anyone from Joe Blow the garbage man to Mayor Irorns could have called the board on this and "won." The school board was breaking the law. My two kids go to Florence city and as far as I know haven't had prayers at games in years. Just don't make a hero of a liar.

I assume that was directed at me. He says he has a job, but we know it isn't with Google, so he lied on his FB page. I know someone who knows him and says he can't hold a job due to his "problems." I think SS or anyone else can just google his job description and see that he is a sub contractor. I suppose he's a friend of yours. Good that you stand up for him, but please don't lie for him.

 

 

Odd that you would know someone that knows him so well that they can not only speak personally of mr. green's life and say he has problems, and feels comfortable enough with you to tell you things about mr. green.  To me it sounds like someone wanting to make himself or herself important for a few minutes.  When a person is doing work for any company, google or whatever, that is who they are working for. It doesn't matter how they came to be there.

Infomercial,

I can't conjure a more thread bare and ridiculous personal attack on someone than the one you've mounted and held against Mr. Green. I mean seriously, his personal life is somehow objectionable to you? And that's germane to any of this exactly how?


He's a patriot. Taking personal risk to uphold  the Constitution, where others have looked away from illegal behavior for decades. You agree he's right about the law, so what exactly is the problem?

Originally Posted by Infomercial:
Originally Posted by DarkAngel:

From what I've read Jeremy Green is a liar at best who can't hold a job and lives with mommy and daddy. Not a prophet. Yes, I'm a fan of SS, but they really should have checked his "MBA" if she/he wanted to get a scoop. I don't think his latest stunt will win him any jobs in the area.

_____________________________

 

He has a job remember? First SS got the part about his education wrong, then she lied about his employment. Since he does consultant work for Google I seriously doubt his job is in any kind of danger due to the crackpot Christians and their ravings here in our backwards little town. Many people who are educated and work in the web industry work from home. Its called trans-commuting or working remotely. After the worldwide exposure he got from this brave act, I am sure there will be many more opportunities open up to him. If I were him I would not want to work for any local businesses. He can do so much better. 

 

Also I am not so sure about the prophet thing....he said this would be the outcome and he was right!

 

 

I assume that was directed at me. He says he has a job, but we know it isn't with Google, so he lied on his FB page. I know someone who knows him and says he can't hold a job due to his "problems." I think SS or anyone else can just google his job description and see that he is a sub contractor. I suppose he's a friend of yours. Good that you stand up for him, but please don't lie for him.

 

It doesn't take a prophet to know the school board will uphold the law. Anyone from Joe Blow the garbage man to Mayor Irorns could have called the board on this and "won." The school board was breaking the law. My two kids go to Florence city and as far as I know haven't had prayers at games in years. Just don't make a hero of a liar.

______________________________

 

Show me where I lied? Yes he is a friend and a very nice guy. The personal attacks that you and SS have launched at him reflect more on your own characters than his. Anytime I here someone say "I know someone that knows him and they said" I stop listening. That is just hen house gossip.

 

I was making a joke about the prophet bit. Oh wait...aren't you the one that can't get a grasp of how to use the emoticons? That would explain the misunderstanding I guess. The difference between Joe Blow, Mayor Irons, or you for that matter, and Mr. Green is that he actually had the guts to stand up and do something about those that were breaking the law. Mr. Green did not lie, doesn't really matter what he does for a living or where he lives though. Apparently you have nothing better to do than to spread gossip and innuendo about someone you don't personally know. What does that say about you info? He is the hero you wish you were.

You may take shots at Jeremy Green's job, it does not matter.  If it had not been him, it would have been Joe Blow, or Mary Palooka, or Charlemagne Gonzales.  The matter remains the same, public prayer in Jesus' name is inappropriate.  Jeremy was simply the patriot who stepped forward.  He is the man who is willing to take the arrows of the superstitious and UnAmerican until the righteousness of his actions sink in.

 

Let's say, for the sake of argument, that Jeremy is a totally unsavory person.  By the way, he is nothing of the sort.  However, taken that he is... so what?  He STILL has a point.  Ad hominem attacks simply demonstrate the inability of his detractors to present a reasonable argument based on the issue at hand.  Every ad hominem attack on Jeremy is an arrow in his quiver.

 

Criticize his arguments--fair enough.  Criticize the man--you lose.

 

DF

Originally Posted by lexum:

Further: Mr. Valentine needs to clarify why his decision that county school employees should not involve themselves in public prayer should not be seen as a threat of persecution.

****

 

Mr. Valentine's order appears clear:  "Effective immediately, football games are not to be opened with a prayer that is in anyway led, directed, organized, or encouraged by Lauderdale County Board of Education employees."


School employees who disregard this instruction will in all likelihood be disciplined in some manner for insubordination, and they should be. Discipline is NOT "persecution." The order does not prevent employees from individually praying in a manner that is NOT associated with leading, directing, organizing, or encouraging religious expression at football games or other official school activities.

 

Too many of you deranged wingers are quick to classify anything that interferes with your unconstitutional notions of theocracy as "persecution."  Your freedom to practice your religious  beliefs is greater in this nation than anywhere else on earth. Whadda ya want?  An egg in yer beer?

Originally Posted by Not Shallow Not Slim:

You may take shots at Jeremy Green's job, it does not matter.  If it had not been him, it would have been Joe Blow, or Mary Palooka, or Charlemagne Gonzales.  The matter remains the same, public prayer in Jesus' name is inappropriate.  Jeremy was simply the patriot who stepped forward.  He is the man who is willing to take the arrows of the superstitious and UnAmerican until the righteousness of his actions sink in.

 

Let's say, for the sake of argument, that Jeremy is a totally unsavory person.  By the way, he is nothing of the sort.  However, taken that he is... so what?  He STILL has a point.  Ad hominem attacks simply demonstrate the inability of his detractors to present a reasonable argument based on the issue at hand.  Every ad hominem attack on Jeremy is an arrow in his quiver.

 

Criticize his arguments--fair enough.  Criticize the man--you lose.

 

DF


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

 

Is it just me or did one certain "loudmouth" drop this subject like a hot potato?

Originally Posted by Contendah:
Originally Posted by lexum:

Further: Mr. Valentine needs to clarify why his decision that county school employees should not involve themselves in public prayer should not be seen as a threat of persecution.

****

 

Mr. Valentine's order appears clear:  "Effective immediately, football games are not to be opened with a prayer that is in anyway led, directed, organized, or encouraged by Lauderdale County Board of Education employees."


School employees who disregard this instruction will in all likelihood be disciplined in some manner for insubordination, and they should be. Discipline is NOT "persecution." The order does not prevent employees from individually praying in a manner that is NOT associated with leading, directing, organizing, or encouraging religious expression at football games or other official school activities.

 

Too many of you deranged wingers are quick to classify anything that interferes with your unconstitutional notions of theocracy as "persecution."  Your freedom to practice your religious  beliefs is greater in this nation than anywhere else on earth. Whadda ya want?  An egg in yer beer?

==================================================

vailed threat of percecution plain and clear contendah. Valentine is in direct violation of the U S Constitution. let me remind you of what it says:

Amendment 1 - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression. Ratified 12/15/1791. Note

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.

 

let me point out to you Contendah:

1. there is no law respecting an ESTABLISHMENT OF RELIGION

2. Mr. Valentine has in violation of the US Constitution sought to prohibit the free execercise of religion on the part of employees and in doing so affected the freedom of exercise on the part of citizens who elected him. He is sworn to uphold the Constitution and is in violation of that trust.

 

contenda if you cant see that plain and simple you simply just don't want to. Don't dig yourself any deeper in error than you already have. eating crow may not be to your taste.

 

on behalf of truth i demand you recant your poisition. [new word for the day]

Originally Posted by lexum:
Originally Posted by Contendah:
Originally Posted by lexum:

Further: Mr. Valentine needs to clarify why his decision that county school employees should not involve themselves in public prayer should not be seen as a threat of persecution.

****

 

Mr. Valentine's order appears clear:  "Effective immediately, football games are not to be opened with a prayer that is in anyway led, directed, organized, or encouraged by Lauderdale County Board of Education employees."


School employees who disregard this instruction will in all likelihood be disciplined in some manner for insubordination, and they should be. Discipline is NOT "persecution." The order does not prevent employees from individually praying in a manner that is NOT associated with leading, directing, organizing, or encouraging religious expression at football games or other official school activities.

 

Too many of you deranged wingers are quick to classify anything that interferes with your unconstitutional notions of theocracy as "persecution."  Your freedom to practice your religious  beliefs is greater in this nation than anywhere else on earth. Whadda ya want?  An egg in yer beer?

==================================================

vailed threat of percecution plain and clear contendah. Valentine is in direct violation of the U S Constitution. let me remind you of what it says:

Amendment 1 - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression. Ratified 12/15/1791. Note

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.

 

let me point out to you Contendah:

1. there is no law respecting an ESTABLISHMENT OF RELIGION

2. Mr. Valentine has in violation of the US Constitution sought to prohibit the free execercise of religion on the part of employees and in doing so affected the freedom of exercise on the part of citizens who elected him. He is sworn to uphold the Constitution and is in violation of that trust.

 

contenda if you cant see that plain and simple you simply just don't want to. Don't dig yourself any deeper in error than you already have. eating crow may not be to your taste.

 

on behalf of truth i demand you recant your poisition. [new word for the day]

****

Demand all you wish, lexum; there is no reason for me to recant anything. "Free exercise" is not a concept that must be enfleshed within  sectarian public actions of governmental authorities in order for the First Amendment to have practical validity.  Your concept of free exercise is intolerably expansive and wholly out of line with a whole string of judicial decisions applying to the First Amendment.  You and others who will simply not face up to this fact, continue to serve up your simplistic and wrongheaded guardhouse lawyer drivel in support of your untenable positions. You are on the losing side, plain and simple.  You are hereby ordered to CEASE and DESIST!!!

By the way Dfat, I’ve been meaning to respond to a post of yours a few days back where you referred to me as a “fundie: be ye not deceived DF I consider it a compliment to be called a “fundie”.

 

I figure with my command of all disciplines of learning it should be a goal of yours to be one.

By the way +1 DF what is the metric upon which you declare someone a fundie?

 

I’ll bet you don’t know.

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×