I'm so excited by this news! It'll save the taxpayers a fortune won't it? How did govt get involved in the schools anywhoo? Slow day in Washington or something? Wait'll I tell Auntie Em...

I never could figure it out.. ??

There is no such thing as an Athiest.
How can you exist if there is no such thing
as what you don't believe in. hmmm.?

allegience? republic? nation? God? liberty?
justice? for all? ... it all ceases to exist.

It is the "matrix".. virtual reality? They have
to be trapped in a logic loop.. or something.

Wow, that could end up leaving a lot of busybody lefty teachers out of work. We should create an Airborne PC Corps and airdrop them into places that are short on teachers, such as active volcanos and regions of Ebola outbreak.

...or employ them as human shields.

In the court's two-to-one decision, the dissenting judge proposed a simpler solution of changing the words "under God" to "over God."

The dissenting juror stated in a post-decision interview, "Heyzeus kreesto, I gave the other two nitwits a chance to knock off early with a simple half-page decision. They stretched it out to three pages and we ran overtime. Now I've missed my ride to go watch those naked hos from Marin county spell out 'peace'."

"How can you exist if there is no such thing
as what you don't believe in. hmmm.?"

That might be the most idiotic argument I've heard in my entire life. Allow me to presume that you believe there's no such thing as Ystrvntz, an enormous three-armed bowling ball with the ability to spontaneously generate tasty Mexican food. BUT IF YOU DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY SUCH THING AS WHAT YOU DON'T BELIEVE IN, HOW CAN YOU EXIST? HUH? HUH? Therefore Ystrvntz MUST exist, by the transative property of I'm a moron.

Hot damn, is it that hard to come up with a meaningful argument against atheism? Here's one: atheism, like all other religions, requires an arbitrary belief in a totally unsupported idea ("There is no God, just because I know this somehow.") (All other religions believe, instead, "There is a God, just because I know this somehow.")

Your argument, however, is sheer idiocy. "If it doesn't exist, how can you not believe in it?" Ri-i-i-ight.

-JS

"allegience? republic? nation? God? liberty?
justice? for all? ... it all ceases to exist."

Nah. Usually it just designates a lack of belief in a diety. That's it.

Regards / GulGnu

-Stabil som fan!

"Here's one: atheism, like all other religions, requires an arbitrary belief in a totally unsupported idea ("There is no God, just because I know this somehow.")"

Atheism of course has one up on the other faiths, as it starts out from a null proposition - the absence of a God. Not much unlike starting out from a null proposition regarding the existance of spotted pink elefants.
Thus, I'd change that to "There is no God, and if there is, please give me some solid proof."

Regards / GulGnu

-Stabil som fan!

Very Good Shlif

I think you got the point !
It is just another religion being foistered
off onto the rest of us by the left.

semantics and rhetoric.

As much or more of a "State Religion" as
Christianity...

the irony is that you have to NOT be an
Athiest to understand how rediculous the
logic loop.

"...or employ them as human shields."

Human TARGETS. Human "shields" makes it sound like they're good for something other than pumping full of holes.

How about pink nukes GulGnu? or WMOD?
Do they exist in Iraq... or not? They don't
exist unless the "inspectors" find them right?

Saddam is counting on that.

Maybe it is better for US to just "ignorantly"
assume that they do.. and act accordingly.

Proof before belief is condemnation by definintion.

The world is going to be a lot better off never
knowing than finding out too late. Or ignoring
all the evidence (like Athiests tend to do)

Bush should delay military action in Iraq till summer.

That way the teachers in Maine and the atheists can share their opinions and beliefs , or lack of them with SH. They would be sure to be well received. Give them a couple months of their valuable ideas and he would resign in confusion.

Speaking of God and I don't claim this as an orignal idea, I think Rush came up with it. The reason the liberal does not want God as part of our government is because it would interfere with their ability to have the regilion of liberalism influence our government.
Liberalism is actually a religion. The fanatics of the liberal left believe that their religous beliefs are the one and only way. If we are going to have a seperation of church and state lets seperate liberalism from our government. We would have to declare the donkey party illegal and unconstitutional.

Zup? Yo, if da do way wif skool, where be iz i gun ta sells ma crakk?

Actually the 9th Circuit Court was close to issuing a decision combining the Second with the First Amendment, thus determining that only state militias have a right to practice religion. Everyone else would have to attend daily sessions of indoctrination in the use of condoms and mutual masturbation. People would still be free to believe in God, after a seven day waiting period and with the consent of the local police chief. A court spokesman pointed out the the Constitution clearly prohibits the establishment of religion, and therefore it is up to the federal government to create endless standardized tests to keep children's minds off of spiritual matters.

In the end the Court was unable to issue a ruling when they found that the judges no longer spoke a common language.

Phroggie, either you're really bad at communicating sarcasm, or you're a fool. Are you suggesting that a god's existence can be proved simply because, for people not to believe in it, there needs to be a god for them not to believe in? Or are you correctly suggesting that that's a really, really dumb idea?

I would say christianity is much, much more of a State Religion than atheism. The US has not been known to provide funding to un-godded philosophical organizations, although "faith-based initiatives" (read: religious favoritism) mark its more unConstitutional policies. Atheism might be correctly construed, however, as a more culturally-popular mistake than christianity.

GulGnu, you are describing not atheism but agnosticism, which is a much more mature choice. Atheists childishly reject religionists' god simply to make the point that they're dramatic and enlightened. Agnostics reject both the irrational claims "there is definitely a god!" and "there is definitely not a god!" Our founding fathers were largely Deists -- "there is definitely a god, but I don't buy all that ancient mythology about Jesus/Moses/Adam/Muhommad/Buddha/Lot/Jacob/etc."

-JS

Oh yes I do exist! And I'm watching you, and you and you..........

........and I'm really keeping my eyes on that dipstick A. Frenchman with his warped ideas

well yeah.. it is a dumb idea! Becuase it's an
entire idology based on what is not. (It's not
the enlightened who call others foolish.)

It's the problem that the left (and French) have.
They don't stand for anything really.. or believe
in anything.

They are just religiously:
Anti-American, Anti-Bush, anti-God, anti-whatever
is on the agenda of anyone who has the courage of
thier convictions.

Becuase I believe in something, or because you
don't may not have much relevance at all on whether
or not it is true.

Nor does our ability to prove it or not sometimes.
But.. ability is authority.

Thats where religion gets it's wrong.
Doesn't mean might is right.. but it does mean
don't mess with someone bigger than you unless
you want your butt kicked. Responsibility will
sometimes require discipline (Assumed authority)
which is what causes these deep seated resentments.

so.. ok.. this is my personal belief.. that the
real reason why people don't beleive in God has
a lot more to do with the (moral) responsiblity
that that they don't want to take.. than that
which they do they do.

Zzebu-since you asked, publicly funded schools were started in the mid 1800's by the (mostly) Protestant members of the federal government as a counter-balance to the growing number of parochial "public" schools open to the newly arriving Catholics from Europe. For way too much detail Google "Public School" origins.

Shlif-even just as an intellectual pursuit, I think it would be worthwhile to read any of the major religions books (Bible, Torah, Koran, etc). To help decide if it is worth going through the "Big" books, start by taking a couple of hours to read Ecclesiastes.

You've gotta dance with who brung ya.

God, Guns and Guts made this country. Let's keep all three.

I've been a thorough atheist for most of my adult life. But I'm going to have to reconsider given the clear evidence of God - namely, His previous posts on this very thread.

=====

As usual, this post is hilarious. Congratulations Scott for creating something that atheists and theists alike can enjoy. Bravo!

"Shlif-even just as an intellectual pursuit, I think it would be worthwhile to read any of the major religions books (Bible, Torah, Koran, etc). To help decide if it is worth going through the "Big" books, start by taking a couple of hours to read Ecclesiastes." - FrozenTundra

I've read almost all of the Bible and parts of the Koran. They're fascinating as archeological remnants -- they help you to understand the culture that created them, and therefore they shed a certain amount of insight on our modern culture. They lay out pretty extensive moral codes, which, while rarely philosophically mature, can be worthwhile foundations for a society, esp. in relatively chaotic times. When you get right down to it, though, they're essentially arbitrary compilations of local myths and primary documents, sewn together or revised as was politically necessary at any given point in time.

"You've gotta dance with who brung ya. God, Guns and Guts made this country. Let's keep all three." - arlo

Presumably this is facetious. America was also founded on slavery and genocide. (Certain fools will tell you that this somhow invalidates its right to exist or its moral authority; they are beneath mention.) The course of human history depended on might-making-right, on very primitive beliefs even by a theist's standards, on mythologies and bad science. But let's dance with who brung us, right?

"well yeah.. it is a dumb idea! Becuase it's an
entire idology based on what is not. (It's not
the enlightened who call others foolish.)" - Phrog Poet

I meant that your "proof" against atheism was stupid. Atheism, though quite flawed, is not "dumb" for the reasons you describe. Of course you can base an ideology on something's not existing -- aliens who created man, for instance. If I don't believe our ancestors were created by aliens, am I being silly? Is it unenlightened to disparage those who do believe that?

I agree that the left is too anti-; it's become instinctively political rather than contemplatively political. However, courage of convictions is not in-and-of itself a good thing. Hitler had it. So did Nietzsche. You need to question your convictions, but only to a reasonable degree -- a balance that eludes both the modern left and the modern right.

"so.. ok.. this is my personal belief.. that the
real reason why people don't beleive in God has
a lot more to do with the (moral) responsiblity
that that they don't want to take.. than that
which they do they do."

I agree that that's true, but that's hardly an argument against atheistic principles -- just against the particular people who make up modern atheism. Communists were evil because they oppressed their people. Communism was not evil for that reason -- it was evil because it is the purpose of a social order to function in the real world, and communism itself can never function in the real world. However, the fact that communism is evil has nothing to do with the particular choices of its practitioners. Similarly, atheism is not stupid because its practitioners are looking for an excuse to ignore traditional morality, nor is it stupid because its practitioners are looking for a dramatic way to rebel against the mainstream. It's stupid because it's deeply flawed as an ideological paradigm.

BTW, it's not so much about moral responsibility as it is about intellectual responsibility -- morality is flawed unless it is slave to a rational and measured analysis of every situation.

-JS

If God doesn't exist, then who will I get to damn my things?

Saddam damn it!
Putin Damn it!
NEA damn it!
UN Damn it!
7-11 damn it!

Nah, they don't seem to work as well

I'd like to have a ruling that we keep God in the damning business. Unless we can come up with a better idea.

Ford damn it!

Any suggestions?

A rough quotation, I think from G. K. Chesterton:

"The problem with atheists is not that they do not believe in God, but, absent that, they believe in anything."

Late in the game, but worth considering. Political Protest has become a form of secular religion.

Don't Make me come down there!
God

1899
"GOD DOES NOT EXIST" - Neitzche
1900
"NEITZCHE DOES NOT EXIST" - God

Why are you trying to argue the existance of God with an athiest? It is illogical.

I believe in God and an athiest cannot convince me that He does not exist, and I am a scientist.

God gave us a free will to believe in Him or not to beleive in Him. As long as the athiest does not infringe unpon my beliefs, then this person can believe in canned corn for all I care.

The problem is is that many of them use this disbelief as a rational for their immoral conduct. If there is no one to answer to then anything that you do is allright. If you are the determinor of morality then anything is acceptable and anyone who says to you that what you are doing is wrong is by definition a fanatic and trying to take away your rights.

This is the cover that the athiests use. THe rights of the non-believers is superior to the rights of the believers since they believe is what is right for them right now.

SInce their core valuesare based on situational ethics, any reminder of absolutes is, of course abhorant to them.

ASHCROFT: 9TH CIRCUIT DETAINED, UNDER INVESTIGATION

Citing an "anonymous hunch", the Justice Dept. early this morning took the 9th Circuit Court into custudy and charged all its members with "crimes to be named later" ... The justices will be held at Guantanamo Bay pending completion of the investigation.

In a related story, the Justice Dept. has announced that all cases related to detainees at Guantanomo Bay will be handled by the 9th Circuit Court, just as soon as it's able to return to formal session.

My friends(?) and family have always accused me of being a sick, cynical, sarcastic, twisted S.O.B..

You are my hero.

Wow, I am an atheist. I never realized it was simply to ignore morality standards and get away with everything I want. Everyday, you read about horrible crimes done by all the atheist. All of the terrorists did it because of their atheism, not their deluded fanatical believes in Allah. The 100 years war, fought by different cults of christians, must have been atheists.
I personally try to do good because its the right thing to do not because "I might get to some imagionary heaven".
Quit trying to figure us out. Religious people suffer under the believe that if someone is not like them, it must be evil. Also that atheist must be liberal democrats. I am neither.
I am a free thinker. Make up my own mind.

Danjo

This just in: a recent UPI poll shows that 2/3 of French exports to the U.S.(whine,cheese & Grey Goose vodka)wind up in the 9th circuit area of Ca. (Hollywood)... Coincidence? The remaining 1/3 is sent directly to N.Y.C.
oops wine...sorry

I've actually been suggesting this seriously...

>>Wow, I am an atheist.

Maybe when the left "progresses" to the point
where anti-athiesm is the State Religion you will
begin to understand. Any thing else but NOT that!

>>I never realized it was simply to ignore morality standards and get away with everything I want.

Typical Athiestic dogma. This assumption that
any reference to morality implies somoeone imposing
theirs on someone else. And then use moral and
amoral interchangebly... but we understand.
Thats the logic loop you are in.

>>Everyday, you read about horrible crimes done by all the atheist. All of the terrorists did it because of their atheism, not their deluded fanatical believes in Allah. The 100 years war, fought by different cults of christians, must have been atheists.

Actually, more truth than poetry. Professing to
believe isn't the same as actually beliveing.
And everything done in the name of God, isn't
necessarily. Deluded fanatics are not true believers.

>>I personally try to do good because its the right thing to do not because "I might get to some imagionary heaven".

Oops.! Right and wrong are religious definitions.
Definitions established by tradition, culture, dogma, history,
bigotry, and yes, even insanity sometimes. Imaginary
heaven is foolish, but imaginary hell .. that's ok
becuase we can do it here and now.

>>Quit trying to figure us out. Religious people suffer under the believe that if someone is not like them, it must be evil. Also that atheist must be liberal democrats. I am neither.

We can quit when you figure it out. Just becuase
it is a moving target doesn't mean its any less
"fair game"

>>I am a free thinker. Make up my own mind.

Yeah.. just like all the other "thousanduplets" who do
the same. Part of your problem is figureing out where
orginal ideas actually come from.

It's ironic that most Athiests can't even discuss this
subject rationally, without getting angry and resorting
to namecalling. "Angry Athiests".. is almost cliche'

Back to the main point ... Why is it so offensive for
a nation to say "Under God"? So offensive even that
we are willing to take that "freedom" away and make it
a crime.

>> "The US has not been known to provide funding to un-godded philosophical organizations, although "faith-based initiatives" (read: religious favoritism) mark its more unConstitutional policies."

If It Please The Court, I wish to submit the following evidence to the contrary, Marked Exibits A-G:

A-Welfare
B-NPR
C-The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals
D-PBS [Well, Barney, at least.]
E-The Department of Education
F-The Department of Motor Vehicles
G-The IRS [Satan is not actually a "god"]

Tys Miha - the organizations you list are given money for other reasons than their religious beliefs -- they may not always be very good reasons, but in each case, at least the idea is that we'r getting something from the investment. Religious organizations are different: just by believing in god, you can steal money from every taxpayer! If you're a christianist organization, it's even easier to convince Bush-'n'-Pals to give you taxpayer money; they'll call it a "faith-based initiative" and trade money for christian-conservatives' votes. Except... that that constitutes the US government preferring and encouraging certain religious beliefs over others, and it's therefore anti-Constitutional.

Danjo - I agree with a lot of your words; my issue is with the word "atheist," which entails absolute conviction that god cannot exist. That's as naive as an absolute conviction that god does exist. A scientific free-thinker will not reach any conclusions he cannot justify rationally. How do you *know* there's no sentient god? I strongly suspect there isn't one, but I'm not stupid enough to claim I know for sure.

Phrog Poet - Sorry; I dunno if this is a language thing or what, but your points are less than comprehensible.

Charles - "Political Protest has become a form of secular religion." Dead right, and frightening.

-JS

WePledge.com is trying to secure ten million signatures for the Constitutional Amendment to save the Pledge of Allegiance and our National Motto. This would be the most people to sign a petition in history! Help save our Pledge of Allegiance and National Motto! Please sign the petition and forward it on to others. To sign the petition and for more information, go
http://www.wepledge.com

This may come as a life-changing shock to some of the . . . erm . . . how to put this politely . . . less well-socialized folks out there, but there are some us around who are a) atheists, b) emphatically not leftists, and c) believers that a consistent morality can be derived through reason alone.

But, if it makes you feel better, keep suggesting that "atheist" = "amoral liberal busybody," and wonder why so many atheist conservatives and libertarians refuse to support the Republican party. As long as the Republican tent prefers budding theocrats to moral atheists, they will never, ever see my vote.

The Athiests should always have the last word.
After all they do represent the ..erm.. more
well-socialized folk.

...and what they have here is all they get!
so let's let them enjoy it while they can.

sooo... Who ya gonna vote for Phil? Nadar?
If not Left then what.. leftover? Thanks just
the same, It's important to divide the left,
So please don't waste your vote on RightWing
third party. Beisides.. they are proabably going
to be even more "Theocratic"

Shilf- Two Points:
1- "Religious organizations are different: just by believing in god, you can steal money from every taxpayer!"

Are you referring to federal tax exemption here, or are there Fundamentalist Cat-burglar Ninja Squads where you live? If so, they are as susceptible to lead poisoning as the secular thief, so next time they creep around, just plug 'em.

2- In case there IS a communication problem, I was making a joke, as both the Barney and the Satan/IRS references should have shown.

You do get that this is a satire news article, don't you?

This is much to in depth to be talking about religion. Religion is a believe it or not thing, not to be discussed. I am what is called a 'religion sceptic', meaning I believe the Bible events took place, but don't really believe in God, Heaven, and Hell. So, I'll act as a neutral moderator, and the first order of business is for everyone to just respect the others beliefs and stop argueing.

Yeah, Phroggy, I'm not a leftist, so I'm going to vote for Nader. You're not the sharpest knife in the drawer, are you?

Since the Pledge managed to exist for about half a century just fine before Congress added the "under God" to it, I wonder why you're so insistent on keeping it? Could it be that your faith is so weak that you must have it reinforced by Government action, or risk losing it? That's not very conservative, nor does it speak well of your faith. It's kind of sad, actually.

Danjo - I agree with a lot of your words; my issue is with the word "atheist," which entails absolute conviction that god cannot exist.

No it doesn't. What a silly thing to say. "A - Theism" = "Without god-belief." It says nothing about whether any gods exist; it says something about what an individual person believes. I do not believe any gods exist, but the existence of gods is not contingent on my belief, nor would I be stupid enough to think that it is.

The word you are looking for, the absolute conviction that no gods exist, is "dogma."

Amen.

Excellent Philly,

That would be the "Right" thing for you to do.

I recommend you keep sharp things out of your
drawers. You might hurt yourself, if it isn't
already too late.

Everybody know that the French have a special and very good relationship with God.

It is a pleasure to see it recognised on a Forum that could be described without exageration as sometimes quite unpleasant toward my beloved country.

Thank you again ;)

Bush should be endorsing this decision... I mean, this will allow him to give MORE tax cuts to the rich at the expense of national infrastructure that the rich don't use... And private schools wouldn't be closed, so the rich have even more advantages!

This will be my last post on this subject, as I agree, I come here for humor and a laugh.

Thanks to Phil and Shlif. Appreciate your comments and utter as I slap my forehead, "Thats what I meant to say."

To Phrog Poet. Have read your post several times now and it just confuses me. I suspect you are just playing around or a language translation problem but not sure what you are trying to say. I was responding to your earlier post of

"the real reason why people don't believe in god has a lot more to do with the (moral) responsibility that that they don't want to take...than that which they do they do."

That is as far from the truth as possible in my case. I am not going to bore the group with my personal issues on this, but I obviously disagree with your blank statement of atheist.

What is a thousanduplets? Is it good or bad? Is there a pill to take to get rid of it or will I have to wear a disguise whenever I go out in public?

Atheists don't have original ideas! This is too ludicrous to even have to answer. Think of the Dark Ages.

Danjo
I have been a good boy, honest.

Well ok.. I stuttered, when I c/p so it has a few "extra" words.
sorry..

I also said it was an opinion.. which obviously I didn't expect to
get any agreement.

My point is this:

yah.. its a blanket statment... not meant personally. The personal
stuff is only self defense ! From people who's argumentative tactic
is to pretend not to understand. "What a stoooopid incomprehensible
idea". When actually they damn well "got it" on the first read.

I think that people become Athiestic becuase they don't like the
idea of being morally responsible. Moral meaing having to answer
to God, or anyone else.

They don't want someone else's definition of good or bad, heaven
or hell, up or down, right or wrong. "I will use my own logic"
But it is a logic loop becuase all of these are defined by things
they deny exists.

So.. in the name of exact science.. or whatever.. we pretend to know
things and "prove stuff" that will later be changed.. when we have
more proof.. or more "evidence" We use carbon dating, or the speed
of light, or some other unproven "constant".

... and all the while saying.. You prove there IS a God... then I will
believe. But.. even that is a lie. They don't change thier mind even
in the face of the "evidence" becuase.. as you change your mind..
you become responsible, which is the reason why you didn't believe
in the first place.

Hey, Did I say you were a "bad" person.. or that I didn't like you..?
.. where ? Actually.. i'm quite indiffrent about how you label yourself.

This is why this insidious "un-Godly" anti-patriotic encroachment
on our freedom and liberty is resisted at the visceral level by any
one with the courage to call themselves red-blooded American as
a matter of principle.

Our National Anthem will be the next target.

Verse Four says,

Oh, Thus be it ever when free men shall stand
Between their loved homes and the war's desolation!
Blest with victory and peace, may the heaven rescued land
Praise the power that hath made and preserved us a nation !

Then conquer we must, when our cause it is just,
And this be our motto; "In God is our Trust!"
And the star spangled banner in triumph shall wave
O'er the land of the free and the home the brave.

I don't know about ya'll.. but that stirs my blood. Every man
woman and child should feel like that about their own country.
Including the Iraqi people.. and America will help them restore
it to that.. not take it away from them like the thugs and criminals
who are there now have done with their reign of terror.

This is not about oil, or making every country just like America.
It is about preserving our America from this onslaught of insanity
from Vulnerable Asia, Jealous Europe, Frightened France,
the Madness of the Middle East, and Enemies from Within.

Ironically.. there is no shame in Surrender.. if you are wrong !
But shame, shame, shame, on anyone who will not support a just
cause because it might have a few casualties.

When I said earlier that I have a good relationship with God, I hope you understand that to the French, God, is Jerry Lewis. We also really like Sach, of the Bowery Boys, Mr. Bean, and Warren on The Andy Griffith Show!

"Sach, of the Bowery Boys, Mr. Bean, and Warren on The Andy Griffith Show."

As I am an "overly educated" French (one of the posters Dixit) I am not afraid to say that I never heard of these members of the probably underestimated US popular culture.

1. There is Canned corn?
2. I always thought some chose athiesm so they could sleep in on Sundays (with a woman of their choice)

Seriously now. One of the main reasons the colonists intially came to America was to escape religious persecution by the governments of Europe. That persecution tried to tell them how to believe in God,and they had some different takes on their beliefs that did not comport with the overall law of the land. This is demonstrated in the 1st Amednment. Why else do you think the very first Bill of the Bill of Rights dealt with religion and speech. The founders did not want the government to control either. There is no seperation of church and state clause written in the Constitution anywhere. What the First Amendment does it restricts the Congress from passing laws dealing with religion. " Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." Therefore, it also prevents Congress from passing a law outlawing prayer in school. The Amendment doesn't say anything about religious activities on government property. Congress starts each day witha prayer. the US Supreme Court has the Ten Commandments posted above their bench.

For those that are athiests, if you don't beleive in a God, then why should it even bother you. Maybe the words indivisible should also be taken out since this country is divided (and was during the civil war) or how about liberty and justice for all, since we know thats not true either. Under the Clinton regime it was clearly not liberty and justice for all, omnly those Bill C liked.