Chief Creative Officer, Publisher
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Lots of stuffing things in each other's mouths in this thread, and You Know Who wouldn't approve of that!
Please behave yourselves, lest I declare you all abominations and shut down the thread with great vengeance and furious anger.
I now return you to your unresolvable argument.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Gas Christians? Get them gay married? What are you talking about? Really don't answer it b/c I don't care.
You know how I used the word persecution and in what context. If your unclear, I doubt it, reread the posts.
I know exactly what you said, Aretas. If you really meant to describe a simple, non-violent, non-oppressive cultural change as persecution then you're either crazy or don't understand the meaning of the word. If you really think the things you listed either count as persecution themselves or represent some sort of gradual program culminating in it, the same applies.
According to you, when I don't use source data, I'm making an appeal to authority, but when I do use source data, I'm oppressing the ignorant.
Its a funny position to take by someone such as yourself who claims to value science so highly.
This game? Not gonna play it.
Which reminds me: Any word on the oft-requested ignore feature?
I know exactly what you said, Aretas. If you really meant to describe a simple, non-violent, non-oppressive cultural change as persecution then you're either crazy or don't understand the meaning of the word. If you really think the things you listed either count as persecution themselves or represent some sort of gradual program culminating in it, the same applies.
Gas Christians? Get them gay married? What are you talking about? Really don't answer it b/c I don't care.
You know how I used the word persecution and in what context. If your unclear, I doubt it, reread the posts.
I respect everyones opinion.
To say I believe your idea is crazy is one thing but to say a person is crazy is another, like you have. Cease the name calling.Yes, I believe that atheists are attempting to slowly transform American society. Thats not crazy its a fact. Its what atheist organization strive to do.
Atheists come to mock and resent public displays of faith, or any acknowledgment of God or religion by the state. The mere suggestion that the country is in fact a Christian one is declared backward, dangerous, and heretical to the Constitution of the United States.
Do I think its persecution in the scale Christians face in in Iraq, Nigeria, Egypt, No!
That is the context in which your failing to see or simply ignoring.
@ Everyone:
I want to stay on track with what has been posted in the last couple pages. I don't want my response to Samnell to be a distraction to that.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yes, I believe that atheists are attempting to slowly transform American society. Thats not crazy its a fact. Its what atheist organization strive to do.Atheists come to mock and resent public displays of faith, or any acknowledgment of God or religion by the state. The mere suggestion that the country is in fact a Christian one is declared backward, dangerous, and heretical to the Constitution of the United States.
Do I think its persecution in the scale Christians face in in Iraq, Nigeria, Egypt, No!
That is the context in which your failing to see or simply ignoring.
But you do think it qualifies as persecution. I rest my case.
|
I'm trying to understand what fabian persecution is. If fabian refers to continually withdrawing until an opportunity to cut the supply lines occurs, is fabian persecution forces pain on someone by retreating against their attack?
Everyone thought he was talking about Fabius Cunctator or "Fabius the Delayer," who was famous for retreating from Hannibal and hiding behind fortified walls until strong enough to win in the field. Those are "Fabian tactics".
It turns out that he was talking about Fabian Socialism, which apparently believes that slow and steady wins the race. The root of the terms may be the same.
I'm trying to understand what fabian persecution is. If fabian refers to continually withdrawing until an opportunity to cut the supply lines occurs, is fabian persecution forces pain on someone by retreating against their attack?Everyone thought he was talking about Fabius Cunctator or "Fabius the Delayer," who was famous for retreating from Hannibal and hiding behind fortified walls until strong enough to win in the field. Those are "Fabian tactics".
It turns out that he was talking about Fabian Socialism, which apparently believes that slow and steady wins the race. The root of the terms may be the same.
Yes Usagi your correct.
The roots of the term are the same, since the Fabian Society of George Bernard Shaw and H.G. Wells named themselves after the Roman emperor.
GBS featured pretty prominently in Glenn Beck's "Revolutionary Holocaust" series.
EDIT: Fabian wasn't an emperor, of course.
Yes, I believe that atheists are attempting to slowly transform American society. Thats not crazy its a fact. Its what atheist organization strive to do.
Which organizations? Are their agendas really so bad? Do they really represent all atheists or are they just the ones that are loud? There are religious organizations trying to force their views on the country, how are they better?
People want to change their corner of the world in a way that they think will make it better… That's nothing new.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I respect everyones opinion.
Except when they're atheists "attempting to slowly transform American society" apparently.
To say I believe your idea is crazy is one thing but to say a person is crazy is another, like you have. Cease the name calling.
Yes, I believe that atheists are attempting to slowly transform American society. Thats not crazy its a fact. Its what atheist organization strive to do.
Atheists come to mock and resent public displays of faith, or any acknowledgment of God or religion by the state. The mere suggestion that the country is in fact a Christian one is declared backward, dangerous, and heretical to the Constitution of the United States.
Do I think its persecution in the scale Christians face in in Iraq, Nigeria, Egypt, No!
That is the context in which your failing to see or simply ignoring.@ Everyone:
I want to stay on track with what has been posted in the last couple pages. I don't want my response to Samnell to be a distraction to that.
Your knowledge of US history is appallingly bad.
The US is NOT a Christian nation, so yes, that notion IS indeed backward, dangerous and "heretical" to anyone with just a smidgen of historic knowledge - although I would most likely just call it ignorant than heretical.You also said earlier that you do indeed believe in separation of church and state... how can it then be a Christian nation if the two are separate?
You state that opposition voices towards those ideas are tantamount to persecution, while you have no problem labeling homosexuals as sinners and deviants and oppose their pursuit of happiness (marriage).
Any atheist movement out there aren't trying to suppress Christianity, it's just telling you to keep it to yourself and not try to influence legislature with it - but that idea apparently triggers the massive persecution complex a whole lot of Christians have.
If you can't see why that might cause some people to call you crazy, then I don't know what to tell you.
As for ceasing the name calling... you just called Dogbladewarrior for DogbladeGirl!?! Hypocrisy much?
Seriously, it seems like you're arguing from both a position of ignorance (e.g. about US history) and a total lack of self-reflection.
|
|
What is "Fabian" persecution?Its a take on Fabian Socialism.
It purpose is to advance the principles of democratic socialism via gradualist and reformist, rather than revolutionary.
The irony being that the Pledge of Allegiance was written by a Socialist....
|
|
Lots of stuffing things in each other's mouths in this thread, and You Know Who wouldn't approve of that!
Please behave yourselves, lest I declare you all abominations and shut down the thread with great vengeance and furious anger.
I now return you to your unresolvable argument.
Yes, my brothers keeper :)
|
|
Yes Usagi your correct.I'm trying to understand what fabian persecution is. If fabian refers to continually withdrawing until an opportunity to cut the supply lines occurs, is fabian persecution forces pain on someone by retreating against their attack?Everyone thought he was talking about Fabius Cunctator or "Fabius the Delayer," who was famous for retreating from Hannibal and hiding behind fortified walls until strong enough to win in the field. Those are "Fabian tactics".
It turns out that he was talking about Fabian Socialism, which apparently believes that slow and steady wins the race. The root of the terms may be the same.
The irony is how you are using it to describe the removal of processes that attempted to slowly and steadily subvert the separation of church and state.
Like for example, making children pledge allegiance to a flag, or having allocated prayer time in publicly funded schools.
The classic "It's not wrong when we do it!" argument.
The classic "It's not wrong when we do it!" argument.
Well, things aren't wrong when I do them…
You know how I used the word persecution and in what context. If your unclear, I doubt it, reread the posts.
The only way you managed to use the word was to say "treat without preferential favors" .. which is not what the word means. You can't make your statement true by altering the entire English language to accommodate it.
Then again considering the level of accommodation you seem to expect Christianity to be granted in the public discourse perhaps that's what you think should happen. Persecution should mean one thing when applied to Christianity, but something else entirely to anyone else. That's the only "context" I can glean from your posts.
Starting a new thread for the church state separation thing
Starting a new thread for the church state separation thing
Oh for the days when there was only one "let's all scream about religion" thread.
JUST KIDDING!
...The mere suggestion that the country is in fact a Christian one...
Do you not see the problem here?
This explicitly isn't a Christian nation, per the Constitution.
Lots of stuffing things in each other's mouths in this thread, and You Know Who wouldn't approve of that!
Please behave yourselves, lest I declare you all abominations and shut down the thread with great vengeance and furious anger.
I now return you to your unresolvable argument.
"And know his name is Erik Mona!"
"And know his name is Erik Mona!"Lots of stuffing things in each other's mouths in this thread, and You Know Who wouldn't approve of that!
Please behave yourselves, lest I declare you all abominations and shut down the thread with great vengeance and furious anger.
I now return you to your unresolvable argument.
Bah, I am only here for that gem!
I respect everyones opinion.Except when they're atheists "attempting to slowly transform American society" apparently.
To say I believe your idea is crazy is one thing but to say a person is crazy is another, like you have. Cease the name calling.
Yes, I believe that atheists are attempting to slowly transform American society. Thats not crazy its a fact. Its what atheist organization strive to do.
Atheists come to mock and resent public displays of faith, or any acknowledgment of God or religion by the state. The mere suggestion that the country is in fact a Christian one is declared backward, dangerous, and heretical to the Constitution of the United States.
Do I think its persecution in the scale Christians face in in Iraq, Nigeria, Egypt, No!
That is the context in which your failing to see or simply ignoring.@ Everyone:
I want to stay on track with what has been posted in the last couple pages. I don't want my response to Samnell to be a distraction to that.Your knowledge of US history is appallingly bad.
The US is NOT a Christian nation, so yes, that notion IS indeed backward, dangerous and "heretical" to anyone with just a smidgen of historic knowledge - although I would most likely just call it ignorant than heretical.
You also said earlier that you do indeed believe in separation of church and state... how can it then be a Christian nation if the two are separate?
You state that opposition voices towards those ideas are tantamount to persecution, while you have no problem labeling homosexuals as sinners and deviants and oppose their pursuit of happiness (marriage).
Any atheist movement out there aren't trying to suppress Christianity, it's just telling you to keep it to yourself and not try to influence legislature with it - but that idea apparently triggers the massive persecution complex a whole lot of Christians have.
If you can't see why that might cause some people to call you crazy, then I don't know what...
Your use of personal insults while telling me "your side" is absurd. What does my personal opinion on homosexual marriage have to do with this conversation? Nobody is taking the rights of homosexuals away, I'm not advocating it. The swipe at Dogblade was a response to his offensive, rude remark. Swapping the words Girl for Warrior in his name was my response to him calling me bigoted. Grow up and get thicker skin. I actually refused to stoop to his level if you bother to read the short exchange.
The United States is indeed a Christian nation!
The founders never wanted to establish a secular nation.
In fact, they repeatedly and insistently averred that the survival of liberty and the prosperity of the United States required a deeply religious society and a populace passionately committed to organized faith.
In his Farewell Address of 1797, President Washington declared that "reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle. Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports."
His successor as president, John Adams, also known as "The Atlas of Independence" wrote to his wife Abigail in 1775: "Statesmen may plan and speculate for liberty, but it is religion and morality alone which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand.
In fact, at the time of the first Continental Congress, nine of the thirteen original colonies had established churches, meaning that they each supported an official denomination, even to the point of using public money for church construction and maintenance. These religious establishments, clearly in contradiction to the idea of a secular government.
The real object of the First Amendmet was to exclude all rivalry among Christian sects, and to prevent any national ecclesiastical establishment
The framers may not have mentioned Christianity in the Constitution, but they clearly intended that charter of liberty to govern a society of faith, freely encouraged by government for the benefit of all. It never involved a religion-free or faithless state but did indeed presuppose America’s unequivocal identity as a Christian nation.
Yeah, and the swipe at Dogblade was a response to his offensive, rude remark. I'm sure you did not see that.
EDIT: Fabian wasn't an emperor, of course.
Of course not! Then he would have been a member of the bourgeoisie. :)
(Actually he still woulda been but still....)
The founding fathers explicitly said, in the Treaty of Tripoli, that this isn't a Christian nation.
This is correct.
While I personally feel the separation of church and state is pretty darn explicit in the Constitution, the fact that United States was not founded as a Christian nation is specifically stated in the treaty.
|
Yes, I believe that atheists are attempting to slowly transform American society. Thats not crazy its a fact. Its what atheist organization strive to do.Atheists come to mock and resent public displays of faith, or any acknowledgment of God or religion by the state. The mere suggestion that the country is in fact a Christian one is declared backward, dangerous, and heretical to the Constitution of the United States.
Do I think its persecution in the scale Christians face in in Iraq, Nigeria, Egypt, No!
That is the context in which your failing to see or simply ignoring.
So then atheists are persecuted by the church as well, are they not? It fits your own definition. The church has strove to change American society to an entirely religious one as long as it has existed. That's what bringing the good word to the heathens is all about. That's what the preaching of eternal torment and the wages of sin is all about. Regardless of good intent, of 'saving' the wayward souls, it's all about transforming society into what God wants.
And you're upset that atheists resist?
The United States is indeed a Christian nation!
"As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion..."
-- U.S. Senate on June 7, 1797
We could go back and forth, but why? "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" is already pretty darn clear. Heck, your position isn't even internally consistent! If you can handle the resulting cognitive dissonance nothing anyone writes is going to penetrate.