Originally posted by whodeyA secular government is not an atheistic one. Such a government has no opinion as to whether or not there is a god. it's citizens are free to believe in a god or not as they see fit. When I promote the separation of church and state, I am not fighting to make the government an atheistic one. I am fighting to keep the government out of the business of theology altogether.
Of course I can't speak for every Christian who are evangelicals in the Republican party but not all endorse a theocracy. Having said that, there is a difference between fighting for morals you think that are "good" and endorsing a Christian government. I can't speak for Huckabee but it may be that all he is saying is that we should have laws that reflect h ...[text shortened]... most part, everything is legal so long as you are not infringing upon the rights of another.
In a secular government children are allowed to pray wherever they want, as long as they are not causing a disturbance. What should be forbidden is to have school sponsored prayer. If a child wants to pray silently on his own, what concern is it of anybody else? Nobody should be taught about creationism is a science class. If parents want their children to learn about creationism then they should do it in the appropriate place, which is in their church. Science should be taught in science class and religion should be taught in church. Or possibly in a comparative religion class. I'm sure there are atheists out there who would punish parents for teaching their children about god, bur fortunately a secular state protects their right to do so as they see fit.
Many laws are indeed based upon morality. But the concept of "doing unto others as you would have them do unto you" is not exclusive to christianity. Almost every moral code embodies that. If you pass a law against murder, you're not enshrining christianity because every moral code is against murder. But if you had to profess a belief in Jesus as your personal savior in order to be president, then that would be an unlawful entanglement of church and state.
Originally posted by darthmixYou are mistaken if you think there is a meaningful discussion going on here. There is not.
So cheap shots and personal attacks, however well-deserved you think they are, only serve to distract from and derail an otherwise meaningful discussion, and you should knock them off. So that.
Originally posted by darthmixWrong. Insults such as those administered by RWillis constitute the main reasons why I stick around here. And you wouldn't want me to leave -- I'm one of the most intelligent people in this forum, a veritable reservoir of knowledge.
I guess I am, then. Your comments by themselves were meaningful and articulate enough. You only detract from them by engaging in little insults like that.
There really isn't any excuse for it. It's just bad rhetorical practice.
Originally posted by darthmixI can't speak for anyone else's posts, but between whodey and myself this thread consists entirely of two people talking past one another. I have absolutely no interest in anything whodey says and he has absolutely no interest in anything I say (even if he denies it). In such an environment there can be no meaningful discussion. So whether I present my argument in an abusive manner or in a civil one is completely irrelevant. It's only window dressing.
I guess I am, then. Your comments by themselves were meaningful and articulate enough. You only detract from them by engaging in little insults like that.
There really isn't any excuse for it. It's just bad rhetorical practice.
The only consideration is whether I care to be 'well liked' by other readers. Since I am quite content to be thought of as 'rude and condescending' (as gaychellplayer put it) I will insult whodey at my own discretion. There is some small amusement in that at least.
1 edit
Whatever reasons you cite for participating in this thread, your insulting behavior was counter to that purpose. It reflects badly on you and will make lurking readers that much less likely to take you seriously.
If you really think this discussion is so worthless that insults are hunky dory, then you can't justify the trouble you took to type out, for example, that three-paragraph post at the top of this page.
Originally posted by rwingettI've learned a lot from Whodey's posts for a long time. He is very intelligent and articulate, and furthermore he DOES NOT insult other posters. I believe he does care about what you have to say. Why do you want people to think that you're a jerk?
I can't speak for anyone else's posts, but between whodey and myself this thread consists entirely of two people talking past one another. I have absolutely no interest in anything whodey says and he has absolutely no interest in anything I say (even if he denies it). In such an environment there can be no meaningful discussion. So whether I present my argu ...[text shortened]... will insult whodey at my own discretion. There is some small amusement in that at least.
Originally posted by darthmixI've probably made more than 2,000 posts in the forums over the six+ years I've been a member of this site. I make no apology for the fact that a small fraction of them are mildly abusive. If you search my past posts you'll eventually find several other examples where I've called someone 'stupid' or an 'idiot.' I'll eventually do so again. One that I've used more than once is to say, "Were you born stupid, or were you dropped on head as a child?" That's probably my favorite. This is the internet, after all. Proper decorum is not always held in high regard.
Whatever reasons you cite for participating in this thread, your insulting behavior was counter to that purpose. It reflects badly on you and will make lurking readers that much less likely to take you seriously.
If you really think this discussion is so worthless that insults are hunky dory, then you can't justify the trouble you took to type out, for example, that three-paragraph post at the top of this page.
So get off my case you freakin' idiot.
Ha ha, just kidding about the "freakin' idiot" part.
Or am I?
Originally posted by gaychessplayerHey, Whodey, you're not allowed to have multiple accounts on this site.
I've learned a lot from Whodey's posts for a long time. He is very intelligent and articulate, and furthermore he DOES NOT insult other posters. I believe he does care about what you have to say. Why do you want people to think that you're a jerk?
Originally posted by gaychessplayerNow, now, there is no need to make this thread into a shouting match. I have been called worse and treated far worse than this, trust me. I understand that he is phobic in terms of religion in general and when the thought of those in authority over him might be religious or swayed by them the thought of it is to much to endure.
Are you really as rude and condescending as you pretend to be, or is that just an act? You don't really help your argument by acting like an a**hole.
Having said that, he does raise some concerns that I share. Namely the thought of those above me speaking for God. When sinful man speaks for a holy God there is much room for abuse. The evidence of this can be seen throughout history and is why I am against theocracies in general. However, people like rwringett will never prevent me from speaking my mind or make me believe that I should not have a voice in government simply because I believe in God and fight for the morals I believe in. If the truth be known, when I begin to encounter insults such as his I get the impression that I may be hitting to close to home, so to speak.