72 replies to this topic

[Colonel Rhuairidh]

ShadowSot, on 29 April 2012 - 03:06 AM, said:

So do the theists. After all, among those who died at the time were Jews and Muslims and, yes, atheists.

Don't getme wrong, I don't necassrily agree. However the US is edging into a theocracy at this point, which is why these fights have started brewing.
  The first amendement stipulates seperation of church in state, thatthe State cannot show preferential treatment to one religion or another. A cross is an explicitly Christian symbol, which is where their case is coming from.

I don't like the idea that the majority gets to decide on the minority, personally. It's to close to "everyone else was doing it."
Some of the worlds darkest moments happen due to this reason, and often to the "minorities."

Edging into a theocracy now?  We're not talking about something that's being done now, we're talking about something that was done in 1921. I'm afraid that insisting that something that was done 90 years ago betaken down because some Atheists might be offended by it sounds rather than wanting to insist on a Atheocracy; that these Atheists want to force their views on everyone.

And again, isn't the idea that the majority gets to decide on the minority the idea on which Democracy is based?

[preacherman76]

ShadowSot, on 29 April 2012 - 03:06 AM, said:

However the US is edging into a theocracy at this point, which is why these fights have started brewing.
  

Wait what??? The US isnt even close to "edging into a theocracy". These fights havent just started. They have been going on for the better part of 60 years. With Christians losing nearly every battle.  Atheists have been able to remove God outta the publics eye nearly everywhere. These memorials are christians last stand so to speak.    Do you have any proof the US is edging tward a theocracy?

Do you think the US is moving tward a theocracy cause of politicions veiws on Christianity in the GOP? If so, that isnt anything new. And 99% of the time they are lieing anyway.

[preacherman76]

747400, on 29 April 2012 - 06:51 AM, said:

And again, isn't the idea that the majority gets to decide on the minority the idea on which Democracy is based?

Pretty much. Thats why our founders never used the word democracy in any of the founding documents.. Especialy when it comes to any specific right. Freedom of religion isnt, or should never be subjected to a vote. A true democracy is among the worst way for any people to be governed. Its two wolves and a sheep voting on what is for dinner.

The powers that be slowly over many years introduced the word democracy to describe our system of government, till we bought it hook line and sinker.

[ShadowSot]

Right, no hint of theocracy.

"In God We Trust."

Bush running the war on Iraq due to his "Christian faith." Political pundits and in office politicians shouting they were spreading God's message to the Muslims.

Laws and pratices showing deference to religion, ranging from tax exempt status to removing regulations oon child care (and then we're shocked when horror stories come out from these place.)

[Karlis]

ShadowSot, on 29 April 2012 - 05:16 PM, said:

Right, no hint of theocracy.

"In God We Trust."

~~~ ...

"Trusting in God" goes back to the time the first settlers came to the New World, and continued for generations afterwards. Still valid today for many Americans, imo.

[ShadowSot]

Karlis, on 29 April 2012 - 05:21 PM, said:

"Trusting in God" goes back to the time the first settlers came to the New World, and continued for generations afterwards. Still valid today for many Americans, imo.

Oh yeah, that's what I was talking about totally!

No, I'm referring to the motto of the US, which was changed from "E Pluribus Unum" to "In God we Trust." Specifically to present the US as a Christian country in comparison to the communists.
Same for the pledge and "under God."

  I don't support the FFRF in this, as I said earlier. I understand why, but I don't agree.

[preacherman76]

ShadowSot, on 29 April 2012 - 05:16 PM, said:

Right, no hint of theocracy.

"In God We Trust."

Bush running the war on Iraq due to his "Christian faith." Political pundits and in office politicians shouting they were spreading God's message to the Muslims.

Laws and pratices showing deference to religion, ranging from tax exempt status to removing regulations oon child care (and then we're shocked when horror stories come out from these place.)

Mmm Shadow, just cause a politcian panders to the religious right by making such comments doesnt mean he represents the Christian faith in any way.  Christianity doesnt teach pre-emtive wars of agression. Bush is globalist scum. Same as 0bama. Same as Romney. None of them want a theocracy. They just kinda say things, and the dumb public goes with it.

[ShadowSot]

preacherman76, on 29 April 2012 - 07:15 PM, said:

Mmm Shadow, just cause a politcian panders to the religious right by making such comments doesnt mean he represents the Christian faith in any way.  Christianity doesnt teach pre-emtive wars of agression. Bush is globalist scum. Same as 0bama. Same as Romney. None of them want a theocracy. They just kinda say things, and the dumb public goes with it.

Christianity teaches peace?
  When convenient, sure.
"I come bearing a sword, I come to set fire to the Earth. I come to set son against father. "

  Yes, and no true Scotsman where's briefs under his kilt.

If politicians are using religion as a tool to fool the religious the religion is still a problem.

[preacherman76]

ShadowSot, on 29 April 2012 - 07:44 PM, said:

.

If politicians are using religion as a tool to fool the religious the religion is still a problem.

No stupid people are the problem. Same with folks like yourself who still fall for the left right paradigm. Who allow this establishment to keep you divided, and even make you against your fellow Americans. Instead of pointing out the real criminals. They use folks like yourself as a tool just as much as anyone.

[Colonel Rhuairidh]

ShadowSot, on 29 April 2012 - 07:44 PM, said:

Christianity teaches peace?
  When convenient, sure.
"I come bearing a sword, I come to set fire to the Earth. I come to set son against father. "

  Yes, and no true Scotsman where's briefs under his kilt.

If politicians are using religion as a tool to fool the religious the religion is still a problem.

Ever heard of metaphor or rhetoric? Anyone can find quotes anywhere to support anything they want it to say, we all know that.

[questionmark]

In any case: What any group wants is quite irrelevant. Relevant is what those honored with the crosses would have wanted.

[Euphorbia]

questionmark, on 30 April 2012 - 07:24 PM, said:

In any case: What any group wants is quite irrelevant. Relevant is what those honored with the crosses would have wanted.

Yes, but......it's highly doubtful they would all be Christians.

Maybe put up one of those "Coexist" bumper stickers........

[Taun]

and then, on 28 April 2012 - 04:57 PM, said:

...  And the last thing any of us need is more conflict.

But it's a WAR memorial!!!  It's all about conflict!!!

[Colonel Rhuairidh]

Euphorbia, on 30 April 2012 - 07:34 PM, said:

Yes, but......it's highly doubtful they would all be Christians.

Maybe put up one of those "Coexist" bumper stickers........

well, does anyone have any information on the ethnic makeup of the people concerned? I think (apart, obviously, from the Jewish community) the great majority of the popualtion would have declared themselves as Christian of some denomination or other 90 years ago. Very, very few outside certain left wing intellectual circles would have defined themselves as an Atheist, that's for sure.

[questionmark]

Correct. And while, if there is a bona-fide identifiable atheist that might would have wanted the cross to go, the wast majority would want their crosses to stay. So some coming around 100 years later clamoring something about crosses should stick their noses in their own bidness.