|
|
Posted by Jerry Stuckle on 09/19/07 22:19
Steve wrote:
> "Jerry Stuckle" <jstucklex@attglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:cuadnVL5QPJvyW3bnZ2dnUVZ_hKdnZ2d@comcast.com...
>> Steve wrote:
>>> "Jerry Stuckle" <jstucklex@attglobal.net> wrote in message
>>> news:296dnbsuHfXCnW3bnZ2dnUVZ_tPinZ2d@comcast.com...
>>>> Steve wrote:
>>>>> "Jerry Stuckle" <jstucklex@attglobal.net> wrote in message
>>>>> news:nNqdnZZZKfElX3LbnZ2dnUVZ_h6vnZ2d@comcast.com...
>>>>>> Steve wrote:
>>>>>>> "Jerry Stuckle" <jstucklex@attglobal.net> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:JoWdneE7j9ChsHLbnZ2dnUVZ_vCknZ2d@comcast.com...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hey, I'd much rather have a God-fearing President than an atheist.
>>>>>>> jerry, i've been quiet thus far. what is wrong with an atheist or
>>>>>>> atheism itself. you and i are involved in a scientific field. i have
>>>>>>> to ask, what scientific evidence do you have that god exists. and,
>>>>>>> with whatever 'evidence' you may provide, what kind of relationship
>>>>>>> does it indicate that she may want to have with us? as there is no
>>>>>>> objective evidence, i can only infer that if a god exists, she wants
>>>>>>> nothing to do with us.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't need scientific evidence. My faith is good enough for me.
>>>>>> And I feel sorry for you.
>>>>> oh my!
>>>>>
>>>>> i can see the romanticism in the idea of the things hoped for. that is
>>>>> the nature of humanity. however, to afix that to a god-figure and
>>>>> create a regiment of though/belief about that concept - one that rules
>>>>> your life and had such a huge and not always pleasant mark on the
>>>>> history of others lives - without proof or indications that say you
>>>>> seem to be correct...that is just scary!
>>>>>
>>>>> why is it that most rational people who go through their lives applying
>>>>> critical thinking to all aspects of their lives, negate or forbid
>>>>> themselves from doing the same with this one, special case - god? that
>>>>> is wholly beyond me!
>>>>>
>>>>> you go ahead and feel sorry for me. i hope you are serving the 'right'
>>>>> one, cuz all of the major religions now are quite exclusive in
>>>>> membership with eternal damnation for not joining. (he pauses to
>>>>> think...i wonder if jerry is going to come back with the good ol'
>>>>> pascal wager at this point...then chuckles to self)
>>>>>
>>>> Whatever. It's my belief. However, you can be assured if there is a
>>>> God, you will be in the wrong. At least I have a chance of practicing
>>>> the "correct" religion.
>>> I KNEW IT...I CALLED IT...I TOLD YOU IT WAS COMING!!!
>>>
>>> PASCAL'S WAGER !!!
>>>
>>> and no, we have exactly the SAME changes of being right. you really
>>> should research theology more before committing one of the most basic,
>>> stupid, and flawed logical arguments passed throughout history. (as jerry
>>> now beings to google, red in the face from embarrassment once he sees
>>> what the fuck he just did).
>>>
>> Not at all. If there is no god, my religion is neither helping or hurting
>> me. However, if there is a god, you have no chance of being right because
>> you never entered the lottery. OTOH, I could have picked the "correct"
>> religion.
>>
>>>>>>> as for your assumption that god-fearers somehow make better decisions
>>>>>>> that atheists...hardly the case. what god shall we fear? muhammad?
>>>>>>> mythra? zeus? buddah? the big jc? as an american and a republican,
>>>>>>> this is the most i've ever feared for democracy in america...it has
>>>>>>> nothing to do with afghanistan or iraq, but everything to do with
>>>>>>> domestic policy inacted after 911...and how easily a 'god-fearing'
>>>>>>> people can be moved and rallied under the banner of 'god' in leu of
>>>>>>> ration thought - especially thought that is critical of current
>>>>>>> events in light of history.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> give me an atheist about now, please!
>>>>>> I don't care what you believe in. However, when you try to impose
>>>>>> your religion on me, the President or anyone else, I draw the line.
>>>>> and the world shudders.
>>>>>
>>>>> why are christians so eager to say that but gaffaw when atheists, for
>>>>> the exact same reason, want to remove religious icons from
>>>>> mountainsides in california, or edicts greeting patrons of public
>>>>> places, or pray in schools? why is there a double standard?
>>>> You're the one setting the double standard - not allowing me to practice
>>>> my religion. What harm does a cross on a mountainside do to you if you
>>>> don't believe in any god? It's just a couple of pieces of wood, after
>>>> all. Or if I want to pray in school, why is it your right to say I
>>>> can't?
>>> practice all you want, but don't ask me to pay for it with the taxes used
>>> to propogate it in public. go off to church and do that shit in
>>> private...not in the public sector. the harm is that a cross on a
>>> mountainside, if paid with public funds, is favoring and sponsoring
>>> religion. do you ever read? how about the federalist papers? madison?
>>> what harm? fucking get a clue!
>>>
>>> if you want to pray in school, go ahead. the problem is when a person
>>> paid by the state says, 'now it is time to pray'. surely you're not that
>>> stupid!
>> I never said you had to pay for it with your taxes. But also notice there
>> is NOTHING in the Constitution saying Congress or the States can or cannot
>> spend money regarding religion - or even sponsor a religion. That has
>> strictly been an "interpretation" of the courts. All it says that
>> Congress and the States cannot force any person to practice any religion.
>> Now that does not mean I disagree with this interpretation.
>>
>> But obviously you have not read the Federalist Papers. You don't have a
>> clue what Madison said.
>>
>> As for someone offering a non-denominational prayer in school - no, I
>> don't see anything wrong with it, as long as people can opt out if they
>> choose. What are you afraid of - your children might actually learn
>> something you don't believe in?
>
> jerry, i am a student of history. i've done my homework. you keep leaving
> out, or ignoring completely, the establishment clause of the first
> ammendment.
>
> and of course you see nothing wrong with prayer in school! you're a fucking
> christian!!! the only thing i'm afraid of is that we have a religious zealot
> in office and people like you are backing him...and you don't see a thing
> wrong with prayer in school or governmental sponsorship of religion.
>
And you have yet to tell me what's so wrong about a non-denominational
prayer that people can chose to participate in or not participate in.
> what would you be afraid of if your kid's school required them to say the
> morning islamic prayer? the point is, that whatever i want my children to
> believe about god is (or should be) up to me to provide, not the state.
> funny how the only things a child learns in school are the essential things
> that will help them get through life...religion is not part of that.
>
I never said it was mandatory. In fact, I specifically said
participation should be optional.
As for my children being exposed to an Islamic prayer - I'd say great.
They should be exposed to different cultures and religions.
> btw, wtf does a prayer sound like...the one where no religion gets offended?
> "non-demoninational"...you've still got your
> asshole-tunnel-vision-christian-perspective goggles on, i see. lol. did you
> mean the non-denominational zen buhdists? the non-denominational hindus? the
> non-denominational wiccans? i couldn't be laughing harder!
>
>
You don't have any idea what a non-denominational prayer is, do you?
It's one which isn't Christian, Jewish, Muslim or any other specific
religion. It's one which allows participants to deal with God as they
believe.
--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|