WELCOME TO THE NEW WORLD ORDER...

[FatAndFaithless]

Wow, he's still trying to conflate banning religious materials with secularism.

[Huggy Bear]

Wow, he's still trying to conflate banning religious materials with secularism.

The year 1917 was a major turning point in Russian history, and also the Russian Orthodox Church.[13] The Russian empire was dissolved and the Tsarist government - which had granted the Church numerous privileges - was overthrown. After a few months of political turmoil, the Bolsheviks took power in October 1917 and declared a separation of church and state. Thus the Russian Orthodox Church found itself without official state backing for the first time in its history. One of the first decrees of the new Communist government (issued in January 1918) declared freedom from "religious and anti-religious propaganda". This led to a marked decline in the power and influence of the Church.

What part of "religious and anti-religious propaganda" don't you understand?

[dyresand]

Wow, he's still trying to conflate banning religious materials with secularism.

The year 1917 was a major turning point in Russian history, and also the Russian Orthodox Church.[13] The Russian empire was dissolved and the Tsarist government - which had granted the Church numerous privileges - was overthrown. After a few months of political turmoil, the Bolsheviks took power in October 1917 and declared a separation of church and state. Thus the Russian Orthodox Church found itself without official state backing for the first time in its history. One of the first decrees of the new Communist government (issued in January 1918) declared freedom from "religious and anti-religious propaganda". This led to a marked decline in the power and influence of the Church.

What part of "religious and anti-religious propaganda" don't you understand?

[Thumpalumpacus]

Probably because you don't understand the difference, and and are unable to admit it, despite it being perfectly obvious to everyone reading this.

What part of "religious and anti-religious propaganda" don't you understand?

The prosecution rests.

[Huggy Bear]

Probably because you don't understand the difference, and and are unable to admit it, despite it being perfectly obvious to everyone reading this.

What part of "religious and anti-religious propaganda" don't you understand?

The prosecution rests.

Whats taking a quote out of context prove? I can do that too
http://atheistforums.org/thread-29834-po...#pid813571

My claim was that David Blaine can levitate and fly, and there are videos supporting it.

see?

[Fidel_Castronaut]

Communism is not secularism taken to the extreme you fucking idiot.

Seriously. How the fuck are you not getting this??

What the fuck is wrong with your ability to understand this?

Again, as I and many others have said over and over and over.

Secularism is, in short, parsimonious terms that you can understand, is the guarantee that people can chose to be (not) religious. It's where a state does not say 'you must be x', which is also why a state which has a state religion can also be secular.

Get it? If you post in this thread again without understanding and acknowledging this I swear to fucking god.

Remember when I said you were arguing against yourself? I'm 100% right because of the above. You're a dolt, a clueless, moronic dolt who, despite over a week of trying to get this very salient and yet easy to understand point across, continually seems to conflate two mutually exclusive concepts (religion and secularism).

I just don't get it.

[FatAndFaithless]

Fortunately, most people would go back to that quote of mine to see the context and intent, something you refuse to do.

[dyresand]

i posted that video for nothing then because he would have gotten a free history lesson on how he is wrong.

[Fidel_Castronaut]

i posted that video for nothing then because he would have gotten a free history lesson on how he is wrong.

You'd need to go back to 'how to think 101' to get through to this idiot.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Whats taking a quote out of context prove? I can do that too

... except that that was perfectly in context, simply shorn of your "supporting" material. You are asserting that anti-theism is secularism, when it isn't. Me trimming the rest of your vapid post doesn't change the gist of what you were saying.

But hey, it sounds smart when you say "context", so if I were you, I'd keep doing it. It's certainly preferable to pretending to understand something you clearly don't.

---

[...] I swear to fucking god.

Aha! You're a theist! I knew it!