A question for you godless types. - Page 20 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

#**286** 12-11-2005, 08:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WANT '71 280SEL

It's odd that people have been discussing this for religion thing for 14 pages, yet no one cites the Constitution, the law of the land. The First Ammendment Establishment Clause follows: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.

Goodbye and Good Day Sir
David

So if all religious activity is banned the Atheist win the battle right? Remember Atheism is a religion.

sfloriII · #**287** 12-11-2005, 09:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WANT '71 280SEL

The First Ammendment Establishment Clause follows: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.

Don't forget that part of the Constitution as well.

aklim · #**288** 12-11-2005, 10:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by raymr

I used to share that same pragmatic outlook: Everybody has a price, etc. etc. I figured everything that people did had some effort/reward thought process behind it.

Along the way I pissed off a few people suggesting that their generous deeds were just a way of masking guilt, or getting some sort of self-satisfaction, or a return favor of equal or greater value. Then I started to wonder if you can ever have true friends if everyone lives their life by that standard. Some of the people I criticized were close to me. They helped me as well as others, and the callous remarks hurt them.

I later came to realize that some people indeed lend a hand to others simply because they can.

That hasn't led me wrong yet. I realize they ahve a price so I am ready for it. IF, IF, IF, I ever find one without a price, I will be really pleasantly surprised. In the meantime I will be expecting it.

Could it be that you pissed them off because you pointed out something that they didn't want to be true so they could claim it was totally selfless? If that is what you believe, so be it? What are you going to do? Change the defination and facts so everyone can be happy? Like I said, if it is truely selfless, they should not be receieving payment in ANY form. Otherwise it is not selfless.

And lending a hand to people is not a weakness. Even lending a hand with the relization they are getting something in return is not a weakness.

aklim · #**289** 12-11-2005, 10:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MedMech

So if all religious activity is banned the Atheist win the battle right? Remember Atheism is a religion.

Since when is anyone advocating banning all religious activity. All that is being said is that we keep it out of the state. How is athiesm a religion? Why the focus on them? Why not Taoists, Buddhists, Agnostics, etc, etc?

#**290** 12-11-2005, 10:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aklim

Since when is anyone advocating banning all religious activity. All that is being said is that we keep it out of the state. How is athiesm a religion? Why the focus on them? Why not Taoists, Buddhists, Agnostics, etc, etc?

Aethiesm is a religion that's why. The Buddhists are not working as hard to wipe out Christian expression.

#**291** 12-11-2005, 10:44 PM

From the positiveaethiest website.

Quote:

Positive Atheism is for atheists. Here we learn of the joys and hardships of
being truthful about our own religion. We study our heritage as unbelievers,
often finding that atheism is no big deal. Still, there exists a class of meddlers
who seem unable to resist any opportunity to "tell those atheists a thing or two!"

A264172 · #**292** 12-11-2005, 10:46 PM

672 more views to page one... unless we get another sticky...

#**293** 12-11-2005, 10:51 PM

It's been a good thread and I would rather be the one that killed it so.

ON

#**294** 12-11-2005, 10:51 PM

To the

#**295** 12-11-2005, 10:52 PM

elusive

#**296** 12-11-2005, 10:52 PM

300 mark

#**297** 12-11-2005, 10:53 PM

Down she goes.

#**298** 12-11-2005, 10:53 PM

night night sweetheart.