Since you deny God utterly, there is no point in discussing with you such concepts as Divine intention, or the redemptive power of suffering, or sacred vows, or other principles which informed her life. Let's just accept that they were as deep and as sincere as your beliefs. We will just have to wait for the hereafter to see which of you was the misguided one.
And what exactly will you see if there isn't a hereafter?
I understand that as a child you suffered for your atheist beliefs. I'm sorry about that. Truly. It was wrong. But I'm sorry that it didn't make you more, rather than less, open to cherishing diversity of belief and respecting the beliefs of those whose beliefs differ from yours.
Right. You're pretty good about pushing "tolerance" for your particular beliefs, but cherishing diversity seems perhaps a bit of an alien concept to you.. As in Message 15667640
I also object to two characterists of certain (not by any means all) athiests. First is denial of history; basic denial that we were founded as a Christian nation, and basic denial that that has had a lot to do with shaping the nature of our society, both for good and for bad. (Though usually they're happy to acknowledge the bad.) Second is to try to force religion out of public life, and make public life atheist. The whole origin, intent, purpose, etc. of the establishment and free exercise clauses of the First Amendment are too complex to get into here, but it's clear that they were never meant to be used in the way they are used today.
Highly disputable, that paragraph. Once more for old times sake: nytimes.com
I am happy to let atheists and agnostics (and the non-religious or whatever other term you wish to use) believe and practice what they want, as long as they let me believe and practice what I want.
But who, exactly, is telling you you can't believe and practice what you want? Looks to me that you are happy to let atheists and agnostics believe and practice what they want, as long as the atheists and agnostics accept your "Christian Nation" formulation and corequisite religious displays in government related activities. Because getting rid of religious displays in government related activities is "atheistic" and therefore unAmerican, or something. So the Christian Nation set gets to tell, and non believers shouldn't ask what's going on here. Seems that Madison and Jefferson might have disagreed there, but what could they have known about " origin, intent, purpose, etc"? |
