That's kind of the fundamental problem with taking religious belief into into law. Faith and beliefs are not universally shared.
Universal Declaration of Human Rights | United Nations
A milestone document in the history of human rights, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights set out, for the first time, fundamental human rights to be universally protected. It has been translated into over 500 languages.www.un.org
Which do you have a problem with?
Are not some things self evident?
So is freedom from religion.And your not comfortable admitting your Atheist peers are perfectly happy doing the same thing.
What I am claiming is we are all human beings. And human beings have a history of murder, war, rape, death, and destruction. In the name of God, in the name of Atheism, in the name of whatever they can use to murder their neighbor. We are not picky, any reason works.
Religious freedom is a fundamental right to everyone, US citizen or not.
We each have our own perception of God.
When the constitution was made it only allowed white landowners to vote. A minority was not even considered a full person when counted.
It has been improved, and will continue to be improved to a more perfect union.
The constitution is a tool, an agreement, to establish justice, insure safety, provide for communal defense, promote welfare of society, and secure freedom for ourselves and our children.
We have no duty to it beyond using it as tool to fulfill the above purpose. It is not holy. It is not to be worshiped. It is a tool we agree to live by, to uphold, to secure the above goals.
We can change it to better achieve said goals. It is not writ in stone. It does not transcend universal Human Rights as given by God.
Don’t bother. It is all circular fallacies all the way down the turtle black hole. They don’t have and cannot have any proof of God. Only faith in man made books and stories or natural phenomena they claim can only result because of God. Utter nonsense.So where's the proof God exists, and that it is the god you believe in as opposed to the God (or Gods) of a different religion?
That's kind of the fundamental problem with taking religious belief into into law. Faith and beliefs are not universally shared.
So is freedom from religion.
That would be Donald Trump. 😁“In the name of atheism” made me laugh tho. When’s the last time and atheist yelled “FOR NO GOD AND COUNTRY” before levying terrible deeds on someone.
I don't see where that is rooted in any particular religious belief or attributed to any particular deity (-ies)Universal Declaration of Human Rights | United Nations
A milestone document in the history of human rights, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights set out, for the first time, fundamental human rights to be universally protected. It has been translated into over 500 languages.www.un.org
Which do you have a problem with?
Are not some things self evident?
Stalin?“In the name of atheism” made me laugh tho. When’s the last time and atheist yelled “FOR NO GOD AND COUNTRY” before levying terrible deeds on someone.
So where's the proof God exists, and that it is the god you believe in as opposed to the God (or Gods) of a different religion?
I don't see where that is rooted in any particular religious belief or attributed to any particular deity (-ies)
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed, by their Creator, with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
please share some kill the theists propagandaStalin?
Mao Zedong?
Pol Pot?
Kim Il Sung?
Did you really think it was immune to being used as a weapon?
Hitlerplease share some kill the theists propaganda
Hitler
Columbus
Ratko Mladić
Ríos Montt <-> William Casey <-> Ronald Reagan
People use whatever they can as a weapon.
Weird, you still haven't actually provided examples.Hitler
Columbus
Ratko Mladić
Ríos Montt <-> William Casey <-> Ronald Reagan
People use whatever they can as a weapon.
I misinterpreted your question. I thought you were stating I was giving propaganda for killing atheists and wanted me to give some for killing theists, and responded accordingly.Weird, you still haven't actually provided examples.
Holy shit, you're fucking denseI misinterpreted your question. I thought you were stating I was giving propaganda for killing atheists and wanted me to give some for killing theists, and responded accordingly.
I just realized, you did not think those atheists committed horrors, or did not go after theists or something. It did not occur to me that it was possible for a person to be that ignorant.
https://www.google.com/search?q=stalin
https://www.google.com/search?q=Mao+Zedong
https://www.google.com/search?q=Pol+Pot
https://www.google.com/search?q=Kim+Il+Sung
https://www.google.com/search?q=stalin+targeting+religion
https://www.google.com/search?q=Mao+Zedong+target+religion
https://www.google.com/search?q=Pol+Pot+targeting+religion
https://www.google.com/search?q=Kim+Il+Sung+targeting+religion
Which idea has been around longer?Holy shit, you're fucking dense
God is sad
DId most of those despise religion? Yes without question. Was that their primary call to action for their people? Shit your last one even was ok with religion as long as they supported him.
We have far more examples through history of explicit calls to action for one religious group to kill another religious group. Wouldn't you agree?
so weirdWhich idea has been around longer?
Which has been far more commonly held?
Your falling for the heat map fallacy.
Peace has been made in the name of God(s) and swore to in front of God(s) far more often then atheism. It might be somewhat difficult to find historical examples that do not evoke Diety(s).
Your question fails simply because atheism was irrelevant in history.
Faith is the polar opposite of science.So where's the proof God exists, and that it is the god you believe in as opposed to the God (or Gods) of a different religion?
That's kind of the fundamental problem with taking religious belief into into law. Faith and beliefs are not universally shared.
How so? Isn't science the process of figuring out the what psychical laws nature obeys to produce a repeatably testable theory that can predict and thus produce useful outcomes.Faith is the polar opposite of science.
And man used to think eclipses were a sign from God. Who gives a shit. You are so arrogant. It doesn’t matter to you if we don’t believe in God because you know we will go to heaven? Wow, Satan, such arrogance you have.Which idea has been around longer?
Which has been far more commonly held?
Your falling for the heat map fallacy.
Peace has been made in the name of God(s) and swore to in front of God(s) far more often then atheism. It might be somewhat difficult to find historical examples that do not evoke Diety(s).
Your question fails simply because atheism was irrelevant in history.
Faith is belief without evidence. If you have evidence, then you don't have faith.How so? Isn't science the process of figuring out the what psychical laws nature obeys to produce a repeatably testable theory that can predict and thus produce useful outcomes.
Isn't religion just the relics of past God -Conscious individuals prescribing a methodology best suited destroy the common cultural blindness of that time people and place? Religions are just individualized keys to ancient and not so ancient kinds of prisons. The pretense or egotistic blindness practiced by scientists in the notion that the observer is not separate from what is observed. How can the eye see itself?
Science is belief without evidence in every hypotheses in formulation until others have established the insight that led to its formulation predicts consistent results. Science is faith in that process because of results. Religion is faith that some psychological discipline prescribed by a person with the knowledge of how to transmit it to another produces a similar enlightenment. You have a tradition or cultural roots in the scientific method, but no belief that a transcendent conscious state is possible or that any real teaching of it exists.Faith is belief without evidence. If you have evidence, then you don't have faith.
man are you gonna be real sad when you find out hinduism has been around far longer than christianity or judaism, and must therefore be the correct religion because it's been around longer.Which idea has been around longer?
Which has been far more commonly held?
Your falling for the heat map fallacy.
Peace has been made in the name of God(s) and swore to in front of God(s) far more often then atheism. It might be somewhat difficult to find historical examples that do not evoke Diety(s).
Your question fails simply because atheism was irrelevant in history.
It sure seems logical that the progression of humanity is a good thing. My problem with what you are saying is that like religious and non religious people of every stripe, they all seem to think that their opinion and only that opinion is what represents real progress. Have you ever noticed that?man are you gonna be real sad when you find out hinduism has been around far longer than christianity or judaism, and must therefore be the correct religion because it's been around longer.
also, your argument is rooted in tradition rather than logic. you're essentially saying "because we've always done things this way" which is kind of the antithesis to the progression of humanity.