Photos of satanic statues for OK courthouse

[thebrucebeat]

saying "protect us from"......

You are free to exercise your faith.
You aren't free to make it a part of national policy.
We are, in fact, protected from that.

you feel you need protection from everyone freely exercising......"omigorsh, I heard someone praying.....did it leave a mark?"......

That was a demonstrably stupid post.
My post was pointing out that more than half of the Ten Commandments are forbidden from becoming national policy by the First Amendment.
What were you responding to?

 

[PostmodernProph]

You are free to exercise your faith.
You aren't free to make it a part of national policy.
We are, in fact, protected from that.

you feel you need protection from everyone freely exercising......"omigorsh, I heard someone praying.....did it leave a mark?"......

That was a demonstrably stupid post.
My post was pointing out that more than half of the Ten Commandments are forbidden from becoming national policy by the First Amendment.
What were you responding to?

the idiocy of atheists who think they need protection from people praying to someone they deny exists.....

 

[Hollie]

you feel you need protection from everyone freely exercising......"omigorsh, I heard someone praying.....did it leave a mark?"......

That was a demonstrably stupid post.
My post was pointing out that more than half of the Ten Commandments are forbidden from becoming national policy by the First Amendment.
What were you responding to?

the idiocy of atheists who think they need protection from people praying to someone they deny exists.....

Yeah, the idiocy of the founding fathers, some of whom new first hand the dangers of theocratic totalitarianism.

How convenient that you want an exemption from constitutional fiat as it applies to your religion which you feel should be granted special dispensation from the law.

 

[PostmodernProph]

That was a demonstrably stupid post.
My post was pointing out that more than half of the Ten Commandments are forbidden from becoming national policy by the First Amendment.
What were you responding to?

the idiocy of atheists who think they need protection from people praying to someone they deny exists.....

Yeah, the idiocy of the founding fathers, some of whom new first hand the dangers of theocratic totalitarianism.

How convenient that you want an exemption from constitutional fiat as it applies to your religion which you feel should be granted special dispensation from the law.

really?....and do you have evidence that the founding fathers felt the need for protecting people from seeing someone pray?.....I rather thought their goal was to prevent a state mandated religion like the one they had fled England to avoid.....

I particularly find it interesting that you claim to seek freedom from totalitarianism while promoting lawsuits prohibiting schools from even mentioning that not everyone shares your beliefs regarding the origin of the universe.....

 

[Hollie]

the idiocy of atheists who think they need protection from people praying to someone they deny exists.....

Yeah, the idiocy of the founding fathers, some of whom new first hand the dangers of theocratic totalitarianism.

How convenient that you want an exemption from constitutional fiat as it applies to your religion which you feel should be granted special dispensation from the law.

really?....and do you have evidence that the founding fathers felt the need for protecting people from seeing someone pray?.....I rather thought their goal was to prevent a state mandated religion like the one they had fled England to avoid.....

I particularly find it interesting that you claim to seek freedom from totalitarianism while promoting lawsuits prohibiting schools from even mentioning that not everyone shares your beliefs regarding the origin of the universe.....

I actually have no evidence that the founding fathers felt any need to protect people from seeing someone pray.

That is because the FF’s never included anything like that restriction on the rights of individuals. The FF’s gave us the concept of freedom of expression and freedom of worship.

You can try this yourself – go to your nearest street corner and prey. Guess what, no one will care. You are free to do that.

So what is it that you’re whining about?

 

[PostmodernProph]

Yeah, the idiocy of the founding fathers, some of whom new first hand the dangers of theocratic totalitarianism.

How convenient that you want an exemption from constitutional fiat as it applies to your religion which you feel should be granted special dispensation from the law.

really?....and do you have evidence that the founding fathers felt the need for protecting people from seeing someone pray?.....I rather thought their goal was to prevent a state mandated religion like the one they had fled England to avoid.....

I particularly find it interesting that you claim to seek freedom from totalitarianism while promoting lawsuits prohibiting schools from even mentioning that not everyone shares your beliefs regarding the origin of the universe.....

I actually have no evidence that the founding fathers felt any need to protect people from seeing someone pray.

That is because the FF’s never included anything like that restriction on the rights of individuals. The FF’s gave us the concept of freedom of expression and freedom of worship.

You can try this yourself – go to your nearest street corner and prey. Guess what, no one will care. You are free to do that.

So what is it that you’re whining about?

and recently, the SC decided that a city council could pray and atheists would have to sit and watch.....but, obviously, that hadn't kept some atheists from trying to use the courts to stop it.....

 

[thebrucebeat]

you feel you need protection from everyone freely exercising......"omigorsh, I heard someone praying.....did it leave a mark?"......

That was a demonstrably stupid post.
My post was pointing out that more than half of the Ten Commandments are forbidden from becoming national policy by the First Amendment.
What were you responding to?

the idiocy of atheists who think they need protection from people praying to someone they deny exists.....

A second stupid post doesn't make the first one any smarter.
The protection is from making prayer or any other form of worship national policy.
But, of course, I already said this.

 

[Hollie]

really?....and do you have evidence that the founding fathers felt the need for protecting people from seeing someone pray?.....I rather thought their goal was to prevent a state mandated religion like the one they had fled England to avoid.....

I particularly find it interesting that you claim to seek freedom from totalitarianism while promoting lawsuits prohibiting schools from even mentioning that not everyone shares your beliefs regarding the origin of the universe.....

I actually have no evidence that the founding fathers felt any need to protect people from seeing someone pray.

That is because the FF’s never included anything like that restriction on the rights of individuals. The FF’s gave us the concept of freedom of expression and freedom of worship.

You can try this yourself – go to your nearest street corner and prey. Guess what, no one will care. You are free to do that.

So what is it that you’re whining about?

and recently, the SC decided that a city council could pray and atheists would have to sit and watch.....but, obviously, that hadn't kept some atheists from trying to use the courts to stop it.....

Oh, those atheists. They're always spoiling the fun you Falwell Nation'ers hope to bring.

But wait, it's not just atheists who have to sit and watch the good Christians pray, it's also every person who holds a faith competing with Christianity.

Cheer up. You can now add every faith other than Christianity (and atheists, of course), to the roll call of those you hate.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Photos of satanic statues for OK courthouse

 

[PostmodernProph]

That was a demonstrably stupid post.
My post was pointing out that more than half of the Ten Commandments are forbidden from becoming national policy by the First Amendment.
What were you responding to?

the idiocy of atheists who think they need protection from people praying to someone they deny exists.....

A second stupid post doesn't make the first one any smarter.
The protection is from making prayer or any other form of worship national policy.
But, of course, I already said this.

but wait....we both know no one has ever proposed that......so why all the lawsuits?....

 

[PostmodernProph]

I actually have no evidence that the founding fathers felt any need to protect people from seeing someone pray.

That is because the FF’s never included anything like that restriction on the rights of individuals. The FF’s gave us the concept of freedom of expression and freedom of worship.

You can try this yourself – go to your nearest street corner and prey. Guess what, no one will care. You are free to do that.

So what is it that you’re whining about?

and recently, the SC decided that a city council could pray and atheists would have to sit and watch.....but, obviously, that hadn't kept some atheists from trying to use the courts to stop it.....

Oh, those atheists. They're always spoiling the fun you Falwell Nation'ers hope to bring.

But wait, it's not just atheists who have to sit and watch the good Christians pray, it's also every person who holds a faith competing with Christianity.

Cheer up. You can now add every faith other than Christianity (and atheists, of course), to the roll call of those you hate.

once again, that doesn't change the fact that it was the atheists who used the courts to force their beliefs, not the "religious fundies"......

 

[thebrucebeat]

the idiocy of atheists who think they need protection from people praying to someone they deny exists.....

A second stupid post doesn't make the first one any smarter.
The protection is from making prayer or any other form of worship national policy.
But, of course, I already said this.

but wait....we both know no one has ever proposed that......so why all the lawsuits?....

To prevent it from happening. The proposals most definitely have been made.

 

[rightwinger]

I suppose they're just embarrassed to place Satan's top 10 commandments next to God's. It would make them look pretty stupid, not to mention reveal their true nature. Couldn't have that.

2 “I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.
3 “You shall have no other gods before Me.
4 “You shall not make for yourself a carved image—any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; 5 you shall not bow down to them nor serve them. For I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children to the third and fourth generations of those who hate Me, 6 but showing mercy to thousands, to those who love Me and keep My commandments.
7 “You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain, for the Lord will not hold him guiltless who takes His name in vain.
8 “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. 9 Six days you shall labor and do all your work, 10 but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord your God. In it you shall do no work: you, nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your male servant, nor your female servant, nor your cattle, nor your stranger who is within your gates. 11 For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it.
12 “Honor your father and your mother, that your days may be long upon the land which the Lord your God is giving you.
13 “You shall not murder.
14 “You shall not commit adultery.
15 “You shall not steal.
16 “You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.
17 “You shall not covet your neighbor’s house; you shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, nor his male servant, nor his female servant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor anything that is your neighbor’s.”

That is embarrassing.
Only two relate to our laws.

My favorite commandment

 

[PostmodernProph]

A second stupid post doesn't make the first one any smarter.
The protection is from making prayer or any other form of worship national policy.
But, of course, I already said this.

but wait....we both know no one has ever proposed that......so why all the lawsuits?....

To prevent it from happening. The proposals most definitely have been made.

no they have not.....please document one proposal to establish a national worship policy.....

 

[Hollie]

and recently, the SC decided that a city council could pray and atheists would have to sit and watch.....but, obviously, that hadn't kept some atheists from trying to use the courts to stop it.....

Oh, those atheists. They're always spoiling the fun you Falwell Nation'ers hope to bring.

But wait, it's not just atheists who have to sit and watch the good Christians pray, it's also every person who holds a faith competing with Christianity.

Cheer up. You can now add every faith other than Christianity (and atheists, of course), to the roll call of those you hate.

once again, that doesn't change the fact that it was the atheists who used the courts to force their beliefs, not the "religious fundies"......

There is no atheist "belief". You desperately need an entity to blame for the continued failures of fundie Christian ministries to impose their dogma on to the public schools in violation of the constitution.

You want special treatment for your religion in violation of the law. How arrogant and self serving is that?

 

[Hollie]

the idiocy of atheists who think they need protection from people praying to someone they deny exists.....

A second stupid post doesn't make the first one any smarter.
The protection is from making prayer or any other form of worship national policy.
But, of course, I already said this.

but wait....we both know no one has ever proposed that......so why all the lawsuits?....

What lawsuits? Are you referring to Dover?

That lawsuit was in connection with keeping religion out of the public schools in accord with the law.

This may come as a shock to you but christians are not exempt from the law.

 

[Hollie]

but wait....we both know no one has ever proposed that......so why all the lawsuits?....

To prevent it from happening. The proposals most definitely have been made.

no they have not.....please document one proposal to establish a national worship policy.....

Why limit your context to the national level.

Proposal to allow official North Carolina state religion dead in legislature | abc11.com

RALEIGH, N.C. -- North Carolina House Speaker Thom Tillis' office said Thursday that a resolution asserting North Carolina has the power to set an official state religion is dead, and won't go any further.

The resolution, filed by two Republicans from Rowan County, declared "each state is sovereign and may independently determine how the state may make laws respecting an establishment of religion" - thereby claiming the federal government and courts have no authority to decide what is constitutional.

 

[September]

Photos of satanic statues for OK courthouse

 

[AmericanFirst]

That has got to be one of the most badass statues I have ever seen. I totally approve.

I think they should paint it pink just to piss the satan worshipers off. That statue would make good target practice.

 

[PostmodernProph]

That lawsuit was in connection with keeping religion out of the public schools in accord with the law.

???....no, that lawsuit was to ban the Dover school board from requiring the one time reading of a one sentence statement that indicated there are people who do not share your opinions........