"Americans who don't identify with any religion are now 15% of the USA, but trends in a new study shows they could one day surpass the nation's largest denominations — including Catholics, now 24% of the nation.

American Nones: Profile of the No Religion Population, to be released today by Trinity College, finds this faith-free group already includes nearly 19% of U.S. men and 12% of women. Of these, 35% say they were Catholic at age 12.

"Will a day come when the Nones are on top? We can't predict for sure," says lead researcher Barry Kosmin.

But if Nones, now 22% of all adults ages 18 to 29, continue to gain among young adults, to draw more people "switching out" from denominations and to replace more religious older people, researchers forecast one in five Americans will be Nones in 20 years.

"Trends clearly favor this," Kosmin says. But he also notes, "There could be a Great Awakening (massive Protestant revival) or immigration may bring in more Catholic believers."

Kosmin and Ariela Keysar of Trinity College, Hartford, Conn., directed three editions of the American Religious Identification Survey over 18 years. The 2008 ARIS (pdf), based on a sampling of 54,000 U.S. adults, also burrowed in for a closer look at 1,106 Nones, who answered extra questions about their beliefs and behaviors and views on God."

More at source: People with 'no religion' gain on major denominations - USATODAY.com (http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/2009-09-22-no-religion_N.htm)

"Americans who don't identify with any religion are now 15% of the USA, but trends in a new study shows they could one day surpass the nation's largest denominations — including Catholics, now 24% of the nation.

American Nones: Profile of the No Religion Population, to be released today by Trinity College, finds this faith-free group already includes nearly 19% of U.S. men and 12% of women. Of these, 35% say they were Catholic at age 12.

"Will a day come when the Nones are on top? We can't predict for sure," says lead researcher Barry Kosmin.

But if Nones, now 22% of all adults ages 18 to 29, continue to gain among young adults, to draw more people "switching out" from denominations and to replace more religious older people, researchers forecast one in five Americans will be Nones in 20 years.

"Trends clearly favor this," Kosmin says. But he also notes, "There could be a Great Awakening (massive Protestant revival) or immigration may bring in more Catholic believers."

Kosmin and Ariela Keysar of Trinity College, Hartford, Conn., directed three editions of the American Religious Identification Survey over 18 years. The 2008 ARIS (pdf), based on a sampling of 54,000 U.S. adults, also burrowed in for a closer look at 1,106 Nones, who answered extra questions about their beliefs and behaviors and views on God."I agree with you Nonno, this is a sad, horrific trend.

And yet we are still one of the worst, if not the worst receiver of prejudice in the nation.

And yet we are still one of the worst, if not the worst receiver of prejudice in the nation.In what manner are you who believe in nothing "receivers of prejudice"?

In what manner are you who believe in nothing "receivers of prejudice"?

.....
American Prejudice & Bigotry Towards Atheism, Atheists, and the Non-Religious - Americans Despise & Distrust Atheists and the Irreligious Most of All (http://atheism.about.com/od/atheistbigotryprejudice/a/AntiAtheism.htm)

.....
American Prejudice & Bigotry Towards Atheism, Atheists, and the Non-Religious - Americans Despise & Distrust Atheists and the Irreligious Most of All (http://atheism.about.com/od/atheistbigotryprejudice/a/AntiAtheism.htm)So, one president is reported as having a religious opinion, and another presidential candidate is reported as having a different opinion.

How's that prejudice?


Did you happen to note the gallup poll? 30 years ago, 53% of people said they wouldn't vote for an atheist for president, 10 years ago it was 48%. Seems as though a belief in nothingness is actually gaining ground, not losing it.

But, you didn't answer my question - in what way has anyone's attitude towards your belief in "#### happens" been a problem? What prejudice have you been subjected to? Or, do you think that people having an opinion about your opinion (like you do about others' opinions) is prejudice in and of itself?

So, one president is reported as having a religious opinion, and another presidential candidate is reported as having a different opinion.

How's that prejudice?


Did you happen to note the gallup poll? 30 years ago, 53% of people said they wouldn't vote for an atheist for president, 10 years ago it was 48%. Seems as though a belief in nothingness is actually gaining ground, not losing it.

But, you didn't answer my question - in what way has anyone's attitude towards your belief in "#### happens" been a problem? What prejudice have you been subjected to? Or, do you think that people having an opinion about your opinion (like you do about others' opinions) is prejudice in and of itself?

Your naivety is delicious. From the 2nd source you neglected to cite because of incovinience.

This group does not at all agree with my vision of American society...

Atheist: 39.6%
Muslims: 26.3%
Homosexuals: 22.6%
Hispanics: 20%
Conservative Christians: 13.5%
Recent Immigrants: 12.5%
Jews: 7.6%

I would disapprove if my child wanted to marry a member of this group....

Atheist: 47.6%
Muslim: 33.5%
African-American 27.2%
Asian-Americans: 18.5%
Hispanics: 18.5%
Jews: 11.8%
Conservative Christians: 6.9%
Whites: 2.3%

Ever dated an athiest? Would you date an athiest? Because there is a serious road block when I am on the dating scene.

I will hold this secrect from my parents until their death because... I could come home gay with a black boyfriend one day and they would care less. But if I confessed to them that I was atheist, I would never be welcome in my home again. They have said this. I have seen more oppression than you would know. My immediate friends know and accept that, but If a conversation came up with a prospective employer I would tell them I am southern baptist. I prejudice is there even if you don't accept it.

Ever dated an athiest? Would you date an athiest? Because there is a serious road block when I am on the dating scene. But, that's not prejudice. I have never dated a complete #######, either. I've never dated someone with extremely different political views than myself. I've never dated a Jewish person, nor a Muslim.

That's not prejudice, that's a valid difference of opinion that would tend to keep people apart.I will hold this secrect from my parents until their death because... I could come home gay with a black boyfriend one day and they would care less. But if I confessed to them that I was atheist, I would never be welcome in my home again.How is that prejudism? If you #### on any other of their strongly held beliefs (say, for example, you killed someone for money, or raped 3 year old girls), would they also disown you?

But, either way, how is that prejudism?They have said this. I have seen more oppression than you would know. My immediate friends know and accept that, but If a conversation came up with a prospective employer I would tell them I am southern baptist.Well, that's what I'm asking you - to tell me so I will know. Did this prospective employer actually deny you a position based on your lack of belief in anything, or do you just assume it? Have you been denied a promotion at work? Do you get to sit in the same spot on the bus or in a restaraunt as others, or are you headed out to somewhere else?

What is it about being atheist that makes your life different, due to prejudism?I prejudice is there even if you don't accept it.I'm not suggesting that you haven't been a victim. It seems important to you to think so. I'm just asking how you've been victimized.

But, that's not prejudice. I have never dated a complete #######, either. I've never dated someone with extremely different political views than myself. I've never dated a Jewish person, nor a Muslim.

That's not prejudice, that's a valid difference of opinion that would tend to keep people apart.How is that prejudism? If you #### on any other of their strongly held beliefs (say, for example, you killed someone for money, or raped 3 year old girls), would they also disown you?

But, either way, how is that prejudism?Well, that's what I'm asking you - to tell me so I will know. Did this prospective employer actually deny you a position based on your lack of belief in anything, or do you just assume it? Have you been denied a promotion at work? Do you get to sit in the same spot on the bus or in a restaraunt as others, or are you headed out to somewhere else?

What is it about being atheist that makes your life different, due to prejudism?I'm not suggesting that you haven't been a victim. It seems important to you to think so. I'm just asking how you've been victimized.

You are trying to redefine prejudice. How Are Atheists Discriminated Against? Expressions of of Anti-Atheist Bigotry and Discrimination in America (http://atheism.about.com/od/attacksonatheism/p/AtheistBigotry.htm)

You have no leg to stand on here. Its like trying to deny slavery... Defiantly not on the same scale but it exists.

You are trying to redefine prejudice. How Are Atheists Discriminated Against? Expressions of of Anti-Atheist Bigotry and Discrimination in America (http://atheism.about.com/od/attacksonatheism/p/AtheistBigotry.htm)

You have no leg to stand on here. Its like trying to deny slavery... Defiantly not on the same scale but it exists.

You mean that telling you that you're going to rot in hell, you dirty little sinner is prejudiced? No way. :lmao:

You are trying to redefine prejudice. How Are Atheists Discriminated Against? Expressions of of Anti-Atheist Bigotry and Discrimination in America

You have no leg to stand on here. Its like trying to deny slavery... Defiantly not on the same scale but it exists.
Maybe I am :shrug:

So, I went to dictionary.com

prej u dice –noun

1. an unfavorable opinion or feeling formed beforehand or without knowledge, thought, or reason.
2. any preconceived opinion or feeling, either favorable or unfavorable.
3. unreasonable feelings, opinions, or attitudes, esp. of a hostile nature, regarding a racial, religious, or national group.
4. such attitudes considered collectively: The war against prejudice is never-ending.
5. damage or injury; detriment: a law that operated to the prejudice of the majority.

Given that people understand what atheism is, I'm not understanding what you feel has happened to you or someone you know that is prejudist. :shrug: Can you help me?

Because, everything you described is a difference of opinion, and a choice to not accept as correct an opinion others do not feel is correct.

I'm certainly not denying slavery, nor am I denying that people for the most part disagree with the point of view that life is devoid of any higher meaning than what feels good right now. But, disagreeing and choosing to not accept that lack of belief as valid, nor comparable and compatible with their own belief, is not prejudice. At least, the way I read the definition it's not.

Where do you see that it fits the definition?

Maybe I am :shrug:

So, I went to dictionary.com

prej u dice –noun

1. an unfavorable opinion or feeling formed beforehand or without knowledge, thought, or reason.
2. any preconceived opinion or feeling, either favorable or unfavorable.
3. unreasonable feelings, opinions, or attitudes, esp. of a hostile nature, regarding a racial, religious, or national group.
4. such attitudes considered collectively: The war against prejudice is never-ending.
5. damage or injury; detriment: a law that operated to the prejudice of the majority.

Given that people understand what atheism is, I'm not understanding what you feel has happened to you or someone you know that is prejudist. :shrug: Can you help me?

Because, everything you described is a difference of opinion, and a choice to not accept as correct an opinion others do not feel is correct.

I'm certainly not denying slavery, nor am I denying that people for the most part disagree with the point of view that life is devoid of any higher meaning than what feels good right now. But, disagreeing and choosing to not accept that lack of belief as valid, nor comparable and compatible with their own belief, is not prejudice. At least, the way I read the definition it's not.

Where do you see that it fits the definition?

Disagreeing != not giving someone a job because they are atheist.
Disagreeing != Removing someone from a family because they are atheist.
Disagreeing != Beating a kid up as school because they are not like you.

That is prejudice.

.....
American Prejudice & Bigotry Towards Atheism, Atheists, and the Non-Religious - Americans Despise & Distrust Atheists and the Irreligious Most of All (http://atheism.about.com/od/atheistbigotryprejudice/a/AntiAtheism.htm)

Since you "a" do not believe that we are endowed by our creator with the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, I would agree that you are not a good American. Sorry.

What ever rights you "a" decide to handout you can always take back in your system.

Since you "a" do not believe that we are endowed by our creator with the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, I would agree that you are not a good American. Sorry.

What ever rights you "a" decide to handout you can always take back in your system.

Thank you for proving my point and coming out of the closet as a bigot.

Since you "a" do not believe that we are endowed by our creator with the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, I would agree that you are not a good American. Sorry.

What ever rights you "a" decide to handout you can always take back in your system.

Since you have no clue what-so-ever what the pertinent paragraph actually statesm, we all agree your definetly not a good American.

Here is the actual verbage from the Declaration of Independence

When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bonds which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
Notice the Bolded part? The Founding Fathers, being a hell-a lot wiser than a Mall Cop pretending to be a Police Officer, designed it so that everyone would be covered, not just people that believe in the same fairy tale as your own.

Disagreeing != not giving someone a job because they are atheist.
Disagreeing != Removing someone from a family because they are atheist.
Disagreeing != Beating a kid up as school because they are not like you.

That is prejudice.So, you have been denied a job based on atheism? Or, know someone who has?

That would be discrimination. They should sue.

However, your family potentially disowning you because you #### on their beliefs is a difference of opinion. You saw in the definition things like "without knowledge, thought, or reason", or "unreasonable" feelings. We're not talking about whether or not someone likes the color red for a car, here.

Kids beating each other up over differences of opinion is as old as life itself.

So, you have been denied a job based on atheism? Or, know someone who has?

That would be discrimination. They should sue.

However, your family potentially disowning you because you #### on their beliefs is a difference of opinion. You saw in the definition things like "without knowledge, thought, or reason", or "unreasonable" feelings. We're not talking about whether or not someone likes the color red for a car, here.

Kids beating each other up over differences of opinion is as old as life itself.

STFU already. Your argument is out the window with Food Critic's above post. :dork:

So, you have been denied a job based on atheism? Or, know someone who has?

That would be discrimination. They should sue.

However, your family potentially disowning you because you #### on their beliefs is a difference of opinion. You saw in the definition things like "without knowledge, thought, or reason", or "unreasonable" feelings. We're not talking about whether or not someone likes the color red for a car, here.

Kids beating each other up over differences of opinion is as old as life itself.

Also, how is him having a differing belief than his parents ####ting on their beliefs?

i think this trend will continue and i think its a good thing.

And yet we are still one of the worst, if not the worst receiver of prejudice in the nation.


:wah:

Since you have no clue what-so-ever what the pertinent paragraph actually statesm, we all agree your definetly not a good American.

Here is the actual verbage from the Declaration of Independence

When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bonds which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
Notice the Bolded part? The Founding Fathers, being a hell-a lot wiser than a Mall Cop pretending to be a Police Officer, designed it so that everyone would be covered, not just people that believe in the same fairy tale as your own.

Very good twist and shuffle on "verbage". The founders obviously believed in God, either Christian or Deist. Hence the "laws of nature and of nature's God". They could have left that out to satisfy the "atheist". They did not however, so all you offer is your own speculation.

"Their creator" obviously assumed that everyone understood this to be a true statement. If your trying to twist the word "their" to mean that the founders meant each individual person's "god" that would be faulty logic also. Your right, they did cover everyone because God is the God of everyone whether they acknowledge that or not. Not only that, but it had to be the God that would acknowledge freedom/liberty. IF they meant a fairy tale god, that god maybe the god that does not believe in freedom/liberty=Allah.

So your point is proven wrong because not all god's are the same are they? This is demonstrable. The God of the founders was the God of the Bible.

STFU already. Your argument is out the window with Food Critic's above post. :dork:

Very good argument..you persuaded me. :yahoo:

Very good twist and shuffle on "verbage". The founders obviously believed in God, either Christian or Deist. Hence the "laws of nature and of nature's God". They could have left that out to satisfy the "atheist". They did not however, so all you offer is your own speculation.

"Their creator" obviously assumed that everyone understood this to be a true statement. If your trying to twist the word "their" to mean that the founders meant each individual person's "god" that would be faulty logic also. Your right, they did cover everyone because God is the God of everyone whether they acknowledge that or not. Not only that, but it had to be the God that would acknowledge freedom/liberty. IF they meant a fairy tale god, that god maybe the god that does not believe in freedom/liberty=Allah.

So your point is proven wrong because not all god's are the same are they? This is demonstrable. The God of the founders was the God of the Bible.

The only twisting going on is by yourself and This_Misrepresentation. The Founding Fathers were very deliberate to not recognize a God. The only time God is mentioned is in regards to Natures God.

If the Founding Fathers wanted to reference God they would have done so, just as they did in regards to Natures God. They meant Their Creator, as they stated in the Declaration. The Founding Fathers were able to recognize a very simple concept, that is obviously missed by you and fellow revisionists.

The Founding Fathers purposely used Creator and not God because it is different for different belief or unbeliefs.
For you Creator is the Father of Jesus
For Muslims its Allah
For other beliefs its their entity
For Atheists its altogether different

The important thing to take away, is they were not lending credence to any one religion nor belief, no matter what Christian Revisionists such as yourself would hope to think.

Very good twist and shuffle on "verbage". The founders obviously believed in God, either Christian or Deist. Hence the "laws of nature and of nature's God". They could have left that out to satisfy the "atheist". They did not however, so all you offer is your own speculation.

"Their creator" obviously assumed that everyone understood this to be a true statement. If your trying to twist the word "their" to mean that the founders meant each individual person's "god" that would be faulty logic also. Your right, they did cover everyone because God is the God of everyone whether they acknowledge that or not. Not only that, but it had to be the God that would acknowledge freedom/liberty. IF they meant a fairy tale god, that god maybe the god that does not believe in freedom/liberty=Allah.

So your point is proven wrong because not all god's are the same are they? This is demonstrable. The God of the founders was the God of the Bible.
And the fact that you had to modify the verbage to make your beffudled point, just lends further proof that the Founding Fathers were not talking about the God of your particular flavor of the Bible.

Keep your mouth shut and voilà! Nobody knows you're a godless heathen and won't "discriminate" against you. Problem solved. :lol:

Very good twist and shuffle on "verbage". The founders obviously believed in God, either Christian or Deist. Hence the "laws of nature and of nature's God". They could have left that out to satisfy the "atheist". They did not however, so all you offer is your own speculation.

"Their creator" obviously assumed that everyone understood this to be a true statement. If your trying to twist the word "their" to mean that the founders meant each individual person's "god" that would be faulty logic also. Your right, they did cover everyone because God is the God of everyone whether they acknowledge that or not. Not only that, but it had to be the God that would acknowledge freedom/liberty. IF they meant a fairy tale god, that god maybe the god that does not believe in freedom/liberty=Allah.

So your point is proven wrong because not all god's are the same are they? This is demonstrable. The God of the founders was the God of the Bible.


you should really research the founding fathers religios beliefs and views of religion

I have never understood people who identify themselves with athieism..why identify yourself with a negative belief? I dont identify my self as not a man...i am a woman..see my point? And questions like this should NOT come up with a boss...or at an interview so I cannot possibly see how you could be denied a job.l.unless someone went into an interview telling everyone how much they DONT believe in God..or being or what have you...and that would cause me not to hire you..not because you are atheist but because you are weird and come into my interview talking about religion. Many atheists tend to be very militant in their beliefs (or lack of)..they want to tell everyone they are wrong..and God doesnt exist..and remove the word God from every possible thing on earth...that is why people mistrust them...i dont believe a lot of things others do..but i dont identify myself with a negative of their belief..that just doesnt make sense...to call yourself someone that doesnt believe what someone else believes..

and "no religion" def does not equal athiest...

I have never understood people who identify themselves with athieism..why identify yourself with a negative belief? I dont identify my self as not a man...i am a woman..see my point? And questions like this should NOT come up with a boss...or at an interview so I cannot possibly see how you could be denied a job.l.unless someone went into an interview telling everyone how much they DONT believe in God..or being or what have you...and that would cause me not to hire you..not because you are atheist but because you are weird and come into my interview talking about religion. Many atheists tend to be very militant in their beliefs (or lack of)..they want to tell everyone they are wrong..and God doesnt exist..and remove the word God from every possible thing on earth...that is why people mistrust them...i dont believe a lot of things others do..but i dont identify myself with a negative of their belief..that just doesnt make sense...to call yourself someone that doesnt believe what someone else believes..

and "no religion" def does not equal athiest...

:yeahthat:

I don't understand how ANY group can run around screaming about tolerance for them, yet turn around and be so intolerant to anyone who does not agree. I don't bring my religious beliefs, my sexuality, or my race up in general conversation, I do not expect anyone to approve, I do not care when they do not. But, I'm a christian white hetero male, so why should I? LOL.

Stop shoving your atheism down peoples throats, and maybe they'll stop resenting it. It just sort of strikes me as similar to the woman in the low cut blouse with the big boobies and the word LOOK on the blouse, who complains because men look at her chest. :shrug:

:yeahthat:

I don't understand how ANY group can run around screaming about tolerance for them, yet turn around and be so intolerant to anyone who does not agree. I don't bring my religious beliefs, my sexuality, or my race up in general conversation, I do not expect anyone to approve, I do not care when they do not. But, I'm an atheist white hetero male, so why should I? LOL.

Stop shoving your Christianity down peoples throats, and maybe they'll stop resenting it. It just sort of strikes me as similar to the woman in the low cut blouse with the big boobies and the word LOOK on the blouse, who complains because men look at her chest. :shrug:

I changed 2 words can you spot them? Please, Christians are the largest evangelical force out there. They have a TV channel ffs. Christianity is rammed down every single Americans throat every day. And when an atheist tries to open discussion about the subject we are the ones who need to stop bringing religion up? Hypocrite much?

I changed 2 words can you spot them? Please, Christians are the largest evangelical force out there. They have a TV channel ffs. Christianity is rammed down every single Americans throat every day. And when an atheist tries to open discussion about the subject we are the ones who need to stop bringing religion up? Hypocrite much?

Atheist discussion: I believe in nothing! That is all.

I changed 2 words can you spot them? Please, Christians are the largest evangelical force out there. They have a TV channel ffs. Christianity is rammed down every single Americans throat every day. And when an atheist tries to open discussion about the subject we are the ones who need to stop bringing religion up? Hypocrite much?


rammed down AMerican's throats? thats the silliest thing I have ever heard..because there is a tv channel? My house has a whole channel devoted to college sports..but I dont think college sports are being rammed down my throat...what else? the pledge bother you because it has God in it? you have the right to not partcipate...you dont have to be "burdened" by other people's prayers in most buisnesses and schools..christmas is even being deemed unnaceptable some places..nativities being replaced with santas...dreidles....kwanzaa candles...is that people believe in God so offensive to you? that you would be soo offended that someone has a tv channel so old shut ins have a place to be comforted? is your negative belief so overpowering that you are sure you are better than those who believe in something? I see the menorahs at christmastime and I smile..i am not jewish..but it reminds me that it is a happy time to people..even the made up holiday Kwanza is good..it is something for people to look foward to and it espouses positive things..what do athiests want? no mention of a higher being anywhere? even things that are comforting to people? that people truely believe and love? I am not about agressive christianity anymore than I am about agressive athieism.

I have never understood people who identify themselves with athieism..why identify yourself with a negative belief? I dont identify my self as not a man...i am a woman..see my point? And questions like this should NOT come up with a boss...or at an interview so I cannot possibly see how you could be denied a job.l.unless someone went into an interview telling everyone how much they DONT believe in God..or being or what have you...and that would cause me not to hire you..not because you are atheist but because you are weird and come into my interview talking about religion. Many atheists tend to be very militant in their beliefs (or lack of)..they want to tell everyone they are wrong..and God doesnt exist..and remove the word God from every possible thing on earth...that is why people mistrust them...i dont believe a lot of things others do..but i dont identify myself with a negative of their belief..that just doesnt make sense...to call yourself someone that doesnt believe what someone else believes..

and "no religion" def does not equal athiest...
Go back and read FoodCritics revision of the Declaration of Independence, and misrepresentation about the Founding Fathers.

Then come back to us about militant

Go back and read FoodCritics revision of the Declaration of Independence, and misrepresentation about the Founding Fathers.

Then come back to us about militant

I dont like militant christianity anymore than I like militant atheism. I don't think anyone should be accosted about their beliefs. because at the end of the day...we don't really know who is wrong and who is right. But If people want to say "under God" in the pledge..im not really sure why it must be stricken out..why it is so offensive to people...it it said under muhammad..i would not say it..or substitute God..I wouldnt try to tell other people not to believe what they believe.

you should really research the founding fathers religios beliefs and views of religion

since your new i will refer you to posts of the past.....

Go back and read FoodCritics revision of the Declaration of Independence, and misrepresentation about the Founding Fathers.

Then come back to us about militant

That's right they were all atheists :killingme

John Adams:“ The general principles upon which the Fathers achieved independence were the general principals of Christianity… I will avow that I believed and now believe that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God.”
• “[July 4th] ought to be commemorated as the day of deliverance by solemn acts of devotion to God Almighty.” –John Adams in a letter written to Abigail on the day the Declaration was approved by Congress

What a militant :coffee:

I changed 2 words can you spot them? Please, Christians are the largest evangelical force out there. They have a TV channel ffs. Christianity is rammed down every single Americans throat every day. And when an atheist tries to open discussion about the subject we are the ones who need to stop bringing religion up? Hypocrite much?

Your ignorance is showing. "Christians are the largest evangelical force out there." Evangelicism is a protestant christian movement that began in 1730. So basically, that statement makes no sense. Evangelists are christians, but not all christians are evangelists. Not even all protestants are evangelists, it is actually a fairly small sect.

Who said you shouldn't bring up religion? Announcing you are an atheist when nobody asked, is a little different. Try sitting down with someone and asking them about their beliefs and why they follow them, without being judgemental or throwing things in there like "But how could God make the Earth in seven days?!?!? That's stupid!" and you might find you are able to have a pleasant discussion, maybe even learn something.

Give me an example of how you would attempt to 'open discussion of the subject' of religion. Seriously.

Atheist discussion: I believe in nothing! That is all.

The dyslexic atheist- "There is no dog!"

I changed 2 words can you spot them? Please, Christians are the largest evangelical force out there. They have a TV channel ffs. Christianity is rammed down every single Americans throat every day. And when an atheist tries to open discussion about the subject we are the ones who need to stop bringing religion up? Hypocrite much?


Rammed down every single American's throat every day?

Honestly?


I used to be an atheist. I wouldn't say that I was of the militant variety, because I never called anyone an idiot for believing in a higher power, nor did I tell anyone that they were weak and needed a crutch. Nor did I find it necessary to search out religous groups and tell them what I thought was wrong with their religion.

I simply didn't believe in a higher power.



I believed this way for years.

During that time, I can honestly say that I was never "discriminated" against or slighted for my lack of religion.

Not one single time.

Ever.

I can also honestly say that very rarely did I perceive religion - of any kind - being "rammed down my throat".


I believe there are two reasons that I don't believe I was a recipient of prejudice even though "we are still one of the worst, if not the worst receiver of prejudice in the nation", and why I don't feel that Christianity was "rammed down my American throat every day".

Firstly, I don't perceive someone else's belief that I'm wrong to be a slight at me personally. I don't consider a religious person's idea of an afterlife, and the fact that I'm not going share it with them to be an attack. I also don't equate being confronted by religion with having it rammed down my throat. I certainly don't consider the fact that there's a EVEN TV CHANNEL FOR #### SAKE to be ramming it down my throat. That's why we have Channel Clickers.



I would daresay the only people who consider the above to be prejudice and having it rammed down their throats would be the people who are LOOKING for reasons to hate religion and its practitioners.

Why else would you do something like, say, go into a religion forum when you're obviously put off by religion?

Consider horses.

I don't like horses.

I think they #### too much, they stink, they're hard to take care of, the clopping sound of their hooves is annoying, and I don't like riding anything that has a brain of its own and the strength to send me into orbit.

So....

Guess which forum around here I do NOT hang out in.

Now, if I had a question about Horses, it seems like a good place to go to have a discussion - but don't you agree that it would be a little ####ed up if I went in there an wondered openly how anyone in their right mind could possibly want to be around those walking manure factories, and how horse-lovers in general are ignorant bastards.

How much more ####ed up would it be if I went in there an then complained about how horse-riding, and equestrian sports are being rammed down my throat every day. Even ESPN shows horse shows from time to time :jameo:

Your ignorance is showing. "Christians are the largest evangelical force out there." Evangelicism is a protestant christian movement that began in 1730. So basically, that statement makes no sense. Evangelists are christians, but not all christians are evangelists. Not even all protestants are evangelists, it is actually a fairly small sect.

Who said you shouldn't bring up religion? Announcing you are an atheist when nobody asked, is a little different. Try sitting down with someone and asking them about their beliefs and why they follow them, without being judgemental or throwing things in there like "But how could God make the Earth in seven days?!?!? That's stupid!" and you might find you are able to have a pleasant discussion, maybe even learn something.

Give me an example of how you would attempt to 'open discussion of the subject' of religion. Seriously.
e⋅van⋅gel⋅i⋅cal  [ee-van-jel-i-kuhl, ev-uhn-] Show IPA
–adjective
1. Also, e⋅van⋅gel⋅ic. pertaining to or in keeping with the gospel and its teachings.
2. belonging to or designating the Christian churches that emphasize the teachings and authority of the Scriptures, esp. of the New Testament, in opposition to the institutional authority of the church itself, and that stress as paramount the tenet that salvation is achieved by personal conversion to faith in the atonement of Christ.
3. designating Christians, esp. of the late 1970s, eschewing the designation of fundamentalist but holding to a conservative interpretation of the Bible.
4. pertaining to certain movements in the Protestant churches in the 18th and 19th centuries that stressed the importance of personal experience of guilt for sin, and of reconciliation to God through Christ.
5. marked by ardent or zealous enthusiasm for a cause.
–noun
6. an adherent of evangelical doctrines or a person who belongs to an evangelical church or party.
English. :yay:

Thank you for proving my point and coming out of the closet as a bigot.

“God who gave us life gave us liberty. And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are a gift from God? That they are not to be violated but with His wrath? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, and that His justice cannot sleep forever.”

Thomas Jefferson (excerpts from his memorial Wash DC)

This sounds eerily like what I said earlier. :popcorn:

“God who gave us life gave us liberty. And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are a gift from God? That they are not to be violated but with His wrath? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, and that His justice cannot sleep forever.”

Thomas Jefferson (excerpts from his memorial Wash DC)

This sounds eerily like what I said earlier. :popcorn:

"If not an absolute atheist, he had no belief in a future existence. All his ideas of obligation or retribution were bounded by the present life."
[President John Quincy Adams on Thomas Jefferson, 1831]
"The Christian God is a being of terrific character -- cruel, vindictive, capricious, and unjust."
[Thomas Jefferson, _Jefferson Bible_]
"If the obstacles of bigotry and priestcraft can be surmounted, we may hope that common sense will suffice to do everything else."
[Thomas Jefferson]
"I do not find in orthodox Christianity one redeeming feature."
[Thomas Jefferson]
"He is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong."
[Thomas Jefferson]
"The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg."
[Thomas Jefferson]
"If we could believe that [Jesus]...countenanced the follies, falsehoods and charlatanisms which his biographers father on him, ...the conclusion would be irresistible...that he was an imposter."
[Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826) 3rd president of the U.S.]
"I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between church and State."
[Thomas Jefferson, letter to Danbury Baptist Association]
"All persons shall have full and free liberty of religious opinion; nor shall any be compelled to frequent or maintain any religious institution."
[Thomas Jefferson, 1776]

What? There are more btw if you want them all.

Oh here is my favorite.

"The Christian god can be easily pictured as virtually the same as the many ancient gods of past civilizations. The Christian god is a three headed monster; cruel, vengeful and capricious. If one wishes to know more of this raging, three headed beast-like god, one only needs to look at the caliber of the people who say they serve him. They are always of two classes: fools and hypocrites."
[Thomas Jefferson, in a letter to his nephew, Peter Carr]

Oh here is my favorite.

First. Context is king. (your "separation of church and state") is one fine example of this.

Second. At any one point in time in a persons life they may have conflicting beliefs and/or opinions.

Third. The plethora of time spent by our founders in public and private life documenting their belief in God is exhaustive.

TJ "I am a real Christian, that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus." [Letter to Benjamin Rush April 21, 1803]

Did TJ have harsh things to say about organized religion or the church...absolutely. However he was not an atheist! Nor did he argue for atheism as an acceptable worldview. EVEN he realized it was incompatible with freedom.......ask the commies.

First. Context is king. (your "separation of church and state") is one fine example of this.

Second. At any one point in time in a persons life they may have conflicting beliefs and/or opinions.

Third. The plethora of time spent by our founders in public and private life documenting their belief in God is exhaustive.

TJ "I am a real Christian, that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus." [Letter to Benjamin Rush April 21, 1803]

Did TJ have harsh things to say about organized religion or the church...absolutely. However he was not an atheist! Nor did he argue for atheism as an acceptable worldview. EVEN he realized it was incompatible with freedom.......ask the commies.

"[no citizen] shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever...[to] compell a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of [religious] opinions which he disbelieves is sinful and tyrannical."
[Thomas Jefferson, Virginia Statute of Religious Freedom]

Please continue bigot.

First. Context is king. (your "separation of church and state") is one fine example of this.

Second. At any one point in time in a persons life they may have conflicting beliefs and/or opinions.

Third. The plethora of time spent by our founders in public and private life documenting their belief in God is exhaustive.

TJ "I am a real Christian, that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus." [Letter to Benjamin Rush April 21, 1803]

Did TJ have harsh things to say about organized religion or the church...absolutely. However he was not an atheist! Nor did he argue for atheism as an acceptable worldview. EVEN he realized it was incompatible with freedom.......ask the commies.

He makes a pretty big point to make sure he says "Christian god" not "Christianity" here.
"The Christian god can be easily pictured as virtually the same as the many ancient gods of past civilizations. The Christian god is a three headed monster; cruel, vengeful and capricious. If one wishes to know more of this raging, three headed beast-like god, one only needs to look at the caliber of the people who say they serve him. They are always of two classes: fools and hypocrites."
[Thomas Jefferson, in a letter to his nephew, Peter Carr]

Please continue bigot.

"[no citizen] shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever...[to] compell a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of [religious] opinions which he disbelieves is sinful and tyrannical."
[Thomas Jefferson, Virginia Statute of Religious Freedom]

I don't disagree with any part of this.....I don't see the point.

PS> I also used to be an atheist..

"[no citizen] shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever...[to] compell a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of [religious] opinions which he disbelieves is sinful and tyrannical."
[Thomas Jefferson, Virginia Statute of Religious Freedom]

I don't disagree with any part of this.....I don't see the point.

PS> I also used to be an atheist..

[laws establishing freedom of religion]..."were meant to include within them the Muslim, the Hindoo [sic], and the infidel of any sort."
[Thomas Jefferson in a letter to his nephew, Dethloff, Henry C., ed. Thomas Jefferson and American Democracy. Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath and Co. 1971]
Such a Christian nation.

The dyslexic atheist- "There is no dog!"



The dyslexic Christian - "There is only one dog!"

The dyslexic Christian - "There is only one dog!"

Good grief! I'm glad I'm not dyslexic, having two dogs and all.... I'd be so confused!!! :drummer:

I agree with you Nonno, this is a sad, horrific trend.

Why??

Because we are "winning"??

In the immortal words of John Lennon..

"Imagine there's no religion, no hell below us, above us only sky... "

What a wonderful world it would be ...


OOOH hybrid lyrics.

Us atheists are COOL like that.

English. :yay:


e⋅van⋅gel⋅i⋅cal  [ee-van-jel-i-kuhl, ev-uhn-] Show IPA
–adjective
1. Also, e⋅van⋅gel⋅ic. pertaining to or in keeping with the gospel and its teachings.
2. belonging to or designating the Christian churches that emphasize the teachings and authority of the Scriptures, esp. of the New Testament, in opposition to the institutional authority of the church itself, and that stress as paramount the tenet that salvation is achieved by personal conversion to faith in the atonement of Christ.
3. designating Christians, esp. of the late 1970s, eschewing the designation of fundamentalist but holding to a conservative interpretation of the Bible.
4. pertaining to certain movements in the Protestant churches in the 18th and 19th centuries that stressed the importance of personal experience of guilt for sin, and of reconciliation to God through Christ.
5. marked by ardent or zealous enthusiasm for a cause.
–noun
6. an adherent of evangelical doctrines or a person who belongs to an evangelical church or party.

Still doesn't explain the original statement... unless you were relying on #5 to back you up, in which case your definition is wrong, check websters, proper usage is "evangelistic" not "evangelism", defines a particular order within a religion, not a religion itself. So nice try there.

English :yay:

Furthermore, by reading the ensuing posts here, I am beginning to understand why you feel so downtrodden. People combat your words when you try to cast their beliefs in a bad light. Can't say I blame 'em. I don't see anyone here trying to convince anyone how atheism is evil, corrupt, sad, etc. but boy you sure go to town.

I think I see the real bigot.

I'm outta here!

That's right they were all atheists :killingme
Reading comprehension is obviously not your strong suit. Nowhere in any of the posts have i claimed the Founding Fathers were atheists.

But unlike Christian Revisionists such as yourself, the Founding Fathers did recognized that the citizens that make up this nation can and do have beliefs other than their own. And unlike Christian revisionists, such as yourself, the Founding Fathers also recognize the citizens of this nation, who held other beliefs, are equally valid. As such they were carefull to keep the Declaration and the Constitution belief neutral.

We know this thanks to the Founding Father you (mistakenly) referenced:

We should begin by setting conscience free. When all men of all religions ... shall enjoy equal liberty, property, and an equal chance for honors and power ... we may expect that improvements will be made in the human character and the state of society.-- John Adams, letter to Dr. Price, April 8, 1785
John Adams:“ The general principles upon which the Fathers achieved independence were the general principals of Christianity… I will avow that I believed and now believe that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God.”
• “[July 4th] ought to be commemorated as the day of deliverance by solemn acts of devotion to God Almighty.” –John Adams in a letter written to Abigail on the day the Declaration was approved by Congress

What a militant :coffee:

"no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States." United States Constitution Article 6, section 3

The Declaration was a radical departure from the idea of divine authority it states that the power of the government is derived from the governed. Up until that time, it was claimed that kings ruled nations by the authority of God.

You might want to research a little (yeah right, as if you'd really be willing to use facts) before throwing up quotes from the Founding Fathers. The words "Jesus Christ, Christianity, Bible, and God" are never mentioned in the Constitution. The only mention of God in the Declaration is Natures God (not a Christian concept). The Founding Fathers were very sure of what they wanted, A Government that recognizes all Beliefs, definetly not a Christian Government.

"As the Government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Musselmen; and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries." - Treaty of Tripoli, 1797 - signed by President John Adams.
"Can a free government possibly exist with the Roman Catholic religion?" John Adams letter to Thomas Jefferson 1821
Thirteen governments [of the original states] thus founded on the natural authority of the people alone, without a pretence of miracle or mystery, and which are destined to spread over the northern part of that whole quarter of the globe, are a great point gained in favor of the rights of mankind. -- John Adams, "A Defence of the Constitutions of Government of the United States of America" (1787-88)
"As I understand the Christian religion, it was, and is, a revelation. But how has it happened that millions of fables, tales, legends, have been blended with both Jewish and Christian revelation that have made them the most bloody religion that ever existed?" --- John Adams, letter to F.A. Van der Kamp, Dec. 27, 1816
The question before the human race is, whether the God of nature shall govern the world by his own laws, or whether priests and kings shall rule it by fictitious miracles? -- John Adams, letter to Thomas Jefferson, June 20, 1815
Indeed, Mr. Jefferson, what could be invented to debase the ancient Christianism which Greeks, Romans, Hebrews and Christian factions, above all the Catholics, have not fraudulently imposed upon the public? Miracles after miracles have rolled down in torrents.
-- John Adams, letter to Thomas Jefferson, December 3, 1813

“God who gave us life gave us liberty. And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are a gift from God? That they are not to be violated but with His wrath? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, and that His justice cannot sleep forever.”

Thomas Jefferson (excerpts from his memorial Wash DC)

This sounds eerily like what I said earlier. :popcorn:
I am for freedom of religion, & against all maneuvres to bring about a legal ascendancy of one sect over another.-- Thomas Jefferson, letter to Elbridge Gerry, 1799
Christianity neither is, nor ever was, a part of the common law.-- Thomas Jefferson, letter to Dr. Thomas Cooper, February 10, 1814

:killingme

You really do not want to use Thomas Jefferson as your Founding Father example (it really shows your ignorance of the Founding Fathers):
Because religious belief, or non-belief, is such an important part of every person's life, freedom of religion affects every individual. Religious institutions that use government power in support of themselves and force their views on persons of other faiths, or of no faith, undermine all our civil rights. Moreover, state support of an established religion tends to make the clergy unresponsive to their own people, and leads to corruption within religion itself. Erecting the "wall of separation between church and state," therefore, is absolutely essential in a free society.
We have solved, by fair experiment, the great and interesting question whether freedom of religion is compatible with order in government and obedience to the laws. And we have experienced the quiet as well as the comfort which results from leaving every one to profess freely and openly those principles of religion which are the inductions of his own reason and the serious convictions of his own inquiries.-- Thomas Jefferson, to the Virginia Baptists (1808)
I never will, by any word or act, bow to the shrine of intolerance, or admit a right of inquiry into the religious opinions of others.
-- Thomas Jefferson, letter to Edward Dowse, April 19, 1803
The rights [to religious freedom] are of the natural rights of mankind, and ... if any act shall be ... passed to repeal [an act granting those rights] or to narrow its operation, such act will be an infringement of natural right. -- Thomas Jefferson, Statute for Religious Freedom, 1779. Papers, 2:546
The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.-- Thomas Jefferson, Notes on the State of Virginia, 1781-82
Millions of innocent men, women, and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined, and imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch toward uniformity. What has been the effect of coercion? To make one-half the world fools and the other half hypocrites. To support roguery and error all over the earth.-- Thomas Jefferson, Notes on the State of Virginia, 1781-82
I know it will give great offense to the clergy, but the advocate of religious freedom is to expect neither peace nor forgiveness from them.-- Thomas Jefferson, to Levi Lincoln, 1802.
No man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer, on account of his religious opinions or belief; but that all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinions in matters of religion, and that the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge, or affect their civil capacities.-- Thomas Jefferson, Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom (1779)
I consider the government of the United States as interdicted by the Constitution from intermeddling in religious institutions, their doctrines, discipline, or exercises. This results not only from the provision that no law shall be made respecting the establishment, or free exercise, of religion, but from that also which reserves to the states the powers not delegated to the United States. Certainly, no power to prescribe any religious exercise or to assume authority in religious discipline has been delegated to the General Government. It must then rest with the states, as far as it can be in any human authority.
But it is only proposed that I should recommend, not prescribe a day of fasting & prayer. That is, that I should indirectly assume to the US an authority over religious exercises which the Constitution has directly precluded them from.... I do not believe it is for the interest of religion to invite the civil magistrate to direct it's exercises, it's discipline, or it's doctrines; nor of the religious societies that the general government should be invested with the power of effecting any uniformity of time or matter among them. Fasting & prayer are religious exercises. The enjoining them an act of discipline. Every religious society has a right to determine for itself the times for these exercises, & the objects proper for them, according to their own particular tenets; and this right can never be safer than in their own hands, where the constitution has deposited it. I am aware that the practice of my predecessors may be quoted.... Be this as it may, every one must act according to the dictates of his own reason, & mine tells me that civil powers alone have been given to the President of the US and no authority to direct the religious exercises of his constituents. -- Thomas Jefferson, to Samuel Miller, January 23, 1808

First. Context is king. (your "separation of church and state") is one fine example of this.

Second. At any one point in time in a persons life they may have conflicting beliefs and/or opinions.

Third. The plethora of time spent by our founders in public and private life documenting their belief in God is exhaustive.

TJ "I am a real Christian, that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus." [Letter to Benjamin Rush April 21, 1803]

Did TJ have harsh things to say about organized religion or the church...absolutely. However he was not an atheist! Nor did he argue for atheism as an acceptable worldview. EVEN he realized it was incompatible with freedom.......ask the commies.

Isnt it interesting that you dismiss the Jefferson Quotes as a conflicting belief, when he is quoted refuting your idiocy.

But you feel quoting him writing positive about Christianity is valid. :killingme

Your naivety is delicious. From the 2nd source you neglected to cite because of incovinience.



Ever dated an athiest? Would you date an athiest? Because there is a serious road block when I am on the dating scene.

I will hold this secrect from my parents until their death because... I could come home gay with a black boyfriend one day and they would care less. But if I confessed to them that I was atheist, I would never be welcome in my home again. They have said this. I have seen more oppression than you would know. My immediate friends know and accept that, but If a conversation came up with a prospective employer I would tell them I am southern baptist. I prejudice is there even if you don't accept it.

Its sad that you have to hide the fact that you are an athiest.

Isnt it interesting that you dismiss the Jefferson Quotes as a conflicting belief, when he is quoted refuting your idiocy.

But you feel quoting him writing positive about Christianity is valid. :killingme

You are an atheist. Your belief is philosophically apposed to that of Jefferson. Jefferson was a deist. HE BELIEVED IN GOD. He also believed in aspects of the bible.

Your position is antithetical to his and mine. I don’t agree with TJ on faith matters. Jefferson’s philosophical world view and mine and infinitely more similar than that of yours.

His quotes with out context don’t prove anything about the joys of godlessness…….which is what you advocate....

You are an atheist. Your belief is philosophically apposed to that of Jefferson. Jefferson was a deist. HE BELIEVED IN GOD. He also believed in aspects of the bible.
And to Jefferson, Franklin, (poss) Washington and a host of others, you believed in the wrong God.

Yet, unlike Christian revisionitst, they also respected that ALL beliefs are equally valid. Enough so, that they proclaimed it in the Declaration of Independence and cemented it into the Constitution.
Your position is antithetical to his and mine. I don’t agree with TJ on faith matters. Jefferson’s philosophical world view and mine and infinitely more similar than that of yours.
My position? Do you even know what the hell your talking about? The Founding Fathers fought for the independce of this county, against people such as yourself.

The Founding Fathers, after years of abuse, recognized religous freedom is fundamental to any free society. These rights were placed into the very first Amendment for a reason, to provide the document with a foundation behind allother rights.
His quotes with out context don’t prove anything about the joys of godlessness…….which is what you advocate....
Oh but when you quote Jefferson, without context, do?

Hypocrite much?

And at no point have i ever claimed the Founding Fathers were atheists. I have claimed 2 things, and unlike you, i have facts to back these up.
The Founding Fathers were not all Christians (notice i do not stated they were atheists)
The Founding Fathers believed in Religious Freedom, and did not want Religion and Government to be intertwined.

And to Jefferson, Franklin, (poss) Washington and a host of others, you believed in the wrong God.
Not a true statement

Yet, unlike Christian revisionitst, they also respected that ALL beliefs are equally valid. Enough so, that they proclaimed it in the Declaration of Independence and cemented it into the Constitution.

All beliefs equally valid is an illogical view.

My position? Do you even know what the hell your talking about? The Founding Fathers fought for the independce of this county, against people such as yourself. Hardly. They fought against goverment tyranny that represented a "church". A point in which I agree.

The Founding Fathers, after years of abuse, recognized religous freedom is fundamental to any free society.
Agree
These rights were placed into the very first Amendment for a reason, to provide the document with a foundation behind allother rights.

Oh but when you quote Jefferson, without context, do?
Hypocrite much?

No not much. I provide them as a counter point to your endless diatribe of religious hatred. They prove that Jefferson was conflicted about his own beliefs which as I stated earlier, MINE are much more in line with than yours...

And at no point have i ever claimed the Founding Fathers were atheists. I have claimed 2 things, and unlike you, i have facts to back these up.
The Founding Fathers were not all Christians (notice i do not stated they were atheists)
The Founding Fathers believed in Religious Freedom, and did not want Religion and Government to be intertwined.

You use their ambigious religious statements to further your anti-christian rhetoric. While ignoring all of the religious statements they made about personal beliefs. They implored our country to turn to God and prayer. They were opposed to GOVERMENT RUN RELIGION. A distinction that leftwing anti-religion fanatics have ignored from the begining.

And to Jefferson, Franklin, (poss) Washington and a host of others, you believed in the wrong God.
Not a true statement
Actually it is, Deists do not believe in the same thing as Christians. Deists believe Christ, if he existed, was propped up as the Messiah. Deists also do not believe in the Supernatural'ness of your God.

Deists (link (http://www.deism.com/)) believe in a God based on reason and nature. This is different than your God, hence they believe you are following the wrong one.
Yet, unlike Christian revisionitst, they also respected that ALL beliefs are equally valid. Enough so, that they proclaimed it in the Declaration of Independence and cemented it into the Constitution.
All beliefs equally valid is an illogical view.
Only to a fanatic like yourself. The Founding Fathers recognized not everyone believed the same as themselves. They also recognized because of this that other peoples beliefs are equally valid.
Oh but when you quote Jefferson, without context, do?

Hypocrite much?
No not much. I provide them as a counter point to your endless diatribe of religious hatred. They prove that Jefferson was conflicted about his own beliefs which as I stated earlier, MINE are much more in line with than yours...
Wrong, you thought you found a quote that supported your position. I posted counterpoints that refute it.

The fact that the Founding Fathers took the counterpoint and made it into law and recognized it in the Constitution shows the fallacy of your argument.

Yours are very much not inline with Jeffersons intentions. We know this based on the laws and the Constitution that was enacted. If the Founding Fathers wanted a theocratical Government they would have created one. They made sure to keep Religion and Government seperate, they mandated that no Religious preference was ever to be given, and they ensured that no Belief was to be held in higher regard than any other.

The Founding Fathers are to blame for the Secularism of our Country they knew this was the only way to ensure Equal recognition for all beliefs. Christian Revisionist have attempted to change the intent of the Founding Fathers, at the expense of what the Founding Fathers enacted for this country.
And at no point have i ever claimed the Founding Fathers were atheists. I have claimed 2 things, and unlike you, i have facts to back these up.
The Founding Fathers were not all Christians (notice i do not stated they were atheists)
The Founding Fathers believed in Religious Freedom, and did not want Religion and Government to be intertwined.
You use their ambigious religious statements to further your anti-christian rhetoric. While ignoring all of the religious statements they made about personal beliefs. They implored our country to turn to God and prayer. They were opposed to GOVERMENT RUN RELIGION. A distinction that leftwing anti-religion fanatics have ignored from the begining.

And a distinction that Religious anti-Constitutions fanatics such as yourself fail to understand and ignore: The quotes I post are what The Founding Fathers intended for the Country
The quotes you posted are what the Founding Fathers felt about their own personal beliefs. You fail to understand the 2 are not equal

Also, how is him having a differing belief than his parents ####ting on their beliefs?Well, which is it, STFU or answer you?

Why??

Because we are "winning"??

In the immortal words of John Lennon..

"Imagine there's no religion, no hell below us, above us only sky... "

What a wonderful world it would be ...


OOOH hybrid lyrics.

Us atheists are COOL like that.Because a world without a higher cause than the people in it is a small, pointless world.

Besides, Lennon just said "imagine", not that it would be better. Certainly, he also said "nothing to live and die for". Do you want to live in a world with nothing to die for?

Oober, did you come up with a way that a difference of opinion fits the definition of "prejudice yet?

Because a world without a higher cause than the people in it is a small, pointless world.

Besides, Lennon just said "imagine", not that it would be better. Certainly, he also said "nothing to live and die for". Do you want to live in a world with nothing to die for?
Taken in context i would suggest nothing to die for would refer to the 70 virgins, or eternal afterlife, not referring to something on this plane worthy of dying for.

You live for today, and not for the promise of something after your life.

Taken in context i would suggest nothing to die for would refer to the 70 virgins, or eternal afterlife, not referring to something on this plane worthy of dying for.

You live for today, and not for the promise of something after your life.
Actually, no. I think it means nothing worthwhile to fight for, to die for. Nothing you feel strongly enough about to actually take action for.

That's what I imagine when I imagine a world without religion. Any religion, quite frankly (except atheism).