Local high schools want to have their graduation in a church - UPDATED 6/4 post 84

[DOMS]

Your church turns away donations?

I don't have a church, but the Mormons will lend out their buildings to people that don't go to their church for free. You just have to clean up after yourself when your done.

 

[DOMS]

Yeah but my God is different than your God.

Which one(s) should we put back into public schools?

The one that was there in the first place.

 

[bio-chem]

"Conservative Christians give more to charity than anyone else in America."

But who donates more of their time and soul, people like non-religious blood in a vial Angelina Jolie or little spiritual but not religious hippie liberals.....you can throw money at people all day, Jesus stopped and spent time with them....

you mean people like tim tebow who goes to the philippines to perform missionary work and humanitarian aid? Christians give of their time. to even suggest otherwise is ignorance.

 

[bandaidwoman]

No, you replied with
"Only non-religious people do.

I've seen more religious people (not just Christians) do good things for others than I have non-religious people. "

None of which I would argue against in respect to public charity part. However churches are just a business. You want to see the worst of it, take a drive to southern Alabama. Take a drive around your average rural town and ask yourself why the highschool is caving in, or why some people still don't have running water and electricity, but the churches in town look like mega cathedrals. The southern baptist are fucking criminal cocksuckers. They would host a breakfast and serve the athletes meals on the mornings on the games, but they would get that money back 3 fold from the parents the following Sunday. One fucking chuck was bigger and cost 10 times more than a school that held over 500 kids.

Whoopty-fucking-doo, you saw a church lady doing something nice for those in need. That is the individual's credit which is what real spirituality is about anyway. It is a beautiful thing, and what what do everyone good. But, the church is an entity that needs feeding, otherwise it dies. So know damn well that someone has to manage the chuch just like a business in by bringing in new followers (AKA customers), and managing PR.

statistically there are more christians than athiests so by default they are going to comprise most of the charities in this country. I'm pretty sure most non profit children's hospitals are athiestic or without religious affilliation, warren buffet and bill gates both athiests gave more than most churches gave in this century. As the most productive partner in my practice I donate$ 25,000 a year to cancer research every year directly from my practice, my two republican partners keep their 25,000 as bonuses at the end of the year. They do tithe about 500 dollars a month to their church. I'm sure my contribution does not get " counted" as an athiestic charity though? Ironically, I am the only partner that volunteers one night a week at the free medical cllinic located at a church even though the other two are christians. It's quite ironic.

The pastor at "Church in the Now" lives in palasade mansion off Floyd Street in Covington, georgia which I note when I do my long road rides out there. Most of these southern churches are huge, huge money machines. I only donate to the sole quaker church in decatur, georgia since they are so nondescript and accepting of all religions.

 

[bio-chem]

statistically there are more christians than athiests so by default they are going to comprise most of the charities in this country. I'm pretty sure most non profit children's hospitals are athiestic or without religious affilliation,

wrong. wrong. wrong. St. Judes anyone? ever heard of it? everyone right now needs to think about the local hospitals they have around them. how many have crosses? how many have a chapel in the hospital? how many are named after a saint? catholic, 7th day adventist, and multiple various protestant churches all run hospitals here. matter of fact the history of hospitals is closely linked to Christian churches in this country. bandaidwoman for being in healthcare you are yet again staggeringly putting forth thoughts not based in fact in a field you should know more about.

 

[bandaidwoman]

wrong. wrong. wrong. St. Judes anyone? ever heard of it? everyone right now needs to think about the local hospitals they have around them. how many have crosses? how many have a chapel in the hospital? how many are named after a saint? catholic, 7th day adventist, and multiple various protestant churches all run hospitals here. matter of fact the history of hospitals is closely linked to Christian churches in this country. bandaidwoman for being in healthcare you are yet again staggeringly putting forth thoughts not based in fact in a field you should know more about.

First of all I said I was pretty sure but not definative, by looking around me all the children's hospital here are non religious ( Childrens Health Care of atlanta the biggest one and one of the best in the nation.) is not religious based. Grady hospital, Northside, Crawford Long,Atlanta Medical, Wellpoint hospital,Rockdale Hospital, Hillendale Hospital, Newton General etc. St Joes is the only religious one here in atlanta that I can think off hand. So when I look around me, there is only one hospital that has a cross.......

But you have not proved your point either, show me a link that says most children's hospitals are religious ,if you can't then we are both at an impasse.

 

[bio-chem]

First of all I said I was pretty sure but not definative, by looking around me all the children's hospital here are non religious ( Childrens Health Care of atlanta the biggest one and one of the best in the nation.) is not religious based. Grady hospital, Northside, Crawford Long,Atlanta Medical, Wellpoint hospital,Rockdale Hospital, Hillendale Hospital, Newton General etc. St Joes is the only religious one here in atlanta that I can think off hand. So when I look around me, there is only one hospital that has a cross.......

But you have not proved your point either, show me a link that says most children's hospitals are religious ,if you can't then we are both at an impasse.

showing a link that shows the statistics behind religious backing of hospitals seems somehow to cheapen the statistic. Christian love and charity speaks for itself for those with the ability to open their eyes and see it.

 

[bandaidwoman]

showing a link that shows the statistics behind religious backing of hospitals seems somehow to cheapen the statistic. Christian love and charity speaks for itself for those with the ability to open their eyes and see it.

I'm not saying you are wrong but even though I am not a Pediatrician Dartmouth sent us out to south central, Los Angles, UCLA, New Haven Ct ( yale) , Arizona, Rhode Island, etc to do my rotations and most of the hospitals, including children's in my experience were not religious affilliated hospitals.

It just means you and I can't support our hypothesis ( mine based on some exposure to many state hospital systems and intimate knowledge of the ones here). But it is foolish to attack someone and throw out "St Judes" as "proof" that most children's hospitals are religious based, like me throwing out "Kaiser" hospital, both well known names, as proof that most hospitals are not religious based.

 

[bio-chem]

and mine is based upon the fact I call into at least 3 hospitals daily across the united states every business day over the last 2 years.

like i said despite your apparent credentials im constantly surprised by the opinions you express. you are definitely in the minority when it comes to professional health care providers opinions

 

[Phineas]

I disagree. That is what is wrong with schools. They took God out.
But I digress.

And, what about the rest of us who feel ALL Religions are a total crock of horseshit?

If other people choose to continue following archaic beliefs from ancient times when we were sacrificing each other and neglect what science has taught us about human life and our origins then that's their vice.

The important thing to remember is that everything all you regilious type believe -- and, I'm talking about ALL relgions -- all the afterlife this, "God" created that, etc, none of that is scientifically proven. Granted, it's probably impossible to disprove God(s), but there is an ABUNDANCE of evidence for evolution, the birth and consequent expansion of the universe, and much better theoretical analyses of time/space than "this guy who lives in the sky somewhere impregnated a virgin without having sex with her, then she gave birth to....him...then, because apparently his sky-incarnation was pissed off that everyone was having sex and committing crimes, he decided to sacrifice himself....to...himself....and, because of that mankind has to spend their "physical" lives worshipping him and limiting themselves to appease his seemingly sick, twisted mind -- even though he mercilessly committs terrible acts against the people he 'loves'....but it's only because he works in mysterious ways..it's his way of dealing with satan...even though he's supposedly omnipotent and could thus destry satan and all evil, he for some reason DOESN'T and insists that he let satan 'tempt' humans with, what basically we non-brianwashed see as, just about anything that makes life enjoyable, so that he (God) can judge those people for the 'unpios' behaviour he truthfully put on them"

Ya, that makes a lot of sense. I wonder why I've never gone for Religion?

Anyway, before I get ranting too much my point is...are you ready???

YOU CAN'T GOVERN SOCIETY BASED ON THE BELIEFS OF A CERTAIN PROPORTION OF OF THE POPULATION.

If you God-fearing shut-ins want to worship your magical savior then please respect our rights and keep it the hell (no pun intended) away from us. There is nothing more I hate than Relgions trying to push their beliefs on others. Seriously, fuck right off.

Relgious beliefs are holding mankind back too much. Far too much of the bad in the world is centered on Relgion. In an otherwise highly advanced specifes, why the fuck are we clinging to these Stone Age concepts?

I feel that humans' greatest flaw is our insecurity with our own existence, because this is what gave birth to Religion. Most people on this planet are insecure and frightened not knowing the answers to how we got here, "where we're going", why they do what they do. Moreover, people are too insecure to deal with the stresses of life; they need to feel like they always have a magical friend looking over them.

"It's alright, 'cause I know I have Jesus."

"I'd like to thank God for making this possible."

"Well, I'm nothing without the Lord and Saviour."

Relgious followers are so insecure with their own existence that they submit themselves to a fictional character (and, before one of you starts flaming me for that just admit it, God IS fictional, until proven scientifically) and view themselves as inferior and worthless. What the hell is that about?

I'm glad to read about this court case, because it's one small step in the right direction: separation of Church and State. They don't belong together.

 

[DOMS]

And, what about the rest of us who feel ALL Religions are a total crock of horseshit?

You've done a great job of divesting religion from just about everything. You're also standing around bitching about why things are getting so bad.

Great job. Take a bow.

 

[bio-chem]

You've done a great job of divesting religion from just about everything. You're also standing around bitching about why things are getting so bad.

Great job. Take a bow.

can't do it so i'll just say it. i give DOMS 50k in rep points for this post.

 

[bio-chem]

Relgious followers are so insecure with their own existence that they submit themselves to a fictional character (and, before one of you starts flaming me for that just admit it, God IS fictional, until proven scientifically) and view themselves as inferior and worthless. What the hell is that about?

I'm glad to read about this court case, because it's one small step in the right direction: separation of Church and State. They don't belong together.

Prove God scientifically? as a scientist i feel confident saying science is far from perfect or complete. Science hasn't learned anything God doesn't already know. suggesting to prove God scientifically is ignorance of the capabilities of science.

answer me this. where in our laws does it say there should be a separation of church and state?

 

[bio-chem]

I'm blown away that this is even an issue. Im a devout Mormon. having a graduation ceremony in a cathedral, mosque, or protestant chapel wouldn't bother me in the least. as long as nothing doctrinal is being preached it's just a nice building that can hold students and family.

 

[Phineas]

Prove God scientifically? as a scientist i feel confident saying science is far from perfect or complete. Science hasn't learned anything God doesn't already know. suggesting to prove God scientifically is ignorance of the capabilities of science.

answer me this. where in our laws does it say there should be a separation of church and state?

If you read all of my post you saw that I mentioned God can't be disproved. I only said that as a hypothetical. Because, without actual proof, God is still a fictional character.

Well, at one point in time there was no law about murdering others. Does that mean they shouldn't have created the law?

Religious type get so bent out of shape when an atheist critisizes them. What I'm arguing is that government and law should be objective; it's for utilitarian purposes. Looking after the greater of good of the population means giving objective freedom and room -- within reason (e.g. violence, etc) -- to pursue personal lifestyle. I said if you religious type want to follow your religions then by all means. But, how ethical do you think it is to govern an entire country based on what you believe? Not everyone believes what you do. There's always going to be disagreements on laws that don't concern religion drectly like taxes, etc, but for many issues like abortion religion is always on one side of the debate, and it shouldn't be. Abortion and same-sex marriage should be legal so that people can choose for themselves. Just because abortion would be legal doesn't mean all women have to get abortions. It just means that those who don't believe in God and sin have the right of ownership over their own body.

 

[Phineas]

You've done a great job of divesting religion from just about everything. You're also standing around bitching about why things are getting so bad.

Great job. Take a bow.

Is that supposed to make me feel guilty?

Look, believe what you want. I don't care. Just don't think you have the right to push those beliefs on the rest of us.

 

[Phineas]

I'm blown away that this is even an issue. Im a devout Mormon. having a graduation ceremony in a cathedral, mosque, or protestant chapel wouldn't bother me in the least. as long as nothing doctrinal is being preached it's just a nice building that can hold students and family.

On one hand I completely agree with you. It's ludicrous that a building would foster such animosity. However, on the other hand, all religious structures -- particularly churches -- are symbolic of religions' influence on their followers. And so, to the non-religious -- and ESPECIALLY to the anti-religious -- it can be discomforting knowing you're surrounded by mindsets you reject. I've been in only 1 church and 1 synagogue, both when I was much younger, and even then I felt extremely uncomfortable and out of place.

 

[DOMS]

Is that supposed to make me feel guilty?

Look, believe what you want. I don't care. Just don't think you have the right to push those beliefs on the rest of us.

I'm not saying that anyone has the right to push any religion on anybody, but you have the right to push it out of where it's been? Hypocritical bullshit.

Guilty? No. Stupid? Maybe.

You (in a general sense) push moral codes of conduct out of society, yet bitch and whine that kids, and adults, are showing less morals and self-control; and you seem confused.

Stupid? Likely.

 

[Phineas]

I'm not saying that anyone has the right to push any religion on anybody, but you have the right to push it out of where it's been? Hypocritical bullshit.

Guilty? No. Stupid? Maybe.

You (in a general sense) push moral codes of conduct out of society, yet bitch and whine that kids, and adults, are showing less morals and self-control; and you seem confused.

Stupid? Likely.

Push it out of where? State? Or, churches?

What the hell makes you think I'm trying to "push out" morality from society? When did I say that? When I did I complain about others' self-control? I don't care about things like pre-marital sex or birth control.

Do people really need the fear of being cast in hell from some dominating jerk to be a decent person? I don't believe in God or any form of spirituality and I'm a good person: I help others when I can; I encourage others to do their best in their endeavours; I obey laws; I'm honest; I'm polite (except when those I argue against get defensive and hostile....); I beleive in law and government; I believe in morality; I believe in respecting others; I'm anti-homophobia; I'm anti-racism; I'm anti-sexism; I give change to homeless; I genuinely care for other people.

Just because I don't believe in your God doesn't mean I go around telling people to wreak havoc on the world. I know someone who was regularly beat by their Christian parents. I realize that not all members of a religion can be judged by the actions of some, but my point is that some people are bad and some people are good. What about all those Catholic priests involved in sexual harassment? Morality isn't exclusive to religion.

I'm not confused about anything. I think I'm actually very fair in this. I wasn't intially going to express my frustration with religion in this thread because I didn't want to jeapordize my relationship with any of our board's members, as I'm pretty fond of everyone. However, as soon as I saw other members pushing their pious arguments then I felt justified in rebutting.

My argument is very fair, objective, and simple: you're free to believe what you want, but it's unethical to govern an entire population based on those beliefs.

And, lashing out at someone and calling them "stupid" is very immature and makes for a weaker argument. To me it seems like a half-assed way to discredit my argument. I really don't appreciate it.

 

[DOMS]

Push it out of where? State? Or, churches?

What the hell makes you think I'm trying to "push out" morality from society? When did I say that? When I did I complain about others' self-control? I don't care about things like pre-marital sex or birth control.

Do people really need the fear of being cast in hell from some dominating jerk to be a decent person? I don't believe in God or any form of spirituality and I'm a good person: I help others when I can; I encourage others to do their best in their endeavours; I obey laws; I'm honest; I'm polite (except when those I argue against get defensive and hostile....); I beleive in law and government; I believe in morality; I believe in respecting others; I'm anti-homophobia; I'm anti-racism; I'm anti-sexism; I give change to homeless; I genuinely care for other people.

Just because I don't believe in your God doesn't mean I go around telling people to wreak havoc on the world. I know someone who was regularly beat by their Christian parents. I realize that not all members of a religion can be judged by the actions of some, but my point is that some people are bad and some people are good. What about all those Catholic priests involved in sexual harassment? Morality isn't exclusive to religion.

I'm not confused about anything. I think I'm actually very fair in this. I wasn't intially going to express my frustration with religion in this thread because I didn't want to jeapordize my relationship with any of our board's members, as I'm pretty fond of everyone. However, as soon as I saw other members pushing their pious arguments then I felt justified in rebutting.

My argument is very fair, objective, and simple: you're free to believe what you want, but it's unethical to govern an entire population based on those beliefs.

As I said, it was the general sense of people that have tried to push religion out of society, and not necessarily you in particular.

And, lashing out at someone and calling them "stupid" is very immature and makes for a weaker argument. To me it seems like a half-assed way to discredit my argument. I really don't appreciate it.

And what was "And, what about the rest of us who feel ALL Religions are a total crock of horseshit?", a compliment? Oh, so when you throw down, it's being "fair, objective, and simple", but when I do it, it's "very immature and makes for a weaker argument."

Okay. Got it.

 

[DOMS]

Oh, crap. I just realized this is your first outing with me on a debate.

Don't read too much into my use of pejoratives. It's just the way I write. I find it to be amusing. With obvious exceptions, I don't mean too much by it.

 

[Phineas]

As I said, it was the general sense of people that have tried to push religion out of society, and not necessarily you in particular.

Fair enough.

And what was "And, what about the rest of us who feel ALL Religions are a total crock of horseshit?", a compliment? Oh, so when you throw down, it's being "fair, objective, and simple", but when I do it, it's "very immature and makes for a weaker argument."

Okay. Got it.

Okay, I guess you got me on that one. My first sentence was harsh, but after reading some of the other aggressive comments I felt it was a little more fitting. But, I admit I probably shouldn't have said that.

At least I went into detail after...main point. I may express my feelings bluntly but at least I back up what I have to say.

Oh, crap. I just realized this is your first outing with me on a debate.

Don't read too much into my use of pejoratives. It's just the way I write. I find it to be amusing. With obvious exceptions, I don't mean too much by it.

No worries man. I love healthy debate!

 

[DOMS]

At least I went into detail after...main point. I may express my feelings bluntly but at least I back up what I have to say.

"Express you feelings bluntly"? I do it with a verbal machete. Over the years, quite a few people assumed that since I'm so caustic in my posts that I can't possibly know the topic and that I'm trying to cover it up. Only to have their shit ruined in the end.

Few people post as many credible sources as I do during a debate, so I have backed up a lot of what I've said. However, this debate is almost entirely founded in opinion. There will be little, if any, credible sources on the effects of removing religion from society. So there won't be any "backing anything up" in this argument.

 

[ZECH]

The one that was there in the first place.

Damnit...............cant rep you but I will!

 

[bandaidwoman]

answer me this. where in our laws does it say there should be a separation of church and state?

Just a dumb ass Asian immigrant who had to take the citizenship test but we were taught it was inferred by the first amendment, then reinforced by both the baptist church ( yes they were behind the seperation of church and state) along with Thomas Jefferson who coined the phrase then by multiple judgments based on this "doctrine" that were passed by the supreme court. Apparently it is a "doctrine" on which multiple laws are passed to protect the religious as in "Everson vs Education" as well as non -religious. As for all the judgments, I leave that to citizens that are familiar with constitutional law. It was why I fought so hard to be a citizen. I always joke to my husband, a devout southern baptist, that the reason I don't mind marrying a southern baptist is that they supported my favorite founding father on this principle. Also, I was taught the obligation of a Republic, which I was taught what America is, not a true democracy like the mob rule in Serbia that is was incumbant in a Republic for the majority to protect the rights of the minority. Back in the old days that was different religious sects that were not part of the major christian denomination, but the brilliance of the American constitution kept up with changing times and it means protecting those like us.

 

[bandaidwoman]

Do people really need the fear of being cast in hell from some dominating jerk to be a decent person? .

I am always astounded that my southern christian counterparts pretty much assume this to be true of us athiests/agnostics etc.

 

[ZECH]

And, what about the rest of us who feel ALL Religions are a total crock of horseshit?

Thats your choice and I'm fine with that. But this country was founded on God and christianity. The further we get from that the worse things get and this country is getting ready to fall. I will stick to what I believe and you can do the same.

 

[bio-chem]

"Express you feelings bluntly"? I do it with a verbal machete. Over the years, quite a few people assumed that since I'm so caustic in my posts that I can't possibly know the topic and that I'm trying to cover it up. Only to have their shit ruined in the end.

Few people post as many credible sources as I do during a debate, so I have backed up a lot of what I've said. However, this debate is almost entirely founded in opinion. There will be little, if any, credible sources on the effects of removing religion from society. So there won't be any "backing anything up" in this argument.

well, other than communism and the french revolution. we have plenty of examples of societies that have altogether rejected religion and have seen exactly what happens in those circumstances. pol pot ring a bell anyone?

when people join together to form a society morality becomes a major part of that society. for instance abortion. some argue that it is the right of the mother to choose. ok that's fine (I personally don't agree with over turning roe vs wade) but what about the other side. what is the detriment to society when the society no longer values a human life? don't i have the right to live in a society that values human life? I have the right to vote for laws that support human life because that is the society i want to live in. If I get out voted, then I have two options. deal with it or move.

same thing with gay marriage. I want to live in a society that values marriage between a man and woman as the building blocks of a healthy society. I feel if that fundamental building block is removed then society as a whole will crumble. I have the right to vote that way. if I am out voted I have 2 options. the debate between individual rights and rights of society goes back a long ways. in some cases decisions must be made between the individual and society.

as another example miranda rights. at what point do we protect an individual's right not to self incriminate vs. society taking a dangerous person off the streets? in this case it has been determined that the individual's rights must be protected because the potential for the government to wrongly persecute it's citizens is more dangerous to society than the individual who has committed a crime.

 

[bandaidwoman]

In my home country the Taiping rebellion killed as many people as the Cultural Revolution so it is about 50/50 on religion vs non -religion ( although athiestic governments don't fight for the sake of athiesm, they fight on political principles).

Buddists are the only religious sect that have not fought wars based on religious doctrine. Buddist leaders have fought wars for land, resources etc, just like non- buddist leaders, but never on religious principles since buddism is generally accepting of different beliefs ( Jesus, Mohammed, Joseph smith are all avatars). Don't ignore the religious beliefs ( mostly buddism) of the giant, Red Dragon that is breathing down America's neck as it begins it climb to superpowerdom.

Pol Pot /kmer rouge is a poor example, America played a vital role in his uprising and supported him intially, Nixon even lobbying for his inclusion into UN, they supported him in hopes he would defile and weaken the "communist" north vietnamese regime.The carpet bombings further steered disenchanted cambodians from the US.

My dad who was in Air America will tell you he had to help lead the CIA directed invasion in 1970 and the puppet general Lon Nol in Cambodia.
The carpet bombings dropped on Cambodia, more than three times the tonnage dropped on Japan in all of World War II.

Land became untillabble, 95% of the population could not earn a living. It didn't matter if it was Khmer or a evangelical christian, or scientilogists, they would turn to anyone.

And if americans don't know about it, then your history books were censored.

The saddest thing is that America never bothered to bring POL pot to justice like Saddam.



.

 

[DOMS]

well, other than communism and the french revolution. we have plenty of examples of societies that have altogether rejected religion and have seen exactly what happens in those circumstances. pol pot ring a bell anyone?

Just look at the place with the least amount of religion: sub-Saharan Africa. Far and away, you won't find a more fucked up place on the planet. In South Africa, a person is raped every 26 seconds. A child (ages 3 to 12) is raped every 90 minutes. I don't mean that someone touched a child inappropriately, I talking about forced intercourse.

Yay for no religion...