100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Does God exist? | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
Be Nice and act like adults everyone.
It's okay to debate, but no attacking !!! |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Krimsa
on
Wed 01/28/09 09:37 AM
|
|
I never was yet I was referred to as "unintelligent."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Was quite clear and well organized to me. Made it easy to follow the conversation and responses.
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Jeanniebean
on
Wed 01/28/09 10:12 AM
|
|
Who cares if there's a nativity displayed in the town square? I care. You can not display a nativity scene on property designated for public use by ALL citizens. Not everyone is a Christian and it is clearly wrong for you to force your beliefs down the throats of others. If your nativity is to be prominently displayed then what of the Jewish star of David and everyone else? Shouldn’t they also be entitled to display icons of their faith? Where does it end? Who cares if the 10 commandments are on the walls of the courthouse? I care. How would you feel as a Buddhist accused of a crime that now must stand trial in said courthouse where the 10 commandments are displayed? I imagine you would feel rather apprehensive and uncertain as to the outcome of this proceeding. A civic office and especially a county court house that has the function of disbursing justice to ALL citizens in that community can not rightfully demonstrate blatant favoritism to one religious belief or faith. How is that forcing beliefs down someone's throat? I suppose they're demanding you believe in Santa Claus too? Please, if you don't really believe, then you can't convince me that you have enough feelings about the matter to be offended. It's a hate inspired act to restrict public displays that are not vulgar and destructive. Freedom of speech to all. Buddhists have much the same value system as Christians. The only feelings that result from what you've just stated are jealousy and hate. I would not allow a nativity scene on my property. Public property is my property, as it belongs to the public. I am the public. I would imagine if a tribute to Satan was displayed on public property there would be a huge outcry and so-called "freedom of Speech" would go down the tubes. Freedom of speech does not give anyone permission to use public property for their agenda or religion. Period. Get used to it, get over it, get past it. Kudo's to the atheists who fight the battle against government sponsored religion. After all, that is the very reason we left England. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I would not allow a nativity scene on my property. Public property is my property, as it belongs to the public. I am the public. I would imagine if a tribute to Satan was displayed on public property there would be a huge outcry and so-called "freedom of Speech" would go down the tubes. Freedom of speech does not give anyone permission to use public property for their agenda or religion. Period. Get used to it, get over it, get past it. Kudo's to the atheists who fight the battle against government sponsored religion. After all, that is the very reason we left England. I still don't understand the connection between displaying beliefs and forcing them down someone's throat. There is none. If you see a Santa Claus, do you feel like you have to believe in him? And if you look at God as just as imaginary as Santa Claus, why would the idea of God provoke you like this? Government doesn't sponsor religion, but they also can not prohibit it. It's constitutional. As long as anyone from any faith or belief can do the same, there's no harm done. Believing anything else is from hate. Thank you guys for showing that so effectively. |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
franshade
on
Wed 01/28/09 10:30 AM
|
|
I would not allow a nativity scene on my property. Public property is my property, as it belongs to the public. I am the public. I would imagine if a tribute to Satan was displayed on public property there would be a huge outcry and so-called "freedom of Speech" would go down the tubes. Freedom of speech does not give anyone permission to use public property for their agenda or religion. Period. Get used to it, get over it, get past it. Kudo's to the atheists who fight the battle against government sponsored religion. After all, that is the very reason we left England. I still don't understand the connection between displaying beliefs and forcing them down someone's throat. There is none. If you see a Santa Claus, do you feel like you have to believe in him? And if you look at God as just as imaginary as Santa Claus, why would the idea of God provoke you like this? Government doesn't sponsor religion, but they also can not prohibit it. It's constitutional. As long as anyone from any faith or belief can do the same, there's no harm done. Believing anything else is from hate. Thank you guys for showing that so effectively. Anyone is free to display personal beliefs on private property, but not on public property. The public encompasses more than one belief and/or non believers. Therefore, it should not be displayed/sponsored/advertised unless willing to display/sponsor/advertise for all beliefs/none believers. jmo |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyone is free to display personal beliefs on private property, but not on public property. The public encompasses more than one belief and/or non believers. Therefore, it should not be displayed/sponsored/advertised unless all beliefs/none believers. jmo Agreed. As far as I am concerned you can plaster Merry Christmas, multiple baby Jesus, and god things all over every square inch of your OWN private property. I love Christmas lights but Christianity does not own the patent on lighting. I also have no problems with nativity scenes on church property. That’s where they should be displayed. Beyond that no, it does not fall under your constitutional right to inflict your belief system on others. It’s a private matter. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyone is free to display personal beliefs on private property, but not on public property. The public encompasses more than one belief and/or non believers. Therefore, it should not be displayed/sponsored/advertised unless all beliefs/none believers. jmo Agreed. As far as I am concerned you can plaster Merry Christmas, multiple baby Jesus, and god things all over every square inch of your OWN private property. I love Christmas lights but Christianity does not own the patent on lighting. I also have no problems with nativity scenes on church property. That’s where they should be displayed. Beyond that no, it does not fall under your constitutional right to inflict your belief system on others. It’s a private matter. I agree - either display for all or none you quoted before I edited |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I agree - either display for all or none Which I have no problem with. :D |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Krimsa
on
Wed 01/28/09 10:45 AM
|
|
I agree - either display for all or none Which I have no problem with. :D But then can you imagine displaying every piece of religious idolatry? It is not realistic. For one thing, there would be so much crap it would cause potential fire hazards and block exits in public areas. Also, is it fair to bombard the Atheists and Agnostics with all that? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No. Nothing of any religious nature should be displayed on public or government property. Nothing.
You cannot possibly represent all faiths in the public square without problems. The problems arise just like this little disagreement. People cry "What's the harm?" The harm is government property should not display anything religious or favor any particular religion. Get your own property and display it there, nobody cares. But I don't want not one or a 'one hundred different' displays of religious junk on my property. My property is government property. Keep that junk off of my government's property. If you want to argue about "freedom of speech" try going to a presidential rally wearing a t-shirt for the opposing candidate. You will be put in a "free speech zone" which is surrounded by a fence and barbed wire at the top. That is the free speech zone. The truth is you have no right to free speech unless you OWN THE NEWSPAPER or the property you place the sign on. And you have no free speech if your agenda is in opposition to the president in power. They call that "national security." |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Jeanniebean
on
Wed 01/28/09 12:41 PM
|
|
I would not allow a nativity scene on my property. Public property is my property, as it belongs to the public. I am the public. I would imagine if a tribute to Satan was displayed on public property there would be a huge outcry and so-called "freedom of Speech" would go down the tubes. Freedom of speech does not give anyone permission to use public property for their agenda or religion. Period. Get used to it, get over it, get past it. Kudo's to the atheists who fight the battle against government sponsored religion. After all, that is the very reason we left England. I still don't understand the connection between displaying beliefs and forcing them down someone's throat. There is none. If you see a Santa Claus, do you feel like you have to believe in him? And if you look at God as just as imaginary as Santa Claus, why would the idea of God provoke you like this? Skad, 1.)I will tell you the difference: Displaying your religious gadgets on your own property is allowed in this country. Feel lucky you are allowed to do that. In some countries who have a state sponsored religion you would not be allowed to even do that, and would probably be arrested for it. 2.)Nobody is out there insisting that Santa Clause is real... to adults anyway. I think it is wrong to insist he is real to your children, but that's my opinion. But people who push their religion, insist that their God is real and they insist that their God is the only true God. There is your difference between Santa and God. Government doesn't sponsor religion, but they also can not prohibit it. It's constitutional. As long as anyone from any faith or belief can do the same, there's no harm done. Believing anything else is from hate. Thank you guys for showing that so effectively. Our government appears to sponsor religion if they display the ten commandments in a court house. That is a step in the direction of sponsoring a religion. It should not be done. Also, any religious display on government property gives the appearance of government sponsored religion. It can't be allowed. Our government also does not prohibit religion. You are allowed to display your religious paraphernalia as much as you want on your own property. They will not stop you. ...unless they begin to start sponsoring a religion, then anything that does not represent that religion will be illegal or not allowed or looked upon as high treason. You need to open your eyes. Why do you and people like you insist on pushing their agenda onto government property? Stay at home and stay on your church property please. If you want to live in a country that has a state sponsored religion, then move to a Muslim country where they make women wear burkas. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Keep ranting.. I like it)
Socialism is also found further east. If you'd like us all to be the same and never say anything offensive, you might find it more comfortable in China. Putting up Christmas displays = sponsoring the religion? You guys are getting really petty. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Krimsa
on
Wed 01/28/09 01:02 PM
|
|
Keep ranting.. I like it) No one has been "ranting." You need to keep those kinds of remarks in check.  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Does Gos exists? we will all know if he does or not know when we die.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
is the universe made with many things that kill, earth burning with fires, and spewing and sputtering volcano's, and typhoons and hurricanes? if one believe in god, then one believe all these things god made as well, as just many of these are called EVIL by the mind, so does the mind say evil is within the world, so go about creating it with it's reactions that come from this thinking? ALL IS GOD OR THE OPPOSITE IS CREATED BY DEFAULT WHICH WAS CALLED SATAN, just the simple action of defining what is good and evil based on WHAT SELF WANT as good? if self want a new car, then it becomes as good, but if it FIRST thought this was a "sin", then it find ways around this thought, by seeking prooof how it is not, and so then drive it around all day, and say it now ok for others to so so as well, now that self has done it, and seen, HEY THIS AIN'T SO BAD? but the GUY THAT REFRAIN FROM DRIVING, AND THEN TRY TO IMNPOSE UPON ALL OTHERS TO NOT DRIVE, these even destroy their own fammilies and communities before seeing one is FOLLOWING FEAR OF GOD, based most on simply what self first HEARD FROM OTHERS AS WHAT WAS GOOD, WHICH CREATE HATE....... Garden of Eden--everything perfect. Man outside the garden because he chose to try and have the knowledge of God, not so perfect. Christians who impose not driving? Doesn't happen. Christians who believe in law, sure--but the laws are set to govern the things that are bad, not driving cars (refer to 10 commandments). All acts of crime can be referenced from them, the country's laws are very similar. For example, when a man covet's another person's car and acts upon it, stealing it, this is wrong. I can't speak for other Christians, but there is no one that I could say I hated. In fact, even writing in opposition on these forums is because I love people and want them to have the chance to hear the truth about Christian's beliefs. The only hate comes from people who think Christianity and God shouldn't exist. Who cares if there's a nativity displayed in the town square? Everyone else has the right to display their own artistic or religious works, too. Who cares if the 10 commandments are on the walls of the courthouse? I'm sure you could ask to have a nice painting put up, too. And Christians aren't fighting because they think you should have to read the plaque upon entering the courthouse, they're fighting it because it's an attack on our beliefs, and no one should have to endure that. Unless, of course, your beliefs impose death and destruction to anyone who believes differently, such as the case with radical Islamists. But regular Islamists, no harm done. It's about freedom from persecution because of belief, and I wish people would stop knocking Christians in their own quest for freedom and knowledge. which god of the "christians" do you speak and represent? you are said to be of the kind that become "as one" with the "creator" as your master? you as a christian are ONE WITH YOUR GOD??? which be your god, jesus or god? is it the "one true god" of the "christians", that you swear allegience to and have become as "one with", that has created the place for all others that are less and unworthy, of "everlasting oven's as lakes of fire's and hell"??? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Does Gos exists? we will all know if he does or not know when we die. I love how simple you make it sound! Cheers to you) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Does Gos exists? we will all know if he does or not know when we die. I love how simple you make it sound! Cheers to you) simple, but dispute it, as this generation will ALL know while they yet be alive...... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As a solstice lover, you have the freedom in America to put up anything you want, dearheart. As a "solstice lover," I would not presume to force my beliefs on anyone else in the community. It's not forcing, it's celebrating. There's been no such case, and probably because if you're there for a crime, you either did it or you didn't, and 10 commandments have nothing to do with whether you get a fair shake or not. Well if we did indeed observe the bible and Ten Commandments as part of our modern day legal code of conduct and legislation, then we might as well just take that Buddhist out to the parking lot and stone him right? Forget all of that "due process" malarkey. Let’s skip trial and proceed directly to stoning. #1--We don't observe all of it. Things like stealing and killing, yes. But we have no laws that govern "having no other gods before me". And #2--stoning isn't in the 10 commandments. Not real strong in history are you skad? The Code of Hammurabi is the best-preserved ancient law code, created in 1760 BC in ancient Babylon. It was enacted by the sixth Babylonian king, Hammurabi. This is what our modern legal system was inherited from. Dodged a bullet on that one.  This is just a comment: Thats interesting krimsa you state the code of hammurabi the best-preserved ancient law code ,and you say our modern legal system was inherited from . I not all too familiar with this code but i have read somewhere The babylonian code of hammuarbi stipulates plural/patriarchal marriages which allows a man to have multiple wives and concubines so long as he can take care of them. That it was only the Romans and the Greeks efforts to enforce monogamy for legitmate marriages. Polygamy was obviously practiced in ancient societies. Yet today it is prohibited in western civilization, although there are some communities like mormon who upholds it. I guess I would like to know if this was acceptable in ancient times under this ancient code where and why has it become intolerable? Not that I am for it or against it. I just trying to understand it. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
SkyHook5652
on
Wed 01/28/09 01:58 PM
|
|
...any religious display on government property gives the appearance of government sponsored religion. It can't be allowed. If I say that my religion is based on the idea that Galileo was God incarnate, would that mean that images of Galileo should hereafter never be displayed in/on any publicly owned property? Or does the religion in question have to be “recognized” before it merits an objection based on freedom of religion? Seems more of a political issue than a religious one. Just a thought.  |
|
|
|
|
