• 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!

Appalling Discrimination against atheist?

What do you think of the laws banning atheist from some offices?


  • Total voters
    97
States Rights, yes? When the world is more complex then your simple equation, you revise the equation. So obviously then you're not ALWAYS for State Rights over Federal Rights as you make it seem when you discuss discrimination and bigotry against atheists. States Rights sometimes, but Federal power should the States not perform the way you think they should.

I would be against the civil war but not for the reason you think, that's what my linear thinking remark was about. I think if those states wanted out of the union they should have been allowed to leave, that is why I would have been against the civil war. There was no contract when states joined the union that they could never opt out so IMO the war as illegal. Think that over a while, I have to get back to work. :2wave:
 
There are many ways to implement a "police" state.

"Having" to go to an "approved" church of that state is not far behind.

Here I thought that members of the LBGT community were the last group subjected to institutionalized discrimination. Color me surprised to find that I, too, am being subjected to institutionalized discrimination. Bummer. :(
 
Atheist rights? I'm not sure really, giving atheist rights takes away religious peoples rights.

please explain this

sounds like the same retarded logic of the people that say granting gays (blacks, woman etc) equal rights infringes on them
 
Which groups, specifically, need to be treated differently for "the betterment of everyone else"?

Child molesters.

Murderers.

Rapists.

I could go on but why don't I give you a chance to elaborate on your views to free all child molesters from prison.
 
I would be against the civil war but not for the reason you think, that's what my linear thinking remark was about. I think if those states wanted out of the union they should have been allowed to leave, that is why I would have been against the civil war. There was no contract when states joined the union that they could never opt out so IMO the war as illegal. Think that over a while, I have to get back to work. :2wave:

I know that argument, it's a State's rights issue as I had said. But you should equally be opposed to the Federal government having the ability to tell the States that slavery in and of itself was illegal to be consistent with your claims.
 
Child molesters.

Murderers.

Rapists.

I could go on but why don't I give you a chance to elaborate on your views to free all child molesters from prison.

:lol: Those are people who engaged in specific behaviors, and are punished for those behaviors. They aren't "groups" that are being discriminated against by any stretch.
 
Which we will now see until a Republican is ever elected POTUS again with respect to voting rights and the voting wrongs laws.
states have always had the right to discriminate ... unless the federal government steps in to protect minorities against the tyranny of the majority ...
 
Does article 6 section 3 of the constitution not apply to the states?

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.
Article VI | U.S. Constitution | LII / Legal Information Institute
 
In most of those states, it might be on the books but it would never hit the courts. The only reason it's still on the books is because it has never been challenged in court and forcibly removed. It's just an artifact of Christian hatred, nothing more.
 
really? so you are saying the state can violate the constitution as it sees fit? WHy do we have a constitution then?
Pre 14th amendment he is correct. The BOR only applied to the federal initially. The only time the federal is supreme under proper constitution to this day is if they have an enumerated power, however, the fourtheenth bound the states to the BOR so the state laws would violate the first amendment without question.
 
I didn't vote in the poll because I'm not sure any of those apply to me.

Personally I would want a person representing me to be of like-mind and conscience.

An Atheist wouldn't come close to that description.

But like I said before, most Pols lie.
 
Oh yeah I forgot, the civil war was fought to free atheist.:roll:


Perhaps the civil war would have better served us all if it was fought to free the ignorant...from their ignorance, bigotries, and prejudices.
 
I didn't vote in the poll because I'm not sure any of those apply to me.

Personally I would want a person representing me to be of like-mind and conscience.

An Atheist wouldn't come close to that description.

But like I said before, most Pols lie.

But you wouldn't give me the same consideration then? What if I think a theist could never come close to being of like-mind and conscience? I can't have the same type of representation you demand for yourself?
 
I didn't vote in the poll because I'm not sure any of those apply to me.

Personally I would want a person representing me to be of like-mind and conscience.

An Atheist wouldn't come close to that description.

But like I said before, most Pols lie.

where would they fall short


to me religion is meaningless in a candidate unless i thought it got in the way. If i agree with him on the issues religion can only make me doubt him instead of have faith.

what i mean by that is the more religious a person might be the more they might care less about the constitution and the rights of ALL Americans. That would make for the worst candidate ever.

I myself am religion but my religion would never effect me in that way if i held an office it would only steer me personally.
 
But you wouldn't give me the same consideration then? What if I think a theist could never come close to being of like-mind and conscience? I can't have the same type of representation you demand for yourself?

I think you must be confused. Never said such a thing.
 
I think you must be confused. Never said such a thing.

Your vote of silence is a vote against allowing me the same opportunities you seek. No one said that saying it's discriminatory that you'd have to vote for an atheist, just that it's discriminatory and you'd allow an atheist to run.
 
where would they fall short


to me religion is meaningless in a candidate unless i thought it got in the way. If i agree with him on the issues religion can only make me doubt him instead of have faith.

what i mean by that is the more religious a person might be the more they might care less about the constitution and the rights of ALL Americans. That would make for the worst candidate ever.

I myself am religion but my religion would never effect me in that way if i held an office it would only steer me personally.


They might not have the conscience part, IMO. Now days morality is at a premium,
.
 
They might not have the conscience part, IMO. Now days morality is at a premium,
.

but the vast majority of atheist have morals
 
Your vote of silence is a vote against allowing me the same opportunities you seek. No one said that saying it's discriminatory that you'd have to vote for an atheist, just that it's discriminatory and you'd allow an atheist to run.

Paranoid much?

Let's put it this way, I wouldn't vote for a known Atheist and since these laws are never enforced, you and I will never know the difference
 
Back
Top Bottom