Page 47 of 83 FirstFirst ... 37454647484957 ... LastLast
Results 461 to 470 of 824

Thread: Atheists take aim at Christmas

  1. #461
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: Atheists take aim at Christmas

    Quote Originally Posted by ludahai View Post
    Glad it doesn't bother you, but it is used as justification by some that Christmas has pagan roots and it simply is not the case.
    No, I use the statics argument people were trying to apply to the English language to prove the Christmas has pagan roots. It's a false argument, but the statics stance is usually mostly false as well.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  2. #462
    Bus Driver to Hell
    Thorgasm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:27 PM
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    68,200

    Re: Atheists take aim at Christmas

    Quote Originally Posted by ludahai View Post
    Vernal Equinox is in March. (no such thing as Spring Solstice) Easter is SOMETIMES in March, so there is an automatic link between the two?

    Silly!
    You don't know how many times I make that mistake. It's like a tick with me.

    I was just at Chichen Itza in November!

    Refresh my memory on how they determine Easter? (Obviously I haven't read this whole thread)
    Quote Originally Posted by faithful_servant View Post
    Being a psychiatric patient does not mean that you are mentally ill.



  3. #463
    Klattu Verata Nicto
    LaMidRighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Louisiana
    Last Seen
    07-21-17 @ 02:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    30,534

    Re: Atheists take aim at Christmas

    [QUOTE][QUOTE=Ikari;1057849217]
    Quote Originally Posted by LaMidRighter View Post

    I don't like static arguments. Because things always change, and thus I was attempting to highlight the absurdity of trying to hold the old meaning of a word valid today while taking other things in their evolved state. Everything changes, even religious celebrations as we are seeing now.
    Yes things change, but principles don't, the fact that more people are celebrating without knowing the true meaning of the holiday is not an excuse though, it is possible to enjoy the celebration as it is now and keep an amount of reverence towards the belief, even if you don't share it, which is the overall point we are all trying to get to, I believe.
    More and more certain religious holidays (especially Christmas) are being "secularized" I suppose is the word. That is that people celebrate it more for the celebration itself and less for the religious implications. This too will happen as everything changes; there is no infinite.
    The problem isn't with those that celebrate with us, the problem comes when statements of a secular nature, like "I can't believe those Christians have the nerve to put a claim on Christmas" are uttered, I don't have a problem with you are anyone else sharing in the joy and happiness of the holiday, I just wish certain extreme secularists would stop acting as if there is no religious basis for it.



    What about the finding of eggs? When was that implemented, the Egg is also another worshiped symbol of fertility; which was what the old Spring Equinox celebration was all about. In the end I don't really care if the fact that things like gift giving and and christmas trees all had roots in differing pagan religions. Nor do I care that Constantine put Christmas on the 25th, and that he has trying to unite the whole of his people under Christianity. Things now are as they are now, meanings and such have changed and people don't imply the same meanings to celebrations or words that they once did.
    This part I am less informed on, so I couldn't discuss it honestly.
    Neither side in an argument can find the truth when both make an absolute claim on it.

    LMR

  4. #464
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    in a neocon's craw
    Last Seen
    04-24-17 @ 10:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    2,801

    Re: Atheists take aim at Christmas

    [QUOTE=LaMidRighter;1057848620]
    Education doesn't make one smart, it makes them educated, big difference. I know a lot of smart high school graduates who are more useful to society than many of my fellow alums.
    Playing semantic games doesn't make you look SMARTER.

    If the community funded it it isn't free, their taxes paid for it.
    How do you figure? Because Joe xian offers up some of his money to his church? Because Joe Xians money was taxed? That's a pretty ridiculous stretch. "The Church" doesn't pay property tax therefore the property is "free" as compared to the government building which is paid for by taxes, me being one of the payees.

    So find enough representation for your beliefs
    So it's about numbers then? Religion A has more followers therefore they are entitled to more benefits from the government than religion B or those without any religion? I doubt this is what the founders had in mind. In fact, I'm sure of it.

    We have a freedom OF not FROM religion, the establishment clause is simply there to insure that you don't go to prison for not being of a certain belief, not to be confused with your "right" to not have to see religious symbols you disagree with,
    Not exactly, we also have "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion". Which basically means that the government is to be secular. Therefore placing religious symbols on government property is akin to saying -we approve of this religion-.

    if you don't like the sybol that the community paid for you are free to turn your head, why would you as a minority opinion want to go against the will of the majority in a community for something they have a right to.
    And there we have the true attitude of xianity 'hey you minority, we can do as we please and if you don't like it too bad for you'.

  5. #465
    Klattu Verata Nicto
    LaMidRighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Louisiana
    Last Seen
    07-21-17 @ 02:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    30,534

    Re: Atheists take aim at Christmas

    [QUOTE][QUOTE=Slippery Slope;1057849283]
    Quote Originally Posted by LaMidRighter View Post

    Playing semantic games doesn't make you look SMARTER.
    Neither does calling my statement semantics, education is education, intelligence is intelligence, and they are not interchangeable or synonomous. Lesson over.


    How do you figure? Because Joe xian offers up some of his money to his church? Because Joe Xians money was taxed? That's a pretty ridiculous stretch. "The Church" doesn't pay property tax therefore the property is "free" as compared to the government building which is paid for by taxes, me being one of the payees.
    First off you have combined two competing concepts in an attempt to come to a singular principle of governance which is in itself a logical fallacy. Taxes v the "wall of seperation" are not interrelated concepts. Government buildings are paid for by taxes, but it does not mean that because YOU don't want to see a religious symbol that YOU can just complain and get it carted off, seperation of church and state means that Congress shall not establish a church, it also states that they shall not infringe the free expression of religion, which means if a church wants to donate a cross, or a mosque wants to donate their symbol, the city is not compelled, yet allowed to display it.


    So it's about numbers then? Religion A has more followers therefore they are entitled to more benefits from the government than religion B or those without any religion? I doubt this is what the founders had in mind. In fact, I'm sure of it.
    Doesn't matter by the numbers, but the point is that numbers mean something in the aggregate in that it can be argued that the city, which is not part of the Congress or federal government is merely representing the core values of it's majority, also, private donations would be more likely to come from that majority because there are more of them, so of course it's a numbers game, it just isn't "law by numbers" as you seem to be trying to assert.


    Not exactly, we also have "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion". Which basically means that the government is to be secular. Therefore placing religious symbols on government property is akin to saying -we approve of this religion-.
    No, it doesn't, it means that there shall be no government established church, such as the Anglican church in England. Fail.


    And there we have the true attitude of xianity 'hey you minority, we can do as we please and if you don't like it too bad for you'.
    Unlike that attitude, "I don't like it so stop, even though the rest of you agree with each other, or aren't offended"
    Neither side in an argument can find the truth when both make an absolute claim on it.

    LMR

  6. #466
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    in a neocon's craw
    Last Seen
    04-24-17 @ 10:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    2,801

    Re: Atheists take aim at Christmas

    Quote Originally Posted by LaMidRighter View Post
    Not unless they say something inflamatory along with it,
    I feel that putting a nativity scene on government property to be inflamatory because it makes it look as though my government supports xianity. Just like xians find saying that there is no god to be inflamatory.

    is your core belief so shaky that someone else's representation of their beliefs makes you uncomfortable?
    You don't see the irony behind those words?

    I could see if the nativity scene was placed next to an athiest or scientology sign that was there first, but the case we are discussing is the exact opposite.
    So it should depend in part on who gets their trappings in the space first?

    The nativity scene was placed on public property, secular property.


    Government of the people, not government of the person, government property isn't "yours" but the majority of people happen to be christian, so it is represented as such,
    The Constitution provides that the majority cannot infringe on the rights of the minority. Your attitude and position is that of a xian who simply believes in mob rule, the strongest (greatest numbers) rule over the weak (the few) but I believe that somewhere in the bible (sermon on the mount) that your god claims the meek shall inherit the earth. Of course that was written when xianity was the minority...

    I don't even care about the sign that was put up in this story, it was the time, place, and manner which are disgusting. That doesn't matter to the discussion.
    That's pretty much how I feel about xians who continue to ignore other peoples feelings in favor of their own desire to be powerful over others. I believe this is the reason xians refuse to stop putting their religious trappings on public property; to display their power over the rest of us. Basically your attitude, we can do as we please because there is more of us than you... in my opinion, it's not very Christ-like. But then, who ever said xianity was Christ-like? Not the actions of xians...

  7. #467
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    in a neocon's craw
    Last Seen
    04-24-17 @ 10:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    2,801

    Re: Atheists take aim at Christmas

    [QUOTE=LaMidRighter;1057848633]
    No, they aren't, they are representing the people of that faith, in no way are you compelled by the government to believe that or look at the symbol. Time, place, manner, if all symbols had to be included they may be included with RESPECT to each other. Because it isn't reasonable, the fact is that if the majority of the community are barred their religious expression then the first as it was written has been violated.
    It isn't reasonable because you don't like it or because it isn't reasonable? You'll have to explain why it isn't reasonable which you haven't done so far. Your example of religious expression is ridiculous since the religious are free to express themselves on their religiously owned property instead of publicaly owned property. The fallacy you expose is that xians believe that because of their numbers/wealth/history that they are entitled to things.

  8. #468
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    in a neocon's craw
    Last Seen
    04-24-17 @ 10:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    2,801

    Re: Atheists take aim at Christmas

    [QUOTE=LaMidRighter;1057848637][QUOTE=EgoffTib;1057848636]
    Quote Originally Posted by LaMidRighter View Post
    Wouldn't you be if someone directly attacked you?
    Putting a symbol of evil in front of my courthouse is a direct attack on me and my freedoms.

  9. #469
    ANTI**ANTIFA
    ReverendHellh0und's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Temple of Solomon
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    75,784

    Re: Atheists take aim at Christmas

    [QUOTE=Slippery Slope;1057849308][QUOTE=LaMidRighter;1057848637]
    Quote Originally Posted by EgoffTib View Post

    Putting a symbol of evil in front of my courthouse is a direct attack on me and my freedoms.



    I thought Athiests did not believe in evil?
    Let evil swiftly befall those who have wrongly condemned us

  10. #470
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    in a neocon's craw
    Last Seen
    04-24-17 @ 10:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    2,801

    Re: Atheists take aim at Christmas

    Quote Originally Posted by LaMidRighter View Post
    Okay, here is what you are uneducated about. Time:holidays, Place: directly in front of a religious symbol, Manner: condescending, arrogant, superiorist, smug. That amounts to an attack on someone else's belief, TPM is a legal guage that the Supreme Court has been using for more than half a century. This was an attack by all stretches of the imagination and could be defined as such using various cases, such as Chaplinski v New Hampshire. The Time, Place, and Manner were directly coorelated to the religion that the Atheists disagreed with and there were NO prior attacks to them, if you don't get it that means you can't see past your own agenda.
    You're absolutely right in that putting that nativity scene on public property violates yout TPM. It was put there during a holiday season (Yule tide), directly in front of a government building and on public property (secular) and was done so to incite acrimony from nonbelievers, by being condescending, arrogant, superiorist, smug.

Page 47 of 83 FirstFirst ... 37454647484957 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •