A Believers Critique Of The Humanist Manifesto

Phat writes: Confirmation bias may well fill in the blanks...as I believe that there is One Spirit and a host of wannabe imitators. Thus in my mind, a voice...feeling...or even observation can be subjectively said to "exist" and yet confirming my belief that it is a false god. A demon.

Indeed, whether the observation was real or not, your biases decide whether it's a true god or a false god. If you were biased toward evidence you might have said it was a brain-glitch, or just a misinterpretation of the data.

Phat writes: Granted I have a measure of respect within my community due to my reputation for questioning things that most believers won't even touch.

Congratulations to your community. Many religious communities would condemn you for questioning anything. When they're fixated on an unsupportable position, condemnation is all they have.

Phat writes: In my mind, I have a high degree of confidance that none of them are the Real Slim Shady.

So, as I've asked before, how DO you recognize the real Slim Shady? Is it just coincidence that you believe in the same Slim Shady as your neighbours? Is it just coincidence that Cleopatra and Tutankhamen believed in the same Slim Shady, though different from yours?

So, as I've asked before, how DO you recognize the real Slim Shady? Is it just coincidence that you believe in the same Slim Shady as your neighbours? Is it just coincidence that Cleopatra and Tutankhamen believed in the same Slim Shady, though different from yours?

In my experience, you don't. It takes faith.

I don't know that what I experienced was God. I do think that the concept that most people use the word "God" to describe does fit for the thing that I encountered. I can't tell if my opinions about it our accurate or not, and I don't know if the way my parents raised me was on track.

I asked them about how I was raised, and what they believe, and we all came to the conclusion that it was a good track to be on. While the odds are that we're off on a lot of things, given the reality of God I can be confident that the teachings that I've receieved are an honest attempt to understand what's going on here.

With the history of my family, and those that came before me following in these footsteps (and the successes that this family has achieved and continues to pass forward), I can accept that our religion is a good way to approach an attempt at figuring out this thing that we cannot understand.

So I'm in.

I could mention pedophile priests but I won't.

My belief in God is based on direct experience. Nobody here today saw the Flood.

No, they did not, but then nobody saw the sun forming from a ball of hydrogen gas either. Most of us don't even have personal experience with the evidence that the sun formed in that way.

I hope it does not seem that I am picking on you. I wrestle with the same questions.

It seems that the battle is far from over. The American Humanist Association, a staunch defender of Scientific Integrity recently derided the US Supreme Court for allowing a church to receive federal funding.
AHA Condemns Supreme Court Ruling Sending Tax Dollars to Churches

I would argue that at least some of the taxpayers are Christians...and the church playground benefits secular kids as well...

The issue in my mind is not simply separation of church and state. It is a test as to who calls the shots. The Supreme Court would seem to fill that role.

Let's see if the Mosque and Temple and Satanist Cabal are given the same funding.

Trust jar to be sure we have lots of wolves in the hen house.

Phat writes: It seems that the battle is far from over.

Of course it isn't. There are still whole swards of the world consumed by religion. Religion has had people by the throat for thousands of years - it's only been challenged by reason for a couple of hundred.

The American Humanist Association, a staunch defender of Scientific Integrity recently derided the US Supreme Court for allowing a church to receive federal funding.

Quite rightly.

AHA Condemns Supreme Court Ruling Sending Tax Dollars to Churches I would argue that at least some of the taxpayers are Christians...and the church playground benefits secular kids as well...

So what? Separation means separation - if the state is funding churches it's not separate from them.

The issue in my mind is not simply separation of church and state. It is a test as to who calls the shots.

It's simple, the answer is the state. How can it be anything else? The state represents ALL the people not just some of them. You have to ask 'which church?' Every believer will assume it's theirs and not the others. That's why separation was decided right at the beginning by your founders.

Faith writes: Trust jar to be sure we have lots of wolves in the hen house.

We live in the US faith. If public money are used to fund a Christian School playground then the local Madrassa has exactly the same rights to public funds.

Religious Freedom means the Muslim Faith must be treated like the Christian Faith. Jewish Faith must be treated like the Christian Faith. Satanist Faith must be treated like the Christian Faith. Buddhist Faith must be treated like the Christian Faith. Hindu Faith must be treated like the Christian Faith.

Thank God!

Yes, stupidest thing ever since Islam wants to rule the world, and Satanism is inimical to all sane culture.

The church claimed discrimination. After all, if the Boy Scouts get funding to improve their playground, surely so too can the church. Thank God the US Supreme Court agreed. As to the other imitators, I suppose they too have a legal basis, though public outcry might shelve the Satanists---or---more likely---the Satanists will eventually force the Christian churches to again lose.

Meanwhile, the boy scouts skate off with public funding! Churches will have to get clever and start Secular programs in order to get funding.

Faith writes: stupidest thing ever since Islam wants to rule the world...

Seculaism will eventually rule the world and will tolerate religions only for so long. The next war will be caused by this. Freedoms will be lost in the name of security.

The sad thing is that the Conservative Christians will do as they have always done and provide only for their own families. Also in regards to the state/church funding, the churches will have to open secular organizations and allow the Islamic and Atheist kids to mingle with the Christian kids. Which may well be Gods overall plan anyway. Isolation won't help.

Edited by Phat, : No reason given.

Faith writes: Yes, stupidest thing ever since Islam wants to rule the world, and Satanism is inimical to all sane culture.

But the reality is that you live in the US and in the US, Thank God!, we do have freedom of religion. That means that in the US Satanism, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Taoism, animism, atheism, agnosticism all have equal standing with Christianity.

Sorry Faith but fortunately that is the Law of the Land.

As long as we now apply the same standards to requests from any other religious group it will be lawful. But as soon as some fools turn down a request from the local Madrassa the whole concept of Religious Freedom will be tested.

Unfortunately there is a possibility, maybe even a likelihood that that could well happen. Remember "It can't happen here"?

The biggest threat to the continuation of the US as a free nation is the rise of a Charismatic Christian politician.

It's a stupid law of the land if it allows freedom to openly totalitarian murderous "religions."