[QUOTE]Originally posted by JonBoy
[B]ltweintz:

If I can be bombarded with violence, sexual promiscuity, and skewed messages every day, can't an atheist put up with God being mentioned once a day?

 

Hey , there's a difference in stupid people and ignorant people . I can tolerate the one that just doesn't know any better.

Phi

 

The government and the flag should be for ALL citizens, not just the ones who worship God. A pledge to that flag should not make citizens who don't believe in God uncomfortable. Removing these words (which weren't even part of the pledge in its original form) is only logical. Religion is for each person to decide in their own lives. Religion and all references to it should be removed from government.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by TrojanHorse
[B]

Are you implying atheists like the violence, sexual promiscuity and skewed messages?

 

I think we're getting off track here - no atheist I know of really cares what the individual person says or does. Sure, it offends me to hear 'God Bless America' - to me, this is an admission that we're no longer capable of helping ourselves, an attitude of submission that I personally find pretty repulsive. But the issue is not whether or not YOU can say it, even in a public venue, this issue is whether government should or should not endorse that statement. The way I see it, if a public school teacher (a government employee) stands in front of a class and recites the Pledge (with or without the 'God' reference) he or she is using my tax money to promote religion. Even if the 'God' reference was removed, it's still promoting the religion of uncritical patriotism. That's where the problem lies - public money funding expressions of religion. That's simply wrong.

JonasM

 

But as a counterpoint, as a Christian tax payer, shouldn't I have a right to see some of my tax money going to at least assist (if not promote) religion? Why should the lack of belief of some people cause the complete removal of anything remotely religous from our governments? What about government endorsement and sponsorship of businesses that I find to be immoral or improper in any way? Isn't that the same thing?

 

You have the absolute right to use your money to promote any view you wish. But, when you want your TAX money to be used for that purpose, that says that you want MY tax money to be used, too. That's what I object to. Would you approve of some government schools (say, about 5-10%) to teach exculsively Atheism? Probably not (especially when you have no choice about which school to send your kids to). The solution here, of course, is to send your kids to private schools, where you can choose what they learn. Not so with government schools.

As far a gov't endorsement of business, I find that highly immoral, too. I firmly believe that there should be a 'wall of separation' between economics and state, for the same reasons as the church and state issue - both are corrupted and diminished by the association - but that's another topic!

JonasM

 

Quick religious tolerance question: If religious groups are so tolerant why are so many athiests and agnositics afraid to come out of the closet? Do we imagine that they are just paranoid? Or is it true that nonbelievers are punished for their views?

Perhaps homosexuals and practitioners of less popular religions are also imagining the discrimination they face. Right.

"...with liberty and justice for all."

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by JonBoy
[B]


Nope, I'm not implying it at all.

 

That's easy to state, but difficult to define. Exactly what do you believe "America is a free country" means, or is supposed to mean?

(As a simple, but profound, example: Are you free to to what you want? Am I free to stop you if it bothers me?)