Day of Prayer Ruled Unconstitutional

[John Dibble]

Good. Taxpayer money shouldn't be wasted in any form by encouraging prayer. It's the job of pastors, priests, and other such people to encourage people to pray, not the government.

[John Dibble]

Christians have never been anything but peaceful and restrained in the US, and never really had extreme power.

Are you kidding? Tons of evil has been done by Christians with their religion as justification in the history of this nation, some of it even against other Christians!

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Let's suppose we accept the notion that the day of prayer wasn't established for Christians. So what? I'm an atheist - why should even a cent of my tax dollars be used to encourage an act that is entirely religious?

If people want to pray, they can. Nobody is stopping them. Nobody is stopping churches from holding their own prayer day either. Besides, isn't prayer supposed to be something you do year round?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Thanksgiving and Christmas are secularized enough that it really isn't necessary to do that.

[John Dibble]

Name one thing.

Easy enough - slavery.

Biblical scripture was used to justify slavery. For instance in the late 1700s Reverend William Graham, an instructor at Liberty Hall Academy, would annually lecture the graduating senior class about the value of slavery and used the Bible as his primary defense for it. For him and many others like him Christianity wasn't meant to change social institutions but rather to convert people and bring them to salvation. Slavery was just another position in which you might become saved. They certainly had quite a bit of scripture to justify this - I'll be glad to tell you exactly which passages in your Bible, if you'd like.

Oh, but it doesn't stop in just using it to justify slavery to their fellow white men. They also used it as a means of keeping the slaves in line. By indoctrinating them into Christianity they could use those passages to encourage slaves to be obedient to their earthly masters in exchange for their promised heavenly reward, as well as implying that disobeying their masters would be perceived by God as disobeying him. Add in the enforced illiteracy and you have it so the slaves can't even read the Bible for themselves, so they could use the dogma without having the slaves able to read from the source of the authority themselves.

Or do you think that the systematic oppression of millions of people is "peaceful and restrained"?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

My attitude is extremely tolerant. For one thing I don't go around killing them because they don't believe the same things I do. The same can't be said for how Christians have treated non-believers, which often included differing sects of Christianity, for much of their history. Catholics and Protestants were at eachother's throats for quite a while, and in many ways still are.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Because those aren't religious. They are encouraging people to learn about actual historical events and such. However you may have a point on racial and gender preferences on the latter two, which could make it unconstitutional on other grounds.

I wouldn't support National Godlessness Day being government endorsed, even if I might like such a day to exist. Religion and government need to remain separated as possible.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Atheism is not a religion. What dogma do atheists have that make us a religious order? Let me give you a hint - the answer is none. Atheism is simply the lack of a certain kind of belief. The government also isn't actively encouraging atheism, nor would it constitutionally be allowed to - a National Day of Encouraging Godless Living would be just as unconstitutional as National Prayer Day.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Who are we giving thanks to?  What's Christmas about?  Those holidays aren't secular at all - especially CHRISTmas.[/quote]

1. I don't know about you, but I give thanks to my friends and family. They are there for me, providing love and support for me whenever I need it. Thanksgiving is just a good time for me to go visit them, share our thanks for one another, and eat some good food. God doesn't really enter the equation as far as I'm concerned. For the believing members of my family it might, but that's not really a concern.
2. Christmas isn't even originally a Christian holiday. It's origins come from pagan holidays. Read up on your history. Besides, what do Santa Clause, flying reindeer, elves, snowmen, decorated trees, and toys have to do with Jesus? Even the Japanese celebrate Christmas en masse, and only half a percent or so of the population there is Christian. Secularized enough for you?

The nature of holidays change with time. Get over it.

[John Dibble]

Wow, Dibble, LOL at the idea that Christianity was responsible for slavery.

Slavery was practiced around the world for thousands of years without second thoughts.

Straw man. I never claimed it was responsible for it, nor that it originated with it. It existed before even Judaism.

What I did claim was that it was used as a justification for it's continuation in this nation for a long time, as well as used as a tool to control the slaves. I even provided a specific example. If you care to actually refute these facts then please do so.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Just because some Christians were against it doesn't mean some Christians weren't for it, and it doesn't mean that those that were for it didn't use their religion to justify it.

How about we crack open our Bibles?

"However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you.  You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land.  You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance.  You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way."  (Leviticus 25:44-46 NLT)

"If you buy a Hebrew slave, he is to serve for only six years.  Set him free in the seventh year, and he will owe you nothing for his freedom.  If he was single when he became your slave and then married afterward, only he will go free in the seventh year.  But if he was married before he became a slave, then his wife will be freed with him.  If his master gave him a wife while he was a slave, and they had sons or daughters, then the man will be free in the seventh year, but his wife and children will still belong to his master.  But the slave may plainly declare, 'I love my master, my wife, and my children.  I would rather not go free.'  If he does this, his master must present him before God.  Then his master must take him to the door and publicly pierce his ear with an awl.  After that, the slave will belong to his master forever."  (Exodus 21:2-6 NLT)

"When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are.  If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again.  But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her.  And if the slave girl's owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter.  If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife.  If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment."  (Exodus 21:7-11 NLT)

"When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished.  If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property."  (Exodus 21:20-21 NAB)

"Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear.  Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ."  (Ephesians 6:5 NLT)

"Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed.  If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful.  You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts.  Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them." (1 Timothy 6:1-2 NLT)

"The servant will be severely punished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it.  "But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly.  Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.""  (Luke 12:47-48 NLT)

[John Dibble]

The Founding Father argument is irrelevent for anyone with half a brain.  It doesn't matter what the Founding Fathers thought.  They lived in the 1700s and we live in 2010, where society, culture, morals, and economic standards are very different.  Why would we continue to follow old ways of thinking.  We are suppose to advance thought, not remain stagnant.

I'm going to have to disagree with you somewhat here. What they thought does matter, in that it gives us a window into what they intended when they wrote the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. This is a very valuable tool when it comes to interpreting these documents, which may be very necessary when trying to apply them to modern concepts and issues that didn't exist at the time.

That said I do agree that we can't just blindly follow their mode of thought. Of course, that's why there's an amendment process. We can change what we need to, when we need to.

[John Dibble]

Oh yes, the old slavery canard.  A system that was perpetrated for centuries, including a millennium or more before Christianity even began is Christianity's fault, even when it is Christians who stopped the practice in the first place.  The Muslim Arab traders who enslaved Africans aren't culpable, nor are the African tribesman who sold people from opposing tribes into bondage.  Slavery was all the fault of evil White Christian male oppressors.

Spare me the politically correct nonsense.

As I pointed out to Libertas, this is a straw man. I never claimed that Christianity was solely to blame for slavery, or even starting it. What I did claim was that Christians used their religion as justification for maintaining it in this country as well as a tool to control their slaves. This is historical fact and you have not done one single thing to refute it. I even went so far as to provide a specific example. Here's some more:

"[Slavery] was established by decree of Almighty God...it is sanctioned in the Bible, in both Testaments, from Genesis to Revelation...it has existed in all ages, has been found among the people of the highest civilization, and in nations of the highest proficiency in the arts." Jefferson Davis, 1861

"The right of holding slaves is clearly established in the Holy Scriptures, both by precept and example." Rev. R. Furman, D.D., a Baptist pastor from South Carolina, 1838

How the hell is it "politically correct nonsense" to point out the historically verified FACT that Christianity was used to justify this barbarity?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Straw man again. If someone wants to get up on a soap box in the middle of town square and preach that everyone who disagrees with him his going to roast in hellfire for all eternity, then that's his right and I'll join in the fight against anyone who tries to stop him. I do not want to end all political debate of it because that would be stupid - if we are to ensure that freedom of religion is protected we have to be willing to debate it when it comes up. And I clearly don't want to pretend religion doesn't exist since I'm quite vocal about it's existence. So you fail to make an actual claim about what I believe FOUR TIMES NOW. (these three and the slavery thing) Talk about intellectual dishonesty at its finest.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I have no intent do deny the influence, be it good, bad, or neutral, of religion on the history of this country and the world in general. To do so would be idiotic. For this reason I am supportive of teaching these kinds of subjects in schools, so long as they are taught objectively. If a national day or week or month of sorts is deemed necessary to encourage learning of these things, a national day of prayer does not do that - instead a national month of theological history or something of that nature would be appropriate.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Incorrect. Not all atheists believe God doesn't exist. Some believe that there definitely is no deities, some believe there is a possibility that that one or more does, some believe that some specific gods others define don't exist but there might be something that might constitute a God, etc. The one and only thing atheism does imply is that there is a lack of a belief in a deity.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Again, not true for the reasons stated - not all atheists believe the same things. Atheism only requires not believing in a god, not specifically believing any doesn't exist. Besides, by this logic you would have to consider NOT believing in Zeus, leprechauns, invisible pink unicorns, and flying spaghetti monsters a religion too. Not believing something doesn't make that not believing a religion.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You have your definitions mixed up. Agnosticism implies a lack of knowledge - the word literally means "without knowledge". Atheism implies a lack of belief in gods - it literally means "without gods". You can actually be, or not be, either. They are not mutually exclusive. Atheism vs. theism is about belief, gnosticism vs. agnosticism is about knowledge. Roughly speaking it translates to this:

Agnostic theist - "I believe there is a god or gods, but I am not certain they actually exist"
Gnostic theist - "I believe in a god or gods and know for sure that the god or gods "
Agnostic atheist - "I do not believe in any gods, but I do not know for certain if any exist or not"
Gnostic atheist - "I do not believe in any gods and know for sure there are no gods"

Of course there are ever more subcategories, as well as degrees of gnosticism vs. agnosticism.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No, it isn't. There is no dogma or church.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

1. Secular humanism is a philosophical concept, not a church.
2. Again, false. Not all atheists are secular humanists.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Which doesn't have anything to do with whether it's a religion or not. You might as well say that conservativism is a religion because part of many conservatives' creed is to belittle liberals.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Except it isn't always given to God. Again, it's been secularized enough that atheists aren't going to care.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The date on which it was decided to celebrate it, Dec. 25th, is also the date on which the ancient Babylonians celebrated the "birthday" of Mithra. (Son of Isis, Goddess of Nature) Partying, excessive drinking and eating, and gift giving were part of this festival. Sound familiar? After various changes it eventually became the Roman pagan event known as Saturnalia, which lasted from Dec 17th to Dec 25th. Interestingly one of the traditions of this festival was consuming human-shaped biscuits. Sound familiar? In the 4th century Christian leaders attempted to change this event into a Christian one in order to win over converts, but since the festival had little to do with Jesus they decided to name the concluding day, the 25th, as the savior's birthday. Unfortunately for them it didn't work out so well, and the earliest Christmases were celebrated much in the same way Saturnalia had always been - drinking, sexual indulgence, and singing naked in the streets. Again, doesn't that last part sound familiar... well, the singing that is, not the nakedness.

So yes, Christmas is really just a bastardized pagan festival that has now become bastardized itself. As I said, holidays change, get over it. Google "origins of Christmas" if you don't believe me.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

St. Nick didn't have flying reindeer, elves, talking snowmen, etc., in case you haven't noticed.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

For you maybe, but as I said the holiday itself has largely been secularized. Many atheists in this country and others, including myself, celebrate it. There are also secular reasons to allow it to be a national holiday even if it was still a primarily religious holiday - it's just not practical to require everyone to come into work on a day when the vast majority aren't coming into work.

[John Dibble]

Wait wait wait.  Thanksgiving is supposed to be giving thanks to God?!  I've always been giving thanks to the Indians who helped out the Christian settlers, shortly before we largely wiped them out and sent them to live on 'reservations'.  I've never given thanks to "God", and I doubt I would even if I believed in such a thing.

Nope, it's God; you were wrong.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Haha, I don't really care what you religious folks get up to, but I'll do it the way I want, ok?  It's a pretty stupid and hypocritical holiday, in any case.

Why do you hate turkey, Joe?  That's like hating America. 

Joe doesn't hate turkeys, he just thinks they are evil, sinful, wretched creatures who deserve to be roasted in ovens.