Atheists want God out of Ky. homeland security

[jillian]

How do these Atheists know that God is a "mythological creature?"

doesn't matter... it doesn't belong in a state's legislation.

that's just full tilt bozo.

 

[Anguille]

full tilt bozo.

I like that expression. Thanks for a new one to add to my vocabulary.

 

[xsited1]

Then I must be a very wise atheist.

Uh, no. Atheists ignore irrationalism and are therefore closed-minded.

 

[Amanda]

Uh, no. Atheists ignore irrationalism and are therefore closed-minded.

LOL

 

[Anguille]

Uh, no. Atheists ignore irrationalism and are therefore closed-minded.

How would you know what atheists think?

You're talking like a full tilt bozo.

 

[xsited1]

doesn't matter... it doesn't belong in a state's legislation.

that's just full tilt bozo.

I disagree. The Founding Fathers recognized the importance of God. By using the generic term 'God', there is no violation of the separation of Church and State. This is just another example of the misunderstanding of the writings of Thomas Jefferson. It does, however, expose the true motivation of the atheists in this case. They have closed their minds to God and call him a 'mythical creature', which is a huge assumption on their part.

 

[xsited1]

How would you know what atheists think?

You're talking like a full tilt bozo.

How? I'm a Scientist. I've known many. Don't go 'full tilt bozo' on me.

 

[Anguille]

How? I'm a Scientist. I've known many. Don't go 'full tilt bozo' on me.

A very simplistic explanation for how atheists and non atheists ( I think I'm going to call youse guys that from now own ) embrace irrationality is to recognize all embrace it. What it indicates to each that is what is different.
However I am not going out on a limb to say I really know what you full tilt bozo non atheists think. That would be so non atheist of me to presume.

 

[Anguille]

I disagree. The Founding Fathers recognized the importance of God. By using the generic term 'God', there is no violation of the separation of Church and State. This is just another example of the misunderstanding of the writings of Thomas Jefferson. It does, however, expose the true motivation of the atheists in this case. They have closed their minds to God and call him a 'mythical creature', which is a huge assumption on their part.

God is not a generic term. It is a Christian term used by a society predominantly Christian in a cultural way if not so much in a religious way.

Who cares if it is mythical or not. it does not belong anywhere where it challenges the sovereignty of the state.

 

[jillian]

I disagree. The Founding Fathers recognized the importance of God. By using the generic term 'God', there is no violation of the separation of Church and State. This is just another example of the misunderstanding of the writings of Thomas Jefferson. It does, however, expose the true motivation of the atheists in this case. They have closed their minds to God and call him a 'mythical creature', which is a huge assumption on their part.

The founding fathers also separated church from state...

But mostly, athiests get to do what they want, same as believers... but there's nothing separating a "lack of belief in G-d" from "state" in the constitution... it's a little stickier when we bring G-d into the mix.

It's not about whether we're talking about mythology or not... but it IS about what can be intertwined with our government. I'm pretty sure the good Kentucky Christians would be very cranky if they were faced with legislation saying "with the help of Allah....."... or "Hashem"... or.. well, you get the picture.

 

[xsited1]

The founding fathers also separated church from state...

But mostly, athiests get to do what they want, same as believers... but there's nothing separating a "lack of belief in G-d" from "state" in the constitution... it's a little stickier when we bring G-d into the mix.

It's not about whether we're talking about mythology or not... but it IS about what can be intertwined with our government. I'm pretty sure the good Kentucky Christians would be very cranky if they were faced with legislation saying "with the help of Allah....."... or "Hashem"... or.. well, you get the picture.

Point well taken. God is a generic term. If they had said "Jesus" (or as you said, "Allah") that would be a different story altogether. To me, this is just another example of a frivolous lawsuit from extremists from the atheist camp.

 

[xsited1]

God is not a generic term. It is a Christian term used by a society predominantly Christian in a cultural way if not so much in a religious way.

Who cares if it is mythical or not. it does not belong anywhere where it challenges the sovereignty of the state.

Agree to disagree.

 

[jillian]

Point well taken. God is a generic term. If they had said "Jesus" (or as you said, "Allah") that would be a different story altogether. To me, this is just another example of a frivolous lawsuit from extremists from the atheist camp.

But G-d isn't a generic term to muslims or to hindu's, etc. So that is the point. As for whether the lawsuit is frivolous or the atheists are extremists, I would point out that the only reason to insert the provision was for the religious right to make a point.

So perhaps extremism is in the eye of the beholder.

Me? I don't want G-d near the U.S. government. It's never boded well for my people. We tend to do much better in moderate countries that aren't too far in either direction.

 

[Shogun]

Bullshit. The First Amendment covers my religion as much as it does YOURS.

jebus and your god are not "we the people". show me his mailing address.

 

[Anguille]

Agree to disagree.

Should we embrace such an act of irrationality ?

 

[catzmeow]

If God really wanted to protect this nation, imagine how easily he/she could have prevented 9/11 entirely.

 

[catzmeow]

We want Atheists out of Kentucky too. Can they go.

Talk about brain drain....

 

[Amanda]

If God really wanted to protect this nation, imagine how easily he/she could have prevented 9/11 entirely.

I don't think that's how it works. We have freewill and God doesn't intervene just because something bad will result.

 

[catzmeow]

I don't think that's how it works. We have freewill and God doesn't intervene just because something bad will result.

Did you read the OP?

Of particular concern is a 2006 clause requiring the Office of Homeland Security to post a plaque that says the safety and security of the state "cannot be achieved apart from reliance upon almighty God" and to stress that fact through training and educational materials.

The plaque, posted at the Kentucky Emergency Operations Center in Frankfort, includes the Bible verse: "Except the Lord keep the city, the watchman waketh but in vain."

Apparently, the Lord was busy golfing on 9/11/01.

 

[RodISHI]

I don't think that's how it works. We have freewill and God doesn't intervene just because something bad will result.

I disagree with you Amanda. God can and will intervene at His will. This I do know for I have a bit of personal experience in that area. I cannot say all will agree with that personal experience testimony but I can say I was there when God reached down and pulled a would be rapist off of me. The young man came very close to having his head blown off by the gun that I had recovered from underneath my mattress. Prior to pulling the gun out I had considered over and over in my own mind, "Thou shalt not kill."

Several years later the young man stopped be on a sidewalk and asked if I remembered him. Of course how could I have forgotten. He asked if he could show me something very special. He then asked if I would wait while he went into a building nearby. He came out with a beautiful little girl. He told me thank you for saving me. I told him thank God as I was going to shoot your ass.

So goes I know that God is capable of changing anything at any time any where in any situation.