• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Supreme Court ruling favors prayer at council meeting [W:93:217]

Re: Supreme Court ruling favors prayer at council meeting

No, but I, and many others, don't want to support religious practices with our taxpayer money. If you are standing in a government building or on government land, it costs money to pray. If we were to use that logic, then I should protest paying rent to my landlord. It does not cost them anything for me to breathe, sleep and eat in the building that I reside in.

It doesn't cost anything to pray. And the Supreme Court voted against you, so you must be wrong right?
 
Re: Supreme Court ruling favors prayer at council meeting

Interesting ruling. By that definition it seems a Hindu person can ask for ganash to be included and they would either have to get unspecific enough that the prayer has no meaning or they have to include ganash.
Seems to coincide with the baphomet thing happening over in Oklahoma.
Here is how this (any other political grandstanding) will be rectified in the 'prayer in public' debate: an official silent prayer, a moment of silence.. If you are an atheist, pray to your civil gods.
 
Re: Supreme Court ruling favors prayer at council meeting

Here is how this (any other political grandstanding) will be rectified in the 'prayer in public' debate: silent prayer. If you are an atheist, pray to your civil gods.

or just stand there going "this is annoying" which what I suspect actually happens.
 
Re: Supreme Court ruling favors prayer at council meeting

You can bow your head and pray anytime you like. Why do you and others want to force the rest of us to participate. If group prayer were not an attempt to force others to participate, then what is the point of group prayer in the first place?

Personally, I am of the opinion that prayer or any type of religious practice should not be allowed in any institution using taxpayer money.
And the current SCOTUS disagrees with you. Even after a previous SCOTUS misinterpreted the religion part of the first amendment with their separation of church and state interpretation to force the first amendment to take an atheist's lean.
 
Re: Supreme Court ruling favors prayer at council meeting

I am just glad the Judicature corrected that "oversight".

Blessed be the gods.
 
Re: Supreme Court ruling favors prayer at council meeting

What if a person of morals only pretends to have those morals?
You seem to think I (or anyone else for that matter) are interested in slowly and laboriously wading through your excuses and imagined rationales for Chaz Stevens' bogus religious conversion to Satanist. I'm not and presenting incoherent musings and ramblings on top of all the side stepping you are doing is not going to change that. If you can't actually address what I have said even though you are quoting my post? You are wasting mine and your time, so nut up and address what I have said or we are done. One thing I said that you ignored is that efforts that start out as dishonest rarely ring true, your replies to me so far tend to strengthen my belief in that statement.
 
Re: Supreme Court ruling favors prayer at council meeting

You seem to think I (or anyone else for that matter) are interested in slowly and laboriously wading through your excuses and imagined rationales for Chaz Stevens' bogus religious conversion to Satanist. I'm not and presenting incoherent musings and ramblings on top of all the side stepping you are doing is not going to change that. If you can't actually address what I have said even though you are quoting my post? You are wasting mine and your time, so nut up and address what I have said or we are done. One thing I said that you ignored is that efforts that start out as dishonest rarely ring true, your replies to me so far tend to strengthen my belief in that statement.

What if a person of morals only pretends to have those morals? You may be missing the point with your diversion. We have a McCarthy era phrase in our pledge that implies in legal fact, a moral of true witness bearing and even a subscription to this:

Job 34:30 That the hypocrite reign not, lest the people be ensnared.
 
Re: Supreme Court ruling favors prayer at council meeting

What if a person of morals only pretends to have those morals? You may be missing the point with your diversion. We have a McCarthy era phrase in our pledge that implies in legal fact, a moral of true witness bearing and even a subscription to this:

Job 34:30 That the hypocrite reign not, lest the people be ensnared.
You don't address what I have said and now that is because I'm diverting? :roll:

You chose to reply to my comments to another poster, not the other way around. You have ignored everything I have said then and since. Stevens' dishonesty and feigned conversion to a "religion" (that eschews prayer) so he can try to disrupt council meetings with his 'satanic prayer' is some kind of high moral ground? Absurd. So since you can't address the first post of mine you quoted and you keep ignoring what I have said, we are done. :2wave:
 
Last edited:
Re: Supreme Court ruling favors prayer at council meeting

You don't address what I have said and now that is because I'm diverting? :roll:

You chose to reply to my comments to another poster, not the other way around. You have ignored everything I have said then and since. Stevens' dishonesty and feigned conversion to a "religion" (that eschews prayer) so he can try to disrupt council meetings with his 'satanic prayer' is some kind of high moral ground? Absurd. So since you can't address the first post of mine you quoted and you keep ignoring what I have said, we are done. :2wave:

That is Only your unsubstantiated opinion, without any form of morals test.
 
Re: Supreme Court ruling favors prayer at council meeting

My advise to you is to take a chill pill and don't worry about how someone else prays.

If any government in the US favors one religion over another, I'll continue to express my opinion. As for your opinion, you can take it and your chill pills and...
 
Re: Supreme Court ruling favors prayer at council meeting

That is Only your unsubstantiated opinion, without any form of morals test.
As you have offered only your unsubstantiated opinion for why Stevens is pretending to a satanist? As well as pretending that satanist actually pray? It does not even come into a morals test; it does not pass the common sense and honesty test. But then I suspect you already know that. Which is why you keep trying to divert from the fake satanist with the rather fanciful idea he is going to offer up a fake satanist prayer. I guess. Who knows, you don't actually make any sense. Have nice day.:2wave:
 
Re: Supreme Court ruling favors prayer at council meeting

As you have offered only your unsubstantiated opinion for why Stevens is pretending to a satanist? As well as pretending that satanist actually pray? It does not even come into a morals test; it does not pass the common sense and honesty test. But then I suspect you already know that. Which is why you keep trying to divert from the fake satanist with the rather fanciful idea he is going to offer up a fake satanist prayer. I guess. Who knows, you don't actually make any sense. Have nice day.:2wave:

You have to make more sense; or resort to a morals test.
 
Re: Supreme Court ruling favors prayer at council meeting

You have to make more sense; or resort to a morals test.
Since satanist don't actually pray (they meditate) I nor anyone else needs to resort to anything more than laughing. At which "prayer" Mr. Satanist is going to engage in when and if he arrives before the council. Myself I wonder which movie or TV show he'll draw on for his prayer? Perhaps "Rosemary's Baby" or the infamous "The Devil's Rain" starring William Shatner and Ernest Borgnine! Because if he is going to show up to "pray" as the real satanist do, I find it hard to imagine anyone will mind his silent meditation. Or the "moral" argument behind the sound of his meditation.:mrgreen:


 
Last edited:
Re: Supreme Court ruling favors prayer at council meeting

Since satanist don't actually pray (they meditate) I nor anyone else needs to resort to anything more than laughing. At which "prayer" Mr. Satanist is going to engage in when and if he arrives before the council. Myself I wonder which movie or TV show he'll draw on for his prayer? Perhaps "Rosemary's Baby" or the infamous "The Devil's Rain" starring William Shatner and Ernest Borgnine! Because if he is going to show up to "pray" as the real satanist do, I find it hard to imagine anyone will mind his silent meditation. Or the "moral" argument behind the sound of his meditation.:mrgreen:

In other words, if I understand you correctly; you are concerned about Persons merely claiming to have morals from public venues even if they don't. Is that correct?
 
Re: Supreme Court ruling favors prayer at council meeting

In other words, if I understand you correctly; you are concerned about Persons merely claiming to have morals from public venues even if they don't. Is that correct?
If you understood me correctly we would not a dozen posts past the point where you started ignoring what I was posting. Much less throughout the thread. Period. I'm still not "concerned" about this story at all. The addition of Mr. Satanist and his prayer hanky have brought a strong element of farce to the matter. Several of us managed to communicate about all of that earlier in the thread. Even spoke about how we found it hard to believe that even if real satanist came and wanted to pray before the meeting, as long as all rules were followed we could not see anyone having a problem with it either. And if they did too bad. Went right over your head. I'm thinking it had something to do with some queer obsession with some incoherent morals "test" or argument. You were late to the party, but now you have been brought up to speed.:devil:
 
Re: Supreme Court ruling favors prayer at council meeting

If any government in the US favors one religion over another, I'll continue to express my opinion. As for your opinion, you can take it and your chill pills and...

This isn't about establishment of religion. This is about the free exercise of religion.


Try to keep up.
 
Re: Supreme Court ruling favors prayer at council meeting

This isn't about establishment of religion. This is about the free exercise of religion.


Try to keep up.

And you restricting the free exercise of religion to just the majority AT A GOVERNMENT PROCEEDING. I never said anything about the establishment of a religion, that is your own feelings of persecution.

Try to pay attention. Clearly your chill pill isn't Adderall.
 
Re: Supreme Court ruling favors prayer at council meeting

This isn't about establishment of religion. This is about the free exercise of religion.


Try to keep up.
Read the first amendment, again. And try to keep up.

BTW, when is non-establishment of religion, and free exercise of religion not one and the same, hum?
 
Re: Supreme Court ruling favors prayer at council meeting

If you understood me correctly we would not a dozen posts past the point where you started ignoring what I was posting. Much less throughout the thread. Period. I'm still not "concerned" about this story at all. The addition of Mr. Satanist and his prayer hanky have brought a strong element of farce to the matter. Several of us managed to communicate about all of that earlier in the thread. Even spoke about how we found it hard to believe that even if real satanist came and wanted to pray before the meeting, as long as all rules were followed we could not see anyone having a problem with it either. And if they did too bad. Went right over your head. I'm thinking it had something to do with some queer obsession with some incoherent morals "test" or argument. You were late to the party, but now you have been brought up to speed.:devil:

Diversions are are usually considered fallacies, along with special pleading. If I understand you correctly; you are concerned about Persons merely claiming to have morals from public venues even if they don't. Is that correct or not. If it doesn't apply to anyone, let me know, here in the public domain regarding your view and position regarding the subjective value of morals in our republic.
 
Re: Supreme Court ruling favors prayer at council meeting

Diversions are are usually considered fallacies, along with special pleading. If I understand you correctly; you are concerned about Persons merely claiming to have morals from public venues even if they don't. Is that correct or not. If it doesn't apply to anyone, let me know, here in the public domain regarding your view and position regarding the subjective value of morals in our republic.
You don't understand anything said to you. You could not even be bothered to grasp anything already discussed in the thread. I'll just chuck that unintended idiocy up to pure laziness on your part, intellectual and otherwise. You dodge and avoid literally every post of mine you bothered to "quote" using the forum reply software. Yet here you are whining (and temp suspended) about fallacies and diversions? Hilarious. And clearly your own "special pleadings" were not enough to exempt you from forum rules and being temp suspended. Enjoy your vacation, as we both know that upon your return you will still have nothing intelligent to share. Except for incoherent diversionary gibberish, oh you've got scads of that! :naughty
 
Back
Top Bottom