darkendless
Guardian of Asgaard
Satanic is a polite way of saying i'm anti-abrahamic. I'm a non-theist and don't believe in magic etc.
Satanism is a mindset that fits best with my viewpoint.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Do you really think you are helping anyone?
- Thread starter Draka
- Start date
Satanism is a mindset that fits best with my viewpoint.
Vile Atheist
Loud and Obnoxious
I actually both agree and disagree with you. I see both sides of the coin.
On the one hand, though I disagree with your beliefs, I assume you hold them dear to you and you feel some sort of emotional connection with God. As an emotional instinct, I can see why you might feel disrespected if someone walked into a church with a shirt that says "God is not real". It's a base human instinct, and I wouldn't fault you for feeling disrespected if someone did that.
On the other, in this particular scenario, it's absolutely stupid to be disrespected. We're engaging on this forum right now. You're fully aware that I believe God is not real, the very same God you feel an emotional connection to. Am I being disrespectful to you by thinking and saying that "God isn't real" in many different ways and wording? Would it be more offensive if I wrote my views on a shirt, rather than a forum post? So why would you even feel disrespected if someone walks into a church with a shirt that carries that exact same message?
But there is one caveat holding me back from thinking you would be crazy for feeling disrespected (in this exact scenario). If someone holds the view that God isn't real, to what point and purpose would they walk into a church? Most likely to provoke people. The person doing that is aware that, while they don't buy into the whole God deal, a church is a sacred and reverend place for those who do believe.
However, if this same person wore this same shirt out in public, would you be offended? Would you feel disrespected? Again, there would be no reason for you to feel disrespected or offended anymore than you feel disrespected or offended by me holding opposite views to yours. Do I feel atheism is disrespected when I see religious billboards telling me I'm going to hell for not believing? Do I feel atheism is disrespected when I see people wearing Christian t-shirts? Or when I check into a hotel room and find a Bible in the drawer, instead of one of Hitchens' great books?
I don't, simply because I know there are people out there who don't agree with what I have to say on this issue or that and I'd rather engage them over the merits of our respective ideas, rather than feel disrespected and offended that someone would dare express a view opposite to my own.
I do not live in the United States, but hypothetically along with Canada, we are free societies and people should be free to do whatever they wish within the bounds of fair and just laws based on the notions of freedom, justice, peace, and democracy. We should not have a religious nor atheistic society and government, but a secular one that favours no belief system - including that of the majority.
Kathryn
It was on fire when I laid down on it.
No - what I said (and this is an exact quote) was:
Wait - what are you saying here? Are you saying that only those who pay in taxes should reap the benefits of public services? Do you really want to go there?
There are all sorts of tax incentives and deals cut in order to attract businesses and investors to certain areas. And let's talk about tax write offs for just a moment. As a banker, I see prosperous businesses and business owners who underreport their earnings or who play the tax write off game and pay far less than they should. And then - what of all the families who actually pay no taxes and THEN get a tax REFUND on top of it? Who's paying for their share of these public services?
Federal tax exmptions do not apply to other Federal taxes such as employment taxes. Additionally, a tax-exempt organization must pay federal tax on income that is unrelated to their exempt purpose.
Furthermore - most fire departments, police departments, water/sewage services, etc are paid for via property and sales taxes. Laws vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, but being a non profit entity doesn't mean you're automatically exempt from paying property and sales tax - many jurisdictions don't offer this tax break at all.
The employees and owners of non profits pay taxes - shouldn't their property be protected?
Finally - there are all SORTS of non profit organizations which are not affiliated with religious organizations which don't pay some federal taxes.
They aren't PAID to take care of foster children and adoption services. These entities are given some vouchers or funds to directly pay for SOME of the costs. There's a big difference between paying someone to take care of children - and paying for food, clothing and shelter for children.
No - again, what I said was this:
From my point of view, it's a secular culture in which the large majority of people are theists - and in which the majority religion is Christianity.
The majority of people who hold religious beliefs (also a majority) in the US are Christians. It's not a matter of "overpowering" others - it's simply a matter of there simply BEING more people who espouse Christian beliefs than any other group of religious, or non religious people.
That doesn't mean that many other views and beliefs aren't present, or shouldn't be respected and tolerated - and our government supports that tolerance and respect.
It is entirely true. World War 2 ended in 1945 - 66 years ago. Japan's government is officially secular.
And our country was overwhelmingly Christian in 1945. Using your logic, Christianity would naturally have quite a bit of influence on US society, which derives this from it's history.
As my earlier post clearly stated, with detailed examples - this is NOT all I "have to deal with." I gave specific examples of expressed beliefs and moral values which offend and bother me - in real life (examples which you completely ignored).
Anyone who wants to express their faith in real life in the United States is allowed to do so.
And furthermore - to repeat myself AGAIN - I am not complaining. I am discussing this topic on a debate forum.
Where would you draw the line, however? Would you abolish Christmas as a bank/post office/public school/trash collector/you name it holiday? Why would it be right for those who wish to observe Christmas with their families (the vast majority of Americans - Christian and otherwise) to have to give that up for the sake of political correctness?
But I guess this is a good example of slapping Christian symbolism and culture all over the place - and forcing Christianity on non Christians.
Kathryn
It was on fire when I laid down on it.
Right. It's right up there with walking into a Democratic party meeting with a shirt on that says "Obama is a freaking idiot" or "Democrats are a joke."
Can you truly not see the difference? Like I said, it's a matter of the setting. Not all actions are appropriate in all places.
It's appropriate to fart when you're by yourself. It's not appropriate to fart in a room full of people. It's appropriate to yell insults at a hockey game. It's not appropriate or respectful to yell insults in a courtroom.
Yes, and no. It's not disrespectful for a person who doesn't believe in God to come into a church - for whatever reason. What they do or wear when they come to the church though can be either respectful or disrespectful.
When I visit the mosque my friend attends, I know the difference between respectful and disrespectful behavior - don't you?
I wouldn't like the shirt - but I wouldn't be justified in behaving disrespectfully or intolerantly toward that person. It's their right to wear it and to express their beliefs - as it's my right as well.
blackout
Violet.
People can wear whatever t-shirts they want out in public.
However, it's just as inappropriate and disrespectful for someone
to actively belittle prayer in/at a function/building dedicated to/existing for the purpose of prayer,
as it is for someone to promote prayer
at a function/building dedicated to ... say... a graduation... or baseball games...
Churches are funded by the church-goers/participants.
As such they have a right to dismiss disruptions.
(ie, ask those 'not with the program', and moreso,
not respectful to their meeting place, to leave)
Patron funded events,
that are not billed as religious events,
are equally DISRESPECTFUL to the people who FUND THEM,
when they allow
prayer and religion
(and even patriotism)
to take the spotlight
at an event having NOTHING AT ALL to do with religion
(or govt./politics).
People should get what they actually paid for.
If I wanted prayer and religion,
I'd go to a church.
If I wanted patriotism,
I'd go to a political rally.
Govt. sponsored events,
if they are going to cave to religious pressure,
should be sure to make the "prayer" spot an ALL INCLUSIVE ONE,
even if it takes 30 minutes to include EVERYBODY,
for every religion/belief system/world view to be represented,
yes, Including athiests and secular humanists.
(with "hopes" and concerns shared -- like at UU)
I'm thinking that no one would really like this.
*yawner*
If we wanted a "faith/path/world'view" gathering,
prayers and intentions,
ecumenical representation day,
we would just have one of those, why not?
However, it's just as inappropriate and disrespectful for someone
to actively belittle prayer in/at a function/building dedicated to/existing for the purpose of prayer,
as it is for someone to promote prayer
at a function/building dedicated to ... say... a graduation... or baseball games...
Churches are funded by the church-goers/participants.
As such they have a right to dismiss disruptions.
(ie, ask those 'not with the program', and moreso,
not respectful to their meeting place, to leave)
Patron funded events,
that are not billed as religious events,
are equally DISRESPECTFUL to the people who FUND THEM,
when they allow
prayer and religion
(and even patriotism)
to take the spotlight
at an event having NOTHING AT ALL to do with religion
(or govt./politics).
People should get what they actually paid for.
If I wanted prayer and religion,
I'd go to a church.
If I wanted patriotism,
I'd go to a political rally.
Govt. sponsored events,
if they are going to cave to religious pressure,
should be sure to make the "prayer" spot an ALL INCLUSIVE ONE,
even if it takes 30 minutes to include EVERYBODY,
for every religion/belief system/world view to be represented,
yes, Including athiests and secular humanists.
(with "hopes" and concerns shared -- like at UU)
I'm thinking that no one would really like this.
*yawner*
If we wanted a "faith/path/world'view" gathering,
prayers and intentions,
ecumenical representation day,
we would just have one of those, why not?
Last edited:
-Peacemaker-
.45 Cal
If we're talking about a 200 year timespan then 40-60 years is talking about roughly a 40 percent difference in timespan. If we're talking about a 2000 year timespan yhen 40-60 years is roughly a 5 percent difference in timepsan. I took the liberty of rounding off the 5 %. Would it have made you feel that much better for me to say the texts were 1960 years old as opposed to 2000?
Last edited:
Draka
Wonder Woman
Holy crap. Not the point at all. The NT was written and compiled and put together YEARS after the supposed events occurred. Tell me, how accurate do you think a telling of your life, and quotes you supposedly said, would be if they were written by people who didn't even know you, only maybe heard of you from oral stories told to them, 50 or 60 years after you died??? My goodness, haven't you ever heard of the game "telephone"? Think of that...over many many years.
-Peacemaker-
.45 Cal
My argument was about SCHOLAR's ACCEPTED METHOD of validating ancient document. Not your accepted method.
Draka
Wonder Woman
Answer the question.
-Peacemaker-
.45 Cal
I wrote a three page paper about it. Read it if you're that interested.
Draka
Wonder Woman
-Peacemaker-
.45 Cal
I love all you guys with all my heart. That is no bs either, but I can't keep repeating myself over and over. I've given specific reasons that support it's veracity based on the evidence left behind, knowledge of ancient oral cultures, as well as other logical arguments based on the knowledge we do have. Things that are NOT rooted in prophecy. So no it's not a simple question about the game of "telephone".
Draka
Wonder Woman
Still no answer I see. It was a simple question directed at you. Your failure to even attempt to answer the question speaks volumes. Look, I have to get to bed now, so you have several hours to see if you can muster up an actual answer to my direct question. Though I am pretty certain that when I return tomorrow that I will still not see an answer from you. Goodnight.
-Peacemaker-
.45 Cal
Your complete lack of willingness to put any effort into learning someone's position speaks more volumes than anything. The answer to your question has been given, you're just too unmotivated to the research. We're talking about 1960 year old documents..hehehe...that's for Mestimia.. relatively speaking this is maybe the shortest game of telephone that has ever been played when it comes to recording an ancient event
Wombat
Active Member
Jesus Wept!....That's one of the saddest-ugliest things I've seen since they let the dogs loose at the Chicago Democratic Convention.
waitasec....you have my retraction and my apologies.
Was there a Just outcome to this? Did they sue their sorry ***'s?
What was the prayer again? "To be led by Your Spirit....help them in reaching out to the people who need their help....Lord, give us a good day today..."?
McBell
Admiral Obvious
I find it most interesting how you are going to such great lengths to prove my point.
I am rather disappointed.
I honestly expected you to last much longer before resorting to out right lies.
Oh well.
waitasec
Veteran Member
Jesus Wept!....That's one of the saddest-ugliest things I've seen since they let the dogs loose at the Chicago Democratic Convention.
waitasec....you have my retraction and my apologies.
Was there a Just outcome to this? Did they sue their sorry ***'s?
What was the prayer again? "To be led by Your Spirit....help them in reaching out to the people who need their help....Lord, give us a good day today..."?
yes it is sad...and really, i don't care who or what they were praying for...
it's the principal, it's the gradual chipping away of the original intent and making the christian tradition the norm...thereby adhering to the christian mob mentality...liberty and justice for the majority ... not for all...
congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion...
just consider what george dubya said...
"...this crusade, this war on terrorism is going to take a while"
[youtube]NsjgjM56HRw[/youtube]
YouTube - ‪Bush Talks about Crusade on Sep 16-2001‬‏
yes religion is a powerful tool...
for the few who are in charge.