Evidence for God from Science

Nessa wrote:

B. W. wrote:

edwardmurphy wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:Should people with stupid beliefs be mocked and ridiculed?

No, I don't think that people with "stupid" beliefs should be mocked and ridiculed. I think that people deserve to be treated courteously, regardless of what they believe. However, I don't accept the argument that any belief should be granted some special status simply because it's widely held, sincerely felt, traditionally accepted, or backed by some holy text. I see nothing wrong with challenging someones' beliefs, but it has to be in the right place at the right time and there's no reason to be a jerk about it.

Now that I think about it, though, there's one caveat. If you go out in public and start pushing your beliefs on the rest of us then you're fair game. I'll still try to be courteous, but if you're spewing idiocy in the streets I'll call you on it and if you wind up looking stupid that's not my problem.

So it is perfectly acceptable for you to push your beliefs upon the rest of us, then?

Welcome to the forum...
-
-
-

i dont think it was his intent to push his beliefs onto the rest of us but just stating what he believes.

Time will be a good indicator.

Kurieuo wrote:

RickD wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:80%? Wow, I might move to the US.

Not quite 80% K.

And edwardmurphy is a little biased on his info here too:

Again, can I get some examples? Last time I looked the United States was about 80% Christian, with overwhelmingly Christian legislatures in every state and at the Federal level, at east 45/50 Christian governors, an overwhelmingly Christian Supreme Court, and an unbroken string of Christian presidents going all the way back to the the dawn of the Republic. How exactly is it that a small, disorganized minority with no political power is slapping Christians around like that?

Unbroken string of Christian presidents?

Many of the founding fathers, including presidents, were deists or theists. Certainly not Christians as we define a Christian.

And the Supreme Court has 3 Jews, and 6 Catholics. The same Supreme Court that just passed the law that redefined marriage, to mean whoever the hell wants to get married, can.

The problem with atheists is that they very broadly define what it is to be Christian.
Certainly not how you or I define a Christian.

Maybe, 80 % of Americans believe in God. Maybe. 80% Christian? Not a chance.

Yes, I figured something was suspect.

Because when I look around, hear the news, see the US government, the philosophies that have seeped down, etc.
The US appears to me to be quite secularised. And Australian follows suite and tries to take the lead on certain things.

I'll probably get some verbal lashings for this, but I think the U.S. has always been a secular nation. I think that's how the founding fathers wanted it. They wanted to keep religion out of the govt. Part of the reason why the people came here, was to get away from the Church of England. Religious freedom is one thing the U.S. is built upon. And religious freedom is only possible, if religion is kept out of the govt.

Tbh,

It kind of scares me when I hear people here saying that they want to bring back the U.S. to its Christian roots. I don't want a theocracy. I'll take a country that's free to worship as we please, any day, and anytime, over a "Christian nation".
I've seen some things done here in the name of Christianity, and I don't like it. Especially here in the south, some who want to bring the U.S. back to its "Christian roots", are some of the same people who want blacks to be slaves again.

RickD wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:

RickD wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:80%? Wow, I might move to the US.

Not quite 80% K.

And edwardmurphy is a little biased on his info here too:

Again, can I get some examples? Last time I looked the United States was about 80% Christian, with overwhelmingly Christian legislatures in every state and at the Federal level, at east 45/50 Christian governors, an overwhelmingly Christian Supreme Court, and an unbroken string of Christian presidents going all the way back to the the dawn of the Republic. How exactly is it that a small, disorganized minority with no political power is slapping Christians around like that?

Unbroken string of Christian presidents?

Many of the founding fathers, including presidents, were deists or theists. Certainly not Christians as we define a Christian.

And the Supreme Court has 3 Jews, and 6 Catholics. The same Supreme Court that just passed the law that redefined marriage, to mean whoever the hell wants to get married, can.

The problem with atheists is that they very broadly define what it is to be Christian.
Certainly not how you or I define a Christian.

Maybe, 80 % of Americans believe in God. Maybe. 80% Christian? Not a chance.

Yes, I figured something was suspect.

Because when I look around, hear the news, see the US government, the philosophies that have seeped down, etc.
The US appears to me to be quite secularised. And Australian follows suite and tries to take the lead on certain things.

I'll probably get some verbal lashings for this, but I think the U.S. has always been a secular nation. I think that's how the founding fathers wanted it. They wanted to keep religion out of the govt. Part of the reason why the people came here, was to get away from the Church of England. Religious freedom is one thing the U.S. is built upon. And religious freedom is only possible, if religion is kept out of the govt.

Tbh,

It kind of scares me when I hear people here saying that they want to bring back the U.S. to its Christian roots. I don't want a theocracy. I'll take a country that's free to worship as we please, any day, and anytime, over a "Christian nation".
I've seen some things done here in the name of Christianity, and I don't like it. Especially here in the south, some who want to bring the U.S. back to its "Christian roots", are some of the same people who want blacks to be slaves again.

Truly, I don't think it is as clear-cut as that.
Don't get me wrong, I hear what you're saying and it helps to provide a balanced view.

Looking over history though, I fear secular rule more than a overly zealous Christians.
And if that is what your people in the south are like, then they're bonkers and God probably needs to heal their brains before they can rationally accept Christ. Christianity helped set blacks free and those who authentically live according to Christ have done much good.

Many is the US are well, overly zealous. So it appears to me.
People just don't like being in the middle. They're either one extreme or the other.

BUT, within Christianity we have two streams that always bump heads.
And it comes to a legalistic form of Christianity versus grace.
The legal form will change laws and would be happy making everyone prayer, repeat the 10 commandments each day or what-have-you.
The grace form will respect people's decisions in the same way that God does, but govern to protect people from themselves and each other.
If that means not praying, so be it. If that mean removing the 10 Commandments from this or that court in a particular area, well it should be the people's choice. Not everyone is Christian, so the yoke should be thin. And further, God have removed the yoke from us all via Christ. So now it's a matter of us and God, and not some external group enforcing their view of Christianity upon others.

A true Christian government as I see it respects freedom.
That said, people do not like to respect the freedom of others who disagree with them.
That is true of Christians, true of Muslims, true of Atheists and anyone who is human.
AND that is probably what scares you and scares me of any human government.

No verbal lashings from me!
I completely agree with you.
I honestly think it would way more problematic because people are flawed. They take the message of Christ and twist it to suit their own agenda. We have free will, that is a very precious gift. People must have the right to choose their beliefs, their religion and how those beliefs are applied to their lives.
The time will come when Christianity will be applied perfectly in this world, 'thy kingdom come, thy will be done, on earth as it is in heaven'. It will be lead by perfection by a perfect king, Jesus. No corruption, greed, lust for power, pride or mistakes. Until then Christianity is a belief, our faith not a tool to rule the masses. I don't think it was ever intended to be. Not yet anyway, and not by humans who are so prone to greed, corruption, pride and power.

K, I get what you are saying.
In a perfect world, with sincere Christians who always put the will of God before their own desires this would work. We would be far better off, as would society as a whole. But it is not realistic. To rise up the political hierarchy whether in a secular or religious government is a dog eat dog enviroment. It is inbuilt in us. Power changes a person. The quest for it, the political process to gain it. All it would take would be for those holding power in government to take their eyes of Christ for human desire to take over. We are all far too flawed to imagine that would not occurr.

B. W. wrote:

edwardmurphy wrote:

B. W. wrote:From the Christian perspective bore out by empirical facts - militant atheists are the ones pushing their system down everyone's throat. Have you considered that?

Can you give me some examples?

In the USA, just look on line and you will find plenty from the battle against Naivety scenes, prayer in public, and atheist runs over a Ten Commandment monument in Oklahoma to the court ruling its removal, hostility form the USA public education system against Christianity, to the outlawing of privet citizens from holding bible studies at home – zoning laws. The 501 3 C tax code which denies ministers the right to endorse candidates running for office or lose tax exempt status thus disfranchising Christians ability to rally politically.

Look online? You made some pretty sensational claims, and now you want me to do the legwork to verify them? Sorry, but no. Proving your case is your job, not mine.

In the meantime, let's try to break these categories...

Battles against nativity scenes - on PUBLIC PROPERTY - aren't examples of persecution, they're examples of Christianity losing a special privilege because it's unconstitutional and always has been. Persecution would be banning nativity scenes nation wide, or forbidding church services, or requiring Christians to wear a cross on their sleeve. None of those things has ever happened. Meanwhile, there are still places where atheists are legally barred from holding public office.

Prayer in public - not illegal anywhere that I know of, provided that it doesn't cause a safety issue or something. If, for example, a group of Christians link arms and pray while blocking access to Families First then they're violating the law, but it's not the prayer that's the problem. Not that Fox News will report it that way...

An atheist hits a monument - so what? I assume that said atheist was cited for it.

Removals of Ten Commandments - from PUBLIC PROPERTY - aren't examples of persecution, they're examples of Christianity losing a special privilege because it's unconstitutional and always has been. Last I looked Christians can still have all the Ten Commandments statues they want on private property.

Hostility against Christianity in the public schools - sure, it happens on occasion. I can also find you examples of hostility against Muslims and atheists by Christian public school teachers and administrators. It shouldn't happen, and all of the teachers involved should be disciplined.

I completely agree with the 501(c)(3) restrictions. A church is not supposed to be a tax-exempt political machine. Unfortunately for my opinion and your argument pastors routinely violate the law and the IRS doesn't do a thing about it. How does allowing pastors to violate the law with impunity fall under persecution?

B. W. wrote:I recall in my upper division Social work class at Colorado State University the professor asking all the Christians in the class to stand up and come to the front of the class. Which we did, about 10 of us out of a class of 32. He them lambasted us yelling things like how dare you tell the rest of us how to live… you are a miniscule outdated minority, worthless, etc and etc… He excoriated all of us on the second day of the class in front of the others. Most sat in disbelief this was America and a few joined in mocked.

Later I went to him according to CSU policy and told that was inappropriate and that several of the women left the class in tears at being humiliated in public. He sneered. I then filed a complaint of discrimination with the department. It was ignored. So don’t tell me it does not exist. As Christians we are called to defend the weak and that defense comes in a wide array of applications. Christians are not pansies. That event and the later one in System Theory was enough to see the clear vitriol unjustified hate some folks have against Christians – as the rant in K’s video shows… is real and experienced.

To be perfectly frank, I don't believe this. This story is just too outrageous. Especially since, based on everything else you've written, it seems like you see anti-Christian bigotry everywhere you look and turn a blind eye to anything that doesn't support your views.

B. W. wrote:Now in othr countries, those folks can add their examples if they like…

Please don't. I'm American and I have no information about how Christians are getting along in the rest of the world. This just sounds like an invitation to play dueling sensationalized anecdotes.

B. W. wrote:

edwardmurphy wrote:

B. W. wrote:When was the last time a Christian forced you by implementing law to go to church?

Never. When was the last time an atheist made a law preventing you from going to church? For that matter, when was the last time an atheist made a law of any kind?

http://ffrf.org/outreach/item/14019-rel ... c-property

http://radio.foxnews.com/toddstarnes/to ... study.html

http://thetruthwins.com/archives/author ... tian-faith

First off, none of those links make reference to atheists making laws of any kind, much less persecuting Christians. You changed the subject.

The first link simply to makes the case that religious displays on public property are unconstitutional. Filing a law suit is not the some thing as making a law, and questioning the constitutionality of a nativity scene does not constitute persecution.

The second link is a story about a guy who got a permit to turn his garage into a game room, but instead made it into a church, complete with seating for 40 and a pulpit, but apparently lacking fire exits, handicap ramps, and various other things that are required by law. I'm sure that any Libertarians out there will see that as government overreach, but pretending that the case has anything at all to do with religion is pretty disingenuous. This is a great example of why mainstream America doesn't take the religious right seriously.

The third link is also mostly about Christians ignoring zoning regulations and then playing the persecution care when they get called to task. Long story short, if you want to found a church in your den start by getting the proper permits. It almost seems like the Liberty Institute or some other conservative Christian think-tank is trying to manufacture "persecution" stories.

B. W. wrote:

edwardmurphy wrote:

B. W. wrote:When was the last time Atheism forced Christians, by law and judicial fiat, media ridicule and mocking, to be silent, remove Nativity scenes, remove prayer, remove the Ten Commandments, destroy christian businesses and character assassinate Christians, to just shut up and go away as irrelevant lower class sub-human beings?

Again, can I get some examples? Last time I looked the United States was about 80% Christian, with overwhelmingly Christian legislatures in every state and at the Federal level, at east 45/50 Christian governors, an overwhelmingly Christian Supreme Court, and an unbroken string of Christian presidents going all the way back to the the dawn of the Republic. How exactly is it that a small, disorganized minority with no political power is slapping Christians around like that?

Search the internet – gave a few above… and one from the FFRF too…

Here are a few more –

http://aclj.org/news

http://aclj.org/petitions

Ok, the first link is to the American Center for Law and Justice news page. Am I supposed to be reading anything particular, or do you expect me to pretend that I'm you and pick the stories that best support your argument? Let's see...

- A kid was supposed to do community service so she volunteered with her church. The school initially said that the volunteer time had to be secular in nature but reversed course after the ACLJ threatened to sue them...
- A Marine was ordered to take down a Bible quote that was posted in her cubicle. The case is still in court...
- The religious right is still opposed to abortions, is still trying to find ways to undermine Roe v Wade, and still uses the most inflammatory language possible...

I'm not seeing anything that remotely resembles persecution. Am I terrible at this, or is this the best you've got?

The second link is to a petition that makes some really shocking claims about colleges discriminating against Christian applicants, but doesn't bother to provide any evidence whatsoever that any of the claims are true. Sorry, but I don't see that as a credible source.

B. W. wrote:

edwardmurphy wrote:

B. W. wrote:Yes, both sides can be stupid when responding to each other as K stated in the original post because sides forget there are human beings with value at the other end. However, one side has a nefarious purpose and uses ridicule and mocking, and laws, to silence the other.

Can you please explain what that nefarious purpose is and give me some examples of the ridicule, mocking, and most importantly, laws being used to silence the politically dominant 80%?

RickD answered this well and again. How many folks in your neighborhood go to church? It is not 80 percent is it?

Think of it, edwardmurphy...and tell us...

Why is it a crime… To Remember the Sabbath day(a day of rest)?

Why is it a crime… to honor your father and your mother?

Why is it a crime… not to murder?

Why is it a crime… not to commit adultery?

Why is it a crime… not to steal?

Why is it a crime… to not bear false witness against your neighbor?

Why is it a crime… not to covet?

Why is it a crime...to no other gods before YHWH?

Why is it a crime... not to make idols out of things or people?

Why is it a crime... not take the name of the LORD your God in vain?

I don't know what percentage of my neighbors go to church. The 80% number was a guesstimate. According to this Pew Research Center study it's actually about 70%. And falling a lot more rapidly than I'd realized.

Regarding your "Why is it a crime..." series, none of those things are crimes and I've never heard anyone claim that they were. Other than you, I mean. What are you talking about?

Abel: I believe mocking and ridiculing is a sign of weakness and it covers up the lack of evidence or weak reasons to believe what they do,so they mock instead.This is the main reason atheists do it,it is to cover up their lack of real evidence bit I detect that less and less atheists are mocking people like they use to and I also notice that they are defending evolution less and less when on line or the internet like they used to.

As for believers I don't believe it is good to mock or ridicule however I believe Christians should confront and discuss issues and interpretations that they disagree with or that they think are bad teaching,however when this is done both parties must be willing to have scripture to back there self up and both should be willing to admit it if they are wrong according to the word of God or else it will do no good to discuss different interpretations and beliefs

I believe that mocking and ridiculing is OK - AS LONG AS - it's a WHAT/an issue/a wrongful action that is a target and NOT a person. I believe there is such a thing, an appropriate manner, and certain situations in which righteously deployed rhetorical sarcasm targeting people's inconsistent, contradictory, fiction-based assertions or negative (and certainly, EVIL) actions is justified and sometimes can be greatly effective. It certainly has the potential to get one's attention. Sometimes, just talking loudly and assertively in one's "boy scout" voice just doesn't cut it, isn't taken nearly as seriously. Sometimes one's response to such things needs a bolder edge to them. But, to attack someone's PERSON, WHO they are, WHAT they are (occupation, racial makeup, social standing, education level, etc.) - NEVER are these appropriate! And one has to use great discernment when to deploy an edgy sarcasm - because sometimes it won't be effective, or it will be seen as a mere personal attack. If a Christian's goal in using mocking or ridicule is ever to simply vent or put someone down, then it's absolutely wrong!

I think of Eiljah and the showdown in kings....there was nothing that indicated his mocking was wrong or so it seems

"At noon Elijah began to taunt them. "Shout louder!" he said. "Surely he is a god! Perhaps he is deep in thought, or busy, or traveling. Maybe he is sleeping and must be awakened."

The First Amendment (Amendment I) to the United States Constitution:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

or prohibiting the free exercise thereof

or prohibiting the free exercise thereof

or prohibiting the free exercise thereof

What part of prohibiting the free exercise thereof do you not get? It is the government that is violating this amendment not Christians praying in public buildings...

edwardmurphy wrote:To be perfectly frank, I don't believe this. This story is just too outrageous. Especially since, based on everything else you've written, it seems like you see anti-Christian bigotry everywhere you look and turn a blind eye to anything that doesn't support your views.

Edward, As for CSU it did happen - so you are calling me a lair?

If you are - that is a ban my friend... an immediate one ... so please apologize for your comment...

Show respect and receive the same...

edwardmurphy wrote:Regarding your "Why is it a crime..." series, none of those things are crimes and I've never heard anyone claim that they were. Other than you, I mean. What are you talking about?

Then why remove these markers on the walls and courthouses in America if not a crime?

Why make it a crime?

Edward, please note this Forum Rules as a warning:

Discussion Guidelines and Board Purpose

1. At Least Two People: This point should be obvious.
2. A Specific Topic: All conversations should have one specific topic, and as such should remain on that topic. Any new topic that forks out and is too far removed, should be started as a new thread or brought to a moderator's attention.
3. Knowledge: It is not expected that you should be thoroughly educated on an issue before commenting about it. At the same token, it is impossible for us to know everything. So if a topic is new to you or you don't know much about it, then it is good to spend some time researching to increase your knowledge before writing.
4. Self-control: Chances are you will disagree with someone, and it is at this point discussions can turn nasty. Please remember to be respectful to others and keep to the topic rather than resorting to personal attacks.

Board Guidelines

Who is the message board intended for?
This message board is publicly open to anyone who wishes to register and participate in discussions, however it is ultimately intended for a specific audience. It is intended to serve as a place for:

1. Sincere seekers to inquire and ask questions;
2. Christians to give and receive encouragement and instruction; and
3. Non-Christians who are willing to "walk a thin line" and reason sensitively and respectfully.

This board is not for those who have strongly made up their mind that Christ is "not" for them; who merely wish to put down, debate, and argue against essential Christian beliefs. As such, those who are Christian, have not made up their minds, or desire civilised discussions on Christianity are encouraged to join, while others who merely wish to attack and try to discredit Christianity are discouraged and will be heavily moderated.


Guidelines for debating against Christian beliefs
The following are some guidelines for members to follow who choose to debate against Christian beliefs:

1. Dialogue and debate with sensitivity, understanding you are participating within a Christian community.
2. Do not set out to try change the opinion of Christians as this immediately creates barriers and hostility.
3. If you receive hostility, or a caution from a moderator, be gracious enough to leave the associated discussion/s politely.
4. Do not criticise the way this board is moderated for Christians either through direct or indirect public comments.
5. If you vehemently disagree with Christian beliefs and constantly attack then know that you will be banned very quickly.
6. If these rules of engagement seem obnoxious to you, then this board probably is not for you. It is just best you leave now.

Any non-Christians who participate in discussions do so with an understanding moderators will be the judge of whether the line is crossed.

Be respectful and use good etiquette, and moderators will treat you the same without being quick to ban. That is, you can expect cautions will be issued if it is felt you are approaching the line; a warning to be issued when you have crossed the line (which may/may not involve a temporary ban); and a permanent ban if you persist.

-
-
-

B. W. wrote:The First Amendment (Amendment I) to the United States Constitution:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

or prohibiting the free exercise thereof

or prohibiting the free exercise thereof

or prohibiting the free exercise thereof

What part of prohibiting the free exercise thereof do you not get? It is the government that is violating this amendment not Christians praying in public buildings...

The part I don't get is what makes you think that there are any laws in the United States of America prohibiting Christians, or anyone else, from praying in public buildings. There aren't.

As far as I can tell, this is a game. The story you linked is a perfect example of how it's being played. A conservative Christian gets a building permit to turn his garage into a game room, but then he builds a church instead, knowing full well that doing so violates local zoning ordinances and building codes. When the local government calls him on it he screams that he's being persecuted because he's a Christian. The thing is, any rational, unbiased observer can see that he's being dishonest and disingenuous. There is no persecution here.

B. W. wrote:

edwardmurphy wrote:To be perfectly frank, I don't believe this. This story is just too outrageous. Especially since, based on everything else you've written, it seems like you see anti-Christian bigotry everywhere you look and turn a blind eye to anything that doesn't support your views.

Edward, As for CSU it did happen - so you are calling me a lair?

If you are - that is a ban my friend... an immediate one ... so please apologize for your comment...

Show respect and receive the same...

No, B.W., I'm not calling you a liar. I have no trouble believing that you believe what you said. I'm saying that, in our limited contact, I've noticed that you seem to see yourself as a member of a hated and persecuted minority, which seems to be having a profound impact on how you see the world. If I had been in the room with you that day I imagine that I'd have seen the incident completely differently. I apologize if I offended you.

B. W. wrote:

edwardmurphy wrote:Regarding your "Why is it a crime..." series, none of those things are crimes and I've never heard anyone claim that they were. Other than you, I mean. What are you talking about?

Then why remove these markers on the walls and courthouses in America if not a crime?

Why make it a crime?

The Constitution prohibits the government from endorsing any religion. Placing the Ten Commandments in a government building is a tacit endorsement of Judaism/Christianity, which is unconstitutional. The Ten Commandments are therefore being removed, not because not killing, not stealing, or not worshiping graven images is illegal, but because placing the Ten Commandments in a public building violates the Constitution.

Removing a sign that says "Thou shalt have no other gods before me" does not make it illegal to follow that commandment any more than removing a "No Smoking" sign makes it illegal not to smoke. If you really need to read the Ten Commandments in a court house you're still entitled to bring a copy of your own, just like you always were.

Ed, you need to look up the word Persecution in the dictionary...

Merriam Webster Dictionary

PERSECUTE

transitive verb
1 to harass or punish in a manner designed to injure, grieve, or afflict; specifically : to cause to suffer because of belief
2 to annoy with persistent or urgent approaches (as attacks, pleas, or importunities) : pester

Google

per·se·cu·tion

ˌpərsəˈkyo͞oSH(ə)n/ noun

hostility and ill-treatment, especially because of race or political or religious beliefs. "her family fled religious persecution"

synonyms: oppression, victimization, maltreatment, ill-treatment, mistreatment, abuse, ill-usage, discrimination, tyranny;

More persistent annoyance or harassment. "his persecution at the hands of other students"

Therefore:

http://www.wallbuilders.com/libissuesar ... ?id=106938

http://www.christianpost.com/news/orego ... et-141390/

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/07 ... rage-case/

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles ... there.html

http://shoebat.com/2015/04/08/persecuti ... old-texas/

http://www.christianpost.com/news/frank ... ng-135348/


Ed you admit to being of the progressive side of the political scheme of things - of course you don't see or experience the pressure and yes pressure is persecution. In fact the progressives are the cause of this.

Why are you here on this forum?

It is not for civil debate is it?

Rather is it for the mere pleasure of poking fun with no intent to listen to the christian side of the things or even acknowledge what Christian are going through today? You justify the talking points of the left and that in itself is stupid regarding the 10 Commandments - and prayer - the USA Government cannot stop the free exercise of...

The establishment clause was written to simply to prevent making a one denominational Church of America. It was written to prevent a one size fits all Church of England style of Church of America. The argument used for the clause oft cited by the left were written in that context and must be read with that in mind. If not, then the progressives mindset is left with a logical contradiction. The clause was not written to keep religion - the Judaic/Christian traditions religions from the halls of Government and law. If that were the case, then why was it permitted way back when, to place the 10 s on federal buildings such as the supreme court? Why, for so long, was it permitted to open Congress with words of Prayer invoking Jesus' Name for hundreds of years?

No, you are all talking point bias and full of twittered history and pitting the Constitution against itself to push a progressive agenda. You use ridicule and distort facts. The writing, quotes from the bible, are found on the walls of governmental buildings for a reason and the reason was not to abolish government from being influenced by Christianity! If that was the real intent of the founders of this nation, and those who followed from 1790' thru 1980's, then why are the 10 c and bible quotes are in pubic buildings/monuments in the first place? Why national day of payer? Why prayers praying to Christian God used in congress? Why did presidents invoke Jesus/God's name during national crisis and on D-Day 1944?

Saul Alinsky - rules for radicals cites to bring down existing order one makes the opponent live up to there own standards. This is done by pitting standards against themselves as do the modern progressives do with the Establishment clause. Even Alinsky dedicated his book to Lucifer... The facts are and remain there is a reason bible verses are on public buildings and prayers prayed that defy the left's argument that the founders sought to establish freedom from religion in the 1'st Amendment. It was written to prevent one National State Church from being formed as was the manner of European church-state model.

You cannot answer these in a rational way due to your own addiction to pressure Christians into silence. You are too lazy to do your own honest research into what Christians are going thru here in slow but steady steps or even look up the word persecution. Just because you deny it, in your world veiw is proof enough it is not true - wow - what faith you have! That is a bit dishonest on you part don't you think?

So Ed, let us cut to the chase and avoid all the clap trap and get to the heart of the matter:

What is the real intent of you being here?

And why do you support diminishing Christianity?

Oh, yes, you will cite the talking points - you are not against people keeping there faith to themselves - give me a break... that is not true and you know it.

Also by your admittance that you cannot believe what I said about CSU is still calling me a lair in the progressive left style of double speak.

However, I will grant you a bit to respond and decide if a ban will go into effect so please answer these two questions and no more or simple of your own volition leave the forum as it is not for you.

What is the real intent of you being here?

And why do you support diminishing Christianity?
-
-
-

B. W. wrote:Also by your admittance that you cannot believe what I said about CSU is still calling me a lair in the progressive left style of double speak.

However, I will grant you a bit to respond and decide if a ban will go into effect so please answer these two questions and no more or simple of your own volition leave the forum as it is not for you.

What is the real intent of you being here?

And why do you support diminishing Christianity?
-
-
-

Has anyone ever told you that you talk like an Inquisitor? Everything seems to be an accusation or a condemnation. It's off-putting.

I didn't call you a liar. You used that word. I said that I thought there was more to that story. Was the professor perhaps trying to make a point about inclusion, or bullying, or stigmatization, or some such thing?

On to your questions -

My real intent is to discuss the issues that I've been discussion with the people with whom I've been discussing them. I assume that it's reasonable to do so, since you have a Questioning Non-Belief section. I'm not sure how it's supposed to work if you don't have any non-believers to question. If you look at my posting history you'll see that this is the only place I'm posting. Notice how I'm not popping into the Bible and Scripture forum and making snide comments? That's intentional.

Regarding my support for "diminishing Christianity," I'm not sure what you mean.

If you're asking why I'm in favor of Christianity becoming smaller and less influential, I don't recall saying that I was and if it does it won't be because of me, but I won't say that it would bother me any. I'm strongly in favor of keeping an impermeable wall of separation between church and state, and conservative Christians seem intent on tearing it down. I'm also in favor of women's reproductive rights, complete equality for all Americans, including those in the LGBT community, mandating age appropriate sex education in our schools, and putting Federal resources into stem cell research. Really, there aren't too many places where the religious right an I see eye to eye, so the less influential they are the happier I'll be. I have no issue with Christians who aren't trying to get their beliefs and prejudices codified into laws.

If you're asking why I'm making light of Christianity, I haven't. I'm not going to sugar coat the fact that I'm an atheist, but I haven't gone out of my way to trivialize religion in general or Christianity in particular. I have definitely been scoffing at the idea that Christians in America are the being persecuted, but that's not an attempt to diminish Christianity, it's an attempt to refute a patently silly claim. If conservative Christians really want to see the church remain influential they'd be wise quit it with all of the histrionics, manufactured outrage, and misrepresentations of unremarkable events. I'm pretty sure the answer to WWJD isn't "throw a fit because the kid at the Kroger said 'Happy holidays' rather than 'Merry Christmas'" or "try to spin the routine enforcement of a zoning regulation into an example of anti-Christian persecution." If it was then we'd never have heard of him.

There you go - asked and answered. I'll be disappointed if you choose to ban me, but such is life. It's your Questioning Non-Belief forum, and if you don't want it full of non-believers that's your call. I expect that my wife would be pleased. She thinks I'm spending too much time engaging in pointless debates. Anyway, it's late.

Good night, B.W.

edwardmurphy wrote: Has anyone ever told you that you talk like an Inquisitor? Everything seems to be an accusation or a condemnation. It's off-putting.

I didn't call you a liar. You used that word. I said that I thought there was more to that story. Was the professor perhaps trying to make a point about inclusion, or bullying, or stigmatization, or some such thing?

It was as stated and his point was clear... so was the departments... this happens

B. W. wrote:I recall in my upper division Social work class at Colorado State University the professor asking all the Christians in the class to stand up and come to the front of the class. Which we did, about 10 of us out of a class of 32. He them lambasted us yelling things like how dare you tell the rest of us how to live… you are a miniscule outdated minority, worthless, etc and etc… He excoriated all of us on the second day of the class in front of the others. Most sat in disbelief this was America and a few joined in mocked.

Later I went to him according to CSU policy and told that was inappropriate and that several of the women left the class in tears at being humiliated in public. He sneered. I then filed a complaint of discrimination with the department. It was ignored. So don’t tell me it does not exist. As Christians we are called to defend the weak and that defense comes in a wide array of applications. Christians are not pansies. That event and the later one in System Theory was enough to see the clear vitriol unjustified hate some folks have against Christians – as the rant in K’s video shows… is real and experienced.

His tone was not trying to make some intellectual learning lesson. Several of the women were in tears at being publicly humiliated and dropped the class. Not sure why you have difficultly reading other than simply a play on word games to justify your unbelief...

Thank you for answering the questions...

As regarding your support for "diminishing Christianity," this is what I mean...

edwardmurphy wrote:If you're asking why I'm in favor of Christianity becoming smaller and less influential, I don't recall saying that I was and if it does it won't be because of me, but I won't say that it would bother me any...

...I'm strongly in favor of keeping an impermeable wall of separation between church and state, and conservative Christians seem intent on tearing it down. I'm also in favor of women's reproductive rights, complete equality for all Americans, including those in the LGBT community, mandating age appropriate sex education in our schools, and putting Federal resources into stem cell research. Really, there aren't too many places where the religious right an I see eye to eye, so the less influential they are the happier I'll be. I have no issue with Christians who aren't trying to get their beliefs and prejudices codified into laws.

You shall not murder, not commit adultery, not to slander, and honor your parents make bad laws???

And then again, your use of double talk, or double speak, is made evident. Typical with those supporting non-beliefs, yet you stated you have beliefs in the above cite things, amazing!

edwardmurphy wrote:If you're asking why I'm making light of Christianity, I haven't. I'm not going to sugar coat the fact that I'm an atheist, but I haven't gone out of my way to trivialize religion in general or Christianity in particular. I have definitely been scoffing at the idea that Christians in America are the being persecuted, but that's not an attempt to diminish Christianity, it's an attempt to refute a patently silly claim.

You just made light of it, in your own words... very clear you do make light of Christianity... And persecution of Christians does happen in this country and it is building. The pressure is on... and well documented... I can't help your prejudice and ignoring facts and lack of doing your own research.

edwardmurphy wrote: If conservative Christians really want to see the church remain influential they'd be wise quit it with all of the histrionics, manufactured outrage, and misrepresentations of unremarkable events. I'm pretty sure the answer to WWJD isn't "throw a fit because the kid at the Kroger said 'Happy holidays' rather than 'Merry Christmas'" or "try to spin the routine enforcement of a zoning regulation into an example of anti-Christian persecution." If it was then we'd never have heard of him.

You are an atheist lecture me on WWJD when you don't even believe - well this is what Jesus did... Matthew 22:18

Routine zoning laws? These are used by the Professor types I encountered in college and people who speak double speak to earse Christian faith into a state of non-belief. Thank you for substantiating that mentality in your own words...

edwardmurphy wrote:There you go - asked and answered. I'll be disappointed if you choose to ban me, but such is life. It's your Questioning Non-Belief forum, and if you don't want it full of non-believers that's your call. I expect that my wife would be pleased. She thinks I'm spending too much time engaging in pointless debates. Anyway, it's late.

I am doing my job as moderator, or inquisitor if you like. You came on here using strong words and likewise met with the same. My field of Study is Social Work with emphasis in Criminal Justice and have over 20+ years dealing inmates and criminals. So do not be surprised if I enter 'command mode' and come down hard on anyone that talks double speak condescension...

If you want to remain here, be respectful, don't call or insinuate folks are liars because of your own non-belief system. If you play word games, expect other folks here to come down hard on you too.
-
-
-

Last Wednesday several folks mentioned feeling frighten at what is going on in the realm of legal action against Christian and momentum to ban or at least severely edit the bible as the advancement of Politically Correct speech takes hold and the revenge mode of the left advances. This attack from the left is based on prejudice, bigotry, and false stereotyping of Christians. This article from CARM points out this very well and contains my views and experience on this matter too:

https://carm.org/concerning-atheist-attacks-theism

In the USA the judicial system is used to advance case law to build other laws on for a larger future goal. That is called judicial activism. So this begins in test states in local and county areas and then builds slowly to the state level and then onward. For years folks having been warning against this, battled it, in some cases able to stop it but it begins again. This is a slow creep, barely noticeably at first. Survivors from the Holocaust report seeing the same slow stages happening in the USA since 2009 that the same techniques applied against people of faith and control of the church to support social issues and tone of the state.

If we mention this, we are attacked and guess by whom for being delusional and paranoid. Yes - attacked and falsely accused! Several folks in my church have noticed the change in the public and been shamed. Others I know - haven't yet encountered this but it is coming. There is a feel in air in the USA, just like one has when being followed by a mountain lion in the back country, of a more overt bashing of all things Christian to come. Many folks are feeling this danger.

Men of integrity such as Franklin Graham and Charles Stanley have been warning of this. Graham was even targeted by the IRS... so if these folks experience it then we need to take note. We should not act in fear either. As the bible predicted, times like this will come. We need to follow Jesus and stay true to him and his grace working within us, changing us out of darkness into true light. It is not a time to cower in fear and be bowled over by word games used to justify Christian must be compliant door mats in the lefts tactics to use bible concepts against Christians. It is a time to stand and turn away from apathy that led to this.

I know a few of our guest here will not agree that Christianity is under attack but it is and has been slowly very slowly building for sometime and now heating up. Here are a few more links... notice the justifications used to implement such actions...

http://www.thefinaledition.com/article/ ... udies.html

http://www.christianpost.com/news/a-tim ... al-114324/

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/brittan ... e-atheists

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/adrianwarn ... -own-home/

http://thetruthwins.com/archives/author ... tian-faith

And it goes on..

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013/06 ... -churches/

http://www.examiner.com/article/arizona ... ible-study

http://www.prophecynewswatch.com/2014/F ... 6/265.html


Now back to the point of this thread is for discussing non-belief ... and we strayed a bit of topic from this but ... have we really?
-
-
-

B. W. wrote:Last Wednesday several folks mentioned feeling frighten at what is going on in the realm of legal action against Christian and momentum to ban or at least severely edit the bible as the advancement of Politically Correct speech takes hold and the revenge mode of the left advances. This attack from the left is based on prejudice, bigotry, and false stereotyping of Christians. This article from CARM points out this very well and contains my views and experience on this matter too:

https://carm.org/concerning-atheist-attacks-theism

I will see your list of quotes from atheists saying that Christianity is silly and raise you a list of quotes from Christians calling for atheists to be deported, tortured, raped, and/or murdered. If the former counts as persecution then surely the latter does as well...

B. W. wrote:In the USA the judicial system is used to advance case law to build other laws on for a larger future goal. That is called judicial activism. So this begins in test states in local and county areas and then builds slowly to the state level and then onward. For years folks having been warning against this, battled it, in some cases able to stop it but it begins again. This is a slow creep, barely noticeably at first. Survivors from the Holocaust report seeing the same slow stages happening in the USA since 2009 that the same techniques applied against people of faith and control of the church to support social issues and tone of the state.

Horse feathers. Calling a decision "judicial activism" is just a way of saying "I lost the case and now I'm mad!" without sounding quite as much like a petulant child.

Also, do you know who else besides atheists tries to get the courts to strike down laws that they don't like and uphold laws they support? Conservative Christians!* If you've been reading the stuff that you keep linking then you'll have seen plenty of examples. If you haven't then allow me to remind you of the Hobby Lobby ACA case and the Families First buffer zone case. You guys won both of those, so congratulations on using the judicial system to get your way. Just like the atheists that you're complaining about...

* And every other interest group, really.

B. W. wrote:If we mention this, we are attacked and guess by whom for being delusional and paranoid. Yes - attacked and falsely accused! Several folks in my church have noticed the change in the public and been shamed. Others I know - haven't yet encountered this but it is coming. There is a feel in air in the USA, just like one has when being followed by a mountain lion in the back country, of a more overt bashing of all things Christian to come. Many folks are feeling this danger.

Accused, yes. Falsely, no. Conservative Christians use precisely the same tactics that are used by groups like American Atheists, the FFRF, and every other interest group with enough cash to hire a lawyer. When they win god is great and the courts are just, but when they lose suddenly they're being persecuted by unelected despots. And then they wonder why rational people don't take them seriously...

B. W. wrote:I know a few of our guest here will not agree that Christianity is under attack but it is and has been slowly very slowly building for sometime and now heating up. Here are a few more links... notice the justifications used to implement such actions...

Having just looked at each of those links, I'd like to take a second and give you a word of advice: If you're going to link an article to support your position you really ought to read it first.

So...

B. W. wrote:http://www.thefinaledition.com/article/ ... udies.html

This article is a joke. The website's motto, which is right there on the banner, is "Satire with teeth."

This is precisely what I'm talking about, B.W. Arizona is one of the most conservative states in the Union, but you uncritically accepted an article saying that "the Arizona Book Banning and Burning Board" banned the Bible because it was "'totally biased in favor of the Jews' and teaching the 'superiority of the Jewish race.'" Do you really think there's even the slightest possibility that any of that could be true? Is there maybe just the tiniest possibility that your preconceived notions about this issue have interfered with your ability to think critically?

B. W. wrote:http://www.christianpost.com/news/a-tim ... al-114324/

Let's assume for a second that, for political reasons, members of the IRS targeted conservative groups while failing to apply the same level of scrutiny to liberal groups. That's not what happened, but as I said, let's assume it was. So what? When the "scandal" came to light the conservatives freaked out and the "guilty" parties were hauled in front of a Congressional hearing, tarred and feathered, and fired or forced to resign. Seems like you got your way, so why are you still yelling about it?

B. W. wrote:http://cnsnews.com/news/article/brittan ... e-atheists

This one is actually kind of cracks me up, although I admit that it's a bit confrontational. I'll recap:

Orange County public schools allowed the Florida Family Policy Council to pass out Bibles on Freedom of Religion Day, which they're really not supposed to do unless they allow any and all other religions to participate as well. When a group of Satanists opted to exercise their own religions freedom by passing out Satanic coloring books the school board canceled the whole thing to keep them out. Nobody got Bibles or coloring books, which was obviously the Satanists' plan all along. The Florida Family Policy Council was mad and said that the school board lacked the courage to stand up for Christianity, as if that's a school board's job.

Anyway, it's kind of obnoxious, but I'm not seeing any persecution. If anything this is an example of favoritism.

B. W. wrote:http://www.patheos.com/blogs/adrianwarn ... -own-home/

This is the 3rd time that you've trotted out this story. It's still not true. Here's the truth, again, brought to you this time by the Christian Post.

B. W. wrote:http://thetruthwins.com/archives/author ... tian-faith

And this is the 2nd time you've linked this story. Here are my thoughts:

First off, the story opens with a picture of the Kitsap County SWAT team doing an anti-terrorist training exercise and the words "Authorities All Over America Are Cracking Down On Home Bible Studies And Other Expressions Of The Christian Faith." So the authors aren't exactly lying, but they're definitely giving the reader a good opportunity to assume that the guy being dragged away was hosting a Bible study group, not participating in a SWAT team training. So we're already seeing hyperbole and misdirection and we haven't even gotten to the article. How very Christ-like...

The article opens with the story of the Roessiger family, persecuted for holding a Friday night Bible study group in their home. You keep asking me to do research, so I did. Here are the minutes from the Venice Florida city council meeting in which we learn that it's not a Bible study, it's a church, it's not just Friday, it's Sunday, Wednesday, and Friday, and the city is only involved because the neighbors have presented a petition asking the that the Roessinger's be told to remove the illuminated cross and 12 signs advertising the ministry from their lawn.

Next we get the story of Chuck and Stephanie Fromm, who actually were fined $300 for hosting a Bible study group. It's a bit ironic that it took a web site called "The Truth" this long to say something true, but kudos all the same. Sadly, it doesn't last. The city of San Juan Capistrano admitted that they were being unreasonable, refunded the fine, and changed the law 3 months before this article was written. Odd that they forgot to mention that...

Next we come to the story Michael Salman. You should know that name, since you've posted links to his story 3 times now (5 if you count this article, which you've linked twice). Here's what the City of Phoenix had to say about the case:

City of Phoenix wrote:The Michael Salman court case is about building safety. Building and safety codes are in-place to protect the safety and welfare of all of our residents. Some of the relevant facts in this case include:

*A house of worship is allowed in any zoning district in the City of Phoenix
*The case is about the building that is used for regular assembly does not meet construction and fire code requirements for assembly
*All houses of worship in the City of Phoenix must conform to the same code

Mr. Salman had regular gatherings of up to 80 people. He held services twice a week and collected a tithe at the services. The building that he held services in had a dais and chairs were aligned in a pew formation. He held himself out as a being a church through the media (Harvest Christian Church) and claimed a church status for tax exemption purposes on his property.

Due to the regular, reoccurring high vehicular traffic in this quiet residential neighborhood, neighbors repeatedly complained about the public assembly occurring on his property. Because of the multiple, reoccurring complaints, the City investigated the activity and discovered numerous building code violations primarily related to fire safety standards. Once apprised of these violations, the City could be held liable for not enforcing safety code requirements in the event anyone was injured on the premises. Prior to commencement of prosecution, Mr. Salman was asked, repeatedly, to comply with the safety codes of the City. He chose to ignore these requests for voluntary compliance prior to the commencement of any proceedings.

There's more, but you get the idea.

Still calling this persecution?

B. W. wrote:http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013/06 ... -churches/

I'll have to do some more research on this one, but my guess is that it's going to end up being more hyperbolic punditry.

B. W. wrote:http://www.examiner.com/article/arizona ... ible-study

Seriously, you need to read the articles. Here's how this one ends:

UPDATE: Since publication of this article, citizen reaction has inspired the city elders of Gilbert to review and revise enforcement of the ordinance, we are delighted to confirm folks are now welcome to gather with friends and neighbors for bible study.

IF you're keeping score, that's twice that the "Bible study groups" have ended up actually being churches in violation of zoning ordinances, and twice that small towns interfered with legitimate Bible study groups before public pressure forced them to admit that they were being unreasonable, refund any fines, and change the law. So this is persecution?

B. W. wrote:http://www.prophecynewswatch.com/2014/F ... 6/265.html

These articles are all the same. They take a couple of isolated incidents, which they often deliberately misconstrue, and use them to try and construct an anti-Christian persecution narrative. Although I have to admit that this quote was a wonderful surprise:

Seriously? wrote:The Arizona Book Banning and Burning Board (ABBBB), a division of the Arizona Dept. of Education, has outlawed any teaching of, or reference to, the Bible in its schools. The organization found both books of the Bible (Old and New Testaments) to be in violation of Arizona’s HB2281 (aka the Ethnic Studies Bill) by being "totally biased in favor of the Jews" and teaching the "superiority of the Jewish race."

Are conservative Christians impervious to irony?

B. W. wrote:Now back to the point of this thread is for discussing non-belief ... and we strayed a bit of topic from this but ... have we really?

I don't think so, but I'll let you be the judge.