Atheists want God taken out of Obama inaugeration

[Krynn72]

Gtfo mormon! You discredit google, you believe the interwebs is lying to you. (Only when it's convenient, other than that you use it for everything you search for )

I'll stop arguing not because I can't argue anymore, but because there's no point arguing with stubborn asses. Good luck with all your atheist shit and whatever.

OK I lied, im going to address this before going to bed. I do not discredit google, because google has no credit. Google doesnt make the articles or information that its searched find. Its impossible to credit or discredit a search engine. And hell yeah I believe the internet is lying to me. If you take everything you find on the internet as factual information, you need to be shot. I bet you even use Wikipedia as a source of real facts. MORAN. And name a time when I posted a list of google hits as proof of anything. Your attack on my character has no ground.

And thanks for wishing me luck in my non belief of a god. But I wont need it, because its entirely irrelevant and makes no sense. Good night.

 

[lame-o]

Why are you saying MORAN?

 

[Krynn72]

If you love google so much, why dont you use it?

 

[Mr-Fusion]

Those crazy atheists! Endless demands from this group of crazies! Aye aye aye aye...

 

[jverne]

^Cpt. Stern pretty much obliterated that a page ago with this quote:
"We don't have to protect the environment, the Second Coming (of jesus) is at hand" - James Watts Secretary of the Interior under Ronald Reagan

Thats a good enough reason to keep religion/state away from each other. Try reading the thread before equating atheists with satanists (assuming you are talking about satanists who KILL others, thats ****in retarded).

this!


people need to understand that...having deep religiolous ideas will interfere with your decision making at a certain point.

continuing the tradition of "so help me god" surely doesn't help at separating state and church or electing an atheist person.

Why? Are you denying the fact that those atheists are grouping together because of their beliefs and acting as a group, just like religions do? That and the fact that they are acting the same way those stupid paranoid religious groups act, except with opposite intentions.

your level of moronism is way over 9000.

seriously i keep laughing at each post of yours.
yes because all atheist must worship Dawkins? what part of "grouping of critical thinking secularist individuals" don't you understand?
i don't even know where to start arguing your stupidity...it totally caught me off guard.

you even searched for "atheist church"...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ziIwuhWLNtA

 

[Kadayi]

Lets not, seeing as how its irrelevant to the topic at hand.

In response to Sterns claims about Canadians getting more religious so lets. :dozey:

Also I'm pretty sure Reagans not been president for 20 years so whatever his secretary of the interior thought is fairly irrelevant today. :dozey:

yes because all atheist must worship Dawkins?

Sadly a lot do because the majority aren't actually that good at critical thinking as a discipline and are more than happy for The Dawkins and his ilk (Sam Harris being another) to tell them what to do, say and think because they lack the imagination and ingenuity to fathom things out for themselves. The number of moronic atheist statements that get drum rolled almost every day on this forum should be proof perfect of that sad reality (oh and retard circle jerking doesn't make them any more valid either). Personally I didn't need anyone to show me the light when it came to realising the there was no God, neither do I need someone else telling me I'm right (I looked at the evidence and made my own conclusions), nor do I feel the need to go on the offensive against people who believe otherwise, unless their beliefs fundamentally and negatively impact upon my way of life. A guy putting his hand on the Bible and pledging his allegiance doesn't really cut the mustard in that respect in my book.

 

[jverne]

Also I'm pretty sure Reagans not been president for 20 years so whatever his secretary of the interior thought is fairly irrelevant today. :dozey:

if he is or isn't still there...that's not the point.

 

[Kadayi]

if he is or isn't still there...that's not the point.

If he's not representative of the current administration I wholly fail to see the relevance. One might as well bring up a quote from some minister from 1800 extolling the virtues of wifebeating and Slavery, and argue about sexist and racist behaviour in the government for all it's worth. From what I can see this James G Watts hardly had much of a tenure before he found himself on the outside, and was pretty much viewed as a radical anyway.

 

[jverne]

Sadly a lot do because the majority aren't actually that good at critical thinking as a discipline and are more than happy for The Dawkins and his ilk (Sam Harris being another) to tell them what to do, say and think because they lack the imagination and ingenuity to fathom things out for themselves. The number of moronic atheist statements that get drum rolled almost every day on this forum should be proof perfect of that sad reality (oh and retard circle jerking doesn't make them any more valid either). Personally I didn't need anyone to show me the light when it came to realising the there was no God, neither do I need someone else telling me I'm right (I looked at the evidence and made my own conclusions), nor do I feel the need to go on the offensive against people who believe otherwise, unless their beliefs fundamentally and negatively impact upon my way of life. A guy putting his hand on the Bible and pledging his allegiance doesn't really cut the mustard in that respect in my book.

that's totally true. atheist is such a poor and lacking term. rationalist would be more precise...but then again no "ideology" is idiot proof.

as for the inauguration part...personally i don't really care if he has to say those words. but from an idealist POV, that is not the way it should be.

 

[jverne]

If he's not representative of the current administration I wholly fail to see the relevance. One might as well bring up a quote from some minister from 1800 extolling the virtues of wifebeating and Slavery, and argue about sexist and racist behaviour in the government for all it's worth. From what I can see this James G Watts hardly had much of a tenure before he found himself on the outside, and was pretty much viewed as a radical anyway.

i believe the point is that...having people with strong and deep religioulous beliefs as powerful leaders that can have a huge impact on the world and your life is not...emm...rational or safe.

 

[Kadayi]

as for the inauguration part...personally i don't really care if he has to say those words. but from an idealist POV, that is not the way it should be.

Agreed, but people should be entitled to believe as they wish as a long as their beliefs don't impact negatively upon the lives of others. When we as atheists/rationalists start trying to dictate peoples lives, we breach our own position.

 

[Eejit]

as for the inauguration part...personally i don't really care if he has to say those words. but from an idealist POV, that is not the way it should be.

Kinda. From an idealist POV Obama wouldn't want to say it. But since he does the closest thing to ideal is letting him say it.

 

[Kadayi]

i believe the point is that...having people with strong and deep religioulous beliefs as powerful leaders that can have a huge impact on the world and your life is not...emm...rational or safe.

Neither Hitler or Stalin were particularly religious and they got pretty far on strong beliefs sadly. There is crazy in a lot of people, and it doesn't require a bunch of mouldy books to give it to them. The person is the killer, not the gun.

 

[mchammer75040]

Agreed, but people should be entitled to believe as they wish as a long as their beliefs don't impact negatively upon the lives of others. When we as atheists/rationalists start trying to dictate peoples lives, we breach our own position.

Noone is disputing that, its freedom of speech and personally I don't really care whether he says it or not. Mostly cause Obama does not strike me as the type of fundamentalist who believes in the endtimes. As far as the quote and its relevance it is very relevant, hell just look at the bush administration. Many of his key f*ck ups were made on religious grounds. The point is people who hold these extreme views that all these catastrophes around the world are just signs of jesus coming back are less inclined to give a damn about solving the problem. That is the last thing we need right now.

 

[Kadayi]

Noone is disputing that, its freedom of speech and personally I don't really care whether he says it or not. Mostly cause Obama does not strike me as the type of fundamentalist who believes in the endtimes. As far as the quote and its relevance it is very relevant, hell just look at the bush administration. Many of his key f*ck ups were made on religious grounds. The point is people who hold these extreme views that all these catastrophes around the world are just signs of jesus coming back are less inclined to give a damn about solving the problem. That is the last thing we need right now.

Going on the offensive against the irrational only serves to reinforce the problem. If you attack peoples core belief systems, you aren't going to persuade them to your viewpoint generally, in fact you'll entrench it (look at the middle east at present). The way you succeed in overcoming an issue is through redirection.

 

[Pesmerga]

Or economically. It is my belief that all world problems can be solved through good manipulation of economics and innovative technology. Lots of Middle Eastern insurgents have very poor families, and the groups they get involved with promise to support their families financially should they blow up a bus or something. Get rid of the poverty (by getting rid of corrupt and Dark Age governments) and promoting capitalism usually fixes most problems we've run into.

 

[mchammer75040]

^Huh? How is that pes?

Going on the offensive against the irrational only serves to reinforce the problem. If you attack peoples core belief systems, you aren't going to persuade them to your viewpoint generally, in fact you'll entrench it (look at the middle east at present). The way you succeed in overcoming an issue is through redirection.

I'm not trying to slander anyone's beliefs and never said I did. Hell I believe that there IS a God, and some of my views are even christian..just like some of yours may very well be. But far enough how do we redirect this problem?

 

[Kadayi]

I'm not trying to slander anyone's beliefs and never said I did. Hell I believe that there IS a God, and some of my views are even christian..just like some of yours may very well be. But far enough how do we redirect this problem?

Obamas focus should be on restoring American pride through rejuvenation as a catalyst. I'd say the one thing the end timers hold dear after anything else is being American, and suddenly if the consensus (delivered via the media) is that it's unamerican to not give a shit about the environment then attitudes and behaviours will change.

 

[mchammer75040]

But don't you think atheists being represented in some way politically is another way? According to religulous atheists compose 16% of the population, thats a hell of a lot of people. I'm not saying we should do anything like what bill says, cause his attitude is off putting to just about everyone when he says we should destroy religion, but representing atheism and trying to change the attitudes towards other religious beliefs is a step in the right direction as well. As opposed to, you know, bush saying atheists are not citizens..which also implies that if you aren't christian than you aren't American.

 

[Kadayi]

But don't you think atheists being represented in some way politically is another way? According to religulous atheists compose 16% of the population, thats a hell of a lot of people. I'm not saying we should do anything like what bill says, cause his attitude is off putting to just about everyone when he says we should destroy religion, but representing atheism and trying to change the attitudes towards other religious beliefs is a step in the right direction as well. As opposed to, you know, bush saying atheists are not citizens..which also implies that if you aren't christian than you aren't American.

One has to consider always with a politician that their words are often used to engender them to a particular group (the majority position normally), and that there is no better way to do this than to belittle or cast aspersions against the minority, for political gain. Bush's time is over, his opinions are no longer relevant, all that matters now is how Obama thinks and his focus has to be on unifying people towards a common goal, rather than alienating groups because the USA is in a terrible financial crisis.

Personally if I was his boots I'd give Israel short shift over their activities in Gaza, openly condemn them and cut their military aid and support. This would force them quite rapidly to come to heel with world opinion. Doing this would demonstrate to the world he's a strong leader, ease international tensions (and cut him a lot of slack in the middle east) and allow him to concentrate on domestic policy, even if it meant a degree of unpopularity with certain factions within the American political system.

I vote on policies not religious beliefs (or lack of). Albeit it's probably true to say that a lot of Atheists share similar views regarding issues like the environment etc. I don't think they require a separate political voice.