Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.
"I don't recall freedom of religion meaning no religion"
pics.obra.se — Is a new religious war about to begin?
rodrigo74- 400 diggs
- digg it
- Bhima, on 10/12/2007, -6/+47About to begin?
- aaronwolfe, on 10/12/2007, -8/+58How did she understand anything she read in the bible, if she can't understand "no state sponsored religion"?
- rune420, on 10/12/2007, -7/+64It seems like "freedom of religion" to her means "freedom to believe in my religion".
- Akaji, on 10/12/2007, -11/+42Yes, a new religious war is about to begin because of one stupid reader sending one stupid response to a newspaper.
Oh. Noes. - blaze03, on 10/12/2007, -4/+51"The United States is based on having freedom of religion...which means you can believe in God any way you want (Baptist, Catholic, Methodist, etc.) but you must believe."
I don't feel any anger towards her, just pity. - rockforever, on 10/12/2007, -6/+21Wow, what kind of idiot would want to start a semantics war with an entire group of people? You want to make me believe in ANY religion?? OK, I'll just make one up. And I guarantee it will piss you off just as much you ignorant bible thumper.
- royall64, on 10/12/2007, -20/+10On a side note, why does it say "In God We Trust" on our coins if there's freedom of religion?
- FoxifiedNutjob, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11Its hard to tell the difference between satire and foxified nazi nutbar ramplings.
You just can't tell the difference anymore. - imperium2000, on 10/12/2007, -13/+19royal64: That's a great point. It's a mistake that needs correcting and needs to be removed from our currency.
- bruenig, on 10/12/2007, -1/+25@royall64
In short, red scare.
"In 1956, the Cold War was in full swing, and the anti-Communist suspicion of the McCarthy era was at its height. Partly in reaction to Communism (which was officially atheist), the 84th Congress passed a joint resolution to replace the existing motto with "In God we Trust." According to United States Code, Title 36, Section 302, the new motto officially displaced the original 180 year-old national motto "E Pluribus Unum" (Out of Many, One) when President Eisenhower signed the resolution into law on 30 July 1956."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_God_We_Trust - chris9902, on 10/12/2007, -23/+3Atheism is a religion/belief. It's the belief there is no God.
he means Agnosticism. - broomett, on 10/12/2007, -8/+11No state sponsored religion does NOt mean that there can never be amention of relgion or God anywhere. Clearly the people who WROTE that part of hte Bill of Rights had no problem with talking about God.
No state sponsored religion means that the state can't force people to aceept/practice one religon. Name ANY instance whre that has been the case. - BeefBaron, on 10/12/2007, -15/+18Religion; well funded encouragement of stupidity.
- Adune0Warrior, on 10/12/2007, -4/+24 Once in our nation's history we did not have "In God we trust" on our money, high officials when swearing in they didn't have to say "So help me God" when the phrase "under God" wasn't in our Pledge of Allegiance. And when people did not say that America was a "Christan" nation. The words "under god" in the pledge of allegiance was not added to it until February 8, 1954 and was introduced to congress by Representative Charles Oakman. Before this the words "under god" were not in our pledge of allegiance.
The Treaty with Tripoli which was approved unanimously by the Senate in 1797 under the administration of President John Adams clearly states in Article 11 of the treaty states, "[T]he government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion…." This was signed by our founding fathers it is a clear indicator to not let any religion make the laws for our nation.
The first attempt of branding our currency with "In God we Trust" was in 1863 from religious out cry and it appeared on lots of American coinage. But, before this time there was no "under god" on American currency whatsoever. But, on July 11, 1955 President Eisenhower signed public law 140 making it mandatory that all coinage and paper currency display the motto "In God We Trust." Later the next year he signed Public Law 851 which officially changed the national motto of "E Pluribus Unum" to "In God we Trust." Also during this time of integrating the words god into our once secular government they also made a statue for all federal justices and judges to swear an oath concluding with "So help me God."
All of these laws were made during the Cold War era (except the coinage branding in 1863.) which was fueled by the need to include "In God We Trust" into numerous things to combat the "godlessness" of communism.
To please our founding fathers and out atheist friends I believe that we need to restore the secular society that America once was. This would be a great sign of freedom of religion. Since 1954 the atheist have been oppressed which goes against the basis of the Constitution of freedom of religion and these laws restrict that freedom by our government. Changes need to be made to show once again that America is indeed the land of the free, the freedom of religion or lack of religion. - Lardquake, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8@chris9902: So what's the belief in no Santa Claus called?
- hbweb500, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6@Broomett
I suggest you read about the Establishment Clause to the 1st Amendment:
http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/estabinto.htm
The government cannot endorse religion for the sole reason that it is a religion. For example, the Supreme Court found in Engel v Vitale that school-sponsored prayer was illegal, and an endorsement of religion. Providing busing to parochial schools, however, is not considered a violation, since it isn't done for religious reasons.
There are two things to remember with church & state: Establishment and Free Exercise. - piuveloce, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4Anyway, the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster is always an alternative.
:-) - pants428, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6@broomett:
Exactly, and that's why if I am an atheist and a US citizen, they can't make me leave just because I don't believe in their God..
@adune0warrior2
Well put. - xbudex, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5@Akaji
The thing I find disturbing about this is that the newspaper published it. Some random nut is one thing, but some people working for a newspaper get a letter like this and think it is a good idea to published it, is another. The way I see it, this is hate speech. It is on the same level of someone sending a letter to the editors saying, "The majority of Americans would love to see _____ kicked out of America. _____ have caused the ruin of this great nation. I don't care if they have never committed a crime, ____ are the reason crime is rampant." (Fill in the blanks as you see fit)
- zeblith, on 10/12/2007, -6/+2@ chris9902
Agnosticism is also a belief/religion, in that if there is a universal truth, it either cannot be known, or is simply beyond our comprehension. - stvnly, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3this was such a ridiculous letter to the editor, why did they even choose to print it?
- NJank, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4@xbudex &stvnly:
Wow. nearly identical questions with such an obvious answer it's almost painful to have to point it out.
The newspaper's job is to maintain readership and generate interest. More eyes on the page = win.
How many diggers checked out the story? How many stories about the story will there be?
How many would there have been if they hadn't printed this? none.
Easy answer. - Y2JCrisis, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Hmm.. Apparently some people don't understand that "Freedom of Religion" really means Freedom FROM Religion. That is, freedom from other people's religion. Freedom of religion really means that the government cannot force beliefs upon you.
- xbudex, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@njank
You are right, it could be a stunt in increase readers or to create buzz. However, I gave them the benefit of the doubt. I assumed they are not some sleazy tabloid going for the lowest common denominator. From the picture, I have no idea where this was published (I can only assume it is near Soldotna, Alaska). I can say, if this was my local paper, they would hear from me and lose me as a customer for life. So, if it was a marketing tactic, I think it would be a very bad tactic. - texpundit, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3"The thing I find disturbing about this is that the newspaper published it."
I don't find it disturbing. I find it par for the course. In the same vein as the Neocons trying to make people believe that Muslim == Terrorist, there is a concerted effort by a large number of establishment types to make all Christians look backwards, intolerant and dumber than a bag of hammers. What better way to promote that idea than to publish a letter to the editor that fits that retarded stereotype?
I just wish that they'd leave moderate, rational Christians like myself alone. Y'know...those of us with more than two brain cells to rub together.
BTW, "hate speech" is a crock. If I state that I hate stupid people or if atheists state that they hate God and Christians, is that considered "hate speech?" - LordLucless, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@royal: Because if you're putting your faith in the US dollar at the moment, you'd better be trusting God's on your side?
- aaronwolfe, on 10/12/2007, -8/+58How did she understand anything she read in the bible, if she can't understand "no state sponsored religion"?
- baalzebub, on 10/12/2007, -8/+64Alice Shannon is whacko, just as extreme as the taliban (just replace islam with christianity)...
- Jaq524, on 10/12/2007, -16/+30Christ-insanity.
Sorry, I had to. - strabes, on 10/12/2007, -2/+20The difference is that if you follow Christian doctrine (New Testament, life of Christ, early church) literally, you'll be something like Amish. Simple, pacifist, loving, and community-oriented. "Christians" that preach hate and things like "god hates fags" are not emulating the life of Christ. They see God as all judgement and fire and brimstone and miss His love and forgiveness.
- flashpointbob, on 10/12/2007, -4/+5How about we beat her... in the name of God.
- thtroyer, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3@strabes
Good points there about the Amish. They do possess many good qualities. However, living in an area containing many Amish (and myself even Mennonite), the Amish don't have everything right either.
Sadly, there are a lot of wacko 'Christians' out there, but I guess that happens with _any_ type/group of people. :/
- Jaq524, on 10/12/2007, -16/+30Christ-insanity.
- nekitip, on 10/12/2007, -5/+61Note she doesn't allow for non-christian religions either.
- unknownsoldierX, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7What a total close-minded, brainwashed nutjob.
"The United States is based on having freedom of religion...which means you can believe in God any way you want (Baptist, Catholic, Methodist, etc.) but you must believe."
Freedom of religion mean you must believe in "God"? So this inherent right to practice a religion of your choice excludes Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, etc.?
Sadly, her line of thought is more common her in the US than many intelligent people care to believe. - merreborn, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3Which highlights an inconsistency in her arguments.
First, she acknowledges "freedom of religion", and secondly argues that "In god we trust" must mean that America is inherently theist.
However, polytheistic religions would implicitly be allowed by "freedom of religion", but disallowed by the "in god we trust" argument (it doesn't say "in gods we trust", after all).
Therefore, the two statements are obviously incompatible. - Mofassa, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3@unknownsoldierx
What you fail it realise is that Islam would be allowed. Islam, Christianity, and Judism all follow the same god. Just preachings that have come about at different points... - chaosium, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"What you fail it realise is that Islam would be allowed. Islam, Christianity, and Judism all follow the same god. Just preachings that have come about at different points..."
The attempt to bring up Abrahamic roots would meet the immediate and scholarly reply of "nuh-uh!"
- unknownsoldierX, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7What a total close-minded, brainwashed nutjob.
- SemajReffahs, on 10/12/2007, -16/+14wow...ya .. um can't comment ... that was way to idiotic
- Lambeco, on 10/12/2007, -6/+2And yet somehow, you still commented. Postcount++. Good contribution, assbag.
- FarcicalFart, on 10/12/2007, -24/+15She should be shot.
- dielawn, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4that would just be immoral. everyones got freedom of speech, and she holds her right to shut the ***** up.
- rodrigo74, on 10/12/2007, -5/+13http://i167.photobucket.com/albums/u128/rodrigo74/1170191653865.jpg
In case the server dies... - thenativeraver, on 10/12/2007, -4/+89~found this comment~
Web posted Tuesday, February 6, 2007
Hate speech isn’t right
Letter to the Editor
Hate speech may be protected under the First Amendment, but that doesn’t mean it’s right, responsible or appropriate to print deranged and hateful diatribes like Alice Shannon’s letter, printed in the Clarion on Jan. 29.
Her call to “stomp out” atheists in America and her dark predictions of atheists destroying America by “practicing what can only be called evil” is frighteningly reminiscent of Adolf Hitler’s contemptible predictions regarding Jews which captivated Germany over 60 years ago.
I am also fascinated by what her definition of “freedom” could possibly be. She defines freedom of religion as the freedom to “believe in God any way you want,” completely ignoring not only the atheists which she so openly abhors, but also any religion that does not conform to her impossibly narrow definition of piety.
I think that the adherents of Buddhism, Agnosticism, Humanism, Unitarian Universalism and a multitude of other polytheistic or atheistic belief systems would object to being limited to “Baptist, Catholic, Methodist, etc.”
Just because vicious attacks of “Get off our country” (apparently there is an inverse relationship between grammar ability and bigotry) are deeply offensive only to a (largely silent) minority of Alaskans does not mean that such assaults, which go directly against the very basic founding principles of this country, should be printed without rebuke.
Shame on Alice Shannon and everyone who agrees with her, and shame on the Peninsula Clarion for providing a forum for such disgusting bigotry and misguided anger.
Joseph Mohorcich
Soldotna- mookiemookie, on 10/12/2007, -25/+7Wow, only two sentances before Godwin's Law kicked in. That's quick!
- Akaji, on 10/12/2007, -3/+16(sentences)
And Godwin's Law only applies to the intarwebs!
For those who don't know it, Godwin's Law: "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one." (Formulated by Mike Godwin in the 1990s) - mookiemookie, on 10/12/2007, -10/+3Godwin's Corollary? ;)
- Jaq524, on 10/12/2007, -16/+8That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard. As ANY discussion continues, the probability of mentioning ANYTHING will approach one.
- ColinCampbell, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10I agree with Jag524. This is the Internets. No joking allowed.
- somnambulator, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2Phew, for a minute there I thought it meant God-wins....eeek what a nightmare!
- DisposableRob, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Godwin's law doesn't really count when the original post or letter has such an obviously fascist message.
- macmcrae, on 10/12/2007, -5/+4I think the mental abuse preachers unleash on the minds of children - by teaching them to believe in hell and Satan - is as damaging as the sexual abuse they do to alter boy's bodies: to paraphrase dawkins more or less.
- Fejerro, on 10/12/2007, -7/+8Worst. Letter-to-the-Editor. Ever.
- doctechnical, on 10/12/2007, -8/+5Is that you, Ed Anger? Are you pig-biting mad?
- clockworkORANGE, on 10/12/2007, -9/+21Hahahah.. I'd like to see all the atheist's leave our country, and see how well college's do after they all leave.. I think there will be a lot of job openings for professors.
- clockworkORANGE, on 10/12/2007, -11/+4I'm an atheist by the way.
- Akaji, on 10/12/2007, -12/+5"all the atheist's"
Yeah, I can tell that them college's' are be doing great job is'. - synystar, on 10/12/2007, -6/+5A recent study showed that roughly 76% of college professors consider themselves to be religious.
- nazuraki, on 10/12/2007, -2/+796% of NAS members are atheist of agnostic.
I'd *love* to see how the nation's already floundering economy fares after the best minds are exiled. - imperium2000, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3That poll about college professors includes social and non-science related professors. The numbers of atheist in this group is also interesting since it still is much higher than the general populace.
If you just count science professors(especially biologist), the number of atheist rises significantly(If I remember correctly almost 50% of biology professors.)
nazuraki: That poll has a lot of problems because of how the question was asked. I don;t know how valid it is. - rhesuspieces00, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Can someone cite a source for the NAS stats? The last statistic I read was that about 40% of American scientists and mathematicians believe in the existence of God (not sure how god(s) was defined for the sake of that survey). I realize those two statistics don't necessarily conflict, but it would at least suggest that the NAS is not an accurate cross section of American scientists.
- xenuday, on 10/12/2007, -6/+0 bahahahahahaahhaha
- macweirdo42, on 10/12/2007, -4/+14This isn't even about atheism. She only mentions Christian demoninations under what she deems "acceptable." There are plenty of religious beliefs that would fall under her definition of "atheism." What if I'm a pantheist? What if I'm a polytheist? In either case, the word "God" is not appropriate. Or should I just be burned at the stake for not being a good little Christian like she wants?
- Gophergreg, on 10/12/2007, -8/+16JESUS, Save me from the Christians!
- starfisch, on 10/12/2007, -3/+18brb, going off the country for a while
- flamingmb, on 10/12/2007, -7/+7what a bitch.
- Fredx, on 10/12/2007, -13/+11 This is just what you would expect from a Christian, trying to ram their fairy tail beliefs down people's throat's. If people don't fall for it, then they start insulting you about your beliefs and how satan is controlling your mind and your going to burn in hell....yeah yeah...Then you find they out they are the biggest breakers of the so called commandments cause they are liars, theives and child molesters.... GO TO HELL BIBLE BASHES !
- TrogdorBurnin8r, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8Good example being Ted Haggard (and there are bunches of others as well) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Haggard
The guy spent hours talking against homosexuals and he was screwing a male prostitute. Talk about hypocrite
- TrogdorBurnin8r, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8Good example being Ted Haggard (and there are bunches of others as well) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Haggard
- crazybrit, on 10/12/2007, -2/+40NEWSFLASH: PEOPLE ARE STUPID.
There are stupid Christians and stupid atheists, but we're going to have to live together, mmkay? Bitching about it isn't going to make things any better.- machinegunopera, on 10/12/2007, -10/+1duggup duggup duggup!
- brasso, on 10/12/2007, -8/+13Goddamn christian redneck...
- roguenine2000, on 10/12/2007, -10/+7Yes and the use of profanity to describe someone is oh so classy...
- BGog, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5See you miss the point. "Goddamn" would only be considered profanity if you weren't an atheist. Not to mention the fact that it was a joke and a funny one at that.
Goddamn prude. :)
- scootscr15, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Wow, that's not offensive at all.. :-
- killzalot, on 10/12/2007, -9/+13lol i am glad i don't live in the US.
- sullivans, on 10/12/2007, -17/+4rotflol wow I'm glad you dont either.
- AquaTeenMS, on 10/12/2007, -3/+16"So, to all the atheists in America: Get off our country"
If there was a god he would smite people like her for making christians sound so stupid.- socketscientist, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0n/m
- noamsml, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8In other news: It seems that the Christian right has resorted to growing people in boxes without contact to the outside world and brainwashing them 24/7. Seriously; that's the only explanation.
- chaosium, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2What do you think social conservatism involves, eh? :)
- mrgeekguy, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4Wow, a one woman war? Rambo's mom she must be! She's your worst nightmare!
- sullivans, on 10/12/2007, -6/+2good one Yoda
- brutalentropy, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1[yoda voice]
mmm, your worst nightmare she is
[/yoda voice]
- machinegunopera, on 10/12/2007, -2/+12I think the article, "Let's just keep fishing" looked more interesting.
- scoyndizzle, on 10/12/2007, -1/+17I love how her options for ways to believe in god are just several sects of the same religion.
- roguenine2000, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6This person shouldn't be taken seriously. What is even more sad than her statement is that atheists will use this as fodder against Christians.
- atown44, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4how's that sad... that's what's happening right here
- mushishi, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4roguenine2000:
Why shouldn't we? She is an representative, albeit slightly more extreme, of the Christian America that would overcome its usual prejudices and elect a black man or a woman as President before one of those *gasp* immoral, debauched, freedom-and-America-hating atheists. Face it: Christianity in America is rife with insidious nonsense like that; it is simply *****. - roguenine2000, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4You are correct that there is a lot of ***** among Christians, but to generalize is extremely unfair. In society, the loudest voice gets heard. I have never seen a digg article about a moderate Christian. Never. But the truth of the matter is, the majority of Christians are loving people who aren't like this woman. Christians like this woman shouldn't even call themselves Christians because they are not following the teachings of Christ at all.
It is ironic, mushishi, that you generalize Christians into being racists and mysoginists while you yourself make unfounded and wide speaking generalizations. - mushishi, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2I do not want to spend the time and you can use Google: there is a page that you should be able to readily find that has a collation of a great many recent surveys of the religious in America, on sundry topics relating to science, specific beliefs, politics, and so on. If you think I was merely generalising, you might like to inform yourself using that compendium and then make reappraisal your opinion.
(learn the definition of irony; that was not irony. it is 'hypocritical', 'incogent' or 'misguided' to attempt to combat what you allege was a generalisation with what was merely your own generalisation of christians in america. now armed with statistics, i can safely say: ***** off.) - mushishi, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1http://www.pollingreport.com/religion.htm
Ho-ho. Peruse those and tell me that you do not live in a theocracy populated by ignorant, chauvinistic *****.
- TrogdorBurnin8r, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8Wow... unbeliavable... "it's time to stomp out atheists in America"... guess that's the love they are preaching about. You let people like this in power (which Bushists almost managed to do) and we'll have Afghanistan in the US of A.
- sullivans, on 10/12/2007, -8/+0weak
- atown44, on 10/12/2007, -25/+4lol at all the atheists commenting.
No wonder the internet's so ***** up, it's full of people without morals.- AquaTeenMS, on 10/12/2007, -2/+16Why does religion denote morality? How many Catholic priests have raped little boys in the last 5 years? Don't take my word for it but I am pretty sure they are religious.
- brutalentropy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Hey, you're here aren't you?
- GregR, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5@ AquaTeenMS "... How many Catholic priests have raped little boys in the last 5 years? Don't take my word for it but I am pretty sure they are religious."
How many politicians raped the country in the past x years? Don't take their word for it that they are religious! - noamsml, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4My God, it's full of Atheists!
- CurtHowland, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7I don't care what religion people have, so long as it is possible to live _without_ religion.
But, as atown44 above makes clear, some religious people are incapable of letting other people believe differently than they do. - plasticquart, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6This lady is obviously a loon... too bad she doesn't appear to have any easily found public contact info. :)
Anywho, lots of good responses in the same newspaper:
http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:Wt1gniDpxlkJ:www.peninsulaclarion.com/letters/+alice+shannon,+soldotna&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us&client=firefox-a - Vektuz, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Its amazing.
Not only is this person stupid and ignorant enough to believe that crap, but they're also stupid enough to broadcast it to a newspaper and thus allow everyone else to see what stupid ***** they are. LOL - orangekid13, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2The ***** just hit the fan
I would personally like to smack this woman in the face with the rusty side of a van...
I don't go to church and I believe evolution is the only explanation. However I think there is some sort of deity (or deities) because after the big bang it seems like too much of a coincidence that there just happened to be more matter than antimatter and everything worked out this way.
The thing is about this country is that I AM ALLOWED TO THINK THAT OR CHANGE MY MIND TO ANYTHING ELSE AND NOBODY CAN DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT!!!
If she thinks otherwise she is, in my opinion, too stupid to live in this country, so he can leave, get himself a Darwin award, or talk ***** to the wrong person.
I don't care your religious view, you're entitled to it. this is different... stop trying to screw up my country, it's doing a good enough job of that on its own by being run by super religious people who think they're Gods gift or God himself and I'm sick of it.
If we get anyone like Bush elected again I'll likely leave... what island is thepiratebay buying?- McLumpy, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1"If she thinks otherwise she is, in my opinion, too stupid to live in this country, so he can leave, get himself a Darwin award, or talk ***** to the wrong person."
I like how your person changes sex midsentence.
- McLumpy, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1"If she thinks otherwise she is, in my opinion, too stupid to live in this country, so he can leave, get himself a Darwin award, or talk ***** to the wrong person."
- sicheah, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3I wish to comment about her opinion on Atheist are ruining America by starting with, on the contrary....
- YellowStar, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Please, one Spanish Inquisition was enough.
Faith is a personal choice and not anybody's business to inflict their "faith" upon me.- broomett, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1And who has ever tried to make you choose their faith?
- RedHerringHack, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7I live by 1 rule. The golden one. It's not complicated. I am an atheist BTW, my sundays are free to think deep.
I think jesus even endorsed that one. - Iwantawii, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3I recommend checking out the book entitled "The Laughing Jesus" by Timothy Freke and Peter Gandy.
It outlines the ways in which "killing for god" has taken place throughout mankind's history.
It differentiates spirituality from religion, faith from following, and acceptance from religous intolerance.
If you'll read between the lines, that means it outlines the ways in which organized religion has been on a nose dive since the day we created god + 1. Endless hate, discrimination, torture and killing all because it is the Word of your God.
Anyways, check it out. Or google it! - gldfshnpcklejar, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4What a bigot.
- AegisC, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0A lot of us are still aghast that there are people like this out there... who believes these sorts of things? How to fix the problem? Do as Richard Dawkins suggests? Don't let parents raise their children religious... It would seem to be that easy. But Dawkins' own friend and fellow atheist Daniel Dennett says in his book Breaking the Spell:
...If you think that religion is, all things considered, a malignant feature of human culture, a childhood disease of sorts with lingering aftereffects, the public-health policy to deal with it would be politically drastic but quite simple: inoculation and isolation. Don’t let parents give their own children a religious upbringing! This policy has been tried, on a major scale, in the former Soviet Union, with dire consequences. The rebound of religion in post-USSR Russia suggests that religion has roles to play and resources undreamt of by this simple vision. (p. 86)
I don't know how we are going to come to a resolution to the belief wars ensuing out there today. People and religious belief are complex and complicated beyond what we can imagine - cr4ft, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6Oh boy! Nothing like reading an intolerance letter by ANOTHER ***** up Christian.
- xZeddx, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5This is why some atheists are antitheistic.
If they practiced what they teach and learn in Church, they would be accepting of all people, including atheists.
I am hoping for the religious culture war to come. Maybe it will eradicate people as close minded as this woman. - captaincc, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2Scary scary sh1t
- MateFrio, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1Ephesians
6:12 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.- ru1dt, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Paul was a good writer, but I think he should have been more specific.
It's vagueness like this that get people into trouble.
So... - insllvn, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Ezekiel 25:17 - The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the iniquities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men. Blessed is he who, in the name of charity and good will, shepherds the weak through the valley of the darkness. For he is truly his brother's keeper and the finder of lost children. And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who attempt to poison and destroy my brothers. And you will know my name is The Lord when I lay my vengeance upon you.
- ru1dt, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Paul was a good writer, but I think he should have been more specific.
- coldequations, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0About your state sponsored religion comment, if you'd become a little more educated about American History, you'd know that America's laws regarding religion (as per the Constitution) are actually quite loose. The Federal Government can't have an official religion, but even at the time of the drafting of the Constitution several states endorsed Christianity as a state religion, and it obviously wasn't a problem to the men who wrote the Constitution. All this bologne about statues of the 10 commandments being removed from courthouses is just a perversion of the Constitution by...certain people. Preserve the Constitution!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_religion- texpundit, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I don't know why you're getting dugg down; you're absolutely correct.
Technically, in the beginning, individual states (NOT the federal government) were allowed to have a state religion if they wanted. Many of them did.
The first changes in federal power overshadowing state's rights started with the passage of the 14th Amendment. But in 1947, in Adamson v. California, the Supreme Court decided to start "interpreting" the the 14th Amendment to say that it requires the states to follow the protections of the Bill of Rights...not that it's necessarily a bad thing. This is generally referred to as "Incorporation."
Basically, in 1947, the US Supreme Court essentially ended state's rights by judicial fiat. Like I said: states adhering to the Bill of Rights isn't a bad thing, but that decision (along with things like the Interstate Commerce Clause) allowed a snowball effect that has stripped nearly all rights to any kind of autonomy from the individual states.
- texpundit, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I don't know why you're getting dugg down; you're absolutely correct.
- madeingermany, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4I still think it should read 'In Gold we trust'
- insllvn, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1why?
- atown44, on 10/12/2007, -7/+2hahahahaha... I post something obvious about atheists and my reply gets buried (not "dugg down" btw)
but all the vicious anti-Christianity comments are through the roof.
...and you say catholics force their beliefs.- TrogdorBurnin8r, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0You were not dugg down because you posted something against atheists (and for the record I am agnostic), but because your comment is just stupid. "lol at all the atheists commenting. No wonder the internet's so ***** up, it's full of people without morals." ...
Are you talking about morals such as Ted Haggard, who was looking for high from a male prostitute, or numerous catholic priests molesting young choir boys. Or morals such as burning/shooting daughters in Afghanistan / Pakistan coz they were inocently flirting. Or morals such as having 15 wives barefoot and pregnant somewhere in Utah...
- TrogdorBurnin8r, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0You were not dugg down because you posted something against atheists (and for the record I am agnostic), but because your comment is just stupid. "lol at all the atheists commenting. No wonder the internet's so ***** up, it's full of people without morals." ...
- elvisdechico, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4GET A BRAIN! MORANS
- chaersi, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2get a spell checker....
- Fhionnlaoch, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Bah, there's people like this in every country. I live in Canada and it's the opposite political persuasion (the left) saying the same things. "If you don't like the CRTC, then move to America."
Okay America, I don't like the CRTC, but you'll have to make some concessions before I move there:
1. Some form of public health system.
2. Repealing the DMCA would be nice.
3. Tone the blind patriotism down, please.
I'll submit the rest of my list when you pass these three through, thanks.- JavertHolmes, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1...From Google: Your search - "if you don't like the CRTC" - did not match any documents.
Who is saying this? Some jackass from the CBC at a cocktail party?
Also, to compare religious freedoms and the freedom to watch US advertising / Canadian programming is a bit superficial. - Fhionnlaoch, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1It is superficial, but it reveals a deep-seated ideological xenophobia.
- JavertHolmes, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1...From Google: Your search - "if you don't like the CRTC" - did not match any documents.
- OGROK, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Religion is a reflection of human ignorance.
- gert2, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1Y'know, the funny thing about being ignorant is: you don't know you're ignorant. If you're crazy, everyone who isn't crazy is crazy from your POV. So, maybe you're the idiot and everyone else is sane!
- Alex74447, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2What about pastafarians?
- hesitaliandad, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5"Is a new religious war about to begin?"
I'm fairly certain that some hick in Alaska writing to her local paper is not the leader of an insurrection.- insllvn, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Christians in America would not constitute an insurrection. They are the oppressive majority.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 108 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2008 —
Content posted by
