• 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!

Praying in Jesus' name angers democrat lawmakers

Obscurity said:
FFS who gives a damn. Keep your religion where it belongs, behind closed doors, and none of this is a problem. This is absurd. You tell gay folks to keep their **** in the closet, but refuse to do the same.

I do not give a **** about your intimate relationship with your imaginary friend.
Click to expand...

Many religious people are just plain assholes. They have to constantly talk and shove religion in everybody's face to try to make themselves feel better and score points with their fake god. Public prayers displays, doesn't the bible speak out against that? They make a spectacle because they want to show everybody how much faith they have

Probably because deep down their logical part of their brain is telling them that religion is ridiculous
 
Sampson Simpson said:
Many religious people are just plain assholes. They have to constantly talk and shove religion in everybody's face to try to make themselves feel better and score points with their fake god. Public prayers displays, doesn't the bible speak out against that? They make a spectacle because they want to show everybody how much faith they have

Probably because deep down their logical part of their brain is telling them that religion is ridiculous
Click to expand...

Yep. I drove my sister to the clinic last saturday and was confronted by a "religious" man, a deceiver, who dressed as if he was an escort volunteer. He called me a baby killer; I told him he as a vile, sickening human being who should be protesting the prices of drugs, which kill actual persons due to their costs, instead of badgering women.

He had the same dead, glassy eyed, slack jawed stare of the indoctrinated. At each entrance to one of the 4 clinics in my state stood MEN.

On my way out after dropping her off, we got into it. I told him as an atheist I knew more about his sickening holy book than he did. He flew into a fit of rage when I advised him he was a traitor to the nation, which would never be christian. All of thise after the endless tide of vile screed and emotional agitprop about killing babies and going to hell.

Great way to introduce me to your faith. It's almost like they should... GET A ****ING JOB.
 
marke said:
it is an undeniable fact of life that people come up with some strange ideas about God, none of which they can prove.
Click to expand...

Considering that no one can prove there is a God—- which is the whole point of faith— that’s not saying much.

One can’t be both religious and an atheist. Trying to claim they are is silly.
 
Night_Ranger said:
Actually, you are totally in the wrong on this debate. Matter of fact, you are exactly opposite the truth.

I will give you once chance to withdraw your suppositions that America was not a Christian nation/founded by men of faith.

Otherwise, be prepared to get obliterated.
Click to expand...

Freedom of religion says otherwise bud. The founders explicitly wanted to avoid the example of Europe, where state religions were used to justify horrific atrocities on a routine basis.
 
trouble13 said:
Nobody is forcing anyone to pray. What is required is for people to exercise tolerance for religious rituals different than their own. Theres a problem when we start calling something as harmless as a prayer, which is an important ritual for the pious and nothing greater than an inconvenience to the rest.
While i agree with the doctrine of seperation of church and state i also believe part of that doctrine is a tolerance toward all religions. Otherwise the gov in essence is persecuting people based on their religious beliefs. Imagine if the gov told Omar she could not wear her hijab in the halls of congress because some people find it offensive. That would be no less wrong then restricting a persons right to prayer.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

The issue, of course, is that the same folks who are crying about “intolerant” people are towards Christians would absolutely lose their **** if Muslim lawmakers did the same thing.
 
marke said:
Savage barbarian hedonism does get a boost from perverted buckaroo activist judges who rule that the Constitution endorses and protects immoral barbarian beliefs, behaviors, values and laws.
Click to expand...

Considering how many folks have been murdered over the years by Christians in the name of God, calling anyone else a “barbarian” seems a rather obvious case of throwing stones while in a glass house.
 
Mashmont said:
And notice you have to go to Islam as the 'religion' which, as I have noted, is indistinguishable from atheism. Both have the same goals; the destruction of Christianity, Israel, capitalism, and the US using violence of necessary. Both are the complete opposite of peaceful loving Christianity.
Click to expand...

And you would still be wrong, in just about every regard.
 
marke said:
Savage barbarian hedonism does get a boost from perverted buckaroo activist judges who rule that the Constitution endorses and protects immoral barbarian beliefs, behaviors, values and laws.
Click to expand...

Is this emotional mess the best argument that you can compose to oppose equal rights for others? This is the very reason that all religions and religious beliefs and the government are to be kept seperate by a very high wall. Others are not asking to be liked or for your appproval, despite what you appear to believe.

I can't wait for you to be forced to obey the relgious beliefs of Muslims, Hindus, Pagans and others by the power of the state because your shrieking would be heard on the far side of the moon.
 
vegas giants said:
It appears Lisa has resolved this point
Click to expand...
Thanlk you very much for noticing.

There is nothing to suggest that America was ever created or seriously considered to be a Christian country, despite the delusions of religious conservatives because Jesus, God, or Christ are not mentioned in the framing documents.



I was beginning to get the impression that my wordy posts were ignored.
 
Lisa said:
Thanlk you very much for noticing.

There is nothing to suggest that America was ever created or seriously considered to be a Christian country, despite the delusions of religious conservatives because Jesus, God, or Christ are not mentioned in the framing documents.



I was beginning to get the impression that my wordy posts were ignored.
Click to expand...

They are not ignored.


They are admired
 
Night_Ranger said:
Actually, you are totally in the wrong on this debate. Matter of fact, you are exactly opposite the truth.

I will give you once chance to withdraw your suppositions that America was not a Christian nation/founded by men of faith.

Otherwise, be prepared to get obliterated.
Click to expand...

You'll be waiting until 3 days after rapture so make yourself very comfortable.
 
Obscurity said:
Yep. I drove my sister to the clinic last saturday and was confronted by a "religious" man, a deceiver, who dressed as if he was an escort volunteer. He called me a baby killer; I told him he as a vile, sickening human being who should be protesting the prices of drugs, which kill actual persons due to their costs, instead of badgering women.

He had the same dead, glassy eyed, slack jawed stare of the indoctrinated. At each entrance to one of the 4 clinics in my state stood MEN.

On my way out after dropping her off, we got into it. I told him as an atheist I knew more about his sickening holy book than he did. He flew into a fit of rage when I advised him he was a traitor to the nation, which would never be christian. All of thise after the endless tide of vile screed and emotional agitprop about killing babies and going to hell.

Great way to introduce me to your faith. It's almost like they should... GET A ****ING JOB.
Click to expand...

Well said mate, bravo:applaud
 
Tigerace117 said:
The issue, of course, is that the same folks who are crying about “intolerant” people are towards Christians would absolutely lose their **** if Muslim lawmakers did the same thing.
Click to expand...

Muslims, Hindus, Pagans, and others.


There are school districts that have parents opposing the use of yoga in gym class because those people are convinced it is a religious exercise and the school is trying to convert their teens, despite the facts.
 
trouble13 said:
Nobody is forcing anyone to pray. What is required is for people to exercise tolerance for religious rituals different than their own. There's a problem when we start calling something as harmless as a prayer, which is an important ritual for the pious and nothing greater than an inconvenience to the rest.
While i agree with the doctrine of separation of church and state i also believe part of that doctrine is tolerance toward all religions. Otherwise, the gov, in essence, is persecuting people based on their religious beliefs. Imagine if the gov told Omar she could not wear her hijab in the halls of congress because some people find it offensive. That would be no less wrong then restricting a person's right to prayer.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

What is the ultimate goal of beginning a government function or meeting with a religious observance, which is in clear opposition to the Establishment clause? What is the goal of that prayer that could not be accomplished by other means that do not bringing very divisive religion into the mix? The fact that there is no evidence that a sentient relists deity existing seems to also be ignored? Why can't you pray before the meeting instead of expecting or asking others to take part in a religious observance? What about the religious beliefs of the in the minority, so they get 5 minutes for rebuttal and forcing the religious members to take part ion their beliefs on an equal basis. I cannot wait for a school board meeting in Tennessee, So. Carolina, Mississippi or Texas to be forced to kneel on rugs facing Mecca or to take part in a Satanic or Hindu ritual as an homage to religious equality. Prayer is already banned before high school football games, so why should the meetings of the city council, county commissioners or the school board be any different? How does the prayer make the school board meeting on the community better for it? The possibility of asking Southern Baptists or other conservative Protestant sects to take part in Jewish, Catholic or Eastern Orthodox prayer could be quite explosive and spread beyond the meeting in question. It is not out of the realm that certain people would not be elected to the governing bodies strictly because of their religious beliefs in certain areas of the country, even if they are qualified and experienced for the job because the other members of the council don't want their religious beliefs being part of the meetings. I am seeing a long list of negatives and no positives to adding prayer to public meetings, in addition to the 1st Amendment.


The gospel of Matthew is very clear on opposing public prayer but that is also being willfully ignored. Should we wonder why that might be happening, despite these people claiming to be devout Christians?

But when you pray, go into your room and shut the door and pray to your Father who is in secret. and your Father who sees in secret will reward you.

7 “And when you pray, do not heap up empty phrases as bthe Gentiles do, for cthey think that they will be heard dfor their many words.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Tigerace117 said:
The issue, of course, is that the same folks who are crying about “intolerant” people are towards Christians would absolutely lose their **** if Muslim lawmakers did the same thing.
Click to expand...
They would be equally wrong.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 
Lisa said:
What is the ultimate goal of beginning a government function or meeting with a religious observance, which is in clear opposition to the Establishment clause?
Click to expand...
The goal is to pay tribute and seek divine guidence as its an element of their religious beliefs. By disallowing it, you are interfering with their right to practice their religion which is more of a conflict with the establishment clause thsn allowing it is.
What is the goal of that prayer that could not be accomplished by other means that do not bringing very divisive religion into the mix?
Click to expand...
it's not for you or i to say which religious ceremonies are legitimate.
The fact that there is no evidence that a sentient relists deity existing seems to also be ignored?
Click to expand...
Thats your opinion, they are entitled to disagree with it.
Why can't you pray before the meeting instead of expecting or asking others to take part in a religious observance?
Click to expand...
Nobody is being forced to pray with them.
What about the religious beliefs of the in the minority, so they get 5 minutes for rebuttal and forcing the religious members to take part ion their beliefs on an equal basis.
Click to expand...
Sure, why not. Theres nothing wrong with that.
I cannot wait for a school board meeting in Tennessee, So. Carolina, Mississippi or Texas to be forced to kneel on rugs facing Mecca or to take part in a Satanic or Hindu ritual as an homage to religious equality.
Click to expand...
Nobody is being forced to pray with them. Are you so intolerant toward christianity that you cant give them 2 minutes of time for a prayer?
Prayer is already banned before high school football games, so why should the meetings of the city council, county commissioners or the school board be any different?
Click to expand...
The places that ban prayer are wrong for doing it
How does the prayer make the school board meeting on the community better for it?
Click to expand...
It dosen't
The possibility of asking Southern Baptists or other conservative Protestant sects to take part in Jewish, Catholic or Eastern Orthodox prayer could be quite explosive and spread beyond the meeting in question.
Click to expand...
Nobody is asking anyone to worship anyone.
It is not out of the realm that certain people would not be elected to the governing bodies strictly because of their religious beliefs in certain areas of the country, even if they are qualified and experienced for the job because the other members of the council don't want their religious beliefs being part of the meetings.
Click to expand...
Practing religious tolerance would not cause that.
I am seeing a long list of negatives and no positives to adding prayer to public meetings, in addition to the 1st Amendment.
Click to expand...
You see what you want to see.

The gospel of Matthew is very clear on opposing public prayer but that is also being willfully ignored. Should we wonder why that might be happening, despite these people claiming to be devout Christians?
Click to expand...
People who follow Matthew should not engage in public prayer.



Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 
Lisa said:
Marke and others of his ilk are terrified that minorities will soon be doing to conservative religious people like him what their religion has done or attempted to do to minorities of race creed, gender, and sexuality for the past 500 years as paybacks as society changes.

Marke claims to be a Christian but he willfully ignores the teachings of the man who he believes to be the son of God and his personal savior and hopes that we don't notice his glaring hypocrisy.

He and others like him treat the bible as nothing but 1200 pages that he can pick and choose from as a way to defend his bigotry and ignorance due to the religious protections of the 1st Amendment and he thinks that we don't notice him doing it.
Click to expand...

Actually, I've never known Mark or Mash to quote the Bible, or pick and choose from it at all. I'm not sure where they get their ideas from but they have never demonstrated familiarity with the scriptures.
 
trouble13 said:
The goal is to pay tribute and seek divine guidence as its an element of their religious beliefs. By disallowing it, you are interfering with their right to practice their religion which is more of a conflict with the establishment clause thsn allowing it is.

it's not for you or i to say which religious ceremonies are legitimate.

Thats your opinion, they are entitled to disagree with it.

Nobody is being forced to pray with them.

Sure, why not. Theres nothing wrong with that.

Nobody is being forced to pray with them. Are you so intolerant toward christianity that you cant give them 2 minutes of time for a prayer?

The places that ban prayer are wrong for doing it

It dosen't

Nobody is asking anyone to worship anyone.

Practing religious tolerance would not cause that.

You see what you want to see.


People who follow Matthew should not engage in public prayer.



Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

How can you possibly pay tribute to what you cannot prove exists in any empirical manner? Maybe your god doesn't want you to pay tribute in a public manner, as instructed in Mathew 6:6-7? Why are you working so hard to ignore the gospel of mathhew? If you claim to be Christian then the gospels are to be paramount to decide your actions and not to be seen as a hindrance. Keep those supposed tributes on your own time and not on time funded and set aside to manage taxpayer dollars and programs that are meant for people who are not always Christians.

After many years of observance and interaction with conservatives, I have come to the logical conclusion that conservative Christians would claim to be victims of pernicious religious persecution if they were required to live by the teachings of the man that they claim to be their personal savior and son of God. Why are you a Christian if you oppose living by the teachings of Jesus?
 
Tigerace117 said:
Considering that no one can prove there is a God—- which is the whole point of faith— that’s not saying much.

One can’t be both religious and an atheist. Trying to claim they are is silly.
Click to expand...

It does not make sense to declare that whatever cannot be seen and measured is not real. What can be seen and measured about the big bang so many people insist invented the universe from nothing?
 
Tigerace117 said:
Considering how many folks have been murdered over the years by Christians in the name of God, calling anyone else a “barbarian” seems a rather obvious case of throwing stones while in a glass house.
Click to expand...

I believe it was Obama's barbarian Homeland Security Chief Janet Napolitano who issued a directive to security personnel that Christians are more dangerous and pose a greater threat to America than Muslim terrorists. No wonder she wanted to take guns out of the hands of all Christians in America.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom