GALLUP POLL: More than 8 out of 10 Americans identify with a Christian faith

[Logan13]

Sorry, I disagree.

We've hashed this notion out several times already; there's no need to hash it out again beyond stating that the lack of a beleif system is not a beleif system in itself.

There is nothing to "hash out". It can be summed up by asking the question: What do atheists' believe? They believe that there is no God.

There is not a lack of a belief system in atheism. Their beliefs are obvious from the breaking down of the word.
atheism:
athe - (athée, from Greek atheos) godless
ism - A distinctive doctrine, system, or theory. A belief (or system of beliefs) accepted as authoritative by some group. A suffix, meaning ideology.

catholism:
cathol - (greek) "general" or "universal"
ism - A distinctive doctrine, system, or theory. A belief (or system of beliefs) accepted as authoritative by some group. A suffix, meaning ideology.

Argue all you want. Again, the facts to do back up your stance..............

[Tock]

There is nothing to "hash out". It can be summed up by asking the question: What do atheists' believe? They believe that there is no God.

Take, for instance, the atheist most Americans beleive in: the God of the Bible. Assuming he exists, of course, it would be safe to assume that he has no information that a being superior to himself exists. So, would he "beleive" that, relative to himself, there was no god? Or would he be an atheist on the basis that he had no reason to suppose there was a being superior to himself?

----------------------------------------------------------------
intransitive verb
1 a: to have a firm religious faith b: to accept as true, genuine, or real <ideals we believe in> <believes in ghosts>
2: to have a firm conviction as to the goodness, efficacy, or ability of something <believe in exercise>
3: to hold an opinion : think <I believe so>

transitive verb
1 a: to consider to be true or honest <believe the reports> <you wouldn't believe how long it took> b: to accept the word or evidence of <I believe you> <couldn't believe my ears>
2: to hold as an opinion : suppose <I believe it will rain soon>
— be·liev·er noun
— not believe : to be astounded at <I couldn't believe my luck>
================================================== =

Again, would be surprised if anyone was really interested in this. I'm not sure I am.

[Logan13]

Take, for instance, the atheist most Americans beleive in: the God of the Bible. Assuming he exists, of course, it would be safe to assume that he has no information that a being superior to himself exists. So, would he "beleive" that, relative to himself, there was no god? Or would he be an atheist on the basis that he had no reason to suppose there was a being superior to himself?

----------------------------------------------------------------
intransitive verb
1 a: to have a firm religious faith b: to accept as true, genuine, or real <ideals we believe in> <believes in ghosts>
2: to have a firm conviction as to the goodness, efficacy, or ability of something <believe in exercise>
3: to hold an opinion : think <I believe so>

transitive verb
1 a: to consider to be true or honest <believe the reports> <you wouldn't believe how long it took> b: to accept the word or evidence of <I believe you> <couldn't believe my ears>
2: to hold as an opinion : suppose <I believe it will rain soon>
— be·liev·er noun
— not believe : to be astounded at <I couldn't believe my luck>
================================================== =

Again, would be surprised if anyone was really interested in this. I'm not sure I am.

Are you seriously attempting to redefine words in order to validate your illogical cliams? Be a man and except the truth for what it is............

[kfrost06]

Take a walk around Washington D.C some time and explore our national monuments. Noting all of the quotes from our Founding Fathers in regards to GOD. Pull out the money in your pocket and note that it says "In God We Trust" on each one. Although it is always muttered by those opposed to any religion, the phrase "separation of church and state" does not appear anywhere in the Constitution.
1st Amendment:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;........"
Declaration of Independence
"....separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them".....
"....all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights"........
..."appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions:.....
....:with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence".....

thats a good one Logan and do you know the same Thomas Jefferson that wrote that is the same one that Tock claims is an Athiest

You know the truth is Tock is not an athiest, like most athiest he claims to not believe because he's just angry at God.

[kfrost06]

There is nothing to "hash out". It can be summed up by asking the question: What do atheists' believe? They believe that there is no God.

There is not a lack of a belief system in atheism. Their beliefs are obvious from the breaking down of the word.
atheism:
athe - (athée, from Greek atheos) godless
ism - A distinctive doctrine, system, or theory. A belief (or system of beliefs) accepted as authoritative by some group. A suffix, meaning ideology.

catholism:
cathol - (greek) "general" or "universal"
ism - A distinctive doctrine, system, or theory. A belief (or system of beliefs) accepted as authoritative by some group. A suffix, meaning ideology.

Argue all you want. Again, the facts to do back up your stance..............

there you go again Logan, confusing them with the facts

[kfrost06]

Oh, and BTW, the US Supreme Court ruled long ago that school officials cannot require students to identify themselves to opt out of prayers or other religious activity, because the schools are not supposed to be involved in religious activity in the first place.


Anyone who wants their kid to participate in religious stuff, just do it yourself. Geez . . . Why parents want to turn religious teaching over to State and local government (particularly the liberal unionized teachers) is beyone me.

You hit the nail on the head! and thats why there is less teaching math and science and more teaching "safe sex", "safe drug use" teaching that creationism is wrong, banning activities like tag, feeding the kids junk food so they are fat and blaming society for not excepting them, teaching the new family unit(jane has 2 daddies) and any other idiot liberal idealogy that some nutcase like Madalyn decides is better for the kids.


Tock didn't Madalyn also try to ban the pledge of aligence because it said God?(yes) and have all Bibles banned from school and to teach 6th grade girls how to have sex, ban the nativity scene from all government properties, etc etc etc.

[kfrost06]

Oh yeah I forgot, the Boy Scouts of America were also a target because they mentioned God to and sometimes would meet on school propertry, way to go athiest yet another way to make the youth and society better off.

[Renesis]

People are atheists because they are angry at God... lol

[Tock]

Oh yeah I forgot, the Boy Scouts of America were also a target because they mentioned God to and sometimes would meet on school propertry, way to go athiest yet another way to make the youth and society better off.

No, the Boy Scouts are targets because in some municipalities (Pittsburgh, for one), it's illegal to discriminate against gays or atheists. Since the Boy Scout's official policy is to discriminate against both, some cities are having second thoughts about giving them free (taxpayer-funded) use of city-owned property.
Ya, can't blame 'em for that.

In the case of the Boy Scouts vs. the city of Pittsburgh, where the city has been giving them free use of a city owned building, there's no reason why the city can't either (1) make them pay rent, or (2) kick 'em out and let another charity use the building.

[Tock]

Tock didn't Madalyn also try to ban the pledge of aligence because it said God?

Probably. Some other folks have made that effort, also.

Here's the deal:
The law says that your kid has to go to school.
The Constitution says that the gov't cannot make your kid participate in religous activities.
The school says your kid has to recite the Pledge of Allegience, which includes the language, "I pledge allegience . . . to the republic . . . one nation under god . . ."
Most people are OK with pledging allegience to our republic. Some folks don't think the gov't should make it mandatory to pledge allegience to the nation under god, because the gov't shouldn't be in the religion business.

What do you think? Should the gov't be allowed to make kids pledge allegience to a nation under a monotheistic god? If so, then what's to prevent a gov't from someday making kids pledge allegience to polytheistic gods, or even to Allah?

IMHO, that would be a bad idea, which is why the US Constitution guarantees citizens freedom from government requirements to promise anything to a god, or to gods, named or un-named, monotheistic or polytheistic.

The government should keep its nose out of religion, IMHO. What do you think?

[Logan13]

Probably. Some other folks have made that effort, also.

Here's the deal:
The law says that your kid has to go to school.
The Constitution says that the gov't cannot make your kid participate in religous activities.
The school says your kid has to recite the Pledge of Allegience, which includes the language, "I pledge allegience . . . to the republic . . . one nation under god . . ."
Most people are OK with pledging allegience to our republic. Some folks don't think the gov't should make it mandatory to pledge allegience to the nation under god, because the gov't shouldn't be in the religion business.

What do you think? Should the gov't be allowed to make kids pledge allegience to a nation under a monotheistic god? If so, then what's to prevent a gov't from someday making kids pledge allegience to polytheistic gods, or even to Allah?

They should allow those who wish to partake in this American tradition to do so. Some kid does not want to, than don't. But do not deny the majority because of the minorites issues.
IMHO, that would be a bad idea, which is why the US Constitution guarantees citizens freedom from government requirements to promise anything to a god, or to gods, named or un-named, monotheistic or polytheistic.

The government should keep its nose out of religion, IMHO. What do you think?

"The free exercise of religion" is the second part of the statement that you are referring to. You always seem to leave that part out...............

[Tock]

"The free exercise of religion" is the second part of the statement that you are referring to. You always seem to leave that part out...............

So, since you're changing the subject, I take it that you're saying that you don't think the government should keep its nose out of religion?

[Tock]

Are you seriously attempting to redefine words in order to validate your illogical cliams? Be a man and except the truth for what it is............

No.

What I'm doing is carrying a conversation with a fellow who evidently does not speak English.

For instance, It's easy to accept the truth. However, I have no idea how one would except the truth. Perhaps you would like to take this golden opportunity to illuminate me?

[Carlos_E]

No.

What I'm doing is carrying a conversation with a fellow who evidently does not speak English.

For instance, It's easy to accept the truth. However, I have no idea how one would except the truth. Perhaps you would like to take this golden opportunity to illuminate me?

[Logan13]

I find it sad that your stances are so weak on facts that you resort to picking apart grammatical errors......... Just like a couple of little girls.

It's all good though as I will continue to educate the ignorant.

[Carlos_E]

I find it sad that your stances are so weak on facts that you resort to picking apart grammatical errors......... Just like a couple of little girls.

It's all good though as I will continue to educate the ignorant.

Excuse me? You're attacking me why? Tock is the one calling you out on grammar. I'm just sitting back enjoying the comedy.

The two of you remind me of 12 year old girls in a slap fight.

[Logan13]

The two of you remind me of 12 year old girls in a slap fight.

Now that paints a funny picture!

[Tock]

I find it sad that your stances are so weak on facts

If you were at all familiar with the English language, you would know that a stance is not the sort of thing to which facts can be applied:
.................................................. ............................
http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/stance

1chiefly Scottish a: station b: site
2 a: a way of standing or being placed : posture b: intellectual or emotional attitude <took an antiwar stance>
3 a: the position of the feet of a golfer or batter preparatory to making a swing b: the position of both body and feet from which an athlete starts or operates
.................................................. ............................

So you can cheer up now, since you no longer need weep for stances trying to make a happy, meaningful life for themselves without benefit of facts. As Republican US Senator Larry Craig (Gay-Idaho) has ably demonstrated, a stance can be either wide or narrow, and be observed, cherished, flourished with pride, photographed, testified about in court, or used as an example in an anabolic steroid forum, and require neither a fact to bolster it, nor a mid-westerner such as yourself to race to their defense. Like toads and bicycles, they have no need for one another.

that you resort to picking apart grammatical errors

There is, indeed, a significant difference between "picking apart grammatical errors" and trying to make heads or tails of what you were trying to say. What you had done was chose words that made no sense whatsoever, words that were as totally out of place as pajamas at a Cotillion.

It seems to me that anyone who would urge another to

Be a man and except the truth

proposes that his listener should neglect applying a set of ethics to a situation ("except the truth"). Or perhaps he is only uncomfortably unfamiliar with his chosen language. Or possibly he bravely labors under the sort of tragic deficiencies which call for our united encouragement instead of our derision. Whatever the cause for his embarrassment, I'm sure that someone who will hold him in their prayers.

Just like a couple of little girls.

You would be hard pressed to find two people more unlike girls than Carlos or myself. It will require no more than an hour in a securely locked room on a sturdy mattress with either one of us to convice you of the glorious truth of this fact.

[Carlos_E]

The two of you remind me of 12 year old girls in a slap fight.

Slap! Slap! Slap! Slap! Slap! Slap! Slap! Slap!

You would be hard pressed to find two people more unlike girls than Carlos or myself. It will require no more than an hour in a securely locked room on a sturdy mattress with either one of us to convice you of the glorious truth of this fact.

[Logan13]

If you were at all familiar with the English language, you would know that a stance is not the sort of thing to which facts can be applied:
.................................................. ............................
http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/stance

1chiefly Scottish a: station b: site
2 a: a way of standing or being placed : posture b: intellectual or emotional attitude <took an antiwar stance>
3 a: the position of the feet of a golfer or batter preparatory to making a swing b: the position of both body and feet from which an athlete starts or operates
.................................................. ............................

There is the root of your problems. You do not equate facts with a personal stance. Since, by your logic, a stance need not be supported by factual evidence you are left with an empty platform. One might call that "ignorant".......
Wring your hands all you want, your little "oh snap" comments only reinforce the fact that you have no legitimate arguments. That must really suck.........

[Tock]

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/wrestling_with_a_pig