|
|
Posted by Shelly on 09/18/07 19:05
"Jerry Stuckle" <jstucklex@attglobal.net> wrote in message
news:jtOdnUEcBZMqYXLbnZ2dnUVZ_vyinZ2d@comcast.com...
> Shelly wrote:
>> "Steve" <no.one@example.com> wrote in message
>> news:gfPHi.28$zy3.22@newsfe02.lga...
>>>> And BTW - atheism is a religion, also. This is conveniently
>>>> "overlooked" by those espousing it in the name of "freedom". But many
>>>> atheists are trying to force their religion on the rest of the country.
>>> if you're not an atheist, don't presume to know what it is outside of a
>>> proper dictionary definition.
>>>
>>> atheism is the lack of belief in god or gods.
>>
>> Sorry, Steve, but you have to give the devil his due here. From
>> www.m-w.com
>>
>> Main Entry: athe·ism
>> Pronunciation: 'A-thE-"i-z&m
>> Function: noun
>> Etymology: Middle French athιisme, from athιe atheist, from Greek atheos
>> godless, from a- + theos god
>> 1 archaic : UNGODLINESS, WICKEDNESS
>> 2 a : a disbelief in the existence of deity b : the doctrine that there
>> is no deity
>>
>> To me those are declarative statements and not passive ones. It is a
>> "disbelief" rather than a "lack of belief". Also, when you mix
>> "doctrine" with theology you have "religion".
>>
>> The point though that Jerry is trying to make is totally wrong, however.
>> Having an atheist in there, and not allowing mixing of standard religion
>> with politics is NOT forcing the "religion" of atheism on anyone.
>> Everyone is free to believe and practice as they wish -- just not mix it
>> into politics. My earlier statement of the flourishing of religion in
>> the USA **BECAUSE** of the separation and freedom goes to that point.
>>
>
> I'm not saying there has to be a mix of religion and politics. But I am
> saying the President is also a citizen, and welcome to practice his
> beliefs.
....and noone is agruing against that point.
>
> Personally, I would rather have a President with certain moral values
> which are taught by religion. He could be Christian (my belief),
....and they are taught by society as well.
> Jewish, Muslim or any of a number of different religions which share those
> same core values. I'm not saying I would not vote for an atheist, but it
> is one of the things I take into consideration when looking at candidates.
Well, do what you want (obviously) and you if you take such irrelevencies as
being religious into account you may well get stuck again with crap like we
have now in office.
> Not to say all people who are religious follow those values - take
You got that one right! The list in interminable of such hypocrites.
> Clinton for example - getting caught with his pants down (literally).
He disgraced the office with his sexual behavior. Otherwise, he was an
excellent president. We had prosperity and low inflation. We were at
peace. He put in that wonderful excemption for the profits (largely due to
infaltion) on the sale of your primary home. He failed on health care. All
in all, he was pretty good. I voted for him once and against him once. I'd
take him again in a heartbeat over the power maniac in office now who has
sent over 3,000 young Americans to their deaths in a war that can't be won
and for an ever-shifting raison d'etre.
> That is something that I, as a Christian, have never done and will never
> do, and I find that behavior abhorrent. My values are higher than that.
You are still a virgin? (Sorry, couldn't resist that one. I understand
what you meant to say).
Shelly
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|