Why atheists, Satanists, heathens, etc can't be Americans or Westerners

[Geeko Sportivo]

The Common Law in the US is based off of "religious" morality and values.

For example, not only rape, murder and things of that nature "sins" in Christianty and world religions, but are also "crimes" under "secular" law; with "secular law" having developed or evolved out of older religious and legal systems, such as Roman, Exodus, and so on.

An atheist, for example, can't have any objection to murder, rape and things of that nature except on faith, or on stealing and appropriating those moral values and axioms from world religions (much as degenerate heathen "religions" and cults such as "Satanism" have no morality to speak of which is compatible with that that of law, society and so forth).

So yes, I'd argue based on these facts, state and federal can and should, indeed favor Christianity (and monotheistic, world religion with compatible values) both in public and private over inferior and socially unacceptable trash such as atheism, Satanism and so forth, rather than pretending that such filth and worthlessness is in anyway "equal" to them, when it is decidedly inferior, and has no right to exist it all.

Dude, God is just Fake News unless you have some proof that a God exists.

We'll wait for you to prove it, but we will understand if you can't!

I suppose you are as mad at and hate those who do not believe in Santa Clause, the Easter Bunny, and the Tooth fairy as well!

It's OK, we understand you are just an old fart religious eccentric bigot!

[MarcusA]

Dude, God is just Fake News unless you have some proof that a God exists.

"Proof" as defined by your nonsensical terms, sure.

We'll wait for you to prove it, but we will understand if you can't!

I suppose you are as mad at and hate those who do not believe in Santa Clause, the Easter Bunny, and the Tooth fairy as well!

It's OK, we understand you are just an old fart religious eccentric bigot!

Yawn, just another idiot conflating simplistic icongraphic imagry and symbolism, perhaps akin to Carl Jung's archetypes to God, which isn't depictable with imagry to begin with.

Simplistic images, whether "ghosts, goblins, flying spaghetti monsters" are just what atheists and simple, heathen people picture and imagine like they always have, akin to whatever silly media characters or "celebrities" and their silly, mythical, and rather fictitious and childishly simplistic notions of them are to begin with, as opposed to God, of course, which is transcendent, intangible, and not able to be depicted with simplistic images to begin with.

[jacksonsprat22]

"Proof" as defined by your nonsensical terms, sure.


Yawn, just another idiot conflating simplistic icongraphic imagry and symbolism, perhaps akin to Carl Jung's archetypes to God, which isn't depictable with imagry to begin with.

Simplistic images, whether "ghosts, goblins, flying spaghetti monsters" are just what atheists and simple, heathen people picture and imagine like they always have, akin to whatever silly media characters or "celebrities" and their silly, mythical, and rather fictitious and childishly simplistic notions of them are to begin with, as opposed to God, of course, which is transcendent, intangible, and not able to be depicted with simplistic images to begin with.

So, your God is a god of hatred.

[MarcusA]

So, your God is a god of hatred.

Hatred of evil? Why is that "bad".

Even in the Old Testmant, it was forbidden to make a graven image of God, like those of "heathens" whose pagan "gods" were simply akin to powerful "mortals", probably more akin to TV celebrities and the superstitious ways in which idiotic voyeurs fictitiously imagine and idolize them.

On the other hand, God as in the Supreme Being of the Cosmos was transcendent, unable to be depicted with the imagery and simplistic of the childish and simple-minded atheist or heathen. (Much as even in the days of the Medieval Church, images of God were not said to be "God" himself, but merely depictions of God for those who were not literate).

So no, simplistic imagery, or Jungian archetypes like "ghosts, goblins, flying spaghetti monsters", and ugly and inferior little things of that nature are merely the property of the atheist, the heathen, and comparatively simplistic, materialistic, and unenlightened rabble.

God, on the flip side, the Supreme Being or Principle of all the Universe, so infinite, like mathematics, that it could never be depicted in words or symbolism which a mere simpleton could comprehend to begin with.

[ThatOwlWoman]

The Common Law in the US is based off of "religious" morality and values.

For example, not only rape, murder and things of that nature "sins" in Christianty and world religions, but are also "crimes" under "secular" law; with "secular law" having developed or evolved out of older religious and legal systems, such as Roman, Exodus, and so on.

An atheist, for example, can't have any objection to murder, rape and things of that nature except on faith, or on stealing and appropriating those moral values and axioms from world religions (much as degenerate heathen "religions" and cults such as "Satanism" have no morality to speak of which is compatible with that that of law, society and so forth).

So yes, I'd argue based on these facts, state and federal can and should, indeed favor Christianity (and monotheistic, world religion with compatible values) both in public and private over inferior and socially unacceptable trash such as atheism, Satanism and so forth, rather than pretending that such filth and worthlessness is in anyway "equal" to them, when it is decidedly inferior, and has no right to exist it all.

Oh look! Father FoxTrump has sent us yet another prophet to explain why we're all so stupid except for him!

[jacksonsprat22]

Oh look! Father FoxTrump has sent us yet another prophet to explain why we're all so stupid except for him!

Yes.

[Guno צְבִי]

Oh really?

An atheist can't have any objection to rape, murder, or other immoral acts by virtue of some "lack of belief in a God".

He can only steal or culturally appropriate those moral axioms from religion, of course.

So yes, a monotheistic religion which prohibits rape and murder as immoral, is decidedly more compatible and acceptable with our Law than a weak and effeminate little atheist who has no morality to speak of beyond that perhaps of a beast, or what he has stolen from his moral and religious superiors.

so a failed dead man god on two sticks is your source of morality, oy vey goyim

[StoneByStone]

The Common Law in the US is based off of "religious" morality and values.

Actually, they're based on the morality of the Enlightenment, which was a departure from religion. Western values generally go against Christianity. For example, Christianity permits slavery, but slavery is considered wrong in Western Civilization.

[MarcusA]

Actually, they're based on the morality of the Enlightenment, which was a departure from religion. Western values generally go against Christianity. For example, Christianity permits slavery, but slavery is considered wrong in Western Civilization.

Bogus, slavery was favored by Enlightenment figures like Voltaire, when individuals like Jesus had been arguing for peace between Samaritans and Jews centuries before.

The Enlightenment was not a "departure from religion", it was simply an intellectual movement which separated from the Medieval Church, there's no such thing as an "Enlightenment value" which wasn't rooted in "religion", or an establishment of "new religious movements" of some variety or another.

Just as how every ill which one rallies against or associates with "religion" was perpetuated by Enlightenment figures such as the racist Voltaire, for example.

[StoneByStone]

Bogus, slavery was favored by Enlightenment figures like Voltaire, when individuals like Jesus had been arguing for peace between Samaritans and Jews centuries before.

Voltaire was against slavery. I have no idea where you heard the opposite, since this is pretty well-known.
Jesus never condemned slavery, despite it being taught in his religion and being common in his country. Now that doesn't necessarily mean he thought slavery was ok, but considering he said that the Jewish laws still stand, he was likely fine with it.

there's no such thing as an "Enlightenment value" which wasn't rooted in "religion", or an establishment of "new religious movements" of some variety or another.

Of course there were! Freedom of speech, freedom of religion, Democracy, equality before the law, pretty much all of the Enlightenment values are rooted in Ancient Greece. And yeah, the Ancient Greeks were Pagan, but these were considered secular values among the Greeks, even if some of them believed they pleased the gods.

[Blackwater Lunchbreak]

Voltaire was against slavery. I have no idea where you heard the opposite, since this is pretty well-known.
Jesus never condemned slavery, despite it being taught in his religion and being common in his country. Now that doesn't necessarily mean he thought slavery was ok, but considering he said that the Jewish laws still stand, he was likely fine with it.



Of course there were! Freedom of speech, freedom of religion, Democracy, equality before the law, pretty much all of the Enlightenment values are rooted in Ancient Greece. And yeah, the Ancient Greeks were Pagan, but these were considered secular values among the Greeks, even if some of them believed they pleased the gods.

he said the old laws were void, that he was the fulfillment of the law. he got in trouble for harvesting on the sabbath.

stop being such a jew.

[StoneByStone]

he said the old laws were void, that he was the fulfillment of the law. he got in trouble for harvesting on the sabbath.

stop being such a jew.

He never said the old laws were void, he said they will stand to the end of time.

[Blackwater Lunchbreak]

He never said the old laws were void, he said they will stand to the end of time.

not really. he was weasel wording.

[StoneByStone]

not really. he was weasel wording.

Not sure how it's weasel wording to say that the old laws will stand to the end of time. That's pretty straight forward.
But then again, he was a Jew.

[Blackwater Lunchbreak]

Not sure how it's weasel wording to say that the old laws will stand to the end of time. That's pretty straight forward.
But then again, he was a Jew.

except it's all wrong. he was bullshitting Pharisees at the time. you believed it, dumb jew. Christ makes your religion invalid, sorry.