Discussion:
Atheists claim they bow down to no gods and have no masters.
Add Reply
Tim Browne
2017-04-01 05:25:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
It must gall the hell out of those crotch sniffers to have to
use the legal system to seek equality with religionists.
Especially when that same system has declared atheism a religion.

--
An atheist is a man who believes himself to be an accident.

-Francis Thompson
 
Mr. B1ack
2017-04-01 05:56:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 07:25:47 +0200 (CEST), "Tim Browne"
Post by Tim Browne
It must gall the hell out of those crotch sniffers to have to
use the legal system to seek equality with religionists.
Especially when that same system has declared atheism a religion.
A rather cartoon version of "atheists".

Atheism is NOT a religion. MILITANT atheism kinda IS
however ... you can spot 'em by their holy zeal to crush
all infidel theists.
Robert Carnegie
2017-04-01 12:59:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mr. B1ack
On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 07:25:47 +0200 (CEST), "Tim Browne"
Post by Tim Browne
It must gall the hell out of those crotch sniffers to have to
use the legal system to seek equality with religionists.
Especially when that same system has declared atheism a religion.
A rather cartoon version of "atheists".
The first part is my practical definition of atheism:
not worshipping. "No masters" was not clear to me;
"Joe Bruno" has taken it as "teacher" or "someone
who knows more than you do". Of course, I respect
Charles Darwin but I know a lot of things that
he didn't know. Another interpretation is that
Tim Browne favours slavery: the /present/
constitutional position on that is reasonably clear.

As for religion, the actual point is that
"religious freedom" is or should be now understood
as including the freedom to not practise religion
at all.
aaa
2017-04-01 13:27:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Mr. B1ack
On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 07:25:47 +0200 (CEST), "Tim Browne"
Post by Tim Browne
It must gall the hell out of those crotch sniffers to have to
use the legal system to seek equality with religionists.
Especially when that same system has declared atheism a religion.
A rather cartoon version of "atheists".
not worshipping. "No masters" was not clear to me;
"Joe Bruno" has taken it as "teacher" or "someone
who knows more than you do". Of course, I respect
Charles Darwin but I know a lot of things that
he didn't know. Another interpretation is that
Tim Browne favours slavery: the /present/
constitutional position on that is reasonably clear.
As for religion, the actual point is that
"religious freedom" is or should be now understood
as including the freedom to not practise religion
at all.
Such freedom is limited to your own personal space. You don't have the
freedom infringing into the public space.
Robert Carnegie
2017-04-01 13:35:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Mr. B1ack
On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 07:25:47 +0200 (CEST), "Tim Browne"
Post by Tim Browne
It must gall the hell out of those crotch sniffers to have to
use the legal system to seek equality with religionists.
Especially when that same system has declared atheism a religion.
A rather cartoon version of "atheists".
not worshipping. "No masters" was not clear to me;
"Joe Bruno" has taken it as "teacher" or "someone
who knows more than you do". Of course, I respect
Charles Darwin but I know a lot of things that
he didn't know. Another interpretation is that
Tim Browne favours slavery: the /present/
constitutional position on that is reasonably clear.
As for religion, the actual point is that
"religious freedom" is or should be now understood
as including the freedom to not practise religion
at all.
Such freedom is limited to your own personal space. You don't have the
freedom infringing into the public space.
You mean I'm not allowed to not worship in public?
aaa
2017-04-01 14:07:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by aaa
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Mr. B1ack
On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 07:25:47 +0200 (CEST), "Tim Browne"
Post by Tim Browne
It must gall the hell out of those crotch sniffers to have to
use the legal system to seek equality with religionists.
Especially when that same system has declared atheism a religion.
A rather cartoon version of "atheists".
not worshipping. "No masters" was not clear to me;
"Joe Bruno" has taken it as "teacher" or "someone
who knows more than you do". Of course, I respect
Charles Darwin but I know a lot of things that
he didn't know. Another interpretation is that
Tim Browne favours slavery: the /present/
constitutional position on that is reasonably clear.
As for religion, the actual point is that
"religious freedom" is or should be now understood
as including the freedom to not practise religion
at all.
Such freedom is limited to your own personal space. You don't have the
freedom infringing into the public space.
You mean I'm not allowed to not worship in public?
Your personal space in public is still yours to control, but you can't
control or interfere with other people's activity.
hypatiab7
2017-04-02 14:25:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Mr. B1ack
On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 07:25:47 +0200 (CEST), "Tim Browne"
Post by Tim Browne
It must gall the hell out of those crotch sniffers to have to
use the legal system to seek equality with religionists.
Especially when that same system has declared atheism a religion.
A rather cartoon version of "atheists".
not worshipping. "No masters" was not clear to me;
"Joe Bruno" has taken it as "teacher" or "someone
who knows more than you do". Of course, I respect
Charles Darwin but I know a lot of things that
he didn't know. Another interpretation is that
Tim Browne favours slavery: the /present/
constitutional position on that is reasonably clear.
As for religion, the actual point is that
"religious freedom" is or should be now understood
as including the freedom to not practise religion
at all.
Such freedom is limited to your own personal space. You don't have the
freedom infringing into the public space.
Neither do you, troll, but you keep invading alt.atheism with your made up nonsense.
Joe Bruno
2017-04-01 07:45:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Tim Browne
It must gall the hell out of those crotch sniffers to have to
use the legal system to seek equality with religionists.
Especially when that same system has declared atheism a religion.
--
An atheist is a man who believes himself to be an accident.
-Francis Thompson
 
It appears to me that they bow to a master named Charles Darwin.
Richard Dawkins is one of his angels.
Marko TheBeest
2017-04-02 04:54:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Joe Bruno
It appears to me that they bow to a master named Charles Darwin.
Richard Dawkins is one of his angels.
I bow to no man. I have bowed gratefully to a few women.
Joe Bruno
2017-04-02 06:16:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Marko TheBeest
Post by Joe Bruno
It appears to me that they bow to a master named Charles Darwin.
Richard Dawkins is one of his angels.
I bow to no man. I have bowed gratefully to a few women.
You have to bow to suck them off.
Tim
2017-04-03 04:40:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Joe Bruno
Post by Marko TheBeest
Post by Joe Bruno
It appears to me that they bow to a master named Charles Darwin.
Richard Dawkins is one of his angels.
I bow to no man. I have bowed gratefully to a few women.
You have to bow to suck them off.
You're talking about your experiences in the navy.
Don Martin
2017-04-02 12:51:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 21:54:46 -0700 (PDT), Marko TheBeest
Post by Marko TheBeest
Post by Joe Bruno
It appears to me that they bow to a master named Charles Darwin.
Richard Dawkins is one of his angels.
I bow to no man. I have bowed gratefully to a few women.
Nor are you the only guy using that ruse to look down cleavages.
--
aa #2278 Never mind "proof." Where is your evidence?
BAAWA Chief Assistant to the Assistant Chief Heckler
Fidei defensor (Hon. Antipodean)
Je pense, donc je suis Charlie.
Christopher A. Lee
2017-04-02 13:29:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sun, 02 Apr 2017 08:51:22 -0400, Don Martin
Post by Don Martin
On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 21:54:46 -0700 (PDT), Marko TheBeest
Post by Marko TheBeest
Post by Joe Bruno
It appears to me that they bow to a master named Charles Darwin.
Richard Dawkins is one of his angels.
And he pretends he doesn't understand how we know he is insane - hence
Mad Joe.
Post by Don Martin
Post by Marko TheBeest
I bow to no man. I have bowed gratefully to a few women.
Nor are you the only guy using that ruse to look down cleavages.
It depends on the situation.
Don Martin
2017-04-02 14:29:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sun, 02 Apr 2017 08:29:00 -0500, Christopher A. Lee
Post by Christopher A. Lee
On Sun, 02 Apr 2017 08:51:22 -0400, Don Martin
Post by Don Martin
On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 21:54:46 -0700 (PDT), Marko TheBeest
Post by Marko TheBeest
Post by Joe Bruno
It appears to me that they bow to a master named Charles Darwin.
Richard Dawkins is one of his angels.
And he pretends he doesn't understand how we know he is insane - hence
Mad Joe.
Post by Don Martin
Post by Marko TheBeest
I bow to no man. I have bowed gratefully to a few women.
Nor are you the only guy using that ruse to look down cleavages.
It depends on the situation.
Or the cleavage. Some are more lush than others, and even when equal,
those topped by pretty faces draw more attention than those topped by
homely ones. (Hint to homely women--wear lower cut tops, and most
guys will never notice that you even _have_ a face.)
--
aa #2278 Never mind "proof." Where is your evidence?
BAAWA Chief Assistant to the Assistant Chief Heckler
Fidei defensor (Hon. Antipodean)
Je pense, donc je suis Charlie.
Marko TheBeest
2017-04-02 14:53:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
AAA said:
"Funny you would praise him for something that didn't even register much on my radar."

I just thanked him and said I like the analogy. That is not praise.
hypatiab7
2017-04-02 14:26:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Joe Bruno
Post by Tim Browne
It must gall the hell out of those crotch sniffers to have to
use the legal system to seek equality with religionists.
Especially when that same system has declared atheism a religion.
--
An atheist is a man who believes himself to be an accident.
-Francis Thompson
 
It appears to me that they bow to a master named Charles Darwin.
You have to be a Christian.
Post by Joe Bruno
Richard Dawkins is one of his angels.
Cloud Hobbit
2017-04-03 09:06:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Joe Bruno
Post by Tim Browne
It must gall the hell out of those crotch sniffers to have to
use the legal system to seek equality with religionists.
Especially when that same system has declared atheism a religion.
--
An atheist is a man who believes himself to be an accident.
-Francis Thompson
 
It appears to me that they bow to a master named Charles Darwin.
Failure to acknowledge Darwin as one the greatest scientific minds ever, noted.
Your inability to understand the mountains of evidence in support of ToE and the fact that it is recognized as a scientific fact by every important scientific organization and college and university as well as more than a few religions, shows just how neither stupid you are or how incredibly stupid you are willing to appear about something that is so glaringly true.
Post by Joe Bruno
Richard Dawkins is one of his angels.
Richard Dawkins happens to be a well spoken evolutionary biologist who also happens to an atheist. Naturally, his ability to debunk all the junk biology that religionists throw around makes him persona no grata as far as they are concerened and a breath of fresh air to the rest of the world.
Joe Bruno
2017-04-03 11:25:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Post by Joe Bruno
Post by Tim Browne
It must gall the hell out of those crotch sniffers to have to
use the legal system to seek equality with religionists.
Especially when that same system has declared atheism a religion.
--
An atheist is a man who believes himself to be an accident.
-Francis Thompson
 
It appears to me that they bow to a master named Charles Darwin.
Failure to acknowledge Darwin as one the greatest scientific minds ever, noted.
Your inability to understand the mountains of evidence in support of ToE and the fact that it is recognized as a scientific fact by every important scientific organization and college and university as well as more than a few religions, shows just how neither stupid you are or how incredibly stupid you are willing to appear about something that is so glaringly true.
Post by Joe Bruno
Richard Dawkins is one of his angels.
Richard Dawkins happens to be a well spoken evolutionary biologist who also happens to an atheist. Naturally, his ability to debunk all the junk biology that religionists throw around makes him persona no grata as far as they are concerened and a breath of fresh air to the rest of the world.
https://tinyurl.com/kw9jvq6
Joe Bruno
2017-04-03 11:36:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Post by Joe Bruno
Post by Tim Browne
It must gall the hell out of those crotch sniffers to have to
use the legal system to seek equality with religionists.
Especially when that same system has declared atheism a religion.
--
An atheist is a man who believes himself to be an accident.
-Francis Thompson
 
It appears to me that they bow to a master named Charles Darwin.
Failure to acknowledge Darwin as one the greatest scientific minds ever, noted.
That's YOUR opinion. I don't agree.
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Your inability to understand the mountains of evidence in support of ToE and the fact that it is recognized as a scientific fact by every important scientific organization and college and university as well as more than a few religions, shows just how neither stupid you are or how incredibly stupid you are willing to appear about something that is so glaringly true.
I understand it. I just don't find it convincing.
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Post by Joe Bruno
Richard Dawkins is one of his angels.
Richard Dawkins happens to be a well spoken evolutionary biologist who also happens to an atheist. Naturally, his ability to debunk all the junk biology that religionists throw around makes him persona no grata as far as they are concerened and a breath of fresh air to the rest of the world.
ROTFL! I read Dawkins' book "The God Delusion". It's full of lies.
I exposed several of them months ago with a long post. Your hero is a liar.(may be that's why you revere him)
John Baker
2017-04-01 08:21:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 07:25:47 +0200 (CEST), "Tim Browne"
Post by Tim Browne
It must gall the hell out of those crotch sniffers to have to
use the legal system to seek equality with religionists.
Especially when that same system has declared atheism a religion.
The system has not now or ever declared atheism a religion, you stupid
fuck, only that it is entitled to the same legal protections as a
religion. In short, the same laws that give you the right to practice
your religion give me the right to reject it as the superstitious
bullshit it is. We've had equality under the law with you
Bible-humping fucktards since day one. Get used to it.










AA #1898
Giver of No Fucks
Keeper of the Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch
Joe Bruno
2017-04-01 08:43:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mr. B1ack
On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 07:25:47 +0200 (CEST), "Tim Browne"
Post by Tim Browne
It must gall the hell out of those crotch sniffers to have to
use the legal system to seek equality with religionists.
Especially when that same system has declared atheism a religion.
The system has not now or ever declared atheism a religion, you stupid
fuck, only that it is entitled to the same legal protections as a
religion. In short, the same laws that give you the right to practice
your religion give me the right to reject it as the superstitious
bullshit it is. We've had equality under the law with you
Bible-humping fucktards since day one.
Since Day one??? NYET. The declaration was made in Federal Court in August 2005.

http://www.wnd.com/2005/08/31895/

Well done, John. You were only off by 225 years.
h***@gmail.com
2017-04-01 10:29:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Joe Bruno
Post by Mr. B1ack
On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 07:25:47 +0200 (CEST), "Tim Browne"
Post by Tim Browne
It must gall the hell out of those crotch sniffers to have to
use the legal system to seek equality with religionists.
Especially when that same system has declared atheism a religion.
The system has not now or ever declared atheism a religion, you stupid
fuck, only that it is entitled to the same legal protections as a
religion. In short, the same laws that give you the right to practice
your religion give me the right to reject it as the superstitious
bullshit it is. We've had equality under the law with you
Bible-humping fucktards since day one.
Since Day one??? NYET. The declaration was made in Federal Court in August 2005.
Idiot mad fellow, we do not need declaration when the laws and constitution make sure atheists have the same right as any other person.

The Federal court just re-emphasize such right....you are stupid.
Post by Joe Bruno
http://www.wnd.com/2005/08/31895/
Well done, John. You were only off by 225 years.
Rick Johnson
2017-04-02 03:06:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Joe Bruno
Post by John Baker
Post by Tim Browne
It must gall the hell out of those crotch sniffers to
have to use the legal system to seek equality with
religionists. Especially when that same system has
declared atheism a religion.
The system has not now or ever declared atheism a
religion, you stupid fuck, only that it is entitled to the
same legal protections as a religion. In short, the same
laws that give you the right to practice your religion
give me the right to reject it as the superstitious
bullshit it is. We've had equality under the law with you
Bible-humping fucktards since day one.
Since Day one??? NYET. The declaration was made in Federal
Court in August 2005.
http://www.wnd.com/2005/08/31895/
Well done, John. You were only off by 225 years.
Obviously John was referencing the constitution: "Congress
shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,
or prohibiting the free exercise thereo[...]" -- protects
atheists from state tyranny as much as it protects theists
from state tyranny. Of course, if had the oppurtunity to
rewrite that clause, i would be more explict about non-
religious people, but the implict implication is there. You
cannot establish a state church. And you cannot compell us
to participate. We have the right to be free. And you have
the right to be a mental slave. That's freedom baby.
John Baker
2017-04-02 21:54:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 20:06:27 -0700 (PDT), Rick Johnson
Post by Rick Johnson
Post by Joe Bruno
Post by John Baker
Post by Tim Browne
It must gall the hell out of those crotch sniffers to
have to use the legal system to seek equality with
religionists. Especially when that same system has
declared atheism a religion.
The system has not now or ever declared atheism a
religion, you stupid fuck, only that it is entitled to the
same legal protections as a religion. In short, the same
laws that give you the right to practice your religion
give me the right to reject it as the superstitious
bullshit it is. We've had equality under the law with you
Bible-humping fucktards since day one.
Since Day one??? NYET. The declaration was made in Federal
Court in August 2005.
http://www.wnd.com/2005/08/31895/
Well done, John. You were only off by 225 years.
Obviously John was referencing the constitution: "Congress
shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,
or prohibiting the free exercise thereo[...]" -- protects
atheists from state tyranny as much as it protects theists
from state tyranny.
Exactly. But there's no point arguing with Artie. It'll get you
absolutely nowhere. <G>
Post by Rick Johnson
Of course, if had the oppurtunity to
rewrite that clause, i would be more explict about non-
religious people, but the implict implication is there. You
cannot establish a state church. And you cannot compell us
to participate. We have the right to be free. And you have
the right to be a mental slave. That's freedom baby.
aaa
2017-04-01 09:20:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mr. B1ack
On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 07:25:47 +0200 (CEST), "Tim Browne"
Post by Tim Browne
It must gall the hell out of those crotch sniffers to have to
use the legal system to seek equality with religionists.
Especially when that same system has declared atheism a religion.
The system has not now or ever declared atheism a religion, you stupid
fuck, only that it is entitled to the same legal protections as a
religion. In short, the same laws that give you the right to practice
your religion give me the right to reject it as the superstitious
bullshit it is.
Yet, you demand the same religious right while denying yourself having
any kind of religious belief. By limiting religious belief to place of
worship, you have made the public space the place of your non-belief
alone, and you think your right is violated?


We've had equality under the law with you
Post by Mr. B1ack
Bible-humping fucktards since day one. Get used to it.
h***@gmail.com
2017-04-01 10:32:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by Mr. B1ack
On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 07:25:47 +0200 (CEST), "Tim Browne"
Post by Tim Browne
It must gall the hell out of those crotch sniffers to have to
use the legal system to seek equality with religionists.
Especially when that same system has declared atheism a religion.
The system has not now or ever declared atheism a religion, you stupid
fuck, only that it is entitled to the same legal protections as a
religion. In short, the same laws that give you the right to practice
your religion give me the right to reject it as the superstitious
bullshit it is.
Yet, you demand the same religious right while denying yourself having
any kind of religious belief. By limiting religious belief to place of
worship, you have made the public space the place of your non-belief
alone, and you think your right is violated?
Why do we have to demand the same right when the laws and constitution are in place???????

We atheists have never initiate any court order or ruling to forbid theism praying, or stop the flow of tithes !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


What sense you think you can speak when you have your brain damaged????
Post by aaa
We've had equality under the law with you
Post by Mr. B1ack
Bible-humping fucktards since day one. Get used to it.
aaa
2017-04-01 13:07:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by h***@gmail.com
Post by aaa
Post by Mr. B1ack
On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 07:25:47 +0200 (CEST), "Tim Browne"
Post by Tim Browne
It must gall the hell out of those crotch sniffers to have to
use the legal system to seek equality with religionists.
Especially when that same system has declared atheism a
religion.
The system has not now or ever declared atheism a religion, you
stupid fuck, only that it is entitled to the same legal
protections as a religion. In short, the same laws that give you
the right to practice your religion give me the right to reject
it as the superstitious bullshit it is.
Yet, you demand the same religious right while denying yourself
having any kind of religious belief. By limiting religious belief
to place of worship, you have made the public space the place of
your non-belief alone, and you think your right is violated?
Why do we have to demand the same right when the laws and
constitution are in place???????
I have no problem with you demanding equal right. I have a problem with
you denying that such right is for your own belief. You are
inconsistent. Atheism is a belief which makes it the same as any
religion. Otherwise, the law that protects religious belief can't give
you any protection for your non-belief. There is nothing for the law to
protect.
Post by h***@gmail.com
We atheists have never initiate any court order or ruling to forbid
theism praying, or stop the flow of tithes !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What sense you think you can speak when you have your brain
damaged????
Post by aaa
We've had equality under the law with you
Post by Mr. B1ack
Bible-humping fucktards since day one. Get used to it.
Smiler
2017-04-02 01:38:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by h***@gmail.com
Post by aaa
Post by Mr. B1ack
On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 07:25:47 +0200 (CEST), "Tim Browne"
It must gall the hell out of those crotch sniffers to have to use
the legal system to seek equality with religionists. Especially when
that same system has declared atheism a religion.
The system has not now or ever declared atheism a religion, you
stupid fuck, only that it is entitled to the same legal protections
as a religion. In short, the same laws that give you the right to
practice your religion give me the right to reject it as the
superstitious bullshit it is.
Yet, you demand the same religious right while denying yourself having
any kind of religious belief. By limiting religious belief to place of
worship, you have made the public space the place of your non-belief
alone, and you think your right is violated?
Why do we have to demand the same right when the laws and constitution
are in place???????
I have no problem with you demanding equal right. I have a problem with
you denying that such right is for your own belief. You are
inconsistent. Atheism is a belief which makes it the same as any
religion.
What belief is that, liar?
Post by aaa
Otherwise, the law that protects religious belief can't give
you any protection for your non-belief. There is nothing for the law to
protect.
The law protects non-belief equally with belief.
Post by aaa
Post by h***@gmail.com
We atheists have never initiate any court order or ruling to forbid
theism praying, or stop the flow of tithes !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What sense you think you can speak when you have your brain damaged????
Post by aaa
Post by Mr. B1ack
We've had equality under the law with you
Bible-humping fucktards since day one. Get used to it.
--
Smiler,
The godless one. a.a.# 2279
All gods are tailored to order. They're made to
exactly fit the prejudices of their believers.
aaa
2017-04-02 07:47:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Post by h***@gmail.com
Post by aaa
Post by Mr. B1ack
On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 07:25:47 +0200 (CEST), "Tim Browne"
It must gall the hell out of those crotch sniffers to have to use
the legal system to seek equality with religionists. Especially when
that same system has declared atheism a religion.
The system has not now or ever declared atheism a religion, you
stupid fuck, only that it is entitled to the same legal protections
as a religion. In short, the same laws that give you the right to
practice your religion give me the right to reject it as the
superstitious bullshit it is.
Yet, you demand the same religious right while denying yourself having
any kind of religious belief. By limiting religious belief to place of
worship, you have made the public space the place of your non-belief
alone, and you think your right is violated?
Why do we have to demand the same right when the laws and constitution
are in place???????
I have no problem with you demanding equal right. I have a problem with
you denying that such right is for your own belief. You are
inconsistent. Atheism is a belief which makes it the same as any
religion.
What belief is that, liar?
Your willful ignorance to your own atheism is not my problem either.
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Otherwise, the law that protects religious belief can't give
you any protection for your non-belief. There is nothing for the law to
protect.
The law protects non-belief equally with belief.
Not possible. Belief can be defined and identified. Non-belief can not
be defined or identified. Without identification, there is no way to
protect it. It doesn't exist.
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Post by h***@gmail.com
We atheists have never initiate any court order or ruling to forbid
theism praying, or stop the flow of tithes !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What sense you think you can speak when you have your brain damaged????
Post by aaa
Post by Mr. B1ack
We've had equality under the law with you
Bible-humping fucktards since day one. Get used to it.
hypatiab7
2017-04-02 15:15:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Post by h***@gmail.com
Post by aaa
Post by Mr. B1ack
On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 07:25:47 +0200 (CEST), "Tim Browne"
It must gall the hell out of those crotch sniffers to have to use
the legal system to seek equality with religionists. Especially when
that same system has declared atheism a religion.
The system has not now or ever declared atheism a religion, you
stupid fuck, only that it is entitled to the same legal protections
as a religion. In short, the same laws that give you the right to
practice your religion give me the right to reject it as the
superstitious bullshit it is.
Yet, you demand the same religious right while denying yourself having
any kind of religious belief. By limiting religious belief to place of
worship, you have made the public space the place of your non-belief
alone, and you think your right is violated?
Why do we have to demand the same right when the laws and constitution
are in place???????
I have no problem with you demanding equal right. I have a problem with
you denying that such right is for your own belief. You are
inconsistent. Atheism is a belief which makes it the same as any
religion.
What belief is that, liar?
Your willful ignorance to your own atheism is not my problem either.
We atheists know what our atheism is. You insist on lying about it and
defining it incorrectly.
Post by aaa
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Otherwise, the law that protects religious belief can't give
you any protection for your non-belief. There is nothing for the law to
protect.
The law protects non-belief equally with belief.
Not possible. Belief can be defined and identified. Non-belief can not
be defined or identified. Without identification, there is no way to
protect it. It doesn't exist.
Your lying again. That's why no one here trusts you.
Post by aaa
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Post by h***@gmail.com
We atheists have never initiate any court order or ruling to forbid
theism praying, or stop the flow of tithes !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What sense you think you can speak when you have your brain damaged????
Post by aaa
Post by Mr. B1ack
We've had equality under the law with you
Bible-humping fucktards since day one. Get used to it.
Smiler
2017-04-03 01:55:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Post by h***@gmail.com
Post by aaa
Post by Mr. B1ack
On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 07:25:47 +0200 (CEST), "Tim Browne"
It must gall the hell out of those crotch sniffers to have to use
the legal system to seek equality with religionists. Especially
when that same system has declared atheism a religion.
The system has not now or ever declared atheism a religion, you
stupid fuck, only that it is entitled to the same legal protections
as a religion. In short, the same laws that give you the right to
practice your religion give me the right to reject it as the
superstitious bullshit it is.
Yet, you demand the same religious right while denying yourself
having any kind of religious belief. By limiting religious belief to
place of worship, you have made the public space the place of your
non-belief alone, and you think your right is violated?
Why do we have to demand the same right when the laws and
constitution are in place???????
I have no problem with you demanding equal right. I have a problem
with you denying that such right is for your own belief. You are
inconsistent. Atheism is a belief which makes it the same as any
religion.
What belief is that, liar?
Your willful ignorance to your own atheism is not my problem either.
Thanks for your admission that you lied about atheism being a belief.
Post by aaa
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Otherwise, the law that protects religious belief can't give you any
protection for your non-belief. There is nothing for the law to
protect.
The law protects non-belief equally with belief.
Not possible.
It is not only possible, it is part of the law.
Post by aaa
Belief can be defined and identified. Non-belief can not
be defined or identified.
Non-belief can be defined and identified as the exact opposite of belief.
Post by aaa
Without identification, there is no way to protect it. It doesn't exist.
Keep telling yourself that, if it makes you feel better.
Post by aaa
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Post by h***@gmail.com
We atheists have never initiate any court order or ruling to forbid
theism praying, or stop the flow of tithes !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What sense you think you can speak when you have your brain
damaged????
Post by aaa
Post by Mr. B1ack
We've had equality under the law with you Bible-humping fucktards
since day one. Get used to it.
--
Smiler,
The godless one. a.a.# 2279
All gods are tailored to order. They're made to
exactly fit the prejudices of their believers.
aaa
2017-04-03 04:28:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Post by h***@gmail.com
Post by aaa
Post by Mr. B1ack
On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 07:25:47 +0200 (CEST), "Tim Browne"
Post by Tim Browne
It must gall the hell out of those crotch sniffers to
have to use the legal system to seek equality with
religionists. Especially when that same system has
declared atheism a religion.
The system has not now or ever declared atheism a
religion, you stupid fuck, only that it is entitled to
the same legal protections as a religion. In short, the
same laws that give you the right to practice your
religion give me the right to reject it as the
superstitious bullshit it is.
Yet, you demand the same religious right while denying
yourself having any kind of religious belief. By limiting
religious belief to place of worship, you have made the
public space the place of your non-belief alone, and you
think your right is violated?
Why do we have to demand the same right when the laws and
constitution are in place???????
I have no problem with you demanding equal right. I have a
problem with you denying that such right is for your own
belief. You are inconsistent. Atheism is a belief which makes
it the same as any religion.
What belief is that, liar?
Your willful ignorance to your own atheism is not my problem
either.
Thanks for your admission that you lied about atheism being a
belief.
That's just my kind suggestion to help you with your atheism.
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Otherwise, the law that protects religious belief can't give
you any protection for your non-belief. There is nothing for
the law to protect.
The law protects non-belief equally with belief.
Not possible.
It is not only possible, it is part of the law.
That has nothing to do with the law. That's just your misinterpretation
of the law.
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Belief can be defined and identified. Non-belief can not be defined
or identified.
Non-belief can be defined and identified as the exact opposite of belief.
Yes, It's the exact opposite of belief and should be dealt with
accordingly. Therefore, what applies to belief does not have to apply to
non-belief.
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Without identification, there is no way to protect it. It doesn't exist.
Keep telling yourself that, if it makes you feel better.
That's perfectly logical according to your definition of atheism.
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Post by h***@gmail.com
We atheists have never initiate any court order or ruling to
forbid theism praying, or stop the flow of tithes
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What sense you think you can speak when you have your brain damaged????
Post by aaa
Post by Mr. B1ack
We've had equality under the law with you Bible-humping
fucktards since day one. Get used to it.
Yap Honghor
2017-04-02 08:17:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by h***@gmail.com
Post by aaa
Post by Mr. B1ack
On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 07:25:47 +0200 (CEST), "Tim Browne"
Post by Tim Browne
It must gall the hell out of those crotch sniffers to have to
use the legal system to seek equality with religionists.
Especially when that same system has declared atheism a
religion.
The system has not now or ever declared atheism a religion, you
stupid fuck, only that it is entitled to the same legal
protections as a religion. In short, the same laws that give you
the right to practice your religion give me the right to reject
it as the superstitious bullshit it is.
Yet, you demand the same religious right while denying yourself
having any kind of religious belief. By limiting religious belief
to place of worship, you have made the public space the place of
your non-belief alone, and you think your right is violated?
Why do we have to demand the same right when the laws and
constitution are in place???????
I have no problem with you demanding equal right. I have a problem with
you denying that such right is for your own belief. You are
inconsistent. Atheism is a belief which makes it the same as any
religion. Otherwise, the law that protects religious belief can't give
you any protection for your non-belief. There is nothing for the law to
protect.
Fucking idiot...if atheism is just another religion, we are quite sure our god will clobber your pixie every single second of the day.
The law just prescribed equal status for us not to believe in your shit.
Post by aaa
Post by h***@gmail.com
We atheists have never initiate any court order or ruling to forbid
theism praying, or stop the flow of tithes !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
See how you conveniently ignore this truth.....

You ain't a truthful person!!!!!!!!!!
Post by aaa
Post by h***@gmail.com
What sense you think you can speak when you have your brain
damaged????
Post by aaa
We've had equality under the law with you
Post by Mr. B1ack
Bible-humping fucktards since day one. Get used to it.
aaa
2017-04-02 10:41:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by aaa
Post by h***@gmail.com
Post by aaa
Post by Mr. B1ack
On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 07:25:47 +0200 (CEST), "Tim Browne"
Post by Tim Browne
It must gall the hell out of those crotch sniffers to have
to use the legal system to seek equality with
religionists. Especially when that same system has declared
atheism a religion.
The system has not now or ever declared atheism a religion,
you stupid fuck, only that it is entitled to the same legal
protections as a religion. In short, the same laws that give
you the right to practice your religion give me the right to
reject it as the superstitious bullshit it is.
Yet, you demand the same religious right while denying
yourself having any kind of religious belief. By limiting
religious belief to place of worship, you have made the public
space the place of your non-belief alone, and you think your
right is violated?
Why do we have to demand the same right when the laws and
constitution are in place???????
I have no problem with you demanding equal right. I have a problem
with you denying that such right is for your own belief. You are
inconsistent. Atheism is a belief which makes it the same as any
religion. Otherwise, the law that protects religious belief can't
give you any protection for your non-belief. There is nothing for
the law to protect.
Fucking idiot...if atheism is just another religion, we are quite
sure our god will clobber your pixie every single second of the day.
The law just prescribed equal status for us not to believe in your shit.
No. The law gives everyone the right to believe whatever they want to
believe, but you can't have equal status with the believers if you don't
have a belief to identify yourself. The believers are different from
common citizens. They have a special belief which you don't have. So the
law that protects religious freedom does not apply to you.
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by aaa
Post by h***@gmail.com
We atheists have never initiate any court order or ruling to
forbid theism praying, or stop the flow of tithes
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
See how you conveniently ignore this truth.....
I don't have to deal with all the shit you guys can come up with.
Atheists have never hesitated to persecute all they can whenever they
have the power to do so. It happened in Communist China regularly in the
old days. There is nothing in atheism that keeps atheists from
committing crimes. A believer of Jesus has the teaching of Jesus to keep
him from doing evil. What does an atheist have to keep him from doing
whatever he can think of to a person he deems superstitious?
Post by Yap Honghor
You ain't a truthful person!!!!!!!!!!
The truth may not be something you would like to know.
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by aaa
Post by h***@gmail.com
What sense you think you can speak when you have your brain
damaged????
Post by aaa
We've had equality under the law with you
Post by Mr. B1ack
Bible-humping fucktards since day one. Get used to it.
hypatiab7
2017-04-02 15:55:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by aaa
Post by h***@gmail.com
Post by aaa
Post by Mr. B1ack
On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 07:25:47 +0200 (CEST), "Tim Browne"
Post by Tim Browne
It must gall the hell out of those crotch sniffers to have
to use the legal system to seek equality with
religionists. Especially when that same system has declared
atheism a religion.
The system has not now or ever declared atheism a religion,
you stupid fuck, only that it is entitled to the same legal
protections as a religion. In short, the same laws that give
you the right to practice your religion give me the right to
reject it as the superstitious bullshit it is.
Yet, you demand the same religious right while denying
yourself having any kind of religious belief. By limiting
religious belief to place of worship, you have made the public
space the place of your non-belief alone, and you think your
right is violated?
No, you demand a right only for yourself and the zero persons who agree with your weirdness but not for anyone else. According to the Constitution, you are full of fecal matter.
Post by aaa
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by aaa
Post by h***@gmail.com
Why do we have to demand the same right when the laws and
constitution are in place???????
I have no problem with you demanding equal right. I have a problem
with you denying that such right is for your own belief. You are
inconsistent. Atheism is a belief which makes it the same as any
religion. Otherwise, the law that protects religious belief can't
give you any protection for your non-belief. There is nothing for
the law to protect.
The law includes our right not to have to have religious beliefs. You
don't like this, so you're performing your regular bigoted song and dance.
Post by aaa
Post by Yap Honghor
Fucking idiot...if atheism is just another religion, we are quite
sure our god will clobber your pixie every single second of the day.
The law just prescribed equal status for us not to believe in your shit.
Geeze, Hap. That makes no sense at all.
Post by aaa
No. The law gives everyone the right to believe whatever they want to
believe, but you can't have equal status with the believers if you don't
have a belief to identify yourself. The believers are different from
common citizens. They have a special belief which you don't have. So the
law that protects religious freedom does not apply to you.
We have a lack of belief to identify us. The law protects us from religion. What are 'common citizens'? What a snobbish thing to say. We are all citizens,
as long as we are either born in the US or naturalized or at least one parent is an American (if born in a different country). You seem to think that religion
belivers have special rights that non-believers don't have .Guess again.
Post by aaa
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by aaa
Post by h***@gmail.com
We atheists have never initiate any court order or ruling to
forbid theism praying, or stop the flow of tithes
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
See how you conveniently ignore this truth.....
I don't have to deal with all the shit you guys can come up with.
Atheists have never hesitated to persecute all they can whenever they
have the power to do so. It happened in Communist China regularly in the
old days. There is nothing in atheism that keeps atheists from
committing crimes. A believer of Jesus has the teaching of Jesus to keep
him from doing evil. What does an atheist have to keep him from doing
whatever he can think of to a person he deems superstitious?
Individual atheists generally have a philosophy that they follow or just
the laws of the land they live in. Most atheists don't care what a non-atheist believes, as long as they keep their beliefs to themselves. Atheists don't
proselytize. What is there to proselytize. And we only discuss our atheism
when asked about it. Creatures like you are the ones who insist on throwing their religious nonsense in our faces unasked for.

I can imagine you sitting in your chair laughing to yourself, thinking that
you've upset me. This is old hat material for trolls. My responses aren't for you, since you'll just ignore them. They're for others who might read both our
responses. Giving them both sides of a argument might give them information
they have been looking for.
Post by aaa
Post by Yap Honghor
You ain't a truthful person!!!!!!!!!!
The truth may not be something you would like to know.
Want to discuss how you believe that knowledge is stored in your heart and not your brain? That's always good for some chuckles.
Post by aaa
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by aaa
Post by h***@gmail.com
What sense you think you can speak when you have your brain damaged????
aaa has mentioned several times that he suffers from brain damage.
Post by aaa
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by aaa
Post by h***@gmail.com
Post by aaa
We've had equality under the law with you
Post by Mr. B1ack
Bible-humping fucktards since day one. Get used to it.
aaa doesn't want to accept that, so he won't.
aaa
2017-04-03 01:31:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by hypatiab7
Post by aaa
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by aaa
Post by h***@gmail.com
Post by aaa
Post by Mr. B1ack
On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 07:25:47 +0200 (CEST), "Tim Browne"
Post by Tim Browne
It must gall the hell out of those crotch sniffers to
have to use the legal system to seek equality with
religionists. Especially when that same system has
declared atheism a religion.
The system has not now or ever declared atheism a
religion, you stupid fuck, only that it is entitled to
the same legal protections as a religion. In short, the
same laws that give you the right to practice your
religion give me the right to reject it as the
superstitious bullshit it is.
Yet, you demand the same religious right while denying
yourself having any kind of religious belief. By limiting
religious belief to place of worship, you have made the
public space the place of your non-belief alone, and you
think your right is violated?
No, you demand a right only for yourself and the zero persons who
agree with your weirdness but not for anyone else. According to the
Constitution, you are full of fecal matter.
There is nothing wrong with the Constitution. There is only something
wrong with atheism. It's inconsistent.
Post by hypatiab7
Post by aaa
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by aaa
Post by h***@gmail.com
Why do we have to demand the same right when the laws and
constitution are in place???????
I have no problem with you demanding equal right. I have a
problem with you denying that such right is for your own
belief. You are inconsistent. Atheism is a belief which makes
it the same as any religion. Otherwise, the law that protects
religious belief can't give you any protection for your
non-belief. There is nothing for the law to protect.
The law includes our right not to have to have religious beliefs.
You don't like this, so you're performing your regular bigoted song
and dance.
I fully support your right to be non-religious. That's why you don't
have the right for religious freedom.
Post by hypatiab7
Post by aaa
Post by Yap Honghor
Fucking idiot...if atheism is just another religion, we are
quite sure our god will clobber your pixie every single second of
the day. The law just prescribed equal status for us not to
believe in your shit.
Geeze, Hap. That makes no sense at all.
Post by aaa
No. The law gives everyone the right to believe whatever they want
to believe, but you can't have equal status with the believers if
you don't have a belief to identify yourself. The believers are
different from common citizens. They have a special belief which
you don't have. So the law that protects religious freedom does not
apply to you.
We have a lack of belief to identify us. The law protects us from
religion. What are 'common citizens'? What a snobbish thing to say.
We are all citizens, as long as we are either born in the US or
naturalized or at least one parent is an American (if born in a
different country). You seem to think that religion belivers have
special rights that non-believers don't have .Guess again.
There is nothing to guess. The believers have their right to exercise
their religious belief. You choose to be non-religious, therefore, you
give up such right.

Should you regret your decision, then you have to redefine your atheism
to make it a little bit different.
Post by hypatiab7
Post by aaa
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by aaa
Post by h***@gmail.com
We atheists have never initiate any court order or ruling to
forbid theism praying, or stop the flow of tithes
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
See how you conveniently ignore this truth.....
I don't have to deal with all the shit you guys can come up with.
Atheists have never hesitated to persecute all they can whenever
they have the power to do so. It happened in Communist China
regularly in the old days. There is nothing in atheism that keeps
atheists from committing crimes. A believer of Jesus has the
teaching of Jesus to keep him from doing evil. What does an atheist
have to keep him from doing whatever he can think of to a person he
deems superstitious?
Individual atheists generally have a philosophy that they follow or
just the laws of the land they live in. Most atheists don't care what
a non-atheist believes, as long as they keep their beliefs to
themselves. Atheists don't proselytize. What is there to proselytize.
And we only discuss our atheism when asked about it. Creatures like
you are the ones who insist on throwing their religious nonsense in
our faces unasked for.
I can imagine you sitting in your chair laughing to yourself,
thinking that you've upset me. This is old hat material for trolls.
My responses aren't for you, since you'll just ignore them. They're
for others who might read both our responses. Giving them both sides
of a argument might give them information they have been looking
for.
I think your argument only confirms my suspicion.
Post by hypatiab7
Post by aaa
Post by Yap Honghor
You ain't a truthful person!!!!!!!!!!
The truth may not be something you would like to know.
Want to discuss how you believe that knowledge is stored in your
heart and not your brain? That's always good for some chuckles.
My hope for your improved philosophical understanding has not been
diminished by your chuckles.
Post by hypatiab7
Post by aaa
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by aaa
Post by h***@gmail.com
What sense you think you can speak when you have your brain damaged????
aaa has mentioned several times that he suffers from brain damage.
Post by aaa
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by aaa
Post by h***@gmail.com
Post by aaa
We've had equality under the law with you
Post by Mr. B1ack
Bible-humping fucktards since day one. Get used to it.
aaa doesn't want to accept that, so he won't.
Mitchell Holman
2017-04-03 01:48:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by hypatiab7
We have a lack of belief to identify us. The law protects us from
religion. What are 'common citizens'? What a snobbish thing to say.
We are all citizens, as long as we are either born in the US or
naturalized or at least one parent is an American (if born in a
different country). You seem to think that religion belivers have
special rights that non-believers don't have .Guess again.
There is nothing to guess. The believers have their right to exercise
their religious belief.
Not when their religious practices interfere
with the freedom of others, they don't.
aaa
2017-04-03 03:38:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by hypatiab7
We have a lack of belief to identify us. The law protects us from
religion. What are 'common citizens'? What a snobbish thing to say.
We are all citizens, as long as we are either born in the US or
naturalized or at least one parent is an American (if born in a
different country). You seem to think that religion belivers have
special rights that non-believers don't have .Guess again.
There is nothing to guess. The believers have their right to exercise
their religious belief.
Not when their religious practices interfere
with the freedom of others, they don't.
Your freedom should not interfere with their practice either. They
shouldn't force you to believe, but you can't stop them expressing their
belief in public either.
Kevrob
2017-04-02 16:52:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by aaa
Post by h***@gmail.com
Post by aaa
Post by Mr. B1ack
On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 07:25:47 +0200 (CEST), "Tim Browne"
Post by Tim Browne
It must gall the hell out of those crotch sniffers to have
to use the legal system to seek equality with
religionists. Especially when that same system has declared
atheism a religion.
The system has not now or ever declared atheism a religion,
you stupid fuck, only that it is entitled to the same legal
protections as a religion. In short, the same laws that give
you the right to practice your religion give me the right to
reject it as the superstitious bullshit it is.
Yet, you demand the same religious right while denying
yourself having any kind of religious belief. By limiting
religious belief to place of worship, you have made the public
space the place of your non-belief alone, and you think your
right is violated?
Why do we have to demand the same right when the laws and
constitution are in place???????
I have no problem with you demanding equal right. I have a problem
with you denying that such right is for your own belief. You are
inconsistent. Atheism is a belief which makes it the same as any
religion. Otherwise, the law that protects religious belief can't
give you any protection for your non-belief. There is nothing for
the law to protect.
Fucking idiot...if atheism is just another religion, we are quite
sure our god will clobber your pixie every single second of the day.
The law just prescribed equal status for us not to believe in your shit.
No. The law gives everyone the right to believe whatever they want to
believe, but you can't have equal status with the believers if you don't
have a belief to identify yourself. The believers are different from
common citizens. They have a special belief which you don't have. So the
law that protects religious freedom does not apply to you.
The US Constitution reads:

[quote]

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,
or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;.....

[/quote] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_amendment

Let's parse that.

Congress.....

{...the several states have similar clauses, and, through the
14th Amendment adopted in 1868, and the Incorporation Doctrine -

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incorporation_of_the_Bill_of_Rights

... the federal protections were extended to the states...)

...shall make no law....

{....and all US gov't activity has to have a basis in law.....)

.....respecting an establishment of religion......

{At the time of the Founding, an "established" religion was
one given special privileges by the government. Spain had
the Roman Catholic Church as its established Church.* The
UK had the Church of England (Anglican,) along with the Scots
Kirk (Presbyterians) and the Church of Ireland (Anglican.)
These were all Protestants. Most of the US states had established
churches, but they were all phased out. Massachusetts didn't fully
disestablish until 1833.

Established churches had functions many nowadays think of as
governmental: they ran schools and hospitals, and distributed
relief to the poor. Special taxes were required to be paid to
support such churches (tithes) whether or not one was a member.
Churches continue to do these things, in addition to secular
governmental efforts, but funds have to be voluntarily collected,
though sometimes they contract with governments to provide services,
as do non-religious providers.

Establishment put burdens on non-members. One could be barred from
political offices, or allowed to enlist in the armed forces, or
even forbidden to preach a rival creed. Britain had "Penal Laws"
punishing those who didn't accept Anglicanism.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penal_law_(Britain)

When Protestant Britain took over Catholic Ireland, they eventually
instituted a similar and strict regime, which also impinged on non-Anglican
Protestants (dissenters.)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penal_Laws_(Ireland)

Non-Anglicans were supposed to be disarmed and disenfranchised, and non-attendance at church of Ireland services meant fines.

Other immigrant groups came to the US to escape oppression by
Catholic monarchs, notably Protestant Huguenots from France.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huguenots

So, the end of established churches means people are free from
supporting an official church.}

..... or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.

(Now, this is the sticky part. The government can't mandate
or subsidize a religion or religion due to the first "make
no law" clause. It also can't proscribe any religion due to
this second one.

That means government has to be neutral among religions, AND
between religion and irreligion. No "favoring religion in
general" v agnosticism or atheism.

So those without religious belief are to have the same civil
rights as those who are inflicted with that.}

At least, that's how things happen in a country with a real
constitution and a 200+-year tradition of church/state separation.
Post by aaa
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by aaa
Post by h***@gmail.com
We atheists have never initiate any court order or ruling to
forbid theism praying, or stop the flow of tithes
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
See how you conveniently ignore this truth.....
I don't have to deal with all the shit you guys can come up with.
Atheists have never hesitated to persecute all they can whenever they
have the power to do so. It happened in Communist China regularly in the
old days.
Church/state separation is designed specifically meant to
avoid the "we are in charge now, do what we say" system,
whether believers are in charge, or not. I agree, some
ideologues, such as the communists, and the French revolutionaries
who tried to promulgate the cult of reason, were atrocious.
Post by aaa
There is nothing in atheism that keeps atheists from
committing crimes.
Ethics can be derived from philosophical principles.

A survey of over 3000 philosophers reported over 2/3rds
are atheists.

http://commonsenseatheism.com/?p=13371

Real, educated philosophers, not delusional headcases.
Post by aaa
A believer of Jesus has the teaching of Jesus to keep
him from doing evil.
So much evil has been done in the names of various ghods that
this isn't credible.
Post by aaa
What does an atheist have to keep him from doing
whatever he can think of to a person he deems superstitious?
Morals.
Post by aaa
Post by Yap Honghor
You ain't a truthful person!!!!!!!!!!
The truth may not be something you would like to know.
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by aaa
Post by h***@gmail.com
What sense you think you can speak when you have your brain damaged????
Post by aaa
We've had equality under the law with you
Post by Mr. B1ack
Bible-humping fucktards since day one. Get used to it.
Kevin R

* https://www.britannica.com/topic/established-church
Marko TheBeest
2017-04-02 17:06:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Somebody wrote:
"A believer of Jesus has the teaching of Jesus to keep him from doing evil."

If this was true, the prisons would be full of atheists and free of xtians.

However, our prison system is populated by about 98% believers and 2% atheists.
aaa
2017-04-03 01:06:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Kevrob
Post by aaa
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by aaa
Post by h***@gmail.com
Post by aaa
Post by Mr. B1ack
On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 07:25:47 +0200 (CEST), "Tim Browne"
Post by Tim Browne
It must gall the hell out of those crotch sniffers to have
to use the legal system to seek equality with
religionists. Especially when that same system has declared
atheism a religion.
The system has not now or ever declared atheism a religion,
you stupid fuck, only that it is entitled to the same legal
protections as a religion. In short, the same laws that give
you the right to practice your religion give me the right to
reject it as the superstitious bullshit it is.
Yet, you demand the same religious right while denying
yourself having any kind of religious belief. By limiting
religious belief to place of worship, you have made the public
space the place of your non-belief alone, and you think your
right is violated?
Why do we have to demand the same right when the laws and
constitution are in place???????
I have no problem with you demanding equal right. I have a problem
with you denying that such right is for your own belief. You are
inconsistent. Atheism is a belief which makes it the same as any
religion. Otherwise, the law that protects religious belief can't
give you any protection for your non-belief. There is nothing for
the law to protect.
Fucking idiot...if atheism is just another religion, we are quite
sure our god will clobber your pixie every single second of the day.
The law just prescribed equal status for us not to believe in your shit.
No. The law gives everyone the right to believe whatever they want to
believe, but you can't have equal status with the believers if you don't
have a belief to identify yourself. The believers are different from
common citizens. They have a special belief which you don't have. So the
law that protects religious freedom does not apply to you.
[quote]
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,
or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;.....
[/quote] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_amendment
Let's parse that.
Congress.....
{...the several states have similar clauses, and, through the
14th Amendment adopted in 1868, and the Incorporation Doctrine -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incorporation_of_the_Bill_of_Rights
.... the federal protections were extended to the states...)
....shall make no law....
{....and all US gov't activity has to have a basis in law.....)
......respecting an establishment of religion......
{At the time of the Founding, an "established" religion was
one given special privileges by the government. Spain had
the Roman Catholic Church as its established Church.* The
UK had the Church of England (Anglican,) along with the Scots
Kirk (Presbyterians) and the Church of Ireland (Anglican.)
These were all Protestants. Most of the US states had established
churches, but they were all phased out. Massachusetts didn't fully
disestablish until 1833.
Established churches had functions many nowadays think of as
governmental: they ran schools and hospitals, and distributed
relief to the poor. Special taxes were required to be paid to
support such churches (tithes) whether or not one was a member.
Churches continue to do these things, in addition to secular
governmental efforts, but funds have to be voluntarily collected,
though sometimes they contract with governments to provide services,
as do non-religious providers.
Establishment put burdens on non-members. One could be barred from
political offices, or allowed to enlist in the armed forces, or
even forbidden to preach a rival creed. Britain had "Penal Laws"
punishing those who didn't accept Anglicanism.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penal_law_(Britain)
When Protestant Britain took over Catholic Ireland, they eventually
instituted a similar and strict regime, which also impinged on non-Anglican
Protestants (dissenters.)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penal_Laws_(Ireland)
Non-Anglicans were supposed to be disarmed and disenfranchised, and non-attendance at church of Ireland services meant fines.
Other immigrant groups came to the US to escape oppression by
Catholic monarchs, notably Protestant Huguenots from France.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huguenots
So, the end of established churches means people are free from
supporting an official church.}
...... or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.
(Now, this is the sticky part. The government can't mandate
or subsidize a religion or religion due to the first "make
no law" clause. It also can't proscribe any religion due to
this second one.
That means government has to be neutral among religions, AND
between religion and irreligion. No "favoring religion in
general" v agnosticism or atheism.
That is not in dispute. As far as the government is concerned, everyone
is equal regardless one's personal belief.
Post by Kevrob
So those without religious belief are to have the same civil
rights as those who are inflicted with that.}
Now there is a problem. Without religious belief, you can't have
religious freedom to exercise your non-existent religious belief. You
are different from the religious people not because you are
discriminated against. It's your own choice to be non-religious. IOW,
you give up your right to exercise your religious freedom by calling
yourself an atheist.

You can't have both ways. If you think atheism is a belief, then it is a
belief system the same as any religion. If you think atheism is a lack
of belief, then it can not be treated as equal to religion.
Post by Kevrob
At least, that's how things happen in a country with a real
constitution and a 200+-year tradition of church/state separation.
Post by aaa
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by aaa
Post by h***@gmail.com
We atheists have never initiate any court order or ruling to
forbid theism praying, or stop the flow of tithes
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
See how you conveniently ignore this truth.....
I don't have to deal with all the shit you guys can come up with.
Atheists have never hesitated to persecute all they can whenever they
have the power to do so. It happened in Communist China regularly in the
old days.
Church/state separation is designed specifically meant to
avoid the "we are in charge now, do what we say" system,
whether believers are in charge, or not. I agree, some
ideologues, such as the communists, and the French revolutionaries
who tried to promulgate the cult of reason, were atrocious.
Post by aaa
There is nothing in atheism that keeps atheists from
committing crimes.
Ethics can be derived from philosophical principles.
A survey of over 3000 philosophers reported over 2/3rds
are atheists.
http://commonsenseatheism.com/?p=13371
Real, educated philosophers, not delusional headcases.
I still see nothing in atheism that would compel an atheist to be
ethical. In fact, logic and reason is likely to trump morality in
Marxist thinking every time. It's why Communism has lost its appeal.
Post by Kevrob
Post by aaa
A believer of Jesus has the teaching of Jesus to keep
him from doing evil.
So much evil has been done in the names of various ghods that
this isn't credible.
People are often at fault, but the teaching of Jesus has never been
proven wrong.
Post by Kevrob
Post by aaa
What does an atheist have to keep him from doing
whatever he can think of to a person he deems superstitious?
Morals.
Interesting. What are morals to an atheist? Is there any evidence for
morals to exist from the atheist point of view?
Post by Kevrob
Post by aaa
Post by Yap Honghor
You ain't a truthful person!!!!!!!!!!
The truth may not be something you would like to know.
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by aaa
Post by h***@gmail.com
What sense you think you can speak when you have your brain damaged????
Post by aaa
We've had equality under the law with you
Post by Mr. B1ack
Bible-humping fucktards since day one. Get used to it.
Kevin R
* https://www.britannica.com/topic/established-church
Mitchell Holman
2017-04-03 01:46:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
I still see nothing in atheism that would compel an atheist to be
ethical.
Bingo. Atheist CHOOSE to be ethical, they don't
need hope of a reward or fear of punishment to do the
right thing.
aaa
2017-04-03 03:45:57 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
I still see nothing in atheism that would compel an atheist to be
ethical.
Bingo. Atheist CHOOSE to be ethical, they don't
need hope of a reward or fear of punishment to do the
right thing.
Except there is no reason for an atheist to choose to be ethical
according to the atheist belief. Atheism is completely amoral.
Joe Bruno
2017-04-03 06:15:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
I still see nothing in atheism that would compel an atheist to be
ethical.
Bingo. Atheist CHOOSE to be ethical, they don't
need hope of a reward or fear of punishment to do the
right thing.
Except there is no reason for an atheist to choose to be ethical
according to the atheist belief. Atheism is completely amoral.
I never realized that before, but I see it for myself.
aaa
2017-04-04 03:38:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Joe Bruno
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
I still see nothing in atheism that would compel an atheist to be
ethical.
Bingo. Atheist CHOOSE to be ethical, they don't
need hope of a reward or fear of punishment to do the
right thing.
Except there is no reason for an atheist to choose to be ethical
according to the atheist belief. Atheism is completely amoral.
I never realized that before, but I see it for myself.
Yes, it's quite funny for atheists to laugh at the believers when they
themselves don't really have a moral center in their own atheism. They
are people who live in their spiritual darkness but claim to have their
moral and spiritual high ground by looking down on the ancient human
history. This is exactly how Communism has committed heinous crimes in
the name of modern progress.
Mitchell Holman
2017-04-04 12:43:57 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by Joe Bruno
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
I still see nothing in atheism that would compel an atheist to be
ethical.
Bingo. Atheist CHOOSE to be ethical, they don't
need hope of a reward or fear of punishment to do the
right thing.
Except there is no reason for an atheist to choose to be ethical
according to the atheist belief. Atheism is completely amoral.
I never realized that before, but I see it for myself.
Yes, it's quite funny for atheists to laugh at the believers when they
themselves don't really have a moral center in their own atheism. They
are people who live in their spiritual darkness but claim to have their
moral and spiritual high ground by looking down on the ancient human
history. This is exactly how Communism has committed heinous crimes in
the name of modern progress.
The fact you haven't read your Bible explains why
you think "biblical morality" is somehow laudable.




When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she
will not be freed at the end of six years as the
men are.
(Exodus 21:7-11 NLT)


When a man strikes his male or female slave with
a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he
shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives
for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since
the slave is his own property.
(Exodus 21:20-21 NAB)


Kill People Who Don't Listen to Priests
(Deuteronomy 17:12)


Kill Witches
(Exodus 22:17)


Kill Homosexuals
(Leviticus 20:13)


Kill Fortunetellers
(Leviticus 20:27)


Death for Hitting Dad
(Exodus 21:15)


Death for Cursing Parents
(Leviticus 20:9)


Death for Adultery
(Leviticus 20:10)


Death for Fornication
(Leviticus 21:9)


Death to Followers of Other Religions
(Exodus 22:19)


Kill Nonbelievers
(2 Chronicles 15:12-13)


Kill False Prophets
(Zechariah 13:3)


Kill the Entire Town if One Person Worships Another God
(Deuteronomy 13:13-19)


Kill Women Who Are Not Virgins On Their Wedding Night
(Deuteronomy 22:20-21)


Kill Followers of Other Religions.
(Deuteronomy 13:7-12)
aaa
2017-04-05 05:41:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Joe Bruno
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
I still see nothing in atheism that would compel an atheist to be
ethical.
Bingo. Atheist CHOOSE to be ethical, they don't
need hope of a reward or fear of punishment to do the
right thing.
Except there is no reason for an atheist to choose to be ethical
according to the atheist belief. Atheism is completely amoral.
I never realized that before, but I see it for myself.
Yes, it's quite funny for atheists to laugh at the believers when they
themselves don't really have a moral center in their own atheism. They
are people who live in their spiritual darkness but claim to have their
moral and spiritual high ground by looking down on the ancient human
history. This is exactly how Communism has committed heinous crimes in
the name of modern progress.
The fact you haven't read your Bible explains why
you think "biblical morality" is somehow laudable.
I agree. What the fuck is "biblical morality"? Never heard of it. The
Bible is a book of philosophy that teaches the morality of God. It's
never meant to be a book of indoctrination on morality. You have to
understand the Bible teaching to realize the true morality of God. The
true morality of God is not what you can see with your eyes alone. The
term "biblical morality" is a misunderstanding. There is no such thing.
Post by Mitchell Holman
When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she
will not be freed at the end of six years as the
men are.
(Exodus 21:7-11 NLT)
When a man strikes his male or female slave with
a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he
shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives
for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since
the slave is his own property.
(Exodus 21:20-21 NAB)
Kill People Who Don't Listen to Priests
(Deuteronomy 17:12)
Kill Witches
(Exodus 22:17)
Kill Homosexuals
(Leviticus 20:13)
Kill Fortunetellers
(Leviticus 20:27)
Death for Hitting Dad
(Exodus 21:15)
Death for Cursing Parents
(Leviticus 20:9)
Death for Adultery
(Leviticus 20:10)
Death for Fornication
(Leviticus 21:9)
Death to Followers of Other Religions
(Exodus 22:19)
Kill Nonbelievers
(2 Chronicles 15:12-13)
Kill False Prophets
(Zechariah 13:3)
Kill the Entire Town if One Person Worships Another God
(Deuteronomy 13:13-19)
Kill Women Who Are Not Virgins On Their Wedding Night
(Deuteronomy 22:20-21)
Kill Followers of Other Religions.
(Deuteronomy 13:7-12)
Mitchell Holman
2017-04-03 09:57:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
I still see nothing in atheism that would compel an atheist to be
ethical.
Bingo. Atheist CHOOSE to be ethical, they don't
need hope of a reward or fear of punishment to do the
right thing.
Except there is no reason for an atheist to choose to be ethical
according to the atheist belief. Atheism is completely amoral.
If your morality is so vile it can only be held
in check by fear of punishment it is not very moral.
aaa
2017-04-04 03:22:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
I still see nothing in atheism that would compel an atheist to be
ethical.
Bingo. Atheist CHOOSE to be ethical, they don't
need hope of a reward or fear of punishment to do the
right thing.
Except there is no reason for an atheist to choose to be ethical
according to the atheist belief. Atheism is completely amoral.
If your morality is so vile it can only be held
in check by fear of punishment it is not very moral.
That's just a personal attack. It has nothing to do with the point I was
raising. What do you have to say about atheism as far as morality is
concerned? Do you take my criticism on atheism as a personal attack on
you as well? Are you amoral?
Mitchell Holman
2017-04-04 12:34:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
I still see nothing in atheism that would compel an atheist to be
ethical.
Bingo. Atheist CHOOSE to be ethical, they don't
need hope of a reward or fear of punishment to do the
right thing.
Except there is no reason for an atheist to choose to be ethical
according to the atheist belief. Atheism is completely amoral.
If your morality is so vile it can only be held
in check by fear of punishment it is not very moral.
That's just a personal attack. It has nothing to do with the point I was
raising. What do you have to say about atheism as far as morality is
concerned? Do you take my criticism on atheism as a personal attack on
you as well? Are you amoral?
Nothing personal about it. Either your morality depends
on fear of divine punishment or it is a product of your
inner sense of decency.
Joe Bruno
2017-04-04 18:29:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
I still see nothing in atheism that would compel an atheist to be
ethical.
Bingo. Atheist CHOOSE to be ethical, they don't
need hope of a reward or fear of punishment to do the
right thing.
Except there is no reason for an atheist to choose to be ethical
according to the atheist belief. Atheism is completely amoral.
If your morality is so vile it can only be held
in check by fear of punishment it is not very moral.
That's just a personal attack. It has nothing to do with the point I was
raising. What do you have to say about atheism as far as morality is
concerned? Do you take my criticism on atheism as a personal attack on
you as well? Are you amoral?
Nothing personal about it. Either your morality depends
on fear of divine punishment or it is a product of your
inner sense of decency.
Inner sense..... decency?

That was notably absent during the Holocaust when the Nazis killed 6 million Jews and 5 million others they didn't approve of.

It was notably absent when the Turks killed 1.1 million Armenians in WWI
It was notably absent when Stalin killed 20 million of his own people and Mao killed thousands of Chinese
It was not apparent during the massacre in Rwanda or Pol Pot's massacre in Cambodia

Saddam Hussein didn't have it
The President of Syria ain't got it
The Viet Cong somehow missed it. They butchered thousands.
The Iranian bigshots sent thousands of young men into battle against Iraq without weapons to protect themselves
The Taliban in Afghanistan seem to be lacking it. They beat and kill people.

It's not inside a whole shitload of people.
Mitchell Holman
2017-04-04 22:03:36 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Joe Bruno
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
I still see nothing in atheism that would compel an atheist to
be ethical.
Bingo. Atheist CHOOSE to be ethical, they don't
need hope of a reward or fear of punishment to do the
right thing.
Except there is no reason for an atheist to choose to be ethical
according to the atheist belief. Atheism is completely amoral.
If your morality is so vile it can only be held
in check by fear of punishment it is not very moral.
That's just a personal attack. It has nothing to do with the point
I was raising. What do you have to say about atheism as far as
morality is concerned? Do you take my criticism on atheism as a
personal attack on you as well? Are you amoral?
Nothing personal about it. Either your morality depends
on fear of divine punishment or it is a product of your
inner sense of decency.
Inner sense..... decency?
That was notably absent during the Holocaust when the Nazis killed 6
million Jews and 5 million others they didn't approve of.
The Nazis were CHRISTIANS, remember?


Besides, I don't recall a lot of gnahing about
killing Jews when your god was doing it.




Numbers 16:49 A plague from the Lord kills 14,700 people.

Numbers 25:9 24,000 people die in a plague from the Lord.

2 Samuel 24:15 The Lord sends a pestilence on Israel that
kills 70,000 men.

2 Kings 19:35 An angel of the Lord kills 185,000 men.
Joe Bruno
2017-04-05 06:15:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by Joe Bruno
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
I still see nothing in atheism that would compel an atheist to
be ethical.
Bingo. Atheist CHOOSE to be ethical, they don't
need hope of a reward or fear of punishment to do the
right thing.
Except there is no reason for an atheist to choose to be ethical
according to the atheist belief. Atheism is completely amoral.
If your morality is so vile it can only be held
in check by fear of punishment it is not very moral.
That's just a personal attack. It has nothing to do with the point
I was raising. What do you have to say about atheism as far as
morality is concerned? Do you take my criticism on atheism as a
personal attack on you as well? Are you amoral?
Nothing personal about it. Either your morality depends
on fear of divine punishment or it is a product of your
inner sense of decency.
Inner sense..... decency?
That was notably absent during the Holocaust when the Nazis killed 6
million Jews and 5 million others they didn't approve of.
The Nazis were CHRISTIANS, remember?
That's what Hitler said BEFORE he became dictator. This was afterwards.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirchenkampf
Mitchell Holman
2017-04-05 12:25:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Joe Bruno
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by Joe Bruno
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
I still see nothing in atheism that would compel an atheist to
be ethical.
Bingo. Atheist CHOOSE to be ethical, they don't
need hope of a reward or fear of punishment to do the
right thing.
Except there is no reason for an atheist to choose to be ethical
according to the atheist belief. Atheism is completely amoral.
If your morality is so vile it can only be held
in check by fear of punishment it is not very moral.
That's just a personal attack. It has nothing to do with the point
I was raising. What do you have to say about atheism as far as
morality is concerned? Do you take my criticism on atheism as a
personal attack on you as well? Are you amoral?
Nothing personal about it. Either your morality depends
on fear of divine punishment or it is a product of your
inner sense of decency.
Inner sense..... decency?
That was notably absent during the Holocaust when the Nazis killed 6
million Jews and 5 million others they didn't approve of.
The Nazis were CHRISTIANS, remember?
That's what Hitler said BEFORE he became dictator.
Germany was and is a CHRISTIAN country. The Nazi
troops were ALL raised as Catholics and Lutherans.
Post by Joe Bruno
This was afterwards.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirchenkampf
If you insist on focusing on Hitler, well.......



"My feelings as a Christian points me to my
Lord and Savior as a fighter."
-Adolf Hitler, 12 April 1922


"In this hour I would ask of the Lord God only
this: that, as in the past, so in the years to
come He would give His blessing to our work and
our action"
-Adolf Hitler, 27 June 1937


"For as a Christian I have also a duty to my
own people."
-Adolf Hitler, 12 April 1922


"God the Almighty has made our nation. By defending
its existence we are defending His work. In vowing
ourselves to one another, we are entitled to stand
before the Almighty and ask Him for His grace and
His blessing."
-Adolf Hitler, 30 Jan. 1945



"Secular schools can never be tolerated because
such a school has no religious instruction and
a general moral instruction without a religious
foundation is built on air; consequently, all
character training and religion must be derived
from faith.... We need believing people."

-Adolf Hitler, April 26, 1933


"We were convinced that the people need and
require the Christian faith. We have therefore
undertaken the fight against the atheistic
movement, and that not merely with a few
theoretical declarations: we have stamped it
out."
-Adolf Hitler, October 1933


"With a tenth of our budget for religion, we
would thus have a Church devoted to the State
and of unshakable loyalty."
-Adolf Hitler, January 1939


"We want to fill our culture again with the
Christian spirit. We want to burn out all the
recent immoral developments in literature, in
the theater, and in the press-in short, we want
to burn out the poison of immorality which has
entered into our whole life and culture as a
result of liberal excess."
-Adolf Hitler, March 1936
Joe Bruno
2017-04-05 06:37:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by Joe Bruno
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
I still see nothing in atheism that would compel an atheist to
be ethical.
Bingo. Atheist CHOOSE to be ethical, they don't
need hope of a reward or fear of punishment to do the
right thing.
Except there is no reason for an atheist to choose to be ethical
according to the atheist belief. Atheism is completely amoral.
If your morality is so vile it can only be held
in check by fear of punishment it is not very moral.
That's just a personal attack. It has nothing to do with the point
I was raising. What do you have to say about atheism as far as
morality is concerned? Do you take my criticism on atheism as a
personal attack on you as well? Are you amoral?
Nothing personal about it. Either your morality depends
on fear of divine punishment or it is a product of your
inner sense of decency.
Inner sense..... decency?
That was notably absent during the Holocaust when the Nazis killed 6
million Jews and 5 million others they didn't approve of.
The Nazis were CHRISTIANS, remember?
Besides, I don't recall a lot of gnahing about
killing Jews when your god was doing it.
Numbers 16:49 A plague from the Lord kills 14,700 people. Not from the Lord
Numbers 25:9 24,000 people die in a plague from the Lord. Not from the Lord
2 Samuel 24:15 The Lord sends a pestilence on Israel that
kills 70,000 men.(That was David's choice of 3 options)
2 Kings 19:35 An angel of the Lord kills 185,000 men.(They were Assyrians-Israel's enemies.)
Europe had numerous plagues in the 13th, 14th, and 15th centuries.
Most were from infected flea bites. The fleas were carried by rats.
aaa
2017-04-05 05:49:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
I still see nothing in atheism that would compel an atheist to be
ethical.
Bingo. Atheist CHOOSE to be ethical, they don't
need hope of a reward or fear of punishment to do the
right thing.
Except there is no reason for an atheist to choose to be ethical
according to the atheist belief. Atheism is completely amoral.
If your morality is so vile it can only be held
in check by fear of punishment it is not very moral.
That's just a personal attack. It has nothing to do with the point I was
raising. What do you have to say about atheism as far as morality is
concerned? Do you take my criticism on atheism as a personal attack on
you as well? Are you amoral?
Nothing personal about it. Either your morality depends
on fear of divine punishment or it is a product of your
inner sense of decency.
Why can't it be both? and what does atheism have anything to do with
your inner sense of decency? I'm not sure that your inner sense of
decency is even considered as real according to atheism. Why is it not
imaginary? Where is the evidence of that in terms of atheism is concerned?
Alex W.
2017-04-04 07:13:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
I still see nothing in atheism that would compel an atheist to be
ethical.
Bingo. Atheist CHOOSE to be ethical, they don't
need hope of a reward or fear of punishment to do the
right thing.
Except there is no reason for an atheist to choose to be ethical
according to the atheist belief. Atheism is completely amoral.
Hogwash and codswallop.

Like the vast majority of people, atheists are part of society, part of
communities, social beings like all other humans. We interact. We
network. All of this absolutely requires morality. There can be no
social interaction without morality.

The one difference is that ours is a genuine morality, not some
unquestioned obedience to some alleged deity. We do things because it
is the right thing to do, not because some god decrees it.
Marko TheBeest
2017-04-04 07:44:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
The war is for Control and Obedience.

There was a period around the turn of the 20th century when people were throwing off the mental, psychological and "spiritual" shackles of the Oligarchy.

FreeThinkers started communities and created art and coexisted peacefully and really wanted to grow.

We have regressed and devolved.

Our machines are evolving exponentially, but our culture, our collective level of emotional maturity and intellectual honesty, is circling the Tidy Bowl man and making that sick gurgling, sucking sound that always accompanies the life leaving something.
Rick Johnson
2017-04-05 01:01:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Marko TheBeest
The war is for Control and Obedience.
Indeed. And eveyday "we the people" are lossing more and
more of our physical and mental autonomy. Some days i feel
like i'm surronded by cash thirsty vampires. Other days, by
mindless zombies. But all to often, it's both.

I see them on the highways, in their sheet-metal coffins,
with their pasty faces lit from the warm glow of an iPhone
screen. (clickity-click) I see them at the watercoolers,
distracting themselves from the mindless daily drugery by
propagating the corporate memes of other engineered
distractions we call Sports and TvDrama (gabbity-gab)

They're all slaves to the system.

How pathetic.
Marko TheBeest
2017-04-03 04:35:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
a limited imagination wrote:
"I still see nothing in atheism that would compel an atheist to be ethical."


Morality is a code or set of principles regarding right and wrong behavior.

In my opinion, RIGHT behavior is that which HELPS living things FLOURISH.

In my opinion, WRONG behavior is that which HARMS and causes SUFFERING.

My 4 year old niece understands this.

Nothing COMPELS anyone to do right.

Our behavior is the direct result of our choices. Some xtians choose to follow the teachings of their textbook. And some xtians choose not to. The prisons are full of pious humans.

Compassion is superior to compulsion.
aaa
2017-04-03 05:11:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
a limited imagination wrote: "I still see nothing in atheism that
would compel an atheist to be ethical."
Morality is a code or set of principles regarding right and wrong behavior.
In my opinion, RIGHT behavior is that which HELPS living things FLOURISH.
In my opinion, WRONG behavior is that which HARMS and causes
SUFFERING.
My 4 year old niece understands this.
Nothing COMPELS anyone to do right.
Our behavior is the direct result of our choices. Some xtians choose
to follow the teachings of their textbook. And some xtians choose not
to. The prisons are full of pious humans.
Compassion is superior to compulsion.
Thank you for confirming what I said. When it comes to compassion,
atheists have nothing to claim a higher ground. Yet, they have no
problem to ignore the compassion of Jesus Christ. I wonder why.
Joe Bruno
2017-04-03 06:16:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Marko TheBeest
"I still see nothing in atheism that would compel an atheist to be ethical."
Morality is a code or set of principles regarding right and wrong behavior.
In my opinion, RIGHT behavior is that which HELPS living things FLOURISH.
In my opinion, WRONG behavior is that which HARMS and causes SUFFERING.
My 4 year old niece understands this.
Nothing COMPELS anyone to do right.
Our behavior is the direct result of our choices. Some xtians choose to follow the teachings of their textbook. And some xtians choose not to. The prisons are full of pious humans.
Compassion is superior to compulsion.
That would be nice, except other priorities get in the way: greed, ego and jealousy.
Kevrob
2017-04-03 10:14:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Marko TheBeest
"I still see nothing in atheism that would compel an atheist to be ethical."
Morality is a code or set of principles regarding right and wrong behavior.
In my opinion, RIGHT behavior is that which HELPS living things FLOURISH.
In my opinion, WRONG behavior is that which HARMS and causes SUFFERING.
My 4 year old niece understands this.
Nothing COMPELS anyone to do right.
Our behavior is the direct result of our choices. Some xtians choose to follow the teachings of their textbook. And some xtians choose not to. The prisons are full of pious humans.
Compassion is superior to compulsion.
That's something I agree with.

You won't convince aaa; he is a self-described sufferer
to a brain injury and is immune to persuasion. He fancies
himself able to discern the truths of the universe by
"listening to his heart," which he thinks is a pipeline to
the divine.

http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/F/Formosas-Law.html

People who don't believe can and do have an entire range of
moral stances, from amoral nihilism to alternate moral systems
such as those held by various flavors of communists or by
Randian objectivists. The moral systems promulgated by
believers, if not always followed by them, aren't actually
invented by any ghod, so they aren't naturally superior
to secular ones. As far as they are based on flawed premises
about the universe, they are likely to be worse.

Kevin R
aaa
2017-04-04 03:58:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Kevrob
Post by Marko TheBeest
"I still see nothing in atheism that would compel an atheist to be ethical."
Morality is a code or set of principles regarding right and wrong behavior.
In my opinion, RIGHT behavior is that which HELPS living things FLOURISH.
In my opinion, WRONG behavior is that which HARMS and causes SUFFERING.
My 4 year old niece understands this.
Nothing COMPELS anyone to do right.
Our behavior is the direct result of our choices. Some xtians choose to follow the teachings of their textbook. And some xtians choose not to. The prisons are full of pious humans.
Compassion is superior to compulsion.
That's something I agree with.
You won't convince aaa; he is a self-described sufferer
to a brain injury and is immune to persuasion. He fancies
himself able to discern the truths of the universe by
"listening to his heart," which he thinks is a pipeline to
the divine.
http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/F/Formosas-Law.html
People who don't believe can and do have an entire range of
moral stances, from amoral nihilism to alternate moral systems
such as those held by various flavors of communists or by
Randian objectivists.
Moral conviction is often in direct contradiction with logic and reason.
It's a conviction. It's before logic and reason. For people who claim to
follow logic and reason like the atheists, there is no reason to believe
that they will be able to uphold their moral conviction in the face of
their different logical conclusions. It's more likely that they will
abandon their morality since it's all imaginary in their mind with no
real physical evidence to be shown as real and true.


The moral systems promulgated by
Post by Kevrob
believers, if not always followed by them, aren't actually
invented by any ghod, so they aren't naturally superior
to secular ones.
That is just your imaginary claim. You have neither the understanding of
morality nor the understanding of God for you to make such claim.
Scientifically speaking, morality and God are entirely nonexistent.
Philosophically speaking, morality is closely related to God.
Spiritually speaking, morality can only come from God.


As far as they are based on flawed premises
Post by Kevrob
about the universe, they are likely to be worse.
The universe is amoral as well. It has nothing to say and has no effect
on morality.
Post by Kevrob
Kevin R
Smiler
2017-04-03 02:06:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by aaa
Post by h***@gmail.com
Post by aaa
Post by Mr. B1ack
On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 07:25:47 +0200 (CEST), "Tim Browne"
It must gall the hell out of those crotch sniffers to have to use
the legal system to seek equality with religionists. Especially
when that same system has declared atheism a religion.
The system has not now or ever declared atheism a religion, you
stupid fuck, only that it is entitled to the same legal protections
as a religion. In short, the same laws that give you the right to
practice your religion give me the right to reject it as the
superstitious bullshit it is.
Yet, you demand the same religious right while denying yourself
having any kind of religious belief. By limiting religious belief to
place of worship, you have made the public space the place of your
non-belief alone, and you think your right is violated?
Why do we have to demand the same right when the laws and
constitution are in place???????
I have no problem with you demanding equal right. I have a problem
with you denying that such right is for your own belief. You are
inconsistent. Atheism is a belief which makes it the same as any
religion. Otherwise, the law that protects religious belief can't give
you any protection for your non-belief. There is nothing for the law
to protect.
Fucking idiot...if atheism is just another religion, we are quite sure
our god will clobber your pixie every single second of the day.
The law just prescribed equal status for us not to believe in your shit.
No. The law gives everyone the right to believe whatever they want to
believe, but you can't have equal status with the believers if you don't
have a belief to identify yourself. The believers are different from
common citizens. They have a special belief which you don't have.
A 'special' belief they get taught in their 'special' schools which they
get to on their 'special' bus.
Post by aaa
So the law that protects religious freedom does not apply to you.
Freedom of and FROM religion.
Post by aaa
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by aaa
Post by h***@gmail.com
We atheists have never initiate any court order or ruling to forbid
theism praying, or stop the flow of tithes !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
See how you conveniently ignore this truth.....
I don't have to deal with all the shit you guys can come up with.
Yet you expect us to deal with all the shit you come up with.
Post by aaa
Atheists have never hesitated to persecute all they can whenever they
have the power to do so. It happened in Communist China regularly in the
old days. There is nothing in atheism that keeps atheists from
committing crimes. A believer of Jesus has the teaching of Jesus to keep
him from doing evil.
So, if you were convinced that there is no god or Jesus you would go on a
murder, rape and pillage spree? I'm glad you're not my neighbour.
Post by aaa
What does an atheist have to keep him from doing
whatever he can think of to a person he deems superstitious?
It's called empathy, something for which theists are not known.
Post by aaa
Post by Yap Honghor
You ain't a truthful person!!!!!!!!!!
The truth may not be something you would like to know.
What truth would that be, liar?
Post by aaa
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by aaa
Post by h***@gmail.com
What sense you think you can speak when you have your brain
damaged????
Post by aaa
We've had equality under the law with you
Post by Mr. B1ack
Bible-humping fucktards since day one. Get used to it.
--
Smiler,
The godless one. a.a.# 2279
All gods are tailored to order. They're made to
exactly fit the prejudices of their believers.
aaa
2017-04-03 04:12:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by aaa
Post by h***@gmail.com
Post by aaa
Post by Mr. B1ack
On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 07:25:47 +0200 (CEST), "Tim Browne"
Post by Tim Browne
It must gall the hell out of those crotch sniffers to
have to use the legal system to seek equality with
religionists. Especially when that same system has
declared atheism a religion.
The system has not now or ever declared atheism a
religion, you stupid fuck, only that it is entitled to
the same legal protections as a religion. In short, the
same laws that give you the right to practice your
religion give me the right to reject it as the
superstitious bullshit it is.
Yet, you demand the same religious right while denying
yourself having any kind of religious belief. By limiting
religious belief to place of worship, you have made the
public space the place of your non-belief alone, and you
think your right is violated?
Why do we have to demand the same right when the laws and
constitution are in place???????
I have no problem with you demanding equal right. I have a
problem with you denying that such right is for your own
belief. You are inconsistent. Atheism is a belief which makes
it the same as any religion. Otherwise, the law that protects
religious belief can't give you any protection for your
non-belief. There is nothing for the law to protect.
Fucking idiot...if atheism is just another religion, we are quite
sure our god will clobber your pixie every single second of the
day. The law just prescribed equal status for us not to believe
in your shit.
No. The law gives everyone the right to believe whatever they want
to believe, but you can't have equal status with the believers if
you don't have a belief to identify yourself. The believers are
different from common citizens. They have a special belief which
you don't have.
A 'special' belief they get taught in their 'special' schools which
they get to on their 'special' bus.
Post by aaa
So the law that protects religious freedom does not apply to you.
Freedom of and FROM religion.
Such freedom only protects you. It does not give you the right to stop
them from doing what they choose to do.
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by aaa
Post by h***@gmail.com
We atheists have never initiate any court order or ruling to
forbid theism praying, or stop the flow of tithes
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
See how you conveniently ignore this truth.....
I don't have to deal with all the shit you guys can come up with.
Yet you expect us to deal with all the shit you come up with.
No. I expect you to fail to deal with all of them.
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Atheists have never hesitated to persecute all they can whenever
they have the power to do so. It happened in Communist China
regularly in the old days. There is nothing in atheism that keeps
atheists from committing crimes. A believer of Jesus has the
teaching of Jesus to keep him from doing evil.
So, if you were convinced that there is no god or Jesus you would go
on a murder, rape and pillage spree? I'm glad you're not my
neighbour.
No. If I were convinced of that, I would have to kill myself first and
foremost before anything else. A life without God and the love of Jesus
is always worse than death.
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
What does an atheist have to keep him from doing whatever he can
think of to a person he deems superstitious?
It's called empathy, something for which theists are not known.
I'm so glad you mention that. Where is your evidence for this empathy?
Why is it not a mere imagination according to you?
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Post by Yap Honghor
You ain't a truthful person!!!!!!!!!!
The truth may not be something you would like to know.
What truth would that be, liar?
For you, in this case, it would be called the truth of empathy.
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by aaa
Post by h***@gmail.com
What sense you think you can speak when you have your brain damaged????
Post by aaa
We've had equality under the law with you
Post by Mr. B1ack
Bible-humping fucktards since day one. Get used to it.
hypatiab7
2017-04-02 15:01:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by h***@gmail.com
Post by aaa
Post by Mr. B1ack
On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 07:25:47 +0200 (CEST), "Tim Browne"
Post by Tim Browne
It must gall the hell out of those crotch sniffers to have to
use the legal system to seek equality with religionists.
Especially when that same system has declared atheism a
religion.
The system has not now or ever declared atheism a religion, you
stupid fuck, only that it is entitled to the same legal
protections as a religion. In short, the same laws that give you
the right to practice your religion give me the right to reject
it as the superstitious bullshit it is.
Yet, you demand the same religious right while denying yourself
having any kind of religious belief. By limiting religious belief
to place of worship, you have made the public space the place of
your non-belief alone, and you think your right is violated?
Why do we have to demand the same right when the laws and
constitution are in place???????
I have no problem with you demanding equal right. I have a problem with
you denying that such right is for your own belief. You are
inconsistent. Atheism is a belief which makes it the same as any
religion. Otherwise, the law that protects religious belief can't give
you any protection for your non-belief. There is nothing for the law to
protect.
You've been told this several times - atheism is a lack of belief,
not a belief. As far as religion is concerned, there is nothing
to believe. And, you can't prove there is. Why do you insist on lying?
Post by aaa
Post by h***@gmail.com
We atheists have never initiate any court order or ruling to forbid
theism praying, or stop the flow of tithes !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What sense you think you can speak when you have your brain
damaged????
Post by aaa
We've had equality under the law with you
Post by Mr. B1ack
Bible-humping fucktards since day one. Get used to it.
Kevrob
2017-04-02 15:13:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by hypatiab7
You've been told this several times - atheism is a lack of belief,
not a belief. As far as religion is concerned, there is nothing
to believe. And, you can't prove there is. Why do you insist on lying?
`Cause he's either unable to change his behavior due to the
brain injury he reported he received years ago, or.......

`Cause he's a lying troll.

If it is the first, there's no point arguing with him.

Kevin R

Kevin R
Kadaitcha Man
2017-04-02 21:36:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Kevrob, thou thing of no bowels, thou. Ye deformed rabble of vile
Post by Kevrob
Post by hypatiab7
You've been told this several times - atheism is a lack of belief,
not a belief. As far as religion is concerned, there is nothing
to believe. And, you can't prove there is. Why do you insist on lying?
`Cause he's either unable to change his behavior due to the
brain injury he reported he received years ago, or.......
`Cause he's a lying troll.
If it is the first, there's no point arguing with him.
Absolutely none whatsoever.
--
Before you fucking well complain about the fucking swearing in my
fucking posts, read this fucking article, you fucking dipshit whiner:

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/01/170117105107.htm
aaa
2017-04-03 01:38:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by hypatiab7
Post by aaa
Post by h***@gmail.com
Post by aaa
Post by Mr. B1ack
On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 07:25:47 +0200 (CEST), "Tim Browne"
Post by Tim Browne
It must gall the hell out of those crotch sniffers to have to
use the legal system to seek equality with religionists.
Especially when that same system has declared atheism a
religion.
The system has not now or ever declared atheism a religion, you
stupid fuck, only that it is entitled to the same legal
protections as a religion. In short, the same laws that give you
the right to practice your religion give me the right to reject
it as the superstitious bullshit it is.
Yet, you demand the same religious right while denying yourself
having any kind of religious belief. By limiting religious belief
to place of worship, you have made the public space the place of
your non-belief alone, and you think your right is violated?
Why do we have to demand the same right when the laws and
constitution are in place???????
I have no problem with you demanding equal right. I have a problem with
you denying that such right is for your own belief. You are
inconsistent. Atheism is a belief which makes it the same as any
religion. Otherwise, the law that protects religious belief can't give
you any protection for your non-belief. There is nothing for the law to
protect.
You've been told this several times - atheism is a lack of belief,
not a belief. As far as religion is concerned, there is nothing
to believe. And, you can't prove there is. Why do you insist on lying?
I don't think that you are disagreeing with what I said in the above.
Post by hypatiab7
Post by aaa
Post by h***@gmail.com
We atheists have never initiate any court order or ruling to forbid
theism praying, or stop the flow of tithes !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What sense you think you can speak when you have your brain
damaged????
Post by aaa
We've had equality under the law with you
Post by Mr. B1ack
Bible-humping fucktards since day one. Get used to it.
Cloud Hobbit
2017-04-03 08:23:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by h***@gmail.com
Post by aaa
Post by Mr. B1ack
On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 07:25:47 +0200 (CEST), "Tim Browne"
Post by Tim Browne
It must gall the hell out of those crotch sniffers to have to
use the legal system to seek equality with religionists.
Especially when that same system has declared atheism a
religion.
The system has not now or ever declared atheism a religion, you
stupid fuck, only that it is entitled to the same legal
protections as a religion. In short, the same laws that give you
the right to practice your religion give me the right to reject
it as the superstitious bullshit it is.
Yet, you demand the same religious right while denying yourself
having any kind of religious belief. By limiting religious belief
to place of worship, you have made the public space the place of
your non-belief alone, and you think your right is violated?
Why do we have to demand the same right when the laws and
constitution are in place???????
I have no problem with you demanding equal right. I have a problem with
you denying that such right is for your own belief. You are
inconsistent. Atheism is a belief which makes it the same as any
religion. Otherwise, the law that protects religious belief can't give
you any protection for your non-belief. There is nothing for the law to
protect.
You are displaying your lack of understanding again. The first amendment protects believers from each other and non-believers from the believers, which history has shown to be far more dangerous tan the nonbelievers.

It protects us from the tyranny of the majority. Just because everybody in the world but you and your family are atheists, does not mean that the rest of the world is allowed to interfere with your rights to not believe.

Atheism is not a set of beliefs, it is nonbelief in any deity or deities. Nothing more.
Post by aaa
Post by h***@gmail.com
We atheists have never initiate any court order or ruling to forbid
theism praying, or stop the flow of tithes !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What sense you think you can speak when you have your brain
damaged????
Post by aaa
We've had equality under the law with you
Post by Mr. B1ack
Bible-humping fucktards since day one. Get used to it.
They will never get used to not being in charge and not being able to put the fear of god into people. You know, cuz they love us so much. :-(
aaa
2017-04-04 04:37:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Post by aaa
Post by h***@gmail.com
Post by aaa
Post by Mr. B1ack
On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 07:25:47 +0200 (CEST), "Tim Browne"
Post by Tim Browne
It must gall the hell out of those crotch sniffers to have
to use the legal system to seek equality with
religionists. Especially when that same system has declared
atheism a religion.
The system has not now or ever declared atheism a religion,
you stupid fuck, only that it is entitled to the same legal
protections as a religion. In short, the same laws that give
you the right to practice your religion give me the right to
reject it as the superstitious bullshit it is.
Yet, you demand the same religious right while denying
yourself having any kind of religious belief. By limiting
religious belief to place of worship, you have made the public
space the place of your non-belief alone, and you think your
right is violated?
Why do we have to demand the same right when the laws and
constitution are in place???????
I have no problem with you demanding equal right. I have a problem
with you denying that such right is for your own belief. You are
inconsistent. Atheism is a belief which makes it the same as any
religion. Otherwise, the law that protects religious belief can't
give you any protection for your non-belief. There is nothing for
the law to protect.
You are displaying your lack of understanding again. The first
amendment protects believers from each other and non-believers from
the believers, which history has shown to be far more dangerous tan
the nonbelievers.
The law is not in dispute. Whether atheism is a belief is in dispute. If
you think it is, then you are protected by the law. If you think it is a
non-belief, then there is nothing for the law to protect. A non-belief
can be anything in this world. The law can't protect everything.
Post by Cloud Hobbit
It protects us from the tyranny of the majority. Just because
everybody in the world but you and your family are atheists, does not
mean that the rest of the world is allowed to interfere with your
rights to not believe.
Atheism is not a set of beliefs, it is nonbelief in any deity or deities. Nothing more.
That's why atheism is inconsistent. A non-belief can not have equal
rights as a belief has.
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Post by aaa
Post by h***@gmail.com
We atheists have never initiate any court order or ruling to
forbid theism praying, or stop the flow of tithes
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What sense you think you can speak when you have your brain
damaged????
Post by aaa
We've had equality under the law with you
Post by Mr. B1ack
Bible-humping fucktards since day one. Get used to it.
They will never get used to not being in charge and not being able to
put the fear of god into people. You know, cuz they love us so much.
:-(
Marko TheBeest
2017-04-04 04:47:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
That's why atheism is inconsistent. A non-belief can not have equal
rights as a belief has.
Hmmmm. This is some interesting logic you are attempting here. Let's see how it holds up:

Can a non-male have the same rights as a male?
Can a non-Priest have the same rights as a Priest?
Can a non-believer have the same rights as a believer?
Can a non-Floridian have the same rights as a Floridian?
Can a non-Republican have the same rights as a Republican?


That logic seems to suggest the answer could be "YES".
Smiler
2017-04-04 23:07:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Post by aaa
Post by h***@gmail.com
Post by aaa
Post by Mr. B1ack
On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 07:25:47 +0200 (CEST), "Tim Browne"
It must gall the hell out of those crotch sniffers to have to use
the legal system to seek equality with religionists. Especially
when that same system has declared atheism a religion.
The system has not now or ever declared atheism a religion, you
stupid fuck, only that it is entitled to the same legal protections
as a religion. In short, the same laws that give you the right to
practice your religion give me the right to reject it as the
superstitious bullshit it is.
Yet, you demand the same religious right while denying yourself
having any kind of religious belief. By limiting religious belief to
place of worship, you have made the public space the place of your
non-belief alone, and you think your right is violated?
Why do we have to demand the same right when the laws and
constitution are in place???????
I have no problem with you demanding equal right. I have a problem
with you denying that such right is for your own belief. You are
inconsistent. Atheism is a belief which makes it the same as any
religion. Otherwise, the law that protects religious belief can't give
you any protection for your non-belief. There is nothing for the law
to protect.
You are displaying your lack of understanding again. The first
amendment protects believers from each other and non-believers from the
believers, which history has shown to be far more dangerous tan the
nonbelievers.
The law is not in dispute. Whether atheism is a belief is in dispute. If
you think it is, then you are protected by the law. If you think it is a
non-belief, then there is nothing for the law to protect. A non-belief
can be anything in this world. The law can't protect everything.
"Freedom can be anything in this world. The law can't protect everything."
Post by aaa
Post by Cloud Hobbit
It protects us from the tyranny of the majority. Just because
everybody in the world but you and your family are atheists, does not
mean that the rest of the world is allowed to interfere with your
rights to not believe.
Atheism is not a set of beliefs, it is nonbelief in any deity or deities. Nothing more.
That's why atheism is inconsistent. A non-belief can not have equal
rights as a belief has.
Why not? Your unevidenced say-so is meaningless.
Post by aaa
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Post by aaa
Post by h***@gmail.com
We atheists have never initiate any court order or ruling to forbid
theism praying, or stop the flow of tithes !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What sense you think you can speak when you have your brain
damaged????
Post by aaa
We've had equality under the law with you
Post by Mr. B1ack
Bible-humping fucktards since day one. Get used to it.
They will never get used to not being in charge and not being able to
put the fear of god into people. You know, cuz they love us so much.
:-(
--
Smiler,
The godless one. a.a.# 2279
All gods are tailored to order. They're made to
exactly fit the prejudices of their believers.
Rick Johnson
2017-04-02 04:10:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by John Baker
Post by Tim Browne
It must gall the hell out of those crotch sniffers to
have to use the legal system to seek equality with
religionists. Especially when that same system has
declared atheism a religion.
The system has not now or ever declared atheism a
religion, you stupid fuck, only that it is entitled to the
same legal protections as a religion. In short, the same
laws that give you the right to practice your religion
give me the right to reject it as the superstitious
bullshit it is.
Yet, you demand the same religious right while denying
yourself having any kind of religious belief.
There is nothing "religious" about demanding to be treated
as an equal. We are talking about civil law and civility
here. Not religious edict.
Post by aaa
By limiting religious belief to place of worship,
You are confusing beliefs with practices. No one can force
you to stop believing in your god-delusion. Trust me, if i
could remove that malware from your grey matter, i would.
But i can't. No one can. No one but *YOU*, that is.
Post by aaa
you have made the public space the place of your non-belief
alone,
Really? When were all the ten commandments shrines removed
from their pedestals? When were the religious art pieces
removed from the capital buildings? When was "in god we
trust" removed from our monies? When will the constitution
finally be relieved of all the god references? If you are
viewing america from the moon perhaps you can conclude that
we are now a secular society, but even the slightest
scrutiny will uncover evidence that suggest an insidious
religious element still infects every aspect of our
government and public life.
Post by aaa
and you think your right is violated?
Our rights have been violated. And they continue to be
violated. Your right to practise is not a right to
brainwash. It is not a right to harass. You can practise in
your churches and homes and private gatherings, which is
more than generous. And you should consider yourself lucky
to live in a time and place of religious tolerance. You have
no idea how bad things could be. You and your ilk are
bitching about christmas trees and easter bunnies. It's
beyond silly. Grow up! You all sound like spoiled children
who are unwilling to share toys at playtime. You have your
delusion, now go comfort yourself in its warm fuzzy embrace.

But that's not enough for you, is it? You want your
delusion, *AND* then you want to ram it down our throats!
You want to spit in our faces. You want to parade around and
thump your chest and tell us how awful we are because we
don't belong to your social group. These are not the
behaviors of a rational, even-tempered individual, nor are
they the behaviors of a tolerant person, no, these are the
behaviors of a hateful and potentially violent person.

Please do some introspection. Spend some time thinking
about what is important in the public sphere, and what is
not.

Imagine a scenario were multiple people enter a room, and
each person has an iPod and earphones for listening to a
personal library of music. (and, of course, each person
thinks their music is the best music ever) And now imagine
that a loud obnoxious person enters the room blaring their
favorite type of music, but this person does not want to use
earphones, no, this person demands that she has a right to
blare her music as loud as she wants in public, and she has
no reguard for the feelings of the other people in the room.
Would this person be acting in a considerate manner? Would
this person deserve respect from the other people in the
room? No. But *YOU* are the loud obnoxious person. You are
demanding that everyone must listen to your favorite music,
but we don't like it. So all we're asking is that you put on
some earphones; or go home; or go to club; or go to friends
house. You can still listen to your music, and we won't ever
demand that you stop, but we do demand that you consume your
music in a manner that is not infringing on the rights of
others.

Is that too much to ask?

Really?
Marko TheBeest
2017-04-02 05:17:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Well, I will be damned. Thank you, Rick Johnson. Finally, some coherence and reason! I like your analogy of the music and earbuds. It's similar to the old axiom about religion being akin to having penis. It's fine as long as you don't whip it out in public or try to force it down people's throats or try to make others worship it the way you do.

Oh, and may I highlight the fact that Rick did not resort to slander or grade school name-calling? Wow. An adult expression of disagreement without degrading into emotional violence.

Bravo, Mr. Johnson. Carry on smartly.
Post by Rick Johnson
Imagine a scenario were multiple people enter a room, and
each person has an iPod and earphones for listening to a
personal library of music. (and, of course, each person
thinks their music is the best music ever) And now imagine
that a loud obnoxious person enters the room blaring their
favorite type of music, but this person does not want to use
earphones, no, this person demands that she has a right to
blare her music as loud as she wants in public, and she has
no reguard for the feelings of the other people in the room.
Would this person be acting in a considerate manner? Would
this person deserve respect from the other people in the
room? No. But *YOU* are the loud obnoxious person. You are
demanding that everyone must listen to your favorite music,
but we don't like it. So all we're asking is that you put on
some earphones; or go home; or go to club; or go to friends
house. You can still listen to your music, and we won't ever
demand that you stop, but we do demand that you consume your
music in a manner that is not infringing on the rights of
others.
Joe Bruno
2017-04-02 06:15:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Saturday, April 1, 2017 at 10:17:50 PM UTC-7, Marko TheBeest wrote:



ПОЧЕМУ ВЫ НЕ СКАЗЫВАЕТЕ, ЧТО ВАША ГОЛОВКА ВЫ ПОДВЕРГА
aaa
2017-04-02 08:01:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Marko TheBeest
Well, I will be damned. Thank you, Rick Johnson. Finally, some
coherence and reason! I like your analogy of the music and earbuds.
Funny you would praise him for something that didn't even register much
on my radar.

:-)
Post by Marko TheBeest
It's similar to the old axiom about religion being akin to having
penis. It's fine as long as you don't whip it out in public or try to
force it down people's throats or try to make others worship it the
way you do.
Oh, and may I highlight the fact that Rick did not resort to slander
or grade school name-calling? Wow. An adult expression of
disagreement without degrading into emotional violence.
Bravo, Mr. Johnson. Carry on smartly.
Imagine a scenario were multiple people enter a room, and each
person has an iPod and earphones for listening to a personal
library of music. (and, of course, each person thinks their music
is the best music ever) And now imagine that a loud obnoxious
person enters the room blaring their favorite type of music, but
this person does not want to use earphones, no, this person demands
that she has a right to blare her music as loud as she wants in
public, and she has no reguard for the feelings of the other people
in the room. Would this person be acting in a considerate manner?
Would this person deserve respect from the other people in the
room? No. But *YOU* are the loud obnoxious person. You are
demanding that everyone must listen to your favorite music, but we
don't like it. So all we're asking is that you put on some
earphones; or go home; or go to club; or go to friends house. You
can still listen to your music, and we won't ever demand that you
stop, but we do demand that you consume your music in a manner that
is not infringing on the rights of others.
hypatiab7
2017-04-02 16:01:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by Marko TheBeest
Well, I will be damned. Thank you, Rick Johnson. Finally, some
coherence and reason! I like your analogy of the music and earbuds.
Funny you would praise him for something that didn't even register much
on my radar.
:-)
That's no surprise to any of us, though it did register enough for you to
comment on it.
Post by aaa
Post by Marko TheBeest
It's similar to the old axiom about religion being akin to having
penis. It's fine as long as you don't whip it out in public or try to
force it down people's throats or try to make others worship it the
way you do.
Oh, and may I highlight the fact that Rick did not resort to slander
or grade school name-calling? Wow. An adult expression of
disagreement without degrading into emotional violence.
Bravo, Mr. Johnson. Carry on smartly.
Imagine a scenario were multiple people enter a room, and each
person has an iPod and earphones for listening to a personal
library of music. (and, of course, each person thinks their music
is the best music ever) And now imagine that a loud obnoxious
person enters the room blaring their favorite type of music, but
this person does not want to use earphones, no, this person demands
that she has a right to blare her music as loud as she wants in
public, and she has no reguard for the feelings of the other people
in the room. Would this person be acting in a considerate manner?
Would this person deserve respect from the other people in the
room? No. But *YOU* are the loud obnoxious person. You are
demanding that everyone must listen to your favorite music, but we
don't like it. So all we're asking is that you put on some
earphones; or go home; or go to club; or go to friends house. You
can still listen to your music, and we won't ever demand that you
stop, but we do demand that you consume your music in a manner that
is not infringing on the rights of others.
aaa
2017-04-03 01:42:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by hypatiab7
Post by aaa
Post by Marko TheBeest
Well, I will be damned. Thank you, Rick Johnson. Finally, some
coherence and reason! I like your analogy of the music and earbuds.
Funny you would praise him for something that didn't even register much
on my radar.
:-)
That's no surprise to any of us, though it did register enough for you to
comment on it.
Yes. I dismissed it.
Post by hypatiab7
Post by aaa
Post by Marko TheBeest
It's similar to the old axiom about religion being akin to having
penis. It's fine as long as you don't whip it out in public or try to
force it down people's throats or try to make others worship it the
way you do.
Oh, and may I highlight the fact that Rick did not resort to slander
or grade school name-calling? Wow. An adult expression of
disagreement without degrading into emotional violence.
Bravo, Mr. Johnson. Carry on smartly.
Imagine a scenario were multiple people enter a room, and each
person has an iPod and earphones for listening to a personal
library of music. (and, of course, each person thinks their music
is the best music ever) And now imagine that a loud obnoxious
person enters the room blaring their favorite type of music, but
this person does not want to use earphones, no, this person demands
that she has a right to blare her music as loud as she wants in
public, and she has no reguard for the feelings of the other people
in the room. Would this person be acting in a considerate manner?
Would this person deserve respect from the other people in the
room? No. But *YOU* are the loud obnoxious person. You are
demanding that everyone must listen to your favorite music, but we
don't like it. So all we're asking is that you put on some
earphones; or go home; or go to club; or go to friends house. You
can still listen to your music, and we won't ever demand that you
stop, but we do demand that you consume your music in a manner that
is not infringing on the rights of others.
Rick Johnson
2017-04-04 04:05:26 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Marko TheBeest
Well, I will be damned. Thank you, Rick Johnson. Finally,
some coherence and reason! I like your analogy of the
music and earbuds. It's similar to the old axiom about
religion being akin to having penis. It's fine as long as
you don't whip it out in public or try to force it down
people's throats or try to make others worship it the way
you do. Oh, and may I highlight the fact that Rick did not
resort to slander or grade school name-calling? Wow. An
adult expression of disagreement without degrading into
emotional violence. Bravo, Mr. Johnson. Carry on smartly.
Thanks "Marko TheBeest"!

After your generous words, this is going to sound like i'm
sucking up, but, you know what, the best thing about being
an jerk is that i am unconcerned of what other people
think about me. :-D

So, yesterday was the first time i noticed your
participation in this group. (I've only been here for a few
years, BTW). And the first thing i noticed, of course, was
your kick-ass avatar. ;-). So i said to myself, "Man, this
guy seems like he might have an interesting personality". So
i followed your Google+ link, and sure enough, i was not
disappointed! :-)

Oh, and just FYI... I never follow anyone publically
because i have quite a few enemies (i know, hard to
believe, huh?) who take sadistic pleasure in annoying my
"public friends". I also encourage no one to follow me
publicly, unless they are spoiling for a conflict.

And even though there may be a ton of noise here, if you are
willing to wade through the cess-pools, you'll be in the
company of many wise folks from many diverse backgrounds.
And although i don't always agree with everyone's politics
here (and they don't always agree with mine O:-)), i really
don't care. I would rather be surrounded by educated people
who hate me, than idiots who love me -- if that makes any
sense.

Of course, to this day i have to meet an idiot who did
love me. Yeah, basically i'm friendless. :-'( Oh well.

So, thanks again Marko. And please, be sure to hang around
as much as you can. We are not lacking too terribly in the
intellectual department, by we are lacking *HEAVILY* in the
personality department -- and your presence is sure to
enrich both departments.

PS: And the best part of being here, is that when you get
bored, there is always plenty of theist troll critters to
slay.

Muster the hounds!
Marko TheBeest
2017-04-04 04:19:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Rick Johnson
I would rather be surrounded by educated people
who hate me, than idiots who love me -- if that makes any
sense.
Why, yes. Yes, it does.

It also reminds me of the old Russian Proverb:
"It is better to be slapped with the truth than to be kissed with a lie."

And, thanks for the invitation.
aaa
2017-04-02 07:40:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Rick Johnson
Post by aaa
Post by John Baker
Post by Tim Browne
It must gall the hell out of those crotch sniffers to
have to use the legal system to seek equality with
religionists. Especially when that same system has
declared atheism a religion.
The system has not now or ever declared atheism a
religion, you stupid fuck, only that it is entitled to the
same legal protections as a religion. In short, the same
laws that give you the right to practice your religion
give me the right to reject it as the superstitious
bullshit it is.
Yet, you demand the same religious right while denying
yourself having any kind of religious belief.
There is nothing "religious" about demanding to be treated
as an equal. We are talking about civil law and civility
here. Not religious edict.
But you make the reference to religion. How can there be equal if you
don't want the same religious right? Religious right is a civil right.
Post by Rick Johnson
Post by aaa
By limiting religious belief to place of worship,
You are confusing beliefs with practices. No one can force
you to stop believing in your god-delusion. Trust me, if i
could remove that malware from your grey matter, i would.
But i can't. No one can. No one but *YOU*, that is.
Irrelevant. You do not have the right to limit religious practice in
public space.
Post by Rick Johnson
Post by aaa
you have made the public space the place of your non-belief
alone,
Really? When were all the ten commandments shrines removed
from their pedestals? When were the religious art pieces
removed from the capital buildings? When was "in god we
trust" removed from our monies? When will the constitution
finally be relieved of all the god references? If you are
viewing america from the moon perhaps you can conclude that
we are now a secular society, but even the slightest
scrutiny will uncover evidence that suggest an insidious
religious element still infects every aspect of our
government and public life.
You are not answering my point. The public space is not for secular
beliefs alone. Believers do have a right to express their beliefs publicly.
Post by Rick Johnson
Post by aaa
and you think your right is violated?
Our rights have been violated. And they continue to be
violated. Your right to practise is not a right to
brainwash. It is not a right to harass.
No one is forcing you to listen and be upset. You should blame yourself
for being so intolerant.


You can practise in
Post by Rick Johnson
your churches and homes and private gatherings, which is
more than generous. And you should consider yourself lucky
to live in a time and place of religious tolerance. You have
no idea how bad things could be. You and your ilk are
bitching about christmas trees and easter bunnies. It's
beyond silly. Grow up! You all sound like spoiled children
who are unwilling to share toys at playtime. You have your
delusion, now go comfort yourself in its warm fuzzy embrace.
But that's not enough for you, is it? You want your
delusion, *AND* then you want to ram it down our throats!
I only wish that is the case, but what you spit out is not what I have
been offering. What I have offered only brought those nasty things out
of you.
Post by Rick Johnson
You want to spit in our faces. You want to parade around and
thump your chest and tell us how awful we are because we
don't belong to your social group. These are not the
behaviors of a rational, even-tempered individual, nor are
they the behaviors of a tolerant person, no, these are the
behaviors of a hateful and potentially violent person.
What you describe is not what the believers have done. It only appears
to you in that way because you have a prejudiced opinion against the
believers.
Post by Rick Johnson
Please do some introspection. Spend some time thinking
about what is important in the public sphere, and what is
not.
The public space is shared by all. Everyone has a right to express
whatever they believe in public. It's not a place reserved only for
secular beliefs.
Post by Rick Johnson
Imagine a scenario were multiple people enter a room, and
each person has an iPod and earphones for listening to a
personal library of music. (and, of course, each person
thinks their music is the best music ever) And now imagine
that a loud obnoxious person enters the room blaring their
favorite type of music, but this person does not want to use
earphones, no, this person demands that she has a right to
blare her music as loud as she wants in public, and she has
no reguard for the feelings of the other people in the room.
Would this person be acting in a considerate manner? Would
this person deserve respect from the other people in the
room? No. But *YOU* are the loud obnoxious person. You are
demanding that everyone must listen to your favorite music,
but we don't like it. So all we're asking is that you put on
some earphones; or go home; or go to club; or go to friends
house. You can still listen to your music, and we won't ever
demand that you stop, but we do demand that you consume your
music in a manner that is not infringing on the rights of
others.
Is that too much to ask?
Really?
Yes, really, because you are infringing on my right of freedom of
expression in public space. Your sorry excuse about manners is just your
made up story. If it's a case of public disturbance, the police will
intervene and stop it. It has nothing to do with the discussion.
hypatiab7
2017-04-02 17:55:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by Rick Johnson
Post by aaa
Post by John Baker
Post by Tim Browne
It must gall the hell out of those crotch sniffers to
have to use the legal system to seek equality with
religionists. Especially when that same system has
declared atheism a religion.
The system has not now or ever declared atheism a
religion, you stupid fuck, only that it is entitled to the
same legal protections as a religion. In short, the same
laws that give you the right to practice your religion
give me the right to reject it as the superstitious
bullshit it is.
Yet, you demand the same religious right while denying
yourself having any kind of religious belief.
There is nothing "religious" about demanding to be treated
as an equal. We are talking about civil law and civility
here. Not religious edict.
But you make the reference to religion. How can there be equal if you
don't want the same religious right? Religious right is a civil right.
So are non-religious rights, whether you like this or not. Religious
believers are not a special class of people better than others. That
is what you've been saying in today's posts. Don't try to deny this.
You know it's true.
Post by aaa
Post by Rick Johnson
Post by aaa
By limiting religious belief to place of worship,
You are confusing beliefs with practices. No one can force
you to stop believing in your god-delusion. Trust me, if i
could remove that malware from your grey matter, i would.
But i can't. No one can. No one but *YOU*, that is.
Irrelevant. You do not have the right to limit religious practice in
public space.
When it isn't wanted, even your Bible says to dust off your clodhoppers and
leave.
Post by aaa
Post by Rick Johnson
Post by aaa
you have made the public space the place of your non-belief
alone,
It's an atheist newsgroup where trolls like you are treated as you deserve.
If you don't like this, feel free to go bye-bye.
Post by aaa
Post by Rick Johnson
Really? When were all the ten commandments shrines removed
from their pedestals? When were the religious art pieces
removed from the capital buildings? When was "in god we
trust" removed from our monies? When will the constitution
finally be relieved of all the god references? If you are
viewing america from the moon perhaps you can conclude that
we are now a secular society, but even the slightest
scrutiny will uncover evidence that suggest an insidious
religious element still infects every aspect of our
government and public life.
You are not answering my point. The public space is not for secular
beliefs alone. Believers do have a right to express their beliefs publicly.
It's an atheist newsgroup. What part of that can't you understand? We don't
want to be converted by nudnicks like you or anyone else.

Religious proselytizing is not welcome in alt.atheism. It is against our
FAQ which also says that religious proselytizing is not welcome.
Post by aaa
Post by Rick Johnson
Post by aaa
and you think your right is violated?
We can't stop him from posting here in a non-moderated newsgroup. But, he
doesn't like our complaining about him. Sounds like he doesn't believe in
Freedom of Speech for anyone but himself.
Post by aaa
Post by Rick Johnson
Our rights have been violated. And they continue to be
violated. Your right to practise is not a right to
brainwash. It is not a right to harass.
No one is forcing you to listen and be upset. You should blame yourself
for being so intolerant.
Believe me, if I had a killfile, you would be gone.
Since you are the troll invading alt.atheism where you know that religious
proselytizing is not welcome, the intolerance is your own.
Post by aaa
You can practise in
Post by Rick Johnson
your churches and homes and private gatherings, which is
more than generous. And you should consider yourself lucky
to live in a time and place of religious tolerance. You have
no idea how bad things could be. You and your ilk are
bitching about christmas trees and easter bunnies. It's
beyond silly. Grow up! You all sound like spoiled children
who are unwilling to share toys at playtime. You have your
delusion, now go comfort yourself in its warm fuzzy embrace.
But that's not enough for you, is it? You want your
delusion, *AND* then you want to ram it down our throats!
I only wish that is the case, but what you spit out is not what I have
been offering. What I have offered only brought those nasty things out
of you.
You wish that people ram your beliefs down our throats? Try proofreading
what you write.
Post by aaa
Post by Rick Johnson
You want to spit in our faces. You want to parade around and
thump your chest and tell us how awful we are because we
don't belong to your social group. These are not the
behaviors of a rational, even-tempered individual, nor are
they the behaviors of a tolerant person, no, these are the
behaviors of a hateful and potentially violent person.
What you describe is not what the believers have done. It only appears
to you in that way because you have a prejudiced opinion against the
believers.
You haven't been in this newsgroup for 21 years. I have. And you are rapidly turning into an annoyance troll.
Post by aaa
Post by Rick Johnson
Please do some introspection. Spend some time thinking
about what is important in the public sphere, and what is
not.
This is a topic derived newsgroup, not a room full of face to face people.
You don't seem to know the difference.
Post by aaa
The public space is shared by all. Everyone has a right to express
whatever they believe in public. It's not a place reserved only for
secular beliefs.
There are laws about harassment. That is what you are doing. This is an
atheist newsgroup. A place intended for atheists to get together to discuss
whatever interests them. This is not a conversion site and never has been.
Trolls like you are walking blobs of deliberate harassment. People who come
here to ask questions are welcome even if they aren't atheists, as long as
they aren't out to attack us, insult us or try to convert us. You do all three.
Post by aaa
Post by Rick Johnson
Imagine a scenario were multiple people enter a room, and
each person has an iPod and earphones for listening to a
personal library of music. (and, of course, each person
thinks their music is the best music ever) And now imagine
that a loud obnoxious person enters the room blaring their
favorite type of music, but this person does not want to use
earphones, no, this person demands that she has a right to
blare her music as loud as she wants in public, and she has
no reguard for the feelings of the other people in the room.
Would this person be acting in a considerate manner? Would
this person deserve respect from the other people in the
room? No. But *YOU* are the loud obnoxious person. You are
demanding that everyone must listen to your favorite music,
but we don't like it. So all we're asking is that you put on
some earphones; or go home; or go to club; or go to friends
house. You can still listen to your music, and we won't ever
demand that you stop, but we do demand that you consume your
music in a manner that is not infringing on the rights of
others.
Is that too much to ask?
Really?
Yes, really, because you are infringing on my right of freedom of
expression in public space. Your sorry excuse about manners is just your
made up story. If it's a case of public disturbance, the police will
intervene and stop it. It has nothing to do with the discussion.
You, aaa, are the one blasting your radio out loud in a room full of people listening to their radios with earplugs. When was the last time you yelled "Fire!" in a crowded theater?
hypatiab7
2017-04-02 14:54:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by Mr. B1ack
On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 07:25:47 +0200 (CEST), "Tim Browne"
Post by Tim Browne
It must gall the hell out of those crotch sniffers to have to
use the legal system to seek equality with religionists.
Especially when that same system has declared atheism a religion.
The system has not now or ever declared atheism a religion, you stupid
fuck, only that it is entitled to the same legal protections as a
religion. In short, the same laws that give you the right to practice
your religion give me the right to reject it as the superstitious
bullshit it is.
Yet, you demand the same religious right while denying yourself having
any kind of religious belief. By limiting religious belief to place of
worship, you have made the public space the place of your non-belief
alone, and you think your right is violated?
It isn't just a religious right. It is also the right to be non-religious.
Post by aaa
We've had equality under the law with you
Post by Mr. B1ack
Bible-humping fucktards since day one. Get used to it.
Right on. Though religiously fanatical Christians insist on trying
to block this. There are still some states with laws that say
atheists can't serve on a jury, even though this is unconstitutional.
They know the law is meaningless, but the assholes insist on leaving
it on the books.
aaa
2017-04-03 01:53:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by hypatiab7
Post by aaa
Post by Mr. B1ack
On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 07:25:47 +0200 (CEST), "Tim Browne"
Post by Tim Browne
It must gall the hell out of those crotch sniffers to have to
use the legal system to seek equality with religionists.
Especially when that same system has declared atheism a religion.
The system has not now or ever declared atheism a religion, you stupid
fuck, only that it is entitled to the same legal protections as a
religion. In short, the same laws that give you the right to practice
your religion give me the right to reject it as the superstitious
bullshit it is.
Yet, you demand the same religious right while denying yourself having
any kind of religious belief. By limiting religious belief to place of
worship, you have made the public space the place of your non-belief
alone, and you think your right is violated?
It isn't just a religious right. It is also the right to be non-religious.
"Your rights end where mine begin."
Post by hypatiab7
Post by aaa
We've had equality under the law with you
Post by Mr. B1ack
Bible-humping fucktards since day one. Get used to it.
Right on. Though religiously fanatical Christians insist on trying
to block this. There are still some states with laws that say
atheists can't serve on a jury, even though this is unconstitutional.
They know the law is meaningless, but the assholes insist on leaving
it on the books.
Tim
2017-04-01 09:16:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Tim Browne
It must gall the hell out of those crotch sniffers to have to
use the legal system to seek equality with religionists.
Especially when that same system has declared atheism a religion.
The same system declared that corporations are individuals. You're in a desperate situation when you have to let the courts decide what words mean so as to defend your belief in an invisible sky friend.
Kevrob
2017-04-01 09:45:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Tim
Post by Tim Browne
It must gall the hell out of those crotch sniffers to have to
use the legal system to seek equality with religionists.
Especially when that same system has declared atheism a religion.
The same system declared that corporations are individuals.
"Legal persons" for some uses. they can't vote in elections or
be made to serve on juries, but since their owners have rights,
including the right to peaceably assemble, those rights aren't
extinguished when people act in concert. The Dartmouth case is
nearly 2000 years old. It didn't start with Citizens United.

Trustees of Dartmouth College v. Woodward, 17 U.S. 518 (1819)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dartmouth_College_v._Woodward

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/17/518.html
Post by Tim
You're in a desperate situation when you have to let the courts decide what words mean so as to defend your belief in an invisible sky friend.
Tandy is hanging his hat on the following, most of which I
posted in a thread here 0n 26 Oct 2016;

Message-ID: <18f2aaec-ee91-4f1a-b106-***@googlegroups.com>


http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-7th-circuit/1467028.html

United States Court of Appeals,Seventh Circuit.

James J. KAUFMAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Gary R. McCAUGHTRY, et al., Defendants-Appellees.
No. 04-1914.
Decided: August 19, 2005

People who aren't prisoners are allowed to join explicitly
atheist organizations, or religious ones - Unitarian Universalists,
Ethical Culture Society - which do not require belief in a deity.

In his pleading, Kaufman specifically mentioned "humanism."

[quote]

While at Waupun, Kaufman submitted an official form titled “Request for
New Religious Practice,” in which he asked to form an inmate group
interested in humanism, atheism, and free speaking.   The group would
work “[t]o stimulate and promote Freedom of Thought and inquiry
concerning religious beliefs, creeds, dogmas, tenets, rituals and
practices[, and to] educate and provide information concerning
religious beliefs, creeds, dogmas, tenets, rituals, and practices.”  
See Kaufman v. McCaughtry, 2004 WL 257133, *4 (W.D.Wis. Feb.9, 2004).  
Kaufman also submitted a list of atheist groups and literature.   The
officials concluded that Kaufman's request was not motivated by
“religious” beliefs.   Accordingly, rather than evaluating the
proposal under the state's relatively more flexible policy for new
religious groups, see Wis. Admin.   Code § DOC 309.61, they considered
it under the procedure for forming a new inmate activity group, see
Wis. Admin. Code § DOC 309.365.   Applying the latter standard, they
denied the request, stating that they were not forming new activity
groups at that time.

[/quote]

Further down, the court explains it is only considering atheism as
a religion in a "...specialized sense....."

[quote]

But when the underlying principle has been examined in the crucible
of litigation, the Court has unambiguously concluded that the
individual freedom of conscience protected by the First Amendment
embraces the right to select any religious faith or none at all.

[/quote]

and again

[quote]

Indeed, Torcaso specifically included “Secular Humanism” as an
example of a religion.  Id. at 495 n. 11, 81 S.Ct. 1680.

[/quote]

The humanists, secular or otherwise, have their own organization:

http://americanhumanist.org/

It is plain that, inmates who wanted to set up a bible study group,
perhaps supported by one of the chaplains serving the prison, or
a group studying another faith, would have privileges atheist
inmates would not have access to, unless they faked interest in
studying some religion.

For the record, IANAL. I was never even a naval officer tasked
with legal duties by his CO when no lawyer was available.
I do know how to use a search engine, and citing the name of the
case, and the opinion is extremely easy in this day and age.

Wikipedia has an article on the Torcaso case, which mooted any
state laws requiring a religious test for office.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torcaso_v._Watkins

So, he knows the "courts say atheism is a religion" is a distortion,
and continues to spread the canard for no good reason I can conceive of,
other than general trollishness.

Further down in that thread, I wrote:

Be that as it may, in a philosophical discussion, I'll be damned*
if I'm going to let lawyers decide what is, or isn't a religion.
Read the opinion I quoted. Search out the opinions from the
cases cited. It is plain that the courts only class atheism as
a religion for the purposes of defending non-believers right to
exercise their constitutional rights to either the free exercise of
religion, or, since the essence of freedom of such action is to
act or NOT act, to refrain from believing, worshiping, swearing
by a deity, praying, etc.

In what reading of the First Amendment does the government, legislature,
judiciary or executive, become the arbiter of what is or is not a
religion? Doesn't that defeat the whole purpose? [Note, we are not
discussing tax exemption, here.]

......

* Damned in only the metaphorical sense. You believers can judge
whether I will be truly damned or not, but you risk being damned
if you are a Christian and you try that: judge not lest ye be
judged, as the legends have it.

Mr Browne is aptly named, as he is so full of it his eyes are that color.


Kevin R
Rick Johnson
2017-04-02 02:52:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Tim
Post by Tim Browne
It must gall the hell out of those crotch sniffers to have
to use the legal system to seek equality with
religionists. Especially when that same system has
declared atheism a religion.
The same system declared that corporations are individuals.
Yep. And that money is speech.
Alex W.
2017-04-03 00:08:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Rick Johnson
Post by Tim
Post by Tim Browne
It must gall the hell out of those crotch sniffers to have
to use the legal system to seek equality with
religionists. Especially when that same system has
declared atheism a religion.
The same system declared that corporations are individuals.
Yep. And that money is speech.
Unhappy but unavoidable.

If individuals can give money and so can pressure groups like MADD or
the Sierra Club, then it is really impossible to deny corporations the same.
Rick Johnson
2017-04-04 05:06:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Alex W.
Post by Rick Johnson
Post by Tim
Post by Tim Browne
It must gall the hell out of those crotch sniffers to
have to use the legal system to seek equality with
religionists. Especially when that same system has
declared atheism a religion.
The same system declared that corporations are
individuals.
Yep. And that money is speech.
Unhappy but unavoidable.
If individuals can give money and so can pressure groups
like MADD or the Sierra Club, then it is really impossible
to deny corporations the same.
Hmm, perhaps i'm a purist concerning the interference of
organized groups with our election process. To me, Democracy
is undermined when these "propaganda machines" do their
dirty work. Voters need to decide the worth of a candidate
based on experience and facts, not lies and media hype. Of
course, i admit, that expectation may be a bit naive,
especially when we consider the large number of ignoramuses
in our mist, but we cannot ignore the brainwashing
capabilities of these organizations who rely on science and
psychological tactics to mold the opinions of the drooling
masses. The whole premise of Democracy was free citizens
making free decision. At some point, we devolved into some
sort of scientifically advanced psychological warfare. It's
not a war for the truth anymore, but a war for the talking
points and narratives. A war for the ear worms and catch
phrases -- Is that really what we want Democracy to be?

I often wonder how much more toxic this political
environment can get before it goes into shock, collapses and
dies. Politics is much like an ecosystem.
Alex W.
2017-04-04 07:26:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Rick Johnson
Post by Alex W.
Post by Rick Johnson
Post by Tim
Post by Tim Browne
It must gall the hell out of those crotch sniffers to
have to use the legal system to seek equality with
religionists. Especially when that same system has
declared atheism a religion.
The same system declared that corporations are
individuals.
Yep. And that money is speech.
Unhappy but unavoidable.
If individuals can give money and so can pressure groups
like MADD or the Sierra Club, then it is really impossible
to deny corporations the same.
Hmm, perhaps i'm a purist concerning the interference of
organized groups with our election process. To me, Democracy
is undermined when these "propaganda machines" do their
dirty work.
That would include political parties. Democracy without parties has
been attempted, but to the best of my knowledge it has never been a
successful experiment.
Post by Rick Johnson
Voters need to decide the worth of a candidate
based on experience and facts, not lies and media hype. Of
course, i admit, that expectation may be a bit naive,
especially when we consider the large number of ignoramuses
in our mist, but we cannot ignore the brainwashing
capabilities of these organizations who rely on science and
psychological tactics to mold the opinions of the drooling
masses. The whole premise of Democracy was free citizens
making free decision. At some point, we devolved into some
sort of scientifically advanced psychological warfare. It's
not a war for the truth anymore, but a war for the talking
points and narratives. A war for the ear worms and catch
phrases -- Is that really what we want Democracy to be?
Free citizens making free decisions requires information and education.
Both of these are essential, but both of them come with their own biases
and preferences.

Moreover, humans are not solitary creatures. We are social animals.
The inescapable conclusion is that decisions are never made in isolation
but always as part of the individual's social environment. IOW, the mob
is ALWAYS with us ... whether we are electing a president or choosing a
breakfast cereal.

Lastly, these tactics you so deplore are in use for one reason only:
because they work. If they didn't, no-one would be employing them.
This may be unpalatable but it is ineluctable.
Post by Rick Johnson
I often wonder how much more toxic this political
environment can get before it goes into shock, collapses and
dies. Politics is much like an ecosystem.
Politics is the art of managing social systems. As such, it will never
die, much like life itself.
Rick Johnson
2017-04-05 00:44:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
[...]
Post by Alex W.
Post by Rick Johnson
Hmm, perhaps i'm a purist concerning the interference of
organized groups with our election process. To me,
Democracy is undermined when these "propaganda machines"
do their dirty work.
That would include political parties. Democracy without
parties has been attempted,
Political parties are bad enough, but modern Democracy has
diversified the political advocacy to such an extreme,that
the line between "genuine advocacy" and "blatant profit
seeking and outright malfeasance" is undetectable.
Post by Alex W.
but to the best of my knowledge it has never been a
successful experiment.
Why not? Can you provide some specific examples for study? I
wonder if the failure was a result of the people, or the
"people in power"?
Post by Alex W.
Free citizens making free decisions requires information
and education. Both of these are essential, but both of
them come with their own biases and preferences.
Yes, and especially so when unwitting voters turn to so-
called "news" outlets trusting these sources as absolute
truth. Is there _any_ news source these days that is not
steeped in partisan rhetoric? I think you (or someone here)
has mentioned the BBC (which i don't get to watch very
often, so i cannot make an objective personal judgment
concerning the BBC), but is there any other source? In the
US trusting cable news or even the major broadcast networks
is a fools game. Fake news and spin are everywhere.
Post by Alex W.
Moreover, humans are not solitary creatures. We are social
animals. The inescapable conclusion is that decisions are
never made in isolation but always as part of the
individual's social environment. IOW, the mob is ALWAYS
with us ... whether we are electing a president or choosing
a breakfast cereal. Lastly, these tactics you so deplore
are in use for one reason only: because they work. If they
didn't, no-one would be employing them. This may be
unpalatable but it is ineluctable.
I'm not ready to simply throw up my hands and accept this
bad behavior. For example: if some quack-doctor sets up shop
in a local hospital pretending to be a professional when she
has no formal training, we don't just throw our hands up and
say: "Well, nothing we can do". And even if the quack-
doctor has the purest of intentions, we will not allow
unwitting patients to be harmed by her ignorance.

But we happily ignore when so-called "professional news
outlets" hire quacks to spread disinformation and outright
lies. On one hand, we will not allow a helpful ignoramus to
cause harm to another from lack of training, but on the
other, we are perfectly willing to allow quack-advocates to
brainwash the masses or intentionally spread lies and
disinformation with the purposeful goal of molding public
opinion.

Something stinks here.

Of course, we humans have always focused more on the
physical and ignored the mental, and we can see this bias
when we recognize the stigma that exists around the subject
of mental health issues. So i guess the news should come as
no surprise that quack-doctors are not tolerated while
propagandist are free to do their dirty work.
h***@gmail.com
2017-04-01 10:26:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Tim Browne
It must gall the hell out of those crotch sniffers to have to
use the legal system to seek equality with religionists.
Especially when that same system has declared atheism a religion.
--
An atheist is a man who believes himself to be an accident.
-Francis Thompson
 
Moron, how can atheism be a religion when no atheist pray or have a church to go to? And there is no atheist organization to milk its members?????
hypatiab7
2017-04-02 14:23:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Tim Browne
It must gall the hell out of those crotch sniffers to have to
use the legal system to seek equality with religionists.
Especially when that same system has declared atheism a religion.
That's Humanism, troll.
default
2017-04-02 17:53:36 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 07:25:47 +0200 (CEST), "Tim Browne"
Post by Tim Browne
It must gall the hell out of those crotch sniffers to have to
use the legal system to seek equality with religionists.
Especially when that same system has declared atheism a religion.
The times are changing. With any luck religions will become extinct.
Christopher A. Lee
2017-04-02 18:07:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mr. B1ack
On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 07:25:47 +0200 (CEST), "Tim Browne"
Post by Tim Browne
It must gall the hell out of those crotch sniffers to have to
use the legal system to seek equality with religionists.
Especially when that same system has declared atheism a religion.
A stupid lie.

The courts have rules that atheists have the same contitutional rights
as the religious.

Which is something else completely.
Post by Mr. B1ack
The times are changing. With any luck religions will become extinct.
Atheism is no more a religion, than is not collecting stamps or not
watching baseball,
default
2017-04-02 21:33:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sun, 02 Apr 2017 13:07:45 -0500, Christopher A. Lee
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by Mr. B1ack
On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 07:25:47 +0200 (CEST), "Tim Browne"
Post by Tim Browne
It must gall the hell out of those crotch sniffers to have to
use the legal system to seek equality with religionists.
Especially when that same system has declared atheism a religion.
A stupid lie.
The courts have rules that atheists have the same contitutional rights
as the religious.
Which the religious ninnies prefer to misconstrue into a "religion,"
since nothing irritates the religious more than thinking there are
people that are free of religion.
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Which is something else completely.
Post by Mr. B1ack
The times are changing. With any luck religions will become extinct.
Atheism is no more a religion, than is not collecting stamps or not
watching baseball,
Joe Bruno
2017-04-03 01:42:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by default
On Sun, 02 Apr 2017 13:07:45 -0500, Christopher A. Lee
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by Mr. B1ack
On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 07:25:47 +0200 (CEST), "Tim Browne"
Post by Tim Browne
It must gall the hell out of those crotch sniffers to have to
use the legal system to seek equality with religionists.
Especially when that same system has declared atheism a religion.
A stupid lie.
The courts have rules that atheists have the same contitutional rights
as the religious.
Which the religious ninnies prefer to misconstrue into a "religion,"
since nothing irritates the religious more than thinking there are
people that are free of religion.
Not at all. Alan Dershowitz, the retired law professor, is an atheist. It don't bother me at all.
default
2017-04-03 10:57:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sun, 2 Apr 2017 18:42:46 -0700 (PDT), Joe Bruno
Post by Joe Bruno
Post by default
On Sun, 02 Apr 2017 13:07:45 -0500, Christopher A. Lee
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by Mr. B1ack
On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 07:25:47 +0200 (CEST), "Tim Browne"
Post by Tim Browne
It must gall the hell out of those crotch sniffers to have to
use the legal system to seek equality with religionists.
Especially when that same system has declared atheism a religion.
A stupid lie.
The courts have rules that atheists have the same contitutional rights
as the religious.
Which the religious ninnies prefer to misconstrue into a "religion,"
since nothing irritates the religious more than thinking there are
people that are free of religion.
Not at all. Alan Dershowitz, the retired law professor, is an atheist. It don't bother me at all.
Then why do so many of the religious try to snag people (preach
"convert") into believe in gods?
Loading...