So…if I feel threatened and offended by the presence of aetheists, can I have them banned?

Or, hey, here’s a thought….how about if I mind my own business, respect what they believe, let them believe it, and don’t try to take it away?

What a novel idea. Think it’ll catch on?

Dave Silverman wants to turn atheism into a religion with him as the supreme being.

Harry Flashman said:
So…if I feel threatened and offended by the presence of aetheists, can I have them banned? Or, hey, here’s a thought….how about if I mind my own business, respect what they believe, let them believe it, and don’t try to take it away? What a novel idea. Think it’ll catch on?

1. Uh, no..trees vs people, you having troubles telling the two apart?

2. take what away? The baby Jeebus trees in Canada? Listen you Christians can play with your Jeebus dolls and dollhouses (nativity scene) all year long if you want. Nobody is taking that away from you. It’s about the work environment and respecting other’s religious beliefs.

You are at work to work, not to play with your dollhouses.

and respect, give me a break…would you vote for an Atheist president?

We Scientologists think all the other faiths are crazy anyway . Xenu is responsible for this schism .

Okay, Christmas trees are not religious symbols, at least, they aren’t Christian religious symbology. Christmas trees are pagan in origin. They represent the winter solstice. And they serve zero connection to the Christian religion. If you feel offended by the Christmas tree because you think it threatens your religious rights, etc. Then, perhaps you should take a long hard look at the history of Christmas.

And, I have to ask, are there white kids who feel left out of Black History Month in February, and are there non-Veterans who feel left out of Veterans Day. Really, this was his “get over it” argument. I know a few non Irish friends who feel excluded from St. Patrick’s Day. And also, some Alzheimer patients who really feel left out when Memorial Day rolls around. Mr. Donahue, if you are going to use a comparison to help your argument, at least, have it make sense.

And for my last thought, athiests shouldn’t feel threatened by Christmas and the war on Christmas should go to where it belongs, away from here. Enjoy the Winter Festival everyone. Oh, and Merry Christmas, though it is actually the same sentiment.

Anything and everything connected with Christianity is a threat to liberals – so liberals work very hard to undermine Christianity.

It’s not so much a war on Christmas as it’s a war on the people who are Christians.

I apologize to no one for my Christmas tree, and I enjoy seeing other trees.

However, that doesn’t mean we have to become bullies when it comes to people of any faith, nor to Christians who are having a difficult time during the season. There are times in all of our lives when Christmas needs to be a bit muted for some. Christians in recovery. Christians in mourning. Christians struggling economically. Christians who are ill. The odd thing is, most of the complaints aired on both sides, those selfishly objecting to the celebrations and those fools claiming there is a war on Christmas, focus on the more secular aspects of the season. I know of no one in the US or in Europe who is faithful, who attends Church, who tries to keep the holiday a Holy Day who feel their worship and adoration has suffered or been in the least compromised. It seems to be only the casual Christians who whine endlessly.

Alz said:
Anything and everything connected with Christianity is a threat to liberals – so liberals work very hard to undermine Christianity.

It’s not so much a war on Christmas as it’s a war on the people who are Christians.

You pompous bag of putrid gas! I am a Christian, and I am a liberal. There are millions and millions like me in the US and throughout the world. Your comment is distinctly unChristian, and you should be thoroughly ashamed of yourself.

I’ve seen some of the ways Donohue’s reacted in the past to comments about the Catholic Church, he should take his own advice and get over it.

That being said, it’s always fun to watch two cars hooked up to each other and drive in oposite directions, nobody gets anywhere, but there’s plenty of noise.

Spine Crusher:

The baby who? Jeebus? Who is that?

moriarty70 said:
I’ve seen some of the ways Donohue’s reacted in the past to comments about the Catholic Church, he should take his own advice and get over it.

That being said, it’s always fun to watch two cars hooked up to each other and drive in oposite directions, nobody gets anywhere, but there’s plenty of noise.

As a Catholic, I am constantly embarrassed by Donohue.

Hey SpinelessCrusher, People who claim to be “offended” by a Christmas Tree at work are simply trying desperately to get someone to pay attention to them.

If you think a Christmas Tree at work is offensive (because it is in effect “pushing Christianity” on you), you must really freak the fuck out when Muslims walk through the door in traditional garb huh? What do you do then? Tear the mask from the females face? Knock Turbins off of Muslims heads?

Harry Flashman said:
Spine Crusher:

The baby who? Jeebus? Who is that?

Sometimes, in Texas, we write our “Lard” for “Lord” and “Geezus” for “Jesus” but only because that tends to be how the clergy and the laity pronounce the words. It’s actually rather endearing. Of course, most people think that “Emmanuel” is the man who owns and operates Taco Heaven. That, plus 84°/F under clear skies in mid-December are the main reasons I love Texas. And, cheese enchiladas.

The Real Royal King said:
You pompous bag of putrid gas! I am a Christian, and I am a liberal. There are millions and millions like me in the US and throughout the world. Your comment is distinctly unChristian, and you should be thoroughly ashamed of yourself.

Really, you’re saying someone else is acting “unChristian?” Really?

Perhaps you need to go back and re-read your own comments first. What part of attacking people for their weight, appearance, or opinions using the nastiest and most hateful language possible is “proper Christian behavior” to you? What part of acknowledging your unable to be respectful to certain people who disagree with you, is in the Christian tradition?

Perhaps you shouldn’t be the one to throw stones.

ImNotBlue said:
Really, you’re saying someone else is acting “unChristian?” Really?

Perhaps you need to go back and re-read your own comments first. What part of attacking people for their weight, appearance, or opinions using the nastiest and most hateful language possible is “proper Christian behavior” to you? What part of acknowledging your unable to be respectful to certain people who disagree with you, is in the Christian tradition?

Perhaps you shouldn’t be the one to throw stones.

Would you like a ticket back to the Koldys’ PHOX Phan Klub? Coach, of course, but free.

ImNotBlue said:
Really, you’re saying someone else is acting “unChristian?” Really? Perhaps you need to go back and re-read your own comments first. What part of attacking people for their weight, appearance, or opinions using the nastiest and most hateful language possible is “proper Christian behavior” to you? What part of acknowledging your unable to be respectful to certain people who disagree with you, is in the Christian tradition? Perhaps you shouldn’t be the one to throw stones.

He’s right King. Those in glass houses…..

timzank said:
Hey SpinelessCrusher, People who claim to be “offended” by a Christmas Tree at work are simply trying desperately to get someone to pay attention to them. If you think a Christmas Tree at work is offensive (because it is in effect “pushing Christianity” on you), you must really freak the fuck out when Muslims walk through the door in traditional garb huh? What do you do then? Tear the mask from the females face? Knock Turbins off of Muslims heads?

1. Donohue said “offended”, notice the other side only said “it is devisive”…nobody is offended by a pagan symbol of the winter solstice you moron.

2. I’m an non-theist and I have one in my home…so Happy Fucking Holidays to you too asshole!

3. I have no fear of anyone’s ethnicity or their cultural dress. I find it very interesting and celebrate their diversity.

The fact that YOU question if I’m afraid when I see a turban says EVERYTHING about you.

and “mask from the females face”…what are you in 2nd grade?

out of the 3 million Muslim women in France…how many of them wear the burqas and/or niqabs (it’s not called a “mask” asshole)? 367!!

YOU ARE AN IGNORANT ASS!

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/01/world/europe/01france.html?_r=3

timzank said:
He’s right King. Those in glass houses…..

Thanks, Tim Z. Ank. I can’t tell you how much that means to me. After I do the monthly septic tank treatment tonight, I’ll contemplate what you said.

SpineCrusher said:
1. Donohue said “offended”, notice the other side only said “it is devisive”…nobody is offended by a pagan symbol of the winter solstice you moron.

2. I’m an non-theist and I have one in my home…so Happy Fucking Holidays to you too asshole!

3. I have no fear of anyone’s ethnicity or their cultural dress. I find it very interesting and celebrate their diversity.

The fact that YOU question if I’m afraid when I see a turban says EVERYTHING about you.

and “mask from the females face”…what are you in 2nd grade?

out of the 3 million Muslim women in France…how many of them wear the burqas and/or niqabs (it’s not called a “mask” asshole)? 367!!

YOU ARE AN IGNORANT ASS!

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/01/world/europe/01france.html?_r=3

Geez. A mask!

I’m waiting to hear from Spine Crusher who “Jeebus” is. Spell it out.

Coincidentally, I said THIS in another thread:

“I’ve noted recently that whenever the left has something ugly or snarky or critical to say directly about Jesus Christ they rarely spell “Jesus” correctly.

Check out the liberal blogs and look at the comments there. I’ve seen “Jeebus” and “JC” when they mock Christ but I don’t recall EVER seeing one of the mockers actually write “Jesus Christ” when they show how cool they are by sniping at Christianity.

Why is that, I wonder?

Really, nevermind the question. I know the answer – and so do they.”

And, TAH DAH!!! Right here in this thread Spine Crusher uses the name Jeebus. Spell out the name. Spell or say out loud “Jesus Christ” when you criticize or shut up.

Coward.

Harry Flashman said:
Coincidentally, I said THIS in another thread: “I’ve noted recently that whenever the left has something ugly or snarky or critical to say directly about Jesus Christ they rarely spell “Jesus” correctly. Check out the liberal blogs and look at the comments there. I’ve seen “Jeebus” and “JC” when they mock Christ but I don’t recall EVER seeing one of the mockers actually write “Jesus Christ” when they show how cool they are by sniping at Christianity. Why is that, I wonder? Really, nevermind the question. I know the answer – and so do they.” And, TAH DAH!!! Right here in this thread Spine Crusher uses the name Jeebus. Spell out the name. Spell or say out loud “Jesus Christ” when you criticize or shut up. Coward.

You are powerless to stop baby Jeebus!! The moon was awash last night in the blood of baby Jeebus signalling the second-coming of the Spaghetti Monster!!!

AHAHAHAHAHAAA!!!

Harry Flashman said:
I’m waiting to hear from Spine Crusher who “Jeebus” is. Spell it out.

just couldn’t hold out any longer before you released your tirade eh?

Feel sorry for your sex partner…unless it’s your hand, less work for him/her if so.

Two posts in reply and Spine Crusher won’t spell out “Jesus Christ”. He hides behind “Jeebus” and mocks.

Here’s a sneaky little secret people like that don’t want you to know – Christ scares them, and scares them badly. That’s why they mock and belittle, but won’t say His name or spell it out. Oh, he might now that I’ve called him on it but he’ll do it while swallowing hard.

Like I said – coward. And he just proved me right.

Now, toddle along, little man. The time will come when the one you now mock will look at you and say, “I don’t know him.”

No START filibuster! 67-28!

Harry Flashman said:
Two posts in reply and Spine Crusher won’t spell out “Jesus Christ”. He hides behind “Jeebus” and mocks. Here’s a sneaky little secret people like that don’t want you to know – Christ scares them, and scares them badly. That’s why they mock and belittle, but won’t say His name or spell it out. Oh, he might now that I’ve called him on it but he’ll do it while swallowing hard. Like I said – coward. And he just proved me right. Now, toddle along, little man. The time will come when the one you now mock will look at you and say, “I don’t know him.”

You’re trying to prove that an anti-theist is afriad of YOUR religious diety…HAHAHAHAHA!!!

You should be afraid of Santa, because he knows “who’s been naughty and who’s been nice”…ROFLMFAO!!!!

Must be a really slow news day when they have to resort to fighting over Xmas-trees. Is anybody else hoping for another civil war? We really need to clear out the chaff, from top to bottom.

CAconservative said:
Must be a really slow news day when they have to resort to fighting over Xmas-trees. Is anybody else hoping for another civil war? We really need to clear out the chaff, from top to bottom.

That’s the most offensive thing I’ve heard all week.

Are you seriously talking about killing your fellow American’s because we have a little debate on Christmas trees?

I don’t even know where to start with that one…

The Real Royal King said:
Would you like a ticket back to the Koldys’ PHOX Phan Klub? Coach, of course, but free.

Sure! It’ll be nice to get something from you… since apparently responding to or defending your hypocrisy is simply too much. At least that way, you’ll be able to give something!

SpineCrusher said:
out of the 3 million Muslim women in France…how many of them wear the burqas and/or niqabs (it’s not called a “mask” asshole)? 367!!

Now that IS interesting.

Apparently, SpineCrusher gets offended (and starts calling names… receiving praise from Royal) when Tim called a burqa a “mask.” Apparently, that’s highly offensive to him, and SC will defend Islam from such a slander.

BUT, when it comes to Christianity, SC has no problem writing “Jeebus,” and saying other insulting things about THAT religion.

Interesting! Hey, SC… why would you go out of your way to “correct” TIm and defend Islam, while also making similar statements yourself about Christianity? Why is one “protected” (at least by you), while the other is fair game for insults?

Harry Flashman said:
Two posts in reply and Spine Crusher won’t spell out “Jesus Christ”. He hides behind “Jeebus” and mocks. Here’s a sneaky little secret people like that don’t want you to know – Christ scares them, and scares them badly. That’s why they mock and belittle, but won’t say His name or spell it out. Oh, he might now that I’ve called him on it but he’ll do it while swallowing hard. Like I said – coward. And he just proved me right. Now, toddle along, little man. The time will come when the one you now mock will look at you and say, “I don’t know him.”

You see the difference? YOU cannot understand someone who does not believe as you do..and you seem to think that there is an ACTUAL heaven that you will go to and people who will talk to you and judge you…are you getting all this..I don’t understand how any clear thinking adult could believe this 2000+ year old myth in this day and age. However, I respect religions of all types for the community that they can offer.

My only issue is when people attempt to “tread on me” with their dogma. Which is exactly what YOU are trying to do.

3 words for people like you Harry: GO FUCK YOURSELF!

Since the issue here is about something Atheists don’t believe rather then something they do believe . Don’t they actually exclude themselves ? And isn’t that freedom and liberty and all that good stuff .

Spine Crusher, wwhen challenged to spell out Jesus Christ when he mocks Him, comes back with this biting retort:

“You’re trying to prove that an anti-theist is afriad of YOUR religious diety…HAHAHAHAHA!!!”

Still haven’t spelled it out, have you? What’s wrong?

Wait, don’t answer, I’ll tell you. Deep inside you’re a believer and you just can’t bring yourself to mock Jesus by name. there are a lot out there like you. You choose to laugh and pretend to be one of the cool guys on the left that thinks it’s all a joke. But….you know better.

Don’t you?

That (5) replies, Crusher. And I’m not “treading on you”.

I’m not forcing anything on you. Why the resentment? I’m following YOUR line of reasoning. I just want to see you mock Jesus by name instead of hiding behind other things. That’s all.

moriarty70 said:
I’ve seen some of the ways Donohue’s reacted in the past to comments about the Catholic Church, he should take his own advice and get over it.

That being said, it’s always fun to watch two cars hooked up to each other and drive in oposite directions, nobody gets anywhere, but there’s plenty of noise.

Awesome analogy!

Harry Flashman said:
Spine Crusher, wwhen challenged to spell out Jesus Christ when he mocks Him, comes back with this biting retort: “You’re trying to prove that an anti-theist is afriad of YOUR religious diety…HAHAHAHAHA!!!” Still haven’t spelled it out, have you? What’s wrong? Wait, don’t answer, I’ll tell you. Deep inside you’re a believer and you just can’t bring yourself to mock Jesus by name. there are a lot out there like you. You choose to laugh and pretend to be one of the cool guys on the left that thinks it’s all a joke. But….you know better. Don’t you?

Jesus is a myth. God is a myth. Zeus is a myth. Allah is a myth. Yaweh is a myth. None one of them exist or ever have existed.

And you can shove your ancient lore in my face all you want, it’s all mythology to me.

You happy now?

Harry Flashman said:
Coincidentally, I said THIS in another thread:

“I’ve noted recently that whenever the left has something ugly or snarky or critical to say directly about Jesus Christ they rarely spell “Jesus” correctly.

Check out the liberal blogs and look at the comments there. I’ve seen “Jeebus” and “JC” when they mock Christ but I don’t recall EVER seeing one of the mockers actually write “Jesus Christ” when they show how cool they are by sniping at Christianity.

Why is that, I wonder?

Really, nevermind the question. I know the answer – and so do they.”

And, TAH DAH!!! Right here in this thread Spine Crusher uses the name Jeebus. Spell out the name. Spell or say out loud “Jesus Christ” when you criticize or shut up.

Coward.

Jeebus is actually a Simpsons reference. Homer, said he didn’t believe in praying and then when things got down and dirty, he started screaming “Save me, Jeebus.” The idea was that he didn’t know who Jesus was really, but still went toward him when things were down and out. Now, the Simpsons is famous for having both liberals and conservatives attach themselves to the show, thus the liberals took the word, Jeebus, to actually mock Jesus a bit better, it’s an actual sign of mockery as opposed to hiding behind it without saying the word Jesus. The same with JC which is a way to take away the power of the phrase by turning the name into initials. It’s a way of demystifying Jesus. Again, not really a way to hide. But if you want, I’ll write this, I don’t think Jesus Christ (no misspelling) is the son of God, nor is there any divinity there whatsoever. I think his teachings are important, and we should pay heed but alas I do not make him a God. And that’s my critique, which doesn’t include the word Jeebus or JC. Better? Or am I a coward as well?

Harry Flashman said:
That (5) replies, Crusher. And I’m not “treading on you”. I’m not forcing anything on you. Why the resentment? I’m following YOUR line of reasoning. I just want to see you mock Jesus by name instead of hiding behind other things. That’s all.

I’ve always resented prosthetizers such as yourself, and you are “treading on me” by doing such.

You just can’t see it because you are so blinded by your faith.

Arthur (Not a Political Comic) said:
Jeebus is actually a Simpsons reference. Homer, said he didn’t believe in praying and then when things got down and dirty, he started screaming “Save me, Jeebus.” The idea was that he didn’t know who Jesus was really, but still went toward him when things were down and out. Now, the Simpsons is famous for having both liberals and conservatives attach themselves to the show, thus the liberals took the word, Jeebus, to actually mock Jesus a bit better, it’s an actual sign of mockery as opposed to hiding behind it without saying the word Jesus. The same with JC which is a way to take away the power of the phrase by turning the name into initials. It’s a way of demystifying Jesus. Again, not really a way to hide. But if you want, I’ll write this, I don’t think Jesus Christ (no misspelling) is the son of God, nor is there any divinity there whatsoever. I think his teachings are important, and we should pay heed but alas I do not make him a God. And that’s my critique, which doesn’t include the word Jeebus or JC. Better? Or am I a coward as well?

I also agree that the teachings of Big Baby Jeebus are good moral lessons as well, as with all mythology.

However, I do not believe that such a person ever existed. It is merely another character in a story lent to help society move forward in a more constructive manner.

ImNotBlue said:
Sure! It’ll be nice to get something from you… since apparently responding to or defending your hypocrisy is simply too much. At least that way, you’ll be able to give something! Now that IS interesting. Apparently, SpineCrusher gets offended (and starts calling names… receiving praise from Royal) when Tim called a burqa a “mask.” Apparently, that’s highly offensive to him, and SC will defend Islam from such a slander. BUT, when it comes to Christianity, SC has no problem writing “Jeebus,” and saying other insulting things about THAT religion. Interesting! Hey, SC… why would you go out of your way to “correct” TIm and defend Islam, while also making similar statements yourself about Christianity? Why is one “protected” (at least by you), while the other is fair game for insults?

I have no dog in your fight with TRRK, I’m not even going to bother to read your posts.

My issue with timzank was his mischaracterization of HUMAN BEINGS who we share this planet with. His ignorance is what was at issue. I could care less for ANY religions dogma.

Arthur said:

” But if you want, I’ll write this, I don’t think Jesus Christ (no misspelling) is the son of God,….”

that’s fine, and I respect that. The Jews don’t think He’s the son of God, either, and I have great respect for them. But they don’t mock him and neither did you. Nothing cowardly about your take on the subject.

I note than you inadvertanly threw Spine Crusher a lifeline with your response and he suddenly switched from a mocking adolescent to a more thoughtful stance.

As you can see on this site, I don’t get into these commenter duels often. I engaged in this one because of Spine Crusher’s sneering stance on my beliefs. Basically, I called him out on it. If you hadn’t replied the way you did he’d still be bumbling about looking for a graceful way out.

He demands I respect his stance on my faith but then gives me none. I resent that mentality.

Spinecrusher says:

That’s the most offensive thing I’ve heard all week

It’s a choice to be offended. Sadly, there are too many people who choose to be offended over every little thing.

SpineCrusher said:
I have no dog in your fight with TRRK, I’m not even going to bother to read your posts. My issue with timzank was his mischaracterization of HUMAN BEINGS who we share this planet with. His ignorance is what was at issue. I could care less for ANY religions dogma.

Well, I didn’t ask you to join my disagreement with Royal, so feel free not to get involved.

Now, you say that your beef was that with Tim’s “mischaracterization of HUMAN BEINGS,” because he said “mask” when he should have said “burqa.” Stop me if I go wrong.

Fair enough. But my question is how can you be upset with Tim’s characterization, when you yourself refer to the Christian Lord as “Jeebus?” Aren’t you doing the same thing? Tim slights (in your opinion) Islam… and you defend. You slight Christianity… and that’s somehow different?

Aren’t you guilty of doing the same thing you’re attacking Tim for doing?

Xmas Trees have NOTHING to do with Christianity!

beavoux said:
Xmas Trees have NOTHING to do with Christianity!

Then how can they be offensive or threatening?

beavoux says:
Xmas Trees have NOTHING to do with Christianity!

In our church, the Christmas tree, being an evergreen, symbolizes eternal life.

Harry Flashman said:
Arthur said: ” But if you want, I’ll write this, I don’t think Jesus Christ (no misspelling) is the son of God,….” that’s fine, and I respect that. The Jews don’t think He’s the son of God, either, and I have great respect for them. But they don’t mock him and neither did you. Nothing cowardly about your take on the subject. I note than you inadvertanly threw Spine Crusher a lifeline with your response and he suddenly switched from a mocking adolescent to a more thoughtful stance. As you can see on this site, I don’t get into these commenter duels often. I engaged in this one because of Spine Crusher’s sneering stance on my beliefs. Basically, I called him out on it. If you hadn’t replied the way you did he’d still be bumbling about looking for a graceful way out. He demands I respect his stance on my faith but then gives me none. I resent that mentality.

My lack of respect for you has nothing to do with your faith. It has to do with YOU and your authoritative stance on issue that you have no control over.

and using Arthur as a crutch to protect your feeble attempts at converting me is laughable.

Re-read the posts and it is clear that YOU were the one questioning my faith, so much to where you called me a coward for not belittling your Big Baby Bejeebus. YOU demanded that I belittle your diety, which I did not….I belittled YOU.

Stop hiding behind your faith and be a man COWARD!

Here we go Henrietta:

1. And, TAH DAH!!! Right here in this thread Spine Crusher uses the name Jeebus. Spell out the name. Spell or say out loud “Jesus Christ” when you criticize or shut up. Coward.

2. Here’s a sneaky little secret people like that don’t want you to know – Christ scares them, and scares them badly. That’s why they mock and belittle, but won’t say His name or spell it out. Oh, he might now that I’ve called him on it but he’ll do it while swallowing hard. Like I said – coward. And he just proved me right. Now, toddle along, little man. The time will come when the one you now mock will look at you and say, “I don’t know him.”

3. Wait, don’t answer, I’ll tell you. Deep inside you’re a believer and you just can’t bring yourself to mock Jesus by name. there are a lot out there like you. You choose to laugh and pretend to be one of the cool guys on the left that thinks it’s all a joke. But….you know better. Don’t you?

4. I’m not forcing anything on you….I just want to see you mock Jesus by name instead of hiding behind other things.

5. He demands I respect his stance on my faith but then gives me none. I resent that mentality.

Now show me where I demanded anything of you other than asking if you’d vote for an Athiest president, because I HAVE voted for Christian presidents.

Thanks for being my bitch for the day Henrietta!

Seeing 2012 From My Window said:
beavoux says:Xmas Trees have NOTHING to do with Christianity! In our church, the Christmas tree, being an evergreen, symbolizes eternal life.

rad! that’s so pagan!

ImNotBlue said:
Well, I didn’t ask you to join my disagreement with Royal, so feel free not to get involved. Now, you say that your beef was that with Tim’s “mischaracterization of HUMAN BEINGS,” because he said “mask” when he should have said “burqa.” Stop me if I go wrong. Fair enough. But my question is how can you be upset with Tim’s characterization, when you yourself refer to the Christian Lord as “Jeebus?” Aren’t you doing the same thing? Tim slights (in your opinion) Islam… and you defend. You slight Christianity… and that’s somehow different? Aren’t you guilty of doing the same thing you’re attacking Tim for doing?

Please re-read Arthur’s post on Jeebus before YOU get offended.

Arthur (Not a Political Comic) said:
Jeebus is actually a Simpsons reference. Homer, said he didn’t believe in praying and then when things got down and dirty, he started screaming “Save me, Jeebus.” The idea was that he didn’t know who Jesus was really, but still went toward him when things were down and out. Now, the Simpsons is famous for having both liberals and conservatives attach themselves to the show, thus the liberals took the word, Jeebus, to actually mock Jesus a bit better, it’s an actual sign of mockery as opposed to hiding behind it without saying the word Jesus. The same with JC which is a way to take away the power of the phrase by turning the name into initials. It’s a way of demystifying Jesus. Again, not really a way to hide. But if you want, I’ll write this, I don’t think Jesus Christ (no misspelling) is the son of God, nor is there any divinity there whatsoever. I think his teachings are important, and we should pay heed but alas I do not make him a God. And that’s my critique, which doesn’t include the word Jeebus or JC. Better? Or am I a coward as well?

Thanks for playing!

Seeing 2012 From My Window said:
Spinecrusher says: That’s the most offensive thing I’ve heard all week It’s a choice to be offended. Sadly, there are too many people who choose to be offended over every little thing.

So if I call your 15 year old daughter a “whore” it’s you that chooses to get offended? Doesn’t sound logical to me.

It’s called emotions…talk to your wife about it, if you have one. She will tell you that we can’t control our emotions…and emotions are what lead to us getting “offended”.

Nice try though, you can try to escape being human all you want but it’ll never work.

SpineCrusher said:
Please re-read Arthur’s post on Jeebus before YOU get offended.

Yeah, I’m familiar with the Simpsons reference. But what does it have to do with what you’ve said thus far? You were using the Simpsons line to (at the very least) mock Christianity. How is that different than what Tim did?

ImNotBlue said:
Yeah, I’m familiar with the Simpsons reference. But what does it have to do with what you’ve said thus far? You were using the Simpsons line to (at the very least) mock Christianity. How is that different than what Tim did?

I’ve already explained it to you.

A. I’m mocking something that cannot be proven, does not exist on this Earth an therefore can do no harm to anyone.

B. Tim was being ignorant about something tangible/factual that actually effects people living on this planet. Spreading ignorance about what real people who believe in Islam do, on this Earth, in reality, is one of his favorite pastimes.

You like cartoons of Muhammed don’t you? What’s the difference?

I love hearing liberals gripe about Christmas. But I’ve never seen a single major retail store, no matter how liberal or progressive its CEO, do anything except try to capture as many Christmas shopping dollars as possible. Even the ones who insist that their employees say ‘Happy Holidays’ and avoid any mention of Christmas, still want to soak up their share of the Christmas spending, no? When liberals can convince their own fellow travelers to stop making money off Christmas, then they will be more convincing when they want to ban the Christmas trees. But as long as everyone, Left or Right, want to make big bucks off of Christmas, they should quit griping about the trees.

SpineCrusher said:
I’ve already explained it to you. A. I’m mocking something that cannot be proven, does not exist on this Earth an therefore can do no harm to anyone. B. Tim was being ignorant about something tangible/factual that actually effects people living on this planet. Spreading ignorance about what real people who believe in Islam do, on this Earth, in reality, is one of his favorite pastimes. You like cartoons of Muhammed don’t you? What’s the difference?

Well, that’s some pretty spin… but doesn’t make a lot of sense.

You believe (again, stop me if get this wrong) that you can mock Jesus because “he never really existed.” But felt you need to defend Muslim women because they actually do wear things called burqas, not “masks.”

Of course, where that all falls apart is when you remember that the reason they wear burqas, is based upon their religious beliefs, and the teachings of Muhammad. SO, if you believe that “Jesus” is a “fraud,” while the word of “Muhammad” is to be taken more seriously and with more respect, what does that say about you? Again, to me, it appears to be a double standard… or at the very least, that you support Islam and not Christianity (which is fine if that’s your choice, but at least be honest about it).

As for the cartoons… I support their right to be drawn and displayed without fear or threat of being murdered. But, at the same time, I don’t think much is accomplished by attacking deities or religious figureheads like that.

ImNotBlue said:
Well, that’s some pretty spin… but doesn’t make a lot of sense. You believe (again, stop me if get this wrong) that you can mock Jesus because “he never really existed.” But felt you need to defend Muslim women because they actually do wear things called burqas, not “masks.” Of course, where that all falls apart is when you remember that the reason they wear burqas, is based upon their religious beliefs, and the teachings of Muhammad. SO, if you believe that “Jesus” is a “fraud,” while the word of “Muhammad” is to be taken more seriously and with more respect, what does that say about you? Again, to me, it appears to be a double standard… or at the very least, that you support Islam and not Christianity (which is fine if that’s your choice, but at least be honest about it). As for the cartoons… I support their right to be drawn and displayed without fear or threat of being murdered. But, at the same time, I don’t think much is accomplished by attacking deities or religious figureheads like that.

OK, last time knucklehead…I’ll condense it for you.

A. Jesus doesn’t exist on this planet

B. Muslim women do
(for context, here was his disgusting comment: “you must really freak the fuck out when Muslims walk through the door in traditional garb huh? What do you do then? Tear the mask from the females face? Knock Turbins off of Muslims heads?” ) – You’ll notice he split after I knocked him the fuck out with my retort…which for some reason you are still defending on his behalf

C. I’m a non-theist, therefore I support no religous dogma

For Jeebus sake man! Take a middle-eastern history class or something. You’d think this is the first time anyone ever schooled you on the fact that the world is bigger than just the United States, and that people in those countries have different beliefs.

SpineCrusher said:
For Jeebus sake man! Take a middle-eastern history class or something. You’d think this is the first time anyone ever schooled you on the fact that the world is bigger than just the United States, and that people in those countries have different beliefs.

You’re starting to get frustrated, because your hypocrisy is showing. I get it… we’ll call it a day after this.

You attacked Christianity for their belief in Jesus, by mocking him. You defended Muslim’s belief that women should wear burqas, and think a comment mocking or criticizing that belief is “disgusting.”

What all this shows is that even as a “non-theist,” you have a list of “protected” and “not protected” religious groups. You can make fun of Christian beliefs all the time, but Muslim beliefs are off limits and unacceptable. And make no mistake about it, we’re talking about religious beliefs. The belief in the word of the God, and God himself go hand in hand.

What I’m really looking for from you is an acknowledgment that, yes, you treat religious groups differently based on your own biases. I doubt I’ll get that from you, but you’ve made it abundantly clear.

Oh, and one more thing… I haven’t been defending (or even commenting) on Tim’s initial statement… only on the hypocritical reaction that station caused from you.

ImNotBlue said:
You’re starting to get frustrated, because your hypocrisy is showing. I get it… we’ll call it a day after this. You attacked Christianity for their belief in Jesus, by mocking him. You defended Muslim’s belief that women should wear burqas, and think a comment mocking or criticizing that belief is “disgusting.” What all this shows is that even as a “non-theist,” you have a list of “protected” and “not protected” religious groups. You can make fun of Christian beliefs all the time, but Muslim beliefs are off limits and unacceptable. And make no mistake about it, we’re talking about religious beliefs. The belief in the word of the God, and God himself go hand in hand. What I’m really looking for from you is an acknowledgment that, yes, you treat religious groups differently based on your own biases. I doubt I’ll get that from you, but you’ve made it abundantly clear. Oh, and one more thing… I haven’t been defending (or even commenting) on Tim’s initial statement… only on the hypocritical reaction that station caused from you.

You frustrate me? HAHA! I love debate!!

You put your faith in gods, I put my faith in people.

You want to turn this into a finger-pointing “you prefer one religion over another” knowing I could care less about the idiosyncrasies between any of them…so be it, you’re allowed your own opinion. However, you are not me and therefore you reaching into the dark about who you’d like to believe I am or how you’d live to believe I feel is a waste of time, because I will state it plainly.

I care about people. When you disparage people I will respond accordingly. My comments were not defending Islam, you crackpot, but women.

This was about the clothes they wear and nothing about their dogma. I’m not understanding why you’re correlating the two.

SpineCrusher said:
I care about people. When you disparage people I will respond accordingly. My comments were not defending Islam, you crackpot, but women.

Well, what Tim said wasn’t an attack on women… so I don’t think they need your defense in this case.

This was about the clothes they wear and nothing about their dogma. I’m not understanding why you’re correlating the two.

You don’t think the clothes represent dogma? You think they wear the burqas for a fashion statement? They wear he burqas for a religious statement, part of the religious beliefs. Do you not recognize or believe that the burqa is part of their religious devotion?

Why do you believe it’s alright to mock on symbol of a religion (Jesus), but not another?

Fact: Santa Claus only leaves gifts under republican’s trees and the democrats know this and try to steal the gifts from out from under these trees because they think they deserve them too! Merry Christmas Republicans and have a happy New Year!

ImNotBlue said:
Well, what Tim said wasn’t an attack on women… so I don’t think they need your defense in this case. You don’t think the clothes represent dogma? You think they wear the burqas for a fashion statement? They wear he burqas for a religious statement, part of the religious beliefs. Do you not recognize or believe that the burqa is part of their religious devotion? Why do you believe it’s alright to mock on symbol of a religion (Jesus), but not another?

mock away moron, you’re now in a circular argument with yourself…and Big Baby Jeebus of course. :)

You are in no manner acknowleding anything that I’ve posted in response to your ridiculous accusations and you reframed the context of my comments to create a new arguement that never existed with anyone but yourself…so go take a flying leap out of a rolling donut..and please, please forget to call!

SpineCrusher said:
mock away moron, you’re now in a circular argument with yourself…and Big Baby Jeebus of course. :) You are in no manner acknowledging anything that I’ve posted in response to your ridiculous accusations and you reframed the context of my comments to create a new argument that never existed with anyone but yourself…so go take a flying leap out of a rolling donut..and please, please forget to call!

I thought you said:

You frustrate me? HAHA! I love debate!!

You still seem frustrated, buddy.

But back to you comment… what would you like me to acknowledge that I haven’t? And why won’t you answer my question? “Why do you believe it’s alright to mock on symbol of a religion (Jesus), but not another?”

I hate to keep frustrating you like this, but I sure would like to get an answer to that question.

Just get over it? Okay, remember that when the fastest growing religion, (ie. Islam) starts spreading in the U.S. It is already the worlds, largest religion, is spreading like wildfire in the U.K. and is growing in the U.S. as well. When that happens, I would be willing to bet that Donohue and others will change their tune.

Seeing 2012 From My Window said:
beavoux says:Xmas Trees have NOTHING to do with Christianity! In our church, the Christmas tree, being an evergreen, symbolizes eternal life.

All the Marys in Heaven what a nitwit! To elevate a fir to a sacrament. It’s positively Beckerheaderish.

Alz said:
Anything and everything connected with Christianity is a threat to liberals – so liberals work very hard to undermine Christianity.

It’s not so much a war on Christmas as it’s a war on the people who are Christians.

This is just ridiculous and not grounded in reality at all.

The Real Royal King said:
However, that doesn’t mean we have to become bullies when it comes to people of any faith, nor to Christians who are having a difficult time during the season.

Does it mean that we should allow ourselves to be bullied?

Arthur (Not a Political Comic) said:
Okay, Christmas trees are not religious symbols, at least, they aren’t Christian religious symbology. Christmas trees are pagan in origin.

Arthur (Not a Political Comic) said:
And for my last thought, athiests shouldn’t feel threatened by Christmas and the war on Christmas should go to where it belongs, away from here. Enjoy the Winter Festival everyone. Oh, and Merry Christmas, though it is actually the same sentiment.

This;

IMO this story is just Fox going for ratings by exaggerating the war on Christmas. I’d like to see this obscure study she mentioned.
I wonder how much guests get paid to argue enthusiastically. The better the argument, the better your chances of being invited back.

IMO, if I work for someone , whatever their religion, they can display religious symbols if they choose to as long as they don’t pressure me to believe as they do.

Harry Flashman said:
Coincidentally, I said THIS in another thread:

“I’ve noted recently that whenever the left has something ugly or snarky or critical to say directly about Jesus Christ they rarely spell “Jesus” correctly.

Check out the liberal blogs and look at the comments there. I’ve seen “Jeebus” and “JC” when they mock Christ but I don’t recall EVER seeing one of the mockers actually write “Jesus Christ” when they show how cool they are by sniping at Christianity.

Why is that, I wonder?

Really, nevermind the question. I know the answer – and so do they.”

And, TAH DAH!!! Right here in this thread Spine Crusher uses the name Jeebus. Spell out the name. Spell or say out loud “Jesus Christ” when you criticize or shut up.

Coward.

Although it isn’t respectful or necessary to purposely snipe at Christianity , let’s keep in mind that Christians have sniped at non Christians a lot more and more often.

CosmosDan said:
This is just ridiculous and not grounded in reality at all.

You are not entirely correct. Ask yourself where your rights come from.

(Dan thinks for a moment and begins to formulate his answer.)

Considering that liberals, progressives, socialists, communists, fascists, statists, despots, monarchs…in other words those who think the Constitution needs to be abandoned or is a “living document,” would like to tell you that your rights are given to you by the government or by man.

The danger in this opinion is that a thing granted by a government or another man can be usurped by the grantor. Only when one holds “these truthes to be self-evident, that all men are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights…” does one understand why our founding fathers arrived at their conclusions and wrote our Constitution the way they did. They knew what monarchs and despots were like; they knew that even if one despot seemed benevolent that the next despot or monarch might not be so much so.

The fact that our revolution ended with a country that protected its people from the government and acknowleged the source of all our rights as coming from something greater than ourselves–”Nature’s God”–is precisely what left us with the greatest country that has ever existed on the face of the Earth.

It is the belief that rights come from the Creator that gave America the Constitution and it is the absence of that belief that gave France, after their revolution, the guillotine.

Arthur (Not a Political Comic) said:
Jeebus is actually a Simpsons reference. Homer, said he didn’t believe in praying and then when things got down and dirty, he started screaming “Save me, Jeebus.” The idea was that he didn’t know who Jesus was really, but still went toward him when things were down and out. Now, the Simpsons is famous for having both liberals and conservatives attach themselves to the show, thus the liberals took the word, Jeebus, to actually mock Jesus a bit better, it’s an actual sign of mockery as opposed to hiding behind it without saying the word Jesus. The same with JC which is a way to take away the power of the phrase by turning the name into initials. It’s a way of demystifying Jesus. Again, not really a way to hide. But if you want, I’ll write this, I don’t think Jesus Christ (no misspelling) is the son of God, nor is there any divinity there whatsoever. I think his teachings are important, and we should pay heed but alas I do not make him a God. And that’s my critique, which doesn’t include the word Jeebus or JC. Better? Or am I a coward as well?

Didn’t know that thanks.

I also value the teachings of Jesus ,and it’s a great story as stories go, but being realistic we don’t actually know if he really lived and walked the earth or which if any details of his life and sayings are true.

Arthur (Not a Political Comic) said:
Jesus Christ (no misspelling) is the son of God, nor is there any divinity there whatsoever

Fact: Jesus refused to curse non-believers: Jesus’ teachings were rejected by the inhabitants of a village in Samaria. His disciples asked that he exterminate the people of the village by issuing a curse. Jesus refused to do it, and simply move on to the next village.

Luke 9:52-56: “…they did not receive him…And when his disciples James and John saw this, they said, Lord, wilt thou that we command fire to come down from heaven, and consume them, even as Elias did? But he turned, and rebuked them, and said, Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of. For the Son of man is not come to destroy men’s lives, but to save them. And they went to another village.”

Realized that I wrote that wrong, I meant to say Jesus Christ is not the son of God, sorry for any confusion.

Another manufactured Fox hate piece to give the old white folks something to bitch about during the festive holiday season.

Seeing 2012 From My Window said:
beavoux says:
Xmas Trees have NOTHING to do with Christianity!

In our church, the Christmas tree, being an evergreen, symbolizes eternal life.

Um, I know it’s been brought up, but I wanted to bring that up again. The Christmas Tree is NOT a Christian symbol. It is pagan in origin. It represented fertility or the renewing qualities of life. It was green during winter which represented death, etc. It was a tradition within the Pagan Roman traditions and is traditionally looked upon as a SECULAR symbol. Again, that’s why this is all BS, because the Christmas tree has zero relation to the birth of Christ or Christianity.

Nahu Tuk said:
You are not entirely correct. Ask yourself where your rights come from.

Your post has nothing to do with my comment to Alz, but I’ll point this out.
Aside from the fact that there is nothing about god in the Constitution, where our laws and rights actually come from, there’s this.
You’re talking about what men, {mankind, or the majority} believe and that’s what determines the law. When men believed that it was okay to burn people at the stake for heresy or witchcraft where were our inalienable rights? When men believed that god didn’t mind if they owned other humans, and to deny equality or slaughtered native Americans out of greed, where were the inalienable rights. Our laws our rights are what we agree on and work for them to be as men, no more no less, and that is clearly demonstrated by mankind’s history.
We don’t know if there is a god or not or what may or may not exist when our physical bodies fail, but I’m fairly certain of one thing. If an atheist , Muslim, Christian, Buddhist, or whatever, believes in the principles of justice, equality, liberty, compassion, etc. and demonstrates that through their actions, whether they are a theist or not doesn’t matter at all, because a theist can just as easily be a selfish cutthroat as anyone else. History demonstrates that as well.

Nacho said:
Another manufactured Fox hate piece to give the old white folks something to bitch about during the festive holiday season.

LOL!! Gotta cater to that demographic

Fact: Baldwin says it straight on this one! Cobbling the Elves!
http://www.hulu.com/watch/3362/saturday-night-live-glengarry-glen-christmas

On Christmas trees: Those who do not like them are free to turn their heads.

INB asked the King: What part of attacking people for their weight, appearance, or opinions using the nastiest and most hateful language possible is “proper Christian behavior” to you?

To which the King replied: Would you like a ticket back to the Koldys’ PHOX Phan Klub?

Gee, King. It’s almost like when anyone asks you a question, you never really have an answer.

Nahu Tuk said:
On Christmas trees: Those who do not like them are free to turn their heads.

Says you to the Canadian college students.

This kinda reminds of the time Bill O’rielly brought in a Canadian Muslim to comment against the “ground Zero” area mosque.

SpineCrusher said:
out of the 3 million Muslim women in France…how many of them wear the burqas and/or niqabs (it’s not called a “mask” asshole)? 367!!

Before or after the French banned them?

CosmosDan said:
Aside from the fact that there is nothing about god in the Constitution, where our laws and rights actually come from, there’s this.

Those who wrote the Constitution did not think that they were creating or granting rights. The source of rights, in the view of the founders, can be found in another very important document. Does any of this ring a bell?

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Good news: this website (====== http://bingshop.us =======) we has been updated and add products and many things they abandoned their increases are welcome to visit our website. Accept cash or credit card payments, free transport. You can try oh, will make you satisfied
（=== http://bingshop.us =====）

Pablo said:
Those who wrote the Constitution did not think that they were creating or granting rights. The source of rights, in the view of the founders, can be found in another very important document. Does any of this ring a bell?

Yes I know. And even there it seems to be more the deist god than the Christian one. My post had nothing to do with what the founders thought about god. It is still the Constitution upon which our laws are grounded in , and there is no mention of god there is there?

Nacho said:
Says you to the Canadian college students. This kinda reminds of the time Bill O’rielly brought in a Canadian Muslim to comment against the “ground Zero” area mosque.

Nacho, I don’t quite get the connection. I don’t watch Mr. O’Reilly’s program all that often so I did not see that and did not hear about it, and I can’t quite put together a connection with the GZ mosque and Christmas trees.

What I do know is I am not offended when I see displays of religious artifacts; in fact, I rather enjoy the artistic appeal of most of them.

But, for those who are offended by the sight of a Christmas tree, it’s kind of like being offended by the face of an ugly woman. We are not forced to look at photos of Barbara Mikulski and so we turn our heads, and I would suggest that those who are offended by Christmas trees do the same.

CosmosDan said:
Your post has nothing to do with my comment to Alz, but I’ll point this out.Aside from the fact that there is nothing about god in the Constitution, where our laws and rights actually come from, there’s this.You’re talking about what men, {mankind, or the majority} believe and that’s what determines the law. When men believed that it was okay to burn people at the stake for heresy or witchcraft where were our inalienable rights? When men believed that god didn’t mind if they owned other humans, and to deny equality or slaughtered native Americans out of greed, where were the inalienable rights. Our laws our rights are what we agree on and work for them to be as men, no more no less, and that is clearly demonstrated by mankind’s history.We don’t know if there is a god or not or what may or may not exist when our physical bodies fail, but I’m fairly certain of one thing. If an atheist , Muslim, Christian, Buddhist, or whatever, believes in the principles of justice, equality, liberty, compassion, etc. and demonstrates that through their actions, whether they are a theist or not doesn’t matter at all, because a theist can just as easily be a selfish cutthroat as anyone else. History demonstrates that as well.

First, thank you for your response. Second, excuse me for stepping in where I probably should not have.

Your remarks about the deplorable acts of man–burning at the stake, enslavement of other human beings, and slaughtering us “native Americans” (yes, I’m of the Ute nation), are examples of what tragic things happen when men decide another man’s rights come from men and not from God. It is God who gives us our rights and not men or governments.

You are also correct that men write laws; some are just and some are unjust. Those that are just are those that are natural laws–the laws of Nature and of Nature’s God. When man decides to promulgate a law that is in contradiction to (or inconsistent with), the laws of Nature and Nature’s God, it is invariably unjust for at some point, the unjust law infringes upon the right of some individual.

You mentioned the Constitution and you are correct that the word “God” does not appear in the text but God is referred to where the limitations placed on government’s being restrained from favoring a particular religion. While this text was written to ensure the United States would not become subject to the power held by the Church of England, it also provided freedom to those who practiced faiths other than Judaeo-Christian–or, no faith at all! However, while the Constitution did not mention God, per se, the Declaration of Independence (which enumerates those unalienable rights imbued upon man by God and Nature) is the key to the Constitution.

In summary, and as you have correctly reminded us, when man (or government) becomes the grantor of rights, someone eventually suffers from it; it is only by acknowleging that the source of an individual’s rights are above the control of man that all men can be free.

CosmosDan said:
We don’t know if there is a god or not or what may or may not exist when our physical bodies fail, but I’m fairly certain of one thing. If an atheist , Muslim, Christian, Buddhist, or whatever, believes in the principles of justice, equality, liberty, compassion, etc. and demonstrates that through their actions, whether they are a theist or not doesn’t matter at all, because a theist can just as easily be a selfish cutthroat as anyone else. History demonstrates that as well.

I was remiss in fully addressing this part of your remarks. For reasons I won’t go into here, for a time in my life I was an atheist. I could not prove–and no one could prove to me–the existence of a God, yet I considered myself to be a just and honest person, and so I will acknowlege that I have met many just and honest atheists.

An atheist who strives to be a good human being, I reckoned, is guided by ethics, while a person who embraces a religion is guided by a moral code. (I don’t know how all religions work, but this is my assumption.) As an athiest, I claimed that I chose to do good not out of some fear of punishment or expectation of some reward, but for the joy that doing good brought to me.

But, one day (the reason why is not important), I came to realize there is something bigger than myself–something that unites us and guides us…if we allow it to. I can’t say how embracing a religious faith would work for you, I can only tell you that it has worked well for me. So, I am not one to damn the man who is an atheist, I am the man who will tell you that you are a part of something bigger than yourself, and I hope you can experience what I have experienced.

Nahu Tuk said:
I was remiss in fully addressing this part of your remarks. For reasons I won’t go into here, for a time in my life I was an atheist. I could not prove–and no one could prove to me–the existence of a God, yet I considered myself to be a just and honest person, and so I will acknowlege that I have met many just and honest atheists.

An atheist who strives to be a good human being, I reckoned, is guided by ethics, while a person who embraces a religion is guided by a moral code. (I don’t know how all religions work, but this is my assumption.) As an athiest, I claimed that I chose to do good not out of some fear of punishment or expectation of some reward, but for the joy that doing good brought to me.

But, one day (the reason why is not important), I came to realize there is something bigger than myself–something that unites us and guides us…if we allow it to. I can’t say how embracing a religious faith would work for you, I can only tell you that it has worked well for me. So, I am not one to damn the man who is an atheist, I am the man who will tell you that you are a part of something bigger than yourself, and I hope you can experience what I have experienced.

That’s nice. A story that should be told often!

CosmosDan said:
… there is nothing about god in the Constitution…

Do you know why? It’s because it was left up to the STATES! At the time of the Declaration of Independence, something like NINE of the thirteen colonies had OFFICIAL religions.

As you may know, one of the main reasons the colonies wanted out was because of the Church of England. And the only way they would agree to combining was an agreement that the FEDERAL government would NOT have a church.

That is why the Constitution does NOT mention God, but EVERY SINGLE State Constitution DOES.

I know the schools do not teach the Constitution, but in this day and age, it’s clear that the liberals desire to LIE about it because this information is out there.