Starboy

As long as there are Christians that are succesfully imposing their religion on others by using the government, then I will oppose Christians right to exist in this society. Social entities that do not play by the rules are outlaw organizations that should be destroyed and banned. This is only considered a radical view because in this case the accused organization is Christianity.

Starboy

RufusAtticus

<img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" /> So as long as some Christians want to use the government to impose their religion, you will want to use the government to impose yours. <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" />

Christianity is an organization? Since when? Starboy, let me offer the following words.

As long as there are aethiests that are succesfully imposing their religion on others by using the government, then I will oppose aethiest right to exist in this society. Social entities that do not play by God's Rules are evil organizations that should be destroyed and banned. This is only considered a radical view because in this case the accused organizations are not god-fearing.

What would your response be to such a statement?

[ December 22, 2002: Message edited by: RufusAtticus ]</p>

seebs

So, the reaction to their decision to wrongly oppose your right to exist is to oppose their right to exist? Don't be silly. There is no way for you to oppose their right to exist without falling to the same exact problem.

Furthermore, you seem to be acting as though "Christians" are a single monolithic group who all cooperate all the time. Why is this a laughably stupid belief when people hold it about atheists, but plausible to you when it's about someone *else*?

Why not, instead of trying to eliminate a large group because some members of that group bother you, work on better definition and enforcement of the "rules" you want them to play by? Then we can all cooperate.

Starboy

Rufus, this appears to be a "straw man" argument. If you want to make the distinction that not all Christians wish to impose their religion by way of the government, then do so. Otherwise what you are doing appears to be far more inflamatorry than my statements.

As I have stated before, there may be a few Christian organization that know how to play nice and even have the wisdom to understand the benifits of a secular state, but this cannot be the majority Christian opinion. If it were, we would not be having this discussion.

Starboy

Starboy

Seebs, what I desire is not some sentiment without precident or basis. It is a foundational principle of the constitution. All I ask is that Christians take their civics lession seriously, and understand the ramifications of breaking the law.

Starboy

RufusAtticus

How can that be? I simply turned your atheist battle cry into a theist one.

Already done pages ago, but you keep asserting otherwise.

Good, now you understand how a Christian would feel reading your statment.

A few? Ha. Of the top of my head I can think of at least five major denominations, and a couple minor ones that advocate maintaining Church and state separate. You do realize that theists do sue the governement to maintian the separation. The case that ended loudspeaker prayer at football games was brought by a catholic and a mormon family in Texas. Jehovah's Witnesses were some of the first people to get the courts to establish protection in state and local jurisdictions for hated religions minorities.

How so? Why can't that be the majority opinion because you don't want it to be? Remember the majority of Americans don't vote, participate in politics, or in the media. So if you are basing your opinion on what happens in politics or on Cable talk shows, then your "majority" only reflects the loud assholes that stick in your memory.

[ December 22, 2002: Message edited by: RufusAtticus ]</p>

RufusAtticus

seebs

Starboy, are you familiar with the idea of a "sampling error"? The majority of Christians have no interest in imposing anything on anybody. However, if you see ten people, and one of them puts up a 10 Commandments side, and the others don't... In America, as I understand the statistics, the Christians who aren't pushing anything on anyone are about 70% of those present, and outnumber the pushy guy 7-1.

You seem to forget that most people aren't doing *anything* either way. The people who are going around being pushy are a "vocal minority". You've heard that phrase, right?

Basically, you're committing the same error they do when they declare that "atheists are opposed to morality". They've seen some guy talking about how he thinks morality is bullshit because God is bullshit, and they're blaming *ALL* atheists for it.

It's stupid no matter who does it.

Starboy

Rufus, thanks for pointing that out. If it were not a majority Christian opinion to impose religion, it would not have been necessary for a case, even one brought by sensible Christians, to be made before the courts in the first place. Your example give hope but it is hardly evidence that the Christian threat does not exist.

Starboy

[ December 22, 2002: Message edited by: Starboy ]</p>

RufusAtticus

Speaking of sampling error, Starboy you need to read Smurfy's comments in <a href="http://www.christianforums.com/threads/30681.html" target="_blank">this thread</a>. You are making the same mistakes she did.