People with 'no religion' gain....................

foodcritic

New Member
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.
 

Nucklesack

New Member
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.
 

Nucklesack

New Member
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.
 

Sonsie

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

ve2dict

New Member
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
 

libertytyranny

Dream Stealer
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...
 
Last edited:

TurboK9

New Member
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:
 

OoberBoober

Awwwwooooooooo
: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?
 

Sonsie

The mighty Al-Sonsie!
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.
 

libertytyranny

Dream Stealer
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.
 

Nucklesack

New Member
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
 

libertytyranny

Dream Stealer
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.
 

foodcritic

New Member
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:
 

TurboK9

New Member
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.
 

Toxick

Splat
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:
 

OoberBoober

Awwwwooooooooo
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:
 

foodcritic

New Member
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:
 
Top