quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

That said seems the gubmint has a controlling interest in promoting enforcing their atheist religion based in some alleged method reason they alone 'dicktate' in the name of secularism so why anyone [peon, vince] would have the audacity to claim otherwise is somewhat beyond me since its crystal clear that the atheists most certainly have and promote their religion albeit somewhat less formal than say catholics or budda, and like so many board members many are militant about their beliefs.

Atheists deny they have their own dogma and belief system yet come out here and evangelize and preach the benefits of atheism every day.

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
That said seems the gubmint has a controlling interest in promoting enforcing their atheist religion

The government that's been fawning and grovelling to the moral minority since Reagan handed the republican party over to the religious right in 1980?
The government that, at a state level, bans atheists from standing for elected political positions in several areas of your country?
The government that has never once been headed by a president who didn't claim to be a christian?
Yeah, if there's a government that's obviously a tool of the atheist conspiracy to promote secular humanism, it's the American one...

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

quote:


If you lack belief you have no legitimately expressable opinion yet at the very same time you express an opinion that in fact is a belief, a belief there is no God.

So that would also apply if I were to alter that to

"If you lack belief you have no legitimately expressable opinion yet at the very same time you express an opinion that in fact is a belief, a belief there are no pogo-sticking elves in my street" ...?

I'm taking it, then, that you don't agree with the alteration? I can't replace 'belief in God' with 'belief in pogo-sticking elves'? Why not?

sure I dont have a problem with that said the way using my statement, my point still stands, its as senseless with elves as it is with God, its not what objet you insert its purely the contradiction of your statement so you should avoid changing the argument to a strawman as it appears you are attempting to do.

to be perfectly clear

If you lack belief you have no legitimately expressable opinion yet at the very same time you express an opinion that in fact is a belief, a belief there is no elf.

You have nowhere else to go RO. You see, G o d...IS the ultimate strawman. He was invented whole cloth, out of thin air to justify power, human violence, murder, subjugation and prejudice. The religious affairs built around [god] has also proven to be quite profitable. I mean come on man...I could buy ($$) absolution ?

What a sad, desolate view of life. No wonder you spend so much time under a tin foil hat. Of course, I assume, those "people" who set the president...any president...straight on what they may or may not do are a party to all of that ultimate straw man.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
That said seems the gubmint has a controlling interest in promoting enforcing their atheist religion

The government that's been fawning and grovelling to the moral minority since Reagan handed the republican party over to the religious right in 1980?
The government that, at a state level, bans atheists from standing for elected political positions in several areas of your country?
The government that has never once been headed by a president who didn't claim to be a christian?
Yeah, if there's a government that's obviously a tool of the atheist conspiracy to promote secular humanism, it's the American one...

Yea, it was Obama...what a minute, you've gone back even further. Not being consistent are you?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

What a sad, desolate view of life. No wonder you spend so much time under a tin foil hat. Of course, I assume, those "people" who set the president...any president...straight on what they may or may not do are a party to all of that ultimate straw man.

Why does it bother you, Nnanji, that some of us are disbelievers? Was it an atheist that started this thread and mocked what your beliefs are? Was it an atheist that introduced the hoakum about a contemporary mythology? When you speak of our "desolate" view of life, do you present evidence that we truly do have a poor view of life or are you projecting your own beliefs that you suffer in this life for the rewards of eternity? Tell us, please, how does our nay saying threaten your dogma? I do not believe Jesus walked on water. I do not believe Jesus was born of a virgin human who copulated with a spirit. I do not believe that life transcends the decay of the brain. I do not know how the universe began. I do not know if there is any purpose in this life other than what I make of it. I do not believe in transubstantiation. I do not believe in soul.

Those are my disbeliefs. I just do not believe what you believe. I do not share your faith. I do not ask you to accept my positions. I do not interfere with your chase after eternal salvation. Why does my presence frighten you?

I think you misunderstand me. I don't care if you're a secular humanist. My point was made to a person that thrives on conspiracy theories. You don't ever (as far as I've seen) put forth conspiracy theories. While it's true, in my opinion, that all you see is negative aspects of history and never positive ones, I've never belittled that as you're honest about it. The person to whom I was speaking is one of the biggest proponents of conspiracy theories here and then has little tolerance for other conspiracies.

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

What a sad, desolate view of life. No wonder you spend so much time under a tin foil hat. Of course, I assume, those "people" who set the president...any president...straight on what they may or may not do are a party to all of that ultimate straw man.

Why does it bother you, Nnanji, that some of us are disbelievers? Was it an atheist that started this thread and mocked what your beliefs are? Was it an atheist that introduced the hoakum about a contemporary mythology? When you speak of our "desolate" view of life, do you present evidence that we truly do have a poor view of life or are you projecting your own beliefs that you suffer in this life for the rewards of eternity? Tell us, please, how does our nay saying threaten your dogma? I do not believe Jesus walked on water. I do not believe Jesus was born of a virgin human who copulated with a spirit. I do not believe that life transcends the decay of the brain. I do not know how the universe began. I do not know if there is any purpose in this life other than what I make of it. I do not believe in transubstantiation. I do not believe in soul.

Those are my disbeliefs. I just do not believe what you believe. I do not share your faith. I do not ask you to accept my positions. I do not interfere with your chase after eternal salvation. Why does my presence frighten you?

I think you misunderstand me. I don't care if you're a secular humanist. My point was made to a person that thrives on conspiracy theories. You don't ever (as far as I've seen) put forth conspiracy theories. While it's true, in my opinion, that all you see is negative aspects of history and never positive ones, I've never belittled that as you're honest about it. The person to whom I was speaking is one of the biggest proponents of conspiracy theories here and then has little tolerance for other conspiracies.

Boy, I really fucked that up. My apologies. I will be more careful hereafter.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

my belief system is irrelevant to the topic, atheist mythology... geeebus you people are hard up

But you still haven't given us any atheist mythology.

Criticism of atheism is criticism of the concepts, validity, or impact of atheism, including associated political and social implications. Criticisms include positions based on the history of science, findings in the natural sciences, theistic apologetic arguments, arguments pertaining to ethics and morality, the effects of atheism on the individual, or the assumptions that underpin atheism.

Various contemporary agnostics like Carl Sagan[1] and theists such as Dinesh D'Souza[2] have criticised atheism for being an unscientific position. Analytic philosopher Alvin Plantinga, Professor of Philosophy Emeritus at the University of Notre Dame, argues that a failure of theistic arguments might conceivably be good grounds for agnosticism, but not for atheism, and points to the observation of an apparently "fine-tuned Universe" as more likely to be explained by theism than atheism. Oxford Professor of Mathematics John Lennox holds that atheism is an inferior world view to that of theism, and attributes to C.S. Lewis the best formulation of Merton's Thesis that science sits more comfortably with theistic notions, on the basis that Men became scientific in Western Europe in the 16th and 17th century "Because they expected law in nature, and they expected law in nature because they believed in a lawgiver.' In other words, it was belief in God that was the motor that drove modern science." The leading American geneticist Francis Collins also cites Lewis as persuasive in convincing him that theism is the more rational world view than atheism.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

Hey dumb shit I didnt say this: Oxford Professor of Mathematics John Lennox holds that atheism is an inferior world view to that of theism

see it has credits included, I am not john lennox

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
That said seems the gubmint has a controlling interest in promoting enforcing their atheist religion

The government that's been fawning and grovelling to the moral minority since Reagan handed the republican party over to the religious right in 1980?
The government that, at a state level, bans atheists from standing for elected political positions in several areas of your country?
The government that has never once been headed by a president who didn't claim to be a christian?
Yeah, if there's a government that's obviously a tool of the atheist conspiracy to promote secular humanism, it's the American one...

Yea, it was Obama...what a minute, you've gone back even further. Not being consistent are you?

Much more consistent than believers who have 3 choices of what they themselves claim IS the only way to salvation.

You need to once again, create an atheist conspiracy that clearly in no way exists.

No WM points out how the poisoning religious society poisons govt.

You want to be elected...better be a christian. In many states, one is required to claim a belief in god, to be on the ballot.

If you are a christian and you absolutely should be in a religiously 'free' country, then vote for [whoever] brings 'christian values' whatever they are...to govt. (how's that worked out for the voters ?)

Govt. therefore is in no way involved in any advancement in secular humanism.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
That said seems the gubmint has a controlling interest in promoting enforcing their atheist religion

The government that's been fawning and grovelling to the moral minority since Reagan handed the republican party over to the religious right in 1980?
The government that, at a state level, bans atheists from standing for elected political positions in several areas of your country?
The government that has never once been headed by a president who didn't claim to be a christian?
Yeah, if there's a government that's obviously a tool of the atheist conspiracy to promote secular humanism, it's the American one...

Yea, it was Obama...what a minute, you've gone back even further. Not being consistent are you?

Much more consistent than believers who have 3 choices of what they themselves claim IS the only way to salvation.

You need to once again, create an atheist conspiracy that clearly in no way exists.

No WM points out how the poisoning religious society poisons govt.

You want to be elected...better be a christian. In many states, one is required to claim a belief in god, to be on the ballot.

If you are a christian and you absolutely should be in a religiously 'free' country, then vote for [whoever] brings 'christian values' whatever they are...to govt. (how's that worked out for the voters ?)

Govt. therefore is in no way involved in any advancement in secular humanism.

[sm=happy-smiley58.gif]

Shall I get my tin foil hat or are you going to provide links to a few states that require you to believe in God to be on a ballot?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

fine for the snottys and other queen divas of irellevant in the crowd;

If you lack belief you have no way to express a legitimate affirmative statement yet at the very same time you express a statement that in fact is a belief, a belief there is no elf.

happy now snotty [8|]

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

If there is no elf, it isn't a belief, but a statement of fact.

ah the atheist mind at its infantile finest.

Prove its a fact, that no elves exist.


Yes I do, I hear that jeopardy music, oh shit its going to run to infinity again! [8|]

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
That said seems the gubmint has a controlling interest in promoting enforcing their atheist religion

The government that's been fawning and grovelling to the moral minority since Reagan handed the republican party over to the religious right in 1980?
The government that, at a state level, bans atheists from standing for elected political positions in several areas of your country?
The government that has never once been headed by a president who didn't claim to be a christian?
Yeah, if there's a government that's obviously a tool of the atheist conspiracy to promote secular humanism, it's the American one...

Yea, it was Obama...what a minute, you've gone back even further. Not being consistent are you?

Much more consistent than believers who have 3 choices of what they themselves claim IS the only way to salvation.

You need to once again, create an atheist conspiracy that clearly in no way exists.

No WM points out how the poisoning religious society poisons govt.

You want to be elected...better be a christian. In many states, one is required to claim a belief in god, to be on the ballot.

If you are a christian and you absolutely should be in a religiously 'free' country, then vote for [whoever] brings 'christian values' whatever they are...to govt. (how's that worked out for the voters ?)

Govt. therefore is in no way involved in any advancement in secular humanism.

[sm=happy-smiley58.gif]

Shall I get my tin foil hat or are you going to provide links to a few states that require you to believe in God to be on a ballot?

There's seven.

quote:

ANNAPOLIS, Md. — A bookkeeper named Roy Torcaso, who happened to be an atheist, refused to declare that he believed in God in order to serve as a notary public in Maryland. His case went all the way to the Supreme Court, and in 1961 the court ruled unanimously for Mr. Torcaso, saying states could not have a “religious test” for public office.
But 53 years later, Maryland and six other states still have articles in their constitutions saying people who do not believe in God are not eligible to hold public office. Maryland’s Constitution still says belief in God is a requirement even for jurors and witnesses.

Now a coalition of nonbelievers says it is time to get rid of the atheist bans because they are discriminatory, offensive and unconstitutional. The bans are unenforceable dead letters, legal experts say, and state and local governments have rarely invoked them in recent years. But for some secular Americans, who are increasingly visible and organized, removing the bans is not only a just cause, but a test of their growing movement’s political clout.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

take a pic of one for snotty :)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
That said seems the gubmint has a controlling interest in promoting enforcing their atheist religion

The government that's been fawning and grovelling to the moral minority since Reagan handed the republican party over to the religious right in 1980?
The government that, at a state level, bans atheists from standing for elected political positions in several areas of your country?
The government that has never once been headed by a president who didn't claim to be a christian?
Yeah, if there's a government that's obviously a tool of the atheist conspiracy to promote secular humanism, it's the American one...

Yea, it was Obama...what a minute, you've gone back even further. Not being consistent are you?

Much more consistent than believers who have 3 choices of what they themselves claim IS the only way to salvation.

You need to once again, create an atheist conspiracy that clearly in no way exists.

No WM points out how the poisoning religious society poisons govt.

You want to be elected...better be a christian. In many states, one is required to claim a belief in god, to be on the ballot.

If you are a christian and you absolutely should be in a religiously 'free' country, then vote for [whoever] brings 'christian values' whatever they are...to govt. (how's that worked out for the voters ?)

Govt. therefore is in no way involved in any advancement in secular humanism.

[sm=happy-smiley58.gif]

Shall I get my tin foil hat or are you going to provide links to a few states that require you to believe in God to be on a ballot?

There's seven.

Supreme Court unanimously declared it unconstitutional over fifty years ago. Where's my tin foil hat?



https://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/07/us/in-seven-states-atheists-push-to-end-largely-forgotten-ban-.html

quote:

ANNAPOLIS, Md. — A bookkeeper named Roy Torcaso, who happened to be an atheist, refused to declare that he believed in God in order to serve as a notary public in Maryland. His case went all the way to the Supreme Court, and in 1961 the court ruled unanimously for Mr. Torcaso, saying states could not have a “religious test” for public office.
But 53 years later, Maryland and six other states still have articles in their constitutions saying people who do not believe in God are not eligible to hold public office. Maryland’s Constitution still says belief in God is a requirement even for jurors and witnesses.

Now a coalition of nonbelievers says it is time to get rid of the atheist bans because they are discriminatory, offensive and unconstitutional. The bans are unenforceable dead letters, legal experts say, and state and local governments have rarely invoked them in recent years. But for some secular Americans, who are increasingly visible and organized, removing the bans is not only a just cause, but a test of their growing movement’s political clout.

Yet you want to make it sound like it's happening now.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
That said seems the gubmint has a controlling interest in promoting enforcing their atheist religion

The government that's been fawning and grovelling to the moral minority since Reagan handed the republican party over to the religious right in 1980?
The government that, at a state level, bans atheists from standing for elected political positions in several areas of your country?
The government that has never once been headed by a president who didn't claim to be a christian?
Yeah, if there's a government that's obviously a tool of the atheist conspiracy to promote secular humanism, it's the American one...

Yea, it was Obama...what a minute, you've gone back even further. Not being consistent are you?

Much more consistent than believers who have 3 choices of what they themselves claim IS the only way to salvation.

You need to once again, create an atheist conspiracy that clearly in no way exists.

No WM points out how the poisoning religious society poisons govt.

You want to be elected...better be a christian. In many states, one is required to claim a belief in god, to be on the ballot.

If you are a christian and you absolutely should be in a religiously 'free' country, then vote for [whoever] brings 'christian values' whatever they are...to govt. (how's that worked out for the voters ?)

Govt. therefore is in no way involved in any advancement in secular humanism.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
That said seems the gubmint has a controlling interest in promoting enforcing their atheist religion

The government that's been fawning and grovelling to the moral minority since Reagan handed the republican party over to the religious right in 1980?
The government that, at a state level, bans atheists from standing for elected political positions in several areas of your country?
The government that has never once been headed by a president who didn't claim to be a christian?
Yeah, if there's a government that's obviously a tool of the atheist conspiracy to promote secular humanism, it's the American one...

Yea, it was Obama...what a minute, you've gone back even further. Not being consistent are you?

Much more consistent than believers who have 3 choices of what they themselves claim IS the only way to salvation.

You need to once again, create an atheist conspiracy that clearly in no way exists.

No WM points out how the poisoning religious society poisons govt.

You want to be elected...better be a christian. In many states, one is required to claim a belief in god, to be on the ballot.

If you are a christian and you absolutely should be in a religiously 'free' country, then vote for [whoever] brings 'christian values' whatever they are...to govt. (how's that worked out for the voters ?)

Govt. therefore is in no way involved in any advancement in secular humanism.

So which of you two is the sock? WM couldn't answer because WM knows exactly what I was saying and why.

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
That said seems the gubmint has a controlling interest in promoting enforcing their atheist religion

The government that's been fawning and grovelling to the moral minority since Reagan handed the republican party over to the religious right in 1980?
The government that, at a state level, bans atheists from standing for elected political positions in several areas of your country?
The government that has never once been headed by a president who didn't claim to be a christian?
Yeah, if there's a government that's obviously a tool of the atheist conspiracy to promote secular humanism, it's the American one...

Yea, it was Obama...what a minute, you've gone back even further. Not being consistent are you?

Much more consistent than believers who have 3 choices of what they themselves claim IS the only way to salvation.

You need to once again, create an atheist conspiracy that clearly in no way exists.

No WM points out how the poisoning religious society poisons govt.

You want to be elected...better be a christian. In many states, one is required to claim a belief in god, to be on the ballot.

If you are a christian and you absolutely should be in a religiously 'free' country, then vote for [whoever] brings 'christian values' whatever they are...to govt. (how's that worked out for the voters ?)

Govt. therefore is in no way involved in any advancement in secular humanism.

[sm=happy-smiley58.gif]

Shall I get my tin foil hat or are you going to provide links to a few states that require you to believe in God to be on a ballot?

There's seven.

Supreme Court unanimously declared it unconstitutional over fifty years ago. Where's my tin foil hat?



https://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/07/us/in-seven-states-atheists-push-to-end-largely-forgotten-ban-.html

quote:

ANNAPOLIS, Md. — A bookkeeper named Roy Torcaso, who happened to be an atheist, refused to declare that he believed in God in order to serve as a notary public in Maryland. His case went all the way to the Supreme Court, and in 1961 the court ruled unanimously for Mr. Torcaso, saying states could not have a “religious test” for public office.
But 53 years later, Maryland and six other states still have articles in their constitutions saying people who do not believe in God are not eligible to hold public office. Maryland’s Constitution still says belief in God is a requirement even for jurors and witnesses.

Now a coalition of nonbelievers says it is time to get rid of the atheist bans because they are discriminatory, offensive and unconstitutional. The bans are unenforceable dead letters, legal experts say, and state and local governments have rarely invoked them in recent years. But for some secular Americans, who are increasingly visible and organized, removing the bans is not only a just cause, but a test of their growing movement’s political clout.

Yet you want to make it sound like it's happening now.

When they repeal the laws, you can claim it's no longer an issue.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
That said seems the gubmint has a controlling interest in promoting enforcing their atheist religion

The government that's been fawning and grovelling to the moral minority since Reagan handed the republican party over to the religious right in 1980?
The government that, at a state level, bans atheists from standing for elected political positions in several areas of your country?
The government that has never once been headed by a president who didn't claim to be a christian?
Yeah, if there's a government that's obviously a tool of the atheist conspiracy to promote secular humanism, it's the American one...

Yea, it was Obama...what a minute, you've gone back even further. Not being consistent are you?

Much more consistent than believers who have 3 choices of what they themselves claim IS the only way to salvation.

You need to once again, create an atheist conspiracy that clearly in no way exists.

No WM points out how the poisoning religious society poisons govt.

You want to be elected...better be a christian. In many states, one is required to claim a belief in god, to be on the ballot.

If you are a christian and you absolutely should be in a religiously 'free' country, then vote for [whoever] brings 'christian values' whatever they are...to govt. (how's that worked out for the voters ?)

Govt. therefore is in no way involved in any advancement in secular humanism.

[sm=happy-smiley58.gif]

Shall I get my tin foil hat or are you going to provide links to a few states that require you to believe in God to be on a ballot?

There's seven.

Supreme Court unanimously declared it unconstitutional over fifty years ago. Where's my tin foil hat?



https://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/07/us/in-seven-states-atheists-push-to-end-largely-forgotten-ban-.html

quote:

ANNAPOLIS, Md. — A bookkeeper named Roy Torcaso, who happened to be an atheist, refused to declare that he believed in God in order to serve as a notary public in Maryland. His case went all the way to the Supreme Court, and in 1961 the court ruled unanimously for Mr. Torcaso, saying states could not have a “religious test” for public office.
But 53 years later, Maryland and six other states still have articles in their constitutions saying people who do not believe in God are not eligible to hold public office. Maryland’s Constitution still says belief in God is a requirement even for jurors and witnesses.

Now a coalition of nonbelievers says it is time to get rid of the atheist bans because they are discriminatory, offensive and unconstitutional. The bans are unenforceable dead letters, legal experts say, and state and local governments have rarely invoked them in recent years. But for some secular Americans, who are increasingly visible and organized, removing the bans is not only a just cause, but a test of their growing movement’s political clout.

Yet you want to make it sound like it's happening now.

When they repeal the laws, you can claim it's no longer an issue.

I can say it's not an issue since the SPOTUS published the decision. If you're so butthurt you can't, then you have issues. I will say, though, that's pretty pretentious of you to think you can or cannot determine what I can and cannot claim. Especially given the silly claims you make.

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
That said seems the gubmint has a controlling interest in promoting enforcing their atheist religion

The government that's been fawning and grovelling to the moral minority since Reagan handed the republican party over to the religious right in 1980?
The government that, at a state level, bans atheists from standing for elected political positions in several areas of your country?
The government that has never once been headed by a president who didn't claim to be a christian?
Yeah, if there's a government that's obviously a tool of the atheist conspiracy to promote secular humanism, it's the American one...

Yea, it was Obama...what a minute, you've gone back even further. Not being consistent are you?

Much more consistent than believers who have 3 choices of what they themselves claim IS the only way to salvation.

You need to once again, create an atheist conspiracy that clearly in no way exists.

No WM points out how the poisoning religious society poisons govt.

You want to be elected...better be a christian. In many states, one is required to claim a belief in god, to be on the ballot.

If you are a christian and you absolutely should be in a religiously 'free' country, then vote for [whoever] brings 'christian values' whatever they are...to govt. (how's that worked out for the voters ?)

Govt. therefore is in no way involved in any advancement in secular humanism.

[sm=happy-smiley58.gif]

Shall I get my tin foil hat or are you going to provide links to a few states that require you to believe in God to be on a ballot?

There's seven.

Supreme Court unanimously declared it unconstitutional over fifty years ago. Where's my tin foil hat?



https://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/07/us/in-seven-states-atheists-push-to-end-largely-forgotten-ban-.html

quote:

ANNAPOLIS, Md. — A bookkeeper named Roy Torcaso, who happened to be an atheist, refused to declare that he believed in God in order to serve as a notary public in Maryland. His case went all the way to the Supreme Court, and in 1961 the court ruled unanimously for Mr. Torcaso, saying states could not have a “religious test” for public office.
But 53 years later, Maryland and six other states still have articles in their constitutions saying people who do not believe in God are not eligible to hold public office. Maryland’s Constitution still says belief in God is a requirement even for jurors and witnesses.

Now a coalition of nonbelievers says it is time to get rid of the atheist bans because they are discriminatory, offensive and unconstitutional. The bans are unenforceable dead letters, legal experts say, and state and local governments have rarely invoked them in recent years. But for some secular Americans, who are increasingly visible and organized, removing the bans is not only a just cause, but a test of their growing movement’s political clout.

Yet you want to make it sound like it's happening now.

When they repeal the laws, you can claim it's no longer an issue.

I can say it's not an issue since the SPOTUS published the decision. If you're so butthurt you can't, then you have issues. I will say, though, that's pretty pretentious of you to think you can or cannot determine what I can and cannot claim. Especially given the silly claims you make.

If we're dismissing silly claims: explain how the fact that this legislation is still part of the legal codes of seven states and has not been repealed despite a supreme court challenge half a century ago supports conspiracy boy's claim that the united states government is a tool of the liberal humanist conspiracy.