Religion-Based Government

Post Reply New Topic

Hear! Hear!

I believe that the religious fairness displayed by an Atheist government would be demonstrated by either banning all religions without exception, or by ignoring all religions equally.

I don't think even Richard Dawkins would ban religion. I bet he knows that the backlash would just be odorous, and the outcome miserable. Just best to sit it out and calm the waves with many gentle pokes and a battery of harsher prods than enrage the religious.

I'd like to see an interpretation of "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." to mean that "Congress shall make no law just because a religious institution demands it; nor shall Congress strike down, modify, amend, or edit in whole or in part any law just because a religious institution demands it...".

This would be so that no church, no matter how wealthy, could ever again impose upon Congress to modify our legal system to their idea of what moral behavior should be. I mean, look at the mess that was made with Prohibition!* The legislation of Christian morality (e.g., "Temperance") led directly to the criminalization of what many Christians consider immoral behavior (e.g., Alcohol intoxication).

Of course "Immorality" - as defined by our allegedly Christian Founding Fathers in 1776 - did not include slavery until 1860, and the subjugation of women until 1911.

(*Prohibition in the United States was a major reform movement sponsored by evangelical Protestant churches, especially the Methodists, Baptists, Presbyterians, Disciples, and Congregationalists. Although alcohol consumption did decline, there was a highly correlative and dramatic rise in organized crime in the larger cities, which now had a cash crop that was in high demand - "Bootleg" Alcohol.)

Pol Pot and Joseph Stalin where both atheists combine how many people they both had killed it.

Out shines Hitler so if your saying Hitler is or was a Christian I can name more athesits that
.
Killed people for believeing in God before you could name religious people killing in the name.

Of their religion Lad.

For bad people to do bad things, all it takes is to have the means, the motivation, the opportunity, and the victim.

For good people to do bad things, all it takes is religion.

Some religious people, do bad things with out religion, for instance I some times get into fights, but thats not because I am fighting, some one who isnt religious, they just provoke me.

Are you sure you weren't trying the patented "conversion by fisticuffs" method?

No he made rude remarks about me mother that's a no no so I let my fist meet his face.

I am not like most christian's I do not turn the other cheek.

I think very few Christians actually turn the other cheek.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Well to be fair when they don't turn the other cheek they use old testement laws to justify their actions.

I was going to say, "Jedi."

Then I remembered what a complete clusterf**k they made of the Old Republic.

In all seriousness, though, I do not believe that a constitutional reference to God serves to protect any inalienable right. If Government, through coercive force, is going to deprive you of your rights, and is prepared to do away with the Rule of Law in order to do so, then no reference to God in the Constitution is going to stop them.

The "Divine Right of Kings" did not keep the heads of Charles I or Louis XVI attached to their necks, and "endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights" will not do the same for life, liberty or the pursuit of happiness.

In his book "Jewish History, Jewish Religion", Israeli jewish writer Israel Shahak had the following to say about the so-called "judeo-Christian" tradition:



In his book "Neoconservatism: The Autobiography of an Idea", jewish writer Irving Kristol had the following to say about "judeo-Christianity":



And as for the famous Ten Commandments, jewish writer Louise Jacobs (in "The Jewish Religion") says this:



So what exactly is it about the jewish religion that you think is so important to a Western secular liberal democracy, and why do so many conservatives repeat these memes about a "judeo-Christian" tradition? Could it be that these memes are being helped to spread in no small measure by jewish propagandists themselves working to advance their ethnic interests?

So he was not an atheist then? It would have been nice to bring this up whenever someone said Hitler was an atheist you know

I also would like to know what you think Satanism actually is. Considering the fact I have given presentations on this matter, this should be interesting.

I feel so silly talking to myself here but I think this shows how the modern anti-Muslim rhetoric looks exactly like these antiquated views on Judaism.
They both require the bizarre requirement that people live their religion in a strict fundamentalist manner that absolutely nobody does.
It require the group under-fire to follow the most obscure readings of their own texts and ignores
any sociological or empirical data. it is just a weird little I found a verse that says blank.
quite silly

78% of the poll respondents so far have chosen "Secularism" or "No government based on religion can ever be ideal".

This means that those who took the poll prefer a non-religious government over a religious government by a ratio of roughly 7 to 2.

Margin of error is still around 3% either way.

Yes, many individuals view "The Nation" as so much "blank" and "quite silly". To avoid as much value as possible to the vulnerability of any "open ideas" of the contrasting images of the Israel-Palestine conflict, it might be held best to avoid any contrary ideas not suited to one's desired limited view, but tid-bits of information sometimes reveal much useful knowledge in unexpected ways. Heck, sometimes I even read that dreaded publication entitled "The Nation", with "blank" articles like this one: http://www.thenation.com/article/israel ... -1933-2001

Government-Based Religion is much like "organized crime", as then Attorney General George Deukmejian was involved in a dispute involving "Against The Gates of Hell: The threat to religious freedom in America", with Deukmejian seizing churches for God Fraud while he was also demanding the World officially recognize the Armenian Holocaust, which is still in semi-official USA denial, but being Politically Correct requires both items to be much as "silly blanks".

The Church seized was classified as a "cult", as in the big book of cults useful to the U.S.A. government whenever the need arises: "The Kingdom of the Cults" by Walter Martin, ed. Hank Hanegraaff(?), but the church was "de-cultified" with death and required recognition of "The Trinity" to be "legally non-fraudulent".

What does such a "cult" book to do with American Politics? Just don't touch anyting in the chapter on "Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints" until you have your Uncle Sam pass-card presently.

Living with religious freedom is so wonderful in the U.S.A., at least until the Patriots start the stoning.

Tadzio