one nation under god
- Thread starter posol
- Start date
- Replies 96
- Views 4K
We may earn a small commission from affiliate links and paid advertisements. Terms
- Status
NotUrAverage_Si
Senior Member
Originally posted by DarkHand@Jun 17 2004, 02:45 PM
Now if they were agnostic, they would see that the whole argument is dumb and they wouldn't care.
true dat.
NotUrAverage_Si
Senior Member
And so is the Atheist trying to remove the "one nation under God" part of the constitution. He is an Atheist, meaning he does not believe in God and therefore is trying to have it removed. Seems to be he is trying to force his Atheistic views on everyone else by trying to have it removed.
Though I am in the Army, this pretty much simplifies my views. then I was a kid I got to see a lot of the politics of the nation, as my father was a Union official for the Air traffic controllers that were all fired by the now thankfully desceased Ronnie Raygun. I got to see Beruit, Lebenon, Syrian wars, or military actions, and the controversy of our political policies leaving used up third world nations left with their ass hanging in the wind. Religion has always been a part of it, gods will, the christian right, playing on peoples weakness, and twisting the sense of spirituality into blind patriotic flag waving fools. My child will know when he steps in the classroom (if he goes to a public school) that he is FREE to say the Pledge or NOT if he chooses, and not because someone says he has to.
Import Builders
Senior Member
I still want my question answered how people can argue/reason/talk/ negotiate their way to peace when the other side doesn;t even offer to talk, they just kill them.
When somebody actually tries to answer that question, with some seriousness, youll find the whole liberal mindset of "peace" not killing, is illogical.
I wonder what the 10's of thousands of kurds failed to do to reason with Saddam when the nerve agent decended on the city, killing almost everyone.
What age do you have to be, to be able to effectively "talk" your way out of it? Because hundreds of children, babies lunged melted all over the city.
Does the rule of "peace" apply to all ages, or do you have to be a certain age? How come people kill people anyway? Why can't everyone just "talk" it out so nobody ever dies from hate?
Ill save you time. the answer is:
"you can't reason with people who want you dead, no matter what you say, or do, as long as you live".
To test, my theory on this, I request somebody who actually "believes" they can talk their way out of ANY situation to gain peace, to fly to Iraq, go into a city, and annouce your there to negotiate for peace.
Problem is, as soon as the people you are trying to negotiate with find out your an American, your head will probably be chopped off in video. So please, do not go. Please stay in the US and continue to believe and say whatever you want, your relatively safe here.
Also, maybe education should educate people on how to effectively use this liberal tactic of "talking" their way to peace, the world could use that trait. Seriously. I mean the Iraqies could have used it, there are from 3-7 million people burried in mass graves, and then in Russia another few/10 million dead from oppression. If they all knew how to talk their way to peace, we would sure have alot less murdered people. What is this tactic to avoid death? What words do I say? Do I have to pay money, give up property AND say the right words to gain peace? What did all the 100+ million people in the last 100 years have to say to live, instead of being killed from oppression. Actually, I think 100 million is more like it.
Blanco, maybe those 100+ million people didn;t know martial arts. Will martial arts stop your lungs from melting in a chemical attack you can't see or smell? How do I live from that? negotiate better? Pray? Talk? What?
Your argument is illogical. Peace is not an option, often. War is the only option.
Am I making sense? I am to some, to others I am insane. lol i know, I know.
When somebody actually tries to answer that question, with some seriousness, youll find the whole liberal mindset of "peace" not killing, is illogical.
I wonder what the 10's of thousands of kurds failed to do to reason with Saddam when the nerve agent decended on the city, killing almost everyone.
What age do you have to be, to be able to effectively "talk" your way out of it? Because hundreds of children, babies lunged melted all over the city.
Does the rule of "peace" apply to all ages, or do you have to be a certain age? How come people kill people anyway? Why can't everyone just "talk" it out so nobody ever dies from hate?
Ill save you time. the answer is:
"you can't reason with people who want you dead, no matter what you say, or do, as long as you live".
To test, my theory on this, I request somebody who actually "believes" they can talk their way out of ANY situation to gain peace, to fly to Iraq, go into a city, and annouce your there to negotiate for peace.
Problem is, as soon as the people you are trying to negotiate with find out your an American, your head will probably be chopped off in video. So please, do not go. Please stay in the US and continue to believe and say whatever you want, your relatively safe here.
Also, maybe education should educate people on how to effectively use this liberal tactic of "talking" their way to peace, the world could use that trait. Seriously. I mean the Iraqies could have used it, there are from 3-7 million people burried in mass graves, and then in Russia another few/10 million dead from oppression. If they all knew how to talk their way to peace, we would sure have alot less murdered people. What is this tactic to avoid death? What words do I say? Do I have to pay money, give up property AND say the right words to gain peace? What did all the 100+ million people in the last 100 years have to say to live, instead of being killed from oppression. Actually, I think 100 million is more like it.
Blanco, maybe those 100+ million people didn;t know martial arts. Will martial arts stop your lungs from melting in a chemical attack you can't see or smell? How do I live from that? negotiate better? Pray? Talk? What?
Your argument is illogical. Peace is not an option, often. War is the only option.
Am I making sense? I am to some, to others I am insane. lol i know, I know.
Import Builders
Senior Member
huh? I just basically asked what is the exact method to avoid death from this "talking" or finding a peacefull alternative to war.
What is it? And then what age do you have to be to employ that?
isn't that a legitimate question? You said martial arts can save you in some cases. So then I ask you this. Its a good question, everyone wants to know this secret method that if often talked about, but never, ever defined. I just want to know how we can never have another murder again, and live in peace, forever, racing our cars and raising our families in total peace. Thats all.
respectfully,
Jeff
What is it? And then what age do you have to be to employ that?
isn't that a legitimate question? You said martial arts can save you in some cases. So then I ask you this. Its a good question, everyone wants to know this secret method that if often talked about, but never, ever defined. I just want to know how we can never have another murder again, and live in peace, forever, racing our cars and raising our families in total peace. Thats all.
respectfully,
Jeff
Import Builders
Senior Member
I just wanted those few democrats, respectfully, to answer the question of how we can avoid war with people that can't be reasoned with, or negotiate with.
Its not going to solve any problems, but it will give us insight into the way they think. I can learn from it.
Jeff
Its not going to solve any problems, but it will give us insight into the way they think. I can learn from it.
Jeff
Import Builders
Senior Member
yreah, religious topics should be banned or restricted for sure. We don;t get anywhere.
Frankie P.
Senior Member
I haven't been on today, so I had to read a lot and there is a lot of things I disagreed and agreed with, but I am going to skip that Guy and Blanco are liberals and I disagree and just say this. With all this talk about the fist amendmant, isn't it a Christians/religios persons right to speak to you about their religion? I mean that is the 1st amendment, "FREDDOM OF SPEECH, RELIGION, PRESS..." I mean I do have the right to tell you to believe in God do I not, or is it wrong because by doing that I piss you off? Personally, the I see more harm in taking out "Under God" or any form of religion from our government. It looks like atheists are the ones trying to invoke their beliefs that no God actually exits. Lets change the name of Las Cruces, New Mexico because it means the crosses. HOW THE HELL is that invoking a religious belief? Mexicans founded that city and named it that for a reason. If I had the money and bought my own city built it from scratch and named it "Jesus Saves", Ca. is that invoking a religion? No, it is naming my city that I own.
I just don't understand why people get so upset with seperation from church is state? It is "wrong" to teach God in any way, shape or form. Yet, evolution is ok because it has been proven? I am sorry but there is no proof that I used to be a fucking fish, so teaching evolution is a violation of the constitution. It makes no sense why we can only stop teaching about "GOD." Every religion whether it be Christian, Atheist, Islamic wants to spread their word, because in their eyes it is "right." If you don't agree then don't go to church or pray or whatever that religion wants you to do, it is your "right" Leave things be the way they are, no one is being hurt, and if you are so worried that your kids will believe in God, teach them otherwise, but if they think that they have sufficient proof that there is a God, isn't it their right. You shouldn't hate a person your own child or a different person because they have a belief.
BTW, I just wanted to say God Bless, I will pray for you all. Remember the 1st amendment, I have that right.
I just don't understand why people get so upset with seperation from church is state? It is "wrong" to teach God in any way, shape or form. Yet, evolution is ok because it has been proven? I am sorry but there is no proof that I used to be a fucking fish, so teaching evolution is a violation of the constitution. It makes no sense why we can only stop teaching about "GOD." Every religion whether it be Christian, Atheist, Islamic wants to spread their word, because in their eyes it is "right." If you don't agree then don't go to church or pray or whatever that religion wants you to do, it is your "right" Leave things be the way they are, no one is being hurt, and if you are so worried that your kids will believe in God, teach them otherwise, but if they think that they have sufficient proof that there is a God, isn't it their right. You shouldn't hate a person your own child or a different person because they have a belief.
BTW, I just wanted to say God Bless, I will pray for you all. Remember the 1st amendment, I have that right.
Well, there are usually ways to solve issues with means other than violence. While the people in the twin towers (an obvious plea to the emotions) may not have been able to talk their way out of the violence that followed (although they couldnt go to war afterwards either) America could have easily avoided that whole situation by refusing to support terrorists in Israel.
Pearl Harbor: There is plenty of evidence to show that America knew of the impending attacks, but did nothing. Beyond that the Japanese were not entirely unprovoked; America had imposed a full trade embargo because Japanese occupied imperialist conquests of American allies. Honestly Japan knew that they would bump heads with America, and made a sound (from a military perspective... well until they began to lose) decision to take out the entire pacific fleet in one fell swoop. For the republicans reading, this is what bush calls a "pre-emptive strike". ironic, huh? Also to say that nuking Hiroshima and Nagasaki was our only option unless we wanted to sacrafice thousands of Americans is absurd and shows that you can neither see past the governments propaganda of today, or back then. Use your imagination and if you truly can come to no other conclusion then ill help you out with a quick answer.
Maybe the problem with your situation concerning Iraq is that it is an American who is asking for change. If there is a desire for Iraq to change, let it come from within. I agree, if you are not a Baathist (much like if you are not a christian in America) things can be pretty shitty. But the nice thing is that if you dont like it (and changing it isnt a viable option) you can move! That or start a revolution, and let it be independant of America's influence. There is this thing... its called tact; America doesnt seem to have much of it in regards to its foreign affairs. The Islamic world hates America because we support the Jews in Isreal. So what do we go and do? We bomb a bunch of Muslims to shit and try and stick out collective corperate hands into the affairs of these people. Not a whole lot of foreward thought going into that is there???
so to answer your question: I just basically asked what is the exact method to avoid death from this "talking" or finding a peacefull alternative to war.
One word: prevention. Dont do things that will unreasonably piss people off. Dont support terrorists at all (islamic/jewish/anyone). Dont let the financial interests of industry get in the way of the wellbeing of our citizens. Its all pretty simple
With all of my heart,
Jeremiah
P.S. i know you are going to try and say it, but not pissing off other peoples is in no way kowtowing to them.
Pearl Harbor: There is plenty of evidence to show that America knew of the impending attacks, but did nothing. Beyond that the Japanese were not entirely unprovoked; America had imposed a full trade embargo because Japanese occupied imperialist conquests of American allies. Honestly Japan knew that they would bump heads with America, and made a sound (from a military perspective... well until they began to lose) decision to take out the entire pacific fleet in one fell swoop. For the republicans reading, this is what bush calls a "pre-emptive strike". ironic, huh? Also to say that nuking Hiroshima and Nagasaki was our only option unless we wanted to sacrafice thousands of Americans is absurd and shows that you can neither see past the governments propaganda of today, or back then. Use your imagination and if you truly can come to no other conclusion then ill help you out with a quick answer.
Maybe the problem with your situation concerning Iraq is that it is an American who is asking for change. If there is a desire for Iraq to change, let it come from within. I agree, if you are not a Baathist (much like if you are not a christian in America) things can be pretty shitty. But the nice thing is that if you dont like it (and changing it isnt a viable option) you can move! That or start a revolution, and let it be independant of America's influence. There is this thing... its called tact; America doesnt seem to have much of it in regards to its foreign affairs. The Islamic world hates America because we support the Jews in Isreal. So what do we go and do? We bomb a bunch of Muslims to shit and try and stick out collective corperate hands into the affairs of these people. Not a whole lot of foreward thought going into that is there???
so to answer your question: I just basically asked what is the exact method to avoid death from this "talking" or finding a peacefull alternative to war.
One word: prevention. Dont do things that will unreasonably piss people off. Dont support terrorists at all (islamic/jewish/anyone). Dont let the financial interests of industry get in the way of the wellbeing of our citizens. Its all pretty simple
With all of my heart,
Jeremiah
P.S. i know you are going to try and say it, but not pissing off other peoples is in no way kowtowing to them.
Im sorry that you think that we are attempting to inhibit your ability to profess your affection for your religion, believe me i would have it no other way. What i am argueing is that your belief has no place in the pledge that is recited in public schools. Its a really easy concept to grasp, and you may understand it if you were to read the earlier posts and not simply disregard them because you think they are liberal. I know it is easier to maintain ignorance, but selectivly choosing what you read will only reify your position, and you can never hope to grow.
Now to clarify my position so you will stop pidgeon-holing me as an athiest. Initially, i am not an athiest. An athiest denies the existance of a god, for whatever reason. Because i believe in the proving/disproving power of science, and science can neither prove/disprove the existance of any sort of god, I am forced to say i really dont know. But please dont mistake that for meaning that i have any sort of hope that there is a god. I dont think that any kind of god exists, but that is only based on my experience and research. Therefore i am forced to say that i am an agnostic.
Now you ask if its wrong to teach about god. yes and no. You can teach your kids whatever the hell you want to. You can tell em that wearing magical mormorn underwear will shield them from posession for all i care. When it is wrong is when you try to teach that shit in public school. Evolutionary theory, unlike creationism, Is a testable science. Evolutionary ideas can be tested and we have a fossil record to back up our ideas. In addition to that, evolution is something that can be peer reviewed. While i cannot use science to disprove the existance of a creator, It can be used to disprove your bible.
P.S. B16vx, Propaghandi kicks butt!!
Frankie P.
Senior Member
Ok, lets say that we knew forehand about every attack America has ever come across, specifically Pearl Harbor and 9/11. What exactly are we to do beforehand if we knew it is inevitable that is was going to happen? Hey, lets attack Japan first and tell every U.S. citizen and the world we knew what was going to happen beforehand, c'mon Guy, I respect your opinion and how you stand up for your beliefs, but enough with the Conspiracy theories. There is no way that our world will be peaceful, it is just no nature in any animal kingdom. You can call it right wing dominance if you want, but it will just never happen, people will always clash heads, something that people will always have to live with. Acutually, you don't always have to have war, we could just pay off terrorists and give to their every demand, because you can't reason with them. That may be the reason their is a policy not to deal with terrorists, they can't be trusted.
Frankie P.
Senior Member
Well, I can use the bible to prove that facts in it are infact accurate. A perfect example would be certain civilizations that were around when the bible was written. Saying this country and that country where in war when "Biblical Person A" did this. So, does that prove that the bible is real, if a fossil of a dinosaur is found that proves evolution? The Bible isn't 100% historical correct, but neither is science. I still see no proof of the Big Bang Theory, which there in lies my point it is a theory and shouldn't be taught, as the reason for human existence. I am not saying to deny the existence of dinosaurs or anything proven by science, but I don't see how I came from a fish or a monkey. A different looking skull doesn't convince me of being a monkey.
Since when does "Under God" mean Chrisianity? Simply because the G, is capitolized? There is no religion being enforced upon your receiting of the Pledge, as stated before. If it said "Under Satan" I wouldn't vow to take it out, I don't believe we should follow Satan, so I simply wouldn't state it. Honestly, if it offends you that much why even mention it in the first place. For the most part, people aren't affected by the word/s God. You can teach your children to be Anti-Christian it is your right, but why must everything related to the word "God" be removed from everything. As stated before our country was founded of a belief of a god, not the God. God can easily mean different things to different persons.
I fail to see my ignorance in the shadow of your own. You preach will all you have of seperation from church and state, yet beg for the teaching of evolution in our schools, which infact is a religion. That seems extremely ignorant to me. The only proof of human existence, is our own stupidity, we know nothing. We know not how we exactly came to be or why, we only know how we produce. Do we know the meaning to life? Of course not, which is why we do not teach it. Do you "KNOW" exactly how we were come to be? Prove the Big Bang Theory. Proove that God exists. You can't which is why there is faith, first of all, but you can't be hipocritical and say God isn't proven while evolution isn't either and yet ask that be taught in our schools because it has more scientific evidence that God. That is ignorance.
Since when does "Under God" mean Chrisianity? Simply because the G, is capitolized? There is no religion being enforced upon your receiting of the Pledge, as stated before. If it said "Under Satan" I wouldn't vow to take it out, I don't believe we should follow Satan, so I simply wouldn't state it. Honestly, if it offends you that much why even mention it in the first place. For the most part, people aren't affected by the word/s God. You can teach your children to be Anti-Christian it is your right, but why must everything related to the word "God" be removed from everything. As stated before our country was founded of a belief of a god, not the God. God can easily mean different things to different persons.
I fail to see my ignorance in the shadow of your own. You preach will all you have of seperation from church and state, yet beg for the teaching of evolution in our schools, which infact is a religion. That seems extremely ignorant to me. The only proof of human existence, is our own stupidity, we know nothing. We know not how we exactly came to be or why, we only know how we produce. Do we know the meaning to life? Of course not, which is why we do not teach it. Do you "KNOW" exactly how we were come to be? Prove the Big Bang Theory. Proove that God exists. You can't which is why there is faith, first of all, but you can't be hipocritical and say God isn't proven while evolution isn't either and yet ask that be taught in our schools because it has more scientific evidence that God. That is ignorance.
Do you really believe that they weren't intending a christian god, or does that just suit your views? To say they didn't is blind retardism.
You know what they say about two wrongs don't you? And no, they aren't trying to make you not believe in god, or force their beliefs, they are trying to get the pledge to be what it is, which is a pledge to a country that is founded on seperation of church and state. God doesn't belong anywhere in it.
And no, you can't use a fictional work like the bible to prove things in it are real, that's not possible.
ok
There is definityly a difference between the theory of evolution and your idea of creationism, and obviously you are not aware of it. Religion is a philosophy, it is untestable. There is no way that i can, with proof, deny the existance of your or any god. But i can also say that we cannot prove that the crazy guy who comes into my family's resturant every wednesday and bothers the customers doesnt hear God in his head when he puts his fingers in his ears and begins to rock back and forth (thanks ronald reagan). Now Evolution is a theory, a scientific theory. The difference being that we can test this, and submit it for peer review. We also have evidence in the fossil record, as well as in observation of our sorroundings (i.e. the peppered moth in england, or darwins finches). Why is it that we teach it in school? Because it is the best that we know, and is the most accepted scientific theory. If something better comes along, then im sure we will adapt.
This isnt a biology class and i have neither the time nor the desire to explain to you the ins and outs of evolution. Its obvious though that much like my earlier posts, you disregarded what was said in your high school biology class because it didnt suit your belief system. Suffice to say we did not evolve from monkeys. Our lineages do share a common ancestor. Whereas the monkey's ancestors traversed a different line to fit into their niche, ours was a toolusing one. from the common ancestor came Australopithecus on our side. from that we get Homo Habilis, Homo Erectus, and Homo Sapiens. Basically what i am trying to get across to you is that we are not decended from monkeys, we have a different liniage with a common ancestor. Basically to deny that evolution (the survival of those who have traits best suited to the environment) is to deny observable truth (insofar as we can know truth given our flawed and biased senses).
In trying to say that by the removal of the phrase we are trying to force you to stop believing in god, you are really proving to me that you really dont understand what im talking about. The removal of it is exactly that, just the loss of an unnecessary phrase. It in no way tells you that you cannot have your beliefs. You are taking the more and more common position of "look at me, im a christian and things arnt going my way, boohoo". Get off of it. The modern christian faith is based on bad translations and the selective bible (council of nicea, translation issues with the king james ed etc). Christianity and religion as a whole have no place in anything that is publicly owned. The existance of a god is intrinsicly religious, therefore the acknowledgement of Gods existance in the pledge is a clear violation of the seperation of church and state.
To your war question, i have already answered it. I refuse to do so again. You are obviously not reading what i have been posting so im not going to bother on that subject with you agian.
There is definityly a difference between the theory of evolution and your idea of creationism, and obviously you are not aware of it. Religion is a philosophy, it is untestable. There is no way that i can, with proof, deny the existance of your or any god. But i can also say that we cannot prove that the crazy guy who comes into my family's resturant every wednesday and bothers the customers doesnt hear God in his head when he puts his fingers in his ears and begins to rock back and forth (thanks ronald reagan). Now Evolution is a theory, a scientific theory. The difference being that we can test this, and submit it for peer review. We also have evidence in the fossil record, as well as in observation of our sorroundings (i.e. the peppered moth in england, or darwins finches). Why is it that we teach it in school? Because it is the best that we know, and is the most accepted scientific theory. If something better comes along, then im sure we will adapt.
This isnt a biology class and i have neither the time nor the desire to explain to you the ins and outs of evolution. Its obvious though that much like my earlier posts, you disregarded what was said in your high school biology class because it didnt suit your belief system. Suffice to say we did not evolve from monkeys. Our lineages do share a common ancestor. Whereas the monkey's ancestors traversed a different line to fit into their niche, ours was a toolusing one. from the common ancestor came Australopithecus on our side. from that we get Homo Habilis, Homo Erectus, and Homo Sapiens. Basically what i am trying to get across to you is that we are not decended from monkeys, we have a different liniage with a common ancestor. Basically to deny that evolution (the survival of those who have traits best suited to the environment) is to deny observable truth (insofar as we can know truth given our flawed and biased senses).
In trying to say that by the removal of the phrase we are trying to force you to stop believing in god, you are really proving to me that you really dont understand what im talking about. The removal of it is exactly that, just the loss of an unnecessary phrase. It in no way tells you that you cannot have your beliefs. You are taking the more and more common position of "look at me, im a christian and things arnt going my way, boohoo". Get off of it. The modern christian faith is based on bad translations and the selective bible (council of nicea, translation issues with the king james ed etc). Christianity and religion as a whole have no place in anything that is publicly owned. The existance of a god is intrinsicly religious, therefore the acknowledgement of Gods existance in the pledge is a clear violation of the seperation of church and state.
To your war question, i have already answered it. I refuse to do so again. You are obviously not reading what i have been posting so im not going to bother on that subject with you agian.
Frankie P.
Senior Member
"Under God" isn't the only removal of church and state that I am referring to. How about changing a cities name, a symbol on a cities seal? Why are all these things so offensive to you people. You must believe and be afraid of God otherwise it wouldn't affect you. If you son asked you what Las Cruces, NM means. Would you say "Son, it is the evil of Chrisitianity, trying to take over our country with their ludacis beliefs that we were created by one sole power..." If that is what you see then you must have head problems. Should we change the name from crosswalk to intersection for walking, because it has cross in it? I am in no way forcing my religion on any of you, I should be the last to do it, because I don't go to church, pray, I am shacking up with my gf. I am really not very chrisitan like, I simple believe in it.
As for your views as negotiating in every aspect in order to avoid war, well let me at least ask you this. Another American Civilian, has been beheaded by Al Qaeda, simply because we didn't release all of Al Qaeda's prisoners. Now tell me, Guy how would you have negotiated with these bastards? Release a few Al Qaeda operatives to save a man, and put the rest of our country in danger? Violence can never be avoided in any way, and to think that there is ignorance.
As for your views as negotiating in every aspect in order to avoid war, well let me at least ask you this. Another American Civilian, has been beheaded by Al Qaeda, simply because we didn't release all of Al Qaeda's prisoners. Now tell me, Guy how would you have negotiated with these bastards? Release a few Al Qaeda operatives to save a man, and put the rest of our country in danger? Violence can never be avoided in any way, and to think that there is ignorance.
You can't compare a collective grouping of people and buildings called a city to the federal government. The federal government and the state government are not cities, and a more than a few states and even cities have, have changed, removed, or otherwise, articles and items that have been demeeded offensive.
- Status
Similar threads
