All Forums > General Discussion > Non-Sports > THE WAR ON CHRISTMAS!!!!!
12/20/2012 4:22 PM
You obviously don't see the problem with that. It's a good thing you aren't a judge.

That's more hilarious than you know. Thanks. I needed that laugh.

The "problem", as you suggest, is that the supreme court has presently ruled on an interpretation of the constitution which allows radical atheists and others who do nothing but cause problems for other people to run roughshod over everyone else when it comes to issues like this. As I've said, the founding fathers never intended the constitution to be interpreted this way, but that's what we've gotten from the supreme court, so we have to live with it for now.

As I said, it would be interesting to see how the atheists agenda would go if there were a vote on the issue. I wonder if there is any place in America where their side of this issue would actually win the vote. Probably, but if there was, it wouldn't happen often.
We're a constitutional republic. Not a majority rules democracy.
Actually we're a bit of both. I think we might be better off if more issues were voted on and less were dictated by the government.

12/20/2012 4:33 PM
I'm glad you're able to read the minds of guys who have been dead for 200 years so much better than the judges appointed to the Supreme Court.


12/20/2012 4:51 PM
I'm glad you're able to read the minds of guys who have been dead for 200 years so much better than the judges appointed to the Supreme Court.

There is no mind reading needed. Look at the writings of these individuals. Look at the way they lead their own lives.

They took actions which would really make atheists angry if someone tried it today.

There is a reason our money says "in God we trust". They put up the ten commandments in public buildings for a reason. They even held christian church services in the Capitol building, for goodness sakes.

Those are the first examples that comes to mind off the top of my head. There are plenty more where that came from if you simply do the research.

Their intent was to make sure the government couldn't tell them what to believe (as many of them had been subjected to prior to coming to America). They didn't want someone dictating their religion to them.

Their intent was NOT to remove religion from government, but to remove government from religion.

If they had only made that more clear, the atheists would have to whine and cry about something else.
This post has a rating of , which is below the default threshold.
12/20/2012 5:21 PM
Posted by bistiza on 12/20/2012 4:51:00 PM (view original):
I'm glad you're able to read the minds of guys who have been dead for 200 years so much better than the judges appointed to the Supreme Court.

There is no mind reading needed. Look at the writings of these individuals. Look at the way they lead their own lives.

They took actions which would really make atheists angry if someone tried it today.

There is a reason our money says "in God we trust". They put up the ten commandments in public buildings for a reason. They even held christian church services in the Capitol building, for goodness sakes.

Those are the first examples that comes to mind off the top of my head. There are plenty more where that came from if you simply do the research.

Their intent was to make sure the government couldn't tell them what to believe (as many of them had been subjected to prior to coming to America). They didn't want someone dictating their religion to them.

Their intent was NOT to remove religion from government, but to remove government from religion.

If they had only made that more clear, the atheists would have to whine and cry about something else.
If I told you that it's fact that the earth is at least 4 billion years old, what would you say?
12/20/2012 6:04 PM
Posted by genghisxcon on 12/20/2012 5:10:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bistiza on 12/20/2012 2:40:00 PM (view original):
I'm not asking for people to vote on religion. That's what you apparently didn't understand.

I'm asking for people in a given area to vote on whether or not they will permit an action, which IS something that we often vote on in this country.

To wit: I'm asking people to vote on whether or not they would permit the display of religious symbols (or whatever you want to call each situation where there is apparent disagreement), with majority ruling the same as it does in most other votes.

It's not a vote on religion but on whether an action should be permitted or not.
"It's not a vote on religion but on whether an action should be permitted or not."

let's break it down

"an action"  -  what action, exactly? Well, an action that endorses a particular religion.

So it's not a vote on religion, it's...oh, wait, that's exactly what it is.
So in your mind it is impossible for the Government to recognize a large majority in the community and allow them public space for traditional decorations?

If most of the people in town were Italians and we did a Columbus statue no one would thing the government were endorsing Italians?

Why is religion so different?
12/21/2012 9:39 AM
Wow, ok. I'll put it this way:

Which is more likely true?

The earth is over 4 billion years old.
The earth is 10,000 years old or less.
12/21/2012 9:42 AM
(slapping forehead)

WHY are you engaging him with this nonsense?
12/21/2012 10:55 AM
I'm curious. Plus it's kind of fun watching him make an *** of himself.
12/21/2012 12:03 PM
12/21/2012 12:10 PM
That's stupid. People need to chill the **** out.
12/21/2012 12:28 PM
Posted by bistiza on 12/21/2012 12:20:00 PM (view original):
Which is more likely true? The earth is over 4 billion years old. The earth is 10,000 years old or less.

Again, this is off topic and I certainly hope you don't intend to distract from the original discussion with this because I'll keep bringing it back up anyway, but I will indulge you for now.

Both of those outcomes are equally as possible from my logical perspective. I've seen evidence to suggest either could be the case, and at the same time, I'm also skeptical of both. I don't take what anyone - even a scientist - says as the absolute truth because, as I mentioned before, we may find out in the future that those people are entirely wrong. I simply don't think there is enough evidence to make a positive conclusion on the matter.
I'm curious. Plus it's kind of fun watching him make an *** of himself.

Is that what you call me handing your *** to you in debate and then your attempt to distract from that fact? Interesting.
You think those are equally possible??? According to you, it's just as likely that the world is 10,000 years old as it is that the world is over 4 billion years old. Because, and this is fun, you "don't think there is enough evidence to make a positive conclusion on the matter."

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you.

I love it. 
12/21/2012 12:29 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 12/19/2012 4:40:00 PM (view original):
Because anything that offends anyone is deemed offensive.    Allowing something to offend another is a form of bullying.    And every ******* thing on earth is bullying.
I agree with this post.
12/21/2012 12:39 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 12/21/2012 12:29:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 12/19/2012 4:40:00 PM (view original):
Because anything that offends anyone is deemed offensive.    Allowing something to offend another is a form of bullying.    And every ******* thing on earth is bullying.
I agree with this post.
So do jackoff Montanans.
12/21/2012 1:33 PM
You think those are equally possible??? According to you, it's just as likely that the world is 10,000 years old as it is that the world is over 4 billion years old. Because, and this is fun, you "don't think there is enough evidence to make a positive conclusion on the matter." Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

All I've done is rendered an objective opinion based upon logic rather than being quick to agree with any theory on the matter.  Unless you find it "fun" to hear of an actual unbiased opinion on a somewhat controversial issue, your post makes no sense.

If you really crave hearing someone use actual logic to render an opinion so badly you feel the need to thank me for it, I truly do feel sorry for you.
of 72
All Forums > General Discussion > Non-Sports > THE WAR ON CHRISTMAS!!!!!

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.