Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
September 16, 2014, 06:51:59 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Login Register  
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10] 11 12 13   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Prayer and Religion in Public Life  (Read 37270 times)
Beach Bum
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 41399


« Reply #225 on: June 24, 2012, 05:37:40 PM »

Everyone has the right to practice any religion they choose, or not religion or at all, but we shouldn't be trying to appease a handful of paranoid anti-religious extremists. 

Lawmakers claim Air Force culture becoming 'hostile towards religion'
Published June 23, 2012
FoxNews.com

Dozens of House lawmakers accused the U.S. Air Force this week of being "hostile towards religion," citing a string of recent incidents they claim show the military is taking separation of church and state too far.

"Censorship is not required for compliance with the Constitution," they wrote in a letter to Defense Secretary Leon Panetta.

The letter from 66 Republican members of Congress referenced a series of cases where they claim the Air Force "succumbed" to demands from outside groups.

Among the incidents:

A decision to remove a Latin reference to "God" from a logo/motto for the Rapid Capabilities Office

A decision to stop requiring staff to check for Bibles in Air Force Inn rooms

The removal of a document from a distance-learning course for Squadron Officer School that suggested chapel attendance is a sign of strong leadership

The suspension of an ethics course because the material included Bible passages

"Mr. Secretary, the combination of events mentioned above raises concerns that the Air Force is developing a culture that is hostile towards religion," the lawmakers wrote. They urged Panetta to investigate all the incidents and issue "clear Department of Defense policy guidance."

The letter was drafted by Reps. Diane Black, R-Tenn.; Randy Forbes, R-Va.; and Todd Akin, R-Mo.

'Censorship is not required for compliance with the Constitution'

- GOP lawmakers in letter to Defense Secretary Leon Panetta

The incidents were not all as clear-cut as the lawmakers made them sound.

In the case of the Squadron Officer School course, the training document in question contained the following paragraph: "If you attend chapel regularly, both officers and Airmen are likely to follow this example. If you are morally lax in your personal life, a general moral indifference within the command can be expected."

The Military Religious Freedom Foundation complained to the Air Force in March that the line "creates the inescapable impression that regular church attendance is a requirement for commissioned Air Force officers in order to demonstrate positive morals to subordinates." The group said the document violates the constitutional prohibition on religious tests for U.S. office holders.

The Air Force subsequently scrapped the document.

In the case of the Rapid Capabilities Office, the reference to God was removed following a complaint from an atheist group. The original logo, according to Fox News Radio, said in Latin: "Doing God's Work with Other People's Money."
It was changed to say, "Doing Miracles with Other People's Money."

In the case of the Air Force Inn rooms, the Air Force moved to nix a question from its checklist asking whether a Bible was provided, according to the Air Force Times, though it did not order Bibles to be removed.

The Republican lawmakers, though, said the change in attitude can all be traced back to a September 2011 memo from Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Norton Schwartz that said chaplains, "not commanders," are expected to notify airmen of the Chaplain Corps programs.

The lawmakers said this suggested "that the mere mention of these programs is impermissible." All the subsequent incidents, they said, "go beyond the requirements of the Constitution."

"The changes lend credence to the notion that the Air Force will remove any reference to God or faith that an outside organization brings to its attention," they wrote.

The Air Force said in a statement responding to the letter that airmen are "free to exercise their constitutional right to practice their religion -- in a manner that is respectful of other individuals' rights to follow their own belief systems."

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/06/23/lawmakers-claim-air-force-culture-becoming-hostile-towards-religion/
Report to moderator   Logged
Mr. Magoo
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 9794


THE most mistaken identity on getbig


« Reply #226 on: June 24, 2012, 06:12:03 PM »

Everyone has the right to practice any religion they choose, or not religion or at all, but we shouldn't be trying to appease a handful of paranoid anti-religious extremists. 


Did you mean a "right to practice" or did you really mean a "right to believe"? I think many would agree to the second, but the first can be troublesome when some religions call on believers to act out against those who don't believe. Is it a right for a muslim to attack a christian for example, if their religion calls for that action?
Report to moderator   Logged
Beach Bum
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 41399


« Reply #227 on: June 24, 2012, 06:14:44 PM »

Did you mean a "right to practice" or did you really mean a "right to believe"? I think many would agree to the second, but the first can be troublesome when some religions call on believers to act out against those who don't believe. Is it a right for a muslim to attack a christian for example, if their religion calls for that action?

I meant "practice," "believe," "not believe," etc.  Not really much of a difference in this context. 

No, it's not right for a Muslim to attack a Christian, and that is not allowed in our country.  Not sure what that has to do with the catering to paranoid anti-religious extremists in the article I posted? 
Report to moderator   Logged
Mr. Magoo
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 9794


THE most mistaken identity on getbig


« Reply #228 on: June 24, 2012, 06:19:26 PM »

I meant "practice," "believe," "not believe," etc.  Not really much of a difference in this context. 

No, it's not right for a Muslim to attack a Christian, and that is not allowed in our country.  Not sure what that has to do with the catering to paranoid anti-religious extremists in the article I posted? 

Theres a difference between freedom to act and freedom to believe regarding obligations of religion versus obligation of society, several supreme court decisions have addressed it.

And I didnt asked if it was "right" for a muslim to attack a christian. I asked if it was A right. You said everyone has a right to practice any religion. I was seeing how consistent you was with that, or if you really meant that everyone has a right to believe any religion.

And I was speaking more generally regarding your comments about the article, not the article itself. My question was going beyond the article, directly at your comment.
Report to moderator   Logged
Beach Bum
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 41399


« Reply #229 on: June 24, 2012, 06:23:40 PM »

Theres a difference between freedom to act and freedom to believe regarding obligations of religion versus obligation of society, several supreme court decisions have addressed it.

And I didnt asked if it was "right" for a muslim to attack a christian. I asked if it was A right. You said everyone has a right to practice any religion. I was seeing how consistent you was with that, or if you really meant that everyone has a right to believe any religion.

And I was speaking more generally regarding your comments about the article, not the article itself. My question was going beyond the article, directly at your comment.

Of course there is a difference between a belief and an action.  Just not in the context of the article and my comments. 

Everyone has the right to practice any religion, or no religion, but no right is absolute, including the right to life.  They can all be taken away. 
Report to moderator   Logged
Beach Bum
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 41399


« Reply #230 on: August 07, 2012, 09:10:01 AM »

Paranoid anti-religious extremists hard at work.

Mayor defends war memorial after group calls for removal of cross
Published August 04, 2012
FoxNews.com


A national atheist organization is seeking to remove this cross from a 91-year-old war memorial in Woonsocket, R.I., claiming it violates separation of church and state.

A mayor has come to the defense of a war memorial that features religious symbols and prayers after a national group called for the cross to be removed.

“The Firefighter’s Prayer” is a 91-year-old memorial in a Rhode Island city that honors hometown soldiers who paid the ultimate sacrifice defending their country during World War I and II, MyFoxBoston.com reports.
It has stood in the parking lot of the Woonsocket fire station for decades with no complaints, until earlier this year when the Freedom from Religion Foundation called for it to be stripped of the cross, claiming it violates the First Amendment’s freedom of religion clause.

The group also wants the Woonsocket Fire Department to remove “The Firefighter’s Prayer” and a picture of an angel from its website.

“We ask that you immediately remove the cross from the Fire Station parking lot and remove the prayer and angel from the Woonsocket Fire Department website,” the foundation’s senior staff attorney, Rebecca Market, wrote in a letter to Woonsocket officials earlier this year.

But at an event Friday, Mayor Leo Fontaine reaffirmed earlier statements that the group’s request will not be met without a fight. “We will defend this monument no matter what,” he told MyFoxBoston.com. Fontaine said the monument is a symbol of the community, and the city is prepared to fight to keep the monument where it stands.

While the city is currently facing the possibility of bankruptcy, residents have rallied to raise $18,500 for a defense fund should the Freedom from Religion Foundation decide to file a lawsuit.
Fontaine has said that the city will not remove the cross, “under any circumstances.”

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/08/04/mayor-defends-war-memorial-after-group-calls-for-removal-cross/
Report to moderator   Logged
Straw Man
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 25205


one dwells in nirvana


« Reply #231 on: August 07, 2012, 09:46:38 AM »

BAPTIST CHURCH REFUSES TO ALLOW A BLACK COUPLE TO MARRY AND IS THEN SHAMED INTO AN APOLOGY WHEN THEIR BIGOTRY IS MADE PUBLIC


By Jeffrey Elizabeth Copeland, CNN

(CNN)–After barring a black couple from marrying in its Mississippi facility in late July, the First Baptist Church of Crystal Springs released a statement Sunday apologizing for its actions.

“We, the church, realize that the Hendersons and Wilsons should never have been asked to relocate their wedding. This wrong decision resulted in hurt and sadness for everyone. Both the pastor and those involved in the wedding location being changed have expressed their regrets and sorrow for their actions,” the church said.

Te’Andrea and Charles Wilson planned for months to marry at the First Baptist Church of Crystal Springs but were asked at the last minute to move.

Their pastor, Stan Weatherford, made the request on behalf of some congregants who didn't want to see the couple married there, according to CNN affiliate WLBT. He performed the ceremony at a nearby church.

Sunday’s statement follows a string of apologies from First Baptist and its congregation for turning away the young couple.

“As a church, we express our apology to Te’Andrea and Charles Wilson for the hurt that was brought to them in the hours preceding their wedding and beyond. We are seeking forgiveness and reconciliation with our Lord Jesus Christ, Te’Andrea and Charles, family and friends of the Hendersons and Wilsons, our church family, and our community for the actions and attitudes that have recently occurred,” the statement continued.

Despite the church’s recent statements, the Wilsons aren’t convinced of the congregations' sincerity, they said, calling the recent release “an insult” and “misleading to the public.”

“The pastor has not spoken to us since a couple days after the incident. We have not heard from the pastor or any church official since the incident,” Charles Wilson said Sunday.

Dr. Richard Land, head of The Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, the public policy arm for the Southern Baptist Convention, called the church’s apology responsible and necessary.

“It certainly sounds to me as if God has been working on the hearts of the church members of Crystal Springs,” Land said. “And, they have seen and felt the error of their ways and they are expressing that in this letter. They’re apologizing and seeking to correct the damage that’s been done to the reputation of Christ and his church.”

Jonathan Thompson, the African-American community relations director for the city of Crystal Springs, was one of many community members to organize a unity rally after the incident, aiming to help reunite church members.

"I think this is an opportunity to really get intentional about reconciling," he said, adding that he prayed God would forgive all of them for their sins and that they would be able to find reconciliation.

However, Charles Wilson said, “at the rally, the pastor avoided us. He walked the other way when he saw us walking toward him. It would have been nice to talk to us before issuing a statement."

A spokesman who agreed to be identified only as a "church member" said that the church had attempted to reach out to the couple and that calls were not returned.

The Wilsons had attended the church but were not official members. They would have been the first African-American couple to marry in First Baptist Church’s 150-year history, church officials said.

"This had never been done before here, so it was setting a new precedent, and there are those who reacted to that because of that," Weatherford told CNN affiliate WLBT in July.

Many church members were unaware of the decision to refuse to marry the couple and reacted with surprise to the news.

The incident "didn't represent all the people of the church," said Thompson, who visited the church after the incident.

Sunday's statement reaffirmed the church's desire for the inclusion of all people. "We the membership of First Baptist Church Crystal Springs hold the position that we should be open to all people. Our desire is to restore the church to be a spiritual lighthouse in doing the Lord’s will in Crystal Springs and in Mississippi."

"I blame the First Baptist Church of Crystal Springs. I blame those members who knew and call themselves Christians and didn't stand up," Charles Wilson told WLBT.

“It’s up to them to decide whether to forgive or not. I hope they will,” Land said. “We recognized that our church, just like any other church, is made up of sinful- redeemed but flawed- saints who intentionally, at times, choose not to follow the Lord’s will. Alas, this is a truth of human nature.”

http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2012/08/06/church-that-refused-to-marry-black-couple-releases-apology/  
Report to moderator   Logged
tonymctones
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 25215



« Reply #232 on: August 07, 2012, 04:43:04 PM »

BAPTIST CHURCH REFUSES TO ALLOW A BLACK COUPLE TO MARRY AND IS THEN SHAMED INTO AN APOLOGY WHEN THEIR BIGOTRY IS MADE PUBLIC


By Jeffrey Elizabeth Copeland, CNN

(CNN)–After barring a black couple from marrying in its Mississippi facility in late July, the First Baptist Church of Crystal Springs released a statement Sunday apologizing for its actions.

“We, the church, realize that the Hendersons and Wilsons should never have been asked to relocate their wedding. This wrong decision resulted in hurt and sadness for everyone. Both the pastor and those involved in the wedding location being changed have expressed their regrets and sorrow for their actions,” the church said.

Te’Andrea and Charles Wilson planned for months to marry at the First Baptist Church of Crystal Springs but were asked at the last minute to move.

Their pastor, Stan Weatherford, made the request on behalf of some congregants who didn't want to see the couple married there, according to CNN affiliate WLBT. He performed the ceremony at a nearby church.

Sunday’s statement follows a string of apologies from First Baptist and its congregation for turning away the young couple.

“As a church, we express our apology to Te’Andrea and Charles Wilson for the hurt that was brought to them in the hours preceding their wedding and beyond. We are seeking forgiveness and reconciliation with our Lord Jesus Christ, Te’Andrea and Charles, family and friends of the Hendersons and Wilsons, our church family, and our community for the actions and attitudes that have recently occurred,” the statement continued.

Despite the church’s recent statements, the Wilsons aren’t convinced of the congregations' sincerity, they said, calling the recent release “an insult” and “misleading to the public.”

“The pastor has not spoken to us since a couple days after the incident. We have not heard from the pastor or any church official since the incident,” Charles Wilson said Sunday.

Dr. Richard Land, head of The Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, the public policy arm for the Southern Baptist Convention, called the church’s apology responsible and necessary.

“It certainly sounds to me as if God has been working on the hearts of the church members of Crystal Springs,” Land said. “And, they have seen and felt the error of their ways and they are expressing that in this letter. They’re apologizing and seeking to correct the damage that’s been done to the reputation of Christ and his church.”

Jonathan Thompson, the African-American community relations director for the city of Crystal Springs, was one of many community members to organize a unity rally after the incident, aiming to help reunite church members.

"I think this is an opportunity to really get intentional about reconciling," he said, adding that he prayed God would forgive all of them for their sins and that they would be able to find reconciliation.

However, Charles Wilson said, “at the rally, the pastor avoided us. He walked the other way when he saw us walking toward him. It would have been nice to talk to us before issuing a statement."

A spokesman who agreed to be identified only as a "church member" said that the church had attempted to reach out to the couple and that calls were not returned.

The Wilsons had attended the church but were not official members. They would have been the first African-American couple to marry in First Baptist Church’s 150-year history, church officials said.

"This had never been done before here, so it was setting a new precedent, and there are those who reacted to that because of that," Weatherford told CNN affiliate WLBT in July.

Many church members were unaware of the decision to refuse to marry the couple and reacted with surprise to the news.

The incident "didn't represent all the people of the church," said Thompson, who visited the church after the incident.

Sunday's statement reaffirmed the church's desire for the inclusion of all people. "We the membership of First Baptist Church Crystal Springs hold the position that we should be open to all people. Our desire is to restore the church to be a spiritual lighthouse in doing the Lord’s will in Crystal Springs and in Mississippi."

"I blame the First Baptist Church of Crystal Springs. I blame those members who knew and call themselves Christians and didn't stand up," Charles Wilson told WLBT.

“It’s up to them to decide whether to forgive or not. I hope they will,” Land said. “We recognized that our church, just like any other church, is made up of sinful- redeemed but flawed- saints who intentionally, at times, choose not to follow the Lord’s will. Alas, this is a truth of human nature.”

http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2012/08/06/church-that-refused-to-marry-black-couple-releases-apology/ 
this should be fought just like the idiotic paranoid anti religious stuff should be fought, wouldnt you agree straw?
Report to moderator   Logged
Straw Man
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 25205


one dwells in nirvana


« Reply #233 on: August 08, 2012, 08:09:13 AM »

this should be fought just like the idiotic paranoid anti religious stuff should be fought, wouldnt you agree straw?

no way to answer such a generalized question

this example was a church refusing to allow a black couple to marry solely based on their race.    That's just plain old fashioned racism and of course everyone should object to that (unless of course they are a racist)

this thread includes many examples of things that are not paranoid/anti-religious that fundies would like to characterize that way and I would not agree that they are equivalent with the experience of this couple in any way, shape or form
Report to moderator   Logged
Beach Bum
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 41399


« Reply #234 on: August 14, 2012, 12:56:23 PM »

 Roll Eyes

School district dismisses atheist group's threat to sue over 'God' songs
By Maegan Vazquez
Published August 14, 2012
FoxNews.com

A national atheist group is demanding that a New York public school district remove songs from the curriculum of a music class because they feature the words "god" and "lord" in the lyrics, but the educators aren't backing down.

The Freedom from Religion Foundation has sent letters to the Shenendehowa Central Schools, in Clifton Park, N.Y., threatening legal action if the songs aren't removed from Okte Elementary School's curriculum. The possibly-religious songs include "Thank You for the World So Sweet," which says "Thank you God for everything," "Now I Lay Me Down to Sleep," which says "I pray the Lord my soul to keep," "Michael Row your Boat Ashore" and "He's Got the Whole World in His Hands."


"They're going after little children over an innocent song."
- Bill Donohue, president of Catholic League

"This is not minor. It's predatory to conduct this toward a young, captive audience who would be truant if they didn't attend public school," Annie Laurie Gaylor, co-president of the Freedom from Religion Foundation, told FoxNews.com.

The organization sent a letter to Superintendent Oliver Robinson about the songs in June on behalf of a parent who complained. While the two groups communicated over the summer break, a third letter from the FRFF staff attorney arrived on Aug. 6, which warned of legal action.

School officials are standing firm, claiming the songs the kids are being taught are simply educational:

"None of the songs was taught, or used, as prayer. Thus, the case you cite dealing with school prayer is an inapposite...[the songs] were used appropriately to teach musical concepts," Kathryn McCary, the school district's attorney, said in letter mailed to the foundation. 

Gaylor dismissed the argument, saying the songs don't have to be part of a prayer to violate the separation of church and state clause of the First Amendment.

"It doesn't matter that the devotional wasn't toward a specific religion. We've already been through this with another case that features prayer songs," she said.

Some religious organizations disagree.

"This would never stand a chance with the Supreme Court. They [FFRF] wants to censor the expressions of Christianity -- and they only go after the Christians, not the Jews or the Muslims. Now they're going after little children over an innocent song," Bill Donohue, president of Catholic League, told FoxNews.com. "I applaud the school district -- they've made a very cogent argument. If this goes to court, we need to teach them (FFRF) a lesson."

It looks like the complaint just might go through the rounds of the justice system.

"We have made it clear that we have a parent that is willing to take formal legal action in court," Gaylor said.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/08/14/atheists-demand-schools-to-remove-songs-mentioning-god/
Report to moderator   Logged
Beach Bum
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 41399


« Reply #235 on: September 20, 2012, 12:33:31 PM »

Crybabies.

University of Tennessee Refuses to Ban Pre-Game Prayers
Posted in Top Stories
Sep 19, 2012
By Todd Starnes

It’s football time in Tennessee where longtime gridiron traditions are cherished – from Rocky Top to the Pride of the Southland Marching Band. At the start of every game inside the colossal Neyland Stadium, thousands of the football faithful rise to their feet, remove their hats and pause for the pre-game prayer.

But in recent days the University of Tennessee Knoxville’s pre-game prayer has come under attack. The Wisconsin-based Freedom From Religion Foundation sent a cease and desist letter to the public university calling for them to abandon the long-time tradition.

“This is a public university, not a Christian club,” wrote Annie Gaylor, co-president of the FFRF in a letter to the chancellor. “When you’re not religious or are of another faith and you get prayed at during events, it’s really very grating.”

“It’s a sock in the gut for you to go for a sporting event and then be told to conform to someone else’s religion,” she said in a story published by the Knoxville News Sentinel.

Chancellor Jimmy Cheek responded by saying the pre-game prayers are protected by the U.S. Constitution and will not be silenced on his campus.

“The university will continue to allow prayers before university events,” he wrote in a letter obtained by Fox News.

Cheek cited a court ruling from the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals that specifically held that “nonsectarian prayer at public university events does not violate the First Amendment.”

And furthermore, Cheek said prayers will also be welcomed at other university events – outside the confines of the football stadium.

The Knoxville News Sentinel reported that the FFRF sent their cease and desist letter on behalf of UT alumni and students who “felt disenfranchised by the prayers.”

“You roll your eyes and say why is this going on at a government-subsidized event?” retired ecologist and FFRF member Bob Craig told the newspaper. “I also see it at all the high school games where they have prayers before games and after games. It’s really out of place. It’s hurting all those people that don’t have that belief and ostracizing them.”

The university’s decision brought praise from Kevin Brooks, a Republican state representative.

“I was at the game on Saturday and actually commented on how thankful I was that we began the game in prayer and how much I enjoyed the halftime musical performance of Amazing Grace,” he told Fox News.

Brooks said it was alarming that an outside organization from Wisconsin would involve itself in the affairs of another state. There is no separation of church and state in the Constitution, he noted.

“I am so thankful that Tennesseans are going to stand up and say this is the Volunteer State and voluntarily we’re going to keep praying,” Brooks said.

http://radio.foxnews.com/toddstarnes/top-stories/university-of-tennessee-refuses-to-ban-pre-game-prayers.html
Report to moderator   Logged
Straw Man
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 25205


one dwells in nirvana


« Reply #236 on: September 20, 2012, 02:51:02 PM »

fundie moron thinks the Federal Government should "investigate" cartoons

http://theclicker.today.com/_news/2012/09/18/13941805-fox-news-host-wants-south-park-investigated-for-blasphemy?lite

Fox News host wants 'South Park' investigated for blasphemy
By Gael Fashingbauer Cooper , TODAY

In the wake of news reports about the anti-Islam film "Innocence of Muslims," a Fox News host has decided that a bigger and more professionally made production, "South Park," should come under fire.


Todd Starnes, host of "FOX News & Commentary" and author of "Dispatches from Bitter America," spoke on a panel about "Religious Hostility in America" at the Values Voter Summit in Washington this past weekend, and Cartman and friends were on his mind.

"We have seen the administration come out and say, 'We condemn anyone who denigrates religious faith.' And they come out in regards to this anti-Muslim film," Starnes said. "Well, that's well and good, but my question is: When has the administration condemned the anti-Christian films that are coming out of Hollywood? Where are the federal investigations into shows like 'South Park,' which has denigrated all faiths? Where is the outrage when people of the Christian faith are subjected to this humiliation that is coming out of Hollywood?"

"South Park" has famously taken on religions of all kinds. Scientology is parodied in an episode where Stan is thought to be the reincarnation of Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard, and Scientologist Tom Cruise wouldn't come out of Stan's closet. Mormonism is mocked in an episode where Stan is impressed by a Mormon family's behavior, if not convinced of their beliefs. Cartman constantly makes fun of Kyle, the lone Jew among the four main characters. Catholicism, especially the child-molestation scandals involving priests, has also been targeted by the show.


 "South Park" also portrayed Muhammad. In its fifth season, the show featured the "Super Best Friends," a superhero group led by Jesus and consisting of Muhammad, Buddha, Moses, Joseph Smith, Krishna, Laozi and an Aquaman parody called Sea Man. The episode first aired on July 4, 2001, before the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks of that year, and there was little fuss when Muhammad was portrayed. But when the show tried to show a Muhammad character in 2010, Comedy Central altered the episode.

In June, a Muslim man pled guilty to threatening the "South Park" creators over the 2010 episode and was sentenced to 11 1/2 years in prison


* 100615-ent-cartman-hmed_photoblog500.jpg (136.13 KB, 500x365 - viewed 144 times.)
Report to moderator   Logged
Mr. Magoo
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 9794


THE most mistaken identity on getbig


« Reply #237 on: September 20, 2012, 04:42:36 PM »

Crybabies.

Isn't this whole thread you crying over people who cry too much?
Report to moderator   Logged
Straw Man
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 25205


one dwells in nirvana


« Reply #238 on: September 20, 2012, 05:03:19 PM »

Isn't this whole thread you crying over people who cry too much?

yep and he loves to bump it whenever he gets the urge to feel victimized and needs a good cry

Report to moderator   Logged
Beach Bum
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 41399


« Reply #239 on: September 20, 2012, 06:49:00 PM »

Isn't this whole thread you crying over people who cry too much?

Nope.  It's about prayer and religion in public life.   Smiley
Report to moderator   Logged
garebear
Time Out
Getbig V
*
Gender: Male
Posts: 6517


Never question my instincts.


« Reply #240 on: September 29, 2012, 07:51:32 AM »

Nope.  It's about prayer and religion in public life.   Smiley
.


* 397240_449251681793742_1748150719_n.jpg (21.2 KB, 480x312 - viewed 118 times.)
Report to moderator   Logged

G
Shockwave
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 19952


Decepticons! Scramble!


« Reply #241 on: September 29, 2012, 07:54:01 AM »

fundie moron thinks the Federal Government should "investigate" cartoons

http://theclicker.today.com/_news/2012/09/18/13941805-fox-news-host-wants-south-park-investigated-for-blasphemy?lite

Fox News host wants 'South Park' investigated for blasphemy
By Gael Fashingbauer Cooper , TODAY

In the wake of news reports about the anti-Islam film "Innocence of Muslims," a Fox News host has decided that a bigger and more professionally made production, "South Park," should come under fire.


Todd Starnes, host of "FOX News & Commentary" and author of "Dispatches from Bitter America," spoke on a panel about "Religious Hostility in America" at the Values Voter Summit in Washington this past weekend, and Cartman and friends were on his mind.

"We have seen the administration come out and say, 'We condemn anyone who denigrates religious faith.' And they come out in regards to this anti-Muslim film," Starnes said. "Well, that's well and good, but my question is: When has the administration condemned the anti-Christian films that are coming out of Hollywood? Where are the federal investigations into shows like 'South Park,' which has denigrated all faiths? Where is the outrage when people of the Christian faith are subjected to this humiliation that is coming out of Hollywood?"

"South Park" has famously taken on religions of all kinds. Scientology is parodied in an episode where Stan is thought to be the reincarnation of Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard, and Scientologist Tom Cruise wouldn't come out of Stan's closet. Mormonism is mocked in an episode where Stan is impressed by a Mormon family's behavior, if not convinced of their beliefs. Cartman constantly makes fun of Kyle, the lone Jew among the four main characters. Catholicism, especially the child-molestation scandals involving priests, has also been targeted by the show.


 "South Park" also portrayed Muhammad. In its fifth season, the show featured the "Super Best Friends," a superhero group led by Jesus and consisting of Muhammad, Buddha, Moses, Joseph Smith, Krishna, Laozi and an Aquaman parody called Sea Man. The episode first aired on July 4, 2001, before the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks of that year, and there was little fuss when Muhammad was portrayed. But when the show tried to show a Muhammad character in 2010, Comedy Central altered the episode.

In June, a Muslim man pled guilty to threatening the "South Park" creators over the 2010 episode and was sentenced to 11 1/2 years in prison

Douches, all of them. Investigation for blasphemy, what bitches.
Report to moderator   Logged
garebear
Time Out
Getbig V
*
Gender: Male
Posts: 6517


Never question my instincts.


« Reply #242 on: September 29, 2012, 08:12:43 AM »

fundie moron thinks the Federal Government should "investigate" cartoons

http://theclicker.today.com/_news/2012/09/18/13941805-fox-news-host-wants-south-park-investigated-for-blasphemy?lite

Fox News host wants 'South Park' investigated for blasphemy
By Gael Fashingbauer Cooper , TODAY

In the wake of news reports about the anti-Islam film "Innocence of Muslims," a Fox News host has decided that a bigger and more professionally made production, "South Park," should come under fire.


Todd Starnes, host of "FOX News & Commentary" and author of "Dispatches from Bitter America," spoke on a panel about "Religious Hostility in America" at the Values Voter Summit in Washington this past weekend, and Cartman and friends were on his mind.

"We have seen the administration come out and say, 'We condemn anyone who denigrates religious faith.' And they come out in regards to this anti-Muslim film," Starnes said. "Well, that's well and good, but my question is: When has the administration condemned the anti-Christian films that are coming out of Hollywood? Where are the federal investigations into shows like 'South Park,' which has denigrated all faiths? Where is the outrage when people of the Christian faith are subjected to this humiliation that is coming out of Hollywood?"

"South Park" has famously taken on religions of all kinds. Scientology is parodied in an episode where Stan is thought to be the reincarnation of Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard, and Scientologist Tom Cruise wouldn't come out of Stan's closet. Mormonism is mocked in an episode where Stan is impressed by a Mormon family's behavior, if not convinced of their beliefs. Cartman constantly makes fun of Kyle, the lone Jew among the four main characters. Catholicism, especially the child-molestation scandals involving priests, has also been targeted by the show.


 "South Park" also portrayed Muhammad. In its fifth season, the show featured the "Super Best Friends," a superhero group led by Jesus and consisting of Muhammad, Buddha, Moses, Joseph Smith, Krishna, Laozi and an Aquaman parody called Sea Man. The episode first aired on July 4, 2001, before the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks of that year, and there was little fuss when Muhammad was portrayed. But when the show tried to show a Muhammad character in 2010, Comedy Central altered the episode.

In June, a Muslim man pled guilty to threatening the "South Park" creators over the 2010 episode and was sentenced to 11 1/2 years in prison

This is literally too ridiculous for me to be upset about.

I'm speechless.

Report to moderator   Logged

G
Shockwave
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 19952


Decepticons! Scramble!


« Reply #243 on: September 29, 2012, 08:13:30 AM »

This is literally too ridiculous for me to be upset about.

I'm speechless.


Seriously.
Report to moderator   Logged
Beach Bum
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 41399


« Reply #244 on: November 26, 2012, 06:00:25 PM »

Charlie Brown?  Really?? 

Secularists: ‘Merry Christmas Charlie Brown’ Violates Constitution
Nov 26, 2012
By Todd Starnes

An Arkansas secular group is defending its opposition to public school students being allowed attend a performance of “Merry Christmas Charlie Brown” while rejecting claims they had declared a ‘war on Christmas.’

“Those who stand up for the rights of children to be free from coercion aren’t making war either on religion or Christmas,” said LeeWood Thomas, spokesperson for the Arkansas Society of Freethinkers. “This is a case of a church forming an alliance with local government to violate religious freedom.”

Students at Terry Elementary School in Little Rock had been invited to attend an upcoming performance of “Merry Christmas Charlie Brown” at Agape Church. The theatrical production is adapted from the popular animated television classic, “A Charlie Brown Christmas.”

The Little Rock School District said students were not required to attend the performance and as far as the district is concerned – there is no controversy.

“The teachers wanted to provide an opportunity for cultural enrichment for students through a holiday production and are supported by the principal,” spokesperson Pamela Smith told Fox News. “Because it will be held at a church, as some public events often are, a letter was sent home with students so parents who took exception and wished to have their children remain at school could do so.”

The Arkansas Society of Freethinkers said they were speaking out on behalf of a parent whose child attends the school. They said the parent felt forced to “choose between maintaining their family religious beliefs versus their child being singled out and possibly ostracized or bullied.”

“Merely allowing a child to opt out of a school-sponsored religious activity during the winter holidays is no solution,” Anne Orsi, vice president of the group said in a statement. “Such a situation exposes the children of minority faiths and outlooks to majority pressure and victimization. Thus the religious rights of children are being violated along with their right to privacy.”

The society said public schools should not take students to churches to see plays with religious content.

“This isn’t about Charlie Brown or Christmas,” Orsi said in her statement. “It’s about the separation of church and state. We must be sensitive to that and never allow public schools to promote one brand of religion over any other.”

But attorneys with the Alliance Defending Freedom said the secular group is way off base.

“An overwhelming majority of Americans agree that it’s okay to celebrate Christmas in schools and in the public square,” attorney Matt Sharp said.

The ADF sent a letter to the Little Rock School District offering their legal services should anyone sue over the performance.

“Schools should not have to think twice about whether they can allow students to watch a classic Christmas production simply because a Bible verse is mentioned in it,” Sharp wrote in his letter. “Are atheist groups going to start demanding that students be blocked from attending other classic productions just because they contain religious references?”

http://radio.foxnews.com/toddstarnes/top-stories/secularists-merry-christmas-charlie-brown-violates-constitution.html
Report to moderator   Logged
littledumbells
Getbig III
***
Gender: Male
Posts: 668



« Reply #245 on: November 26, 2012, 06:19:56 PM »

I was kidding about the ACLU.

I agree the government shouldn't be proselytizing. 

It's not just that this is a free country, it's that faith is really interwoven throughout our society, both in the public and private sectors.  It was fascinating to see this at play yesterday. 

  Its either that or folks just go with the flow
Report to moderator   Logged
Beach Bum
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 41399


« Reply #246 on: November 30, 2012, 02:04:09 PM »

How insecure do you have to be to complain about a little kid saying the word "God"? 

'God' removed from student's poem
Landdis Hollifield
Posted: Tuesday, November 20, 2012

A decision to remove the word “God” from a school program is causing a world of controversy for McDowell County Schools.

But a First Amendment expert said school officials made the right decision.

During Monday’s Board of Education meeting, two members of the public stepped forward to talk to board members about a First Amendment issue at West Marion Elementary.

McDowell County Schools employee Chris Greene and McDowell County resident Esther Dollarhyde each took a turn talking about West Marion Elementary’s Veterans Day program during the public comment portion of the meeting.

“On Nov. 8, 2012 West Marion held their annual Veterans Day program in the midst of a lot of drama,” Greene said. “We had one parent concerned with the use of the word God in this program. This parent did not want the word God mentioned anywhere in the program. When the demand from this person was heard, the rights of another stopped. It did so by hushing the voice of a six-year-old girl.”

Greene said the student had written a special poem for the program about her grandfathers, both of whom had served in the armed forces during the Vietnam War.

In it, she wrote, “he prayed to God for peace, he prayed to God for strength,” which Greene stated she was told she could not read during the school assembly.

“She was told that she was not allowed to say the word God during this program” stated Greene. “Being a six year old, and not knowing her rights, she did what she was told.”

Greene said the girl wasn’t trying to force people to pray, but was just telling them what her grandfather had done.

“Let me add here that those prayers worked, because he went on to serve two tours in Vietnam,” Greene said. “My question is this, when do the rights of one outweigh the rights of another? I believe that this little girl’s rights were violated and that those who worked so hard to prepare this program should receive an apology.”

Esther Dollarhyde agreed.

“We need to keep in mind what was our country founded on,” stated Dollarhyde. “It was founded on God and Jesus Christ, and our veterans went out and fought for us so we would have a free country, but if we aren’t allowed to honor them the way that the children want to then America is getting lost.”

When contacted after the presentations, School Board member Lynn Greene, who is also Chris Greene’s father, said school officials had overstepped their authority.

“My understanding on the law is a teacher cannot promote any certain religion, but when it comes to students voicing their opinion or expressing themselves in a poem we pretty much have to give some leeway,” Greene said. “To me this whole thing is a violation of that child’s rights. Nobody forced her to write the poem, that was her part of the program. She was asked to write a poem about veterans and she did. My personal opinion is that her rights were violated.”

School Board member Terry Frank said he could not comment until he knew more about the situation.

When asked why the decision was made to remove the word God, Superintendent Gerri Martin said it came about after a serious discussion with West Marion’s Principal Desarae Kirkpatrick and Vice Principal Nakia Carson.

“The discussion (about the poem) occurred between myself, the principal and the assistant principal at West Marion,” stated Martin. “We wanted to make sure we were upholding the school district’s responsibility of separation of church and state from the Establishment Clause.”

When asked why other schools were allowed to hold programs containing poems and student writings with the word God in them, Martin said that was because West Marion was the only one who had asked for consultation about their program.

Kirkpatrick, like Martin, said the decision was based on a public school’s necessity to not infringe upon other students’ freedom of religion.

“After consulting with the Superintendent, Dr. Martin, we jointly decided that we must err on the side of caution to prevent from crossing the line on the Establishment Clause of the Constitution,” stated Kirkpatrick. “As a principal of a public school, I must put aside my personal religious beliefs and follow the law, which upholds that we have freedom of speech and freedom of religion, but that we, as public schools, cannot endorse one single religion over another.”

The McDowell News contacted the First Amendment Center in Washington, D.C., which serves as a forum for the study and exploration of free-expression issues, including freedom of speech, of the press and of religion, and the rights to assemble and to petition the government.

After studying the situation, President and Chief Executive Officer Ken Paulson stated the school did in fact have the right to remove the word God from the child’s poem.

“Courts have consistently held up the rights for students to express themselves unless their speech is disruptive to the school,” stated Paulson. “When the little girl wrote the poem and included a reference to God she had every right to do that. The First Amendment protects all Americans. She had every right to mention God, (but) that dynamic changed when they asked her to read it at an assembly.”

Paulson stated that because students were a captive audience, which means they didn’t have another place to go if they didn’t want to attend the assembly, that administrators had the right to remove the word God.

“Courts have found that religious references at school-sponsored events generally run afoul of the First Amendment,” said Paulson, adding that if kids had randomly been asked what they thought of veterans, the little girl could have shared her poem, because it wasn’t planned. “When a public school knows there’s going to be a reference to religion then there is a problem and they have to address it. The reason for these restrictions is to prevent the government from endorsing a specific faith or religion. So public schools have to steer clear of religious references.”

http://www.hickoryrecord.com/mcdowell_news/news/article_c671bb96-335e-11e2-9c33-001a4bcf6878.html
Report to moderator   Logged
whork
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 5405


Getbig!


« Reply #247 on: November 30, 2012, 05:44:28 PM »

How insecure do you have to be to complain about a little kid saying the word "God"? 

'God' removed from student's poem
Landdis Hollifield
Posted: Tuesday, November 20, 2012

A decision to remove the word “God” from a school program is causing a world of controversy for McDowell County Schools.

But a First Amendment expert said school officials made the right decision.

During Monday’s Board of Education meeting, two members of the public stepped forward to talk to board members about a First Amendment issue at West Marion Elementary.

McDowell County Schools employee Chris Greene and McDowell County resident Esther Dollarhyde each took a turn talking about West Marion Elementary’s Veterans Day program during the public comment portion of the meeting.

“On Nov. 8, 2012 West Marion held their annual Veterans Day program in the midst of a lot of drama,” Greene said. “We had one parent concerned with the use of the word God in this program. This parent did not want the word God mentioned anywhere in the program. When the demand from this person was heard, the rights of another stopped. It did so by hushing the voice of a six-year-old girl.”

Greene said the student had written a special poem for the program about her grandfathers, both of whom had served in the armed forces during the Vietnam War.

In it, she wrote, “he prayed to God for peace, he prayed to God for strength,” which Greene stated she was told she could not read during the school assembly.

“She was told that she was not allowed to say the word God during this program” stated Greene. “Being a six year old, and not knowing her rights, she did what she was told.”

Greene said the girl wasn’t trying to force people to pray, but was just telling them what her grandfather had done.

“Let me add here that those prayers worked, because he went on to serve two tours in Vietnam,” Greene said. “My question is this, when do the rights of one outweigh the rights of another? I believe that this little girl’s rights were violated and that those who worked so hard to prepare this program should receive an apology.”

Esther Dollarhyde agreed.

“We need to keep in mind what was our country founded on,” stated Dollarhyde. “It was founded on God and Jesus Christ, and our veterans went out and fought for us so we would have a free country, but if we aren’t allowed to honor them the way that the children want to then America is getting lost.”

When contacted after the presentations, School Board member Lynn Greene, who is also Chris Greene’s father, said school officials had overstepped their authority.

“My understanding on the law is a teacher cannot promote any certain religion, but when it comes to students voicing their opinion or expressing themselves in a poem we pretty much have to give some leeway,” Greene said. “To me this whole thing is a violation of that child’s rights. Nobody forced her to write the poem, that was her part of the program. She was asked to write a poem about veterans and she did. My personal opinion is that her rights were violated.”

School Board member Terry Frank said he could not comment until he knew more about the situation.

When asked why the decision was made to remove the word God, Superintendent Gerri Martin said it came about after a serious discussion with West Marion’s Principal Desarae Kirkpatrick and Vice Principal Nakia Carson.

“The discussion (about the poem) occurred between myself, the principal and the assistant principal at West Marion,” stated Martin. “We wanted to make sure we were upholding the school district’s responsibility of separation of church and state from the Establishment Clause.”

When asked why other schools were allowed to hold programs containing poems and student writings with the word God in them, Martin said that was because West Marion was the only one who had asked for consultation about their program.

Kirkpatrick, like Martin, said the decision was based on a public school’s necessity to not infringe upon other students’ freedom of religion.

“After consulting with the Superintendent, Dr. Martin, we jointly decided that we must err on the side of caution to prevent from crossing the line on the Establishment Clause of the Constitution,” stated Kirkpatrick. “As a principal of a public school, I must put aside my personal religious beliefs and follow the law, which upholds that we have freedom of speech and freedom of religion, but that we, as public schools, cannot endorse one single religion over another.”

The McDowell News contacted the First Amendment Center in Washington, D.C., which serves as a forum for the study and exploration of free-expression issues, including freedom of speech, of the press and of religion, and the rights to assemble and to petition the government.

After studying the situation, President and Chief Executive Officer Ken Paulson stated the school did in fact have the right to remove the word God from the child’s poem.

“Courts have consistently held up the rights for students to express themselves unless their speech is disruptive to the school,” stated Paulson. “When the little girl wrote the poem and included a reference to God she had every right to do that. The First Amendment protects all Americans. She had every right to mention God, (but) that dynamic changed when they asked her to read it at an assembly.”

Paulson stated that because students were a captive audience, which means they didn’t have another place to go if they didn’t want to attend the assembly, that administrators had the right to remove the word God.

“Courts have found that religious references at school-sponsored events generally run afoul of the First Amendment,” said Paulson, adding that if kids had randomly been asked what they thought of veterans, the little girl could have shared her poem, because it wasn’t planned. “When a public school knows there’s going to be a reference to religion then there is a problem and they have to address it. The reason for these restrictions is to prevent the government from endorsing a specific faith or religion. So public schools have to steer clear of religious references.”

http://www.hickoryrecord.com/mcdowell_news/news/article_c671bb96-335e-11e2-9c33-001a4bcf6878.html

WTF

 Angry
Report to moderator   Logged
tbombz
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 19162


Psalms 150


« Reply #248 on: November 30, 2012, 06:02:23 PM »

references to "God" made in government agencies should be allowed, but there should absolutely never be any mention of any particular religious dogma (such as quoting the bible, checking for bibles in hotel rooms, encouraging church attendance, saying the name "jesus", etc.)
Report to moderator   Logged
tbombz
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 19162


Psalms 150


« Reply #249 on: December 01, 2012, 03:58:02 PM »

BAPTIST CHURCH REFUSES TO ALLOW A BLACK COUPLE TO MARRY AND IS THEN SHAMED INTO AN APOLOGY WHEN THEIR BIGOTRY IS MADE PUBLIC

http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2012/08/06/church-that-refused-to-marry-black-couple-releases-apology/  
  private organization, they can do whatever they want. be racist, be homophobic, be whatever. thats what freedom is all about.
Report to moderator   Logged
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10] 11 12 13   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Theme created by Egad Community. Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!