| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Khartoum" |
| Date: |
03 Sep 2004 09:20:55 PM |
| Object: |
Elizabeth Dole |
While on a business trip this week I was flipping the channels and stopped
briefly on the Republican convention. Elizabeth Dole was speaking and the
only part I stayed for was the quote below. I was so f*cking angry that I
unplugged the T.V until after the convention was over.
She said "The Constitution guarantees freedom of religion, not freedom from
religion."
I got back in town tonight and decided to read the quote in context. I am
not angry now, but I am sadly realizing that possibly the majority of
Americans agree with this crank ***** (possibly still a little angry).
Perhaps she could explain how you can have freedom of religion without
having freedom from religion
Full speech can be read here:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A50426-2004Aug31.html
--
***********************************************
Khartoum aa#2110
EAC Director of Subversive Horticulture
Isn't it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without
having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too?
~Douglas Adams
.
|
|
| User: "Dale" |
|
| Title: Re: Elizabeth Dole |
04 Sep 2004 01:01:47 AM |
|
|
"Khartoum" <KhartoumNOSPAM@insightbb.com> wrote in message
news:bE9_c.4136$Wv5.691@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
While on a business trip this week I was flipping the channels and stopped
briefly on the Republican convention. Elizabeth Dole was speaking and the
only part I stayed for was the quote below. I was so f*cking angry that I
unplugged the T.V until after the convention was over.
She said "The Constitution guarantees freedom of religion, not freedom
from
religion."
I got back in town tonight and decided to read the quote in context. I am
not angry now, but I am sadly realizing that possibly the majority of
Americans agree with this crank ***** (possibly still a little angry).
Perhaps she could explain how you can have freedom of religion without
having freedom from religion
Full speech can be read here:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A50426-2004Aug31.html
What she really wishes is "The Constitution guarantees freedom of
denomination, not freedom from religion."
.
|
|
|
| User: "quibbler" |
|
| Title: ***** Lizzy Dole with a telephone pole. |
04 Sep 2004 07:36:03 PM |
|
|
In article <fTc_c.16809$rJ2.298@newssvr22.news.prodigy.com>,
dmgreer@nspm.airmail.net says...
What she really wishes is "The Constitution guarantees freedom of
denomination, not freedom from religion."
Lizzy Dolt is just trying to play the religious bigotry card. Ever
since Bob started getting his mojo from a bottle I think Lizzy been
screaming a lot about god in bed.
--
Quibbler (quibbler247atyahoo.com)
"It is fashionable to wax apocalyptic about the
threat to humanity posed by the AIDS virus, 'mad cow'
disease, and many others, but I think a case can be
made that faith is one of the world's great evils,
comparable to the smallpox virus but harder to
eradicate." -- Richard Dawkins
.
|
|
|
| User: "Khartoum" |
|
| Title: Re: ***** Lizzy Dole with a telephone pole. |
04 Sep 2004 10:16:31 PM |
|
|
quibbler <quibbler247@yahoo.com> wrote in news:MPG.1ba40d5a616fdb7c9898f1
@news.individual.net:
In article <fTc_c.16809$rJ2.298@newssvr22.news.prodigy.com>,
dmgreer@nspm.airmail.net says...
What she really wishes is "The Constitution guarantees freedom of
denomination, not freedom from religion."
Lizzy Dolt is just trying to play the religious bigotry card. Ever
since Bob started getting his mojo from a bottle I think Lizzy been
screaming a lot about god in bed.
Innocent look/
Is that why Bob is always holding a pen in his left hand and shaking it?
--
***********************************************
Khartoum aa#2110
EAC Director of Subversive Horticulture
Isn't it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without
having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too?
~Douglas Adams
.
|
|
|
| User: "quibbler" |
|
| Title: Re: ***** Lizzy Dole with a telephone pole. |
05 Sep 2004 01:16:44 PM |
|
|
In article <jyv_c.6816$Wv5.6039@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net>,
KhartoumNOSPAM@insightbb.com says...
quibbler <quibbler247@yahoo.com> wrote in news:MPG.1ba40d5a616fdb7c9898f1
@news.individual.net:
In article <fTc_c.16809$rJ2.298@newssvr22.news.prodigy.com>,
dmgreer@nspm.airmail.net says...
What she really wishes is "The Constitution guarantees freedom of
denomination, not freedom from religion."
Lizzy Dolt is just trying to play the religious bigotry card. Ever
since Bob started getting his mojo from a bottle I think Lizzy been
screaming a lot about god in bed.
Innocent look/
Is that why Bob is always holding a pen in his left hand and shaking it?
Probably little bobby isn't much thicker than a ballpoint pen.
--
Quibbler (quibbler247atyahoo.com)
"It is fashionable to wax apocalyptic about the
threat to humanity posed by the AIDS virus, 'mad cow'
disease, and many others, but I think a case can be
made that faith is one of the world's great evils,
comparable to the smallpox virus but harder to
eradicate." -- Richard Dawkins
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: Elizabeth Dole |
04 Sep 2004 08:21:51 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 04 Sep 2004 06:01:47 +0000 in episode
<fTc_c.16809$rJ2.298@newssvr22.news.prodigy.com> we saw our hero "Dale"
<dmgreer@nspm.airmail.net>:
"Khartoum" <KhartoumNOSPAM@insightbb.com> wrote in message
news:bE9_c.4136$Wv5.691@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
While on a business trip this week I was flipping the channels and
stopped briefly on the Republican convention. Elizabeth Dole was
speaking and the only part I stayed for was the quote below. I was so
f*cking angry that I unplugged the T.V until after the convention was
over.
She said "The Constitution guarantees freedom of religion, not freedom
from
religion."
I got back in town tonight and decided to read the quote in context. I
am not angry now, but I am sadly realizing that possibly the majority of
Americans agree with this crank ***** (possibly still a little angry).
Perhaps she could explain how you can have freedom of religion without
having freedom from religion
Full speech can be read here:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A50426-2004Aug31.html
What she really wishes is "The Constitution guarantees freedom of
denomination, not freedom from religion."
Once they get that through, it'll become:
"The Constitution guarantees freedom of correcting the heretics, not
freedom from correction. Where are my matches?"
--
Mark K. Bilbo - a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
Alt-atheism website at: http://www.alt-atheism.org
-----------------------------------------------------------
"Being surprised at the fact that the universe
is fine tuned for life is akin to a puddle being
surprised at how well it fits its hole"
-- Douglas Adams
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "quibbler" |
|
| Title: Re: Elizabeth Dole |
03 Sep 2004 11:39:22 PM |
|
|
In article <bE9_c.4136$Wv5.691@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net>,
KhartoumNOSPAM@insightbb.com says...
She said "The Constitution guarantees freedom of religion, not freedom from
religion."
It is classic muddled-headed, theist stupidity. The "freedom" *of*
practicing xianity, for example, necessarily means freedom *from* being
forced to practice Islam or other mutually exclusive religious
doctrines.
OTOH, the whole "of" versus "from" debate is phoney from the start,
because atheists are not asking for freedom "from" religion, presuming
that this is even a defined term. Atheists are not claiming that they
think first amendment rights entitle them to be shielded from the
religious expressions of others. Rights are an individual thing and the
right of an atheist to refrain from practicing religion in no way takes
religious freedom away from others. At most atheists are making the
separate argument that the constitution prohibits using government
resources or legal apparatus to establish religion. This includes using
government employees, such as teachers, to lead mandatory prayers.
However, I've also noticed that some people who use the "of" versus
"from" dichotomy seem to honestly think that it shows atheists don't
have a right to refrain "from" practicing religion, in general. They
seem to use the logic that freedom "of" religion makes it obligatory
that one pick some kind of religion and practice it. But, by this
argument, freedom of speech would not include the right to remain silent
or to refrain from compulsory speech, oaths, etc. One would have to
speak at all times in order to maintain one's "freedom of speech". In
reality, freedom of speech includes both freedom to remain silent and
freedom to refrain from compulsory speech. By extension, freedom of
religion includes both the ability to refrain from practicing religion
and to resist any compulsory formulation of religious dogmas.
--
Quibbler (quibbler247atyahoo.com)
"It is fashionable to wax apocalyptic about the
threat to humanity posed by the AIDS virus, 'mad cow'
disease, and many others, but I think a case can be
made that faith is one of the world's great evils,
comparable to the smallpox virus but harder to
eradicate." -- Richard Dawkins
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Cam Desautels" |
|
| Title: Re: Elizabeth Dole |
06 Sep 2004 12:45:34 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 04 Sep 2004 02:20:55 +0000, Khartoum wrote:
While on a business trip this week I was flipping the channels and stopped
briefly on the Republican convention. Elizabeth Dole was speaking and the
only part I stayed for was the quote below. I was so f*cking angry that I
unplugged the T.V until after the convention was over.
She said "The Constitution guarantees freedom of religion, not freedom from
religion."
I got back in town tonight and decided to read the quote in context. I am
not angry now, but I am sadly realizing that possibly the majority of
Americans agree with this crank ***** (possibly still a little angry).
Perhaps she could explain how you can have freedom of religion without
having freedom from religion
Full speech can be read here:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A50426-2004Aug31.html
I have not read the speech, so I may be wrong about this, but it may be a
question of interpretation.
She may simply mean that we not have a right to live in a nation where
religion is completely banned -- we to not have a right to have our
environment completely devoid of religion. Which is a reasonable statement
which is truly only a rewording of the right to freedom of religion as
seen from the other side.
Anyway, just a thought..
.
|
|
|
| User: "Lord Calvert" |
|
| Title: Re: Elizabeth Dole |
06 Sep 2004 01:09:28 PM |
|
|
She may simply mean that we not have a right to live in a nation where
religion is completely banned -- we to not have a right to have our
environment completely devoid of religion. Which is a reasonable statement
which is truly only a rewording of the right to freedom of religion as
seen from the other side.
That would be inconsistent with modern Republican dogma. The post-Goldwater GOP
has uniformly sought to strengthen religion (specifically Christianity) through
the use of increased government power, regulation, privileged legislation and
taxpayer handouts from the public treasury. Dole was simply reiterating that
position. The principle of religious neutrality in government is wholly alien
to them. They actively seek a larger role for government in religion and
vice-versa.
Rich Goranson, Amherst, NY, USA (aa#MCMXCIX, a-vet#1)
EAC Department of Applied Rattan Use
"Without faith we might relapse into scientific or rational thinking, which
leads by a slippery slope toward constitutional democracy." - Robert Anton
Wilson
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
