Atheist soldier says Army punished him

[jillian]

I know.

cool

 

[mattskramer]

If that discussion falls under the usual free speech preclusions that solders suffer, then no.

What a dodge!
Yet, I should have expected no nore from you.

 

[midcan5]

Read what I said.
This is a free speech issue, not a freedom of religion issue.

But then he has the right? and if not, the sole difference is religion. Does he have that right?

 

[mattskramer]

If that discussion falls under the usual free speech preclusions that solders suffer, then no.

Okay. Let me try to ask you a straight question this way: Based on what little or great deal you know about “free speech preclusions” do you honestly think that a calm discussion about atheism would fall under free speech preclusions?

 

[mattskramer]

But then he has the right? and if not, the sole difference is religion. Does he have that right?

Don’t hold your breath. I’ve asked him what seems like the simplest questions one could ask. He has an amazing way of ducking and avoids giving straight answers.

 

[midcan5]

Answer the question, no prevarications.

 

[Shogun]

Nice try. None of these things address the question I asked you, and since I didn't in any way engage in any discussion of these topics, there;s no reason for me to do so now.

Your's is not the only question on the table. And I've given you answers but you don't want to listen to them. "Creator" can mean anything. And, given that a DEIST wrote the fucking document instead of a christian, it may very well have been some pagan god of freemasonry. do you KNOW otherwise? Feel free to avoid admitting what you know you can't answer though.. It's hilarious watching you avoid Tripoli like a cat thrown in a body of water.


So, actually answer the questions, or admit you cannot.

I have answered the question.. Feel free to scroll up.


Show this to be true.

There is no mention of a specific god, the Treaty of tripoli states that the US is not a christian nation and has respect for belivers of mohammed and JEFFERSON's VERY OWN WORDS REGARDING USING RELIGIOUS VOCAB.

sheesh...

having a dense day today?


Show this to be true.
Given that your entire argument seems to be based on the idea that I thik they were referring to JC, you'll need to do this for your argument to hold any water whatsoever.

HAHAHAHAHAHA!

uh, so NOW you are going to switch gears and state that you are not insisting that Creator means the god of jebus, eh?



nice.... Also, considering your avoidance of the above Treaty you are probably not the local authority on what hold water.


I didnt ask you what it COULD mean, I asked you what they DID mean, in the context used.

Again, it could have meant anything. Feel free to read the Treaty of Tripoly, signed by James Madison and ratified by congress, as proof.


Again, its not up to me to prove or disproive your assertions.

No, it's up to you to prove your assertion that the use of Creator means anything more than "honest Johns Used Car Sales" does to sheisty car lots. I'm warm and comfy in my evidence.. where is yours?


Again, I didnt ask you what it COULD mean, I asked you what they DID mean, in the context used.

Given that a deist wrote the document and was both a freemason and a big fan of enlightenment era philosophy including the gods of socrates and plato, the word could have meant anything.

but, again, feel free to keep avoiding the primary documents..


That's just as likely as you stroking yourself under the desk as you drool over that picture of Adam you posted.

WOW. I'm so impressed with your sarcasm and wit!



Don't you mean Adam and his CREATOR?

C'mon son -- tell me, specifcally, to whom or what they were referring to.

The flying speghettim monster, dude.. How many times do you have to hear it? Obviously, Jefferson was touched by his noodley appendage and you can't prove otherwise.



Never mind that you're necessarily admitting that they WERE referring to a Divine Power, whatever His name might be.

sure, for the sake of gathering support for a revolution. It's almost like we've never seen a politician act in the same manner in order to gather support. Clearly, this means that Thomas Jefferson was really an arch angel and blessed America with the divine hand of the god of moses.



So, now that you've kicked that goofy point into the ground do you want to address the TREATY OF TRIPOLI or would you rather slink back into the ether and lick your wounds?

 

[BrianH]

You also said that monotheistic religion had nothing to do with it. So if Jefferson and the founding fathers used religion of the masses (christianity) to organize a resistance to England, than religion was crucial part of the founding of this nation.

 

[LuvRPgrl]

Nice try.

Given that a deist wrote the document and was both a freemason and a big fan of enlightenment era philosophy including the gods of socrates and plato, the word could have meant anything.


So, now that you've kicked that goofy point into the ground do you want to address the TREATY OF TRIPOLI or would you rather slink back into the ether and lick your wounds?

QUICK !!!! Which came first, the treaty or the Constitution??? Yea, I thought so. To lean so heavily on a treaty shows how utterly weak your posistion is. So what, you still havent answered or responded to NUMEROUS points such as STATE sponsored religions, sponsored by signers of the COTUS

Jefferson was not a Diest. http://www.adherents.com/people/pj/Thomas_Jefferson.html

"In a practical sense, classifying Jefferson as a "Deist" with regards to religious affiliation is misleading and meaningless. Jefferson was never affiliated with any organized Deist movement. This is a word that describes a theological position more than an actual religious affiliation, and as such it is of limited use from a sociological perspective. If one defines the term "Deist" broadly enough, then the writing of nearly every U.S. president or prominent historical figure could be used to classify them as a "Deist," so classifying people as such without at least some evidence of nominal self-identification is not very useful. "

 

[Shogun]

You also said that monotheistic religion had nothing to do with it. So if Jefferson and the founding fathers used religion of the masses (christianity) to organize a resistance to England, than religion was crucial part of the founding of this nation.

no more than the actual reasons the US revolted from England.

Was there something that you wanted to say about the primary document that is the Treaty of Tripoli?

 

[BrianH]

Nope, just that you said that Jefferson and the founding fathers USED RELIGION to rally support behind the independence movement. It played a role.

 

[Shogun]

QUICK !!!! Which came first, the treaty or the Constitution??? Yea, I thought so. To lean so heavily on a treaty shows how utterly weak your posistion is. So what, you still havent answered or responded to NUMEROUS points such as STATE sponsored religions, sponsored by signers of the COTUS

Jefferson was not a Diest. http://www.adherents.com/people/pj/Thomas_Jefferson.html

"In a practical sense, classifying Jefferson as a "Deist" with regards to religious affiliation is misleading and meaningless. Jefferson was never affiliated with any organized Deist movement. This is a word that describes a theological position more than an actual religious affiliation, and as such it is of limited use from a sociological perspective. If one defines the term "Deist" broadly enough, then the writing of nearly every U.S. president or prominent historical figure could be used to classify them as a "Deist," so classifying people as such without at least some evidence of nominal self-identification is not very useful. "

arent you the guy acting like the Declaration of Independance is a legal precedent? It really is hilarious that you run to the Constitution now despite the first Amendment.

To say that Jefferson was not a Deist is the cherry on top your your goofiness.


"Question with boldness even the existence of God; because if there be one, he must more approve the homage of reason, than that of blindfolded fear."
Thomas Jefferson


I was going to unload on you with a shotgun blast of sources but, frankly, you are not worth the effort. Alas, since the Flying Spaghetti Monster loves you though, I am moved to post a single link that you can use to rescue yourself from the dank darkness that is ignorance.

The Jefferson Library
http://www.monticello.org/reports/interests/religion.html


Jefferson believed in the existence of a Supreme Being who was the creator and sustainer of the universe and the ultimate ground of being, but this was not the triune deity of orthodox Christianity. He also rejected the idea of the divinity of Christ, but as he writes to William Short on October 31, 1819, he was convinced that the fragmentary teachings of Jesus constituted the "outlines of a system of the most sublime morality which has ever fallen from the lips of man." In correspondence, he sometimes expressed confidence that the whole country would be Unitarian, but he recognized the novelty of his own religious beliefs. On June 25, 1819, he wrote to Ezra Stiles, "I am of a sect by myself, as far as I know."




I mean, christians usually DO rewrite the bible nixing all of the divinity and miracles.. For realz.

 

[Shogun]

Nope, just that you said that Jefferson and the founding fathers USED RELIGION to rally support behind the independence movement. It played a role.

so did racism and sexism. Do you want to make a similar arguement for those variables of their colonial society? You should read a little bit about Jefferson and his religious views before jumping the shark.

 

[BrianH]

hey man, this wasn't about racism or sexism. Whether an intended contradiction or not, I was just pointing it out in your post. We don't have to go over it again. But if someone were to read that one statement...one could gather that religion played a part.


Upon your request, I will read into Jefferson a little more before assuming (by quotes) what his intentions were. However, I still believe religion played a part...whether the fathers used it to their advantage, or they actually believed in it. They used the religion of the masses to gather support for their cause. It's actually quite cunning and controlling...I admire that.

 

[Shogun]

Fair enough. and in the spirit of fair play I will concede that, regardless of the influence of christianity, I agree with Jefferson about the latter half of the bible and its worthwhile moral philosophy.

 

[M14 Shooter]

What a dodge!
Yet, I should have expected no nore from you.

As the desert said to the grain of sand.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Okay. Let me try to ask you a straight question this way: Based on what little or great deal you know about “free speech preclusions” do you honestly think that a calm discussion about atheism would fall under free speech preclusions?

Beats me. -I- would think not, but then it's entirely possible that the military thinks otherwise.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Don’t hold your breath. I’ve asked him what seems like the simplest questions one could ask. He has an amazing way of ducking and avoids giving straight answers.

As the ocean said to the drop of water...

 

[M14 Shooter]

....And I've given you answers but you don't want to listen to them.

You keep telling yourself that.

When I ask for a specific answer and you respond with "could" or "might" or "any number of", you arent answering my question.

Again, its not up to me to prove or disproive your assertions.

No, it's up to you to prove your assertion that the use of Creator means anything more than "honest Johns Used Car Sales"...

Tell you what:
You show me where I made that assertion, and I will.

That's just as likely as you stroking yourself under the desk as you drool over that picture of Adam you posted.

WOW. I'm so impressed with your sarcasm and wit!

Given your hard-on for the subject, and your pathalogical desire to not have to admit you can't support your position with any specific information -- that is, you cannot show me, specifically, to what or whom they meant by "Creator", et al -- I mostly expected you to admit you ARE stroking yourself. Imagine my surprise.

C'mon son -- tell me, specifcally, to whom or what they were referring to.

The flying speghettim monster, dude.

Glad to see you can answer the question in a meaningful way. [/sarcasm]
But, if you can show that he was specifically referring to the FSM, please do.

Never mind that you're necessarily admitting that they WERE referring to a Divine Power, whatever His name might be.

Sure...

All that needs to be said. Thanks for your admission and agreement that everyone's rights come from whomever they choose to call God.

 

[mattskramer]

As the desert said to the grain of sand.

Don’t give me that. I have always given my opinion and answers to questions put to me (as right or wrong – as educated or uneducated – as biased or unbiased as they may be).