Far from it. I'm berating those that think they have the right to force me to believe in their god.Jeremy R said:
I find it well worth my time to fight against those who would violate the first amendment rights of all.
Doesn't this kinda violate the separation between Church and State?
- Thread starter Capt. Jack Sparrow
- Start date
You imposing YOUR religious morals on me and being allowed to do it by coersion of the state is a scary prospect.N8 said:Moral Authority scares some people.. bad.
as much as I hate religion it seems to me that bible studies are nearly in every work place. I want to have a Koran study just to rattle the sh*t out of the bible worshippers. i am no expert on bible studies but its funny how christians have violated the bible show many times and keep referring to it and worshiping the damn thing. because it was written a long time ago by multiple amounts of people and they answer questions no one else can answer (except for other religions of course) people are desperately attracted to it. there is no proof that god or even jesus existed so why worship made up people? this reminds me of the Family Guy movie where the older stewie goes back to Jesus' time and realizes that jesus wasnt all that special. if you saw it you know what I mean. if this offends anyone then i am sorry but grow up and face the facts. why set your life around something that cant even be determined?MMike said:
I hear this all too often. So church and state are mixed, who cares? Well, we all should. The founding fathers sure did. They put religious freedom about as high on the priority list as possible, writing it into the very first amendment (as well as a blurb in the actual Constitution itself.) They recognized the dangers to a society that is ruled on religious grounds.N8 said:
So, why did they write it the way they did? Don't know, but the intent is pretty clearly evident. We can look at their own words, which is where we find Jefferson clearly stating that the purpose of the first amendment is to build a wall of separation between church and state.
I really don't see this as mixing church and state. The Bible study is a hobby, enjoyed by people who happen to work together. This is not part of "policy"...or shouldn't be. But just have bible study at work, isn't really that big of a deal. But I'd rather have boob study.....
AND who exactly is doing that to you?Old Man G Funk said:
As for the orginial question, the information Capt. Jack has provided is too vague to make a determination. However, it is doubtful that a "bible study" in a government building hasn't been vetted by about a 1000 lawyers before a supervisor gave it the okay.
Anyone who asserts that it is OK for the gov. to sponsor a specific religion.DRB said:
Agreed, as I've said a few times before. We don't know enough details.
I would disagree, however, that we can assume this has "been vetted by about 1000 lawyers." It's my experience that the gov. doesn't really worry about making sure things pass legal muster when setting up programs like this. I've been to government science conferences where they have a prayer before lunch. Tell me how that passed through 1000s of lawyers.
Such a drama queen.Old Man G Funk said:
There's nothing in the constitution about separation of church and state, it's just a priciple that was seen to be a good one until recently.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof......
Article VI: Clause 3: The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.
The public trust bit is more relevant here.
The public trust bit is more relevant here.
And, as I've already explained, Jefferson enlightened us on what they meant by that when he coined the phrase, "Separation of Church and State." It is not in the Constitution, but it is what was meant.JerseyDave said:
I also like to cite that part of the Constitution. It's what I was referring to earlier.Changleen said:
Of course, we know this doesn't work in practice since no atheist could get elected to any national office right now (and it is doubtful any atheist could get elected to most regional/state offices) but the concept was enshrined in the law.
So just to sum this all up:
There's actually nothing in the constitution that says you cant pray together in a room in a federal building. STFU already you whiney little vaginas.
There's actually nothing in the constitution that says you cant pray together in a room in a federal building. STFU already you whiney little vaginas.
No, that's not a correct summation. If you can't follow the discussion, perhaps you shouldn't be telling us all to STFU.BurlyShirley said:
No, I think that's about right. There's been the usual whining and wanking of Thomas Jefferson and some other crap, but what it really boils down to is that you hate christians and there's nothing you can do about it. Sucks to be you, I guess.Old Man G Funk said:
Burly,BurlyShirley said:
I challenge you to find anywhere on this thread where I have bashed Xtians or Xtianity.
The real summation of this thread is that we don't have enough info to decide whether or not there is a potential church/state separation issue. The other stuff has simply gone into hypotheticals and whether it is possible to actually violate church/state separation. If you are trying to assert that it is not possible, then too bad for you because you are dead wrong. If you think it is good to blur the line of separation, then go live in Saudi Arabia or Iran and then tell me how you like it.
Also, your comment that I hate Xtians has already been dealt with. I challenge you find anywhere on any thread where I say that I hate Xtians. Of course, coming from the guy who said that religion is for people who are too stupid to live without it, your remark is simply retarded.
Old Man G Funk said:
So, I'll take it that the challenge will not be met?BurlyShirley said:
Next time you try to bash me, make sure you have some ammo, or I'll make you look stupid then too.
You ****ing swim off with the bait so easy every day in this b!tch. I cant help myself.Old Man G Funk said:
I'm not buying the Colbert thing if that's what you mean. In fact, I'm pretty sure no one buys the Colbert thing. So, I treat you like any other debate opponent, whether you are serious or not, because it is impossible to tell. Someone reading this would not be able to tell, and I think it is important to make sure that this issue is dealt with accurately and in good faith. Also, when you make personal attacks on me that neither I nor others realize is in jest, I'm going to defend myself.BurlyShirley said:You ****ing swim off with the bait so easy every day in this b!tch. I cant help myself.
Old Man G Funk said:
Who cares what you buy? You DO in fact attack christianity at every given opportunity, and while Im admittedly very inconsistent about attacking it, I tend to only do it when I have a point to make. Here, as usual, it's the same petty drama you like to stir...
I dont have answer some challenge to tell me your opinion on christians. Its blatantly evident in every post you make. And good for you, but Im going to continue to give you sh!t about it, as that's just the kind of thing I do.
Deal with it, or ignore me. Either way, stop whining like a little girl.
And attacking Xtianity is NOT the same as attacking Xtians. But I forgot that you aren't able to comprehend that.BurlyShirley said:
Who cares what you buy? You DO in fact attack christianity at every given opportunity, and while Im admittedly very inconsistent about attacking it, I tend to only do it when I have a point to make. Here, as usual, it's the same petty drama you like to stir...
Because you can't.
Then it should be easy to show, but you can't.
Whining like a little girl? The only one whining here is you. "Oh, how dare you challenge me on my pathetic little snipings that I can't back up. I'm going to call you names now because that's what little girls throwing temper tantrums do."
Where've I whined? I could care less where anyone prays or who calls me what names...Old Man G Funk said:
You're the one with you panties in a bunch in EVERY debate. You throw a temper tantrum when someone prays in a freaking conference room. You dont see how ridiculuous you are because you're too upset with christians to care.
Oh, and Burly, for the record most of the time you aren't funny.
Whining about being challenged on your blatantly false accusations.BurlyShirley said:
Where have I thrown a temper tantrum? If you could read you would note that I've said multiple times that we don't have enough info to tell whether it is a problem or not. Are you really that deficient in reading comprehension?
Old Man G Funk said:
Well Im glad thats on record now. Man you sure take yourself too seriously.I really couldnt care less if some ultraliberal anti christian internet debater thinks Im funny to be honest, but some people do, most importantly ME. So like I said, you can deal with it, ignore me, or stop whining like a little girl any time now.
Every post you make is a temper tantrum. I can picture you jumping in the floor and flailing about after every N8 post.Old Man G Funk said:
I am dealing with it. I'm showing how you have nothing to back up your base assertions against me.BurlyShirley said:
I really couldnt care less if some ultraliberal anti christian internet debater thinks Im funny to be honest, but some people do, most importantly ME. So like I said, you can deal with it, ignore me, or stop whining like a little girl any time now.
Watch this:
You hate Christians.
See? You aint shown me sh!t!
You hate Christians.
See? You aint shown me sh!t!
Then you don't know me at all. I rarely lose my temper.BurlyShirley said:
Of course, you can't point to any specific thing on this thread where I have bashed Xtians or Xtianity or lost my temper. You also can't find other places where I've bashed Xtians as you assert. So, really you must like making yourself look stupid. But hey, you could make me look stupid. All you have to do is find a post that refutes me. C'mon. It should be easy. I mean, every single one of my posts according to you fits the above categories. So, is it really that difficult for you? It would take 1 minute tops to go back to an earlier post on this thread even and produce it. In fact, it would take less effort to do that than to do all of the explaining away why you haven't done it. So, c'mon. Sh*t or get off the pot.
No, but everyone else knows you are full of it.BurlyShirley said:
Edit: Simply because you don't have the cognitive faculties to realize that you're argument is deficient doesn't mean that everyone is so afflicted.
Why do you hate them so bad though?
As I've explained, I don't.BurlyShirley said:
Why are you so chicken that you have to lob insults and base accusations at people and then can't back them up?
Sheesh, get a room.
Maybe because he's racist...?? a lot of black people are devout christians...BurlyShirley said:
N8, feel free to help Burly out with his challenge.N8 said:Maybe because he's racist...?? a lot of black people are devout christians...
Edit: He needs all the help he can get.
Old Man G Funk said:
You know damn good and well you are scared of christians and their beliefs.