Offensive signature

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote: Sorry not offending, only an example which I hate as much as any normal human being: Tristan Mulders: And what if any member changes his signature to:   Would you find it offensive enough??????? Iván

Definitely... but than you're promoting mass murders who have hurt people emotionally from all over the world, not looking at religions..

Sorry not offending, only an example which I hate as much as any normal human being:

Tristan Mulders: And what if any member changes his signature to:

Would you find it offensive enough???????

Iván

That's my point precisely, Satanism isn't considered a formal religion, because it's main purposeis to attack the beliefs of other religions (Most of them), this is not Atheism, which is a valid position, this is ANTI Theism, ewhich ois a form of discrimination.

A few years ago I saw on TV a guy from one Satanic group making a scandal because the IRS and later the Supreme Court denied for hem the tax exemption granted to every Church, so apparently the Supreme Court who always cared about protection to the suposedly rights of the minorities, considered that Satanism wasn't a valid religion.

Not even the watchers of the rights protested against this decision.

Anyway, Stonebeard, as Ivan stated, he was simply pointing out the apparent hypocrisy in "separation of church and state" policies here, and frankly, he's got a very valid point. I agree with many of your comments, though.

Thanks Empathy, that's exactly what I pretended, I believe the right watchers go too far sometimes and theCourts fall in their game. Judges are afraid to take rational decistions because the ACLU (Not sure aboutthe letters) may fall against them and acuse them of harrassing the minorities.

It's absurd that a Judge can't place theJewish Tables of the Law, because want it or not, like it or hate it, it's a legal code so it has aplace in a courtroom.

Why ban religious teachings in Public Schools? Maybe make it optional, this will be an irerestrict respect to the freedom of everybody, if you don't want to take a Religion class, well, you have 20 other options.

The problem is politic and economic, every Religion will ask for classes and there would be no budget to pay teachers for every Religion in all schools, and the politicians can't allow that, because minorities also vote.

But on the other hand and because the Intelligent Design followers also vote, they are allowedto put in books about evolution that thisis only a theory as valid as Creationism or Intelligent Design.

Sorry guys, but I find this absolutely contradictory, even when I believe in God and Evolution (Which is probably some form of Intelligent Design, which is close to my beliefs), but to place thatb Evolution is only a theory is absurd even for me.

USA in their fight to protect the right of everybody is falling in the limitation of the rights of everybody. If you can't teach every Religion....Don't teach anyone. If you can't teach Ateism (Well hard issue to teach about except for some humanist Philosophies) then don't mention God.

As Bob Jones said I don't discriminate banning interracial dates, because I ban them for everybody......Holy God!!!!!! Thanks Heaven his tax exemption as University has been revoked.

Iván

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote: The Progtologist wrote: But I also was raised in a country where everyone is free to practice whatever religion they choose,and are free from prosecution because of it. I really can't understand you, if your info is correct you live in USA. A country in which school principals can loose their jobs if the word God is mentioned, a country where God can't be mentioned in public institutions, a country where a Circuit Judge was fired and sued because he commited the sin of hanging the Ten Commandments over his head (Even when he argued that it was a reference to a legal code). I don't believe people is allowed to practice whatever religion they want, at least not in Public places. But at the same time a country that accepts that a bunch of Fundamentalists force the Governments of several States to place before any book about evolution "This is only a theory, as valid as Creationism". So what irrestricted Religious freedom are you talking about?

I'm only going to make this one post. I don't want to debate anything.

1. Concerning those underlined in red: In my personal opinion, lef-wing/right-wing/etc. radical ignoramuses have made these cases so. If the constitution doesn't specifically allow for benign policies reguarding references of God and all other things relating to these subjects, then we should amend it. The USA should strive be a utopia for all people, and if certain people would stop making rediculous arguments like those outlined above, our society would nearly be that. Fundamentalists are the root of all evil, or at least it seems so to me.

Hey Stonebeard, I never said I agree with that, I'm only mentioning FACTS there are at least three cases that reached the Supreme Court in which Principals were fired for allowing religious references.

The case of the circuit Judge is well documented, he lost his position but he was declared innocent (Of course he was never elected again).

I'm against this kind of Fanatism, I don't have a problem with other religions or even Atheism but if something is praising a form of evil that is clearly against 4 big religions, it should be considered offensive.

2. Concerning the one in purple: As long as it isn't obscene or grotesque, I think society has to accomodate for it. Obviously no satanist can slaughter a sheep or anything like that, but a benign religious act should be accommodated. EX: Some people may get offended if, as if out of nowhere, a Muslim gets down on the ground and faces Mecca right in the middle of a sidewalk at midday. They may be offeneded, or felt imposed upon, but the Muslim should be allowed to do it, and the people should not care. It's those people who care about stuff like that, in any religion, society, and political field, and people who try to keep to old ways instead of embracing the future that are the root of all evil.

The Coran or Moslems beliefs are not against any other Religion, by the contrary, they are very similar in many aspects, they have some Fundamentalist, well some Christian groups claim that only white people can go to Heaven and the Bob Jones University didn't allowed dates between people from different races.

Is Bob Jones University guilty of racism because it has a rule restricting interracial dating? Students of all races attend here and live in racial harmony and respect for one another as Christians. If there is discrimination in the policy, which race is discriminated against? Black, white, or yellow? Each person dates within his own race. For there to be discrimination, one race would have to be treated differently than the other. (...) Bob Jones University opposes one world, one church, one economy, one military, one race, and unisex. God made racial differences as He made sexual differences. Each race and each sex should be proud to be what God made it, and none should reproach the other. http://www.sullivan-county.com/news/bob_jones/bju.htm

Any religious refernce MAY BE dangerous in a public forum (look at the quote, this is how things end some times),  but Satanism is a direct attack to almost every Religion.

BTW: I'm not a Fundamentalist, I'm totally against Fundamentalism (For God's sake, the last time I went to mass was in December because my Grandmother died) even if it comes from Christians or Catholics, I kept my mouth shut when a couple of members made fun the day the Pope (Our spiritual leader and God's direct representative for us) died, even when an idiot insulted his memory, but there's a point when things can get out of hand.

The guy from the signature was reasonable enough to retiire it, i don't even bekllieve he's a Satanist, probably he thought it wa fun to create some reaction, or maybe just found it cool, I don't know or care, but he made he correct decision IMO.

Iván