NationStates Jolt Archive

So, the other night I was hanging out with my friends, some of them are Neo-Pagans and Wiccans. Of course the conversation turns to religion as it always does. Then that leads to us talking about the state of Religion in the United States.

My Pagan and Wiccans friends are tired of the Christians going around claiming that the "liberals" (I'm starting to hate that term and I'm a Libertarian) are oppressing them because they took the 10 commandments out of a court house or a Muslim politician wants to swear on the Koran instead of the Bible.

They are annoyed by this because they wear Pentacles or sign of their faith around their neck, however when they go to work, they have to either put it under their shirts or take it off. The reason being is that they get a bunch of idiots asking idiotic questions or making idiotic statements.

We live in the Baptist Bible Belt, (South East of the United States) and there are more church per town than there is schools. Trust me, the Christians around these parts are not being oppressed. I actually heard one of my classmates talked about how she can't show her cross anymore. I slapped my forehead and turned around. I asked her to look around and see how many people were wearing crosses, we counted 20 out of 30. Then I asked her to point out symbols of other faith. We really only found two. After that she decided to shut up and I went back to my work.

Jack Chick (*pause for groans*) in his cartoons, he shows Christians being told by their boss, wives (It's never the Husband), or whoever to keep the "preaching" down or suffer the consequences. I'd actually have to say that the opposite is true, that the Christians are the one telling the other faith to keep their "preaching" down, because as we know, anything that isn't from the Bible must be the work of the Devil!

So the final word on this is, Christians, you're not being oppressed so shut up and sit down.

Comments?

yeah. You found Wiccans and Pagans in the Bible belt? How?

yeah. You found Wiccans and Pagans in the Bible belt? How?

The wonders of the Internet my friend. :)

yeah. You found Wiccans and Pagans in the Bible belt? How?

Presumably they were the ones ducking the odd rock....

"Don't you oppress me!"

"I'm not oppressin' you Reg - you haven't got a womb!"

So the final word on this is, Christians, you're not being oppressed so shut up and sit down.

Comments?

Well, of course they're not being oppressed. They run the country.

So the final word on this is, Christians, you're not being oppressed so shut up and sit down.

Comments?

Either that's not really the final word, or you're not really inviting comments.

So the final word on this is, Christians, you're not being oppressed so shut up and sit down.

Comments?

Yes. Stop oppressing me you bastard! I will not shut up and sit down and shut up if I don't want to and how dare you try to force me to! You cruel, heartless bastard! You all saw it, didn't you? He's oppressing me!

I'm surprised this hasn't been posted yet:
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y19/m00nbeast/artwork%20-%20funnies/oppressedchristians.jpg


Anyone losing their power to trod all over others will feel victimized.

I slapped my forehead and turned around. I asked her to look around and see how many people were wearing crosses, we counted 20 out of 30. Then I asked her to point out symbols of other faith. We really only found two.

Well considering about 80% of the country is christian, 15% are not of any particular religion, and 5% are of a religion other than christianity...why is it at all surprising to find that 66% of the class wore christian symbolism and 6% of the class had symbolism of another faith.

Demographically alone in the US, in a class of 30 people, even outside the "bible belt", you'd only expect 2-3 people to be of a religion other than christianity.

They are annoyed by this because they wear Pentacles or sign of their faith around their neck, however when they go to work, they have to either put it under their shirts or take it off. The reason being is that they get a bunch of idiots asking idiotic questions or making idiotic statements.


All the more reason they SHOULD wear them openly.

People ask stupid questions or make idiot statements precisely because they're ignorant. Having their religious identity visible is a good thing if it causes people to ask questions. Sure, at first it'll be silly but if such people answer the questions calmly and honestly then the ignorance will start to ebb.

On my desk at work I have a picture of the Mormon Temple near Washington DC. You can't imagine how many times a co-worker has asked me how many wives I have or made some kind of comment about some other facet of the Mormon religion. So what? They ask questions and I answer, and if they act like asshats I stop answering. This encourages discussion and at worst, makes your belief system more visible.

yeah. You found Wiccans and Pagans in the Bible belt? How?

They do exist. We've even got some atheists!

As a Christian in the US that totally offends me.

The animated one is so much funnier and therefore the only rational choice.

You rang?

http://i239.photobucket.com/albums/ff287/johnnybmetal/christian_pacman.gif

So, the other night I was hanging out with my friends, some of them are Neo-Pagans and Wiccans. Of course the conversation turns to religion as it always does. Then that leads to us talking about the state of Religion in the United States.

My Pagan and Wiccans friends are tired of the Christians going around claiming that the "liberals" (I'm starting to hate that term and I'm a Libertarian) are oppressing them because they took the 10 commandments out of a court house or a Muslim politician wants to swear on the Koran instead of the Bible.

They are annoyed by this because they wear Pentacles or sign of their faith around their neck, however when they go to work, they have to either put it under their shirts or take it off. The reason being is that they get a bunch of idiots asking idiotic questions or making idiotic statements.

We live in the Baptist Bible Belt, (South East of the United States) and there are more church per town than there is schools. Trust me, the Christians around these parts are not being oppressed. I actually heard one of my classmates talked about how she can't show her cross anymore. I slapped my forehead and turned around. I asked her to look around and see how many people were wearing crosses, we counted 20 out of 30. Then I asked her to point out symbols of other faith. We really only found two. After that she decided to shut up and I went back to my work.

Jack Chick (*pause for groans*) in his cartoons, he shows Christians being told by their boss, wives (It's never the Husband), or whoever to keep the "preaching" down or suffer the consequences. I'd actually have to say that the opposite is true, that the Christians are the one telling the other faith to keep their "preaching" down, because as we know, anything that isn't from the Bible must be the work of the Devil!

So the final word on this is, Christians, you're not being oppressed so shut up and sit down.

Comments?

This post made me so happy. I grew up in Wheaton IL, which spends the most capita per GDP on chruches in the United States. I often heard them talk about how Christians were persecuted in the US and "teh ebil secularists" were out to get them.


This is why I hate Christians (well, you know what I mean...).

I'm surprised this hasn't been posted yet:
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y19/m00nbeast/artwork%20-%20funnies/oppressedchristians.jpg


Anyone losing their power to trod all over others will feel victimized.

As a Christian in the US that totally offends me.










The animated one is so much funnier and therefore the only rational choice.

As a Christian in the US that totally offends me.










The animated one is so much funnier and therefore the only rational choice.


Sadly, I do not have that one.

and cue the "help were being oppressed", hungry pie graph...I couldn't find it...:p

EDIT: Okay someone posted it...




I found this though it was pretty lolz

http://paulmayers.blogs.com/my_weblog/images/postmodern.gif

Hmmm, yeah i don't think Christians are oppressed much here either. Might be a different story in other parts of the world.
I don't consider myself a Christian. Hey does anyone know if to be a heretic you have to be a Christian beforehand? Because i like the sound of it, heretic it's got a ring to it.

part of the problem is that christianity is founded as a religion of the oppressed so when the roman empire adopted it as the official religion christians lost out on their identity. A lot of them still cling to the preroman view of themselves as the oppressed martyr. Stupid christians lions are in zoos, and you aren't on the menu anymore.

and cue the "help were being oppressed", hungry pie graph...I couldn't find it...:p

EDIT: Okay someone posted it...




I found this though it was pretty lolz

http://paulmayers.blogs.com/my_weblog/images/postmodern.gif

That's more a metaphor for NSG debate I believe. :D

You rang?

http://i239.photobucket.com/albums/ff287/johnnybmetal/christian_pacman.gif

Huzzah! :fluffle:

heh, its funny we don't get the "we're being opressed" thing much here in the U.K. when we're 2/3rds secular... oh well.

This is why I hate Christians (well, you know what I mean...).
Love the Christian, hate the Christianity!

Huzzah! :fluffle:

Thank you. :) :fluffle:

So, the other night I was hanging out with my friends, some of them are Neo-Pagans and Wiccans. Of course the conversation turns to religion as it always does. Then that leads to us talking about the state of Religion in the United States.

My Pagan and Wiccans friends are tired of the Christians going around claiming that the "liberals" (I'm starting to hate that term and I'm a Libertarian) are oppressing them because they took the 10 commandments out of a court house or a Muslim politician wants to swear on the Koran instead of the Bible.

As far as I know, only the loud Christians say that.

They are annoyed by this because they wear Pentacles or sign of their faith around their neck,

Do they also have bumper stickers proclaiming how proud they are of their faith?

however when they go to work, they have to either put it under their shirts or take it off. The reason being is that they get a bunch of idiots asking idiotic questions or making idiotic statements.

So? If one is harassed too badly, one can see to it that one's harasser is fired.

We live in the Baptist Bible Belt, (South East of the United States) and there are more church per town than there is schools. Trust me, the Christians around these parts are not being oppressed.

I doubt there is an area in the U.S. where they are.

I actually heard one of my classmates talked about how she can't show her cross anymore. I slapped my forehead and turned around. I asked her to look around and see how many people were wearing crosses, we counted 20 out of 30. Then I asked her to point out symbols of other faith. We really only found two. After that she decided to shut up and I went back to my work.

People enjoy complaining.

Jack Chick (*pause for groans*) in his cartoons, he shows Christians being told by their boss, wives (It's never the Husband), or whoever to keep the "preaching" down or suffer the consequences. I'd actually have to say that the opposite is true, that the Christians are the one telling the other faith to keep their "preaching" down, because as we know, anything that isn't from the Bible must be the work of the Devil!


Years back, my dad eventually did have to call the police because some Bible-thumper across the street kept shouting gospels (about how so many people who rejected Jesus were going to Hell) after curfew. He left his door open, you ask him shut it: "You can't shut-out God." You ask him to preach another time: "God knows no curfew."

People like to view themselves as belonging to something greater, some sort of movement or some such thing with a greater, deeper degree of significance. Being oppressed, and lifting that oppression, is one of those very such things, which is precisely why so many Christian groups feel like they're being oppressed: Because they want to. It makes their religion more exciting, which should say something about the people believing, and their choice of beliefs.

Part of me also wants to say that they want to be martyrs, like their good, dear radical Islamic brethren.

I'm surprised this hasn't been posted yet:
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y19/m00nbeast/artwork%20-%20funnies/oppressedchristians.jpg


Anyone losing their power to trod all over others will feel victimized.

I like the animated version of that pic better.

Christians are only "oppressed" because gays have rights, and don't have to stay in the closet; women are allowed to do their own thing and people can think for themselves.

All the more reason they SHOULD wear them openly.

People ask stupid questions or make idiot statements precisely because they're ignorant. Having their religious identity visible is a good thing if it causes people to ask questions. Sure, at first it'll be silly but if such people answer the questions calmly and honestly then the ignorance will start to ebb.

On my desk at work I have a picture of the Mormon Temple near Washington DC. You can't imagine how many times a co-worker has asked me how many wives I have or made some kind of comment about some other facet of the Mormon religion. So what? They ask questions and I answer, and if they act like asshats I stop answering. This encourages discussion and at worst, makes your belief system more visible.

I'd like to take this moment to mention that ignorant people aren't necessarily stupid or bad people. They just have yet to be educated on the relevant topic.

Incidentally, I would like to play the oppression card. You see, I am left-handed. Now, my people have been oppressed by you right-handers for several hundreds of years now, and we'd like it to stop. Now, I know you've stopped the beatings for using our left hands to write with, but you're beating us in your minds.

Furthermore, we would like to discourage the use of the word "southpaw" to describe us. Many of you are not aware of the history of this word, and that it refers to a time when the Roman Emperor Nero would have us mauled by Bears for his sick amusement. Furthermore, it is our word and a part of our culture.

I'm not trying to cause trouble, I just want equal rights for us left-handed peoples. Perhaps reparations for the beatings would be in order. And I will definitely keep campaigning until we have the right to vote! Left Power!

If you go to my school and see the kids, you'll realize that pie graph is about to chaaaaaange.
Every religion has a handful of people that thinks they're being oppressed. That's because every religion has to go through a certain amount of crap, and there are some people who think that life is only hard for them.
And it's interesting that Christians think they're being oppressed when the Ten Commandments are taken out of courthouses *cough*whatabouttheJews*cough*

Orthodox jews don't care. As far as they're concerned, the jews are the chosen people, nobody else. Why would they want to put their religious codes on secular buildings that are also used by gentiles?

The orthodox jewish mentality is very different than the orthodox christian one.

If you go to my school and see the kids, you'll realize that pie graph is about to chaaaaaange.
Every religion has a handful of people that thinks they're being oppressed. That's because every religion has to go through a certain amount of crap, and there are some people who think that life is only hard for them.
And it's interesting that Christians think they're being oppressed when the Ten Commandments are taken out of courthouses *cough*whatabouttheJews*cough*

That's excatly right becuase Jews believe that they are the superoir race.

Just becuase there are more Christians in the US than other religions doesn't mean that they aren't being oprressed, after all there are more women and those of a darker skin colour than White men does that mean that when Black people and women go on about how they are being oppressed they should just stfu.

Gopt to go so I will clarify later watch for Edit

Actually, I think Caucasian is still the largest racial group in the U.S. that's why they're not considered a minority.

That's excatly right becuase Jews believe that they are the superoir race.

Depends on how you define "superior". Orthodox jews believe the jews, and only the jews, are god's chosen people, the ones chosen to receive the covenant of god.

Which is what I said, christians and jews have very differnet mentalities at their most orthodox. Chritianity believes that god set rules for everyone, and christianity is the path to obey those rules. Jews think god gave us rules, but gave them to the jews. Orthodox jews by and large don't get upset when non jews don't obey jewish law, and why would they? As far as they're concerned, they're the chosen ones, not you, and if god expected you to obey the rules, he would have made you jewish.

Which is different than thinking they're superior though.

Orthodox jews don't care. As far as they're concerned, the jews are the chosen people, nobody else. Why would they want to put their religious codes on secular buildings that are also used by gentiles?

The orthodox jewish mentality is very different than the orthodox christian one.

That's excatly right becuase Jews believe that they are the superoir race.

Just becuase there are more Christians in the US than other religions doesn't mean that they aren't being oprressed, after all there are more women and those of a darker skin colour than White men does that mean that when Black people and women go on about how they are being oppressed they should just stfu.

Gopt to go so I will clarify later watch for Edit

You're right. Simple majority doesn't exclude one from oppression.

However, when about 70% of the populace is Christian, just about every president has been Christian, the current presidential administration is openly Christian, Congress is mostly Christian (more like overwhelmingly Christian), and the Supreme Court is mostly Christian (hint: the 3 branches of the US government), then you have to REALLY wonder what's going on in these people's heads when they cry "zomg oppression!!"

Many places aren't allowed to say 'Merry Christmas' or show crosses in the public square during the holiday season.

Source?

People have also have tried to remove the word 'God' from the pledge.

Added in the 50s, shouldn't be there in the first place. The rest of your points I either agree with or don't care to argue, which one I have not decided. There's one that I won't touch with a 20-ft pole and I think we know which one that is.

Well to be fair, there are some elements of oppression towards Christians in the United States. Many places aren't allowed to say 'Merry Christmas' or show crosses in the public square during the holiday season. Also teachers and school officials can't lead even a non-dominational prayer in school. People have also have tried to remove the word 'God' from the pledge. Finally there's Roe v. Wade. This took a very important issue in the eyes of Christains(life and abortion) out of the hands of the people and the states. All are misguided policies and all show at least some form of Christian oppression.

You not being allowed to put your religious iconography in public is not you being oppressed. You not being allowed to make choices for other people is not you being oppressed.

You can still have a cross, you can still choose not to have an abortion. But you can't have the government promote your faith, you can't tell other people what to do.

And that's not oppression, that's you being prevented from oppressing someone else. Unfortunatly, some think the two are the same

Well to be fair, there are some elements of oppression towards Christians in the United States. Many places aren't allowed to say 'Merry Christmas' or show crosses in the public square during the holiday season. Also teachers and school officials can't lead even a non-dominational prayer in school. People have also have tried to remove the word 'God' from the pledge. Finally there's Roe v. Wade. This took a very important issue in the eyes of Christains(life and abortion) out of the hands of the people and the states. All are misguided policies and all show at least some form of Christian oppression.

Excuse me? Do any of those qualify as oppression?

Merry Christmas stuff: happens almost no where, exaggerated to such a large degree it's funny. The only place you'll hear happy holidays is on commercials or maybe a school announcement. How exactly is this preventing Christians from freely practicing their religion?

About non-denominational prayer: schools are public institutions, and thus teachers--being public servants--should not be endorsing one religion over another or even religion over nonreligion. Thus, students and teachers are certainly allowed to hold and freely express religious beliefs. You just can't do it such that is done by the school.

Removing "God" from the pledge, again, does not oppress Christians. "God" was only added during the 1950s; furthermore, its removal does nothing to interfere with Christians' first amendment rights to practice Christianity. They still can say "under God" if they want, only now without it, it does not endorse one religion over another, or over no religion. Hence the meaning of "secular."

Roe v. Wade does not stop Christians from practicing their religions. Same with gay marriage and so on. Christians can believe abortion is wrong--hence they protest it and choose to not get abortions. Their beliefs -- abortion is against God's will or whatever -- are not silenced. They still can believe that. They are not ENFORCED to get abortions either.

In conclusion, Christians aren't being oppressed.

Well to be fair, there are some elements of oppression towards Christians in the United States. Many places aren't allowed to say 'Merry Christmas' or show crosses in the public square during the holiday season. Also teachers and school officials can't lead even a non-dominational prayer in school. People have also have tried to remove the word 'God' from the pledge. Finally there's Roe v. Wade. This took a very important issue in the eyes of Christains(life and abortion) out of the hands of the people and the states. All are misguided policies and all show at least some form of Christian oppression.

Sure. Sadly, an awful lot of Orthodox Jews I've known haven't made that particular distinction. (Which makes them no better or worse than orthodox anybody-else, of course.)

Sure.

Just saying though, the orthodox jewish mentality is very different than what is commonly thought of as "orthodox religious" in america today. Orthodox christians are interested in conversion, orthodox jews are not, and that shapes their entire outlook as to their faith. Understanding that goes very far into understanding why christians get upset when the 10 commandments are taken down but jews, by and large, don't. Why not? Because they don't expect an american courhouse to have the jewish laws on it. This is not the holy land, this is not jerusalem, and they'd reject any effort to treat it as such.

This took a very important issue in the eyes of Christains(life and abortion) out of the hands of the people and the states.
It put it INTO the hands of the people, away from the state. Christians think they are "oppressed" if they are deprived of the "right" to impose upon others.

-snip-
So the final word on this is, Christians, you're not being oppressed so shut up and sit down.

Comments?

Not in America, no. I'm a Christian, and I don't think we're being opressed in the least. Elsewhere, however, it's less "opression" than it is non-government social pressure against religion in general, and Christianity in particular.

So, the other night I was hanging out with my friends, some of them are Neo-Pagans and Wiccans. Of course the conversation turns to religion as it always does. Then that leads to us talking about the state of Religion in the United States.

My Pagan and Wiccans friends are tired of the Christians going around claiming that the "liberals" (I'm starting to hate that term and I'm a Libertarian) are oppressing them because they took the 10 commandments out of a court house or a Muslim politician wants to swear on the Koran instead of the Bible.

They are annoyed by this because they wear Pentacles or sign of their faith around their neck, however when they go to work, they have to either put it under their shirts or take it off. The reason being is that they get a bunch of idiots asking idiotic questions or making idiotic statements.

We live in the Baptist Bible Belt, (South East of the United States) and there are more church per town than there is schools. Trust me, the Christians around these parts are not being oppressed. I actually heard one of my classmates talked about how she can't show her cross anymore. I slapped my forehead and turned around. I asked her to look around and see how many people were wearing crosses, we counted 20 out of 30. Then I asked her to point out symbols of other faith. We really only found two. After that she decided to shut up and I went back to my work.

Jack Chick (*pause for groans*) in his cartoons, he shows Christians being told by their boss, wives (It's never the Husband), or whoever to keep the "preaching" down or suffer the consequences. I'd actually have to say that the opposite is true, that the Christians are the one telling the other faith to keep their "preaching" down, because as we know, anything that isn't from the Bible must be the work of the Devil!

So the final word on this is, Christians, you're not being oppressed so shut up and sit down.

Comments?

No, you're wrong, we ARE being oppressed, and NO, I will NOT "shut up" or "sit down"! :mad:

And if one believes that the fetus growing inside of the mother is a living human being, they have almost a requirement to try to prevent the death of that person.

Sure. It's a good thing though nobody actually believes that though. And with that I won't further participate in this threadjack.

No, you're wrong, we ARE being oppressed, and NO, I will NOT "shut up" or "sit down"! :mad:

but apparently you WILL act like a child. Ah well...

Depends on how you define "superior". Orthodox jews believe the jews, and only the jews, are god's chosen people, the ones chosen to receive the covenant of god.

Which is what I said, christians and jews have very differnet mentalities at their most orthodox. Chritianity believes that god set rules for everyone, and christianity is the path to obey those rules. Jews think god gave us rules, but gave them to the jews. Orthodox jews by and large don't get upset when non jews don't obey jewish law, and why would they? As far as they're concerned, they're the chosen ones, not you, and if god expected you to obey the rules, he would have made you jewish.

Which is different than thinking they're superior though.

Sure. Sadly, an awful lot of Orthodox Jews I've known haven't made that particular distinction. (Which makes them no better or worse than orthodox anybody-else, of course.)

I'd like to take this moment to mention that ignorant people aren't necessarily stupid or bad people. They just have yet to be educated on the relevant topic.

Incidentally, I would like to play the oppression card. You see, I am left-handed. Now, my people have been oppressed by you right-handers for several hundreds of years now, and we'd like it to stop. Now, I know you've stopped the beatings for using our left hands to write with, but you're beating us in your minds.

Furthermore, we would like to discourage the use of the word "southpaw" to describe us. Many of you are not aware of the history of this word, and that it refers to a time when the Roman Emperor Nero would have us mauled by Bears for his sick amusement. Furthermore, it is our word and a part of our culture.

I'm not trying to cause trouble, I just want equal rights for us left-handed peoples. Perhaps reparations for the beatings would be in order. And I will definitely keep campaigning until we have the right to vote! Left Power!

*sets bear loose on Geniasis*

but apparently you WILL act like a child. Ah well...

Well, maybe Christians aren't being oppressed in America, but they ARE elsewhere

And NO, I'm NOT acting like a child, and I STILL refuse to "shut up" about it because that's what you WANT me to do, to shut up about Jesus Christ dying, being buried, and rising from the dead.

I will NOT shut up about it. If you don't want to accept it, fine, but DON'T tell me to "shut up".

The epic time warps in this thread are oppressing me.


¤runs away crying¤

No, you're wrong, we ARE being oppressed, and NO, I will NOT "shut up" or "sit down"! :mad:

Care to provide some proof of this oppression?
If not then shut up and sit down.

It put it INTO the hands of the people, away from the state. Christians think they are "oppressed" if they are deprived of the "right" to impose upon others.

The courts are not the "people." And if one believes that the fetus growing inside of the mother is a living human being, they have almost a requirement to try to prevent the death of that person. They wouldn't see it as oppression, more of preventing murder.

The courts are not the "people." And if one believes that the fetus growing inside of the mother is a living human being, they have almost a requirement to try to prevent the death of that person. They wouldn't see it as oppression, more of preventing murder.

That's only because they don't really know what oppression or murder is.

All are misguided policies and all show at least some form of Christian oppression.

Sounds more like personal opinions and typical propaganda statements, if you ask me. If you truly believe that Christians are oppressed in the United States, I've got a nice bridge that I would like to sell you for a decent price.

Well, maybe Christians aren't being oppressed in America, but they ARE elsewhere

Where, and to what extent?

If some one wants to wish someone a merry Christmas and aren't allowed to for religious reasons, that oppression.
No it isn't
If someone wants to pray for a school over the speaker and aren't allowed to express their religious belief, thats oppression.
Nope, they have no right to force their religious beliefs upon others. If they want to pray they can do it quietly and/or to themselves.
And if someone wants to pledge to a country which they feel is protected by God and wants to say so but can't, again oppression.
No one is saying they can't.

If some one wants to wish someone a merry Christmas and aren't allowed to for religious reasons, that oppression. If someone wants to pray for a school over the speaker and aren't allowed to express their religious belief, thats oppression. And if someone wants to pledge to a country which they feel is protected by God and wants to say so but can't, again oppression.

All of these situations are personal ones, all of the ones mentioned before are public institutions or buildings. You aren't restricted from doing any of these things you mention. You can say 'Merry Christmas' to whoever you like, just not plaster it on a public building. The teacher can say the prayer to themselves, they have no need to voice it to everyone. Anyone can say the pledge however they like, including god or not.

If some one wants to wish someone a merry Christmas and aren't allowed to for religious reasons, that oppression. If someone wants to pray for a school over the speaker and aren't allowed to express their religious belief, thats oppression. And if someone wants to pledge to a country which they feel is protected by God and wants to say so but can't, again oppression.

Oh please. Hey, how about I want to DAMN people over the speaker so that they can be saved!!! Does preventing that count as oppression?

You have every right to say Merry CHristmas, "under God" or wear a cross. What you DONT have the right to, is to make other people follow your belief.

Quite frankly, I'm still interested in seeing where all this oppression is actually happening. You know, people being banned from saying Merry Xmas and what not, rather than private or public institutions choosing to not say it themselvesfor the sake of tolerance. You can say "I love Jesus and Merry Christmas as much as you want." This companies are simply choosing to NOT say it. You can choose to say it, just like they have chosen not to.

They would say the same to you.

The difference is I'm right, not being allowed to force your opinions upon others is not oppression, and abortion is not murder - though some christians want it to be.

Where, and to what extent?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Christians#Recent_Christian_persecution_in_other_countries

Excuse me? Do any of those qualify as oppression?

Merry Christmas stuff: happens almost no where, exaggerated to such a large degree it's funny. The only place you'll hear happy holidays is on commercials or maybe a school announcement. How exactly is this preventing Christians from freely practicing their religion?

About non-denominational prayer: schools are public institutions, and thus teachers--being public servants--should not be endorsing one religion over another or even religion over nonreligion. Thus, students and teachers are certainly allowed to hold and freely express religious beliefs *snip*

If some one wants to wish someone a merry Christmas and aren't allowed to for religious reasons, that oppression. If someone wants to pray for a school over the speaker and aren't allowed to express their religious belief, thats oppression. And if someone wants to pledge to a country which they feel is protected by God and wants to say so but can't, again oppression.

For arguments sake:

Hail Mary, mother of God, pray for us sinners now and at the hour of our death, Amen.

Now, have I oppressed you?

Nope, what's your point?

Sure. It's a good thing though nobody actually believes that though. And with that I won't further participate in this threadjack.

no, many people do.

The courts are not the "people."
The courts do not order anyone to have an abortion, or not to. The people decide that. The courts have simply ordered that no-one may impose their own decision on others.

For arguments sake:

Hail Mary, mother of God, pray for us sinners now and at the hour of our death, Amen.

Now, have I oppressed you?

This forces religion how? You aren't mandating me to follow religious code or follow a particular religion. As a private citizen, you have the right to free speech, which includes reciting whatever superstitious bs you want. Hence no rights have been violated.

That's only because they don't really know what oppression or murder is.

They would say the same to you.

If someone wants to pray for a school over the speaker and aren't allowed to express their religious belief, thats oppression.
No, that is being prevented from IMPOSING on others. You can pray all you want, without disturbing others. But no, you insist on being "as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men".

That saying a prayer, whether on a forum or over a schoolroom speaker does not oppress others however preventing someone from saying said prayer does. Thank you for proving my point.

Will you allow me to go on a loudspeaker at school and say fags deserve to die?

Nope, they have no right to force their religious beliefs upon others. If they want to pray they can do it quietly and/or to themselves

For arguments sake:

Hail Mary, mother of God, pray for us sinners now and at the hour of our death, Amen.

Now, have I oppressed you?

That saying a prayer, whether on a forum or over a schoolroom speaker does not oppress others however preventing someone from saying said prayer does. Thank you for proving my point.

And now once you get around to demonstrating that this forum, like a public school, is a government institution, THEN you might have a point.

But I won't hold my breath.

That saying a prayer, whether on a forum or over a schoolroom speaker does not oppress others however preventing someone from saying said prayer does. Thank you for proving my point.

We have no obligation to be on this forum and read it. A child is required to attend school, at which no one religion should be presented over another, a teacher saying a prayer over a loudspeaker is forcing the child to hear it.

Nope, what's your point?

That saying a prayer, whether on a forum or over a schoolroom speaker does not oppress others however preventing someone from saying said prayer does. Thank you for proving my point.

For arguments sake:

Hail Mary, mother of God, pray for us sinners now and at the hour of our death, Amen.

Now, have I oppressed you?
Depends on if you are saying that quietly or shouting it over a loudspeaker.

I do believe so. Last time I checked we are still in America. I disagree with your position as I do with Christians and their prayers, but we do have a certain thing called freedom of speech.

sure you have the right to say whatever you want. But you don't have the right to use a school to promote religion. But you know this and are just trolling so...

That saying a prayer, whether on a forum or over a schoolroom speaker does not oppress others however preventing someone from saying said prayer does. Thank you for proving my point.

I didn't, the fact that you don't see any difference is really rather sad.
It isn't a matter of "If it isn't oppression for them to hear it, then it is oppression for me not to be able to say it (in a government institution)"

Will you allow me to go on a loudspeaker at school and say fags deserve to die?

I do believe so. Last time I checked we are still in America. I disagree with your position as I do with Christians and their prayers, but we do have a certain thing called freedom of speech.

That saying a prayer, whether on a forum or over a schoolroom speaker does not oppress others however preventing someone from saying said prayer does. Thank you for proving my point.

So unless EVERYONE is allowed to use the schoolroom speaker to say WHATEVER THEY WANT, there is a degree of oppression. Sure, that is tautologically true.

But since schools actually control the speaker, it can't be controlled in a way that promotes religion or any religion.

See the difference?

saying a prayer on a school loudspeaker doesn't promote any one religion anymore than annoucing fishsticks will be served for lunch in the school cafetaria promotes the consumption of only fish.

Yes it does...
You do realize that there's more than one religion, yes?

And now once you get around to demonstrating that this forum, like a public school, is a government institution, THEN you might have a point.

But I won't hold my breath.

Freedom of speech has no place in the very government set up to protect it? the irony, it burns.

saying a prayer on a school loudspeaker doesn't promote any one religion anymore than annoucing fishsticks will be served for lunch in the school cafetaria promotes the consumption of only fish.

If fishsticks is the only thing on the menu, then yes it is. Just like only having Christian prayers in a school assembly.

Source?

Not knowing where you are from you made not have heard of this news article, but a school principal changed the tradiotinal Chrristmas Celebration to an end of year celebration so "not to offend non-christains" as part of that ban Traditional Christmas Carols were banned from being sung during the celebration and children were told to say Happy Holidays and not to say Merry Christmas as well as being banned from giving presents for kris Kringle as is usually the custom in schools and workplaces and parents were told not to wrap them up in Christmas paper.

All very well you might say, but the principal stated that instead of the Christmas carrols which he had banned becuase of fear it might offend he would have traditional jewish and muslim songs to be sung by the students, now why is this allowed wouldn't that also offend non-jews and non-muslims. Apprenatly not there is one example of why christians may fell 'oppressed' as I said a bit strong, but when you see that type of shit happening where you aren't allowed to do something within your belief but then others are dosen't that make you feel are bit signled out.

They may even feel more 'oppressed' as when they try to speak out aginst it they are told to "shut up and sit down".

I am currently looking for this article for your precious source it was two years ago so it may take a while maybe I am not using the right search words

So unless EVERYONE is allowed to use the schoolroom speaker to say WHATEVER THEY WANT, there is a degree of oppression. Sure, that is tautologically true.

But since schools actually control the speaker, it can't be controlled in a way that promotes religion or any religion.

See the difference?

saying a prayer on a school loudspeaker doesn't promote any one religion anymore than annoucing fishsticks will be served for lunch in the school cafetaria promotes the consumption of only fish.

I don't agree with the saying of a prayer over the loud speaker in public school. It's not the place for it. I also wouldn't agree with public school mandating the teaching of something that would go directly against a religion either. Religion should not be there in any form .. for or against period. There are plenty of other schools people can go to specifically for that.

From my perspective .. all you would need to know can be learned at home (by yourself or with parents guardians -- friends whoever) or in your choice place of worship/faith .. whatever .. outside any school. But .. I'm not big on the teaching of the history of a religion/church ... or in laws and doctrines. It's about your heart and personal relationship with god (if your religion has a god/gods), and/or your attitude and actions.

saying a prayer on a school loudspeaker doesn't promote any one religion anymore than annoucing fishsticks will be served for lunch in the school cafetaria promotes the consumption of only fish.
If fishsticks is all that the cafeteria has, then indeed you are promoting the consumption of fish and fish only.
You have no business pushing Christian prayers on everyone. The Constitution forbids it, and Jesus condemns it also.

Actually, I think Caucasian is still the largest racial group in the U.S. that's why they're not considered a minority.

Yes but women aren't and actually in the world population Caucasian is a minority

Freedom of speech has no place in the very government set up to protect it? the irony, it burns.

Does this ring any bells?
Separation of church and state is the political and legal idea that government and religion should be separate, and not interfere in each other's affairs.

In the United States separation of church and state is often identified with the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, which states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…" The phrase "building a wall of separation between church and state" was written by Thomas Jefferson in a January 1, 1802 letter to the Danbury Baptist Association.

To messers. Nehemiah Dodge, Ephraim Robbins, & Stephen S. Nelson, a committee of the Danbury Baptist association in the state of Connecticut.

Gentlemen

The affectionate sentiments of esteem and approbation which you are so good as to express towards me, on behalf of the Danbury Baptist association, give me the highest satisfaction. my duties dictate a faithful and zealous pursuit of the interests of my constituents, & in proportion as they are persuaded of my fidelity to those duties, the discharge of them becomes more and more pleasing.

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.

I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection & blessing of the common father and creator of man, and tender you for yourselves & your religious association, assurances of my high respect & esteem.

Th Jefferson
Jan. 1. 1802.

Freedom of speech has no place in the very government set up to protect it? the irony, it burns.

Um. Did you miss the distinction between a government forum and a private forum?

saying a prayer on a school loudspeaker doesn't promote any one religion anymore than annoucing fishsticks will be served for lunch in the school cafetaria promotes the consumption of only fish.

Officially saying the prayer of one or some religions over the school loudspeaker necessarily discriminates against all other or no religions. A religious message simply has no place on the school loudspeaker.

As I tried to point out, the school loudspeaker is not a free forum. It can't be used by anyone anytime for any purpose. So to deny access to the loudspeaker is not inherently oppressive. Officially sponsoring a religous message is oppressive.

So, the other night I was hanging out with my friends, some of them are Neo-Pagans and Wiccans. Of course the conversation turns to religion as it always does. Then that leads to us talking about the state of Religion in the United States.

My Pagan and Wiccans friends are tired of the Christians going around claiming that the "liberals" (I'm starting to hate that term and I'm a Libertarian) are oppressing them because they took the 10 commandments out of a court house or a Muslim politician wants to swear on the Koran instead of the Bible.

They are annoyed by this because they wear Pentacles or sign of their faith around their neck, however when they go to work, they have to either put it under their shirts or take it off. The reason being is that they get a bunch of idiots asking idiotic questions or making idiotic statements.

We live in the Baptist Bible Belt, (South East of the United States) and there are more church per town than there is schools. Trust me, the Christians around these parts are not being oppressed. I actually heard one of my classmates talked about how she can't show her cross anymore. I slapped my forehead and turned around. I asked her to look around and see how many people were wearing crosses, we counted 20 out of 30. Then I asked her to point out symbols of other faith. We really only found two. After that she decided to shut up and I went back to my work.

Jack Chick (*pause for groans*) in his cartoons, he shows Christians being told by their boss, wives (It's never the Husband), or whoever to keep the "preaching" down or suffer the consequences. I'd actually have to say that the opposite is true, that the Christians are the one telling the other faith to keep their "preaching" down, because as we know, anything that isn't from the Bible must be the work of the Devil!

So the final word on this is, Christians, you're not being oppressed so shut up and sit down.

Comments?

Oh, sit down and shut up. (what? you don't like people being rude to you?)

Yes. Yes it is. You are right.

On a similar note, though, I think a student should be allowed to quietly pray to him or herself, though, but kids have gotten in trouble for doing that.

I'm sure you can prove that, yes?

Yes but women aren't and actually in the world population Caucasian is a minority

He was talking about the U.S. if I recall correctly, and I forget which gender he was talking about.

Oh, sit down and shut up. (what? you don't like people being rude to you?)

LOL

It put it INTO the hands of the people, away from the state. Christians think they are "oppressed" if they are deprived of the "right" to impose upon others.

That's a sweeping generalization, and it's prejudice.
And it's not very nice either. :(

And saying a prayer creates a law supporting or prohibiting a religion how exactly? I was unaware all teachers were also members of congress.

You do realize that public school teachers in this country are employees of the state, right?

It put it INTO the hands of the people, away from the state. Christians think they are "oppressed" if they are deprived of the "right" to impose upon others.

That's a sweeping generalization, and it's prejudice.
And it's not very nice either. :(

True, now fixed...

It put it INTO the hands of the people, away from the state. The christians that think they are "oppressed", do so if they are deprived of the "right" to impose upon others.

As I tried to point out, the school loudspeaker is not a free forum. It can't be used by anyone anytime for any purpose. So to deny access to the loudspeaker is not inherently oppressive. Officially sponsoring a religous message is oppressive.

Yes. Yes it is. You are right.

On a similar note, though, I think a student should be allowed to quietly pray to him or herself, though, but kids have gotten in trouble for doing that.
We have to remember that millions have died horribly in the name of secularism, just as millions have died in the name of religion. Both can be oppressive.

Does this ring any bells?

And saying a prayer creates a law supporting or prohibiting a religion how exactly? I was unaware all teachers were also members of congress.

Yes. Yes it is. You are right.

On a similar note, though, I think a student should be allowed to quietly pray to him or herself, though, but kids have gotten in trouble for doing that.We have to remember that millions have died horribly in the name of secularism, just as millions have died in the name of religion. Both can be oppressive.

No. Not to any significant degree. Perhaps some principal somewhere has once violated the Constitution by punishing a student for praying, but I bet it was quickly nipped in the bud.

That's a sweeping generalization, and it's prejudice.
And it's not very nice either. :(
It's a simple statement of the facts here. Show me an example of an American Christian claiming to be "oppressed" that does not, in fact, come down to the Christian not being allowed to IMPOSE.

And saying a prayer creates a law supporting or prohibiting a religion how exactly? I was unaware all teachers were also members of congress.

Um. Check out the Fourteenth Amendment which makes the First Amendment applicable to state governments as well as Congress.

School teachers are instruments of government. Government agents generally may not support or prohibit religion.

Do I really need to break out the caselaw on this one?

No. Not to any significant degree. Perhaps some principal somewhere has once violated the Constitution by punishing a student for praying, but I bet it was quickly nipped in the bud.

Hope so.
Before this goes any further, I'd like to say that I don't think Christians suffer any more oppression than any other religious denomination in America... probably they suffer less. Still, I can see where someone might feel a little oppressed by this. I'm gonna go looking for links on it.

And saying a prayer creates a law supporting or prohibiting a religion how exactly? I was unaware all teachers were also members of congress.

I suggest you try reading the entire post next time, I'll repost the part you skipped

To messers. Nehemiah Dodge, Ephraim Robbins, & Stephen S. Nelson, a committee of the Danbury Baptist association in the state of Connecticut.

Gentlemen

The affectionate sentiments of esteem and approbation which you are so good as to express towards me, on behalf of the Danbury Baptist association, give me the highest satisfaction. my duties dictate a faithful and zealous pursuit of the interests of my constituents, & in proportion as they are persuaded of my fidelity to those duties, the discharge of them becomes more and more pleasing.

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.

I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection & blessing of the common father and creator of man, and tender you for yourselves & your religious association, assurances of my high respect & esteem.

Th Jefferson
Jan. 1. 1802.

You do realise the congress of the US is often led in prayer right? And by often I mean almost everyday. They to are agents of the state. They to do not make laws supporting any one religion. They to are within their consitutional bounds.

Of which congress members join in under their own free will and may if they so choose decide not to participate, or say their own prayer, or leave the room.

Children in school however do not have the option of leaving the building.

You do realise the congress of the US is often led in prayer right? And by often I mean almost everyday. They too are agents of the state. They too do not make laws supporting any one religion. They too are within their consitutional bounds.

You do realize that it isn't the same as forcing students to sit through prayer, nor is it the same as requiring students to participate. Any representative who does not wish to involve himself in this prayer is free to leave and return when they are done. Students are not afforded the same luxury.

And it's "too." You messed it up all three times.

It's a simple statement of the facts here. Show me an example of an American Christian claiming to be "oppressed" that does not, in fact, come down to the Christian not being allowed to IMPOSE.

The original statement didn't discriminate between Christians in general and those who felt oppresses. The distinction was strongly implied, but not present within the statement itself.

It's a simple statement of the facts here. Show me an example of an American Christian claiming to be "oppressed" that does not, in fact, come down to the Christian not being allowed to IMPOSE.

You didn't say THOSE Christians. You said Christians. Meaning that they all want to run your life. This is untrue. Look at all the Christians who voted to get the Ten Commandments out of courthouse lawns and voted against prayer in school.

That is one of the aforementioned demands, yes. And would it be too much to ask for left-handed scissors that work?

and don't get me started on those damned jars!

I'd like to take this moment to mention that ignorant people aren't necessarily stupid or bad people. They just have yet to be educated on the relevant topic.

Incidentally, I would like to play the oppression card. You see, I am left-handed. Now, my people have been oppressed by you right-handers for several hundreds of years now, and we'd like it to stop. Now, I know you've stopped the beatings for using our left hands to write with, but you're beating us in your minds.

Furthermore, we would like to discourage the use of the word "southpaw" to describe us. Many of you are not aware of the history of this word, and that it refers to a time when the Roman Emperor Nero would have us mauled by Bears for his sick amusement. Furthermore, it is our word and a part of our culture.

I'm not trying to cause trouble, I just want equal rights for us left-handed peoples. Perhaps reparations for the beatings would be in order. And I will definitely keep campaigning until we have the right to vote! Left Power!

Damn southpaws, next they'll be wanting to vote...

what if they were given that option?

that very principle is what has kept "god" in the pledge of allegance. Now, however, if you need to resort to hypotheticals rather than using actual facts to support your position I see no reason to engage you further in it.

If you want to make your point, do it with real worl examples, not "what ifs"

Of which congress members join in under their own free will and may if they so choose decide not to participate, or say their own prayer, or leave the room.

Children in school however do not have the option of leaving the building.

But they do have the option of not participating. While a prayer is being said by the teacher or over the PA system the child could choose not to listen.

You do realize that public school teachers in this country are employees of the state, right?

You do realise the congress of the US is often led in prayer right? And by often I mean almost everyday. They to are agents of the state. They to do not make laws supporting any one religion. They to are within their consitutional bounds.

You do realise the congress of the US is often led in prayer right? And by often I mean almost everyday. They to are agents of the state. They to do not make laws supporting any one religion. They to are within their consitutional bounds.

Not a valid defense.

1) The members are adults(well they are supposed to be) and are capable to make their own decesions be leave, join in, or simply not participate. Children tend to follow and don't have the ability to leave.

2) Said prayers are not limited to one religion.

Damn southpaws, next they'll be wanting to vote...

That is one of the aforementioned demands, yes. And would it be too much to ask for left-handed scissors that work?

You do realise the congress of the US is often led in prayer right? And by often I mean almost everyday. They to are agents of the state. They to do not make laws supporting any one religion. They to are within their consitutional bounds.

There is a difference between adult members of Congress voluntarily engaging in prayer and school officials leading children in prayer.

But, you make a good point that we have allowed religion perhaps too much room in the Halls of Congress. That doesn't mean we have to violate the separation of Church and State more than we already are.

That is one of the aforementioned demands, yes. And would it be too much to ask for left-handed scissors that work?

Yes, now if you'd just quit being wrong-handed, you wouldn't have any problems, now would you?
:p

Again, saying a prayer oppresses no one nor does it violate the church and state.

correct, saying a prayer does not, based merely on the act of saying. Using government sponsored time, or through a government employee in the capacity of his employment, however, is state endorsement of religion

You do realise the congress of the US is often led in prayer right? And by often I mean almost everyday. They to are agents of the state. They to do not make laws supporting any one religion. They to are within their consitutional bounds.

Yes, and I don't think that it should be.

Of which congress members join in under their own free will and may if they so choose decide not to participate, or say their own prayer, or leave the room.

Children in school however do not have the option of leaving the building.

what if they were given that option?

Yes, now if you'd just quit being wrong-handed, you wouldn't have any problems, now would you?
:p

Help, help! I'm being oppressed!

Help, help! I'm being oppressed!

*oppresses Geniasis*

Yes, and I don't think that it should be.

And then who would be oppressing whom? I would rather my representatives be allowed to pray or choose not to. Rather than not being able to pray at all. Again, saying a prayer oppresses no one nor does it violate the church and state.

It's a simple statement of the facts here. Show me an example of an American Christian claiming to be "oppressed" that does not, in fact, come down to the Christian not being allowed to IMPOSE.

It may be due to the fact that they are shouted down when they express their beliefs on anything abortion, taxes, euthanasia, how much the price of eggs in China should be. becuase they are Chritsian
E.g

Man1: "Abortion should not be allowed as it destroys a living being"

Man2: "Shut up you Christian stop imposing your beliefs onto me it shouldn't be allowed"

Man1: "Just becuase I am Christian he thinks I don't get the right to speak what I believe is true"

Now the first man might have that view even though it may have nothing to do with his religious beliefs thus becuase they aren't allowed to say what they believe in becuase they belong to a certain religion then they may feel oppressed and cry foul.

what if they were given that option?

Why should we disrupt the ordinary business of public schools in order to endorse a religious viewpoint?

It doesn't make sense and it is unacceptable.

that very principle is what has kept "god" in the pledge of allegance.

Then it's settled. What is needed is more freedom. The freedom for people to pray and freedom for people to leave if they don't want to hear it.

Why should we disrupt the ordinary business of public schools in order to endorse a religious viewpoint?

It doesn't make sense and it is unacceptable.

This quoted statement sums up quite nicely why many Chirstians feel oppressed.

And then who would be oppressing whom? I would rather my representatives be allowed to pray or choose not to. Rather than not being able to pray at all. Again, saying a prayer oppresses no one nor does it violate the church and state.

They can pray by themselves. Oh, and here's something interesting.
http://www.vexen.co.uk/religion/christian_prayer.html
Jesus doesn't want you advertising your faith FTW!

I. Learned something.

And then who would be oppressing whom? I would rather my representatives be allowed to pray or choose not to. Rather than not being able to pray at all.

I agree the representatives should be allowed to pray, just not in a government building, and especially not when they are also acting as government agents.



And again, you do realize that there is more than one religion, right?

I'm really beginning to think that you don't.


Either that or you are trolling.

Oh, sit down and shut up. (what? you don't like people being rude to you?)

NEVER!!

*Gets up, runs around and starts screaming wildly*

That is one of the aforementioned demands, yes. And would it be too much to ask for left-handed scissors that work?

*oppresses Geniasis*

because that's what you WANT me to do, to shut up about Jesus Christ dying, being buried, and rising from the dead.


Hmmm. Let's see. Died. Rose from the dead.

http://people.freebsd.org/~wpaul/ZOMBIE_JESUS.JPG

Does anyone else see the irony in the thread title?

I'm just going to assume the answer is 'Yes'.

*oppresses Geniasis*

Several score years ago, a great man, in whose symbolic shadow we stand signed the Handipation Proclamation. This momentous decree came as a great beacon light of hope to millions of Left-handed slaves who had been seared in the flames of withering injustice. It came as a joyous daybreak to end the long night of captivity. But seventeen hundred years later, we must face the tragic fact that the Lefty is still not free. Men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics, will be able to join hands and sing in the words of the old Lefty spiritual, "Fuck off and give me scissors that work. Oh, and can I borrow $20?"

And then who would be oppressing whom? I would rather my representatives be allowed to pray or choose not to. Rather than not being able to pray at all. Again, saying a prayer oppresses no one nor does it violate the church and state.

Try reading Engel v. Vitale (http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=370&invol=421), 370 U.S. 421 (1962):

For this reason, petitioners argue, the State's use of the Regents' prayer in its public school system breaches the constitutional wall of separation between Church and State. We agree with that contention since we think that the constitutional prohibition against laws respecting an establishment of religion must at least mean that in this country it is no part of the business of government to compose official prayers for any group of the American people to recite as a part of a religious program carried on by government. It is a matter of history that this very practice of establishing governmentally composed prayers for religious services was one of the reasons which caused many of our early colonists to leave England and seek religious freedom in America. ...
By the time of the adoption of the Constitution, our history shows that there was a widespread awareness among many Americans of the dangers of a union of Church and State. These people knew, some of them from bitter personal experience, that one of the greatest dangers to the freedom of the individual to worship in his own way lay in the Government's placing its official stamp of approval upon one particular kind of prayer or one particular form of religious services. They knew the anguish, hardship and bitter strife that could come when zealous religious groups struggled with one another to obtain the Government's stamp of approval from each King, Queen, or Protector that came to temporary power. The Constitution was intended to avert a part of this danger by leaving the government of this country in the hands of the people rather than in the hands of any monarch. But this safeguard was not enough. Our Founders were no more willing to let the content of their prayers and their privilege of praying whenever they pleased be influenced by the ballot box than they were to let these vital matters of personal conscience depend upon the succession of monarchs. The First Amendment was added to the Constitution to stand as a guarantee that neither the power nor the prestige of the Federal Government would be used to control, support or influence the kinds of prayer the American people can say -- that the people's religious must not be subjected to the pressures of government for change each time a new political administration is elected to office. Under that Amendment's prohibition against governmental establishment of religion, as reinforced by the provisions of the Fourteenth Amendment, government in this country, be it state or federal, is without power to prescribe by law any particular form of prayer which is to be used as an official prayer in carrying on any program of governmentally sponsored religious activity.

Why should we disrupt the ordinary business of public schools in order to endorse a religious viewpoint?

It doesn't make sense and it is unacceptable.

You make the typical and laughable mistake of thinking that the "business of public schools" is the general education of children for the purposes of informed and able participation in civil society.

The purpose of the public school system is to make children good people. The Bible, and only the Bible, accomplishes this.

Seriously, Cat-Tribe, you should spend less time rousting pimps and more time learning that the only reason we teach mathematics in school is that Numbers is a book of the Bible.

Come to Jesus or else do the honorable thing and disbar yourself.

"He that increaseth knowledge, increaseth sorrow" - Zechamania, 22:4

"Is it better that a man should fall victim to the perils of autonomous thought, or that he be rightfully led by majorative dogma? If you think about this question, you've already gotten it wrong" - Betram of Nazareth

I agree the representatives should be allowed to pray, just not in a government building, and especially not when they are also acting as government agents.



And again, you do realize that there is more than one religion, right?

I'm really beginning to think that you don't.


Either that or you are trolling.

I'm not trolling anymore than you are. I see no problem with school officials leading prayers from several religions on any given today. To tell them not actually violates the 1st amendment.

Then it's settled. What is needed is more freedom. The freedom for people to pray and freedom for people to leave if they don't want to hear it.

So you are endorsing oppressing non-christians?

I'm not trolling anymore than you are. I see no problem with school officials leading prayers from several religions on any given today. To tell them not actually violates the 1st amendment.

Ah, you're not trolling, so you don't realize that there is more than one religion. Got it.

Does anyone else see the irony in the thread title?

I'm just going to assume the answer is 'Yes'.

16 post timewarp!?
:eek:
Is that a record?

*oppresses Geniasis*

copycat :mad:

Several score years ago, a great man, in whose symbolic shadow we stand signed the Handipation Proclamation. This momentous decree came as a great beacon light of hope to millions of Left-handed slaves who had been seared in the flames of withering injustice. It came as a joyous daybreak to end the long night of captivity. But seventeen hundred years later, we must face the tragic fact that the Lefty is still not free. Men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics, will be able to join hands and sing in the words of the old Lefty spiritual, "Fuck off and give me scissors that work. Oh, and can I borrow $20?"

*crucifies Geniasis*

So you are endorsing oppressing non-christians?

So now even letting people leave during a prayer is oppression? Just say what most people here are thinking "Any form of Chirstian display anywhere outside the home or Church is automatically offensive to me and should not be allowed not matter how benign that display is"

This quoted statement sums up quite nicely why many Chirstians feel oppressed.

Precisely. Every time Cat-Tribes makes a cogent observation that illustrates why the practice of a religion (which prayer is) under the location, instigation, and choice of a goverment institution is problematic, it totally oppresses Christians.

Totally.

So, starting tomorrow:

1st period: Christian prayer or quiet time.
2nd period: Muslim prayer or quiet time.
3rd period: Catholic Mass or quiet time.
4th period: Scientology auditing or quiet time.
5th period: Study hall.
6th period: Raelian sensual meditation or quiet time.
7th period: Standardized testing.

<Snip>

You almost got me J, until I saw whose post it was :)

Will you allow me to go on a loudspeaker at school and say fags deserve to die?

You've got it wrong. You should be asking if he will allow you to go on a loudspeaker, and say that everyone should convert to Pastafareenism or be strangled by his noodliness.

I'm not trolling anymore than you are. I see no problem with school officials leading prayers from several religions on any given today. To tell them not actually violates the 1st amendment.

Precisely.

Just like my constitutional right to free speech should allow me to go to a church, seize the pulpet, and give a lengthy dissertation on the topic of my choice.

Anyone in the church that doesn't like it can talk about something else or leave.

After all, the right to do something naturally includes doing it on somebody else's time and money.

*crucifies Geniasis*

wow...I wasn't going to go that far...maybe just cut off his left hand...

copycat :mad:

LIES! SLANDEROUS LIES!

So now even letting people leave during a prayer is oppression? Just say what most people here are thinking "Any form of Chirstian display anywhere outside the home or Church is automatically offensive to me and should not be allowed not matter how benign that display is"

No, you said:Then it's settled. What is needed is more freedom. The freedom for people to pray and freedom for people to leave if they don't want to hear it.
Thusly implying that christians have more rights than non-christians.

This quoted statement sums up quite nicely why many Chirstians feel oppressed.

Christians feel oppressed unless their religion is endorsed by government institutions?

I feel* you are underestimating the degree to which the vast majority of Christians support the separation of Church and State -- precisely because such separation is best for BOTH Church AND State.

*Actually, I know.

No, you said:
Thusly implying that christians have more rights than non-christians.

Why can't non-Chirstians pray and Chirstians leave if they don't want ot be there?

You almost got me J, until I saw whose post it was :)

So, what, now you're implying that a post is flawed merely because its mine?

That is a flame. More than a flame, that is the energization of plasmatic deuterium to the point of fusion, resulting in the release of BILLIONS of kilojoules of flame energy.

I would notify the mods, save for my kindness, patience, and total lack of legitimate complaint.

Cock.

Why can't religious people just not take up time that is supposed to be for doing other things?
I went to school and am sending my kids to school to learn, not to waste time listening to some rubbish about a jewish zombie.

Big mistake. :p

Why can't non-Chirstians pray and Chirstians leave if they don't want ot be there?

Why should the tax dollars of either Christians or non-Christians be used to support a prayer of any kind?

You really don't seem to have a fundamental grasp of what freedom of religion means (and has meant to this country).

I'm not trolling anymore than you are. I see no problem with school officials leading prayers from several religions on any given today. To tell them not actually violates the 1st amendment.

Unfortunately, this can't work. As a devout, open, and practicing polytheist (Of what I follow matters not here), any "non-denominational" praper is discriminative towards me. In fact being required to place my hands together and bow my head is discriminatory to me, as is the mention of a god, "He" in reference to god, or any higher power even as a general. It is oppressive to me to be forced to follow a Christian pattern of "prayer", even if the prayer is supposed to be "non-denominational".

Non-denominational prayers don't exist.

Now do I give a crap if the Christian guy over there prays to God? Or that muslim girl prays to Allah five times a day? Not in the least. But the moment I am not alowed to pray the way my religion endorses (Which, by the way, I am sort of not legally alowed to, but that is not a religious issue so I take no personal offense to it, in fact I agree with it in its principle) then it is opression of my religious belief.

So what then, are you forced to allow everyone to publicly pray as they wish in a state insitution? In a school would you feel comfortable seeing some people pray at an altar to statues, while naked and dirty? That has no place in school. I leave my religious practice to myself, I see no reason why Christians, Muslims, Jews, Wiccans, or whatever, can't do the same.

Why can't non-Chirstians pray and Chirstians leave if they don't want ot be there?

Again, surgical precision on your part, Soviestan.

You convey the truth, which is that public school grounds are for Christian religious activity, and should be vacated by non-participants.

Your message is simple and beautiful: If you aren't Christian and willing to show it, leave school.



Otherwise, people would have to practice their religion on their own time outside of a building paid for by public money, and Christians shouldn't have to do that. That's oppression.

So, what, now you're implying that a post is flawed merely because its mine?

That is a flame. More than a flame, that is the energization of plasmatic deuterium to the point of fusion, resulting in the release of BILLIONS of kilojoules of flame energy.

I would notify the mods, save for my kindness, patience, and total lack of legitimate complaint.

Cock.

lmao

Actually I was complimenting you, it was a brilliant piece of satire (which I've seen in another thread, which was the only reason I stopped to check who posted it rather than immediately responding)

Why should the tax dollars of either Christians or non-Christians be used to support a prayer of any kind?

You really don't seem to have a fundamental grasp of what freedom of religion means (and has meant to this country).

Cat-Tribe, you are more full of shit than a toddler with its ass sewn shut.


Freedom of religion is hardly protected by leaving the government religiously neutral.

That would just protect the freedom of religions, plural.

Thus, you'd be working to secure the rights of a bunch of faiths that aren't ever yours, and that would hardly serve to also preserve your own religious rights.

Ass.

Why can't non-Chirstians pray and Chirstians leave if they don't want ot be there?

Why can't religious people just not take up time that is supposed to be for doing other things?
I went to school and am sending my kids to school to learn, not to waste time listening to some rubbish about a jewish zombie.

lmao

Actually I was complimenting you, it was a brilliant piece of satire (which I've seen in another thread, which was the only reason I stopped to check who posted it rather than immediately responding)

Pfft. Your backhanded compliments have about as much merit as your puerile defense of equal rights for non-christians.

See how much shit you talk when Jesus gets here.

Putz.

You PRETEND to be so polite and affable, but then BAM, you refuse to symbolically wash yourself in the blood of an innocent man to facilitate forgiveness from a being that doesn't forgive in the absence of somebody's brutal torture killing.

Sigged

Cat-Tribe, you are more full of shit than a toddler with its ass sewn shut.


Freedom of religion is hardly protected by leaving the government religiously neutral.

That would just protect the freedom of religions, plural.

Thus, you'd be working to secure the rights of a bunch of faiths that aren't ever yours, and that would hardly serve to also preserve your own religious rights.

Ass.

Might want to watch it there. He knows you're kidding, we know you're kidding, but it's technically still flaming.

Still, hats off as always.

Pfft. Your backhanded compliments have about as much merit as your puerile defense of equal rights for non-christians.

See how much shit you talk when Jesus gets here.

Putz.

Thank you
:D

Thank you
:D

See, this is the problem with people like you, Dyakovo.

You PRETEND to be so polite and affable, but then BAM, you refuse to symbolically wash yourself in the blood of an innocent man to facilitate forgiveness from a being that doesn't forgive in the absence of somebody's brutal torture killing.

And what's more, you refuse to let the state immerse your child in the spiritual practices associated thereto.

Glans.

All of these situations are personal ones, all of the ones mentioned before are public institutions or buildings. You aren't restricted from doing any of these things you mention. You can say 'Merry Christmas' to whoever you like, just not plaster it on a public building. The teacher can say the prayer to themselves, they have no need to voice it to everyone. Anyone can say the pledge however they like, including god or not.

But if you can't heeeeear the word of God, how are you supposed to know that you're doing it wrong?? People could walk around their whole lives thinking they're good, happy people because they haven't had the GOD GIVEN right to hear other people tell them they're not!

The only flaming around here are the fast approaching curtains of fire that will be drown down on anybody that works against getting prayer, the bible, bible-based prayer, and prayer-based bible study back in our schools.

If the mods want to call that flaming, fine, but I will NOT let Cat-Tribes continue spewing his anti-christian shitsplatter just because it happens to be consistent with the constitution and an genuine, equal regard for the unhindered yet unforced practice of all religions.

Buttcheek.

I am so glad I don't bring drinks to my desk. :D

I am so glad I don't bring drinks to my desk. :D

Yeah, between LG and Jhah it can be very dangerous for your computer.

Might want to watch it there. He knows you're kidding, we know you're kidding, but it's technically still flaming.

Still, hats off as always.

The only flaming around here are the fast approaching curtains of fire that will be drown down on anybody that works against getting prayer, the bible, bible-based prayer, and prayer-based bible study back in our schools.

If the mods want to call that flaming, fine, but I will NOT let Cat-Tribes continue spewing his anti-christian shitsplatter just because it happens to be consistent with the constitution and an genuine, equal regard for the unhindered yet unforced practice of all religions.

Buttcheek.

But if you can't heeeeear the word of God, how are you supposed to know that you're doing it wrong?? People could walk around their whole lives thinking they're good, happy people because they haven't had the GOD GIVEN right to hear other people tell them they're not!

Finally, somebody who gets it.

Should change the nation name, though, dude, it sounds very...Lamist-Islay, if you ow-nay what I ean-may.

You do realize that it isn't the same as forcing students to sit through prayer, nor is it the same as requiring students to participate. Any representative who does not wish to involve himself in this prayer is free to leave and return when they are done. Students are not afforded the same luxury.

And it's "too." You messed it up all three times.

This made me think of something. Someone or entity was trying to stop some type of prayer. It was a few or more years ago.. and I do not remember who it was.. I want to say the ACLU though. They were trying to outlaw a certain prayer basically. Forsyth County NC. I also do not know the outcome. But I know it was an issue! I remember watching some things on our local gov channel.



Edit: Ahh found something..

LINK (http://www.interstateq.com/archives/1994/) turns out to be blog like, but still gives the gist.
LINK (http://www.wxii12.com/news/10416274/detail.html#) News story link


(My search was 'prayer outlawed from forsyth county nc' if you are so inclined)

I know I'm not being oppressed, but I've got other things to talk about. *Cough* Over-sized government*coughcough* sorry. Really bad cold.

I hope you realize that this

LINK (http://www.interstateq.com/archives/1994/)

Does not in any way resemble this:

Someone or entity was trying to stop the people of my counties court from praying -- Christian. It was a few or more years ago.. and I do not remember who it was.. I want to say the ACLU though. They were trying to outlaw prayer basically.

Or you could recognize that "trying to stop a government institution from using denominational prayers as part of their government meetings" is not the same as "wants to make it illegal to pray.

But, you know...good try, keep pretending that the ACLU wants to make it illegal for you to pray. You know, that institution whose sole purpose is to protect the constitution really wants to deny you your first amendment rights :rolleyes:

I do believe so. Last time I checked we are still in America. I disagree with your position as I do with Christians and their prayers, but we do have a certain thing called freedom of speech.

Freedom of speech is wonderful. Freedom of speech does not include the right to yell "fire" in a crowded theater, or the right for me to tell you I'm going to kill you. That's assault.

Um. Check out the Fourteenth Amendment which makes the First Amendment applicable to state governments as well as Congress.

School teachers are instruments of government. Government agents generally may not support or prohibit religion.

One thing that hasn't been brought up either is how TEACHERS feel about this. As a pagan-buddhist leaning agnostic (my religion is ambivalence!) AND a teacher, I do not have any desire whatsoever to be an agent of christianity or any other religion within the school. That's not my job. I can't imagine how difficult and uncomfortable it would be to have to work in a school where prayer and religion was forced upon us. I still feel very uncomfortable saying the pledge--until I became a teacher, I hadn't said it since I was about 9.

You do realise the congress of the US is often led in prayer right? And by often I mean almost everyday. They to are agents of the state. They to do not make laws supporting any one religion. They to are within their consitutional bounds.

Yes, and it's a flagrant violation of the separation of church and state. As is the pledge, as is the mention of god on our money. I think those are all pretty good examples of how Christianity is SUPPORTED and encouraged by our government, even when it violates our constitutional rights.

Then it's settled. What is needed is more freedom. The freedom for people to pray and freedom for people to leave if they don't want to hear it.

So you would have no problem if I was your [fictional] child's teacher and decided to lead the class in a one-hour pagan ceremony each day?

But the moment I am not alowed to pray the way my religion endorses (Which, by the way, I am sort of not legally alowed to, but that is not a religious issue so I take no personal offense to it, in fact I agree with it in its principle) then it is opression of my religious belief.

I'm fairly sure my school would have a big problem if I decided to take time during the day to break out some candles and get skyclad. ;)

I hope you realize that this



Does not in any way resemble this:



Or you could recognize that "trying to stop a government institution from using denominational prayers as part of their government meetings" is not the same as "wants to make it illegal to pray.

But, you know...good try, keep pretending that the ACLU wants to make it illegal for you to pray. You know, that institution whose sole purpose is to protect the constitution really wants to deny you your first amendment rights :rolleyes:

I was going from simply vague memory.. I'm surprised I remembered as much as I did.

I provided links to the actual event. Would you like me to go back and rephrase what I said?

They do exist. We've even got some atheists!

I exist! I exist! *jumps up and down waving arms in the air enthusiastically*

I am an atheist in Eastern North Carolina!

yes I am Darknovae, my nation died again and I haven't gotten it rezzied yet

Alos .. 'The keep pretending ACLU' whatever was not necessary. I don't go around bashing them. That one post I replied to happen to just jar a memory of something that had to do with prayer in my local district.

And I thought it was relevant to the topic.

I exist! I exist! *jumps up and down waving arms in the air enthusiastically*

Rubbish, you only imagine that you exist.

I exist! I exist! *jumps up and down waving arms in the air enthusiastically*

I am an atheist in Eastern North Carolina!

yes I am Darknovae, my nation died again and I haven't gotten it rezzied yet

Didn't your mother ever tell you not to get a pet if you couldn't take care of it?

And of course, preventing prayer by a court (powerful government entity) is the same as "outlawing prayer basically."


I was going by vague memory. And yeah .. that's how I took it ... what I saw of it on the gov channel I watched years ago. As I said .. I'm surprised I remembered as much as I did. It's relevant to the topic tho. Isn't it?

I'm going to go back and edit my post and just.. well you'll see.

This made me think of something. Someone or entity was trying to stop the people of my counties court from praying -- Christian. It was a few or more years ago.. and I do not remember who it was.. I want to say the ACLU though. They were trying to outlaw prayer basically. Forsyth County NC. I also do not know the outcome. But I know it was an issue! I remember watching some things on our local gov channel.


And of course, preventing prayer by a court (powerful government entity) is the same as "outlawing prayer basically."

Alos .. 'The keep pretending ACLU' whatever was not necessary. I don't go around bashing them. That one post I replied to happen to just jar a memory of something that had to do with prayer in my local district.

/Satire off

You didn't bash them, but you tried to imply that they were seeking to preclude prayer in some kind of generalized sense, "basically".

In fact, they just didn't want a court, which has tremendous authority and power over its juristiction, to not engage in a religious practice on public time and money.

/Satire back on

There is a difference between adult members of Congress voluntarily engaging in prayer and school officials leading children in prayer.

But, you make a good point that we have allowed religion perhaps too much room in the Halls of Congress. That doesn't mean we have to violate the separation of Church and State more than we already are.

So was the situation in the link (http://www.wxii12.com/news/10416274/detail.html#) I provided a case where the members of said county weren't allowed to voluntarily disengage?

This is not directed at Cat.. but his post fit my question.

Your editing makes your post much closer to something like what actually happened, but the natural consequence of that is, the ACLU didn't really attack prayer in a general sense.


Suppose a pack of Scientologists showed up at the Department of Motor Vehicles, and stopped the lines so that everyone could do Scientology Auditing. Would you be okay with that?

Lots of us wouldn't. Our government should be handling EVERYBODY's public business, not certain people's religious activities.

I totally understand what you are saying. My intent in posting what I did was only because I read where congress is supposibly able to pray in what way they want .. but then I remember a situation where county officials were confronted for the same thing? It seemed that way to me. I still need to read the entirety though.

I was going by vague memory. And yeah .. that's how I took it ... what I saw of it on the gov channel I watched years ago. As I said .. I'm surprised I remembered as much as I did. It's relevant to the topic tho. Isn't it?

I'm going to go back and edit my post and just.. well you'll see.

Well, you may not have checked your own links thoroughly, and using sources that you have a "vague" recollection of is a fine way to be easily refuted.

Nothing personal, but what the ACLU was against was sectarian prayer, that is to say, prayer for a specific religion.

Naturality, if the government or any arm thereof backs any one group, it takes away from all the other groups. Unless you want every city council to open with prayers and practices from EVERY religion, they need to open with something non-sectarian at most.

This made me think of something. Someone or entity was trying to stop some type of prayer. It was a few or more years ago.. and I do not remember who it was.. I want to say the ACLU though. They were trying to outlaw a certain prayer basically. Forsyth County NC. I also do not know the outcome. But I know it was an issue! I remember watching some things on our local gov channel.



Edit: Ahh found something..

LINK (http://www.interstateq.com/archives/1994/) turns out to be blog like, but still gives the gist.
LINK (http://www.wxii12.com/news/10416274/detail.html#) News story link


(My search was 'prayer outlawed from forsyth county nc' if you are so inclined)

Your editing makes your post much closer to something like what actually happened, but the natural consequence of that is, the ACLU didn't really attack prayer in a general sense.


Suppose a pack of Scientologists showed up at the Department of Motor Vehicles, and stopped the lines so that everyone could do Scientology Auditing. Would you be okay with that?

Lots of us wouldn't. Our government should be handling EVERYBODY's public business, not certain people's religious activities.

/Satire off again

Satire aside, I sympathize.

There really is so much information out there on such a broad range of topics, its hard for anyone to penetrate it perfectly.

I'm honestly sorry if I came at you too rough.

/Satire back on again

No problem.

So was the situation in the link (http://www.wxii12.com/news/10416274/detail.html#) I provided a case where the members of said county weren't allowed to voluntarily disengage?

This is not directed at Cat.. but his post fit my question.

Next time there is a hearing on some public matter important to you, and you take time off work to go participate in your government at a Council Meeting, and they decide to spend time doing Mormon Baptism for the Dead, don't complain or ask questions. Just "voluntarily disengage." You know, leave.

I totally understand what you are saying. My intent in posting what I did was only because I read where congress is supposibly able to pray in what way they want .. but then I remember a situation where county officials were confronted for the same thing? It seemed that way to me. I still need to read the entirety though.

/Satire off again

Satire aside, I sympathize.

There really is so much information out there on such a broad range of topics, its hard for anyone to penetrate it perfectly.

I'm honestly sorry if I came at you too rough.

/Satire back on again

I'm fairly sure my school would have a big problem if I decided to take time during the day to break out some candles and get skyclad. ;)
I'm not Wiccan, and that's nowhere near what I was getting at.

However, the image of naked wiccans dancing around a fire conveys the point just as well. Simply that if you want prayer you can not possibly have non-denominational prayer, you will always descriminate against some religion, and support one or several, over it. Which would be a government support of a religion or religions is it were done by the government.

And if you want to include all religions, just think about that for a moment. Harken back to dancing naked Wiccans, Kemitic animal sacrafice, or perhaps Aztec human sacrafice? do you really want to encourage everyone to pray their own way in places like schools? Would it simply not be better to have them do it on their own time?

I'm not Wiccan, and that's nowhere near what I was getting at.

However, the image of naked wiccans dancing around a fire conveys the point just as well. Simply that if you want prayer you can not possibly have non-denominational prayer, you will always descriminate against some religion, and support one or several, over it. Which would be a government support of a religion or religions is it were done by the government.

And if you want to include all religions, just think about that for a moment. Harken back to dancing naked Wiccans, Kemitic animal sacrafice, or perhaps Aztec human sacrafice? do you really want to encourage everyone to pray their own way in places like schools? Would it simply not be better to have them do it on their own time?



Bah, you and your damn logic. The government is far above such things.

Cock.

Oh, don't be that guy. This is sooooo not the right direction in which to take this thread...

EDIT: Never mind.

Oh, don't be that guy. This is sooooo not the right direction in which to take this thread...

EDIT: Never mind.

You sir, are the sort of guy whose post count is expressible as the square of square.

Earlobe.

I suddenly feel the urge to go out and oppress a few xtians.:mad:

Nah.

Oh and if Texas is considered part of the bible belt, then it produces Satanists as well. (actually a remarkable number of us.)

Suppose a pack of Scientologists showed up at the Department of Motor Vehicles, and stopped the lines so that everyone could do Scientology Auditing. Would you be okay with that?
A better question is would anyone notice the lines being stopped at the DMV?

So, the other night I was hanging out with my friends, some of them are Neo-Pagans and Wiccans. Of course the conversation turns to religion as it always does. Then that leads to us talking about the state of Religion in the United States.

My Pagan and Wiccans friends are tired of the Christians going around claiming that the "liberals" (I'm starting to hate that term and I'm a Libertarian) are oppressing them because they took the 10 commandments out of a court house or a Muslim politician wants to swear on the Koran instead of the Bible.

They are annoyed by this because they wear Pentacles or sign of their faith around their neck, however when they go to work, they have to either put it under their shirts or take it off. The reason being is that they get a bunch of idiots asking idiotic questions or making idiotic statements.

We live in the Baptist Bible Belt, (South East of the United States) and there are more church per town than there is schools. Trust me, the Christians around these parts are not being oppressed. I actually heard one of my classmates talked about how she can't show her cross anymore. I slapped my forehead and turned around. I asked her to look around and see how many people were wearing crosses, we counted 20 out of 30. Then I asked her to point out symbols of other faith. We really only found two. After that she decided to shut up and I went back to my work.

Jack Chick (*pause for groans*) in his cartoons, he shows Christians being told by their boss, wives (It's never the Husband), or whoever to keep the "preaching" down or suffer the consequences. I'd actually have to say that the opposite is true, that the Christians are the one telling the other faith to keep their "preaching" down, because as we know, anything that isn't from the Bible must be the work of the Devil!

So the final word on this is, Christians, you're not being oppressed so shut up and sit down.

Comments?

I thought people had already come to the consesus that Paganism was silly.

I'm a Christian, and I am just fine with not having prayers broadcast over the loudspeaker in school.

I don't discuss my faith with students unless directly asked; I simply say Catholic and move on. Unless there is for some reason a necessity to discuss the religion portrayed in the literature we are discussing (such as: remember when AUTHOR wrote this, it was from the perspective of a person in a time and place when RELIGION was the dominant belief system) it really doesn't come up.

There are all kinds of belief systems in my classroom: who's to judge which is the right one?

There are religious clubs on campus (the Christian club, the Muslim student club, the Jewish club) but the students who join them certainly are not forced to be there -- they're there of their own free choice, and there are many, MANY other clubs in the school that are not in the LEAST religious. (And I've seen kids from one club visit another just to see how the other half lives.)

The most I have ever heard my principal do on the loudspeaker when there has been a catastrophe somewhere is ask that we have a moment of silence for whomever is affected.

isnippet-

The most I have ever heard my principal do on the loudspeaker when there has been a catastrophe somewhere is ask that we have a moment of silence for whomever is affected.


Same here. I was in 7th grade. A school mate, Doug (will with hold all last names in this), had been shot and killed by his younger brother, accidentally of course, during a hunting trip.

All that was mentioned over the intercom was a moment of silence. And then the teachers were to let everyone know that if any of us needed to talk to someone .. head to the guidance office.

Then the preppy little girls that never had absolutely nothing to do with him went on their merry way in order to either get attention or get out of class, while his girl friend, Diane, who wasn't in with the hip chics at all, didn't go. It made me sick at the time.

Looking back tho, I realize we were all kids. It was a very sad situation. I don't hold a real grudge to those who pretended to give a flip. But I remember it .. like it was yesterday.

And my god .. I cannot even begin to imagine what his little brother and parents went through. :(

The most I have ever heard my principal do on the loudspeaker when there has been a catastrophe somewhere is ask that we have a moment of silence for whomever is affected.

I wouldn't even call that religious. I mean, that could be anything from a prayer to even just a quiet moment of reflection.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Christians#Recent_Christian_persecution_in_other_countries

Yes, there is oppression of Christians (and in fact all religious groups who aren't the state religion) going on around the world, but then again all the countries mentioned there have (with maybe the exception of India) dubious human rights records at best, and generally oppression of all forms of freedom of expression, not just religious.

The OP didn't appear to be saying that Christians are never oppressed anywhere, ever, he was saying that in the US (and you could extend this to most of the Western world), Christians are not being oppressed.

Orthodox jews don't care. As far as they're concerned, the jews are the chosen people, nobody else. Why would they want to put their religious codes on secular buildings that are also used by gentiles?

The orthodox jewish mentality is very different than the orthodox christian one.

...do you encounter different Orthodox Jews from the ones I do?

Well, maybe Christians aren't being oppressed in America, but they ARE elsewhere

And NO, I'm NOT acting like a child, and I STILL refuse to "shut up" about it because that's what you WANT me to do, to shut up about Jesus Christ dying, being buried, and rising from the dead.

I will NOT shut up about it. If you don't want to accept it, fine, but DON'T tell me to "shut up".

Despite your claim, most places where Christians are subject to discrimination still treat Christians better than they do Atheists. In fact, even if history shows persecution of Christians, if you examine it closely, it's Christians persecuting Christians for the most part.

The problem is not what Christians are saying about Christ but rather the bemoaning of their so-called "plight" in that they are persecuted. Cry me a river, build a bridge and get over it. Until modern Christians are persecuted on the level that Atheists are, they don't have a leg to stand on.

While Egypt may supposedly discriminate against Christians, for example, it still grants them the same basic human rights. Atheists are denied every single basic human right. That's just one example. Any nation that has supposedly persecuted Christianity will do doubly worst to any Atheist.

There are still many western nations that claim tolerance that still treat Atheists like little shit-faces.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_atheists
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discrimination_against_atheists
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheists_in_foxholes
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boy_Scouts_of_America_membership_controversies

Christians, you're not being oppressed so shut up and sit down.

This.

If someone wants to pray for a school over the speaker and aren't allowed to express their religious belief, thats oppression.

Why? Nothing stops that person from praying for said school in their own time. The speaker system was installed for announcements and the like, not religious functions. If some little attention whore feels slighted because his or her school refused to cooperate with their desired public display of "hear what a good and devout [insert denomination here] I am", that's just the personal problem of a bruised ego. To call that oppression is a folly.

Why? Nothing stops that person from praying for said school in their own time. The speaker system was installed for announcements and the like, not religious functions. If some little attention whore feels slighted because his or her school refused to cooperate with their desired public display of "hear what a good and devout [insert denomination here] I am", that's just the personal problem of a bruised ego. To call that oppression is a folly.

Well said. And much more diplomatically than I would have. :)

Diplomacy is not something found often on this forum. Lots of trolls and flamewars, though. Oh well, you learn to adapt.

Why? Nothing stops that person from praying for said school in their own time. The speaker system was installed for announcements and the like, not religious functions. If some little attention whore feels slighted because his or her school refused to cooperate with their desired public display of "hear what a good and devout [insert denomination here] I am", that's just the personal problem of a bruised ego. To call that oppression is a folly.
Yeah, I find it cute how some Christians think that the following are their inalienable rights:

-The right to have other people listen to you whenever you want
-The right to never get your feelings hurt
-The right to never be argued with, no matter what you say
-The right to "practice your religion" at any time, in any place, and in any manner you feel like, no matter what

Thus, if a Christian isn't allowed to "practice his religion" by praying loudly over a public address system, then he's clearly being oppressed.

Coming to the startling discovery that not everyone on this world is like you and believes the same things you do, is not the same as being oppressed. Get over it.

Coming to the startling discovery that not everyone on this world is like you and believes the same things you do, is not the same as being oppressed. Get over it.
Sure it is! It's an oppressive feeling to find out that not everyone thinks like you and likes the same things as you. Why, that might mean that you're not the center of the universe after all and that's very oppressive! (Yes, tongue is planted firmly in cheek here)

Sure it is! It's an oppressive feeling to find out that not everyone thinks like you and likes the same things as you. Why, that might mean that you're not the center of the universe after all and that's very oppressive! (Yes, tongue is planted firmly in cheek here)

I don't consider people not linking the same things I do nor thinking like I do oppressive. Then again, I'm not very proned to follow the masses. Maybe that makes me an oddball.:D

Of course, going back to the original question, Christianity per se has always been an oppressed and, therefore, oppressive doctrine. I guess their credo could be attack or be attacked in the process. I don't think the term turn in the other cheek applies to most Christians I know. Even to the people who belong to the same congregation the Ecclesiastical authorities oppress them. Take a look at women on the church. Women have been oppressed and misstreated on account of an ancient story where a lady named Eve ate a friggin' apple because a stupid ass named Adam told her to. And to top it off, on account of that, women have been blamed for being kicked out of Paradise. Give me a break!

Despite your claim, most places where Christians are subject to discrimination still treat Christians better than they do Atheists. In fact, even if history shows persecution of Christians, if you examine it closely, it's Christians persecuting Christians for the most part.

The problem is not what Christians are saying about Christ but rather the bemoaning of their so-called "plight" in that they are persecuted. Cry me a river, build a bridge and get over it. Until modern Christians are persecuted on the level that Atheists are, they don't have a leg to stand on.

While Egypt may supposedly discriminate against Christians, for example, it still grants them the same basic human rights. Atheists are denied every single basic human right. That's just one example. Any nation that has supposedly persecuted Christianity will do doubly worst to any Atheist.

There are still many western nations that claim tolerance that still treat Atheists like little shit-faces.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_atheists
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discrimination_against_atheists
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheists_in_foxholes
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boy_Scouts_of_America_membership_controversies

So what you are saying is that because Atheists are prosecuted for their (non)-beliefs more then Christians then it is alright for Christians (or any other religious group) to be prosecuted against

I don't consider people not linking the same things I do nor thinking like I do oppressive. Then again, I'm not very proned to follow the masses. Maybe that makes me an oddball.:D

Of course, going back to the original question, Christianity per se has always been an oppressed and, therefore, oppressive doctrine. I guess their credo could be attack or be attacked in the process. I don't think the term turn in the other cheek applies to most Christians I know. Even to the people who belong to the same congregation the Ecclesiastical authorities oppress them. Take a look at women on the church. Women have been oppressed and misstreated on account of an ancient story where a lady named Eve ate a friggin' apple because a stupid ass named Adam told her to. And to top it off, on account of that, women have been blamed for being kicked out of Paradise. Give me a break!

Actually it was the other way around Eve brought about the problem for Adam. Anyway we all know that women are the cause of bringing pain and suffering into the world look at Pandora and her box

Actually it was the other way around Eve brought about the problem for Adam. Anyway we all know that women are the cause of bringing pain and suffering into the world look at Pandora and her box

Now I am trying to work out if you are being ironic or not, to be honest I cannot tell.

So what you are saying is that because Atheists are prosecuted for their (non)-beliefs more then Christians then it is alright for Christians (or any other religious group) to be prosecuted against

Yes. I think there's a persecutometer somewhere on the interwebs so people know what the score is. Don't tell me you didn't know morality worked on a points system?

I don't give a damn what religion you are christian,jewish,catholic or a suicide bomber just shut the f*ck up about it.I personaly htink religion is a waste of time but it is good to belive in something.

Perhaps not, however, you can easily forgive them their belief that they are. In any position of dominance, the slightest imposition can seem to prefigure oppression; notably for believers in a religion whose peculiar role in the west is being eroded, and whose sense of oppression is fabricated and aggravated by an alarmist lower media.

So what you are saying is that because Atheists are prosecuted for their (non)-beliefs more then Christians then it is alright for Christians (or any other religious group) to be prosecuted against

I'd like to know of a single person in the united states who has been prosecuted for his religious beliefs...

Do Christians face religious persecution in some countries? Yes, along with other religious groups as well.

But this bullshit about Christians being persecuted in the US simply did not exist prior to the end of the Reagan administration and the beginning of the so-called "culture wars," which are nothing but a movement for political power and to use religion as a benchmark for social status.

There is absolutely nothing religious about the "religious freedoms" being claimed by those who complain about persecution against Christians. It is never a matter of actually practicing the religion or of being denied rights to work, buy property, travel freely, associate freely, publish opinions, etc, because of the religion. Rather, it is always a matter of wanting to enshrine their religion as the official belief of the US, in direct contradiction to the US Constitution. It is always about public religious displays in courthouses and government buildings, about religious practice in public schools, about public acknowledgement of their holidays (and no one else's), etc.

Well, I remember a line from the Christian Bible - something about rendering unto Ceasar that which is Ceasar's and rendering unto the Lord that which is the Lord's. You know what that implies to me, poor benighted polytheist that I am? It implies that NOT EVERYTHING IS THE LORD'S CONCERN. Some things really ARE secular, and government business is one of those things. The US constitutional separation of church and state is based precisely on that principle -- that secular business and religious business are two different things, and it is bad for both if they get mixed together.

Personally, I think opening Congress's day with prayer (of any denomination) is a waste of time, has nothing to do with their work, and should not be done. I not only think that "under God" has no place in the US Pledge of Allegiance, I also think the Pledge of Allegiance has no place anywhere except in swearing-in of elected officials, enlistment of military personnel, and citizenship ceremonies for new citizens. I do not think it is the proper role of public schools to be extracting oaths of national allegiance from little children, just as I do not think it is the proper role of public schools to act like religious clergy and take any steps whatsoever in regard to other people's children's souls.

And finally, I do wish that some people would develop a little self-awareness and realize that it is not a huge injustice that the whole world does not revolve around them personally. It is my fervent wish that certain people could just learn to pay their taxes, bring their lawsuits, study their classes, get to frigging work, do a thousand other things that people do in life, without demanding constant reassurances that their religion is in the front of the mind of every bureaucrat or shop clerk they deal with. In other words, stop using their religion to make themselves the constant center of attention.

Isn't it enough that their god cares about them? Why do I have to care, too?

I'd like to know of a single person in the united states who has been prosecuted for his religious beliefs...

Joseph Smith

So what you are saying is that because Atheists are prosecuted for their (non)-beliefs more then Christians then it is alright for Christians (or any other religious group) to be prosecuted against

Way to completely miss the point.

My point is that Christians can say that they are oppressed all they want but in the end,l they are still not as persecuted as say Atheists in a nation like Egypt, where conversion from Islam to Christianity is pretty much illegal, though being a Christian is legal.

And yes, it's perfectly fine to PROSECUTE Christians and pretty much anyone (in the sense of the law). The word that you're looking for is PERSECUTE.

In Britain the Oppressed are: (in no particular order)

The White Working Class

The Middle Class

Christians (esp CofE and Methodists)

The Law Abiding MAjority who want to Protect their Property

The Population of the Countryside.

Ok now for your next big trick state how

I am Christian and I am oppressed by certain loudmouthed Christians who feel entitled to speak in the name of all Christianity, and whom I'd like to thank for giving this faith such reputation that saying "I am Christian" feels a bit like "I screw little boys".

In Britain the Oppressed are: (in no particular order)

The White Working Class

The Middle Class

Christians (esp CofE and Methodists)

The Law Abiding MAjority who want to Protect their Property

The Population of the Countryside.

*snip*

Finally, some level-headed perspective!

Joseph Smith

zing!

Joseph Smith

I should have added "in the last 100 years"

Actually it was the other way around Eve brought about the problem for Adam. Anyway we all know that women are the cause of bringing pain and suffering into the world look at Pandora and her boxNo, we're not, or at least not alone in it. Men are equally guilty, you also ate off the apple!!:mad:
And since the church is more of a patriarchy than anything else, men have committed the worst sins too (Crusades, Inquisition, Wars in the name of God, perverted Church officials). Who the heck wrote the Maellus Maleficarum, a witch hunting book? Men, because we women weren't allowed to read or write in the Middle Ages. To say more, there's a Church saying that a husband must not let his wife grow long hair nor keep it lose because a woman's hair is the rope with which the Devil climbs to tempt mankind. Men have oppressed women as much as Religion's being the cause of the worst crimes in humanity's history.It's good no one is taking a fable seriously...

Actually it was the other way around Eve brought about the problem for Adam. Anyway we all know that women are the cause of bringing pain and suffering into the world look at Pandora and her box

No, we're not, or at least not alone in it. Men are equally guilty, you also ate off the apple!!:mad:
And since the church is more of a patriarchy than anything else, men have committed the worst sins too (Crusades, Inquisition, Wars in the name of God, perverted Church officials). Who the heck wrote the Maellus Maleficarum, a witch hunting book? Men, because we women weren't allowed to read or write in the Middle Ages. To say more, there's a Church saying that a husband must not let his wife grow long hair nor keep it lose because a woman's hair is the rope with which the Devil climbs to tempt mankind. Men have oppressed women as much as Religion's being the cause of the worst crimes in humanity's history.

No, we're not, or at least not alone in it. Men are equally guilty, you also ate off the apple!!:mad:
And since the church is more of a patriarchy than anything else, men have committed the worst sins too (Crusades, Inquisition, Wars in the name of God, perverted Church officials). Who the heck wrote the Maellus Maleficarum, a witch hunting book? Men, because we women weren't allowed to read or write in the Middle Ages. To say more, there's a Church saying that a husband must not let his wife grow long hair nor keep it lose because a woman's hair is the rope with which the Devil climbs to tempt mankind. Men have oppressed women as much as Religion's being the cause of the worst crimes in humanity's history.

Who takes that adam and eve story seriously anyway?
There's been loads of stuff in the bible that oppresses women and just about half the rest of the world too, it's out of date.
You just had to change the debate about feminism didn't you?
oh no, not again.
Incidently did you know that Peter the Great introduced a Tax in Russia which taxes them on the size of their beards? (well i thought it was funny)

Incidently did you know that Peter the Great introduced a Tax in Russia which taxes them on the size of their beards? (well i thought it was funny)

Taxed whom? Women? :eek:

Who takes that adam and eve story seriously anyway?
There's been loads of stuff in the bible that oppresses women and just about half the rest of the world too, it's out of date.
You just had to change the debate about feminism didn't you?
oh no, not again.
Incidently did you know that Peter the Great introduced a Tax in Russia which taxes them on the size of their beards? (well i thought it was funny)

I'm too tired to continue arguing with you, Mad Hatters;). And no, I wasn't trying to turn this debate into a femenist issue. Far from it. My aim was to state that the Church is an oppressed and oppressive organism (Religion), so, I used the state of women in it.
As for the Peter the Great fact, WTF? A tax for the size of a man's beard? Friggin' Russia.

As for the Peter the Great fact, WTF? A tax for the size of a man's beard? Friggin' Russia.It was meant to oppress the Orthodox Christians and make them more western. Primarily, Peter wanted to break the tradition of growing a long beard because he thought it made the Russians look backward.

Taxed whom? Women? :eek:

No men you...ah my mistake bad grammar and all that. funny though.

I'm too tired to continue arguing with you, Mad Hatters;). And no, I wasn't trying to turn this debate into a femenist issue. Far from it. My aim was to state that the Church is an oppressed and oppressive orgasm (Religion), so, I used the state of women in it.
As for the Peter the Great fact, WTF? A tax for the size of a man's beard? Friggin' Russia.

Oh right, Peter the Great did that because it was the style in the upper and middle class men to grow longer beards, thus he could make more money. and what Laerod said.
There's many innovative ways to tax people, but no one can agree how it should be spent, oh the irony.
I almost read it as. (well see your edited quote in bolded part)

If some one wants to wish someone a merry Christmas and aren't allowed to for religious reasons, that oppression. If someone wants to pray for a school over the speaker and aren't allowed to express their religious belief, thats oppression. And if someone wants to pledge to a country which they feel is protected by God and wants to say so but can't, again oppression.


I say, before anybody can claim special rights for Christianity they should take the following test :

http://russellsteapot.com/images/comics/2007/Image072.jpg

No men you...ah my mistake bad grammar and all that. funny though.


Yeah I know, I just couldn't resist ;)

Interesting. I never knew that being a true Christian grants you immunity against deadly poisons. But since it's in the Bible, I guess there's no harm in asking those who are in Christ to drink poison. If they drop dead, they never were true believers anyway and any complaints from the recently deceased about being oppressed because of their faith are therefore nullified. If they refuse to drink the poison, they're not a Christian at all.

"Help! Help! I'm being repressed! Come see the violence inherent in the system! Come see the violence inherent in the system!"

"Bloody Christian!"

"Oh! Did you hear that? That's a dead giveaway!"

Interesting. I never knew that being a true Christian grants you immunity against deadly poisons. But since it's in the Bible, I guess there's no harm in asking those who are in Christ to drink poison. If they drop dead, they never were true believers anyway and any complaints from the recently deceased about being oppressed because of their faith are therefore nullified. If they refuse to drink the poison, they're not a Christian at all.

Fool-proof, really :D

Interesting. I never knew that being a true Christian grants you immunity against deadly poisons. But since it's in the Bible, I guess there's no harm in asking those who are in Christ to drink poison. If they drop dead, they never were true believers anyway and any complaints from the recently deceased about being oppressed because of their faith are therefore nullified. If they refuse to drink the poison, they're not a Christian at all.

Diamond Body? Monks get that at level 11.

RhynoDD;13503517']Diamond Body? Monks get that at level 11.

Or you could just take some levels of Ninja and get Poison Use.

RhynoDD;13503593']So it's settled! All Christians get 11 levels of monk and a few levels of ninja. Dilemma solved.

a few appear to get Raise Dead as well...

RhynoDD;13503593']So it's settled! All Christians get 11 levels of monk and a few levels of ninja. Dilemma solved.

This thread is like a FF Tactics game!:eek:

It was meant to oppress the Orthodox Christians and make them more western. Primarily, Peter wanted to break the tradition of growing a long beard because he thought it made the Russians look backward.

It was less oppression and more trying to get the nation to be recognized as a legitimate power. Up until this point Russia was viewed (correctly) as an assbackwards, underdeveloped country of no particular value. He did his at a time when the nobles were still bitching about the serfs being freed, and the people themselves were worshiping strange pagan religions that popped up all over Siberia.

The story of Russia: remain backwards and undeveloped until some dictator forces them to do in 5 years what took the rest of the world several decades, usually at the cost of many lives.

Or you could just take some levels of Ninja and get Poison Use.
So it's settled! All Christians get 11 levels of monk and a few levels of ninja. Dilemma solved.

In Britain the Oppressed are: (in no particular order)

...

Christians (esp CofE and Methodists)

Yes, that's why the Church of England control a third of state-schools, why all schools are obliged to hold a 'daily act of collective worship of a Christian nature' which it is actually obligatory for children to take part in unless their parents give them a note, why most state schools teach Christian mythology as truth, why state funds support the CofE, why blasphemy is still a criminal offence in the 21st century and why their most senior bishops get automatic, unelected places in the House of Lords. :rolleyes:

If this is oppression then I would LOVE to be oppressed. Seriously, many Atheist parents can't even send their children to the local school because it's been reserved for the children of religionists, and then the religionists have the nerve to scream persecution! Hypocrites the lot of them.

Yes. Yes it is. You are right.

On a similar note, though, I think a student should be allowed to quietly pray to him or herself, though, but kids have gotten in trouble for doing that.


Source?

America is a wondrous land where everyone can practice the faith they wish and then complain when others choose not to.

What I find interesting is that people actually being oppressed in the US rarely talk about it. Right now, the most marginalized group I can think of is the poor: not Christians, not liberals, not blacks, women, gays, etc., just people who don't have enough money. I never hear them talking about their rights being ignored.

(But I do note that racism, sexism, etc. are significant and occur separately from discrimination against the poor.)
That's very true; I don't mean to say that those problems don't exist. But at least the US government is nominally anti-sexist, anti-racist, etc. It's not as politically incorrect to disenfranchise poor people.

America is a wondrous land where everyone can practice the faith they wish and then complain when others choose not to.

What I find interesting is that people actually being oppressed in the US rarely talk about it. Right now, the most marginalized group I can think of is the poor: not Christians, not liberals, not blacks, women, gays, etc., just people who don't have enough money. I never hear them talking about their rights being ignored.

SSHHHHH!! Class is the dirty little secret we don't talk about in the U.S.

(But I do note that racism, sexism, etc. are significant and occur separately from discrimination against the poor.)

there aren't that many Christians left anyway. Like those "Christian" people who support the war? that is wild! you can't do both. Thou shalt not kill! there was no comma after that. real followers of Jesus would MUCH rather be oppressed then sell out to the horrible things that are commonplace in our modern world.

This made me think of something. Someone or entity was trying to stop some type of prayer. It was a few or more years ago.. and I do not remember who it was.. I want to say the ACLU though. They were trying to outlaw a certain prayer basically. Forsyth County NC. I also do not know the outcome. But I know it was an issue! I remember watching some things on our local gov channel.


LINK (http://www.wxii12.com/news/10416274/detail.html#) News story link



Read the article. It doesn't even remotely match your claim.

I'd like to know of a single person in the united states who has been prosecuted for his religious beliefs...

The closest I can come are some Pagan parents who've had their religion used against them in custody battles.

a few appear to get Raise Dead as well...

Only the ones who take the Messiah prestige class.

America is a wondrous land where everyone can practice the faith they wish and then complain when others choose not to.

What I find interesting is that people actually being oppressed in the US rarely talk about it. Right now, the most marginalized group I can think of is the poor: not Christians, not liberals, not blacks, women, gays, etc., just people who don't have enough money. I never hear them talking about their rights being ignored.

That's because they can't afford Megaphones.

I personaly htink religion is a waste of time but it is good to belive in something.

So what you're saying is that it's good to believe in a waste of time. Yeah, that makes sense. Your spelling could use a bit of improvement, by the way.