Atheists are Intolerant

[Annik]

I love the SAB. You can hit a button and it'll pull up all the horrifying shit that's in that book.

[Abishalom]

I simply asked someone to give me a few examples of the bible teaching us to do bad things (10+ pages later there are still no examples) which stemmed from a disagreement on earlier pages.

More lies. I gave you many biblical examples here and all you did was merely ignore it (as I said you would). Making the above post of yours an outright lie.

In fact your only response was the following and then you disappeared ... knowing full well there's no way you can defend those biblical references I provided at YOUR request.

I use the Hebrew interlinear, so I'll go check what they say in a bit.

I have no problem with you bowing out of a debate once you've been beaten ... but don't fucking lie about it. I would've let you alone if you hadn't lied.

If it could be proven that I did not ignore your post and that said quote ("I use the Hebrew interlinear, so I'll go check what they say in a bit.") was not my last response...would that then make your post an outright lie?

Well I did address said verse several pages ago...
http://atheistforums.org/thread-12704-po...#pid281864

Perhaps you just overlooked this...so I'll just give you the benefit of the doubt.

I gave him a link to the Skeptic's Annotated Bible, and he completely dismissed it.

I did address your post...

http://atheistforums.org/thread-12704-po...#pid282570

Do you know what a parable is? Obviously whoever owns that site does not. All they did was nitpick words in several verses and give their own deluded interpretation of it (most of which where outright lies) .

[NoMoreFaith]

I keep missing the commandment which instructs all christians "Thou shalt not use quote tags correctly"

Its a bloody epidemic.

EDIT: Ninja Edit and fixed quotes, appreciated ta!

[Reforged]

I love the SAB. You can hit a button and it'll pull up all the horrifying shit that's in that book.

Wow, thats a pretty decent link. I believe thats worth some rep.

[Epimethean]

Abashalom, would you tell your devoted audience what parables are intended to do?

[Mister Agenda]

You are wrong, very wrong. it was a GIFT from a GRADUATING class to their SCHOOL> Government (state and federal) had no part in the matter. You are reading into this far too much.

A physical gift, with religious content, displayed in the lobby of a government-run school. It was illegal.

There was NO violation of the supposed establishment claus.

That's a matter of opinion, but it's a matter of fact that it is currently illegal for public schools to display religous material.

Then why is it ONLY atheists who are bringing these lawsuits?

Are you contending that I would be unable to cite any Jews or Hindus or Buddhists bringing a lawsuit that challenges Christian hegemony, anywhere in the country in the last sixty years? Because I can think of two cases off the top of my head, just in towns I lived in at the time (a Hindu in Champagne IL in the sixties and a Jew in Ft. Walton Beach FL in the eighties), when I wasn't even an atheist. I suspect I could find many more examples on the interwebz.

As is yours. You have nothing to make your reading greater than anyone else's. Yours is based upon your unbelief and that is not enough.

Well, mine has the advantage that the Supreme Court, not made up of atheists, has consistently agreed with me.

Wrong. itis the offense, you just use the principle and the law as an excuse to force out information you do not like. Atheists are very intolerant and spoiled little babies.

Good unintentional irony.

Then the constitution is of no value and needs to be struck down, replaced by subjective opinion reliant upon the whims of those who are in power. All you are advocating is anarchy.

Using your own infantile reasoning, keeping the Constitution means all other laws need to be struck down, replaced by police and courts 'winging it' based on their individual interpretations of the Constitution. All you are advocating is abandonment of the rule of law.

The Constitution was never intended to be the sole law of the land. Laws are to be compliant to the Constitution, and the SCOTUS is the body charged with making sure that remains the case.

Yes you will and you will have no MORAL fiber or standard to guide your actions. Then you will see how dangerous atheism is and how wrong you are.

I do sometimes worry that we'll turn out to be no more magnanimous in our majority-hood than Christians have been; but listening to Christianists like you inclines me to think we can hardly do worse.

IF there is such a thing as religious freedom, it must apply to all even governments or there is no such thing as religious freedom.

ALL of the rights in the Ten Amendments are limitations on the government's activities, restrictions on what the government (and therefore, its agents) can do to citizens.

If you merely expressed your opinions then there would be NO problems BUT atheists do not. They go to the courts and FORCE their opinions on others. (or try to force).

If Christianists merely obeyed the law, then there would be no problems. But Christianists do not. They secretively violate the law, hoping no one will notice, and when someone does, they go to the courts and waste taxpayer money on fighting lawsuits in the face of all the precedents that tell them they're going to lose. We're a tiny minority. We couldn't do anything if the law was not on our side. And that law wasn't decided by atheists. It was decided by the supreme court, whose rulings Christianists seem to delight in spitting on when they don't go their way.

If we want to take this a step further, you will notice that their is NO constitutional right to atheism. Read it without doing any eisegetical work and you will see your unbelief is unconstitutional.

---

P.S. Atheists claim that atheism is not a belief or a religion thus it is SOL.

Our rights are not limited to those spelled out in the Constiution. It says that in the Constitution. I have trouble fathoming the moral and legal mental retardation required to actually claim that atheism is unconstitutional.

[ElDinero]

You're the bigot and the coward. A bigot is one who is intolerant of other opinions that differ from their own. You literally dragged this discussion for 10 pages trying to ask me about my views on homosexuality. I told I do not condone it, but if someone was a homosexual it would not affect my life. Apparently you cannot accept the fact that I just have a different opinion than you.

You answered a question that I never asked, repeatedly, despite me making it very clear what information I was after, then pretended (and are still pretending) that you resolved my query. You're being disingenuous, which is most unsurprising. In fact, you're just a liar. Add it to the list.

[The Heff]

Wow, is this thread still going? It's cracking evidence for the futility of debating with the indoctrinated.

Tolerance...

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

@Cinjin; that cute link;how you do dat?

[AthiestAtheist]

Preventing people from using public property to force their religion on other people is not "forcing our unbelief" on others, it is standing up for freedom of religion. You have no right to use public property for your indoctrination.