If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CBC)   Student suspended for wearing shirt that promotes a) alcohol, b) drugs, or c) Jesus   (cbc.ca) divider line 409
    More: Asinine, William Swinimer, Nova Scotia, students  
•       •       •

8033 clicks; posted to Main » on 03 May 2012 at 2:51 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



409 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-05-03 06:25:57 PM
You can tech creationism in my schools the day I can teach evolution in your stupid church.
 
2012-05-03 06:28:35 PM

retrograde: Cyber_Junk: You must really love the view from up there on that cross.

I see the pattern emerging. This is the advantage to being a student of history and human nature as opposed to most hateful atheists who seem all too willing to repeat the crimes and folly of the past. Atheism places man at the pinnacle of existence. This is used to justify all kinds of moral relativist horrors. Killing believers as enemies of the state? No problem. Killing the unborn? No problem. Killing ethnic minorities? No problem. There is no "good" and no "evil" its all "just stuff people do". "Good is what we, meaning those in power, say is good". Perfect Stalinist thinking. Big Brother is watching you comrade.



Commies!Commies!Commies!

I prefer to do good things because they're good. Not because a mythical sky god is sitting in judgement of me.
 
2012-05-03 06:30:08 PM

The Flexecutioner: retrograde: The Flexecutioner: retrograde: RTOGUY: I'm fine with it.

At least you're honest about your desire to oppress your fellow Americans. Be glad that the present majority does not submit YOU to these kinds of oppression. Be glad that you can bring your frivolous lawsuits trying to get crosses taken down from national cemeteries and war memorials.

Then, as Soviet Russia and Maoist China have shown us atheists are not particularly concerned with the lives of their fellow men.

you sound like you write for Fox? extrapolation and distortion are truly the skills of a good christian.

This guy just wrote that he was "fine" with the murder of Christians and the burning of churches and I'm the extremist?

no, you are the idiot. he was fine with christianity being the minority. you are fine with stretching that out to the absurd "murder of christians and burning of churches". you are at least effectively trolling, but only until 8pm when i have to get up from the computer and do things that matter more in my life. but until then i'll feed it. this thread got way less interesting without tatsuma, so im just really bored.


Now, even though your name calling and the old and busted "I'm bored" blah blah blah post was right out of the troll's playbook I'll try and make this simple for you. I wrote about the burning of churches and murder of Christians. He wrote "I'm fine with it". See, simple.
 
2012-05-03 06:33:42 PM

I alone am best: Ace Rimmer: I alone am best: SphericalTime: I alone am best: He is warning people to not do it just so they look good in the eyes of others.

He isn't limiting it. He's very clear about that.

Looking at the passage and some other passages from the bible public prayer might not be the way to go. I still believe the entire reason may be the impression that one is left with after seeing someone pray. I also still believe however that the passage still states that prayer outside of the home is not frowned upon by god if the purpose of the prayer is not to draw attention to yourself or show others how righteous you are.

Then again we know most people who participate in public prayer are doing it just to let others know they are doing it or to look better in someone else's eyes.

Let's see:

1. Jesus says, "Don't be a hypocrite"
2. Jesus says, "Here is what hypocrites do"
3. ???
4. You say "yeah but it is totally cool when I do it, right?"

/hypocrite

Your premise is flawed, for one you're assuming I am a Christian. I am not. For two, he is saying that hypocrites draw attention to themselves purposely while praying in public.


As you already stated:
"Be careful not to practice your righteousness in front of others to be seen by them. If you do, you will have no reward from your Father in heaven."

"And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by others."

Those statements are fairly specific, and explicit. They are not a parable, or metaphor, or whatever. It clearly says, 'Don't pray in a way that makes it noticeable to others.' Why do you have to advertise the fact you are praying? Is it possible to walk down the street and pray? Or, do you have to kneel in a church to do so? If 'god' is omniscient and omnipresent, can't I just pray in my head, whenever I want, without alerting others?
 
2012-05-03 06:34:35 PM
The school has a legitimate and compelling interest in maintaining a comfortable learning environment for all students. The school has determined that while messages of personal religious devotion don't undermine that environment, messages which explicitly or implicitly criticize other religions do. The school could reasonably determine that this student's shirt implicitly criticized other religions, and is therefore inappropriate for school.

The school is wholly right. The student is wholly wrong. And if the student returns to school with the shirt, he should be expelled. And if other students come to school wearing the same shirt, they should be subject to the same hierarchy of disciplinary action to which the student here was. Starting with "politely being asked not to wear it again."

Next.
 
2012-05-03 06:35:11 PM
Retrograde.."The tide is rising. Only the fact that Christians are still a majority in the West is preventing an all out attack on religious freedom. The trend will be first no religious expression of any kind anywhere on or near a government building including schools. Then it will be no overt religious expression in any public space lest non believers be offended. Then it will be overt oppression against religious institutions, taxing, licensing and harassment.

We will see an increase in violence directed at the faithful. First attacks on property such as vandalism and then outright church burning. The the violence will spread to the faithful themselves and we will see attacks and bloodshed directed against believers.

The common atheist troll image is that pie chart showing that Christians are in the majority but still complaining about being oppressed. Even a majority can be oppressed, it happens all the time in the world. Imagine if it ever happens that Christians are a minority.

It is coming folks, mark my word."

Yes, you are the extremist, YOU painted the bleak future for Xtians and he is obviously fine with (some) of what you wrote, I'm fine with the seperation of church and state and better when they no longer try and force their juice onto all of society myself, but you take a "I'm fine with that" and run to the extremes of what YOU said! Typical majority Xtian Roman lion persecution complex!
 
2012-05-03 06:35:44 PM

Mock26: Do you have any evidence that proves that all those atrocities committed by atheists were committed because they were atheists? Because christians and other religious people have committed various atrocities in the name of their higher being(s). What is the difference?


Moral relativism flows from atheism. Moral relativism, the idea that man, the state, determines the "good" directly led to the murder of 100 MILLION people in China and Russia in the last century. It has led to the murder of uncounted millions of unborn human beings in the United States alone in this century. This "moral relativism" is the greatest evil to befall mankind in recent history. It entirely removes the restraints of conscience from those in power. Hence, this thread and all of the comments that the oppression of believers is a good thing and to be desired. Atheism is evil for this reason. Everywhere atheism has ever held sway atrocities have been the result. That is why they are so despised.
 
2012-05-03 06:36:40 PM

retrograde: genner: This is Canada they don't have freedom anyway.

The tide is rising. Only the fact that Christians are still a majority in the West is preventing an all out attack on religious freedom. The trend will be first no religious expression of any kind anywhere on or near a government building including schools. Then it will be no overt religious expression in any public space lest non believers be offended. Then it will be overt oppression against religious institutions, taxing, licensing and harassment.

We will see an increase in violence directed at the faithful. First attacks on property such as vandalism and then outright church burning. The the violence will spread to the faithful themselves and we will see attacks and bloodshed directed against believers.

The common atheist troll image is that pie chart showing that Christians are in the majority but still complaining about being oppressed. Even a majority can be oppressed, it happens all the time in the world. Imagine if it ever happens that Christians are a minority.

It is coming folks, mark my word.


What a great world it would be. Thank you for brightening my day, if only a little. Now, if you could run along and do something to help that minority become a reality, the rest of us would really appreciate it.
 
2012-05-03 06:36:54 PM

retrograde: The Flexecutioner: retrograde: The Flexecutioner: retrograde: RTOGUY: I'm fine with it.

At least you're honest about your desire to oppress your fellow Americans. Be glad that the present majority does not submit YOU to these kinds of oppression. Be glad that you can bring your frivolous lawsuits trying to get crosses taken down from national cemeteries and war memorials.

Then, as Soviet Russia and Maoist China have shown us atheists are not particularly concerned with the lives of their fellow men.

you sound like you write for Fox? extrapolation and distortion are truly the skills of a good christian.

This guy just wrote that he was "fine" with the murder of Christians and the burning of churches and I'm the extremist?

no, you are the idiot. he was fine with christianity being the minority. you are fine with stretching that out to the absurd "murder of christians and burning of churches". you are at least effectively trolling, but only until 8pm when i have to get up from the computer and do things that matter more in my life. but until then i'll feed it. this thread got way less interesting without tatsuma, so im just really bored.

Now, even though your name calling and the old and busted "I'm bored" blah blah blah post was right out of the troll's playbook I'll try and make this simple for you. I wrote about the burning of churches and murder of Christians. He wrote "I'm fine with it". See, simple.


well, you are certainly skilled in putting words in people's mouth since i never called you an extremist. but you are certainly an idiot. i also responded to RTOGUY's post, not the whole tit-for-tat between you. And in terms of burning churches and whatnot, i suppose what is good for the goose is good for gander, reaping what you sow, etc. etc. etc. But keep the "im persecuted" mantra. It justifies all kinds of atrocities.
 
2012-05-03 06:38:06 PM

retrograde: Mock26: Do you have any evidence that proves that all those atrocities committed by atheists were committed because they were atheists? Because christians and other religious people have committed various atrocities in the name of their higher being(s). What is the difference?

Moral relativism flows from atheism. Moral relativism, the idea that man, the state, determines the "good" directly led to the murder of 100 MILLION people in China and Russia in the last century. It has led to the murder of uncounted millions of unborn human beings in the United States alone in this century. This "moral relativism" is the greatest evil to befall mankind in recent history. It entirely removes the restraints of conscience from those in power. Hence, this thread and all of the comments that the oppression of believers is a good thing and to be desired. Atheism is evil for this reason. Everywhere atheism has ever held sway atrocities have been the result. That is why they are so despised.


Just as I suspected, you have no proof to back up your claim.
 
2012-05-03 06:39:28 PM

retrograde: Mock26: Do you have any evidence that proves that all those atrocities committed by atheists were committed because they were atheists? Because christians and other religious people have committed various atrocities in the name of their higher being(s). What is the difference?

Moral relativism flows from atheism. Moral relativism, the idea that man, the state, determines the "good" directly led to the murder of 100 MILLION people in China and Russia in the last century. It has led to the murder of uncounted millions of unborn human beings in the United States alone in this century. This "moral relativism" is the greatest evil to befall mankind in recent history. It entirely removes the restraints of conscience from those in power. Hence, this thread and all of the comments that the oppression of believers is a good thing and to be desired. Atheism is evil for this reason. Everywhere atheism has ever held sway atrocities have been the result. That is why they are so despised.


You bring up a good point about the dangers of moral relativism. It is great Christians have the bible to help them make moral decisions. I've been trying to follow the bible recently but have run into some problems

I could use some advice from you, regarding some elements of God's Laws and how to follow them.

1. Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her? She is 6 years old, healthy, and very smart. She doesn't want to be a slave, so that might be a problem.

3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanness - Lev.15: 19 24. The problem is how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

4. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord - Lev.1:9. The problem is, my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

5. I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2. clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself, or should I ask the police to do it?

6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination - Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this? Are there 'degrees' of abomination?

7. Lev.21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear contact lenses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle-room here?

8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though Lev. 19 expressly forbids this: How should they die?

9. I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves? What should we do with the NFL?

10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev.19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? Lev.24:10-16. Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair, like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14) I know you have studied these things extensively and thus enjoy considerable expertise in such matters, so I am confident you can help.

Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging
 
2012-05-03 06:40:50 PM

Mock26: retrograde: Mock26: Do you have any evidence that proves that all those atrocities committed by atheists were committed because they were atheists? Because christians and other religious people have committed various atrocities in the name of their higher being(s). What is the difference?

Moral relativism flows from atheism. Moral relativism, the idea that man, the state, determines the "good" directly led to the murder of 100 MILLION people in China and Russia in the last century. It has led to the murder of uncounted millions of unborn human beings in the United States alone in this century. This "moral relativism" is the greatest evil to befall mankind in recent history. It entirely removes the restraints of conscience from those in power. Hence, this thread and all of the comments that the oppression of believers is a good thing and to be desired. Atheism is evil for this reason. Everywhere atheism has ever held sway atrocities have been the result. That is why they are so despised.

Just as I suspected, you have no proof to back up your claim.


subject changing, distorted assumptions, it's a skill in it's own right and in great demand these days. retrograde is just flexing his chops. but its fun reading.
 
2012-05-03 06:43:30 PM
please, please, please let it be d) all of the above
 
2012-05-03 06:45:22 PM

bigsteve3OOO: ACLU will be all over this one ............right?


That comment would be really clever, if it weren't so phenomenally stupid.

No really, I have read a lot of incredibly stupid things on the internet, but your comment is right up near the top of the most idiotic, ignorant, and ill-informed comments ever to be made.

Really, I want you to think about what you wrote, and try to understand what is so completely, utterly, mind-bogglingly moronic about it, and don't come back to the internet until you have an answer.
 
2012-05-03 06:50:41 PM

Bucky Katt: please, please, please let it be d) all of the above


The problem here is that subby was less than forthright about why the student has been suspended. It's not that the shirt promoted Jesus. It's that it was reasonably construed to criticize other religions. An expression of personal religious devotion would have been acceptable. This student's implicit attack on other religions was not.

Schools are special places. They have a responsibility to maintain a comfortable environment for all students. The school here determined, quite reasonably, that expressions of personal religious devotion don't undermine that environment, while explicit or implicit attacks on other religions do. The student was rightly suspended, and if he wears the shirt again, he should be expelled.
 
2012-05-03 06:52:58 PM

I alone am best: Ace Rimmer: I alone am best: SphericalTime: I alone am best: He is warning people to not do it just so they look good in the eyes of others.

He isn't limiting it. He's very clear about that.

Looking at the passage and some other passages from the bible public prayer might not be the way to go. I still believe the entire reason may be the impression that one is left with after seeing someone pray. I also still believe however that the passage still states that prayer outside of the home is not frowned upon by god if the purpose of the prayer is not to draw attention to yourself or show others how righteous you are.

Then again we know most people who participate in public prayer are doing it just to let others know they are doing it or to look better in someone else's eyes.

Let's see:

1. Jesus says, "Don't be a hypocrite"
2. Jesus says, "Here is what hypocrites do"
3. ???
4. You say "yeah but it is totally cool when I do it, right?"

/hypocrite

Your premise is flawed, for one you're assuming I am a Christian. I am not. For two, he is saying that hypocrites draw attention to themselves purposely while praying in public.


I am using you because you made the argument. I don't know or care what your personal beliefs are.

For two, that probably clarifies better where you are coming from and I wouldn't call it a wrong interpretation at all.
 
2012-05-03 06:57:58 PM

I alone am best: Ace Rimmer: I alone am best: SphericalTime: I alone am best: He is warning people to not do it just so they look good in the eyes of others.

He isn't limiting it. He's very clear about that.

Looking at the passage and some other passages from the bible public prayer might not be the way to go. I still believe the entire reason may be the impression that one is left with after seeing someone pray. I also still believe however that the passage still states that prayer outside of the home is not frowned upon by god if the purpose of the prayer is not to draw attention to yourself or show others how righteous you are.

Then again we know most people who participate in public prayer are doing it just to let others know they are doing it or to look better in someone else's eyes.

Let's see:

1. Jesus says, "Don't be a hypocrite"
2. Jesus says, "Here is what hypocrites do"
3. ???
4. You say "yeah but it is totally cool when I do it, right?"

/hypocrite

Your premise is flawed, for one you're assuming I am a Christian. I am not. For two, he is saying that hypocrites draw attention to themselves purposely while praying in public.


And if there's one thing we know for sure, it's that American religious conservatives would never dream of purposely drawing attention to themselves while praying in public. Ergo, the passage doesn't apply to them.

amirite?
 
2012-05-03 06:58:42 PM

Mock26: Just as I suspected, you have no proof to back up your claim.


Okay, "proof". First, that is the wrong term. You want "evidence". Presumably, a personal note admitting culpability signed before a notary public by Chairmen Mao and Stalin. Well, I have that in my safe deposit box along with President Obama's birth certificate. So, I will offer you evidence from history instead:

Stalin deliberately targeted Eastern Orthodox clergy. He put them in camps for no other reason that they were priests and bishops and then brutally tortured them and murdered them almost to the last man. He destroyed priceless religious artworks, demolished churches and melted down the golden altars for bullion to pay for war. He then turned on the highly devout class of middle class property owners and farmers known as the "Kulaks" using the fact that they supported the clergy to brand them as enemies of the state to murder them and seize their farms and the subsequent mismanagement of these confiscated farms led to a famine which killed an estimated ten to fifteen million MORE Russians.

Mao, targeted all religions including Buddhists and Christians. Imprisoned, tortured and killed them wholesale. Burned temples and churches. To this day, in Tibet the persecution of the faithful as "enemies of the state" persists and the Chinese government has desecrated or destroyed hundreds of prayer wheels, statues and shrines in Tibet. They are still murdering priests and nuns. It is going on as we speak.

Moral relativism. Atheism. Two great evils which go hand in hand. Anything the state claims is good is good. Evil. Unspeakable evil.
 
2012-05-03 07:06:32 PM

retrograde: Mock26: Just as I suspected, you have no proof to back up your claim.

Okay, "proof". First, that is the wrong term. You want "evidence". Presumably, a personal note admitting culpability signed before a notary public by Chairmen Mao and Stalin. Well, I have that in my safe deposit box along with President Obama's birth certificate. So, I will offer you evidence from history instead:

Stalin deliberately targeted Eastern Orthodox clergy. He put them in camps for no other reason that they were priests and bishops and then brutally tortured them and murdered them almost to the last man. He destroyed priceless religious artworks, demolished churches and melted down the golden altars for bullion to pay for war. He then turned on the highly devout class of middle class property owners and farmers known as the "Kulaks" using the fact that they supported the clergy to brand them as enemies of the state to murder them and seize their farms and the subsequent mismanagement of these confiscated farms led to a famine which killed an estimated ten to fifteen million MORE Russians.

Mao, targeted all religions including Buddhists and Christians. Imprisoned, tortured and killed them wholesale. Burned temples and churches. To this day, in Tibet the persecution of the faithful as "enemies of the state" persists and the Chinese government has desecrated or destroyed hundreds of prayer wheels, statues and shrines in Tibet. They are still murdering priests and nuns. It is going on as we speak.

Moral relativism. Atheism. Two great evils which go hand in hand. Anything the state claims is good is good. Evil. Unspeakable evil.


Retard, pay attention:

Stalin and Mao both slaughtered the religious authorities for two reasons.

1) They were agents of a cultural element that might have challenged their rule. Dictators of all brands and breeds are jealous creatures which hate the idea of anything having the loyalty, respect and fear of their subjects. Thus, these types tend to target religious authorities of all kinds instinctively.

2) In Stalin's case, the religious authorities had blessed the rule of the Romanovs' as divinely inspired and were as corrupt as the monarchy itself. They were seen as collaborators and stooges of the Romanov regime and were killed off as a result.

It has nothing to do with atheism. If anything the corruption of the Church in Russia INSPIRED the atheism that Communism embraced.

As I'm sure you know, Communism does not instinctively hate religious authority, as the Polish Communists could have told you before they abandoned Communism shortly before the 90s started.

In Russia's case, their atheism sprang from a hatred of a Church that they, RIGHTFULLY, saw as an instrument of a hated monarchy that abused and used them terribly.
 
2012-05-03 07:07:09 PM

retrograde: Mock26: Just as I suspected, you have no proof to back up your claim.

Okay, "proof". First, that is the wrong term. You want "evidence". Presumably, a personal note admitting culpability signed before a notary public by Chairmen Mao and Stalin. Well, I have that in my safe deposit box along with President Obama's birth certificate. So, I will offer you evidence from history instead:

Stalin deliberately targeted Eastern Orthodox clergy. He put them in camps for no other reason that they were priests and bishops and then brutally tortured them and murdered them almost to the last man. He destroyed priceless religious artworks, demolished churches and melted down the golden altars for bullion to pay for war. He then turned on the highly devout class of middle class property owners and farmers known as the "Kulaks" using the fact that they supported the clergy to brand them as enemies of the state to murder them and seize their farms and the subsequent mismanagement of these confiscated farms led to a famine which killed an estimated ten to fifteen million MORE Russians.

Mao, targeted all religions including Buddhists and Christians. Imprisoned, tortured and killed them wholesale. Burned temples and churches. To this day, in Tibet the persecution of the faithful as "enemies of the state" persists and the Chinese government has desecrated or destroyed hundreds of prayer wheels, statues and shrines in Tibet. They are still murdering priests and nuns. It is going on as we speak.

Moral relativism. Atheism. Two great evils which go hand in hand. Anything the state claims is good is good. Evil. Unspeakable evil.


Christian Henry VIII:

1) brutally tortured priests and bishops
2) destroyed priceless religious artworks
3) demolished churches,
4) took church gold and used it to finance war,
5) turned on devout Catholics, had many burned at the stake, confiscated their property, etc.

Weird. It's almost like psychopaths do terrible things when given unchecked power, regardless of their religion or lack thereof.

In any event, Stalin wasn't areligious. His religion was "Communism."
 
2012-05-03 07:08:50 PM

retrograde: Mock26: Just as I suspected, you have no proof to back up your claim.

Okay, "proof". First, that is the wrong term. You want "evidence". Presumably, a personal note admitting culpability signed before a notary public by Chairmen Mao and Stalin. Well, I have that in my safe deposit box along with President Obama's birth certificate. So, I will offer you evidence from history instead:

Stalin deliberately targeted Eastern Orthodox clergy. He put them in camps for no other reason that they were priests and bishops and then brutally tortured them and murdered them almost to the last man. He destroyed priceless religious artworks, demolished churches and melted down the golden altars for bullion to pay for war. He then turned on the highly devout class of middle class property owners and farmers known as the "Kulaks" using the fact that they supported the clergy to brand them as enemies of the state to murder them and seize their farms and the subsequent mismanagement of these confiscated farms led to a famine which killed an estimated ten to fifteen million MORE Russians.

Mao, targeted all religions including Buddhists and Christians. Imprisoned, tortured and killed them wholesale. Burned temples and churches. To this day, in Tibet the persecution of the faithful as "enemies of the state" persists and the Chinese government has desecrated or destroyed hundreds of prayer wheels, statues and shrines in Tibet. They are still murdering priests and nuns. It is going on as we speak.

Moral relativism. Atheism. Two great evils which go hand in hand. Anything the state claims is good is good. Evil. Unspeakable evil.


It still does not "prove" (and that is correct word) that Stalin did what he did because he was an atheist. You can keep repeating those words all you want but it does not prove any link between atheism and committing evil acts.
 
2012-05-03 07:08:52 PM

retrograde: genner: This is Canada they don't have freedom anyway.

The tide is rising. Only the fact that Christians are still a majority in the West is preventing an all out attack on religious freedom. The trend will be first no religious expression of any kind anywhere on or near a government building including schools. Then it will be no overt religious expression in any public space lest non believers be offended. Then it will be overt oppression against religious institutions, taxing, licensing and harassment.

We will see an increase in violence directed at the faithful. First attacks on property such as vandalism and then outright church burning. The the violence will spread to the faithful themselves and we will see attacks and bloodshed directed against believers.

The common atheist troll image is that pie chart showing that Christians are in the majority but still complaining about being oppressed. Even a majority can be oppressed, it happens all the time in the world. Imagine if it ever happens that Christians are a minority.

It is coming folks, mark my word.


Funny but christians are hardly the majority in Europe any more (with only 52% believing in any god at all) and I don't see wide spread church burnings or christian bashing there.

If you are American and are this worried you need to calm down, first of all christians are firmly still in the majority here (sadly) and second of all we have a first amendment here to protect our right to free speach and religion. I know that our rights have been degraded slightly over the past two administrations but if those fundie whackos can still stand outside abortion clinics with 2' x 3' pictures of aborted fetuses on them withoout consequence then I'm pretty sure something as mild as public prayer is safe.
 
2012-05-03 07:08:55 PM
Nuke the gay baby whales on the moon for Jesus.
 
2012-05-03 07:12:02 PM

The Flexecutioner: Smoky Dragon Dish: Mugato: I had to wear tape over my "I'm Bart Simpson, who the Hell are you?" shirt, that's how far back I go.

We couldn't wear Spuds McKenize tee-shirts at school. That's how far back *I* go.

In 1987 I was actually allowed to wear my Big Johnson Casino t-shirt with "Liquor Up Front, Poker In The Rear" on the back. I had to hide it under my jacket from my mother but not the school. And it was a small tight-knit xtian community.


The last year I was in high school (1980) they forbade a student from wearing a "Mr. Zog's Sex Wax" t-shirt because of the [whisper] sex word.
 
2012-05-03 07:12:47 PM
When I was in high school I got in trouble for wearing a "Who Farted?" shirt. So I think we all know what this means.

Jesus farted.
 
2012-05-03 07:15:32 PM

bugontherug: retrograde: Mock26: Just as I suspected, you have no proof to back up your claim.

Okay, "proof". First, that is the wrong term. You want "evidence". Presumably, a personal note admitting culpability signed before a notary public by Chairmen Mao and Stalin. Well, I have that in my safe deposit box along with President Obama's birth certificate. So, I will offer you evidence from history instead:

Stalin deliberately targeted Eastern Orthodox clergy. He put them in camps for no other reason that they were priests and bishops and then brutally tortured them and murdered them almost to the last man. He destroyed priceless religious artworks, demolished churches and melted down the golden altars for bullion to pay for war. He then turned on the highly devout class of middle class property owners and farmers known as the "Kulaks" using the fact that they supported the clergy to brand them as enemies of the state to murder them and seize their farms and the subsequent mismanagement of these confiscated farms led to a famine which killed an estimated ten to fifteen million MORE Russians.

Mao, targeted all religions including Buddhists and Christians. Imprisoned, tortured and killed them wholesale. Burned temples and churches. To this day, in Tibet the persecution of the faithful as "enemies of the state" persists and the Chinese government has desecrated or destroyed hundreds of prayer wheels, statues and shrines in Tibet. They are still murdering priests and nuns. It is going on as we speak.

Moral relativism. Atheism. Two great evils which go hand in hand. Anything the state claims is good is good. Evil. Unspeakable evil.

Christian Henry VIII:

1) brutally tortured priests and bishops
2) destroyed priceless religious artworks
3) demolished churches,
4) took church gold and used it to finance war,
5) turned on devout Catholics, had many burned at the stake, confiscated their property, etc.

Weird. It's almost like psychopaths do terrible things when given uncheck ...


I can already see the response: "Henry VIII was not a real christian." That seems to be the rote response when christians are presented with any act of evil committed by christians.

If you think about that response and "will of god" are absolutely brilliant defense mechanisms for their faith. "Not a real christian" allows them to disavow any association with anyone who could give their faith a black eye. "Will of god" allows them to seemingly answer any question about their faith without having to actually answer it and without requiring them to question there faith. Q: "Why would god let an infant be born with a debilitating disease?" A: "Who am I to question the world of god?"
 
2012-05-03 07:17:08 PM

retrograde: Mock26: Just as I suspected, you have no proof to back up your claim.

Okay, "proof". First, that is the wrong term. You want "evidence". Presumably, a personal note admitting culpability signed before a notary public by Chairmen Mao and Stalin. Well, I have that in my safe deposit box along with President Obama's birth certificate. So, I will offer you evidence from history instead:

Stalin deliberately targeted Eastern Orthodox clergy. He put them in camps for no other reason that they were priests and bishops and then brutally tortured them and murdered them almost to the last man. He destroyed priceless religious artworks, demolished churches and melted down the golden altars for bullion to pay for war. He then turned on the highly devout class of middle class property owners and farmers known as the "Kulaks" using the fact that they supported the clergy to brand them as enemies of the state to murder them and seize their farms and the subsequent mismanagement of these confiscated farms led to a famine which killed an estimated ten to fifteen million MORE Russians.

Mao, targeted all religions including Buddhists and Christians. Imprisoned, tortured and killed them wholesale. Burned temples and churches. To this day, in Tibet the persecution of the faithful as "enemies of the state" persists and the Chinese government has desecrated or destroyed hundreds of prayer wheels, statues and shrines in Tibet. They are still murdering priests and nuns. It is going on as we speak.

Moral relativism. Atheism. Two great evils which go hand in hand. Anything the state claims is good is good. Evil. Unspeakable evil.


I'm sorry, in the bible I read, god gave the jews a promised land on the condition that they kill every person currently living there. The 'atrocities' you ascribe to atheists pale in comparison to the acts your god considers moral and acceptable. Maybe you can take the moral high ground when you follow a holy work of fiction that doesn't preach violence and intolerance. Until then, however, continue to wallow in your own hypocrisy. Otherwise, how could we tell you are christian?
 
2012-05-03 07:23:35 PM

retrograde: Mock26: Do you have any evidence that proves that all those atrocities committed by atheists were committed because they were atheists? Because christians and other religious people have committed various atrocities in the name of their higher being(s). What is the difference?

Moral relativism flows from atheism. Moral relativism, the idea that man, the state, determines the "good" directly led to the murder of 100 MILLION people in China and Russia in the last century. It has led to the murder of uncounted millions of unborn human beings in the United States alone in this century. This "moral relativism" is the greatest evil to befall mankind in recent history. It entirely removes the restraints of conscience from those in power. Hence, this thread and all of the comments that the oppression of believers is a good thing and to be desired. Atheism is evil for this reason. Everywhere atheism has ever held sway atrocities have been the result. That is why they are so despised.


And every where theists have held sway (theocracies) has been a wonderful bed of roses. Need we point out the dark ages, the different inquisitions, Saudi Arabia, Iran, slavery in the christian south, Bosnia etc, etc, etc.

Let's just say it, people are dicks and will use any excuse they can to wipe each other out. It has however gotten better as countries have become more secular.
 
2012-05-03 07:27:07 PM

Cyber_Junk: retrograde: Cyber_Junk: You must really love the view from up there on that cross.

I see the pattern emerging. This is the advantage to being a student of history and human nature as opposed to most hateful atheists who seem all too willing to repeat the crimes and folly of the past. Atheism places man at the pinnacle of existence. This is used to justify all kinds of moral relativist horrors. Killing believers as enemies of the state? No problem. Killing the unborn? No problem. Killing ethnic minorities? No problem. There is no "good" and no "evil" its all "just stuff people do". "Good is what we, meaning those in power, say is good". Perfect Stalinist thinking. Big Brother is watching you comrade.


Commies!Commies!Commies!

I prefer to do good things because they're good. Not because a mythical sky god is sitting in judgement of me.


Yup. If God's judgement is the only thing keeping you from raping, looting and murdering then you're a pretty pathetic human being.
 
2012-05-03 07:29:22 PM

LovingTeacher: retrograde: Mock26: Do you have any evidence that proves that all those atrocities committed by atheists were committed because they were atheists? Because christians and other religious people have committed various atrocities in the name of their higher being(s). What is the difference?

Moral relativism flows from atheism. Moral relativism, the idea that man, the state, determines the "good" directly led to the murder of 100 MILLION people in China and Russia in the last century. It has led to the murder of uncounted millions of unborn human beings in the United States alone in this century. This "moral relativism" is the greatest evil to befall mankind in recent history. It entirely removes the restraints of conscience from those in power. Hence, this thread and all of the comments that the oppression of believers is a good thing and to be desired. Atheism is evil for this reason. Everywhere atheism has ever held sway atrocities have been the result. That is why they are so despised.

And every where theists have held sway (theocracies) has been a wonderful bed of roses. Need we point out the dark ages, the different inquisitions, Saudi Arabia, Iran, slavery in the christian south, Bosnia etc, etc, etc.

Let's just say it, people are dicks and will use any excuse they can to wipe each other out. It has however gotten better as countries have become more secular.


I do think there's something to be said for the inherently corrupting influence of religion.

Catholic Saint Sir Thomas More burned at least six people alive for heresy--before Henry ever dreamed of breaking off from Rome. Here's an example of a normal, psychologically healthy man, known for his decency, who committed unspeakable evil for no reason other than religion. I think you can find atheist psychopaths who abused communism, and I think you can find theistic psychopaths who abused religion. I don't think you can find an atheist St. Thomas More. That is, a normal, healthy, decent person who committed atrocity for no reason other than atheism.
 
2012-05-03 07:30:58 PM

Ed Finnerty: When I was in high school I got in trouble for wearing a "Who Farted?" shirt. So I think we all know what this means.

Jesus farted.


i105.photobucket.com
 
2012-05-03 07:34:32 PM

bugontherug: Bucky Katt: please, please, please let it be d) all of the above

The problem here is that subby was less than forthright about why the student has been suspended. It's not that the shirt promoted Jesus. It's that it was reasonably construed to criticize other religions. An expression of personal religious devotion would have been acceptable. This student's implicit attack on other religions was not.

Schools are special places. They have a responsibility to maintain a comfortable environment for all students. The school here determined, quite reasonably, that expressions of personal religious devotion don't undermine that environment, while explicit or implicit attacks on other religions do. The student was rightly suspended, and if he wears the shirt again, he should be expelled.


As a teacher in the US I hope the school that I teach in never becomes this asinine. Yes schools are special places, shirts that promote slavery, drug use, criminal activity including gang related clothing and a few other topics can be banned but this one doesn't cross any lines. Luckily I teach at a very small school (120 8-12 graders) and if something like this comes up we would tell the complainers to grow some thicker skin unless as one person interviewed for the articles said the boy was harrassing others with his prosteletizing. If I say something you don't like then the solution to that is saying something that you do like. The solution is more speech not less speech. And yes recently we have had to stand up for unpopular "speech", there is a lesbian couple at our school and we have made it clear that there will be absolutely no harrassment, and what do you know there hasn't been. The kids have been shown that we respect each other and they have taken the hint.
 
2012-05-03 07:40:58 PM

retrograde:
Moral relativism. Atheism. Two great evils which go hand in hand. Anything the state claims is good is good. Evil. Unspeakable evil.


You have no idea how full of shiat you are! Wow!
 
2012-05-03 07:41:12 PM

retrograde: genner: This is Canada they don't have freedom anyway.

The tide is rising. Only the fact that Christians are still a majority in the West is preventing an all out attack on religious freedom. The trend will be first no religious expression of any kind anywhere on or near a government building including schools. Then it will be no overt religious expression in any public space lest non believers be offended. Then it will be overt oppression against religious institutions, taxing, licensing and harassment.

We will see an increase in violence directed at the faithful. First attacks on property such as vandalism and then outright church burning. The the violence will spread to the faithful themselves and we will see attacks and bloodshed directed against believers.

The common atheist troll image is that pie chart showing that Christians are in the majority but still complaining about being oppressed. Even a majority can be oppressed, it happens all the time in the world. Imagine if it ever happens that Christians are a minority.

It is coming folks, mark my word.


Sounds great, minus the violence bit. Get rid of religion and I'm moving the hell back there.
 
2012-05-03 07:41:59 PM

LovingTeacher: bugontherug: Bucky Katt: please, please, please let it be d) all of the above

The problem here is that subby was less than forthright about why the student has been suspended. It's not that the shirt promoted Jesus. It's that it was reasonably construed to criticize other religions. An expression of personal religious devotion would have been acceptable. This student's implicit attack on other religions was not.

Schools are special places. They have a responsibility to maintain a comfortable environment for all students. The school here determined, quite reasonably, that expressions of personal religious devotion don't undermine that environment, while explicit or implicit attacks on other religions do. The student was rightly suspended, and if he wears the shirt again, he should be expelled.

As a teacher in the US I hope the school that I teach in never becomes this asinine. Yes schools are special places, shirts that promote slavery, drug use, criminal activity including gang related clothing and a few other topics can be banned but this one doesn't cross any lines. Luckily I teach at a very small school (120 8-12 graders) and if something like this comes up we would tell the complainers to grow some thicker skin unless as one person interviewed for the articles said the boy was harrassing others with his prosteletizing. If I say something you don't like then the solution to that is saying something that you do like. The solution is more speech not less speech. And yes recently we have had to stand up for unpopular "speech", there is a lesbian couple at our school and we have made it clear that there will be absolutely no harrassment, and what do you know there hasn't been. The kids have been shown that we respect each other and they have taken the hint.


Maybe that policy works fine in your school. It may not work fine elsewhere. In any event, not all schools should be required to adhere to a one size fits all dress code policy. It makes perfect sense for schools, in a non-discriminatory manner, to regulate on campus political and religious speech by teachers and students to preserve harmony and minimize distraction in the learning environment. And this school's policy and its enforcement are more than reasonable.
 
2012-05-03 07:53:10 PM

retrograde: The Flexecutioner: retrograde: The Flexecutioner: retrograde: RTOGUY: I'm fine with it.

At least you're honest about your desire to oppress your fellow Americans. Be glad that the present majority does not submit YOU to these kinds of oppression. Be glad that you can bring your frivolous lawsuits trying to get crosses taken down from national cemeteries and war memorials.

Then, as Soviet Russia and Maoist China have shown us atheists are not particularly concerned with the lives of their fellow men.

you sound like you write for Fox? extrapolation and distortion are truly the skills of a good christian.

This guy just wrote that he was "fine" with the murder of Christians and the burning of churches and I'm the extremist?

no, you are the idiot. he was fine with christianity being the minority. you are fine with stretching that out to the absurd "murder of christians and burning of churches". you are at least effectively trolling, but only until 8pm when i have to get up from the computer and do things that matter more in my life. but until then i'll feed it. this thread got way less interesting without tatsuma, so im just really bored.

Now, even though your name calling and the old and busted "I'm bored" blah blah blah post was right out of the troll's playbook I'll try and make this simple for you. I wrote about the burning of churches and murder of Christians. He wrote "I'm fine with it". See, simple.


Actually it was the part about Christians being the minority I was fine with at first. Now that I think about it though it would make sense that some Christians might be worried that other faiths might have been keeping score for all the past centuries.
 
2012-05-03 07:56:18 PM

bugontherug: Maybe that policy works fine in your school. It may not work fine elsewhere. In any event, not all schools should be required to adhere to a one size fits all dress code policy. It makes perfect sense for schools, in a non-discriminatory manner, to regulate on campus political and religious speech by teachers and students to preserve harmony and minimize distraction in the learning environment.NO And this school's policy and its enforcement are more than reasonable.


This is where I differ from you, these are high school kids, they are a year or two away from living in the adult world, They need to be taught that they can disagree with people and still be respectful. Speech codes in high school and college are mostly BS. I would agree with you that harrassment and threats should not be tolerated but beyond that I am very skeptical that speech codes are helpful. Hate speech codes started in high schools and is now firmly entrenched in colleges, now this is being used to say that college clubs can't say anything that hurts the feelings of any student on campus.

Don't believe me? Colleges across America are forcing college christian clubs to accept atheists as members and even in leadership positions. This is BS.

Now I am an atheist and mock christians whenever I feel like it but if their rights are trampled I have learned that mine are not far behind.

In fact the "free speech zones" for protestors to keep them from disrupting and hurting the feelings of the participants in political rallies and conventions are a direct outgrowth of the speech codes in first high schools and then colleges.
 
2012-05-03 08:03:24 PM
 
2012-05-03 08:06:05 PM

LovingTeacher:

Don't believe me? Colleges across America are forcing college christian clubs to accept atheists as members and even in leadership positions. This is BS.


I suspect the conclusion of that paragraph is technically correct.
 
2012-05-03 08:09:21 PM
Nancy Pynch-Worthylake, board superintendent, said some students and teachers found the T-shirt offensive.

Here's a pic of her
img515.imageshack.us

Definitely not 'Pynch Worthy'

or 'sponge worthy' come to think of it.
 
2012-05-03 08:11:10 PM

FloydA: LovingTeacher:

Don't believe me? Colleges across America are forcing college christian clubs to accept atheists as members and even in leadership positions. This is BS.


I suspect the conclusion of that paragraph is technically correct.


I'd need a cite to where a college can "force" a voluntary club to do anything before I could comment on the depth of it, however.
 
2012-05-03 08:14:59 PM

LovingTeacher: Don't believe me? Colleges across America are forcing college christian clubs to accept atheists as members and even in leadership positions. This is BS.


img.photobucket.com
 
2012-05-03 08:18:03 PM

LovingTeacher: This is where I differ from you, these are high school kids, they are a year or two away from living in the adult world, They need to be taught that they can disagree with people and still be respectful.


That's fine. But other people may believe they need to be taught math, science, and language without distraction by political and religious debate.


Hate speech codes started in high schools and is now firmly entrenched in colleges, now this is being used to say that college clubs can't say anything that hurts the feelings of any student on campus.


For the most part, at public universities this is untrue. Public university campus speech codes are limited by the First Amendment in a way that public high school speech codes are not. I don't know what the status of speech codes in private schools is. But they're not limited by the First Amendment.

Don't believe me? Colleges across America are forcing college christian clubs to accept atheists as members and even in leadership positions. This is BS.

Citation needed.
 
2012-05-03 08:19:10 PM

LovingTeacher: In fact the "free speech zones" for protestors to keep them from disrupting and hurting the feelings of the participants in political rallies and conventions are a direct outgrowth of the speech codes in first high schools and then colleges.


No they're not.

Are you trolling us?
 
2012-05-03 08:19:51 PM

FloydA: LovingTeacher:

Don't believe me? Colleges across America are forcing college christian clubs to accept atheists as members and even in leadership positions. This is BS.


I suspect the conclusion of that paragraph is technically correct.


Hah.
 
2012-05-03 08:21:37 PM
As an atheist who forced his way into a leadership position for my college's christian club, I'm getting a kick out of these comments.
 
2012-05-03 08:23:40 PM

Tatsuma: Oh boohoo. Something on a t-shirt I disagree with!

The three most offensive things (in order) about this article:

1) The fact that someone would try to prevent him from wearing it
2) the color of the t-shirt
3) the fact he wore it every day for months (seriously?)


He has every right to wear that t-shirt, or one about Islam, or about being a Jedi, as long as there are no specific school rules that makes it forbidden to specifically wear clothes or accessories that display religious messages.

And he would have every right to take the school to court to fight those rules.



No.

He has a right to dress as he chooses until he creates a disruption in the education process. Everything I've read says he purposely created disruptions. The principal told him to stop the distracting behavior. He didn't. Welcome to suspension.

And cry me a river.
 
2012-05-03 08:27:14 PM

Ed Finnerty: As an atheist who forced his way into a leadership position for my college's christian club, I'm getting a kick out of these comments.


Needed you some hot virgin coeds, huh?
 
2012-05-03 08:31:51 PM

FloydA: retrograde:

[i105.photobucket.com image 251x288][i105.photobucket.com image 500x333]


Mmmm... Edgar Allen Cabbage.
 
2012-05-03 08:33:40 PM

retrograde: clyph: Straw man much?

Better go back to the Wiki "Fallacy" page. I don't think you understand the concept of the "straw man" argument.

Ignorant much?


Straw man: misrepresenting the opposing view so you can easily defeat it.

Which is exactly what you did.

I'll just leave you this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4aCRHjH6d4Q

Go back to your cave and rub more blue mud in your navel, troglodyte.
 
Displayed 50 of 409 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report