School Removes God From First-Grader's Poem

**NJCardFan** · 11-30-2012, 09:37 PM

Originally Posted by PeterS

If the 99 have no problem ofending one why should one have any problem offending 99?

Thank you for totally missing the point. Liberals are always the ones who like to screech about majority rule but only when it further's their agenda. Truth be told, there is nothing in this world that doesn't offend someone but the truth here is that secular progressives and their useful fools in the Atheist movement to totally remove God from the public forum. Nothing more, nothing less.

**PeterS** · 11-30-2012, 09:57 PM

Originally Posted by JB

There's the answer. If atheists want to believe God is imaginary and have any mention of Him removed from school we should do that with all imaginary things that are mentioned in school.

Why? The removal of God from the public sphere is predicated on secularism. Your other imaginary examples aren't. Your battle isn't with atheists, who have no more proof for their beliefs than a Christian, but with the secularist who insists on the removal of god so that no belief can be imposed over another...

**PeterS** · 11-30-2012, 10:02 PM

Originally Posted by NJCardFan

Thank you for totally missing the point. Liberals are always the ones who like to screech about majority rule but only when it further's their agenda. Truth be told, there is nothing in this world that doesn't offend someone but the truth here is that secular progressives and their useful fools in the Atheist movement to totally remove God from the public forum. Nothing more, nothing less.

And why do I get the feeling that this PeterS is TheNightOwl.

There is no majority rule over individual rights...which was my point...and god should be removed from the public forum. We are a secular country after all...

As for being the night owl. Nope, try again...

**Rockntractor** · 11-30-2012, 10:09 PM

Originally Posted by NJCardFan

Thank you for totally missing the point. Liberals are always the ones who like to screech about majority rule but only when it further's their agenda. Truth be told, there is nothing in this world that doesn't offend someone but the truth here is that secular progressives and their useful fools in the Atheist movement to totally remove God from the public forum. Nothing more, nothing less.

I'm getting tired of every new member being accused of being somebody else, if you must say something send a PM to a mod.

JB · 11-30-2012, 10:16 PM

Originally Posted by Rockntractor

I'm getting tired of every new member being accused of being somebody else...

He's not even new!! I think Pete is waiting for a chick to get dressed and just wanted to post a bit.

**PeterS** · 11-30-2012, 10:20 PM

Originally Posted by Rockntractor

I'm getting tired of every new member being accused of being somebody else, if you must say something send a PM to a mod.

I'm the same PeterS that was on here in 07 and 08. I got bored on FB so drifted by. Thats all...

JB · 11-30-2012, 10:21 PM

Originally Posted by PeterS

...so that no belief can be imposed over another...

I just don't want my school mascot to be named after something imaginary. The imaginary was the issue that I originally replied to.

Originally Posted by PeterS

We are a secular country after all...

Not quite. Not having an officially recognized religion does not mean the country is secular.

**PeterS** · 11-30-2012, 10:21 PM

Originally Posted by JB

He's not even new!! I think Pete is waiting for a chick to get dressed and just wanted to post a bit.

I like that one!

**ReinMan** · 11-30-2012, 10:22 PM

Originally Posted by PeterS

There is no majority rule over individual rights...which was my point...and god should be removed from the public forum. We are a secular country after all...

As for being the night owl. Nope, try again...

Non sequitur. If your point is that individual rights should be protected from majority rule, then why not recognize that the 'free exercise of religion' is one of the first enumerated. Nowhere in the constitution are you guaranteed the right to be free from personal offense, but the free exercise of religion is very clearly and unambiguously stated in first amendment. That particular individual right is protected from interference by the majority, and specifically from Congress.

And if you start on about the 'wall of separation between church and state', I'll know you've completely misunderstood the concept of 'individual rights'. The wall is there to protect religion from government, not the other way around.

**PeterS** · 11-30-2012, 10:35 PM

Originally Posted by JB

I just don't want my school mascot to be named after something imaginary. The imaginary was the issue that I originally replied to.

Not quite. Not having an officially recognized religion does not mean the country is secular.

Be careful my friend, you are on thin ice here. The question to be asked is whether the founders intended this country to be free. If that is the case then how can one be free when the religion of one cab be imposed over another? And if the religion of one cannot be imposed another isn't the definition of secularism what is it?