|
|
| Re: Those atheists are at it again (817469) | |
 |
|
| Home > OTChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 5 of 16 |
||
|
| (818008) | |
Re: Those atheists are at it again |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Jul 28 03:17:55 2011, in response to Re: Those atheists are at it again, posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jul 28 02:57:49 2011. A GOVERNMENT MONUMENT is having a cross erected within, ESTABLISHING Christianity as the religion of this monument.Not AT all. The statement SAYS, "Congress shall pass no law....." COngress is not passing anything. In fact, Congress has nothing to do with it at all, and is not "establishing" anything. It excludes anyone whose religion prohibits entry into a church, which could be any enclosed area marked by a symbol of another religion. It's not a church, and it if bothers you don't stand by it. No one is being excluded. And furthermore, if my religion bars me from entering white colored buildings and the building is white, that's not "the government's" problem either, nor is that anyone else's fault. |
|
|
| (818009) | |
Re: Those atheists are at it again |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Thu Jul 28 03:18:39 2011, in response to Re: Those atheists are at it again, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Jul 28 03:09:06 2011. With Selkirk, that's how it works. |
|
|
| (818010) | |
Re: Those atheists are at it again |
|
|
Posted by Dand124 on Thu Jul 28 03:20:23 2011, in response to Re: Those atheists are at it again, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Jul 28 03:17:55 2011. Not AT all. The statement SAYS, "Congress shall pass no law....." COngress is not passing anything. In fact, Congress has nothing to do with it at all, and is not "establishing" anything.the First amendment has applied to the states since at least the 1930s |
|
|
| (818011) | |
Re: Those atheists are at it again |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Thu Jul 28 03:20:50 2011, in response to Re: Those atheists are at it again, posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jul 28 03:11:48 2011. That's not what he is saying, and you know it. |
|
|
| (818012) | |
Re: Those atheists are at it again |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Thu Jul 28 03:20:53 2011, in response to Re: Those atheists are at it again, posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jul 28 03:11:48 2011. That's not what he is saying, and you know it. |
|
|
| (818013) | |
Re: Those atheists are at it again |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Jul 28 03:21:17 2011, in response to Re: Those atheists are at it again, posted by The Silence on Thu Jul 28 03:14:32 2011. And people ALSO have the first amendment right to speak their minds. SMAZ apparently doesn't believe people should be allowed that first amendment right. Speaking your mind doesn't imply that those same people are going to throw themselves in front of a bulldozer in front of the building either. I should have (and do have) the right to say I don't think it's a good idea that the mosque should be there. That doesn't imply I am going to do anything to stop it. |
|
|
| (818014) | |
Re: Those atheists are at it again |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Thu Jul 28 03:21:59 2011, in response to Re: Those atheists are at it again, posted by Dand124 on Thu Jul 28 03:10:57 2011. now you ask? |
|
|
| (818015) | |
Re: Those atheists are at it again |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Jul 28 03:22:33 2011, in response to Re: Those atheists are at it again, posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jul 28 02:58:13 2011. Correct. And I have a first amendment right to say I don't think that location so close is a good idea. |
|
|
| (818016) | |
Re: Those atheists are at it again |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Jul 28 03:23:10 2011, in response to Re: Those atheists are at it again, posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jul 28 02:59:26 2011. Yes you were. You seem to have been thinking he said one thing, and it appeared to me at least he was saying the opposite of what you thought he was saying. |
|
|
| (818017) | |
Re: Those atheists are at it again |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Jul 28 03:23:50 2011, in response to Re: Those atheists are at it again, posted by The Silence on Thu Jul 28 03:00:34 2011. Yes, that's what I thought too. He missed your point as he seemed to be agreeing with you, but you seemed to be saying something opposite of what he was saying in other posts. |
|
|
| (818018) | |
Re: Those atheists are at it again |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Jul 28 03:24:16 2011, in response to Re: Those atheists are at it again, posted by SMAZ on Thu Jul 28 02:59:28 2011. Your loss. |
|
|
| (818019) | |
Re: Those atheists are at it again |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Thu Jul 28 03:27:38 2011, in response to Re: Those atheists are at it again, posted by The Silence on Thu Jul 28 02:55:31 2011. Once again, the reason for the Fourteenth AMENDment escapes you. |
|
|
| (818020) | |
Re: Those atheists are at it again |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Jul 28 03:27:41 2011, in response to Re: Those atheists are at it again, posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jul 28 03:03:47 2011. No one is refraining you from practicing "no religion". It says "Congress shall pass no law....". That's quite clear. Congress is NOT passing any law here. And I never said people aren't free NOT to have religion. Having no religion means the cross is utterly meaningless to you, so it has no significance any way you look at it, it's two pieces of metal. You have the right to that, just as the government can't stop people from worshiping whatever religion they want to. |
|
|
| (818021) | |
Re: Those atheists are at it again |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jul 28 03:30:03 2011, in response to Re: Those atheists are at it again, posted by The Silence on Thu Jul 28 02:55:31 2011. In it's most basic form, the exact words written on that document, the first amendment clauses that deal with religon only forbids congress from outlawing a religion or selecting a national religion. Everything else is just an interpritation that someone made up, and those can change on a moment's notice. In the past 50 years SCOTUS has changed it's mind 4 times on how to interprite those lines.It's not 1865 anymore. The 14th Amendment incorporates the provisions against state and local government. As for selecting a national religion, that is what they are doing by placing the symbol of a specific religion in a prominent position in the monument to a NATIONAL tragedy. There is nothing there that forbids a popular symbol for hope from tragidy from being displayed in a museum run by a private orgization. Except this is not a private organization. The WTC site is owned by the government (the Port Authority). This is why the cross should continue to be displayed at St. Peter's Church, a private organization (or at least one not part of the government of the United States or of any state). You don't remember those days? just after the towers fell? The fear, the panic and the worry? That cross made people feel better. Did it do that because it was shaped like a cross? adimitly yes, but that's not the point. The point is, it helped to heal. And that's all that matters. That's the problem. You believe that a cross heals. It doesn't. It may heal some, that's why it should be in the possession and display of a private organization and not of the government which is supposed to represent all people. We could argue laws and opinions till we're blue in the face and the bones of our fingers are dust from typing. But that cross helped millions of people, who'd just had thier world shattered, to get back to thier lives. It deseres a place of honor, not as a symbol of a religon, but as a symbol for what it did for people. Nothing will stop it from being a symbol of religion though. As you've admitted, it was only not melted down for scrap because of its shape. Nobody would have seen it and been healed by it if some workers had not noticed the religious implications. That having been said, it was right that it was saved, just wrong that it was not immediately and permanently given to a private organization or house of worship. Maybe you need to think about this from someone else's perspective. I could say the same about you and others. I have a relaitve who was an FDNY fireman. He was lucky enough to have had 9/11 off, but he lost a lot of friends. Heck, he lost half his firehouse. He was an emotial trainwreck for months, and he's still not exactly the person he used to be, and probibly never will be. That's sad. That's all I can say about that, no argument. To simply stand there and raise a high holy stink about the cross is as ingorant and petty as the kind of behavior people like you mock the religous about. I don't mock the religious, except in retaliation to mocking. |
|
|
| (818022) | |
Re: Those atheists are at it again |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Jul 28 03:30:09 2011, in response to Re: Those atheists are at it again, posted by Dand124 on Thu Jul 28 03:10:57 2011. No, where did I say that? I DID say that I thought it was not a good idea for them to build it there, and they should consider other people's thoughts on this and that it is a sensitivity issue because of what happened, who did it, and why, and build it elsewhere.Where does that say I promote the governement getting involved? |
|
|
| (818023) | |
Re: Those atheists are at it again |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Jul 28 03:31:36 2011, in response to Re: Those atheists are at it again, posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jul 28 03:09:47 2011. Because the other pieces of metal aren't these pieces, that at the time, provided comfort to a lot of people. It's as simple as that. You will never have something that comforts 100% of people. |
|
|
| (818024) | |
Re: Those atheists are at it again |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jul 28 03:31:48 2011, in response to Re: Those atheists are at it again, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Jul 28 03:03:41 2011. You completely missed the point of your own hypocrisy. If Buddhists can bring their religious paraphernalia, why can't Christians do the same and not have it provided for them by the government? |
|
|
| (818025) | |
Re: Those atheists are at it again |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Thu Jul 28 03:33:08 2011, in response to Re: Those atheists are at it again, posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jul 28 03:05:54 2011. Yup. The same people who are against burning the Koran or mocking Mohammed should be against atheist billboards that mock religion. I'm fine with atheism. But when they mock a religion, they are no different they are no different than that idiot pastor in Gainesville. |
|
|
| (818026) | |
Re: Those atheists are at it again |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jul 28 03:33:19 2011, in response to Re: Those atheists are at it again, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Jul 28 03:23:10 2011. Only because I didn't bother counting and thought he was talking about the establishment clause. |
|
|
| (818027) | |
Re: Those atheists are at it again |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Jul 28 03:34:16 2011, in response to Re: Those atheists are at it again, posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jul 28 03:11:48 2011. Hahaha, I shouldn't even respond to this, but it's too ridiculous to let go. The statement doesn't match the response, and you are the one with a problem here (meaning your response).No one is saying everyone should be the same religion. You know what? You know that's not what I said, and I am not playing this game. |
|
|
| (818028) | |
Re: Those atheists are at it again |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jul 28 03:34:40 2011, in response to Re: Those atheists are at it again, posted by The Silence on Thu Jul 28 03:01:43 2011. The thing is that if what I say comes to pass, then no one is hurt, but if what you want comes to pass, people are hurt.No one is hurt if the cross remained where it was at the church. People are hurt if it's placed in the memorial. |
|
|
| (818029) | |
Re: Those atheists are at it again |
|
|
Posted by Dand124 on Thu Jul 28 03:34:56 2011, in response to Re: Those atheists are at it again, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Jul 28 03:30:09 2011. I thought you did, and many of the opponents of the mosque did. Didn't the COP candidate for Governor have haveing the government stop the the Mosoque? |
|
|
| (818030) | |
Re: Those atheists are at it again |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Jul 28 03:35:18 2011, in response to Re: Those atheists are at it again, posted by Dand124 on Thu Jul 28 03:20:23 2011. Okay. The State is passing no law..... |
|
|
| (818031) | |
Re: Those atheists are at it again |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jul 28 03:35:56 2011, in response to Re: Those atheists are at it again, posted by Dand124 on Thu Jul 28 03:09:05 2011. That's pretty much false advertising. But not illegal or anything. |
|
|
| (818032) | |
Re: Those atheists are at it again |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Thu Jul 28 03:36:09 2011, in response to Re: Those atheists are at it again, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Jul 28 03:30:09 2011. If cops got rough with a bunch of anti-mosque demonstrators, it would be the one time Dand124 wouldn't call them "pigs". That's how it works. |
|
|
| (818033) | |
Re: Those atheists are at it again |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Thu Jul 28 03:37:05 2011, in response to Re: Those atheists are at it again, posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jul 28 03:31:48 2011. Because we're a Judeo-Christian nation? |
|
|
| (818034) | |
Re: Those atheists are at it again |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Jul 28 03:38:13 2011, in response to Re: Those atheists are at it again, posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jul 28 03:33:19 2011. Right, that's why I said you missed something, as you I knew you really weren't agreeing to what he said based on your other posts. |
|
|
| (818035) | |
Re: Those atheists are at it again |
|
|
Posted by Dand124 on Thu Jul 28 03:39:01 2011, in response to Re: Those atheists are at it again, posted by LuchAAA on Thu Jul 28 03:36:09 2011. If cops got rough with a bunch of anti-mosque demonstrators, it would be the one time Dand124 wouldn't call them "pigs".what on earth are you talking about. one of the retards who burnt a koran lost his job with a government agency and i siad he shouldn't have been fired. |
|
|
| (818036) | |
Re: Those atheists are at it again |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Jul 28 03:40:50 2011, in response to Re: Those atheists are at it again, posted by Dand124 on Thu Jul 28 03:34:56 2011. There you are too....assuming something and then passing it off like someone else said that or feels that way based on other things they said.I have no idea who said what in regards to governors having the government stop it, but that's irrelevant to how I feel, or what my actions would or wouldn't be. What does what a GOP candidate said or did have to do with me? |
|
|
| (818037) | |
Re: Those atheists are at it again |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Thu Jul 28 03:40:56 2011, in response to Re: Those atheists are at it again, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Jul 28 02:54:47 2011. Those were Black supremacist sermons, of which if a white lunatic minister was spouting, the KKK police would have been called.Except that there WAS a guest white priest spouting it and no KKK police came. He's one of ours too and he's no lunatic either and was 100% right in this sermon. God Bless Father Michael Phleger |
|
|
| (818038) | |
Re: Those atheists are at it again |
|
|
Posted by Dand124 on Thu Jul 28 03:41:13 2011, in response to Re: Those atheists are at it again, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Jul 28 03:35:18 2011. Okay. The State is passing no law.....the courts have also held the the first amendment applies to the actions of government agencies like PANYNJ. |
|
|
| (818039) | |
Re: Those atheists are at it again |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Jul 28 03:42:11 2011, in response to Re: Those atheists are at it again, posted by Dand124 on Thu Jul 28 03:39:01 2011. His assuming of that is no different than what your assuming of what "I thought or do" was. |
|
|
| (818040) | |
Re: Those atheists are at it again |
|
|
Posted by Dand124 on Thu Jul 28 03:42:29 2011, in response to Re: Those atheists are at it again, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Jul 28 03:40:50 2011. There you are too....assuming something and then passing it off like someone else said that or feels that way based on other things they said.i was wrong i'm sorry. What does what a GOP candidate said or did have to do with me? who did you vote for in the governors race |
|
|
| (818041) | |
Re: Those atheists are at it again |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jul 28 03:42:53 2011, in response to Re: Those atheists are at it again, posted by LuchAAA on Thu Jul 28 03:09:17 2011. It doesn't mock religion. Religion is not beyond criticism. Saying a particular biblical event "probably never happened" is not mocking.OTOH there is one religion that mocks another by saying that its prophesied messiah has arrived, and that their holiest book is an old testament and has been superseded by a new one. Then there is a third religion that says that both of them are wrong and that a later prophet was the last messenger of god and that the holy figures of the previous religions were really following the later religion all along and that it was corrupted and the final messenger brought it back. Finally there's another religion that claims it's like the second one, but that the descendants of the first group moved to another continent and god darkened their skin for being faithless or something. |
|
|
| (818042) | |
Re: Those atheists are at it again |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jul 28 03:43:57 2011, in response to Re: Those atheists are at it again, posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jul 28 03:42:53 2011. And before you say that I think the first religion is blameless of "mocking" other religions, it also has its moments of looking down at other people who worship graven images. |
|
|
| (818043) | |
Re: Those atheists are at it again |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jul 28 03:44:55 2011, in response to Re: Those atheists are at it again, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Jul 28 03:11:02 2011. It constitutes establishment by endorsing one religion over another. By placing the symbol of one religion and not another. |
|
|
| (818044) | |
Re: Those atheists are at it again |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jul 28 03:45:51 2011, in response to Re: Those atheists are at it again, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Jul 28 03:13:02 2011. But now the government's very own actions have prohibited the free exercise of someone's religion! That's clearly right there and not subject to any interpretation. |
|
|
| (818045) | |
Re: Those atheists are at it again |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jul 28 03:48:29 2011, in response to Re: Those atheists are at it again, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Jul 28 03:17:55 2011. Once again, it's not 1865 anymore. The First Amendment restricts the states too.An agency of a state is empowered by the legislature of that state to function without further intervention of the legislature. Any of its actions are effectively actions of the legislature of that state. In this case it's two states, but the same thing applies. People are being excluded IF THEIR RELIGION MAKES IT SO THEY CAN'T PRAY IN FRONT OF A CROSS. |
|
|
| (818046) | |
Re: Those atheists are at it again |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jul 28 03:49:12 2011, in response to Re: Those atheists are at it again, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Jul 28 03:22:33 2011. Yes, you do. |
|
|
| (818047) | |
Re: Those atheists are at it again |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jul 28 03:50:46 2011, in response to Re: Those atheists are at it again, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Jul 28 03:27:41 2011. Once again, it's not 1865. |
|
|
| (818048) | |
Re: Those atheists are at it again |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Thu Jul 28 03:50:48 2011, in response to Re: Those atheists are at it again, posted by Dand124 on Thu Jul 28 03:39:01 2011. that's because no one would side with NJT under any circumstances :) THIW. |
|
|
| (818049) | |
Re: Those atheists are at it again |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Thu Jul 28 03:52:42 2011, in response to Re: Those atheists are at it again, posted by Dand124 on Thu Jul 28 03:42:29 2011. are you saying that if someone voted for Paladino, they're anti-mosque? |
|
|
| (818050) | |
Re: Those atheists are at it again |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jul 28 03:52:59 2011, in response to Re: Those atheists are at it again, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Jul 28 03:34:16 2011. It was exactly what you said. I pointed out that religious minorities can be offended if you're not, and you decided to say "fuck that, let them eat cake." There is no other way to interpret your post. |
|
|
| (818051) | |
Re: Those atheists are at it again |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Thu Jul 28 03:53:09 2011, in response to Re: Those atheists are at it again, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Jul 28 02:15:31 2011. And it's not my or anyone else's fault that you are whatever religion you are.that's really fucked up man. |
|
|
| (818052) | |
Re: Those atheists are at it again |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jul 28 03:53:47 2011, in response to Re: Those atheists are at it again, posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jul 28 03:52:59 2011. And it's consistent with all of your other posts in this thread where you clearly express the opinion that because a lot of people aren't offended by it, that no one should be and that those who are should just shut up. |
|
|
| (818053) | |
Re: Those atheists are at it again |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Thu Jul 28 03:56:09 2011, in response to Re: Those atheists are at it again, posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jul 28 03:42:53 2011. The problem with atheism is that it mainly mocks religion. The billboard is an example of that. Atheismshould present it's own beliefs and benefits without mocking what millions of others believe in. If atheism took that approach, people would not have a problem with them. |
|
|
| (818054) | |
Re: Those atheists are at it again |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jul 28 03:56:23 2011, in response to Re: Those atheists are at it again, posted by LuchAAA on Thu Jul 28 03:37:05 2011. Except that WE ARE NOT! First, there is no such thing as "Judeo-Christian," and that is another thing that is DEEPLY OFFENSIVE (much, MUCH more so than this cross at this site) and second, how many times do I have to post that THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES IS NOT, IN ANY SENSE, FOUNDED ON THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION. |
|
|
| (818055) | |
Re: Those atheists are at it again |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Thu Jul 28 03:57:51 2011, in response to Re: Those atheists are at it again, posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jul 28 03:52:59 2011. Ah yes, fake outrage. That in itself is the biggest religion of this century. |
|
|
| (818056) | |
Re: Those atheists are at it again |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jul 28 03:59:54 2011, in response to Re: Those atheists are at it again, posted by LuchAAA on Thu Jul 28 03:56:09 2011. Atheism does present it's own beliefs: That there is no god (or are no gods), that there are no miracles or other supernatural explanations for any phenomena,* that there is no life after death* and that the Bible is not entirely historical. You seem to believe that is mocking.*Technically an atheist COULD believe in the supernatural and afterlife but that is not common among people considered atheists so one could ignore that. |
|
|
| (818057) | |
Re: Those atheists are at it again |
|
|
Posted by SUBWAYSURF on Thu Jul 28 04:00:18 2011, in response to Re: Those atheists are at it again, posted by LuchAAA on Thu Jul 28 03:57:51 2011. What was the biggest religion of the 20th century in your estimation? |
|
|
|
Page 5 of 16 |
||