Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (230811)	4/27/2005 2:29:03 AM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573850

JF, We should have both. So if a cross is in plain view of an atheist, and he is offended by the view, should the cross be taken down? ......if its in/on a public building. What would you do if an atheist wanted to put up an upside down cross of Jesus's crucifixion in a public building to symbolize his/her atheism? Freedom FROM religion more often than not tramples on other people's freedom of expression. Freedom OF religion more often than not tramples on other people's freedom FROM religion. It appears that some believe it's a tool of religious politics, not partisan politics. Do you believe that? You're not making sense to me. It's not the "religious" party that is threatening to use the filibuster. The GOP isn't a religious party? They sure are acting as if they are. ted

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (230811)	4/27/2005 9:22:31 AM
From: Road Walker	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1573850

re: So if a cross is in plain view of an atheist, and he is offended by the view, should the cross be taken down? Freedom FROM religion more often than not tramples on other people's freedom of expression. Frankly, I've always thought that this whole thing was silly... but here is how I think it should work. If a religious majority in a community decides that they want to put up a religious symbol, every other religion (and atheists) should be provided equal space, if they want to use it. Not perfect, but it may shut everybody up on all sides. Would you want an atheist symbol in front of your local school? re: You're not making sense to me. It's not the "religious" party that is threatening to use the filibuster. No, it's the "religious party" that is threatening to change the rules wrt filibusters; the nuclear option. It's just amazing to me that this, and so much more in US politics has become a religious debate, at least for the right. I wonder what Jesus would think? John