Prayer and Religion in Public Life

[Dos Equis]

I think it is a false picture to say they are suffering emotional distress. But if that is the playbook you want to go by cool... I'll try again, though I think you really already understand it, you just can't admit it but it's certainly not weird when a group who doesn't believe in Dragons, are concerned when another group that does believe in dragons, and actively tries to weave their belief of dragons into government and laws. Of course the group that doesn't believe in dragons will get involved to insure there is separation of dragons  and state. 

O Rly?  Because I'm a nice guy, I'll give you a chance to use Google, because Google knows everything, and see whether or not atheists file lawsuits claiming emotional distress over things they don't believe exist. 

Or you can stand behind your false statement and let me educate you.   

[Agnostic007]

O Rly?  Because I'm a nice guy, I'll give you a chance to use Google, because Google knows everything, and see whether or not atheists file lawsuits claiming emotional distress over things they don't believe exist. 

Or you can stand behind your false statement and let me educate you.   

You still don't get it... 

[Dos Equis]

I think it is a false picture to say they are suffering emotional distress. But if that is the playbook you want to go by cool...

Ok.  Fine.  You're too lazy or bullheaded to do just a little homework.  School is in session.   

Here is one.  Lawsuit filed over the display of the Ten Commandments:

Plaintiff Sue Mercier is a resident of La Crosse, Wisconsin and a member of plaintiff Freedom from Religion Foundation. When visiting her lawyer's office, which is near the monument site, plaintiff Mercier must sometimes alter her route to avoid seeing the monument. She shops at the People's Food Coop and the farmers' market less often than she would if the monument were not in Cameron Park. When she has viewed the monument, it has "disturbed" her emotionally.

Plaintiff Elizabeth Ash is a resident of La Crosse. She does not attend meetings or events held in Cameron Park because she does not want to view the monument. She does not use banks near the monument. When driving downtown, she avoids streets that would take her past the monument. She has stopped going to Cameron Park to sit in it and read books. When she does see the monument, she feels marginalized and has experienced physical pain.

Plaintiff Angela Belcaster is a resident of La Crosse. She patronizes several businesses surrounding Cameron Park, including the People's Food Coop and U.S. Bank. She has changed her route when visiting these establishments so that she does not park in front of the monument. She no longer has lunch in the park because of the monument. However, Belcaster still passes Cameron Park when driving through the downtown. When she approaches the park, she begins thinking about the monument, which distracts her and causes her emotional distress. The monument's presence and defendant's support of it makes Belcaster feel like an outsider.

. . . .

https://ffrf.org/uploads/legal/LCDecision.html

I'll give you another opportunity to retract before I continue.   

[IroNat]

Some of these athiests are whackjobs just like other kinds of whackjobs.

No doubt.

[Agnostic007]

Some of these athiests are whackjobs just like other kinds of whackjobs.

No doubt.

Some are but when you understand and soulcrusher can chime in, in order for a law suit to be filed there has to be some damage to the plaintiff, whether it is financial, physical or emotional. It's part of the system so it would be normal, actually required for a person who wishes to put the religious folks in check, to use the emotional argument. Doesn't actually mean they were emotionally distressed. Again, blaming the athiests for reacting to Christians historical abuse of their religion in government is ridiculous. And again, it goes right over his head

[Dos Equis]

Some of these athiests are whackjobs just like other kinds of whackjobs.

No doubt.

Agree. 

[Dos Equis]

I think it is a false picture to say they are suffering emotional distress. But if that is the playbook you want to go by cool...

We learned in spring 2005 that a high school in Brevard County, Florida, was planning to hold its graduation ceremony in a local church. The church has a large cross on its dais that the church refused to allow to be covered. Because our complainants were uncomfortable with going public with their objections, we sought to encourage the School Board to change the venue without the need for litigation, but our efforts were unsuccessful. In the course of our negotiations, we learned that the practice was not limited to a single high school; several high schools and at least one middle school were planning to hold their graduations at the church. On May 17, 2005, shortly before the first of these graduation ceremonies was to be held, we filed a complaint and a motion for a temporary restraining order in federal district court. The court held a hearing on the motion the following day. After hearing argument, the court ruled that the plaintiffs were likely to succeed on the merits of their claim, but that a restraining order would not be proper at that late date because it would mean the graduation ceremonies would need to be canceled. The School Board then proceeded with the graduation ceremonies as planned. We later amended our complaint to seek emotional-distress damages for the harm that our plaintiffs suffered as a result of the Board’s decision to proceed with the graduation. The court set a trial date of December 21, 2005, so we quickly proceeding with discovery. On October 25, 2005, however, while discovery was underway, the School Board voted to settle the case with a court-enforceable order prohibiting graduation ceremonies at sites in which religious iconography is visible. The case concluded with the court’s acceptance of the settlement agreement. All the graduation ceremonies for 2006 are slated to take place at secular venues.

https://www.au.org/our-work/legal/lawsuits/musgrove-v-brevard-county-school-board

[Agnostic007]

thanks for proving my point

." The court set a trial date of December 21, 2005, so we quickly proceeding with discovery. On October 25, 2005, however, while discovery was underway, the School Board voted to settle the case with a court-enforceable order prohibiting graduation ceremonies at sites in which religious iconography is visible. The case concluded with the court’s acceptance of the settlement agreement. All the graduation ceremonies for 2006 are slated to take place at secular venues."

It's a shame that religious people KNOW what they are doing is a violation and still insist on ignoring it, making the atheists who are just wanting separation of church and state out to be the bad guys. That you don't understand how the legal system works and think atheists who oppose the violations are actually  emotionally distressed rather than vying for legal standing is your problem

[Dos Equis]

I think it is a false picture to say they are suffering emotional distress. But if that is the playbook you want to go by cool...

You are one pigheaded dude.  You want more? 

It is unconstitutional, a federal court has ruled, for a public cemetery to have a planter in the shape of a cross, since, as the court explained, the mere sight of it could cause “emotional distress” to a passerby and thus constitute “injury-in-fact.”
http://mobile.wnd.com/2002/11/16030/#cA3hoVuwOlBxu2uP.99

[Agnostic007]

You are one pigheaded dude.  You want more? 

It is unconstitutional, a federal court has ruled, for a public cemetery to have a planter in the shape of a cross, since, as the court explained, the mere sight of it could cause “emotional distress” to a passerby and thus constitute “injury-in-fact.”
http://mobile.wnd.com/2002/11/16030/#cA3hoVuwOlBxu2uP.99

whooooooosh!

[Dos Equis]

whooooooosh!

Wait.  First you say atheists do not claim emotional distress by seeing something they don't believe in, then you claim they are justified in doing so?  LOL!

Class is dismissed.  Take your seat in the corner.  Tall pointy hat to follow. 

[Agnostic007]

Nope, you want to label them as snowflakes for being emotionally distressed. I stand by my position which is the correct one by the way, they are not clinically emotionally distressed, they are legally emotionally distressed. it is a requirement to have some kind of injury or loss in order to have standing. I can explain it to you, I can't understand if for you

[Dos Equis]

Nope, you want to label them as snowflakes for being emotionally distressed. I stand by my position which is the correct one by the way, they are not clinically emotionally distressed, they are legally emotionally distressed. it is a requirement to have some kind of injury or loss in order to have standing. I can explain it to you, I can't understand if for you

My position was that they are claiming emotional distress.  I said nothing about whether they actually suffer from emotional distress.  Your position was that they do not even claim to suffer from emotional distress.  Until I proved that they do make those claims, at which time you felt vindicated because they actually might suffer emotional distress. lol 

But whatever.  My work here is done.  And as I have told you in the past, come correct.   

[The Scott]

Ok.  Fine.  You're too lazy or bullheaded to do just a little homework.  School is in session.   

Here is one.  Lawsuit filed over the display of the Ten Commandments:

Plaintiff Sue Mercier is a resident of La Crosse, Wisconsin and a member of plaintiff Freedom from Religion Foundation. When visiting her lawyer's office, which is near the monument site, plaintiff Mercier must sometimes alter her route to avoid seeing the monument. She shops at the People's Food Coop and the farmers' market less often than she would if the monument were not in Cameron Park. When she has viewed the monument, it has "disturbed" her emotionally.

Plaintiff Elizabeth Ash is a resident of La Crosse. She does not attend meetings or events held in Cameron Park because she does not want to view the monument. She does not use banks near the monument. When driving downtown, she avoids streets that would take her past the monument. She has stopped going to Cameron Park to sit in it and read books. When she does see the monument, she feels marginalized and has experienced physical pain.

Plaintiff Angela Belcaster is a resident of La Crosse. She patronizes several businesses surrounding Cameron Park, including the People's Food Coop and U.S. Bank. She has changed her route when visiting these establishments so that she does not park in front of the monument. She no longer has lunch in the park because of the monument. However, Belcaster still passes Cameron Park when driving through the downtown. When she approaches the park, she begins thinking about the monument, which distracts her and causes her emotional distress. The monument's presence and defendant's support of it makes Belcaster feel like an outsider.

. . . .

https://ffrf.org/uploads/legal/LCDecision.html

I'll give you another opportunity to retract before I continue.   

Your words were not directed at me but I shall try to offer content worthy of your words.

I'm now an Atheist and Christian symbols don't bother me in the least.   Assholists on the other hand (you know, the LEFT  hand that muslimes wipe their buttholes with) will claim anything to rid the world of anything of the Nazarene.  And money.  Let's not forget that while these Assholists don't worship a God, they do worship the almighty moolah.

If Rory believes in the Nazarene, good for  him.  Better the Christ than some bass ackwards muslime pedophile of a Profit.   

 

Fuck That Noise. 

[Agnostic007]

Your words were not directed at me but I shall try to offer content worthy of your words.

I'm now an Atheist and Christian symbols don't bother me in the least.   Assholists on the other hand (you know, the LEFT  hand that muslimes wipe their buttholes with) will claim anything to rid the world of anything of the Nazarene.  And money.  Let's not forget that while these Assholists don't worship a God, they do worship the almighty moolah.

If Rory believes in the Nazarene, good for  him.  Better the Christ than some bass ackwards muslime pedophile of a Profit.   

 

Fuck That Noise. 

You weren't responding to me but I'll try and offer content worthy of your post.... There are a lot of causes in this world. Animal abuse, Disabled veterans, cancer, homelessness, etc. People pick causes generally that matter to them or they are drawn to. I am a proponent for dogs. I like dogs. I also do a few other things but mainly I like to help shelters out. Other people are concerned that religious zealots, left unchecked, will impose their religious views on others, the main concern is by muddying the waters between church and state. There are people out there than believe it is a worthy cause to make sure the line is kept clear. I don't have time for that, but I appreciate that others have taken it upon themselves to do so. As an atheist, you should recognize the value of that. Otherwise, left unchecked, I guarantee you it wouldn't be long before you wont be able to buy alcohol on Sundays or shop for a car... oh wait.. that's already a law in some states due to religious beliefs...

[IroNat]

Other people are concerned that religious zealots, left unchecked, will impose their religious views on others, the main concern is by muddying the waters between church and state.

This.  While it may not bother people to have their own religion integrated with government, it would bother them greatly to have a different religion do so.

Better to avoid all that and separate church and state.

There are far-out whackjobs on both sides of this issue like any other.  Atheists who try to impose their ideas on everyone else are just as bad as religious extremists.

Do your own thing, harm no one else, and mind your own business.

Avoid all "isms".

[Dos Equis]

Your words were not directed at me but I shall try to offer content worthy of your words.

I'm now an Atheist and Christian symbols don't bother me in the least.   Assholists on the other hand (you know, the LEFT  hand that muslimes wipe their buttholes with) will claim anything to rid the world of anything of the Nazarene.  And money.  Let's not forget that while these Assholists don't worship a God, they do worship the almighty moolah.

If Rory believes in the Nazarene, good for  him.  Better the Christ than some bass ackwards muslime pedophile of a Profit.   

 

Fuck That Noise. 

I'm glad you don't suffer emotional distress when you see things that you don't believe exist.  The people who do are hypersensitive weirdos.  I am a firm believer in church-state separation.  I'm not a believer in trying to avoid hurting someone's feelings because they see religious symbols or hear a prayer. 

You're right about people who use religion to take advantage of others.  Happens way too often.  But that's a problem with some people, not the faith itself.  Just like I say about our Constitution and system of government:  they are brilliant; it's the people who screw them up.  Same with faith:  Christianity, the Bible, and what they stand for are terrific; it's the people who screw it up. 

[Dos Equis]

This.  While it may not bother people to have their own religion integrated with government, it would bother them greatly to have a different religion do so.

Better to avoid all that and separate church and state.

There are far-out whackjobs on both sides of this issue like any other.  Atheists who try to impose their ideas on everyone else are just as bad as religious extremists.

Do your own thing, harm no one else, and mind your own business.

Avoid all "isms".

We do have church state separation.  There is no religion mandated by the government.  We don't have a government church.  No one is forced to belong to belong to a church. 

What we don't and should not have is some kind of cleansing of all references to religion from the public square. 

[Agnostic007]

This.  While it may not bother people to have their own religion integrated with government, it would bother them greatly to have a different religion do so.

Better to avoid all that and separate church and state.

There are far-out whackjobs on both sides of this issue like any other.  Atheists who try to impose their ideas on everyone else are just as bad as religious extremists.

Do your own thing, harm no one else, and mind your own business.

Avoid all "isms".

Can't argue with any of that.

[The Scott]

I'm glad you don't suffer emotional distress when you see things that you don't believe exist.  The people who do are hypersensitive weirdos.  I am a firm believer in church-state separation.  I'm not a believer in trying to avoid hurting someone's feelings because they see religious symbols or hear a prayer. 

You're right about people who use religion to take advantage of others.  Happens way too often.  But that's a problem with some people, not the faith itself.  Just like I say about our Constitution and system of government:  they are brilliant; it's the people who screw them up.  Same with faith:  Christianity, the Bible, and what they stand for are terrific; it's the people who screw it up. 

Most assholists are part-time vampires.  Ever notice in films how a vampire can wake up in a coffin in the middle of graveyard full of crosses and still be able to walk about as if nothing is going on?  They just want to get out of there!  Same with a mirror.  They're not supposed to have a reflection so they avoid looking in them.  But with assholists (who are in general, libtards)  it's simply a matter of their reflection being their own Picture of Dorian Gray and they go out of their way to be offended, i.e., make it a point to go see a cross or a Nativity during Christmas.

We have a separation of church and state because it is the right thing to do.  No state sponsored religion is the way to go.  Just look at muslimes to know what happens when the "government" are the enforcers of belief.  The teachings of the Nazarene are to be admired not admonished.  To be followed, not cast aside.  You need not believe in Jesus of Nazareth to know he was a good and wise man. 

I know more than a few assholists that will jump at the chance to belittle followers of the Christ.  On more than on occasion I've asked them why they don't do the same thing with muslimes.  It's because while a Christian may well die for their faith, a muslime will kill for theirs. 

[Agnostic007]

Most assholists are part-time vampires.  Ever notice in films how a vampire can wake up in a coffin in the middle of graveyard full of crosses and still be able to walk about as if nothing is going on?  They just want to get out of there!  Same with a mirror.  They're not supposed to have a reflection so they avoid looking in them.  But with assholists (who are in general, libtards)  it's simply a matter of their reflection being their own Picture of Dorian Gray and they go out of their way to be offended, i.e., make it a point to go see a cross or a Nativity during Christmas.

We have a separation of church and state because it is the right thing to do.  No state sponsored religion is the way to go.  Just look at muslimes to know what happens when the "government" are the enforcers of belief.  The teachings of the Nazarene are to be admired not admonished.  To be followed, not cast aside.  You need not believe in Jesus of Nazareth to know he was a good and wise man. 

I know more than a few assholists that will jump at the chance to belittle followers of the Christ.  On more than on occasion I've asked them why they don't do the same thing with muslimes.  It's because while a Christian may well die for their faith, a muslime will kill for theirs. 

Not to be a stickler, but the cross only works if it's held by a person with faith in the cross.

[The Scott]

Not to be a stickler, but the cross only works if it's held by a person with faith in the cross.

I look at it for what it is, i.e., a film.  There was one film where the hero jumped onto a blade of a windmill and it rotated until he dropped off when it became a giant cross.  The vampire died.   Go figure. No one holding that cross.  Or was it the faithful act of rotating it?  If that were the case, then crossing your fingers would work, but not crossing you eyes.   I recall a 70s era Hammer Film where you could kill a vampire by putting it in running water.  One of the vampires got pushed into a shower and they turned on the water and poof!
'
I don't recall if he burst into flame, but I doubt it as the water would have dowsed the fire and then he would have exploded in flames again  and so on ad infinitum.  Or is that ad nauseam?  For theaction/comedy, "Abraham Lincoln - Vampire Hunter", they had vampires wearing sunglasses and putting on primitive sunblock so they could be day-walkers.   They were also big proponents of slavery as a source of blood without consequence.

If only Honest Abe had accepted his vampire buddy's offer to become one of the undead, he would have survived the assassination on his life and probably gotten a good meal off of J.W. Booth.   I tend to think  of the film as the "real story" of ol' Abe.  

[Agnostic007]

I look at it for what it is, i.e., a film.  There was one film where the hero jumped onto a blade of a windmill and it rotated until he dropped off when it became a giant cross.  The vampire died.   Go figure. No one holding that cross.  Or was it the faithful act of rotating it?  If that were the case, then crossing your fingers would work, but not crossing you eyes.   I recall a 70s era Hammer Film where you could kill a vampire by putting it in running water.  One of the vampires got pushed into a shower and they turned on the water and poof!
'
I don't recall if he burst into flame, but I doubt it as the water would have dowsed the fire and then he would have exploded in flames again  and so on ad infinitum.  Or is that ad nauseam?  For theaction/comedy, "Abraham Lincoln - Vampire Hunter", they had vampires wearing sunglasses and putting on primitive sunblock so they could be day-walkers.   They were also big proponents of slavery as a source of blood without consequence.

If only Honest Abe had accepted his vampire buddy's offer to become one of the undead, he would have survived the assassination on his life and probably gotten a good meal off of J.W. Booth.   I tend to think  of the film as the "real story" of ol' Abe.  

I'm just going on a couple films where the victim brandishes the cross, and the vampire at first shows fear, then laughs because the person holding it doesn't have faith.... But then I wonder, if the Vampire was originally Jewish, would a cross have any impact at all? Ive created more questions than answers...  I will sleep with garlic around  my door and windows until I get this figured out

[The Scott]

I'm just going on a couple films where the victim brandishes the cross, and the vampire at first shows fear, then laughs because the person holding it doesn't have faith.... But then I wonder, if the Vampire was originally Jewish, would a cross have any impact at all? Ive created more questions than answers...  I will sleep with garlic around  my door and windows until I get this figured out

You are correct in that a genuine faith is what matters most.  For validation one can read Acts 19:13-17.

The lore that surrounds vampires and the like is turgid with religious or rather Christian symbolism.  For example, silver is offensive/fatal to both vampires and werewolves.  This is due to it being used to pay Judas Iscariot for betraying the Nazarene. 

Personally I carry a bounced cheque to ward off Jewish Vampires. Garlic was used to keep mosquitos away and became effective against all manner of blood suckers including both vampires and your run of the mill liberal.  Or so I am told.  I just carry the aforementioned insufficent funds cheque.     

[AbrahamG]

You are correct in that a genuine faith is what matters most.  For validation one can read Acts 19:13-17.

The lore that surrounds vampires and the like is turgid with religious or rather Christian symbolism.  For example, silver is offensive/fatal to both vampires and werewolves.  This is due to it being used to pay Judas Iscariot for betraying the Nazarene. 

Personally I carry a bounced cheque to ward off Jewish Vampires. Garlic was used to keep mosquitos away and became effective against all manner of blood suckers including both vampires and your run of the mill liberal.  Or so I am told.  I just carry the aforementioned insufficent funds cheque.     

For an asshole, this is really fucking funny.;