[joelsdad]

While I doubt your ability to show an order of magnatude increase... espically in regards to non-tounge-in-cheek media; you've just agreed with me. Since I never claimed that Christians were not persecuted, only that some Christians were persecuting others... You just admitted that happens.

I could not say that it never happened for their has been more evil done in the name of Christ than should even be imagined.

Ahh yes, back when slavery was legal; brothels were in motor homse so they could move around, 13-year-old kids killing people in armed robberies were folk-heros, prhibition and the mob, gunfighters, the raping and genocide of the Indians, etc... very Christ-like.

Ah but those were crimes not committed by the godly average citizen. The vast majority of the country never made the newspapers. We didn't need the governent socialist welfare system because of the teachings of Jesus, people helped people. When there was a fire, people hel;ped rebuild--that is the ethic I am referring to and not the secularist mindset that glamorized jesse james and the KKK(which is not a Christian org.) and all the rest.


can show you one politition after another calling homosexuals evil and twisted, or spouting exactly what you are ("get our country back to God") but I'm having trouble finding elected officials who call Christians names.


Just go on Cspan and wait till Dascchle or Clinton or any one of the other hard core liberals speak--we are the right wing religious whackos, fundamentalists, bigots, narrow minded folks to them.


When religious fervor caused the death of 5,000 Americans in the trade center, what song was congress out on the steps singing again? Oh yes, one of relgious fervor, "God bless America".


Well I guess that is better than singing " Mindless Random Chaotic evolution bless America" At least that song is sung ot the one true God.


Give me one example, anywhere in the US, where any standing ruling exists which disallows a student to pray in school. (and no, one that excludes (for example) speaking at all will not count, you need a disallowance of prayer or something Christian in regards to a student).


Would you like the website for the Christian legal foundation which defneds 1st amendmantr rights in this o____ry for Christians and see the hundreds of cases where kids were suspended or threatened with suspensions for praying in school or meeting on their own voluntarily with other Christians for a short [rayer before or after school?


Really? I live in a country where homosexuals cannot get married, and have great trouble adopting. In my state, it's also illegal for them to have sex... wonder what the foundation for anti-homosexuality laws is? Seems like more than wind to me.

Yep and despite all the fighting that religious folk have bben doing homosexuals will get their full "rights" sooner rather than later and when that happens it will really hit the fan then. Galatians 6:7 still stands and refers to nations as well as indiviuals.


Not all moralities demand that you conduct yourself by their standards of morality. There's a difference between may saying that everyone should help one another and me attempting to impose a law reqiring it.

This is where you are wrong . Every morality be it religiouos or secular has its adherents seeking to impose its brand of moralitry on society. That is why the anything goes brando f morality is pushing for laws legalizing most activities that do not directly harm others.


(JerryLove) Fundamentalist Christianity is most certainly persecuting and attempting to impose its religious and moral beliefs on the country.


Jerry please define what you mean by persecuting and then cite examples.

[brandontmilan]

"People being Jewish in the 1940s caused WWII." Thats why religion is bad.

[Chrysostom]

(Previous) There are certainly degrees of "persecuting" that could be debated, but it is no complaint at all to say that a worldview is "attempting to impose its religious and moral beliefs on the country." All worldviews do that, no matter the case.

(JerryLove) Not all moralities demand that you conduct yourself by their standards of morality. There's a difference between may saying that everyone should help one another and me attempting to impose a law reqiring it.

(Me) Yes, you can give specific instances of this kind of abstinence. However, no matter what happens, you will act from the foundation of your moral view of the world. Therefore, when you interact with other people, your moral view of the world will rub off.

If you try to have others act morally according to your view, it will obviously show itself.

If you do not try to do so because you don't think that "forcing" your view upon others is wrong, then there are two options. Either you try to force that view on others (that you shouldn't "force" your view upon others) or you do not.

If you do, it is obviously that you are forcing your moral view of the world on others.

If you do not, you're not really going to meaningfully interact with society at all. For, if you do not express your likes and dislikes, whether moral or aesthetic, whether verbally or non-verbally, whether explicitly or implicitly, then you are not communicating with anyone. And if you are not communicating with anyone, then you are not meaningfully interacting with anyone.

Therefore, when you're interacting in a society, you're always going to be "forcing" your own moral view on others.

The case of law-makers is especially explicit. Every law they make is a moral one, because every law they make carries with it information about what they think about how government should be run, what kind of control it should have, what its functions should be, how society should be, and so on.

If you are a film-maker, a writer, a journalist, or something of that nature, it ought to be blindingly clear how you cannot escape the promulgation of your worldview. The topics and content of your work directly reflects your thoughts about the world, which are ultimately rooted in your ethical view of the world.

Etc.

The question is not whether or not we'll try to "force" our beliefs on others. The question is only the way we'll choose to do it.

[JerryLove]

Ah but those were crimes not committed by the godly average citizen. The vast majority of the country never made the newspapers.

It was lauded by the average citizen.. it was the average citizen the hid Bonnie and Clyde, that kept Jessie James from the law, and that gave the Mod their money during prohibition.

Just go on Cspan and wait till Dascchle or Clinton or any one of the other hard core liberals speak--we are the right wing religious whackos, fundamentalists, bigots, narrow minded folks to them.

Cite an example.

Well I guess that is better than singing " Mindless Random Chaotic evolution bless America" At least that song is sung ot the one true God.

Thanks for adding to the rhetoric... you just, however, illustrated the weakness of your position.

Would you like the website for the Christian legal foundation which defneds 1st amendmantr rights in this o____ry for Christians and see the hundreds of cases where kids were suspended or threatened with suspensions for praying in school or meeting on their own voluntarily with other Christians for a short [rayer before or after school?

I asked for what I want. Give me one example, anywhere in the US, where any standing ruling exists which disallows a student to pray in school. (and no, one that excludes (for example) speaking at all will not count, you need a disallowance of prayer or something Christian in regards to a student).

Yep and despite all the fighting that religious folk have bben doing homosexuals will get their full "rights" sooner rather than later and when that happens it will really hit the fan then. Galatians 6:7 still stands and refers to nations as well as indiviuals.

Then when it happens we can have this discussion again.. until then my point is proven, Christian politians enforce Chrsitian laws which opress non-christians; not just "pay lipservice".

This is where you are wrong . Every morality be it religiouos or secular has its adherents seeking to impose its brand of moralitry on society. That is why the anything goes brando f morality is pushing for laws legalizing most activities that do not directly harm others.

Allowing something is not enforcing the activity. I allow people to gamble, but I don't make them; nor do I do it myself.

When it becomes foribdden or compulsory, then it's enforced. Atheist "morality" demands we take an honest look and reject religion as supersition... where do I enforce that morality?

Jerry please define what you mean by persecuting and then cite examples.

Forcing non-Christians to participate in Christian rituals as part of high-school graduation... attacking mosks... attacking synogauges... attacking clinics which perform abortion... making oral sex illegal... discriminitory practices against non-Christians (I can point you at a half-dozen non-Christians with personal expereince here)... the list goes on.

[Lyle]

Originally posted by JerryLove
Forcing non-Christians to participate in Christian rituals as part of high-school graduation... attacking mosks... attacking synogauges... attacking clinics which perform abortion... making oral sex illegal... discriminitory practices against non-Christians (I can point you at a half-dozen non-Christians with personal expereince here)... the list goes on.

What? Forcing people to, I've never heard of people being "forced" to do those things.

What I was saying earlier is, sure bad things have been done in our nation. But just because it was Godly, doesn't make everyone Godly. People have done bad things in the name of God.. To take an example from the great outdoors. In my back yard there are a lot of White poplars. But they are not poplars at all. They breat the name, it doesn't make them one though. People have boren the name of God everywhere, it doesn't make them Christians. In fact I doubt they were since Jesus was against such things

[JerryLove]

Yes, you can give specific instances of this kind of abstinence. However, no matter what happens, you will act from the foundation of your moral view of the world. Therefore, when you interact with other people, your moral view of the world will rub off.

How can you equivocate what "rubs off" with a demand for moral conduct?

If you do not, you're not really going to meaningfully interact with society at all. For, if you do not express your likes and dislikes, whether moral or aesthetic, whether verbally or non-verbally, whether explicitly or implicitly, then you are not communicating with anyone. And if you are not communicating with anyone, then you are not meaningfully interacting with anyone.

Again, you equivocate personal interaction (behaving in an internally moral fashion) with enforcement of morals as law or in practice.

The case of law-makers is especially explicit. Every law they make is a moral one, because every law they make carries with it information about what they think about how government should be run, what kind of control it should have, what its functions should be, how society should be, and so on.

But the root of these decisions need not be moral:

Law should serve one end, to protect me. Laws are not to create or envorce morals, but to ensure my protection.

See, no moral. I don't talk about "good and evil" simply the purpose with which I would choose to enter into government, just like one has a purpose for joining the boy-scouts.

The question is not whether or not we'll try to "force" our beliefs on others. The question is only the way we'll choose to do it.

Your opinions leaking out, and a decision to compel others to conform to your morality are not the same thing. Stop equivocating.

[joelsdad]

When it becomes foribdden or compulsory, then it's enforced. Atheist "morality" demands we take an honest look and reject religion as supersition... where do I enforce that morality?

By passing laws disallowing prayer in public places. By the ACLU demanding the removal of the ten commandments from public places, by laws passed prohibiting the display of nativity scenes unless they are deluged with secular decorations as well.

making oral sex illegal...

Othe rthan it b eing performed by homoswxuals show me one state that has banned oral sex and the Christian reference to it ( No bible I know outlaws it between consenting husbands and wives)

discriminitory practices against non-Christians (I can point you at a half-dozen non-Christians with personal expereince here)...

And I can point you to thousands of Christians who have been suspended and expelled from schools and beleivers fired from jobs and conmpany owners forced to have to defend themselves in court for the crime of being Christian.

It was lauded by the average citizen.. it was the average citizen the hid Bonnie and Clyde, that kept Jessie James from the law, and that gave the Mod their money during prohibition.

Jerry it was the newspapers that heroized the criminals. Are you so naive as to think that everyone in America who wasn't a declared non Christian religion is somehow a Christian?

Cite an example.

Well unfortunately I did not save their little diatribea against people of faith but the next tiem they dso I will see about downloading and passing it along.

www.aclj.org/

Here is a website that will show you how groups like the ACLU and PAW are taking away Americans 1st amendment right to freedom of religion and the couret cases that have had to happen. It will also lead to other legal orgs firghting the erosion of religious freedoms by secular grouops.

[JerryLove]

By passing laws disallowing prayer in public places. By the ACLU demanding the removal of the ten commandments from public places, by laws passed prohibiting the display of nativity scenes unless they are deluged with secular decorations as well.

Please cite a cingle law which prohibits a private person, business, or group from any of the activities you list... there are none, they do not exist. The government making decisions as to what it's representatives can do, in their function as agenst of the government, is hardly relevent; and the only thing you have to make these baseless claims on.

So put up or shut up.. where is the law in question?

Othe rthan it b eing performed by homoswxuals show me one state that has banned oral sex and the Christian reference to it ( No bible I know outlaws it between consenting husbands and wives)

The Christian references are never express, simply obvious.. Like why the laws for serving alcholol are different on Sunday in most locations (the so called "blue laws" which seek to maintin different behavior on the Christian Sabbath).

And I can point you to thousands of Christians who have been suspended and expelled from schools and beleivers fired from jobs and conmpany owners forced to have to defend themselves in court for the crime of being Christian.

But what you cannot do is show that it would have any bearing on the issue at hand... that Atheists do indeed suffer persecution by Christians.

Jerry it was the newspapers that heroized the criminals. Are you so naive as to think that everyone in America who wasn't a declared non Christian religion is somehow a Christian?

The old "not real Christians" excuse... but you, again straw-man the issue. I did not declare that 1920's America was Christian.. You are the one who said that:

"Then I would hasve to say we have not been successful in restoring the Judeo-Christian ethic this nation enjoyed for nearly 2 centuries." - joelsdad 06-08-2003 04:51 PM

If we did live by the "Judeo-Christian ethic" when we gave the Indians small-pox covered blankets, or shoved them on the desert, or when we declared war on ourselves, or while we enslaved blacks as "less than human" or while we opressed the Chinese under the same guise (or the Irish, or the Koreans, or most everyone else); while we were burning witches at the stake or while we were cheering and hiding bonnie and clyde, al capone, jessie james, billy the kid, and their peers. If we were living by the judeo-christian ethic when we formed the KKK, enacted jim-crowe laws, and shoved people of Japanese decent into concentration campes... if we were acting under that ethis then, then these are indeed the acts of a Christin... and if we were not, your entire premise that we were at one point is wrong... you choose.

Well unfortunately I did not save their little diatribea against people of faith but the next tiem they dso I will see about downloading and passing it along.

OK, well when you do, you *might* have a leg to stand on.. come back then.

Here is a website that will show you how groups like the ACLU and PAW are taking away Americans 1st amendment right to freedom of religion and the couret cases that have had to happen. It will also lead to other legal orgs firghting the erosion of religious freedoms by secular grouops.

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.

I see a prohibition against congress passing laws regarding religion. What law has congress passed?

Your entire post is, as is unfortunately typical for your posts, rhetoric. It's lies upon lies and not on-point.

[joelsdad]

The Christian references are never express, simply obvious.. Like why the laws for serving alcholol are different on Sunday in most locations (the so called "blue laws" which seek to maintin different behavior on the Christian Sabbath).

But Jerry I asked you to show me one state that has laws making oral sex illegal between heterosexual couples. This is just smoke screen garbage.


So put up or shut up.. where is the law in question?

Look upi the archives of Supreme court decisions. There are many cases where the "seperation of Church and state" opinion (which by the way does not appear in our constitution bt the former USSR's constittution), was used to prohibit groups from holding vokuntary prayer meetings on school grounds.

People living on a town common were ordered by pain of arrest with removal of a nativity scene.


Plus besides citing an anti oral sex law, please cite some specific cases of persecution by Christians of non-Christians. Remember the rul is that it had to be done in the name of the Christian religion and not by some guy who in his own dementia acted on his own accord.



But what you cannot do is show that it would have any bearing on the issue at hand... that Atheists do indeed suffer persecution by Christians

And you have yet to show any specific examples or cases, where physical or emotional damage was done to someone in the name of Chrisatianity.

Like why the laws for serving alcholol are different on Sunday in most locations (the so called "blue laws" which seek to maintin different behavior on the Christian Sabbath).

Again what has this to do with illegal oral sex.
But in reference to your cite here. In this alcoholic workaholic society what is so inherently evil about trying to have one day off for relaxation and trying to curb the voracious consumption of alcohol. i thought you secularists wanted to see alcoholism curbed.

he old "not real Christians" excuse... but you, again straw-man the issue. I did not declare that 1920's America was Christian.. You are the one who said that:

But you cite some examples of crime predominsant in asll societies. Give me the sense of community and caring and help that was prevalent with society prior to the humanist manifesto 1 became the unspoken driving force of this land and the greatest influence on the mionds of people in America anyday. Once again governemtn didn't need a welfare state--people took care of people. Even today oin this secular self centers society we call America it sai the "Christian " churches and their people who give the most and accomplish the most help in lifting people out of the morass that secularism help bring about.

Couple of good books to read are none dare call it conspiracy, the NEA trojan horse of American education and Like lambs to the Slaughter. Heavily referenced, cross referenced books showing the decline of /america because of the decline of the respect of the bilble in society and the rise of secualr thought.

[JerryLove]

Look upi the archives of Supreme court decisions. There are many cases where the "seperation of Church and state" opinion (which by the way does not appear in our constitution bt the former USSR's constittution), was used to prohibit groups from holding vokuntary prayer meetings on school grounds.

You told me to put up, I did... cite your case.

People living on a town common were ordered by pain of arrest with removal of a nativity scene.

Again cite, though I can already see the problem with your example shoult it even have happened (they violted an allowed useage of public land).

Plus besides citing an anti oral sex law, please cite some specific cases of persecution by Christians of non-Christians. Remember the rul is that it had to be done in the name of the Christian religion and not by some guy who in his own dementia acted on his own accord.

Pretty much every bombing of an abotrion center... would you like me to cite one or do you accept their existance?

And you have yet to show any specific examples or cases, where physical or emotional damage was done to someone in the name of Chrisatianity.

In the US? Go to Workdbeliefs and ask the neurologist who lost his practice when it was revealed he was Atheist.

But I did not claim emotional or physical damage did I? I claimed persecution... such as being forced to participate in recitation of religious liturge (such as the modified pledge of alliegence).

Again what has this to do with illegal oral sex.

Gads man, CAN'T YOU FOLLOW YOUR OWN POSTS?!?

You've argued that this is not a Christian country.. that Christians are not passing laws which attempt to persecute others by imposing their will. You accused polititions of not passing laws around Christian beliefs... Blue laws are one example that disproves your repeated assertions.

But in reference to your cite here. In this alcoholic workaholic society what is so inherently evil about trying to have one day off for relaxation and trying to curb the voracious consumption of alcohol. i thought you secularists wanted to see alcoholism curbed.

I want it eliminated, but that won't happen. I suppose you are going to argue it's a coincidence that there are is other single day in the week which routinely has a different set of ordinance than every other.

But you cite some examples of crime predominsant in asll societies.

So do you... but you are the one that argued:

"Then I would hasve to say we have not been successful in restoring the Judeo-Christian ethic this nation enjoyed for nearly 2 centuries." - joelsdad 06-08-2003 04:51 PM

So where is *your* support? You have none.


So again:

Please cite a cingle law which prohibits a private person, business, or group from any of the activities you list... there are none, they do not exist. The government making decisions as to what it's representatives can do, in their function as agenst of the government, is hardly relevent; and the only thing you have to make these baseless claims on.

So put up or shut up.. where is the law in question?


Show that any of your "Christians get persecuted" rhetoric has any bearing on the question of weather they pesecute Atheists.


Prove your claim that we used to live by the "Judeo-christian" ethic and stopped... and don't use anticdotal fallacies.


Show any law anywhere in the US which deprives anyone of the freeedom to be a Christian / worship.

You've been taseked to all of these in response to claims you made.. you've done none. Put up your proof.

[joelsdad]

Pretty much every bombing of an abotrion center... would you like me to cite one or do you accept their existance?

Show me the Christian organization that promoteds or approved these things. Show me a Christian leader that approved of these acts. You take something that is the extreme fringe and try to paint it as mainstream.. Shall I say then that because the American Phsyciatric Association seeks to decriminalize pedophilia that all secularists are in suipport of pedophilia????[


QUOTE](1) "Deviate sexual intercourse" means:[/QUOTE]

Well Ojk then there are some states that have passed such laws, but which church is responsible for it.

You told me to put up, I did... cite your case.

http://naacd.com/opposition.htm

heres a web site that lists the websites of organizations that have openly stated opposition to Christianity.


http://www.cnn.com/US/9711/06/alabama.prayer/index.html


Another web site from CNN with oither links of court cases against Christians or Christian activity.


http://www.users.voicenet.com/~sakossor/ken4_9.html

On this website is a reprint of an article by John Dunphy in the humanist magazine about the need to rid American Society of Christian influence (it won an award by the magazine)


By the way, I don't think we will find a specific law prohibiting prayer, but will you settle for numerous court decisions discriminating against Christians or Christian activity?

[Lyle]

JerryLove - I edited you post because I felt that its contents were exceeding the limit of info allowed to be on this board. I know you posted laws, but it is my duty to address this, and I felt that it exceeded the guidelines for matieral allowed to be posted.


But to the both of you, a warning, please shy away from speaking on such topics to that level...

[JerryLove]

Show me the Christian organization that promoteds or approved these things. Show me a Christian leader that approved of these acts.

It's not within the scope of my claim ("persecution by Christians of non-Christians"); though there are certinal pro-life organizations which have encouraged or condoned such behavior.

You take something that is the extreme fringe and try to paint it as mainstream..

No, I said that Atheists are persecuted Christians. This is the issue at hand.

Shall I say then that because the American Phsyciatric Association seeks to decriminalize pedophilia that all secularists are in suipport of pedophilia????

Notice how you added "all", I have not. This is the nature of your straw-manning of my position. That and your tendancy to red-herring the argument really make this a poor discussion .

Well Ojk then there are some states that have passed such laws, but which church is responsible for it.

Almost half... did I claim that this was the result of the activities of the governing body of a Church? I would not doubt it, but it's hardly relevent to my case.

heres a web site that lists the websites of organizations that have openly stated opposition to Christianity.

Sorry, organizations opposing Christianity have nothing to do with weather there are laws opressing it... that is your task, not establishing tat Christianity has opponents.

Another web site from CNN with oither links of court cases against Christians or Christian activity.

http://www.cnn.com/US/9703/13/briefs...yer/index.html

It's was student-lead, but school sanctioned.. In other-words, it was "let's start the day with a prayer", but with a student austensably leading it rather than a faculty member. Since this neccesairily involved all students, it was deemed a violation of church and state.

It does not prohibit prayer, nor the practice of Christianity. It does prohibt the school from starting school functions with a prayer.

Of course, this state (AL) is pushing through legislation that would *require* teachers to start th day with a prayer. From your cite:

Albertville school superintendent Jim Pratt, who walked with the protesting students, says he told them the ruling does not take away an individual's right to pray.

On this website is a reprint of an article by John Dunphy in the humanist magazine about the need to rid American Society of Christian influence (it won an award by the magazine)

also neither support of your claim that Atheists are not persecuted, nor a defense of your claim that the law persecutes Christians.

By the way, I don't think we will find a specific law prohibiting prayer, but will you settle for numerous court decisions discriminating against Christians or Christian activity?

Against Christians for being Christian? Yes; against Christian activity? Depends on context. So far, your references have been problems with church-state seperation and rulings related to that... I see no instance of, for example, going to church being outlawed; or crosses on your door being illegal.

Where is your non-anticdotal support that we lived with a Judeo-Christian ethic that we no longer live with?

[joelsdad]

http://www.jcn.com/manifestos.html

Website postin g verbatim , the humanist manifestos 1 and 2 and showing some of the very influential signatories.

[joelsdad]

http://www.faklen.dk/en/the_torch/index.shtml

Another nice web site against Christianity and religion.