(09-22-2014 07:14 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(09-22-2014 07:06 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(09-22-2014 06:08 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(09-22-2014 05:43 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(09-22-2014 04:36 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  Does the Freedom from God Foundation ring any bells with you?

Shall we pull up all their activities for the last year? Ever tried to have a nativity scene in a public park in Los Angeles. Or erect a giant cross in San Diego? Maybe you haven't ever tried to have Christmas tree in an Oregon airport.

Or how about the ACLU and the Ten Commandments. Or how about the new fad among liberals: partner with satanic organizations to further ridicule Christians and their imagery by placing statues of Satan next to their displays.

Then we have the nerd atheists and their Flying Spaghetti Monster. Get the picture?

None of those things give me pause to back away from what I posted. I understand why you don't like it when some people go to extremes in their objection to having somebody else's religion thrust in their face. But it doesn't change, for me, the appropriateness of those objections.

The bottom line is that I think you disagree with the premise that the objections are appropriate more than you are offended by the vehemence of those objections. I reiterate that very few people object when churches display their religious symbols on their own grounds, or when individuals do so on their own property. Those displays are entirely appropriate.

We are a Christian nation. The overwhelming majority in America identifies with Christianity. Try your philosophy in a Muslim country.

The fact remains these groups have spent a lot of time and money to remove something they fear. Whether they are a small group or a large group is irrelevant. It takes one and one activist judge.

Your first sentence suggests that you do, in fact, believe that display of the symbols of one particular religion on government property is appropriate. I agree the number of people who disagree with that premise is irrelevant. It doesn't matter if the practice offends a million people or a thousand. It is inappropriate regardless, and should be stopped.

No, I'm sorry it should not. Because being offended is not why these people want it removed. That is proven by the childish arguments they make for why it should be removed. Nor is is the reason you want it removed. It is fear and the fact that on some level they symbols remind people of all their immorality, laziness and selfish acts.

So, in your mind I am immoral, lazy and selfish. What a Christian thing to say. It's not, of course, what Jesus would have said, but then, he wasn't a Christian.

Now, what I just said probably isn't what Jesus would have said either. But it's the kind of response that is often triggered when you insult others. It's especially galling when you seem to be doing the insulting in the name of your God.

I can only conclude that you and the poster who followed you just don't have a clue. If you believe that in-your-face displays of piety are examples of proper Christian behavior, you don't understand the concept of morality. If you fail to recognize that many people might view such displays as representing the kind of threat to religious freedom their forebears were subjected to, you don't understand history, either.

(09-22-2014 08:56 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(09-22-2014 07:14 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(09-22-2014 07:06 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(09-22-2014 06:08 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(09-22-2014 05:43 PM)ken d Wrote:  None of those things give me pause to back away from what I posted. I understand why you don't like it when some people go to extremes in their objection to having somebody else's religion thrust in their face. But it doesn't change, for me, the appropriateness of those objections.

The bottom line is that I think you disagree with the premise that the objections are appropriate more than you are offended by the vehemence of those objections. I reiterate that very few people object when churches display their religious symbols on their own grounds, or when individuals do so on their own property. Those displays are entirely appropriate.

We are a Christian nation. The overwhelming majority in America identifies with Christianity. Try your philosophy in a Muslim country.

The fact remains these groups have spent a lot of time and money to remove something they fear. Whether they are a small group or a large group is irrelevant. It takes one and one activist judge.

Your first sentence suggests that you do, in fact, believe that display of the symbols of one particular religion on government property is appropriate. I agree the number of people who disagree with that premise is irrelevant. It doesn't matter if the practice offends a million people or a thousand. It is inappropriate regardless, and should be stopped.

No, I'm sorry it should not. Because being offended is not why these people want it removed. That is proven by the childish arguments they make for why it should be removed. Nor is is the reason you want it removed. It is fear and the fact that on some level they symbols remind people of all their immorality, laziness and selfish acts.

So, in your mind I am immoral, lazy and selfish. What a Christian thing to say. It's not, of course, what Jesus would have said, but then, he wasn't a Christian.

Now, what I just said probably isn't what Jesus would have said either. But it's the kind of response that is often triggered when you insult others. It's especially galling when you seem to be doing the insulting in the name of your God.

I can only conclude that you and the poster who followed you just don't have a clue. If you believe that in-your-face displays of piety are examples of proper Christian behavior, you don't understand the concept of morality. If you fail to recognize that many people might view such displays as representing the kind of threat to religious freedom their forebears were subjected to, you don't understand history, either.

If you are threatened by Christian symbols in public places and work to have them removed, yes you are a small and selfish person. If you can go about your life and not be bothered by them, knowing that they represent the majority, then you are strong, proactive and selfless.

(09-22-2014 09:09 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(09-22-2014 08:56 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(09-22-2014 07:14 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(09-22-2014 07:06 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(09-22-2014 06:08 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  We are a Christian nation. The overwhelming majority in America identifies with Christianity. Try your philosophy in a Muslim country.

The fact remains these groups have spent a lot of time and money to remove something they fear. Whether they are a small group or a large group is irrelevant. It takes one and one activist judge.

Your first sentence suggests that you do, in fact, believe that display of the symbols of one particular religion on government property is appropriate. I agree the number of people who disagree with that premise is irrelevant. It doesn't matter if the practice offends a million people or a thousand. It is inappropriate regardless, and should be stopped.

No, I'm sorry it should not. Because being offended is not why these people want it removed. That is proven by the childish arguments they make for why it should be removed. Nor is is the reason you want it removed. It is fear and the fact that on some level they symbols remind people of all their immorality, laziness and selfish acts.

So, in your mind I am immoral, lazy and selfish. What a Christian thing to say. It's not, of course, what Jesus would have said, but then, he wasn't a Christian.

Now, what I just said probably isn't what Jesus would have said either. But it's the kind of response that is often triggered when you insult others. It's especially galling when you seem to be doing the insulting in the name of your God.

I can only conclude that you and the poster who followed you just don't have a clue. If you believe that in-your-face displays of piety are examples of proper Christian behavior, you don't understand the concept of morality. If you fail to recognize that many people might view such displays as representing the kind of threat to religious freedom their forebears were subjected to, you don't understand history, either.

If you are threatened by Christian symbols in public places and work to have them removed, yes you are a small and selfish person. If you can go about your life and not be bothered by them, knowing that they represent the majority, then you are strong, proactive and selfless.

Over the years, as I have explored the possibility of the existence of your God, I have come close to the conclusion that even if he existed, I'd just as soon not have to spend an eternity with him. Then I realize that it isn't the entity itself that I dislike so intensely, but rather the traits that those who profess to believe in his existence attribute to him.

I have also, during that exploration, come to admire even more greatly the philosophy of the man Christians eventually came to believe was a god himself. It is simply inconceivable to me that such a good man would have shared your attitudes toward your fellow men. I believe that if he were alive in 21st Century America, he would be on the side of those who oppose the public displays of Christian symbols. He just doesn't strike me as fearful, small or selfish. Just respectful of others, especially when those others are in the minority.

I always enjoy Atheists telling Christians how they think they should live.

(09-22-2014 09:28 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(09-22-2014 09:09 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(09-22-2014 08:56 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(09-22-2014 07:14 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(09-22-2014 07:06 PM)ken d Wrote:  Your first sentence suggests that you do, in fact, believe that display of the symbols of one particular religion on government property is appropriate. I agree the number of people who disagree with that premise is irrelevant. It doesn't matter if the practice offends a million people or a thousand. It is inappropriate regardless, and should be stopped.

No, I'm sorry it should not. Because being offended is not why these people want it removed. That is proven by the childish arguments they make for why it should be removed. Nor is is the reason you want it removed. It is fear and the fact that on some level they symbols remind people of all their immorality, laziness and selfish acts.

So, in your mind I am immoral, lazy and selfish. What a Christian thing to say. It's not, of course, what Jesus would have said, but then, he wasn't a Christian.

Now, what I just said probably isn't what Jesus would have said either. But it's the kind of response that is often triggered when you insult others. It's especially galling when you seem to be doing the insulting in the name of your God.

I can only conclude that you and the poster who followed you just don't have a clue. If you believe that in-your-face displays of piety are examples of proper Christian behavior, you don't understand the concept of morality. If you fail to recognize that many people might view such displays as representing the kind of threat to religious freedom their forebears were subjected to, you don't understand history, either.

If you are threatened by Christian symbols in public places and work to have them removed, yes you are a small and selfish person. If you can go about your life and not be bothered by them, knowing that they represent the majority, then you are strong, proactive and selfless.

Over the years, as I have explored the possibility of the existence of your God, I have come close to the conclusion that even if he existed, I'd just as soon not have to spend an eternity with him. Then I realize that it isn't the entity itself that I dislike so intensely, but rather the traits that those who profess to believe in his existence attribute to him.

I have also, during that exploration, come to admire even more greatly the philosophy of the man Christians eventually came to believe was a god himself. It is simply inconceivable to me that such a good man would have shared your attitudes toward your fellow men. I believe that if he were alive in 21st Century America, he would be on the side of those who oppose the public displays of Christian symbols. He just doesn't strike me as fearful, small or selfish. Just respectful of others, especially when those others are in the minority.

That's fine, but crosses in public and monuments of the Ten Commandments are not people telling you how to live your life. It is fear and immaturity that drives people to want them removed.

(09-23-2014 08:10 AM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(09-22-2014 09:28 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(09-22-2014 09:09 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(09-22-2014 08:56 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(09-22-2014 07:14 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  No, I'm sorry it should not. Because being offended is not why these people want it removed. That is proven by the childish arguments they make for why it should be removed. Nor is is the reason you want it removed. It is fear and the fact that on some level they symbols remind people of all their immorality, laziness and selfish acts.

So, in your mind I am immoral, lazy and selfish. What a Christian thing to say. It's not, of course, what Jesus would have said, but then, he wasn't a Christian.

Now, what I just said probably isn't what Jesus would have said either. But it's the kind of response that is often triggered when you insult others. It's especially galling when you seem to be doing the insulting in the name of your God.

I can only conclude that you and the poster who followed you just don't have a clue. If you believe that in-your-face displays of piety are examples of proper Christian behavior, you don't understand the concept of morality. If you fail to recognize that many people might view such displays as representing the kind of threat to religious freedom their forebears were subjected to, you don't understand history, either.

If you are threatened by Christian symbols in public places and work to have them removed, yes you are a small and selfish person. If you can go about your life and not be bothered by them, knowing that they represent the majority, then you are strong, proactive and selfless.

Over the years, as I have explored the possibility of the existence of your God, I have come close to the conclusion that even if he existed, I'd just as soon not have to spend an eternity with him. Then I realize that it isn't the entity itself that I dislike so intensely, but rather the traits that those who profess to believe in his existence attribute to him.

I have also, during that exploration, come to admire even more greatly the philosophy of the man Christians eventually came to believe was a god himself. It is simply inconceivable to me that such a good man would have shared your attitudes toward your fellow men. I believe that if he were alive in 21st Century America, he would be on the side of those who oppose the public displays of Christian symbols. He just doesn't strike me as fearful, small or selfish. Just respectful of others, especially when those others are in the minority.

That's fine, but crosses in public and monuments of the Ten Commandments are not people telling you how to live your life. It is fear and immaturity that drives people to want them removed.

Bushwa. They are displayed for the same reasons that Nazis displayed the swastika - to intimidate and remind people who do not agree with them that they are the ones with the power of the state to compel your obedience.

If your God was as powerful as you think he is, he wouldn't need the support of the state.

(09-23-2014 08:56 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(09-23-2014 08:10 AM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(09-22-2014 09:28 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(09-22-2014 09:09 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(09-22-2014 08:56 PM)ken d Wrote:  So, in your mind I am immoral, lazy and selfish. What a Christian thing to say. It's not, of course, what Jesus would have said, but then, he wasn't a Christian.

Now, what I just said probably isn't what Jesus would have said either. But it's the kind of response that is often triggered when you insult others. It's especially galling when you seem to be doing the insulting in the name of your God.

I can only conclude that you and the poster who followed you just don't have a clue. If you believe that in-your-face displays of piety are examples of proper Christian behavior, you don't understand the concept of morality. If you fail to recognize that many people might view such displays as representing the kind of threat to religious freedom their forebears were subjected to, you don't understand history, either.

If you are threatened by Christian symbols in public places and work to have them removed, yes you are a small and selfish person. If you can go about your life and not be bothered by them, knowing that they represent the majority, then you are strong, proactive and selfless.

Over the years, as I have explored the possibility of the existence of your God, I have come close to the conclusion that even if he existed, I'd just as soon not have to spend an eternity with him. Then I realize that it isn't the entity itself that I dislike so intensely, but rather the traits that those who profess to believe in his existence attribute to him.

I have also, during that exploration, come to admire even more greatly the philosophy of the man Christians eventually came to believe was a god himself. It is simply inconceivable to me that such a good man would have shared your attitudes toward your fellow men. I believe that if he were alive in 21st Century America, he would be on the side of those who oppose the public displays of Christian symbols. He just doesn't strike me as fearful, small or selfish. Just respectful of others, especially when those others are in the minority.

[b]That's fine, but crosses in public and monuments of the Ten Commandments are not people telling you how to live your life[/b]. It is fear and immaturity that drives people to want them removed.

Bushwa. They are displayed for the same reasons that Nazis displayed the swastika - to intimidate and remind people who do not agree with them that they are the ones with the power of the state to compel your obedience.

If your God was as powerful as you think he is, he wouldn't need the support of the state.

Are you seriously comparing a Christian Cross to a swastika? Are you fearful that the Christians might load you up and haul you off to the gas chambers of you don't go to Church?

Drive by Bible Studies and forced Church camps.

Come on man.

(09-23-2014 08:59 AM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(09-23-2014 08:56 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(09-23-2014 08:10 AM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(09-22-2014 09:28 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(09-22-2014 09:09 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  If you are threatened by Christian symbols in public places and work to have them removed, yes you are a small and selfish person. If you can go about your life and not be bothered by them, knowing that they represent the majority, then you are strong, proactive and selfless.

Over the years, as I have explored the possibility of the existence of your God, I have come close to the conclusion that even if he existed, I'd just as soon not have to spend an eternity with him. Then I realize that it isn't the entity itself that I dislike so intensely, but rather the traits that those who profess to believe in his existence attribute to him.

I have also, during that exploration, come to admire even more greatly the philosophy of the man Christians eventually came to believe was a god himself. It is simply inconceivable to me that such a good man would have shared your attitudes toward your fellow men. I believe that if he were alive in 21st Century America, he would be on the side of those who oppose the public displays of Christian symbols. He just doesn't strike me as fearful, small or selfish. Just respectful of others, especially when those others are in the minority.

[b]That's fine, but crosses in public and monuments of the Ten Commandments are not people telling you how to live your life[/b]. It is fear and immaturity that drives people to want them removed.

Bushwa. They are displayed for the same reasons that Nazis displayed the swastika - to intimidate and remind people who do not agree with them that they are the ones with the power of the state to compel your obedience.

If your God was as powerful as you think he is, he wouldn't need the support of the state.

Are you seriously comparing a Christian Cross to a swastika? Are you fearful that the Christians might load you up and haul you off to the gas chambers of you don't go to Church?

Drive by Bible Studies and forced Church camps.

Come on man.

No, I'm not comparing symbols. I am comparing motives for insisting on using public displays of group totems. Are Christians fearful that if they don't make these public displays that their God will abandon them? Or that the faith of their fellow Christians is so weak that they will abandon their God? Or, perhaps, if they don't rattle their Christian sabers loud enough that the non-Christian minority will become emboldened and oust them from power?

I seem to recall a lesson in the Bible in which Jesus admonished priests and Pharisees for public displays of piety, and counseled his followers to do their worshipping in private. Sounds like good advice to me.

(09-23-2014 09:41 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(09-23-2014 08:59 AM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(09-23-2014 08:56 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(09-23-2014 08:10 AM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(09-22-2014 09:28 PM)ken d Wrote:  Over the years, as I have explored the possibility of the existence of your God, I have come close to the conclusion that even if he existed, I'd just as soon not have to spend an eternity with him. Then I realize that it isn't the entity itself that I dislike so intensely, but rather the traits that those who profess to believe in his existence attribute to him.

I have also, during that exploration, come to admire even more greatly the philosophy of the man Christians eventually came to believe was a god himself. It is simply inconceivable to me that such a good man would have shared your attitudes toward your fellow men. I believe that if he were alive in 21st Century America, he would be on the side of those who oppose the public displays of Christian symbols. He just doesn't strike me as fearful, small or selfish. Just respectful of others, especially when those others are in the minority.

[b]That's fine, but crosses in public and monuments of the Ten Commandments are not people telling you how to live your life[/b]. It is fear and immaturity that drives people to want them removed.

Bushwa. They are displayed for the same reasons that Nazis displayed the swastika - to intimidate and remind people who do not agree with them that they are the ones with the power of the state to compel your obedience.

If your God was as powerful as you think he is, he wouldn't need the support of the state.

Are you seriously comparing a Christian Cross to a swastika? Are you fearful that the Christians might load you up and haul you off to the gas chambers of you don't go to Church?

Drive by Bible Studies and forced Church camps.

Come on man.

No, I'm not comparing symbols. I am comparing motives for insisting on using public displays of group totems. Are Christians fearful that if they don't make these public displays that their God will abandon them? Or that the faith of their fellow Christians is so weak that they will abandon their God? Or, perhaps, if they don't rattle their Christian sabers loud enough that the non-Christian minority will become emboldened and oust them from power?

I seem to recall a lesson in the Bible in which Jesus admonished priests and Pharisees for public displays of piety, and counseled his followers to do their worshipping in private. Sounds like good advice to me.

Pal, the motives are not the same. The Nazi's were trying to ethnically cleanse an entire people. Christians are just trying to represent and promote their positive message....and why the argument that all faiths should be represented or nothing at all is ridiculous....The overwhelming majority of Americans are Christians. You wouldn't dare go to a Muslim or Hindu dominated country and demand that a Cross be erected next to one of their shrines. This is just another ridiculous argument put forth by fake atheists that are scared of Christianity....not religion, just Christianity.

It's a throwback from the 1950s beatnik and 60s left wing uprising that wanted to fight conservative America, do drugs and burn their bras.

Real atheists are not threatened by images of Christianity. Scared and immature individuals like to hide behind constitutional arguments and silly assertions of equality...but have one ultimate goal. Erase Christianity from our culture. They want it marginalizes, ridiculed and pushed into the shadows. It's also why they adore factions that rival Christians..IE Islam

This is why I cut right to the chase with so called atheists. I know what they are really trying to do. Real atheists wouldn't even be discussing this with me.

(09-23-2014 09:49 AM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(09-23-2014 09:41 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(09-23-2014 08:59 AM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(09-23-2014 08:56 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(09-23-2014 08:10 AM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  [b]That's fine, but crosses in public and monuments of the Ten Commandments are not people telling you how to live your life[/b]. It is fear and immaturity that drives people to want them removed.

Bushwa. They are displayed for the same reasons that Nazis displayed the swastika - to intimidate and remind people who do not agree with them that they are the ones with the power of the state to compel your obedience.

If your God was as powerful as you think he is, he wouldn't need the support of the state.

Are you seriously comparing a Christian Cross to a swastika? Are you fearful that the Christians might load you up and haul you off to the gas chambers of you don't go to Church?

Drive by Bible Studies and forced Church camps.

Come on man.

No, I'm not comparing symbols. I am comparing motives for insisting on using public displays of group totems. Are Christians fearful that if they don't make these public displays that their God will abandon them? Or that the faith of their fellow Christians is so weak that they will abandon their God? Or, perhaps, if they don't rattle their Christian sabers loud enough that the non-Christian minority will become emboldened and oust them from power?

I seem to recall a lesson in the Bible in which Jesus admonished priests and Pharisees for public displays of piety, and counseled his followers to do their worshipping in private. Sounds like good advice to me.

Pal, the motives are not the same. The Nazi's were trying to ethnically cleanse an entire people. Christians are just trying to represent and promote their positive message....and why the argument that all faiths should be represented or nothing at all is ridiculous....The overwhelming majority of Americans are Christians. You wouldn't dare go to a Muslim or Hindu dominated country and demand that a Cross be erected next to one of their shrines. This is just another ridiculous argument put forth by fake atheists that are scared of Christianity....not religion, just Christianity.

It's a throwback from the 1950s beatnik and 60s left wing uprising that wanted to fight conservative America, do drugs and burn their bras.

Real atheists are not threatened by images of Christianity. Scared and immature individuals like to hide behind constitutional arguments and silly assertions of equality...but have one ultimate goal. Erase Christianity from our culture. They want it marginalizes, ridiculed and pushed into the shadows. It's also why they adore factions that rival Christians..IE Islam

This is why I cut right to the chase with so called atheists. I know what they are really trying to do. Real atheists wouldn't even be discussing this with me.

And real Christians wouldn't be discussing it with me.

You think you understand atheists, but you just don't have a clue. I'm not the least bit threatened by Christianity or its images. I don't adore Islam any more than I adore Christianity. Neither do I hate either of them. The only thing either have going for them is that they are the majority political force in their respective regions. They don't make their followers any more ethical or moral or charitable than they would be if they did not believe in the God of Abraham. They do, however, make some of their followers obnoxious and disrespectful and contemptuous of non-believers/infidels. I stress the word some, because just as in every population, there are good ones as well. They just aren't as loud.

(09-23-2014 10:22 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(09-23-2014 09:49 AM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(09-23-2014 09:41 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(09-23-2014 08:59 AM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(09-23-2014 08:56 AM)ken d Wrote:  Bushwa. They are displayed for the same reasons that Nazis displayed the swastika - to intimidate and remind people who do not agree with them that they are the ones with the power of the state to compel your obedience.

If your God was as powerful as you think he is, he wouldn't need the support of the state.

Are you seriously comparing a Christian Cross to a swastika? Are you fearful that the Christians might load you up and haul you off to the gas chambers of you don't go to Church?

Drive by Bible Studies and forced Church camps.

Come on man.

No, I'm not comparing symbols. I am comparing motives for insisting on using public displays of group totems. Are Christians fearful that if they don't make these public displays that their God will abandon them? Or that the faith of their fellow Christians is so weak that they will abandon their God? Or, perhaps, if they don't rattle their Christian sabers loud enough that the non-Christian minority will become emboldened and oust them from power?

I seem to recall a lesson in the Bible in which Jesus admonished priests and Pharisees for public displays of piety, and counseled his followers to do their worshipping in private. Sounds like good advice to me.

Pal, the motives are not the same. The Nazi's were trying to ethnically cleanse an entire people. Christians are just trying to represent and promote their positive message....and why the argument that all faiths should be represented or nothing at all is ridiculous....The overwhelming majority of Americans are Christians. You wouldn't dare go to a Muslim or Hindu dominated country and demand that a Cross be erected next to one of their shrines. This is just another ridiculous argument put forth by fake atheists that are scared of Christianity....not religion, just Christianity.

It's a throwback from the 1950s beatnik and 60s left wing uprising that wanted to fight conservative America, do drugs and burn their bras.

Real atheists are not threatened by images of Christianity. Scared and immature individuals like to hide behind constitutional arguments and silly assertions of equality...but have one ultimate goal. Erase Christianity from our culture. They want it marginalizes, ridiculed and pushed into the shadows. It's also why they adore factions that rival Christians..IE Islam

This is why I cut right to the chase with so called atheists. I know what they are really trying to do. Real atheists wouldn't even be discussing this with me.

And real Christians wouldn't be discussing it with me.

You think you understand atheists, but you just don't have a clue. I'm not the least bit threatened by Christianity or its images. I don't adore Islam any more than I adore Christianity. Neither do I hate either of them. The only thing either have going for them is that they are the majority political force in their respective regions. They don't make their followers any more ethical or moral or charitable than they would be if they did not believe in the God of Abraham. They do, however, make [b]some[/b] of their followers obnoxious and disrespectful and contemptuous of non-believers/infidels. I stress the word some, because just as in every population, there are good ones as well. They just aren't as loud.

Sure they would, because Christians have been put on the defensive.

You can claim that you are not any of those things, but you proved to be the opposite in a previous post where you said these images needed to go.

If I start a religion that worships a massive, erect *****, you having your ten commandments on that wall grants me the ability to put an image of my god on that same wall. It seems to me that you want that.

Checkmate.

(09-23-2014 11:13 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  If I start a religion that worships a massive, erect *****, you having your ten commandments on that wall grants me the ability to put an image of my god on that same wall. It seems to me that you want that.

Checkmate.

LMAO at you checkmate. Ha ha

No it doesn't Mr. Checkmate. That would violate obscenity laws in just about every town in America.

Checkmate.