Posts: 13901
Threads: 263
Joined: January 11, 2009
Reputation:
82
RE: Ken Ham petulantly stamps his feet at reality, internet replies, "this is stu...
February 18, 2015 at 2:28 pm
(February 18, 2015 at 1:52 pm)YGninja Wrote: (February 18, 2015 at 1:51 pm)downbeatplumb Wrote: Wow I mean wow we've had some simple minded people here before but wow......
I can't even....
Thats great, because like fat and faithless, you've not yet come up with an argument, which i am sure would be your first response, if it were that easy.
Ok lets put it like this. In the sense used by the constitution "church" is the catch all term for religious institutions of all kinds it does not refer to the buildings that religious ceremonies are held in.
You appear to arguing that the term religion should have been used rather than church to avoid confusion and to point out that it means all religions and not just Christianity, but as you are the only person that I have heard of making this error it is like asking for all laws be dumbed down just so they make sense to you.
I feel this requires a larger amount of work than America can afford. It may be easier to make you smarter but I am not sure that is possible, starved of oxygen as a child, the product of incest who knows why but you seem to have plumbed a level of stupid and I have encountered many intractable idiots since joining here.
Its part of the fun.
You can fix ignorance, you can't fix stupid.
Tinkety Tonk and down with the Nazis.
Posts: 5466
Threads: 36
Joined: November 10, 2014
Reputation:
53
RE: Ken Ham petulantly stamps his feet at reality, internet replies, "this is stu...
February 18, 2015 at 2:31 pm
(February 18, 2015 at 2:27 pm)SteelCurtain Wrote: (February 18, 2015 at 1:33 pm)Chad32 Wrote: To the nearest gynecology ward!
Good. You go study at the place with all the sick vaginas. I will go into the wild. And live amongst them.
![[Image: Amazed.gif]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=d3gbcblfj930tw.cloudfront.net%2Fimages%2F1185173%2Foriginal%2FAmazed.gif)
Anthropology, done right.
Are you bringing a film crew?
"I was thirsty for everything, but blood wasn't my style" - Live, "Voodoo Lady"
Posts: 15351
Threads: 118
Joined: January 13, 2014
Reputation:
117
RE: Ken Ham petulantly stamps his feet at reality, internet replies, "this is stu...
February 18, 2015 at 2:38 pm
(February 18, 2015 at 2:31 pm)KevinM1 Wrote: Anthropology, done right.
Are you bringing a film crew?
I'll be like Mick Dodge.
![[Image: Mick_Dodge.jpg]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=weirdnewsfiles.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2014%2F01%2FMick_Dodge.jpg)
"There remain four irreducible objections to religious faith: that it wholly misrepresents the origins of man and the cosmos, that because of this original error it manages to combine the maximum servility with the maximum of solipsism, that it is both the result and the cause of dangerous sexual repression, and that it is ultimately grounded on wish-thinking." ~Christopher Hitchens, god is not Great
PM me your email address to join the Slack chat! I'll give you a taco(or five) if you join! --->There's an app and everything!<---
Posts: 9176
Threads: 76
Joined: November 21, 2013
Reputation:
40
RE: Ken Ham petulantly stamps his feet at reality, internet replies, "this is stu...
February 18, 2015 at 2:51 pm
(February 18, 2015 at 2:27 pm)SteelCurtain Wrote: (February 18, 2015 at 1:33 pm)Chad32 Wrote: To the nearest gynecology ward!
Good. You go study at the place with all the sick vaginas. I will go into the wild. And live amongst them.
Oh the burning! The burning!
There's a double meaning right there.
Posts: 11260
Threads: 61
Joined: January 5, 2013
Reputation:
123
RE: Ken Ham petulantly stamps his feet at reality, internet replies, "this is stu...
February 18, 2015 at 4:58 pm
(February 18, 2015 at 1:45 pm)YGninja Wrote: The only claim i've made is that by "Church", they were most likely referring exclusively to the Christian Church, this is because Jews Have synagogues, Muslims have Mosques, other religions have temples, and the country was 99.9% Christian. I've fulfilled my BOP which is to explain why i think this is most likely. If you want to deny me, you inherit a BOP to explain why you think im wrong.
Aaaaand this is why I feel okay about ignoring this thread for as long as I have: the only person even attempting to form some kind of argument is an unrepentant sophist, content to play smug little semantic games, anything to safeguard the conclusion he's already come to and is unwilling to investigate honestly. 
That said, the language regarding the law doesn't exclusively use the word "church" either: the treaty of Tripoli makes it clear that the US wasn't founded on the christian religion, and the establishment clause denies the establishment of a religion so what he's saying isn't even a good semantic argument. 
"YOU take the hard look in the mirror. You are everything that is wrong with this world. The only thing important to you, is you." - ronedee
Want to see more of my writing? Check out my (safe for work!) site, Unprotected Sects!
Posts: 3817
Threads: 5
Joined: November 19, 2012
Reputation:
54
RE: Ken Ham petulantly stamps his feet at reality, internet replies, "this is stu...
February 18, 2015 at 6:04 pm
(This post was last modified: February 18, 2015 at 8:04 pm by Chas.)
(February 12, 2015 at 4:04 pm)YGninja Wrote: (February 11, 2015 at 2:04 am)Esquilax Wrote: Misrepresentation again, its becoming something of a tradition for you.
It is, however, present in the establishment clause, which is in the first amendment. Enough with the sophistry.
Where? Or do you expect to be believed on blind faith?
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;
Quote:How many religions had churches at the relevant time period? For this reason your claim is a non sequitur. By 'church' they were referring to the Christian religion alone. The only objective was to keep the state from interfering with or controlling the Christian Church. There is freedom of religion for the people, and the state cannot meddle with the Church, but clearly this does not mean that the state cannot support or endorse the Christian Church specifically, as it has done throughout the history of the USA, until the modern era.
Are you willfully ignorant or just stupid?
The first Jewish Synagogue in Colonial America was built in 1759 in Newport, Rhode Island.
Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
Posts: 15351
Threads: 118
Joined: January 13, 2014
Reputation:
117
RE: Ken Ham petulantly stamps his feet at reality, internet replies, "this is stupid."
February 18, 2015 at 6:57 pm
Oh boy, Chas, you boofed that up... 
"There remain four irreducible objections to religious faith: that it wholly misrepresents the origins of man and the cosmos, that because of this original error it manages to combine the maximum servility with the maximum of solipsism, that it is both the result and the cause of dangerous sexual repression, and that it is ultimately grounded on wish-thinking." ~Christopher Hitchens, god is not Great
PM me your email address to join the Slack chat! I'll give you a taco(or five) if you join! --->There's an app and everything!<---
Posts: 3817
Threads: 5
Joined: November 19, 2012
Reputation:
54
RE: Ken Ham petulantly stamps his feet at reality, internet replies, "this is stu...
February 18, 2015 at 8:04 pm
(February 18, 2015 at 6:57 pm)SteelCurtain Wrote: Oh boy, Chas, you boofed that up...
fixt.
Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
Posts: 132
Threads: 1
Joined: January 28, 2015
Reputation:
1
RE: Ken Ham petulantly stamps his feet at reality, internet replies, "this is stu...
February 18, 2015 at 8:24 pm
(This post was last modified: February 18, 2015 at 8:33 pm by YGninja.)
(February 18, 2015 at 2:28 pm)downbeatplumb Wrote: (February 18, 2015 at 1:52 pm)YGninja Wrote: Thats great, because like fat and faithless, you've not yet come up with an argument, which i am sure would be your first response, if it were that easy.
Ok lets put it like this. In the sense used by the constitution "church" is the catch all term for religious institutions of all kinds it does not refer to the buildings that religious ceremonies are held in.
You appear to arguing that the term religion should have been used rather than church to avoid confusion and to point out that it means all religions and not just Christianity, but as you are the only person that I have heard of making this error it is like asking for all laws be dumbed down just so they make sense to you.
I feel this requires a larger amount of work than America can afford. It may be easier to make you smarter but I am not sure that is possible, starved of oxygen as a child, the product of incest who knows why but you seem to have plumbed a level of stupid and I have encountered many intractable idiots since joining here.
Its part of the fun.
How do you know thats the sense in which it was used? There is no separation of Church and state in the constitution any way.
(February 18, 2015 at 4:58 pm)Esquilax Wrote: (February 18, 2015 at 1:45 pm)YGninja Wrote: The only claim i've made is that by "Church", they were most likely referring exclusively to the Christian Church, this is because Jews Have synagogues, Muslims have Mosques, other religions have temples, and the country was 99.9% Christian. I've fulfilled my BOP which is to explain why i think this is most likely. If you want to deny me, you inherit a BOP to explain why you think im wrong.
Aaaaand this is why I feel okay about ignoring this thread for as long as I have: the only person even attempting to form some kind of argument is an unrepentant sophist, content to play smug little semantic games, anything to safeguard the conclusion he's already come to and is unwilling to investigate honestly.
That said, the language regarding the law doesn't exclusively use the word "church" either: the treaty of Tripoli makes it clear that the US wasn't founded on the christian religion, and the establishment clause denies the establishment of a religion so what he's saying isn't even a good semantic argument.
No, the ToT says the US Government wasn't founded on the Christian religion. The establishment clause, again, protects religion from interference from Government. Not the government or any of its institutions from religion, which we've already established couldn't possibly be the case because all US Colleges and Universities were founded as Christian, schoolchildren sung Christian hymns from the very beginning, and the entire nation learned to read and write using the Bible.
(February 18, 2015 at 6:04 pm)Chas Wrote: (February 12, 2015 at 4:04 pm)YGninja Wrote: Where? Or do you expect to be believed on blind faith?
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;
Quote:How many religions had churches at the relevant time period? For this reason your claim is a non sequitur. By 'church' they were referring to the Christian religion alone. The only objective was to keep the state from interfering with or controlling the Christian Church. There is freedom of religion for the people, and the state cannot meddle with the Church, but clearly this does not mean that the state cannot support or endorse the Christian Church specifically, as it has done throughout the history of the USA, until the modern era.
Are you willfully ignorant or just stupid?
The first Jewish Synagogue in Colonial America was built in 1759 in Newport, Rhode Island.
Its called a Synagogue, not a Church. Y'know why?
church
tʃəːtʃ/Submit
noun
1.
a building used for public Christian worship.
Posts: 9176
Threads: 76
Joined: November 21, 2013
Reputation:
40
RE: Ken Ham petulantly stamps his feet at reality, internet replies, "this is stu...
February 18, 2015 at 8:34 pm
You can't have an agreement of one side not interfering with another side without it working both ways. It just doesn't work. Eventually you'd have a theocracy, and we all know how shitty theocratic governments are when it comes to equal rights and democracy.
If you think they wanted a theocracy, why didn't they just have a theocracy?
|
