(January 5, 2015 at 2:28 pm)Esquilax Wrote: The problem wasn't the speed with which you grabbed the links, but that you fell for and propagated known falsehoods because they confirmed what you already believed. The majority of these christian persecution tales are much the same; lies or distortions that theist news sources latch onto without ever knowing the full story, nor caring. If you were googling them, either you already knew what you were looking for, in which case you're a dupe who didn't bother to fact check, or you were looking for persecution of your religion generally, meaning you were just looking for examples that confirm your presuppositions, which both isn't an honest way to present a situation, nor is it effective as single examples, given without context or a broader social indicator, are not sufficient to determine larger trends. Either way, what reason do any of us have to trust any links you give in future? It only took me three minutes or so to falsify your last claims, after all; evidently even that much research is too much, both for you and the persecution brigade this stuff feeds.

Which doesn't even address the broader notion that, just as Not-X is not X, Not-Secularism is not Secularism, making your entire point moot even if it was accurate. "X, Y, and Z aren't doing A right!" does not imply that the ideological basis for A is ineffective, impossible, or incorrect.

I don't know how it is in Australia, but these stories are not uncommon in the US (probably the most litigious country in the world #American Atheists #Freedom From Religion Foundation), Hence why I didn't bother fact checking.

Not uncommon, but commonly non-factual.

(January 5, 2015 at 2:45 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: I don't know how it is in Australia, but these stories are not uncommon in the US (probably the most litigious country in the world #American Atheists #Freedom From Religion Foundation), Hence why I didn't bother fact checking.

Not uncommon, but also not, you know, factual. As I think I've pretty aptly demonstrated so far, given that the best examples you saw fit to give were a joke and a complete fabrication. Most days you can at least find one or two of these squealing persecution narratives from US sources on atheist blogs, followed by a round of slight fact checking or language deconstruction that shows that the persecution either is not happening, or is simply the proper execution of a secular American government being misinterpreted by christians used to a certain amount of privilege.

Since you mention American Atheists and the FFRF, I will too, since the cases they take on are often breaches of the definition of a secular government that they are attempting to repair. What we have here, if you wanted to be at all accurate, is a country where the most highly religious demographics are the ones damaging the secular nature of the government, while the atheists are the ones attempting to keep that secular nature pure.

It's almost like an exact reversal of your claim here! hock:

(January 5, 2015 at 2:45 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: Hence why I didn't bother fact checking.

There is no good excuse. You are responsible for your own thinking.

Carry on.

(January 5, 2015 at 4:15 pm)Esquilax Wrote: Since you mention American Atheists and the FFRF, I will too, since the cases they take on are often breaches of the definition of a secular government that they are attempting to repair. What we have here, if you wanted to be at all accurate, is a country where the most highly religious demographics are the ones damaging the secular nature of the government, while the atheists are the ones attempting to keep that secular nature pure.

It's almost like an exact reversal of your claim here! hock:

No, usually their cases are petty, like the attempt to remove the 10 commandments from public property. If there is no law against erecting a monument on public land, then one should be allowed to do so, the government just can't have a preference in the case of religion, this is secularism.
http://atheists.org/legal/bradford-county

Quote:In the complaint, American Atheists and Mr. Cooney demanded a declaratory judgement stating that the display of the monument violates the United States Consitution, specifically the Establishment Clause and an injuction requiring the removal of the monument.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Atheists

Quote:In May 2013 the American Atheists settled with Bradford County, Florida, regarding a monument containing the ten commandments. The American Atheists would be allowed to place their own monument onto public property. This marks the first time that such a monument will be placed on public land. The monument is being furnished by American Atheists via a grant from the Stiefel Freethought Foundation

http://ffrf.org/outreach/item/16760-why-...be-removed

Quote: It's very simple: I don't believe in "God," but my money says I do.

I am an American, but I am not a part of the "We" in "In God We Trust." Millions of good, moral, patriotic citizens do not believe in a god. We pay taxes, vote, sit on juries and serve in the military, but every time we spend a dollar bill we are told that Congress considers us outsiders.

To be accurate, the motto should say, "In God Some Of Us Trust," and wouldn't that be silly?

Unbelievers represent 7%-9% of the population. By comparison, Jews are a respected minority at 2%-3%. Most people would consider "In Jesus We Trust" to be exclusionary and inappropriate. So, why is it okay to exclude atheists and agnostics?

Yes, because Judaism is the only religion that doesn't believe in Jesus.

I'm pretty sure their resources could be put to better use fighting "real" problems, don't you agree?

(January 5, 2015 at 11:32 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: Yes, because Judaism is the only religion that doesn't believe in Jesus.

I believe there are a couple others. We even have a catholic from some strange sect that does not worship god or jesus.

I'm sorry, did you just describe a case involving the constitutional issues of a monument in front of an american fucking courthouse as petty? You've flown the coop man.

The AA dropped the ball on that one. I don't want to see their silly monument on a lawn, I want to see our constitution upheld.....

It clearly hasn't occurred to this thread's resident idiot that removing engravings of the ten commandments from public property is secularism.

I can't wait 'til he sees his first monument to Satan mounted under his argumentation.

(January 5, 2015 at 9:59 pm)Parkers Tan Wrote:

(January 5, 2015 at 2:45 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: Hence why I didn't bother fact checking.

There is no good excuse. You are responsible for your own thinking.

Carry on.

You sir are not one to talk, remember this little correspondence....
http://atheistforums.org/thread-29545-po...#pid793713

Of course, no response.... shocking.

(January 5, 2015 at 11:49 pm)Rhythm Wrote: I'm sorry, did you just describe a case involving the constitutional issues of a monument in front of an american fucking courthouse as petty? You've flown the coop man.

The AA dropped the ball on that one. I don't want to see their silly monument on a lawn, I want to see our constitution upheld.....

It is petty, in what way does that monument in affect you?

(January 5, 2015 at 11:51 pm)Parkers Tan Wrote: I can't wait 'til he sees his first monument to Satan mounted under his argumentation.

I could careless, which is how atheists claim to feel, except they don't.

With the new world order... i guess ill take a side of fries and a shake.