In article , says...

On 12/7/2012 12:36 AM, Califbill wrote:
thumper wrote:
On 12/6/2012 1:30 PM, Califbill wrote:

Atheists are using the court to enforce their beliefs. The door to door
missionary is at least honest about their views, and you can just close the
door in their face.

They are using the courts to enforce the constitution.

Debatable. The constitution does not say there will not be religion.
Basically it states there will not be "state religion" ala Church of
England. God is even referenced in the Declaration of Independence.
Religious people also have a right to use public property. It is also
owned by them. This a government of, by, and for the people. Even
atheists can have a display on public property.


And that's the point... They can so they do, even if they have nothing
to celebrate, only want to disrupt someone elses celebration...

You should be a member of Westboro Baptist, you'd fit right in.

On 12/7/2012 7:47 AM, ESAD wrote:
On 12/7/12 7:38 AM, JustWait wrote:
On 12/7/2012 12:36 AM, Califbill wrote:
thumper wrote:
On 12/6/2012 1:30 PM, Califbill wrote:

Atheists are using the court to enforce their beliefs. The door to
door
missionary is at least honest about their views, and you can just
close the
door in their face.

They are using the courts to enforce the constitution.

Debatable. The constitution does not say there will not be religion.
Basically it states there will not be "state religion" ala Church of
England. God is even referenced in the Declaration of Independence.
Religious people also have a right to use public property. It is also
owned by them. This a government of, by, and for the people. Even
atheists can have a display on public property.


And that's the point... They can so they do, even if they have nothing
to celebrate, only want to disrupt someone elses celebration...


Funny, neither you nor Bilious Bill understand the First Amendment or
its history. There's a lot more about how the Amendment came about than
"the Church of England."

Obviously, "religious people" can use public facilities, but that
doesn't mean they can use those facilities to promote their religious
beliefs.

No one gives a damn what displays "religious people" put up on private
or church property.


You're just sore because your wife puts up Christmas decorations without
your consent. Don't be putting your own misery on us. Man up and take
charge of your own life and leave us alone, Grinch

On 12/7/12 10:55 AM, GuzzisRule wrote:
On Fri, 7 Dec 2012 08:31:35 -0500, iBoaterer wrote:

In article 610427301376509105.183778bmckeenospam-
, says...

ESAD wrote:
On 12/6/12 7:46 AM, GuzzisRule wrote:
On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 15:55:36 -0500, Wayne.B wrote:

On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 11:03:07 -0500, GuzzisRule
wrote:

This article sums it up pretty well. Of course, I didn't write it, but
hopefully you'll get the
drift.

http://tinyurl.com/a3a6gfy

Sorry you're disappointed, but it's not the first time and probably won't be the last.

====

Judging from that article I'd have to say that the author, and
probably you, share some confusion about the difference between
values, religious beliefs and political beliefs. Sometimes reasonable
people with high values have to agree to disagree. More importantly,
it is inappropriate to try and impose your religious beliefs on others
and then accuse them of lacking "values".

Other than, possibly, the first one, there is nothing religious there. I
don't consider the first
one a religious position. 'Marriage' was an institution that had some
meaning. Now liberals,
especially, have made it a sham. And, I agree that 'it is 'it is
inappropriate to try and impose
your religious beliefs on others', and that includes atheists imposing
theirs. If you can't read
that and determine what 'values' are being discussed, then I can understand your comments.


Funny post, really, and it shows how disconnected you are.

Please explain how liberals have made marriage a sham and while you are
at it, tell how atheists are "imposing" their beliefs. Atheists don't
give a damn about your religious beliefs so long as you don't try to
impose them on others. Atheists aren't imposing their beliefs on
anyone...there are no door to door atheist.

Atheists are using the court to enforce their beliefs. The door to door
missionary is at least honest about their views, and you can just close the
door in their face.

Cite?

Here, Kevin:

About 5,670,000 results (0.17 seconds)
Search Results
Home - Freedom From Religion Foundation
ffrf.org/FFRF takes IRS to court to enforce church electioneering ban ... Portlanders to their
“friendly neighborhood atheists” was defaced recently. ... Non-Belief Relief ...
Atheist group sues IRS for failing to enforce church electioneering ...
http://www.rawstory.com/.../atheist-...r-failing-to-e...


Churches *should* be called on the carpet for electioneering.

I wasn't aware there was a Freedom *from* Religion Foundation. Sounds
like a great idea.

Here it is...

http://ffrf.org/


Why are you shoveling religion? You certainly don't practice the
preaching of your savior.

In article , says...

On 12/7/2012 7:56 AM, BAR wrote:
In article ,
says...

On 12/6/12 10:21 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 12/6/2012 10:00 PM, thumper wrote:
On 12/6/2012 1:30 PM, Califbill wrote:

Atheists are using the court to enforce their beliefs. The door to door
missionary is at least honest about their views, and you can just
close the
door in their face.

They are using the courts to enforce the constitution.


Show me where it says "freedom from religion"??


You have no understanding of the Constitution or the "separation"
clause, so why should anyone bother to "show" you a thing.

If we use your interpretation of the Constitution and the laws we may
end up with a tax lien on our property or we may even be sued by the
government for non-payment of taxes.



I dismiss anything harry says, he's just rockin' that extra chromosome:0

Of course you dismiss anything that doesn't toe the FOX line.

On Friday, December 7, 2012 11:05:11 AM UTC-5, ESAD wrote:

Why are you shoveling religion? You certainly don't practice the
preaching of your savior.


Why are you shoveling liberalism? You don't pay your taxes and debts.

Oh, the two aren't mutually exclusive, more like bedfellows, eh?

"iBoaterer" wrote in message
...

In article 1635163131376547539.158933bmckeenospam-
, says...

thumper wrote:
On 12/6/2012 1:30 PM, Califbill wrote:

Atheists are using the court to enforce their beliefs. The door to
door
missionary is at least honest about their views, and you can just close
the
door in their face.

They are using the courts to enforce the constitution.

Debatable. The constitution does not say there will not be religion.
Basically it states there will not be "state religion" ala Church of
England. God is even referenced in the Declaration of Independence.
Religious people also have a right to use public property. It is also
owned by them. This a government of, by, and for the people. Even
atheists can have a display on public property.

Ever hear of separation of church and state?


----------------------------
yup. Where does it state that in the Constitution?

"iBoaterer" wrote in message
...

In article 610427301376509105.183778bmckeenospam-
, says...

ESAD wrote:
On 12/6/12 7:46 AM, GuzzisRule wrote:
On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 15:55:36 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 11:03:07 -0500, GuzzisRule
wrote:

This article sums it up pretty well. Of course, I didn't write it,
but
hopefully you'll get the
drift.

http://tinyurl.com/a3a6gfy

Sorry you're disappointed, but it's not the first time and probably
won't be the last.

====

Judging from that article I'd have to say that the author, and
probably you, share some confusion about the difference between
values, religious beliefs and political beliefs. Sometimes reasonable
people with high values have to agree to disagree. More importantly,
it is inappropriate to try and impose your religious beliefs on others
and then accuse them of lacking "values".

Other than, possibly, the first one, there is nothing religious there.
I
don't consider the first
one a religious position. 'Marriage' was an institution that had some
meaning. Now liberals,
especially, have made it a sham. And, I agree that 'it is 'it is
inappropriate to try and impose
your religious beliefs on others', and that includes atheists imposing
theirs. If you can't read
that and determine what 'values' are being discussed, then I can
understand your comments.


Funny post, really, and it shows how disconnected you are.

Please explain how liberals have made marriage a sham and while you are
at it, tell how atheists are "imposing" their beliefs. Atheists don't
give a damn about your religious beliefs so long as you don't try to
impose them on others. Atheists aren't imposing their beliefs on
anyone...there are no door to door atheist.

Atheists are using the court to enforce their beliefs. The door to door
missionary is at least honest about their views, and you can just close
the
door in their face.

Cite?


-----------------

Can not help since you are intellectually lazy.

"Califbill" wrote in message
...

GuzzisRule wrote:
On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 15:55:36 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 11:03:07 -0500, GuzzisRule
wrote:

This article sums it up pretty well. Of course, I didn't write it, but
hopefully you'll get the
drift.

http://tinyurl.com/a3a6gfy

Sorry you're disappointed, but it's not the first time and probably
won't be the last.

====

Judging from that article I'd have to say that the author, and
probably you, share some confusion about the difference between
values, religious beliefs and political beliefs. Sometimes reasonable
people with high values have to agree to disagree. More importantly,
it is inappropriate to try and impose your religious beliefs on others
and then accuse them of lacking "values".

Other than, possibly, the first one, there is nothing religious there. I
don't consider the first
one a religious position. 'Marriage' was an institution that had some
meaning. Now liberals,
especially, have made it a sham. And, I agree that 'it is 'it is
inappropriate to try and impose
your religious beliefs on others', and that includes atheists imposing
theirs. If you can't read
that and determine what 'values' are being discussed, then I can
understand your comments.

Religious beliefs are fine. Just do not force them on others, but
likewise, others should not infringe your religious freedoms. And marriage
has been different things through the years. Lots of the profits in the
bible had multiple wives. In the 1800's you could marry multiple spouses
in Texas, Alabama and another regions also. And not even have to be
Mormon. Texas about we're married if you announced it in front of 20
witness's or signed in to a hotel as Mr. And Mrs. No church or state
involved. It is supposed to be a free country. You want to marry same
sex? Go for it. Just do not require the rest of unto pay for your
lifestyle. Same goes for most drugs, do them, die if that happens, but do
not expect society to pay for your medical bills.


-----------------
dang Ipad and the spelling corrections.

On 12/7/12 5:37 PM, Califbill wrote:
"iBoaterer" wrote in message
...

In article 1635163131376547539.158933bmckeenospam-
, says...

thumper wrote:
On 12/6/2012 1:30 PM, Califbill wrote:

Atheists are using the court to enforce their beliefs. The door to
door
missionary is at least honest about their views, and you can just
close the
door in their face.

They are using the courts to enforce the constitution.

Debatable. The constitution does not say there will not be religion.
Basically it states there will not be "state religion" ala Church of
England. God is even referenced in the Declaration of Independence.
Religious people also have a right to use public property. It is also
owned by them. This a government of, by, and for the people. Even
atheists can have a display on public property.

Ever hear of separation of church and state?


----------------------------
yup. Where does it state that in the Constitution?


In the first amendment and in interpretations by the supreme court,
neither of which you've probably read for comprehension.

"JustWait" wrote in message ...

On 12/6/2012 4:30 PM, Califbill wrote:
GuzzisRule wrote:
On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 15:55:36 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 11:03:07 -0500, GuzzisRule
wrote:

This article sums it up pretty well. Of course, I didn't write it, but
hopefully you'll get the
drift.

http://tinyurl.com/a3a6gfy

Sorry you're disappointed, but it's not the first time and probably
won't be the last.

====

Judging from that article I'd have to say that the author, and
probably you, share some confusion about the difference between
values, religious beliefs and political beliefs. Sometimes reasonable
people with high values have to agree to disagree. More importantly,
it is inappropriate to try and impose your religious beliefs on others
and then accuse them of lacking "values".

Other than, possibly, the first one, there is nothing religious there. I
don't consider the first
one a religious position. 'Marriage' was an institution that had some
meaning. Now liberals,
especially, have made it a sham. And, I agree that 'it is 'it is
inappropriate to try and impose
your religious beliefs on others', and that includes atheists imposing
theirs. If you can't read
that and determine what 'values' are being discussed, then I can
understand your comments.

Religious beliefs are fine. Just do not force them on others, but
likewise, others should not infringe your religious freedoms. And
marriage
has been different things through the years. Lots of the profits in the
bible had multiple wives. In the 1800's you could marry multiple spouses
in Texas, Alabama and another regions also. And not even have to be
Mormon. Texas about we're married if you announced it in front of 20
witness's or signed in to a hotel as Mr. And Mrs. No church or state
involved. It is supposed to be a free country. You want to marry same
sex? Go for it. Just do not require the rest of unto pay for your
lifestyle. Same goes for most drugs, do them, die if that happens, but do
not expect society to pay for your medical bills.


Atheists are bullying Christians all over the country. Putting up nasty
posters to mock and just kill Christian freedom of speech at Nativities
and such, even going as far as taking the word God from a 6 year olds
poem to her granny at a school function, and getting "A Charlie Brown
Christmas" banned... This is just intolerance and hate, nothing else...


------------------

It may be hate and intolerance, but they have the same rights to speech as
do those of a religious bent. Getting such banned, should not be, but they
have the right to speak against religion.