The athiests groups that seem to only have time for suing because something is reference about God is really starting to get under my skin. Now they got ID (Intelligent Design, something about an intelligent being helping the start of all life, BUT DID NOT REFERENCE GOD!!!) banned from being taught.

OMFG!!! Those jackasses really need to grow up! They don't want religion to interfere with Government, right? Because they need to get themselves out of it as well.

Why? because if you and a large group believe there is no God, then that is you, but it is your belief! That being said, religion is nothing more than your belief in something, wether it is God, Hindu, Budha, whatever, but it can be considered a religion.

I am half tempted to try to win the lottery, just so I can get a really good lawyer, and fight back. We now have 150 lbs of missing C4 explosive material, which can do some awesome damage, and we are worried about wether there were advanced beings that created all life and it shouldn't be taught?

To all the athiest groups that are out there suing and trying to get christianity out of public places: You have a right to peaceably assemble, and you have the right to speak up, but you do not have the right to opress others abilty to show their belief in something, and you sure as hell have the right to shut up, and just accept this country as is.

This country was founded on the basis of Christianity. If you don't like it, get out of this country, live where there is no christianity, like the North pole.

Oh, and wait, now they are saying that they want these croses removed from the roadsides that honors the deaths of fallen police officers is some other city...



I think I am done ranting about politics for now. Any comments?

i'll add - i'm sick off all this "happy HOLIDAY'S" bullshit. Why is it that its fine to say 'happy hanuaka', or whatever other non-christian holiday's, but its NOT OK to say "Merry Christmas"!?

WAKE UP DUMB-A**es! SANTA'S A CHRISTIAN!!!!

Take the word SANTA: S-A-N-T-A

Rearrange the words:

Satan

or,

Satan's Clause. What is the clause, who knows, but it makes you think. And if you need further convincing, Santa is depicted as a guy in a RED suit, who has small elves to do his workof making toys. If you look at the old pictures of the Elves, they look sorta demonic...

how does "Jingle Bells" relate to Christianity???????????????????????????? We can sing Kwanzaa songs, cause we have to be "tolerant", but we cant sing "Rudolph the Rednose reindeer" because its "Christian".....the only people not being tolerant here are the ACLU, who aren't being tolerant of Christianity, despite tolerance being their flagship word.

Well, Christmas technically has nothing to do with Christianity anyways, as scholars has proven Jesus was born sometime in October...

and the fact, that Christmas was delibarately rescheduled to overlap with pagan holidays by missionaries who wanted to change the religion, not the culture.

Yeah, and if you go to most Christian Churches, they preach from Doctrine, not the Bible, which means for the most part, they don't even have a clue what they are sayin...

My dad quit going to church until he found out an old friend ran one, and he preaches directly from the Bible.

Oh yea, your post reminds me of a piece of scripture:

"Do not go into the groves, do not cut down the trees, do not bring them into my sanctuary, do not place gold and silver upon them. Do not do as the peagans do."

sure it does. Chistmas is the celebration of jeesus's birth, and scholors haven't proven shit. They can guess all they want, and more than likely jeesus wasn't born on dec 25th, but this never will be proven unless someone digs up a birth certificate

[I'm enjoying watching this develop]

Did you ever read the Wedge Document? That comes straight from the group making the book they were going to teach from. Plus, the board members had an idea of injecting creationism behind it the whole time while trying to get it put in. Plus, who ever said that atheists were behind it at all? I have a few creationist friends who agree that ID is bogus and does jack squat in trying to predict what the world does (which is exactly what science is supposed to do). It is in no way that it is scientific (unless you try to change the definition, like Kansas did). What can you predict about the world using this? All you can do is point to the sky and say: "Something up there did it, I don't know anything else." That tells you nothing about the world and gets us nowhere.
I personally have no problem with it being in school. It's when it is put into a category it doesn't belong in (science) that it gets me fired up. It belongs where religion does in school: in an elective course that studies every major religion around the world.

Have you even read the Constitution? It explicitly says that religion and government are mutually exclusive.

Really? Does a 2-year-old have religion? It obviously doesn't know about any supernatural until it goes to a religious assembly. Seems to me like atheism is default because I know of no accounts where a baby learns about God by itself without another person pressing it onto them.

And what will you do? That just sounds like you're struggling to make your point with words. If you can't do it there, it has no merit. Also, if you have 150lbs. of missing C4, that means you don't have it.

Majority has nothing to do with what's right.

That still doesn't mean it needs to be followed or people be oppressed with it. Other countries were founded with other religions as a basis. I'm just glad that there is the freedom of religion and separation of church and state.

This doesn't bother me. I personally have no problem with people who believe in something, it's when they try to oppress me with it that I get angry. I don't oppress people with my beliefs, why should anyone else? By the way, debating is not oppressing (both sides are in it to prove their point).

Simply apply the lemon test... this wasn't a secular purpose, much for the same reason the courts ruled that a state couldn't have a minute of silence in schools, because it was made for the express purpose of promoting religion. And btw, it's not the Constitution that has the separation, but the establishment clause of the first amendment.

Where did you find that? Book and Chapter if you can

A few things:
1) Intelligent Design is Creationism. You can argue that with me, or you can simply visit http://talkorigins.org and make it easier for everyone.
2) To teach creationism as scientific fact is unconstitutional. The Supreme Court has already ruled on this.

Yes, it's as simple as that. As for Dan's outrage, let's recognize that not teaching Christianity in schools is not teaching atheism. To teach atheism would be to tell kids that there is no God. Religion needs to be left to the churches, not public schools. No one is oppressing Christians from expressing their beliefs.

Also, this country was NOT founded on Christianity. Read up on the Founding Fathers, and you'll find that many of them (Thomas Jefferson, Ben Franklin, etc.) were Deists or Atheists. The country was founded on enlightened reason. This is in part why the Federalists died out - their failure to use emotion to manipulate voters. Just because the vast majority of the country is Christian does not mean that we are or should be a theocracy. If you think Iran, Saudi Arabia, and any other country founded on Islamic law is bad, then you can see why it would be foolish to relax laws relating to Separation of Church and State.

yet our law system is based on the 10 Commandments......however teaching evolution as scientific fact is unconstitutional too.....sure they they say "this is just a theory" on the first day of bio class, but then they teach the rest of the year as if it is fact and become uncomfortable everytime you remind them it is a theory

evolution is generally accepted, and has alot more scientific evidence supporting it, and even some religions are saying its OK to follow as long as you believe god is/was the one "guiding" evolution

That evolution happens is a fact.
How it happens is the theory.

Simply another case of people being afraid of others' reactions that they procrastinate the problem by merely appeasing all (or most) of the parties involved.
http://sciam.com/article.cfm?chanID=sa006&articleID=00022DE1-0C15-11E6-B75283414B7F0000&colID=15
My views exactly.

No, our law system is not based on the ten commandments. "Thou Shalt Not Kill" - capital punishment, self-defense, war, law enforcement. "Honor thy Mother and Father" - not illegal to dishonor mother & father. "Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife" - not illegal either. "Thou shalt not commit adultery" - not illegal (though you might end up getting divorced). "Thou shalt not honor other gods before me" - we have freedom of religion. "Thou shalt not take the name of the lord in vain" - swearing is not illegal, we have freedom of speech. “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy” - no laws against working on Sunday. "Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is on the earth beneath, or that is in the water below.” - not even Christians follow this one. QED

Interesting viewpoint.

Technically that's agnosticism, not knowing whether there is a god, as opposed to atheism, which is refusing to believe in (a) god.

No, it is definitely atheism because they don't believe in a god because they don't know what it is. Do you believe in a glackerspatch? If you've never heard of it, how could you have been uncertain whether it existed or not? You never knew it could exist and therefore didn't believe in it's existence.