What happened to freedom of religion?
Side Score: 20
Side Score: 15
Whether or not I agree with this debate, I find prochoice societies always have better human rights and social issues than prolife ones. Consistently, throughout history and in modern times, this has been true.
The more secular the society, the happier the populace and vice versa.
I don't really care whether someone is going to come and say 'those happiness scales are rigged/biased' because the fact is they're taken by third party psychology experts.
Left-wing sided centrism that leans socially to liberty will always be the dominant political system.
Oppressing people is not a very Christian thing. It is a very Christian thing to live in pagan societies and spread the good news. In the world, but not of it. It is a very Christian thing to abandon the 99 sheep in order to save the 1 lost. Whether in minority or majority, it is not a very Christian thing to oppress people. The way of Christ discipleship is to lead people to God through charity, not condemnation.
I believe in the law of liberty as described in scripture. Should opinions on these activities be expressed by Christians or anyone else for that matter? Absolutely. Do I think that the law should regulate these things?
All authorities were put into place by God. Do you recognize a law? I recognize The Law of God. Whether or not human beings make laws concerning this or that, The Law of God holds true regardless. Just because something is legal doesn't mean that it is moral behavior.
Freedom of religion is a two sided sward. Above all things it describes a witness account for religions to form beyond organized governing establishments like church. The Freedom of religion is still provable as it is only forms a category of religions without self-value.
In demanding that others solve the issue of United States Constitutional representation a people we all share a folly.
First Abortion is a self-incrimination to a felony crime of pre-mediated murder. This self-incrimination is transferable into the general public. On this understanding abortion is a crime that denies a public of United States Constitutional separation for their own protection. I can find no justification why every person in any united states must take part in a babies sacrifice do you? Leaving I impart the words Gender Specific Amputation.
Second Marriage is a likely-hood describing two individual’s ability to add the taxpayer’s burden of judicial impartiality cost by creating Citizens by a sexual Union. There is legal cause to insist that witnesses view and observe the possibility of this Union.
To my knowledge likely-hoods formed by people of the same gender must receive assistance form outside median to obtain this purpose. Be it adoption or surrogate. What does a witness need to witness by law Binivir, UnosMulier, and Marriage.
As for the Quote of Constitutional disclaimer it is written documenting that the governing system does not pass religious law it is representation or the constituents which might do so. People have a profound right to disagree this does not give them a right to force others to participate in crimes they favor by consent of law and intellect.
Concluding that both pregnancy and abortion hold types of accusation which may be disputed by law.
Religion has no place anywhere other than within the confines of the places of worship and the homes of the followers of a particular religion.
All religions are no more than superstitious hocus pocus and only serve to retard the scientific and medical progress of the nations whose people are sufficiently stupid to believe the irrational ravening of self declared prophets.
OH? Every time I see an Evangelical supporting, right wing Rep or Senator, I must be "misunderestimating" them?! (Thanx for the word, Dubya.) It sure SEEMS like they are trying to "establish" a
Christian Congress which WOULD RESULT IN an established religion in the U.S. because they are so INTOLLERANT of ANY other religion that chooses any "god" but their own! That would be another "mission accomplished" moment ... and the end of freedom of religion!
and the end of freedom of religion
1)Be careful what you wish for Al. If you got the opportunity to live in a Christianized nation and then in an Islamized nation, you'd quickly retreat to the cross, and we both know it.
2)Other religions aren't the majority of the population, yet other religions live peacefully in America, a heavily Christian nation, and refugees always want to run to? Heavily Christian majority nations. Take your faceguard off Al and face reality rather than liberal Wonderland.
Lol look at the religious makeup of the house and senate. 79% of democrats in congress identify Christian. 94% of the Republicans identify as Christians. So we have a Christian congress and I don't see any established religion. I think Christanity is more wide spread in the government than most athiests think.
Do you think all sides, all beliefs, aren't capable of what you are only accusing Christians of?
People crap bricks over a group of people praying in public, even when they aren't demanding others do.
So yes, how about we all just stop pushing agenda's down each other's throats and try to realize what makes us all beautiful is our differences.
so... in that case why arent you voting for the tolerant side? i completely agree with your point but you really dont seem to be disagreeing with anything...
if you do disagree with one of the four "demands" on the top of the page please clarify which one, otherwise you dont make any sense.
Just so you know, there are LIBERALS who DO think like you (as far as the Christian God is concerned. They may lean away from the RADICAL Christian views of the right simply because they prefer to be more "Jesus like" and less anti-Constitution, less authoritarian, less, cruel to the sick and the poor, more tolerant to other religions and their believers ... like the Constitution demands they do! Apparently, you didn't get the memo! Here it is again in the words of John Adams (He's one of our founders, by the way).
"The government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion." Memo sent.
less authoritarian, less, cruel to the sick and the poor
1)Obama ran the Constitution through a shredder and dropped more bombs than all post WWII Presidents combined. You didn't even flinch.
2)Conservatives donate to charity far more than liberals, and it isn't even close. Put your money where your mouth is. Talk is cheap.
because they prefer to be more "Jesus like"
So they use a whip to run off idolators, say he's the only way to eternal life (his words), point out things that are "antichrist" and oppose them, render unto Caesar what is Caesar's, believe in taking care of your own people first (the story of the woman at the well), claim that marriage is between a woman and a man, preach not to lie-believe- or love lies (while snuggling with CNN), preach a law that can't be changed and will "stand forever" (not very progressive), are hated by the world as he was (his words), don't "conform to the world", defend the faith vigilently even if it offends others, and oppose Atheism (unbelief)?
Hmmm...I never knew that. Tell me more.
more tolerant to other religions and their believers
What you mean here is Islam. You know as well as I do that Christians, Jews, Budhists, Hindus, Mormons, Scientologists, etc get along just fine. Islam is a religion at war with anyone nonMuslim and built on conquest, according to itself. When a religion is attempting to create the final caliphate, meaning the rest of us die or submit to Islam, tollerance for it is intellectual suicide. Islam is Fascist according to its own definition of itself. Pardon us for not being interested in palling around with a system that oppresses women, gays, Christians, Jews and Atheists anywhere its tentacles get a foothold. Sacrificing your peoples' safety because it makes you feel good about yourself doesn't make you a "good person". It makes you a blind person who makes decisions from emotional appeals rather than intellectual appeals.
Muslims make up about 2% of Britain's population, yet account for over 90% of terrorism in the country. This isn't exactly rocket science. Intellectually this is checkers, not chess.
"The government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion
Uh huh. That's why they swore on the Bible, and we still do to this day, and the Pilgrims were Quakers...
Nevertheless, no one is trying to officially "establish a religion". But, when you are 80% of the population and someone tells you the country isn't yours and that you can have no major influence in your own country, where you are the vast majority, you just laugh and stare, sadly noticing that the person saying this doesn't realize it's them that's the welcomed minority, and that they have freedom because some other religion isn't the majority.
Look at the countries where some other religion runs the show. They are complete dumpster fires, and many would kill atheists simply for being atheists. Probably a good thing that you aren't in Pakistan, Saudi Arabi, Afghanistan, or Iran, eh Al?
Gladly. It applies to all religions. Why is christianity the usual focus? In the US - over 70% are christian. .9% are muslim.
Libs aren't hellbent on bringing in more Christians, now are they?
Why do you think it is that refugees always try to flee to predominantly Christian nations? Because nations run by other religions are fascist and/or despotic. Perhaps you could go to Iran and tell them about your Atheism. I'm sure they'll have a sharp axe ready for you.
im very surprised this got 2 points even tho you literally didnt present any argument and made one very big accusation... do you think that we shouldnt have the freedom to believe what we want? i would hope not.
my point is, you didnt actually dispute his point... instead you used manipulative wording to utterly ignore it.
im very surprised this got 2 points
Most of Bronto's posts end up getting two or more points because he uses sock accounts to upvote himself. He's been doing it for years. It's why he's always top of the CD leaderboard.
And he's such a disingenuous little rat that he accuses other people of using sock accounts just to throw you off his own scent.