It’s times like these I’m reminded to send a renewed thanks to our future Senate leader Chuck Schumer and his war profiteering sidekick Dianne Feinstein for giving the gift of this Supreme Court to America. You deserve our unending gratitude.
3 Likes
Lol, people still blame Nader? Grow up.
2 Likes
Forget Bush, and please refrain from the “Bush won Florida” myth. The state was given to Shrub in a ‘first time in the history of the USA’ by the SCOTUS, who took the case away from the FL Supremes before even being asked. Again, that has never happened before. The job of SCOTUS is to wait for a lawsuit to come to them, then they decide whether to hear it, or let the lower court ruling stand.
I urge everyone to read The Betrayal of America: How the Supreme Court Undermined the Constitution and Chose Our President by Vincent Bugliosi.
The five committed treason, and never even went to trial for it.
5 Likes
I can imagine it’s possible that 50% of Nader voters would have stayed home, I really don’t believe that the remainder would have split their votes evenly between Bush and Gore.
2 Likes
You’re obviously new here. The Ghost is our revered Sahib of Snark.
Fish on!!!
1 Like
I rest my case.
6 Catholic men
3 Jewish women
Representative government, no, unrepresentative even for the Theocratic Oligarchy it is. If I were King, no one would be able to use anything that was made using science if they did not believe in all the science involved. Which is just about everything we touch. Other than that I would require every citizen to vote in every political election they could. Read this book, Image There’s No Heaven–How atheism Helped Create The Modern World, it shows the correlation between scientific advancement and periods where skeptics were tolerated and occasionally respected. We are in one of those periods that has been expanding throughout the history of our country, but one surely would not know it if their only view of the USA were the self reported beliefs of our representatives.
An alternative title could have been Scientists Get The Shaft
1 Like
I deny that premise. Quotation marks do not make the absence of prayer an exercise of anything.
1 Like
When we are asked to pray and do not bow our heads and close our eyes, that most definitely is exercising our belief that we do not believe in prayer. Our beliefs constitute our religion, and our actions prove more about what we believe than our words or self reported religious affiliation. Removing the quotes and the italization from JacksonSquire’s post does not change the meaning of that post for me.
1 Like
You make a huge mistaken assumption that everyone has beliefs. I do not believe. I do not practice religion. When I do not pray, it means nothing. Believers believe. I do not, and I am not the only one. Many like myself use reason, logic, and working hypothesis as a means to understand the world, and see no necessity for any kind of belief. I greatly dislike it when atheism is described as a belief system, and that all atheists are believers in non-belief, or some such nonsense. If you want to believe, fine. But don’t assume that everyone believes something, or anything. Many do not.
ETA: Some will say, “Well, don’t you believe that the Earth orbits the Sun?” or “Since you’re an atheist, don’t you believe that God does not exist?” My answer: In the case of the Sun, we have direct awareness and scientific knowledge of it’s existence. I know the Sun exists, or at least have reason to accept the hypothesis that it exists as described by scientists. As for the existence of “God”, I simply have no knowledge that such an entity as described in religious traditions exists. I haven’t seen or heard one directly or indirectly, and have not been privy to any kind of reasonable evidence that any such beings exist. Belief never enters into it.
4 Likes
Not just bigotry…illegal discrimination. Anti-discrimination laws defend “sincerely held religious belief”, and precedent has established that even the refusal to believe in an organized religion is a creed that must be protected. I hope the folks shut out by this lame-brained rule take the whole town to court and flog it through the damn streets…
1 Like
So wait until the town board rejects an applicant for the opening invocation based on “established presence”, then take them back to court with proof of discrimination.
1 Like
Religious people suck . . . . .
The Court agrees. Catholicism is the one, true religion.
Tough loss for the Baptists.
1 Like
“…that regularly meet for the primary purpose of sharing a religious perspective…”
And how do we know this isn’t taxpayer funding of facilities to be used by a bunch of religious people with a “perspective” for political action?
I mean, I don’t see myself paying taxes for that, frankly on religious grounds, because a lot of these conservative shysters with their hands out aren’t “sharing” experiences. They’re swapping dollars using the taxpayer’s dime.
1 Like
That was a fabulous book and I totally agree
When you make the statement, “I do not believe.”, you are making a huge mistake in the scientific meaning of belief.
Answer me this, when you take a step walking on what you believe to be a flat, hard ground, do you believe your foot will hit the ground and stop you from falling through it? Am I making the huge assumption that you do indeed believe these things?
Do you believe you have no beliefs? Your mind’s construct of reality is overflowing with beliefs. Unless you believe I posted the above questions you cannot answer them; for you they do not exist. Reality and Beliefs are co-dependent. If you are an atheist then I assume you believe there is no proof supporting the existence of God(s). You are mistaking beliefs for a subset of beliefs. You are not alone, many scientists claim they are skeptical of everything. Yet they move for some reason.
Many scientists say they believe in God. Many because it is the political position they pretend to keep from being ostracized, for others they reason that something must have started everything. I believe I know almost nothing real. Yet I believe what I perceive to be out there while simultaneously believing I cannot see most of what is out there. What and Who do you believe? Who? Who? Who? Who?
1 Like
Another determined effort to bring a theocracy to this country. This is nothing, wait until we get an adherent of Christian Dominionism in power at the presidential level such as one Ted Cruz. Then we will see harsh reality on par with any of the Islamist countries.
2 Likes
A sorta joke reply.
When a person starts to say a prayer as part of a public meeting, non believers should bury it with by coincidently expressing their disgust with wasting their time with prayers. Amen. Awomen.
I have always said that belief-centered individuals lack the ability to understand that a human mind can operate completely free of beliefs and belief systems, because their belief-dependent psyches can’t believe it.
You are completely wrong. It is you who does not understand the meaning of belief, as I will illustrate with my comments below:
When I walk on ground that I can perceive with my senses, logic and reason, (either directly, or through indirect examination, maps or geological survey, past personal experience with ground, etc.) to be flat, hard ground, I have a reasonable expectation that my foot will hit the ground and stop me from falling through. Belief does not enter into it.
Yes, you have made a huge assumption, and indeed you are mistaken.
Of course not. I do not believe. Since I am intimately familiar with my own mind and thoughts, I know that I do not believe. I understand that this is a very difficult concept for some believers to grasp.
Of course not! I have knowledge that a comment was posted, or at least that it appears that way on my computer monitor, and I have a reasonable expectation that it does exist. I do not believe you posted anything, I can see it for myself, and therefore I do not believe, I know. And even if knowing is not possible, I can have a reasonable expectation based upon my personal understanding of internet communications, and, at the least, a * working hypothesis that the comment exists*, and that another person was indeed responsible for it. Belief does not ever enter into it.
Wrong. Reality and beliefs can be completely independent, and reality is not dependent upon beliefs in any way. You don’t need to believe in water for it to exist. Reality is independent of assumptions.
Again, you assume wrongly. I do not believe, because I am not a believer. I have seen no evidence that a “God” exists. There is a difference between believing, knowing and not knowing. I know that I have not seen (or at least not comprehended or been aware of) evidence of the existence of a “God”. Again, belief does not enter into it in any form.
No one, of course. Because (here it comes…) I am not a believer.
Example: If my wife says to me, “Dinner’s ready”, do I believe her? No, of course not. However, I do have a reasonable expectation that what she is telling me is a truthful statement, based upon my past personal experience observing the accuracy and truthfulness of her statements over time, and the aroma of food in the air. It’s a working hypothesis that my wife is honest and does not lie to me. However, that is not a belief, it is a reasonable hypothesis based upon observation.
Face it. You believe. You also believe that everyone else believes. Which illustrates a very important point about beliefs: They can be absolutely wrong and without logic or reason or any supporting evidence. You may not believe that I do not believe. Regardless, it’s true, and no belief of yours or anyone else can change that fact.
2 Likes