("Personally this whole thing could have been solved by not letting any specific religious type symbols in a state capital.")
But then the anti-religious groups would have an outright monopoly on free speech and public expression. Because only religious groups would be banned from exhibiting their beliefs in public which is what Dan Barker's anti-Christians want. People will be fined for preaching the Gospel in public, but Dan Barker and his gang of Hipster Doofuses will be able to shout obscenities at Christians and it will be considered free speech.
There are places were the government is founded on atheistic principles and people are imprisoned and tortured for practicing their religion openly in public. This is what Dan Barker wants to happen in the United States.
If he and members of his gang had the political power that tyrants like Stalin and Hitler had they would do the same things they have done.
29 comments
No, because "no religious symbols" would also mean that atheists (of which neither Hitler nor Stalin was an example, incidentally) would be no more allowed to put up a sign saying "there is no god" or something like that than a religious group would be allowed to put up a symbol of their faith.
Blah, blah, blah, we're sooo prosecuted, blah, blah, blah, everybody has rights but us, blah, blah, blah, why can't we shove our religion down everyone's throats, blah, blah, blah...
Um, some points, guys, for dealing with Godwins:
1. Stalin was an atheist. Sorry, but he was. He said so often enough. He found something else to be a fundie about, though.
2. Jehovah's Witnesses, for one, were persecuted for their beliefs by the Nazis. Others could get KZ time for having the wrong sort of faith - i.e. one in active opposition to the Nazis. They did not however, persecute Christians per se - although you could argue that any Christian who didn't oppose them wasn't much of a Christian. (As in, follower of the teachings of Jesus ... but then there aren't many of those anyway).
"Hipster?" What decade did you just fall out of?
Instead of making things up, why don't you just ASK Dan Barker what he wants?
...Dan Barker and his gang of Hipster Doofuses will be able to shout obscenities at Christians...
1. They already can.
...and it will be considered free speech.
2. It already is.
If he and members of his gang had the political power that tyrants like Stalin and Hitler had they would do the same things they have done.
1. Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Any Human with access to Hitler-and-Stalin levels of political power would wind up going down similar paths.
2. Humanity has had 2,000 years to observe the behavior of the Christian church during the time it had absolute power. Millions died in wars fought to enforce religious power. Millions were tortured to death in the name of religious purity.
But then the anti-religious groups would have an outright monopoly on free speech and public expression.
No, a lot of religious people don't want public religious displays, either. They know that any time you favor one religion, you automatically discriminate against another, so it's best for the government to stay out of the religious display business.
{"Personally this whole thing could have been solved by not letting any specific religious type symbols in a state capital.")
But then the anti-religious groups would have an outright monopoly on free speech and public expression. Because only religious groups would be banned from exhibiting their beliefs in public which is what Dan Barker's anti-Christians want. People will be fined for preaching the Gospel in public, but Dan Barker and his gang of Hipster Doofuses will be able to shout obscenities at Christians and it will be considered free speech.
Citation needed please. It's not in public that I have a problem with the christians exhibiting their beliefs. It's when it's on government ground. Big difference there.
There are places were the government is founded on atheistic principles and people are imprisoned and tortured for practicing their religion openly in public. This is what Dan Barker wants to happen in the United States.
Citation needed there killerangel. Usually it's theological militant tyrannies that do it when you're not practicing their choices of religion.
If he and members of his gang had the political power that tyrants like Stalin and Hitler had they would do the same things they have done.
But he and members of his gang (while slaughtering proper grammer) don't have political power. Not to mention, Hitler was a christian. You should know this by now.
These idiots can make up a persecution faster than most people can fart. Dan Barker, for Crissake?
Incidentally, killerangel, the idea is no religious expression of any kind -- for or against -- on government property, or all is acceptable. Then you have things like the Washington free-for-all. You're the ones who are always yapping about placing your symbols on taxpayers' property. Make up your minds.
Do these dumbphucks even pay attention to what they do/say? Have they even considered the fact that there constant whining in defense of their gods is evidence that their religions are without merit?
Here's the deal. If their gods are dependent on whiny little creeps it proves one of three things.
1. Their gods don't exist.
There are no other options.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
