Total Posts:28|Showing Posts:1-28
Jump to topic:

Anti-theists?

SNP1
Posts: 2,403
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2014 2:42:21 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
All these people complaining about anti-theists (when they are not always in the wrong) are getting annoying. There are people more annoying than anti-theists, the anti-atheists. The people that complain whenever an atheist makes a legal action. I see a lot of anti-atheists on this site and they are starting to get annoying.

THERE ARE CERTAIN LAWS IN THIS COUNTRY!
WHEN AN ATHEIST GROUP PRESSES LEGAL CHARGES AND WINS THEN THEY WERE LEGALLY CORRECT!

Not every atheist action makes them anti-theists.
#TheApatheticNihilistPartyofAmerica
#WarOnDDO
Kc1999
Posts: 1,037
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2014 2:47:31 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/24/2014 2:42:21 AM, SNP1 wrote:
All these people complaining about anti-theists (when they are not always in the wrong) are getting annoying. There are people more annoying than anti-theists, the anti-atheists. The people that complain whenever an atheist makes a legal action. I see a lot of anti-atheists on this site and they are starting to get annoying.

THERE ARE CERTAIN LAWS IN THIS COUNTRY!
WHEN AN ATHEIST GROUP PRESSES LEGAL CHARGES AND WINS THEN THEY WERE LEGALLY CORRECT!

Not every atheist action makes them anti-theists.
LOL no.

I agree that Anti-Atheists are annoying, but no one could be more annoying than hardlined bald-headed Atheists, who criticise tradition and religion as the "opium of the people" (ahem Marxists), and ought to use their ultra-Marxist rhetoric to pin us theists down. I hope there are no ultramarxists here; they are very annoying (in regards to religion)
#NoToMobocracy #BladeStroink
Installgentoo
Posts: 1,420
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2014 11:59:09 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/24/2014 2:42:21 AM, SNP1 wrote:

THERE ARE CERTAIN LAWS IN THIS COUNTRY!
WHEN AN ATHEIST GROUP PRESSES LEGAL CHARGES AND WINS THEN THEY WERE LEGALLY CORRECT!


Yes, there are laws against the Government forcing people to do something religious.

There is nothing in the law about gay-theists delicate eyes being protected from seeing something religious.
SNP1
Posts: 2,403
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2014 12:14:54 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/25/2014 11:59:09 AM, Installgentoo wrote:
At 3/24/2014 2:42:21 AM, SNP1 wrote:

THERE ARE CERTAIN LAWS IN THIS COUNTRY!
WHEN AN ATHEIST GROUP PRESSES LEGAL CHARGES AND WINS THEN THEY WERE LEGALLY CORRECT!


Yes, there are laws against the Government forcing people to do something religious.

There is nothing in the law about gay-theists delicate eyes being protected from seeing something religious.

You are correct that there is no law that A-theists eyes can't see something religious, but there are laws that religious symbols, monuments, etc. cannot be put on government property.

By the way, saying gay-theists is one of the stupidest things you have ever done. What makes atheists gay?
#TheApatheticNihilistPartyofAmerica
#WarOnDDO
Installgentoo
Posts: 1,420
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2014 12:17:37 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/25/2014 12:14:54 PM, SNP1 wrote:
At 3/25/2014 11:59:09 AM, Installgentoo wrote:
At 3/24/2014 2:42:21 AM, SNP1 wrote:

THERE ARE CERTAIN LAWS IN THIS COUNTRY!
WHEN AN ATHEIST GROUP PRESSES LEGAL CHARGES AND WINS THEN THEY WERE LEGALLY CORRECT!


Yes, there are laws against the Government forcing people to do something religious.

There is nothing in the law about gay-theists delicate eyes being protected from seeing something religious.

You are correct that there is no law that A-theists eyes can't see something religious, but there are laws that religious symbols, monuments, etc. cannot be put on government property.

No, there are laws that the Government cannot fund those monuments. They are allowed to be there however, given the American gaytheists just lost their case over the 9/11 cross.

By the way, saying gay-theists is one of the stupidest things you have ever done. What makes atheists gay?

Constant whining about petty crap, thinking every famous person is atheist, like homosexuals do with famous people, constantly whining about being oppressed...
Iredia
Posts: 1,608
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2014 12:20:15 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/24/2014 2:42:21 AM, SNP1 wrote:
All these people complaining about anti-theists (when they are not always in the wrong) are getting annoying. There are people more annoying than anti-theists, the anti-atheists. The people that complain whenever an atheist makes a legal action. I see a lot of anti-atheists on this site and they are starting to get annoying.

THERE ARE CERTAIN LAWS IN THIS COUNTRY!
WHEN AN ATHEIST GROUP PRESSES LEGAL CHARGES AND WINS THEN THEY WERE LEGALLY CORRECT!

Not every atheist action makes them anti-theists.

Sure. But if you are a self-described anti-theist, you are pissed of by theism (and mayhaps deism) anyway, so why the rant ? You shouldn't expect to be on the offensive against theists and not get complaints. I'm an anti-atheist because I believe atheism is a wrong way of looking at the world (ie without a belief of a Creator God). Annoyed yet ?
Porn babes be distracting me. Dudes be stealing me stuff. I'm all about the cash from now. I'm not playing Jesus anymore.
SNP1
Posts: 2,403
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2014 12:22:42 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/25/2014 12:20:15 PM, Iredia wrote:
At 3/24/2014 2:42:21 AM, SNP1 wrote:
All these people complaining about anti-theists (when they are not always in the wrong) are getting annoying. There are people more annoying than anti-theists, the anti-atheists. The people that complain whenever an atheist makes a legal action. I see a lot of anti-atheists on this site and they are starting to get annoying.

THERE ARE CERTAIN LAWS IN THIS COUNTRY!
WHEN AN ATHEIST GROUP PRESSES LEGAL CHARGES AND WINS THEN THEY WERE LEGALLY CORRECT!

Not every atheist action makes them anti-theists.

Sure. But if you are a self-described anti-theist, you are pissed of by theism (and mayhaps deism) anyway, so why the rant ? You shouldn't expect to be on the offensive against theists and not get complaints. I'm an anti-atheist because I believe atheism is a wrong way of looking at the world (ie without a belief of a Creator God). Annoyed yet ?

Depends, do you get pissed whenever atheists bring legal issues to court (example is the Bibles in the state funded college rooms that was brought up in a different forum topic)?
#TheApatheticNihilistPartyofAmerica
#WarOnDDO
SNP1
Posts: 2,403
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2014 12:27:51 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/25/2014 12:17:37 PM, Installgentoo wrote:
No, there are laws that the Government cannot fund those monuments. They are allowed to be there however, given the American atheists just lost their case over the 9/11 cross.

No, they cannot be. It is on property funded by the state, it being there is a government endorsement of religion. Also, do you have a link to that court case? I have not heard of there being an official ruling yet.

Constant whining about petty crap,

Examples please.

thinking every famous person is atheist,

That does not happen. When there are famous atheists then they do get added to that list, but when someone is a famous theist they do not.

like homosexuals do with famous people,

Again, that does not happen. You are also generalizing a whole group of people.

constantly whining about being oppressed...

I see homosexuals doing that because they actually do get oppressed in certain situations, but when do atheists whine about getting oppressed? I see atheists argue for equal rights and to maintain the constitutional rights of the people, not whine about being oppressed.
#TheApatheticNihilistPartyofAmerica
#WarOnDDO
Installgentoo
Posts: 1,420
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2014 12:42:13 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/25/2014 12:27:51 PM, SNP1 wrote:
At 3/25/2014 12:17:37 PM, Installgentoo wrote:
No, there are laws that the Government cannot fund those monuments. They are allowed to be there however, given the American atheists just lost their case over the 9/11 cross.

No, they cannot be. It is on property funded by the state, it being there is a government endorsement of religion.

You're retarded.
SNP1
Posts: 2,403
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2014 12:47:47 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/25/2014 12:42:13 PM, Installgentoo wrote:
At 3/25/2014 12:27:51 PM, SNP1 wrote:
At 3/25/2014 12:17:37 PM, Installgentoo wrote:
No, there are laws that the Government cannot fund those monuments. They are allowed to be there however, given the American atheists just lost their case over the 9/11 cross.

No, they cannot be. It is on property funded by the state, it being there is a government endorsement of religion.

You're retarded.

ad hominem, thank you for the logical fallacy.
#TheApatheticNihilistPartyofAmerica
#WarOnDDO
Iredia
Posts: 1,608
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2014 1:04:12 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/25/2014 12:22:42 PM, SNP1 wrote:
At 3/25/2014 12:20:15 PM, Iredia wrote:
At 3/24/2014 2:42:21 AM, SNP1 wrote:
All these people complaining about anti-theists (when they are not always in the wrong) are getting annoying. There are people more annoying than anti-theists, the anti-atheists. The people that complain whenever an atheist makes a legal action. I see a lot of anti-atheists on this site and they are starting to get annoying.

THERE ARE CERTAIN LAWS IN THIS COUNTRY!
WHEN AN ATHEIST GROUP PRESSES LEGAL CHARGES AND WINS THEN THEY WERE LEGALLY CORRECT!

Not every atheist action makes them anti-theists.

Sure. But if you are a self-described anti-theist, you are pissed of by theism (and mayhaps deism) anyway, so why the rant ? You shouldn't expect to be on the offensive against theists and not get complaints. I'm an anti-atheist because I believe atheism is a wrong way of looking at the world (ie without a belief of a Creator God). Annoyed yet ?

Depends, do you get pissed whenever atheists bring legal issues to court (example is the Bibles in the state funded college rooms that was brought up in a different forum topic)?

For one, whether I'm pissed or not, its of little consequence. I'm not an American. However, to some extent that has been clearly taken advantage of, the law is on the atheist side: public schools shouldn't favor a religion over any other.
Porn babes be distracting me. Dudes be stealing me stuff. I'm all about the cash from now. I'm not playing Jesus anymore.
Pitbull15
Posts: 479
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2014 1:10:21 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/24/2014 2:42:21 AM, SNP1 wrote:
All these people complaining about anti-theists (when they are not always in the wrong) are getting annoying. There are people more annoying than anti-theists, the anti-atheists. The people that complain whenever an atheist makes a legal action. I see a lot of anti-atheists on this site and they are starting to get annoying.

THERE ARE CERTAIN LAWS IN THIS COUNTRY!
WHEN AN ATHEIST GROUP PRESSES LEGAL CHARGES AND WINS THEN THEY WERE LEGALLY CORRECT!

Not every atheist action makes them anti-theists.

Russia had many brutal laws regarding religion that were considered legally correct, but that didn't make them right.

The reason there's an uprising about this is because people are beginning to see past the widespread delusion that "legal correctness=moral correctness." If you have a problem with them being freed from this mindset, there's really nothing you can do about it.
zmikecuber and I debate the Modal Ontological Argument
http://www.debate.org...

"YOU ARE A TOTAL MORON!!! LOL!!!- invisibledeity

"I have shown incredible restraint in the face of unrelenting stupidity."-Izbo10

"Oh my God, WHO THE HELL CARES?!"-Peter Griffin

"Let me put this in Spanish for you: NO!!"-Jase Robertson
SNP1
Posts: 2,403
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2014 1:16:20 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/25/2014 1:10:21 PM, Pitbull15 wrote:
At 3/24/2014 2:42:21 AM, SNP1 wrote:
All these people complaining about anti-theists (when they are not always in the wrong) are getting annoying. There are people more annoying than anti-theists, the anti-atheists. The people that complain whenever an atheist makes a legal action. I see a lot of anti-atheists on this site and they are starting to get annoying.

THERE ARE CERTAIN LAWS IN THIS COUNTRY!
WHEN AN ATHEIST GROUP PRESSES LEGAL CHARGES AND WINS THEN THEY WERE LEGALLY CORRECT!

Not every atheist action makes them anti-theists.

Russia had many brutal laws regarding religion that were considered legally correct, but that didn't make them right.

The reason there's an uprising about this is because people are beginning to see past the widespread delusion that "legal correctness=moral correctness." If you have a problem with them being freed from this mindset, there's really nothing you can do about it.

So having religious symbols taken off of government property of a country that is supposed to represent all of its people equally is not moral correctness?
#TheApatheticNihilistPartyofAmerica
#WarOnDDO
monty1
Posts: 1,084
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2014 1:20:41 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/25/2014 1:10:21 PM, Pitbull15 wrote:
At 3/24/2014 2:42:21 AM, SNP1 wrote:
All these people complaining about anti-theists (when they are not always in the wrong) are getting annoying. There are people more annoying than anti-theists, the anti-atheists. The people that complain whenever an atheist makes a legal action. I see a lot of anti-atheists on this site and they are starting to get annoying.

THERE ARE CERTAIN LAWS IN THIS COUNTRY!
WHEN AN ATHEIST GROUP PRESSES LEGAL CHARGES AND WINS THEN THEY WERE LEGALLY CORRECT!

Not every atheist action makes them anti-theists.

Russia had many brutal laws regarding religion that were considered legally correct, but that didn't make them right.

The reason there's an uprising about this is because people are beginning to see past the widespread delusion that "legal correctness=moral correctness." If you have a problem with them being freed from this mindset, there's really nothing you can do about it.

Russia's attempt to purge Christianity from their country was not in vain. Had it been given a few more years it would have been almost completely successful. Almost because there will always be a few hangers-on who will be largely irrelevant.

Russia's attempts were successful to a fairly high degree because if Christianity is not handed down by parents to children at a young age, it will eventually be lost. And if a child is not indoctrinated at a young age then the child will grow old enough to dismiss religious superstitious beliefs by himself.

Russia is much less religious today as a result but the indideous nature of religion is such that there is a danger of it creeping back in to corrupt young minds.
Pitbull15
Posts: 479
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2014 1:21:20 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/25/2014 1:16:20 PM, SNP1 wrote:
At 3/25/2014 1:10:21 PM, Pitbull15 wrote:
At 3/24/2014 2:42:21 AM, SNP1 wrote:
All these people complaining about anti-theists (when they are not always in the wrong) are getting annoying. There are people more annoying than anti-theists, the anti-atheists. The people that complain whenever an atheist makes a legal action. I see a lot of anti-atheists on this site and they are starting to get annoying.

THERE ARE CERTAIN LAWS IN THIS COUNTRY!
WHEN AN ATHEIST GROUP PRESSES LEGAL CHARGES AND WINS THEN THEY WERE LEGALLY CORRECT!

Not every atheist action makes them anti-theists.

Russia had many brutal laws regarding religion that were considered legally correct, but that didn't make them right.

The reason there's an uprising about this is because people are beginning to see past the widespread delusion that "legal correctness=moral correctness." If you have a problem with them being freed from this mindset, there's really nothing you can do about it.

So having religious symbols taken off of government property of a country that is supposed to represent all of its people equally is not moral correctness?

No, it's not. Not generally, anyway. It would be justified, however, if people were forcing others to worship that particular religion. But this is not the case here.
zmikecuber and I debate the Modal Ontological Argument
http://www.debate.org...

"YOU ARE A TOTAL MORON!!! LOL!!!- invisibledeity

"I have shown incredible restraint in the face of unrelenting stupidity."-Izbo10

"Oh my God, WHO THE HELL CARES?!"-Peter Griffin

"Let me put this in Spanish for you: NO!!"-Jase Robertson
SNP1
Posts: 2,403
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2014 1:23:39 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/25/2014 1:21:20 PM, Pitbull15 wrote:
No, it's not.

Then tell me how and why it is not.

Not generally, anyway. It would be justified, however, if people were forcing others to worship that particular religion. But this is not the case here.

But it is still a government that is supposed to represent all the people showing favoritism towards a certain group within the country.
#TheApatheticNihilistPartyofAmerica
#WarOnDDO
Pitbull15
Posts: 479
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2014 1:25:15 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/25/2014 1:20:41 PM, monty1 wrote:
At 3/25/2014 1:10:21 PM, Pitbull15 wrote:
At 3/24/2014 2:42:21 AM, SNP1 wrote:
All these people complaining about anti-theists (when they are not always in the wrong) are getting annoying. There are people more annoying than anti-theists, the anti-atheists. The people that complain whenever an atheist makes a legal action. I see a lot of anti-atheists on this site and they are starting to get annoying.

THERE ARE CERTAIN LAWS IN THIS COUNTRY!
WHEN AN ATHEIST GROUP PRESSES LEGAL CHARGES AND WINS THEN THEY WERE LEGALLY CORRECT!

Not every atheist action makes them anti-theists.

Russia had many brutal laws regarding religion that were considered legally correct, but that didn't make them right.

The reason there's an uprising about this is because people are beginning to see past the widespread delusion that "legal correctness=moral correctness." If you have a problem with them being freed from this mindset, there's really nothing you can do about it.

Russia's attempt to purge Christianity from their country was not in vain. Had it been given a few more years it would have been almost completely successful. Almost because there will always be a few hangers-on who will be largely irrelevant.

Russia's attempts were successful to a fairly high degree because if Christianity is not handed down by parents to children at a young age, it will eventually be lost. And if a child is not indoctrinated at a young age then the child will grow old enough to dismiss religious superstitious beliefs by himself.

Russia is much less religious today as a result but the indideous nature of religion is such that there is a danger of it creeping back in to corrupt young minds.

Then how do you explain all the people that come to religion later in life? Another extremely widespread delusion is that atheism is supposed to equal free thought. (Whatever that is to them.) Atheist organizations don't encourage free thought; they encourage thinking without religion AND their way of thinking.
zmikecuber and I debate the Modal Ontological Argument
http://www.debate.org...

"YOU ARE A TOTAL MORON!!! LOL!!!- invisibledeity

"I have shown incredible restraint in the face of unrelenting stupidity."-Izbo10

"Oh my God, WHO THE HELL CARES?!"-Peter Griffin

"Let me put this in Spanish for you: NO!!"-Jase Robertson
Pitbull15
Posts: 479
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2014 1:28:08 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/25/2014 1:23:39 PM, SNP1 wrote:
At 3/25/2014 1:21:20 PM, Pitbull15 wrote:
No, it's not.

Then tell me how and why it is not.

Because it's a memorial. Nobody's forcing their religion on anyone.

Not generally, anyway. It would be justified, however, if people were forcing others to worship that particular religion. But this is not the case here.

But it is still a government that is supposed to represent all the people showing favoritism towards a certain group within the country.

If you're going to use that kind of logic, then why not remove all the big corporations in the country for the sake of equality? It'd be harder without them, but after all, political correctness is all-important.
zmikecuber and I debate the Modal Ontological Argument
http://www.debate.org...

"YOU ARE A TOTAL MORON!!! LOL!!!- invisibledeity

"I have shown incredible restraint in the face of unrelenting stupidity."-Izbo10

"Oh my God, WHO THE HELL CARES?!"-Peter Griffin

"Let me put this in Spanish for you: NO!!"-Jase Robertson
monty1
Posts: 1,084
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2014 1:47:20 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/25/2014 1:25:15 PM, Pitbull15 wrote:
At 3/25/2014 1:20:41 PM, monty1 wrote:
At 3/25/2014 1:10:21 PM, Pitbull15 wrote:
At 3/24/2014 2:42:21 AM, SNP1 wrote:
All these people complaining about anti-theists (when they are not always in the wrong) are getting annoying. There are people more annoying than anti-theists, the anti-atheists. The people that complain whenever an atheist makes a legal action. I see a lot of anti-atheists on this site and they are starting to get annoying.

THERE ARE CERTAIN LAWS IN THIS COUNTRY!
WHEN AN ATHEIST GROUP PRESSES LEGAL CHARGES AND WINS THEN THEY WERE LEGALLY CORRECT!

Not every atheist action makes them anti-theists.

Russia had many brutal laws regarding religion that were considered legally correct, but that didn't make them right.

The reason there's an uprising about this is because people are beginning to see past the widespread delusion that "legal correctness=moral correctness." If you have a problem with them being freed from this mindset, there's really nothing you can do about it.

Russia's attempt to purge Christianity from their country was not in vain. Had it been given a few more years it would have been almost completely successful. Almost because there will always be a few hangers-on who will be largely irrelevant.

Russia's attempts were successful to a fairly high degree because if Christianity is not handed down by parents to children at a young age, it will eventually be lost. And if a child is not indoctrinated at a young age then the child will grow old enough to dismiss religious superstitious beliefs by himself.

Russia is much less religious today as a result but the indideous nature of religion is such that there is a danger of it creeping back in to corrupt young minds.

Then how do you explain all the people that come to religion later in life? Another extremely widespread delusion is that atheism is supposed to equal free thought. (Whatever that is to them.) Atheist organizations don't encourage free thought; they encourage thinking without religion AND their way of thinking.

If people come to religion later in life it's to use as a crutch. But in any case we're not talking about a large number re. population %wise. If religion can be kept out of the heads of children until they are of an age to make their own choices, the religion in question will go nearly extinct. Not withstanding, it's insidious nature and it's ability to creep back to some degee.

If the Chrisitans could just view this argument in terms of 'Islam' for instance then they would have little hesitation in accepting it's truth.

Russia could in fact have a big 'leg up' through reducing the number of Christians in their country. Cerainly, considering science, where in America children waste so much time with creationism as opposed to clean science, Russia would have to be seeing an advantage.
Installgentoo
Posts: 1,420
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2014 1:54:25 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/25/2014 12:27:51 PM, SNP1 wrote:
At 3/25/2014 12:17:37 PM, Installgentoo wrote:
No, there are laws that the Government cannot fund those monuments. They are allowed to be there however, given the American atheists just lost their case over the 9/11 cross.

No, they cannot be. It is on property funded by the state, it being there is a government endorsement of religion. Also, do you have a link to that court case? I have not heard of there being an official ruling yet.

How are religious monuments not allowed to be on Government property? Unless thiose monuments are not armed soldiers forcing people to bow down and pray to a God of a partiular religion, they are not illegal. Have you even read the laws of the U.S?
Lordgrae
Posts: 666
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2014 8:25:06 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/25/2014 12:14:54 PM, SNP1 wrote:
At 3/25/2014 11:59:09 AM, Installgentoo wrote:
At 3/24/2014 2:42:21 AM, SNP1 wrote:

THERE ARE CERTAIN LAWS IN THIS COUNTRY!
WHEN AN ATHEIST GROUP PRESSES LEGAL CHARGES AND WINS THEN THEY WERE LEGALLY CORRECT!


Yes, there are laws against the Government forcing people to do something religious.

There is nothing in the law about gay-theists delicate eyes being protected from seeing something religious.

You are correct that there is no law that A-theists eyes can't see something religious, but there are laws that religious symbols, monuments, etc. cannot be put on government property.

By the way, saying gay-theists is one of the stupidest things you have ever done. What makes atheists gay?

Yeah, to be honest, I don't know any other gay atheists, except me. And I know quite a few atheists.
Birth Name: Graesil s'h'u Aln s'de Alanai'u s'se Saeron
Name: Grae
Titles: Lord, x'Sor Linniae (the false king), Elven War Chief, Heir to Aln
Class: Melee Archer/ Orator
Main Stats: Charisma, Dexterity
Weilds: Bladebow, Elven Slim Sword
Skills: Oration, Double Shot, Backstab, Snatch, Overwhelm Mind, Dominate, Parley, Restorative Sleep
Personal History: Born as the second of triplets, he was wed at an early age to a Dryad. He escaped several times, and on the last was captured and enslaved
Lordgrae
Posts: 666
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2014 8:30:13 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/25/2014 1:54:25 PM, Installgentoo wrote:
At 3/25/2014 12:27:51 PM, SNP1 wrote:
At 3/25/2014 12:17:37 PM, Installgentoo wrote:
No, there are laws that the Government cannot fund those monuments. They are allowed to be there however, given the American atheists just lost their case over the 9/11 cross.

No, they cannot be. It is on property funded by the state, it being there is a government endorsement of religion. Also, do you have a link to that court case? I have not heard of there being an official ruling yet.

How are religious monuments not allowed to be on Government property? Unless thiose monuments are not armed soldiers forcing people to bow down and pray to a God of a partiular religion, they are not illegal. Have you even read the laws of the U.S?

Okay, the problem with this is that it is an all or none issue. Yes we can have private groups build religious monuments outside of public buildings with private funds, as long as every other group is able to do the same. The problem is, this just doesn't work. When 'satanists' tried to put up a monument, the same people who wanted religious monuments protested it. When the atheists put up their monument near the ten commandments, (I think it was in Florida. It was by some courthouse) same thing happened.

I would be okay with this mentality if it weren't for this problem, and the obvious problem that there are more Christians to put up more of their monuments then there are Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Deists, Seculars and others.
Birth Name: Graesil s'h'u Aln s'de Alanai'u s'se Saeron
Name: Grae
Titles: Lord, x'Sor Linniae (the false king), Elven War Chief, Heir to Aln
Class: Melee Archer/ Orator
Main Stats: Charisma, Dexterity
Weilds: Bladebow, Elven Slim Sword
Skills: Oration, Double Shot, Backstab, Snatch, Overwhelm Mind, Dominate, Parley, Restorative Sleep
Personal History: Born as the second of triplets, he was wed at an early age to a Dryad. He escaped several times, and on the last was captured and enslaved
Installgentoo
Posts: 1,420
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2014 8:53:53 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/25/2014 1:54:25 PM, Installgentoo wrote:
At 3/25/2014 12:27:51 PM, SNP1 wrote:
At 3/25/2014 12:17:37 PM, Installgentoo wrote:
No, there are laws that the Government cannot fund those monuments. They are allowed to be there however, given the American atheists just lost their case over the 9/11 cross.

No, they cannot be. It is on property funded by the state, it being there is a government endorsement of religion. Also, do you have a link to that court case? I have not heard of there being an official ruling yet.

How are religious monuments not allowed to be on Government property? Unless thiose monuments are not armed soldiers forcing people to bow down and pray to a God of a partiular religion, they are not illegal. Have you even read the laws of the U.S?

*Unless those monuments are armed soldiers

Sorry.
Pitbull15
Posts: 479
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2014 12:34:48 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/25/2014 1:47:20 PM, monty1 wrote:
At 3/25/2014 1:25:15 PM, Pitbull15 wrote:
At 3/25/2014 1:20:41 PM, monty1 wrote:
At 3/25/2014 1:10:21 PM, Pitbull15 wrote:
At 3/24/2014 2:42:21 AM, SNP1 wrote:
All these people complaining about anti-theists (when they are not always in the wrong) are getting annoying. There are people more annoying than anti-theists, the anti-atheists. The people that complain whenever an atheist makes a legal action. I see a lot of anti-atheists on this site and they are starting to get annoying.

THERE ARE CERTAIN LAWS IN THIS COUNTRY!
WHEN AN ATHEIST GROUP PRESSES LEGAL CHARGES AND WINS THEN THEY WERE LEGALLY CORRECT!

Not every atheist action makes them anti-theists.

Russia had many brutal laws regarding religion that were considered legally correct, but that didn't make them right.

The reason there's an uprising about this is because people are beginning to see past the widespread delusion that "legal correctness=moral correctness." If you have a problem with them being freed from this mindset, there's really nothing you can do about it.

Russia's attempt to purge Christianity from their country was not in vain. Had it been given a few more years it would have been almost completely successful. Almost because there will always be a few hangers-on who will be largely irrelevant.

Russia's attempts were successful to a fairly high degree because if Christianity is not handed down by parents to children at a young age, it will eventually be lost. And if a child is not indoctrinated at a young age then the child will grow old enough to dismiss religious superstitious beliefs by himself.

Russia is much less religious today as a result but the indideous nature of religion is such that there is a danger of it creeping back in to corrupt young minds.

Then how do you explain all the people that come to religion later in life? Another extremely widespread delusion is that atheism is supposed to equal free thought. (Whatever that is to them.) Atheist organizations don't encourage free thought; they encourage thinking without religion AND their way of thinking.

If people come to religion later in life it's to use as a crutch. But in any case we're not talking about a large number re. population %wise. If religion can be kept out of the heads of children until they are of an age to make their own choices, the religion in question will go nearly extinct. Not withstanding, it's insidious nature and it's ability to creep back to some degee.

If the Chrisitans could just view this argument in terms of 'Islam' for instance then they would have little hesitation in accepting it's truth.

Russia could in fact have a big 'leg up' through reducing the number of Christians in their country. Cerainly, considering science, where in America children waste so much time with creationism as opposed to clean science, Russia would have to be seeing an advantage.

That's a rather bold assertion. What makes you think everyone that comes to religion later in life use it solely for a crutch, and why it's so insidious to you?

And when did we start talking about creationism?
zmikecuber and I debate the Modal Ontological Argument
http://www.debate.org...

"YOU ARE A TOTAL MORON!!! LOL!!!- invisibledeity

"I have shown incredible restraint in the face of unrelenting stupidity."-Izbo10

"Oh my God, WHO THE HELL CARES?!"-Peter Griffin

"Let me put this in Spanish for you: NO!!"-Jase Robertson
SNP1
Posts: 2,403
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2014 9:51:29 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/25/2014 8:30:13 PM, Lordgrae wrote:
Okay, the problem with this is that it is an all or none issue. Yes we can have private groups build religious monuments outside of public buildings with private funds, as long as every other group is able to do the same. The problem is, this just doesn't work. When 'satanists' tried to put up a monument, the same people who wanted religious monuments protested it. When the atheists put up their monument near the ten commandments, (I think it was in Florida. It was by some courthouse) same thing happened.

I would be okay with this mentality if it weren't for this problem, and the obvious problem that there are more Christians to put up more of their monuments then there are Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Deists, Seculars and others.

Exactly, this country is supposed to have EQUALITY. If a Christian monument can be put up then a Satanist, Hindu, etc. monument should be able to be put up as well.

Are those monuments allowed? No.

If some religious monuments are denied then ALL religious monuments should be denied.

Also, to those saying that the majority of the country is Christian, this is not a theocracy, this is a democracy. We also have the Bill of Rights to protect the rights of the minority. Majority does not always rule.
#TheApatheticNihilistPartyofAmerica
#WarOnDDO
SNP1
Posts: 2,403
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2014 9:57:48 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/25/2014 1:28:08 PM, Pitbull15 wrote:
Because it's a memorial. Nobody's forcing their religion on anyone.

But taxes pay for the property that those memorials are on. Even if I am not being forced to worship that religion I am being forced to pay money to promote that religion.

If you're going to use that kind of logic, then why not remove all the big corporations in the country for the sake of equality? It'd be harder without them, but after all, political correctness is all-important.

if you are going to use that example then why not remove currency as some people cannot afford everything? BECAUSE THAT WAS NOT MY POINT! Big companies are supported by people that work there and pay for their services by choice. Anything on government property is being payed for by the citizens whether they want to pay or not. Why should I be forced to pay for something I do not support? Even if a monument/memorial/etc. is payed for and maintained by a private organization I still have to pay for the property that it is on, which means that I am being forced to pay money to support something that I might not agree with.
#TheApatheticNihilistPartyofAmerica
#WarOnDDO
Pitbull15
Posts: 479
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2014 10:19:43 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/26/2014 9:57:48 AM, SNP1 wrote:
At 3/25/2014 1:28:08 PM, Pitbull15 wrote:
Because it's a memorial. Nobody's forcing their religion on anyone.

But taxes pay for the property that those memorials are on. Even if I am not being forced to worship that religion I am being forced to pay money to promote that religion.


If you're going to use that kind of logic, then why not remove all the big corporations in the country for the sake of equality? It'd be harder without them, but after all, political correctness is all-important.

if you are going to use that example then why not remove currency as some people cannot afford everything? BECAUSE THAT WAS NOT MY POINT!

The same thought process applies here and is just as ridiculous.

Big companies are supported by people that work there and pay for their services by choice. Anything on government property is being payed for by the citizens whether they want to pay or not. Why should I be forced to pay for something I do not support? Even if a monument/memorial/etc. is payed for and maintained by a private organization I still have to pay for the property that it is on, which means that I am being forced to pay money to support something that I might not agree with.

Why should I have to pay for all the billboards American Atheists puts up, then? Honestly, that logic simply doesn't work.

Let's recap for a minute, you're saying that since a religious themed memorial is on property that you're paying for, you're paying to support it and that's not okay; but at the same time, by that logic, I have to pay for all the billboards and advertising AA and such puts up:

http://atheistbillboards.com...

Can you really look at this and say this isn't more offensive than a simple cross?
zmikecuber and I debate the Modal Ontological Argument
http://www.debate.org...

"YOU ARE A TOTAL MORON!!! LOL!!!- invisibledeity

"I have shown incredible restraint in the face of unrelenting stupidity."-Izbo10

"Oh my God, WHO THE HELL CARES?!"-Peter Griffin

"Let me put this in Spanish for you: NO!!"-Jase Robertson
SNP1
Posts: 2,403
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2014 10:43:28 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/26/2014 10:19:43 AM, Pitbull15 wrote:
The same thought process applies here and is just as ridiculous.

How does the same logic apply here? Big companies=choice, Government property=forced.

Why should I have to pay for all the billboards American Atheists puts up, then? Honestly, that logic simply doesn't work.

Let's recap for a minute, you're saying that since a religious themed memorial is on property that you're paying for, you're paying to support it and that's not okay; but at the same time, by that logic, I have to pay for all the billboards and advertising AA and such puts up:

http://atheistbillboards.com...

Can you really look at this and say this isn't more offensive than a simple cross?

FIRST, how many billboards are on government property? Wherever I have gone they are usually on private property.

SECOND, unlike memorials, monuments, etc. billboards are open to ANYONE. It is equal. If a satanist wanted to they could put satanist propaganda on a billboard. IT IS EQUAL! Now, can a Satanist put up a monument, memorial, etc. on government property? They have been denied, MANY religions have been denied. IT IS NOT EQUAL! There are TWO options for it to be fair.

ONE: No religious monuments/memorials/etc. can be on government property.
TWO: ANY religious monuments/memorials/etc. can be on government property.

It is about EQUALITY! Equal representation. If you do not agree with that then it is impossible to reason with you about this.

I do not care if it is option one or two, but I do care if neither option exists.
#TheApatheticNihilistPartyofAmerica
#WarOnDDO