Originally Posted by Guest

Atheists are not angry at God (just as they are not angry at the Tooth Fairy), and most of us didn’t become atheists because something bad happened to us. We became atheists because we find no evidence for any gods.

War on religion, war on Christmas, war on Christians? "Let's put Christ back in Christmas?"
Who wants to carry this out?
As a secular humanist without a religion, I just want to live and let live, be kind to others and do good in the living world.

Dear Guest:

I hope you don't perceive this as being patronizing ,I have every respect for what you say and the way you manage your life

Christians like you just want to live and let live, be kind to others and do good in the living world.

But like some misguided religious people some atheists, like, Jeffrey Tayler, who is featured in the opening post here, direct their angry at Christians as do The Freedom From Religion organization from Wisconsin who fail to see or care that most people just want to get along to be free to express their beliefs and practice their religion

What is happening in Muslim countries to Christians is clearly inhumane and is a prime reason as to why we should never let anyone demean or denigrate anyone's personal faith or those who preference is not to believe in God.

Personal Best Regards:

There are radicals in all areas, their way or the highway mentality. Everyone is entitled to their own beliefs without someone else trying to change them or know what is right for someone else.

Originally Posted by Guest

As an atheist are you offended by the opening commentary which opens Supreme Court meeting? ie "God save the United States and this Honorable Court?"

The words are meaningless, like Oyez, oyez. Would I be offended if they said "May the Flying Spaghetti Monster bless this court" ? No I would not as that is also meaningless. Are you offended? Do you see this a government endorsement of a religion or merely ceremonial language adopted from the 18th century English tradition? And if you believe it is a governmental endorsement of a particular God, which one? Athena perhaps, the God of wisdom and justice.

Originally Posted by Guest

The words are meaningless, like Oyez, oyez. Would I be offended if they said "May the Flying Spaghetti Monster bless this court" ? No I would not as that is also meaningless. Are you offended? Do you see this a government endorsement of a religion or merely ceremonial language adopted from the 18th century English tradition? And if you believe it is a governmental endorsement of a particular God, which one? Athena perhaps, the God of wisdom and justice.

Now, now, you we're doing pretty well until you succumbed to the use of sophistry. You know, as well as I do, the reference is to the Judeo Christian God upon which Western Civilization was built.

As a devout atheist you still have not, and presumably never will, acknowledge your debt to being fortunate enough to have been borne into the Judeo-Christion civilization that tolerates your beliefs.

"As a devout atheist you still have not, and presumably never will, acknowledge your debt to being fortunate enough to have been borne into the Judeo-Christion civilization that tolerates your beliefs."

I am not quite sure what you mean by your statetment. One of my co-workers claimed he was an atheist but he had retired from the Army after a career of 24 years. He retired as a Command Sergeant Major. I tried to get him to attend my church but he always refused.

I believe he had repaid any debt about being born in the USA. It had nothing to do with his religion. Just a very decent (but misguided in religion) man.

Yawn!
I think I will change the pace and go measure some passing clouds!

Originally Posted by Guest

Perhaps this dialogue will be useful. Please read your post as it might appear to an atheist like me. Your claim that in a secular world evil people take control is wrong. You can certainly name some non-religious people who are evil and took control... Pot, Stalin for example, but I can name evil people who are performing their acts of evil because of their faith, as can you. You, I am sure, are very aware of the sad history of both Eastern and Western religions being the justification for war, slavery, slaughter, political and economic malice. And one need not go back to the Crusades nor the Spanish Inquisition for Christian examples. So the claim that it is preferable having leaders come from people of strong faith is wrong if they are using their particular book or their particular god(s) in their decision making.

Your next posit that science and religion are twins as both are faith based is errant. It is true that both have unknowns. But science and only science is disprovable (until we get a time machine). People of faith will tell you that there is no evidence, no study, no photograph, no document, nothing that will alter their belief. It will be a trick played by others to test their faith. Science tests, retests, tweaks and modifies. Science is mutable and fallible. Religion is immutable and infallible. Justice demands that evidence be examined and considered in making a decision. Religion demands that all observations fit a preconceived endpoint.

Justice Scalia has never seemed humbled to me.

We completely agree that our Western democracy has evolved from other Western institutions and ideas and prior governmental failures, including the failure of our own early country. And I will strongly support your freedom of religion whether it be Christian or Wiccan or anything. I want you to just as strongly support my freedom from your religion or any other religion being promoted by my government, and that when you enter government service you leave your holy book at home and use our laws to govern. That you decide what is Constitutional based on the Constitution not on Leviticus.

And lastly, while your invention of a god may bring out the best in some, it also brings out the worst in some. And yes, I think I am a moral and good person. If there is a god and there is a heaven which is meant as a reward for living a moral life here on earth, and I'm not allowed into heaven because I failed to accept a doctrine, then there is something very wrong with the entry requirements into heaven.

Dear Guest: I like the way you think and I like the way point, counter point. It may surprise you to know, perhaps not ,that much of what you said has crossed my mind over the years. Consider this as I address each of your five paragraphs in consecutive order.

You open with evil done in the name of religion. I have previously addressed and acknowledged that fact in previous posts including the one you copied for the above stated response. However, I believe those religious evil doers were following their selfish goals and not God's and I believe it is an oxymoron to place God and evil together. Secondly you cite the Crusades, etc as examples and again I agree but and while not excusable you have to judge such actions in their time as relates to the political climate at the time etc. For instance the Catholic Church has drastically changed over the centuries. As a side bar I work with due diligence to separate man's actions from God message. For instance Pope Francis exhibits some fine qualities but his anti-capitalist tendencies demonstrate his breeding in a socialist nation which I dislike . Of course I believe the critical factor here is how one perceives his God and my God is a God of love, unity and an intolerance for immorality and hate.

You next dispute the relationship between religion and science yet many documents handed down through the ages by religious people have a sound scientific basis. If one openly looks at the universe and all of its creature it is hard to imagine that it has developed by happenstance. Its like saying that a building loaded to the top with alpha-numeral characters and having exploded created a complete set of encyclopedias. A serious look at how the human body and mind functions places one in awe. There is a book out called "The Strange Case of the Rickety Cossack" which posit on how because of bias, desire etc scientist have committed fraud over the years in all fields of science much of what has resulting in leading us astray about earth's history.

As to Judge Scalia I view his demeanor as being confident which does not preclude his being humble

Again I say that the Charters of Freedom were based on our Judeo-Christian beliefs. without going into detail the pilgrims faith sustained them and Christianity has had a great influence since the Europeans crossed the Atlantic. Rule of law etc was formed from the principles of religion such as God made us all free..................................

Finally I say again but for the idea of one God I do not believe people would be civil or moral because it was through such teachings that bound us altogether, again imperfect as it maybe because nature has its limits and religion has played a major role and overcoming those limits. So whether one believes in God or not religious influences influence us all believers and non-believers alike .


Personal Best Regards:

Originally Posted by Guest

Dear Guest: I like the way you think and I like the way point, counter point. It may surprise you to know, perhaps not ,that much of what you said has crossed my mind over the years. Consider this as I address each of your five paragraphs in consecutive order.

You open with evil done in the name of religion. I have previously addressed and acknowledged that fact in previous posts including the one you copied for the above stated response. However, I believe those religious evil doers were following their selfish goals and not God's and I believe it is an oxymoron to place God and evil together. Secondly you cite the Crusades, etc as examples and again I agree but and while not excusable you have to judge such actions in their time as relates to the political climate at the time etc. For instance the Catholic Church has drastically changed over the centuries. As a side bar I work with due diligence to separate man's actions from God message. For instance Pope Francis exhibits some fine qualities but his anti-capitalist tendencies demonstrate his breeding in a socialist nation which I dislike . Of course I believe the critical factor here is how one perceives his God and my God is a God of love, unity and an intolerance for immorality and hate.

You next dispute the relationship between religion and science yet many documents handed down through the ages by religious people have a sound scientific basis. If one openly looks at the universe and all of its creature it is hard to imagine that it has developed by happenstance. Its like saying that a building loaded to the top with alpha-numeral characters and having exploded created a complete set of encyclopedias. A serious look at how the human body and mind functions places one in awe. There is a book out called "The Strange Case of the Rickety Cossack" which posit on how because of bias, desire etc scientist have committed fraud over the years in all fields of science much of what has resulting in leading us astray about earth's history.

As to Judge Scalia I view his demeanor as being confident which does not preclude his being humble

Again I say that the Charters of Freedom were based on our Judeo-Christian beliefs. without going into detail the pilgrims faith sustained them and Christianity has had a great influence since the Europeans crossed the Atlantic. Rule of law etc was formed from the principles of religion such as God made us all free..................................

Finally I say again but for the idea of one God I do not believe people would be civil or moral because it was through such teachings that bound us altogether, again imperfect as it maybe because nature has its limits and religion has played a major role and overcoming those limits. So whether one believes in God or not religious influences influence us all believers and non-believers alike .


Personal Best Regards:

Thank you both for discussing point counterpoint on a sensitive topix without any insults. If you are with the intent to give someone an opportunity to consider your take on a topic, these last two posts have shown us all how to approach that end.

Originally Posted by Guest

Thank you both for discussing point counterpoint on a sensitive topix without any insults. If you are with the intent to give someone an opportunity to consider your take on a topic, these last two posts have shown us all how to approach that end.

Amen to that! Great posts, and although I don't have anything to add to the discussion at this time, both posters have given me pause to think and reflect on these issues. Thank you both for sharing your thoughts and wisdom on the topic.

Originally Posted by Guest

Amen to that! Great posts, and although I don't have anything to add to the discussion at this time, both posters have given me pause to think and reflect on these issues. Thank you both for sharing your thoughts and wisdom on the topic.

This needs to be ecohed. Great discussion like adults.

This is what this forum is supposed to be about, and at its inception was.

Thanks again...it does restore faith in my neighbors.

To quote Thomas Jefferson. "I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should make 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof', thus building a wall of separation between Church and State."