1 - 10 Next
In response to:

Forgetting the Meaning of Freedom

nhurston Wrote: Aug 21, 2014 12:02 PM
At least my President has read the Constitution, which it is painfully apparent Dr. Carson has not. He would not have made such inane arguments if he understood the Constitution and the decades of jurisprudence interpreting it. Encyclopedic? More like laughable. He ignores the basic tenets of the endorsement clause. Then he makes a mockery of common sense with his water bottle analogy. It's idiotic.
In response to:

Forgetting the Meaning of Freedom

nhurston Wrote: Aug 21, 2014 11:58 AM
Arpiem, you really should get to know Supreme Court jurisprudence on the First Amendment. I suggest starting with Everson v. Board of Education and Lemon v. Kurtzman. It's impossible to intelligently discuss the Constitution without having knowledge of Supreme Court decisions. Regarding atheistic beliefs via public institutions, I suppose you are referencing evolutionary theory in public science classrooms. Whether you like it or not, in a science classroom, science should be taught. There are philosophy and religion classes where alternative theories of universal origin may be taught. I'm not aware of other instances in which atheists are using government to push an affirmative agenda of godlessness. And no, simply denying Christians the right to use government to promote their religion is not the same thing as using government to promote godlessness. You can still worship whatever you want privately. We are not interested in stopping you. I'm really not interested in personal anecdotes because there is no way to gauge whether the person testifying about their near-death experience is fabricated based on prior reported NDE's. There are also numerous scientific rebuttals regarding the feelings a person has during an NDE, the repeated similarity of which only serving to support those rebuttals.
In response to:

Forgetting the Meaning of Freedom

nhurston Wrote: Aug 21, 2014 11:37 AM
Where are there fits about private expressions of faith? We're talking about governmental expressions of faith. Please don't misrepresent our arguments.
In response to:

Forgetting the Meaning of Freedom

nhurston Wrote: Aug 21, 2014 11:32 AM
It says government can't prohibit the free exercise, and it says government shall not endorse a particular religion, which has been interpreted to mean promotion by any governmental entity. Private exercise of religion is not prohibited. Do what you wish, just don't use our government to back you up.
In response to:

Forgetting the Meaning of Freedom

nhurston Wrote: Aug 21, 2014 11:30 AM
You can publicly speak your beliefs all you wish. The question is about government promoting one religion over another. Is it not Matthew chapter 6 that teaches you that proclaiming your faith in public so as to be seen among men is hypocritical, and that worshiping in your own home is the true path?
In response to:

Forgetting the Meaning of Freedom

nhurston Wrote: Aug 21, 2014 11:22 AM
When I GIS, here's what shows up: https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Anything+that+one+believes+in+so+strongly+that+it+influences+their+behavior+is+deemed+a+%E2%80%98religion%27.%22&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&channel=sb It's nothing but a list of Townhall articles and a teapartyeconomist site. I'm amazed that you wouldn't have read the case. It never ceases to amaze me though that people on the internet offer quotations which they don't verify. It's so simple to do with the internet. I hope this is a lesson learned, good sir. Sorry if I was a little harsh, I wasn't sure if you were intentionally misleading people here, perhaps even the source of the bogus quotation. I think logically, whether atheism is a religion or not is an irrelevant question in the subject matter the article. Atheists aren't trying to insert Dawkins books, for instance, in the lodging rooms. They simply don't want government promoting a single religion over another. Private lodging can have any religions text they wish. I understand what would be your argument that atheists are trying to promote their "religion" by virtue of evolutionary theory in public schools. You have to remember though, we are talking about science classes, wherein science and the theories propounded by years of research should properly be taught. There are philosophy and religion courses wherein students can learn about and discuss alternative theories (all of them) regarding the origin of the Universe and our place therein.
In response to:

Forgetting the Meaning of Freedom

nhurston Wrote: Aug 20, 2014 1:23 PM
Have you actually read the Torcaso case? http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=17484916405561277413&q=torcaso+v.+watkins&hl=en&as_sdt=6,47&as_vis=1 Please show me where Justice Black says that. Here's a hint. He says nothing of the sort. He doesn't even make a statement that implies such a thing or could be interpreted in any way to mean that. You are reproducing a FICTION, which appears (After a GIS) to have been created on another Townhall forum. Stop lying. Read the Case. Go on about your business. Thanks!
In response to:

Forgetting the Meaning of Freedom

nhurston Wrote: Aug 20, 2014 1:19 PM
The Navy temporarily allowed the bibles back into the lodges pending review of the policy.
In response to:

Forgetting the Meaning of Freedom

nhurston Wrote: Aug 20, 2014 1:17 PM
False. Atheists don't care about how you privately practice your religion, we just don't want it being done through our public institutions. Thanks for offering the ages old Pascal's Wager, i.e. believe in God because it's the better bet, given that if atheists are right, then nothing happens, no harm no foul. Assuming you're Christian, you ignore the fact that we can both be wrong. There may be a true religion, but you may also not be worshiping correctly to get whatever afterlife reward is offered therefore. Whoa!! There's a big difference between "cannot be explained" and "has not yet been explained." There have been many "unexplained" phenomena blamed on divine intervention that have been explained using the scientific method. That some things remain unexplained does not equal God. Your God is quickly becoming a God of smaller and fewer scientific gaps. Pretty much all you have is the unexplained question regarding whether there is an afterlife. Have fun clinging to that island.
In response to:

Forgetting the Meaning of Freedom

nhurston Wrote: Aug 20, 2014 12:57 PM
It would appear there are people spreading a lie on the internet about a Supreme Court decision, Torasco v. Watkins. The lie is thus: "Supreme Court Justice Hugo L. Black (Torcaso v. Watkins -1961) ruled: "Anything that one believes in so strongly that it influences their behavior is deemed a ‘religion'."" You can read the case here. http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=17484916405561277413&q=torcaso+v.+watkins&hl=en&as_sdt=6,47&as_vis=1 Should you take the time to do so, you will find that not only does that quote not appear in the case, Justice Black says nothing even remotely akin to that which the quote purports. There's nothing in the holding that could be implied or twisted to somehow provide support for that quote. It is internet FICTION designed to mislead gullible people.
1 - 10 Next