It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: WarminIndy
It means this....
Suppose that you have a glass of water, ok a certain percentage of that water is Christians, atheists...etc. etc.
When you pour out the part that is Christian, you are left with less water in the glass, so if you want that glass filled to the same level, you have to do what? Refill it. So what do you put in to fill it back to the level?
And if you say you want to fill it with atheisism or secularism, then if you keep pouring out the portions that are Christian or religious, then fill it up with your world views, then you have gotten rid of religion, and hence you have denied freedom of religious expression.
But the same thing happens with every world view. If the glass is ok how it is, then don't worry about it. But notice here, on this thread, even though I disclaimered with "if you are offended, ask yourself why".
Can you really tell me within yourself that you really are offended? And if you are offended, why were you so offended by a post that I said was sarcastic? Is sarcasm reserved for your side?
Ask Prezbo if that sentiment hasn't been passed around, but I hear that over on Conspiracies in Religion thread, they say all kinds of things over there.
Those Christians who take the moral high ground, they aren't all right. I admit that. But you have to understand, not all Christians think the same way. I think the problem is that for some people, they hear "Christian" and the immediate knee jerk reaction is "Christians are going to burn me at the stake".
But go ahead, ask Prezbo, I simply don't have time to link you to all the threads. Even one, those comments are buried in almost every religious thread.
originally posted by: Prezbo369
Don't you dare mention me in such a dishonest manner, par for the course I guess....
Are you able to hold a discussion without throwing around baseless accusations in order to play the victim.....again?
The 'sentiment' you claim is widespread is not one I have come across, nor do I think it even exists (not here on ATS at least).
That is unless you can show a single thread or post from someone that would 'vow their lives to get rid of religion'?
The only person I've ever come across with a sentiment even close to that, is yourself and the OP in this very thread. It's nothing but pure projection.....
originally posted by: peter vlar
originally posted by: Prezbo369
Don't you dare mention me in such a dishonest manner, par for the course I guess....
Are you able to hold a discussion without throwing around baseless accusations in order to play the victim.....again?
The 'sentiment' you claim is widespread is not one I have come across, nor do I think it even exists (not here on ATS at least).
That is unless you can show a single thread or post from someone that would 'vow their lives to get rid of religion'?
The only person I've ever come across with a sentiment even close to that, is yourself and the OP in this very thread. It's nothing but pure projection.....
My thoughts exactly. To claim there are too many of those comments to cite and to not have time to link a single one was super sketchy and then to try to toss me at another poster and relieve themselves of the responsibility of supporting their claim is dishonest, disingenuous and antithetical to the self professed Christianity that warmindy is so afraid is trying to be done away with in this country. And that doesnt even touch on the irational fear mongering and bigotry that are so far from Christ's teachings that the ones working hardest at getting rid of Christianity in this country are the self proclaimed christians who dont actually follow the teachings of their namesake.
originally posted by: WarminIndy
And you don't believe in that Christ, so how are you going to tell me how to follow the moral example of a being that you don't even believe in?
You forgot all your contributions to my threads. Do you need to take something for your memory problems? Some Gingko Biloba or something?
We've discussed this a lot, thank you for once again for ultimately not defending the rights of religious people. You say you do, but you don't really. You just showed us on this thread once again that my rights are not important, because my rights somehow offend your life.
Well, now do I need to post links from that thread just to remind you of all what was said on there? Not one single time on that thread did you ever say "the person who believes in Creation should be allowed to speak what they think". Nope, and you call me dishonest. Please, everyone, go to my thread there and then come back and tell me just how much Peter Vlar defended my right to discuss on the subject.
originally posted by: iterationzero
a reply to: WarminIndy
I'm still waiting for you to tell me which town in Ohio had their religious freedom taken away by the ACLU.
originally posted by: iterationzero
a reply to: WarminIndy
Can you provide any other information? I just tried to Google "Celina, OH" and "ACLU". The first ten pages only show action by the ACLU in Celina in 2012, when they urged the administration of the High School to reverse their ban on pro-gay t-shirts.
originally posted by: peter vlar
a reply to: WarminIndy
Are you referrimg to tge case where a child died vecause their Christian Scientist parents refused treatment? If so, whos rights were more i fringed? The childs right to live or the parents right to force their faith on a dying child? Please correct me if Im reading the wrong case and you are referring to another one.
originally posted by: WarminIndy
I have a problem with the mustard gassing of Khurds.
I have a problem when 275 little girls are burned to death for not wearing burkhas.
I have a problem with Jewish and Palestenian children living with constant threats of rockets.
I have a problem with Syrian children being beheaded.
I have a problem with worldwide poverty in which children are forced to starve because of war lords.
I have a problem with children in Cote de Ivoire being forced into slavery for French chocolate.
I have a problem with the international sex trafficking of children.
I have a problem with the lack of punishment of pedophiles and rapists.
I have a problem with gay children being attacked.
I have a problem with violence enacted toward children, no matter where or who they are.
originally posted by: peter vlar
a reply to: WarminIndy
Maybe I'm missing something...
Which side if the fence is that exactly?
And what do morons who are too stupid to vaccinate their kids have to do with the question,
The one in which you again neglect to actually address the question directly because you're too bust moving goal posts.
Either directly cite a case supporting your easier claims or admit you
Can't. Please.
When the Constitution was first drafted, children were considered property of their parents and afforded few rights. However, in the years since, the U.S. Supreme Court has recognized youth should be granted many of the same rights as adults.