WTF???

[Paul the Human]

Humanity may be overrated but it beats the alternative, IMNSHO.

And how many alternatives to being human have you tried? <- the preceding was a joke.

I'm all for secularism. I don't see our govt. 'forcing' religion anywhere. With all due respect, it seems to me that you guys are swattin' butterflies.

I can understand why you would say that and, believe it or not, I agree to an extent. These are relatively minor and harmless things, hardly worthy of getting worked up about, let alone staging actual protests. As an atheist, I see these little things as pushing the boundaries (if not actually crossing them) of the separation of church and state.

Our children are forced to recite "one nation, under god", regardless of their actual religion. I am forced to swear to 'god' that I will tell the truth. My money declares trust in 'god'. And so on. These small religious references are forced upon the entire populace, regardless of individual religious views.

So what? At face value, I agree... but I also feel it is important to remind the powers that be that they have already come close to the 'line' and should take care not to cross it. Complaining about these minor infringements is the easiest way to prevent them from going too far. Most of us do not actually expect them to change these things, but now they know they can't just keep heading toward theocracy without opposition.

[Tiberius]

It states simply that Congress shall establish no religion, nor prohibit the free exercise thereof.

Yes, and choosing one aspect of a religion (i.e. belief in God) and putting into official state ceremonies, or pledges, or displaying the 10 commandments in courtrooms, *is* prohibiting the free exercise of religion by anyone whose religion doesn't subscribe to those ideas.

There are two solutions to this. Either allow every single religion to have a place in government (i.e. have every single set of religious commandment displayed at court rooms), or allow none of them (including atheism).

In recent years, the former was tried (namely holiday displays in government buildings), and it just made everything a mess. Thus, it is far easier to allow no religion a prominent place in the state.

People can still worship on their own; still say prayers in public buildings if they want, just as long as they aren't doing it as part of an American "all-inclusive" ceremony.

[AngryBiker]

And we both have equal proof, only mine is more equal than yours.

Is that was it looks like when you are trying to avoid answering? o.O

Do a little research Honey. The Founding Fathers were deists. Look up Thomas Paine.

[Entropist]

I'm all for secularism. I don't see our govt. 'forcing' religion anywhere. With all due respect, it seems to me that you guys are swattin' butterflies.

Lets put the shoe on the other foot then: Every day your child has to go to school to recite this: "I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under Allah, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all." Would you be OK with that?

You can replace "Allah" with "Yahweh," "Christ," "Buddha," "L. Ron Hubbard" or "no god." All of these alternatives are a violation of separation of church and state, including "no god." That's the whole point of secularism (which, incidentally, is not synonymous with atheism): the state cannot invoke any religion, nor can it prohibit citizens (as citizens) from holding and practicing their own personal religious belief (or lack thereof). It is a two-edged sword. Secularism simply means the government must butt out.

Where the government fails to do so, it should be challenged. And atheists are not the only ones that do this.

[AngryBiker]

Humanity may be overrated but it beats the alternative, IMNSHO.

And how many alternatives to being human have you tried? <- the preceding was a joke.

I'm all for secularism. I don't see our govt. 'forcing' religion anywhere. With all due respect, it seems to me that you guys are swattin' butterflies.

I can understand why you would say that and, believe it or not, I agree to an extent. These are relatively minor and harmless things, hardly worthy of getting worked up about, let alone staging actual protests. As an atheist, I see these little things as pushing the boundaries (if not actually crossing them) of the separation of church and state.

Our children are forced to recite "one nation, under god", regardless of their actual religion. I am forced to swear to 'god' that I will tell the truth. My money declares trust in 'god'. And so on. These small religious references are forced upon the entire populace, regardless of individual religious views.

So what? At face value, I agree... but I also feel it is important to remind the powers that be that they have already come close to the 'line' and should take care not to cross it. Complaining about these minor infringements is the easiest way to prevent them from going too far. Most of us do not actually expect them to change these things, but now they know they can't just keep heading toward theocracy without opposition.

Right on, friend. Here's to ya (clink).

[chasm]

And we both have equal proof, only mine is more equal than yours.

Is that was it looks like when you are trying to avoid answering? o.O

Do a little research Honey. The Founding Fathers were deists. Look up Thomas Paine.

Did you not even read my post?

P.S. Our Founding Father's were deists, and some of them were atheists.

And by "some of them" I mean Thomas Jefferson. It's arguable he's an atheist.

[Tiberius]

I should also point out something that just came to mind. Even if the constitution doesn't need interpretation, and the founding fathers never meant for there to be a "separation of church and state", that doesn't mean that it isn't a good idea, or that we shouldn't strive to accomplish it.

Sure, the founders were great men; very intelligent and proud leaders. However, they were living in a different time, and our modern values of equality should trump those of the past. Governments should treat their citizens equally, regardless of race, sexual orientation, income, or religion. To make decisions that favour one set of people over another based on an attribute not shared by all citizens is inherently unfair, and imo inherently un-American.

One of my favourite phrases is written in the Declaration of Independence, and despite the fact that I am an atheist and have no concept of a "Creator", I think that what the phrase *means* for government is very important:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal."

Nobody gets to hold one attribute over another; that is the essence of what America was founded on.

[AngryBiker]

It states simply that Congress shall establish no religion, nor prohibit the free exercise thereof.

Yes, and choosing one aspect of a religion (i.e. belief in God) and putting into official state ceremonies, or pledges, or displaying the 10 commandments in courtrooms, *is* prohibiting the free exercise of religion by anyone whose religion doesn't subscribe to those ideas.

There are two solutions to this. Either allow every single religion to have a place in government (i.e. have every single set of religious commandment displayed at court rooms), or allow none of them (including atheism).

In recent years, the former was tried (namely holiday displays in government buildings), and it just made everything a mess. Thus, it is far easier to allow no religion a prominent place in the state.

People can still worship on their own; still say prayers in public buildings if they want, just as long as they aren't doing it as part of an American "all-inclusive" ceremony.

Adrian, you're all right. Do you live in the Southeast? I'd like to buy you a beer.

The Constitution chooses no single aspect of any particular religion. Ten Commandments in the courtroom (in Alabama, where I currently reside, Judge Roy Moore, exactly) is bullcrap. But I, and the US Constitution, maintain that anyone is free to exercise whichever fable they subscribe to, or not. A group of young people was recently prohibited from singing the National Anthem at the Lincoln Memorial. I think that blows your last sentence in the weeds.

[Paul the Human]

God Bless America!

>.>

[Tiberius]

Adrian, you're all right. Do you live in the Southeast? I'd like to buy you a beer.

I'm not actually an American; I'm an Englishman who was left behind when the founders decided to form their great country. I've always wanted to become an American citizen though...hopefully one day I might be able to emigrate

Anyway, I do like the South East, so if I'm ever in the same area I'm sure you can buy me a drink

The Constitution chooses no single aspect of any particular religion. Ten Commandments in the courtroom (in Alabama, where I currently reside, Judge Roy Moore, exactly) is bullcrap. But I, and the US Constitution, maintain that anyone is free to exercise whichever fable they subscribe to, or not.

Agreed. Everyone should be able to practice their religion. I just don't believe that gives the government the right to proclaim one religious idea over another. The people within the government may make such proclamations, but not the government itself.