Obama, Anti Bible?

[xrac]

Why not?

(Come on neos (Christian, Jewish, Hindu, etc.) ... I'm opening the door for you to present your argument for religious discrimination, hatreds, dis-trusts, past-injustices, political-agenda etc. of those who are Muslim (or shall we say non-Christian,) ... a subject I know you always enjoy.)

As far as I am concerned the principles, values, and practices of the Muslim religion, despite what apologists say, is in conflict with principles of peace, freedom, self-determination, and liberty. For an individual to be a good president and follow the principles our nation was built upon would require them to deny certain aspects of their faith.

 

[Guest]

As far as I am concerned the principles, values, and practices of the Muslim religion, despite what apologists say, is in conflict with principles of peace, freedom, self-determination, and liberty. For an individual to be a good president and follow the principles our nation was built upon would require them to deny certain aspects of their faith.

So you want to discuss the "principles of peace, freedom, self-determination" in the context of the past two thousand years of Christianity? OK, I'm listening.

 

[GreenSky]

So you want to discuss the "principles of peace, freedom, self-determination" in the context of the past two thousand years of Christianity? OK, I'm listening.

Al, how is your obvious hate for Christians, Atheists, Conservatives, etc. put you in any position to discuss "peace, freedom, self-determination?"

I'm waiting to read something positive from you. It's easy to attack and criticize, and you have chosen the easy way every time.

You don't speak like this on a one on one basis, so why do you post like this?

Rick

 

[arnguy]

Where in the Constitution is the so-called separation of church and state?

How else would you interpet Amendment #1 to the Constitution that was Ratified 12/15/1791?

 

[Guest]

...put you in any position to discuss "peace, freedom, self-determination?"

You are right about one thing. "Discuss" was the wrong word. I should have said "listen" because there is no way to discuss anything with the 12,000+ conservative agents in this venue. Even if the intent was there, few have the intelligence level to maintain a dialectic before their inability to contain their anger "kicks in" and they go "Jesus-postal."

After some three years on this board I've learned that lesson well.

I'm waiting to read something positive from you.

And for some reason I'm supposed to care about whether or not I'm blessed by anyone here with praise because they (you) decide what is positive or negative? As I said in an earlier post... you need to understand that it is not all about (the collective) you.

It's easy to attack and criticize, and you have chosen the easy way every time.

In this venue, it is not the easy way, it is the only way. You've been here as long as I have. Are you going to tell me that you honestly believe in your heart of hearts that a civil "discussion" on your views of atheism and how Jesus is a myth (as is god) is going to be viewed and responded to here with deep introspection, retrospection, and with any substantial "care" for your feelings on the subject? Or will you be put on the rack and then lynched and burned? You decide on that one and let me know.

You don't speak like this on a one on one basis, so why do you post like this?

"When in Rome... " I can rise to the occasion, but I'm just as easily able to lower myself to the depths that is the usual paradigm in this venue with agents who are neither well-read nor well-educated, but who know everything about what they really don't know anything about.

I can discuss with you in a civil manner in private what I can't discuss here in ANY manner if for no other reason then the fact that you went to one of the top ten universities in the nation, are well-educated and you are an intellectual... while the vast majority of the subscribers here never finished junior college.

Does the above answer your questions?

Al

 

[Yoda]

AL SAID- "
Sometimes (actually often) you arch/neo-con bogus-Christian agents disgust me to the point of nausea."
================================================

It just kinda makes you glad you don't have to deal with these folks in person don't it? I see that hundreds of people are coming to this site a day but it appears that most of the agents that decide to post are the con artists and scammers and raving lunatics. Its too bad.

 

[xrac]

So you want to discuss the "principles of peace, freedom, self-determination" in the context of the past two thousand years of Christianity? OK, I'm listening.

Yea! Al you are right! If our president were a full fledged Muslim there would be no conflict between his faith and our freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom to bear arms, etc.!

 

[Guest]

Yea! Al you are right! If our president were a full fledged Muslim there would be no conflict between his faith and our freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom to bear arms, etc.!

And when your dream comes true that you elect Rev. Huckabee and LDS Romney, you will be able to establish that Christian theocracy you've always wanted by starting (and finishing) a pogrom on national scale.

 

[Guest]

How else would you interpet Amendment #1 to the Constitution that was Ratified 12/15/1791?

That governments shall not establish any kind of state religion. Have they? Is atheism or evolution or socialism or marxism a religion? Does this mean religious people cannot serve? What about all the scripture engraved on government buildings? How do you see it? Just askin'.

 

[Winter_123]

That governments shall not establish any kind of state religion. Have they? Is atheism or evolution or socialism or marxism a religion? Does this mean religious people cannot serve? What about all the scripture engraved on government buildings? How do you see it? Just askin'.

Well there is actually a fairly weighty issue embedded in there. Government and the libs are committed to replacing certain teachings with secular humanism and content that is free of any religious worldview. However, it is increasingly being argued that secular humanism is in fact a religion or a set of implied religious beliefs and that government is prohibited from establishing or supporting any type of religion. I must say that it is an interesting argument and not without merit.