yayyyyyy God

[Kanada Kev]

[Kanada Kev]

[Kanada Kev]

Fisher Price Doll Promotes Islam in the US

[Kanada Kev]

[AD]

Suit against God thrown out

Oct 15, 2008 02:54 PM

Comments on this story (3)

NATE JENKINS

The Associated Press

LINCOLN– A judge has thrown out a Nebraska legislator's lawsuit against God, saying the Almighty wasn't properly served due to his unlisted home address.

State Sen. Ernie Chambers filed the lawsuit last year seeking a permanent injunction against God. He said God has made terroristic threats against the senator and his constituents in Omaha, inspired fear and caused "widespread death, destruction and terrorization of millions upon millions of the Earth's inhabitants.''

Chambers has said he filed the lawsuit to make the point that everyone should have access to the courts regardless of whether they are rich or poor.

On Tuesday, however, Douglas County District Court Judge Marlon Polk ruled that under state law a plaintiff must have access to the defendant for a lawsuit to move forward.

"Given that this court finds that there can never be service effectuated on the named defendant this action will be dismissed with prejudice," Polk wrote.

Chambers, who graduated from law school but never took the bar exam, thinks he's found a hole in the judge's ruling.

"The court itself acknowledges the existence of God," Chambers said Wednesday. "A consequence of that acknowledgment is a recognition of God's omniscience.''

Therefore, Chambers said, "Since God knows everything, God has notice of this lawsuit.''

Chambers has 30 days to decide whether to appeal. He said he hasn't decided yet.

Chambers, who has served a record 38 years in the Nebraska Legislature, is not returning next year because of term limits. He skips morning prayers during the legislative session and often criticizes Christians.

[Birdy]

"Since God knows everything, God has notice of this lawsuit."

[Kanada Kev]

Preahing says " he who is without sin, let him/her cast the first stone."

A rock comes flying from the back of the crowd and hits him on the forehead.

Jesus says rubbing his head "you know mom, sometimes you piss me off!"

[d_rawk]

Speak of the devil (the Voter Tunrout thread). No sooner did I bemoan DEM's disappearance than I received this link from him in email.

Atheist evangelising?

It's likely that the vast majority of people will be as sceptical about being sold atheism as they are about being sold belief

This week the "atheist bus" project finally gets wheels. After scrambling around for a few thousand quid, the money has finally come in to perambulate an inspiring message ("There's probably no God. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life") around our streets, bringing merriment to millions.

Apparently multimillionaire Richard Dawkins has been matching donations – but only up to a total of £5,500. Even so, the £11,000 needed to keep two sets of 30 buses carrying the slogan across Westminster for four weeks hasn't quite arrived yet. But it probably will. With another three due any minute.

To those without a huge vested interest in promoting or dissing religion, this probably looks a slightly odd initiative. Frankly, the slogan is a bit anodyne. It's the non-believing equivalent of "God may very well exist. Now have a nice day". But it will probably still be enough to upset counter-evangelists of the kind who like to tell everybody they are going to hell for not subscribing to their particular doctrine, and who think atheism is very, very naughty.

I wonder what impact this kind of campaign has, though? It will appeal to those who like that kind of thing, no doubt. And in part it seems to have been born out of resentment towards comparatively prodigious (and extremely well-funded) religious advertising. But apart from raising brand awareness, I suspect that the vast majority of people will be as sceptical about being sold unbelief as they are about being sold belief. Well, unless someone is thinking of throwing in a free set of wine glasses or something.

Beyond the headline, there's also a nice philosophical conundrum involved in the slogan. It claims to be atheist, but that "probably" sounds rather more like the frugal wing of agnosticism to me. Then again, theology never was Dawkins' supporters strong point, though it's intriguing that the campaigners are backing off the "almost certainly" that has accompanied many of Dawkins' own God-denunciations.

For what it's worth, as a Christian, I agree wholeheartedly with the slogan. The first part, anyway. It is indeed most probable that the kind of vindictive sky-god caricatured by the "new atheists", perpetuated by fundamentalists, and subtly compared to flying space teapots by over-eager Cif readers, does not exist.

The non-reality of "the gods" and the non-viability of any notion which makes God a thing, person or event subject to humanly verifiable rules of existence and to human classes of object is, of course, taken for granted by thoughtful people whatever their affiliation – Christian, Muslim and humanist. Perfectly traditional theology going back to Thomas Aquinas and beyond makes this evident.

Whether it rules in or out the transcendent God whose unconditional love many of us discover in and through the lesions of a free universe which can be both terrifyingly tragic and gloriously inspiring is, it seems to me, another matter altogether – and one that will not be settled by vituperative, knock-down arguments. It is, rather, a matter of faith. By this I do not mean the denial of rationality, but the kind of reasoning appropriate to a mystery which can never be captured by human mastery, and which requires an encounter with the personal (that is, the struggle to love) to perceive.

But back to those bus slogans. The "stop worrying and enjoy your life" bit I find more problematic. Not because I want people to worry and not enjoy life, but because for so many people it is really difficult to do this right now. Which is why the real message that needs to get out there is about encouraging one another in active compassion.

That, surely, is something we could all agree on? Compassion – an identification with the suffering of others so that you feel the need to alleviate pain and challenge injustice – is at the heart of the best kind of humanist thinking and living, and also the best kind of religious thinking and living.

Indeed, the New Testament suggests that those who go around

proclaiming that they love God while actually hating their sisters and brothers (in modern times by bombing them or condemning them out of hand) are actually liars – their religion is false, and they haven't got a clue what they are talking about when they use words like "God" and "love".

As for me, well I'm not much of a believer in slogans. The truth of deeds matching words and vice versa seems to me to be a much more convincing argument for whatever it is people claim to believe than any attempt to cajole with arguments or posters.

But if I had to summarise my convictions in a way that could communicate with believers and non-believers alike (for the purposes of meaningful conversation, rather than to "prove I'm right") it would be by saying that my life is staked, deeply fallibly, on the conviction that the power of love is finally stronger than the love of power.

If you can get to believe that without God, simply on the basis of what the universe appears to be and your own unaided effort, fair enough. I reckon that takes rather too much believing. But if the atheist bus campaign gets anyone to think seriously about this, or to live life more joyfully, I will be genuinely appreciative.

[d_rawk]

God is what spills in through the cracks of eternity.

Dibs.

[SaggyBalls]

Step on a crack, break your mothers' back!

[Thorgnor]

Share this with your friends...

Edited October 22, 2008 by Guest

[Kanada Kev]

Homosexual Scientists Isolate Gene for Christianity

Edited October 23, 2008 by Guest

[Kanada Kev]

[Kanada Kev]

[Kanada Kev]

[Kanada Kev]

[Kanada Kev]

[Birdy]

Just wondering if it's possible to have anything positive shown in this thread?

Having it continually resurface at the top of my little forum screen drives me crazy.

[d_rawk]

That's a good question. I get a kick out of all of it, but do feel like presenting the other side would a) not be as funny (and I think people primarily read this thread for humour, despite its origins) and would be seen as proselytizing. It's no secret that I self-identify as 'Christian' and a bunch of stuff showing the 'good side' of that would probably go over like a ton of bricks.

[Birdy]

Thing is, I don't even self-identify as a Christian.

I just don't find a lot of humour in poking fun at a person's religious beliefs. I equate it to laughing as the school bully picks on the less fortunate kid in the classroom.

It gets very old (for me at least), very fast. And considering the size of this thread, that 'very fast' came ages ago.

[Birdy]

Here, in an effort to be more positive, i post this photo I took a few days ago...

i just came back from London and this little Norman chapel was in the white tower at the Tower of London site. If anyone is in London, i highly suggest visiting the Tower... it was my most favourite thing I did while over there and was absolutely amazing in every regard.

[Kanada Kev]

Birdy,

That's a killer shot of that chapel. Looks really cool.

As for your concerns about this thread ... maybe the subject line should have been in purple??? Go back and take a look at the initial posts in the thread. It's about the EXTREMES in religion. Like d_jango said, it's for the humour, albeit a bit black. To see/hear extremes in the religious realm show how ultimately nasty it can be.

I just don't find a lot of humour in poking fun at a person's religious beliefs. I equate it to laughing as the school bully picks on the less fortunate kid in the classroom.

Since when are these examples of religious nuttdom equivalent to the "less fortunate" kid in the classroom? These fundamentalist "less fortunate" kids are trying to exert their beliefs in ways that resemble the bully that you mention.

Lot of touchy people around these parts these days.

Having it continually resurface at the top of my little forum screen drives me crazy.

Don't read it then!!!

Remember, YOU have control of what you open up and read here. You can also change your settings to IGNORE members as well.

[Birdy]

dude, trust me, I've considered it in the past. But then not everything a person writes is something I don't want to read.

Religious 'nuttdom' is TOTALLY subjective and you equate that with what your perception of religion is.

Tell me how your continual posting of videos and photos and articles is any better than the continual attempt at conversion by these 'nuts'? You're doing the SAME thing, from the other side Kev. They spout their propaganda, you spout yours. Who's better?

Sorry, i don't mean to sound like a complete beeyotch, just the way I see it. I understand from your previous posts that you've had some not-so-comfortable experiences with fundamentalists, and I respect that. I just think there's a much better way to sort it all out than with these derogatory photos, et al.

I know I don't have to open the thread and I exercise that right quite frequently. Only occasionally will I come in to see if something is new or different and I find i'm often wrong.

Thanks for the comment about my photo... that place was the best!

[Birdy]

from the telegram.com

Religion in school hit

Worcester humanists hear teen’s experience

By Bronislaus B. Kush TELEGRAM & GAZETTE STAFF

bkush@telegram.com

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

WORCESTER— Matthew LaClair looked forward to taking his accelerated 11th-grade American history class, hoping to learn how the founding fathers, among other things, framed the U.S. Constitution to guarantee that the government would be free of religious influences.

The 16-year-old got more than he had hoped for — becoming the focus of a lingering separation of church and state controversy that some feel will be discussed for years to come in constitutional law classes.

Mr. LaClair, now 18, drew national media attention back in fall 2006 after complaining that David Paszkiewicz, his history instructor at Kearny High School in Kearny, N.J., was proselytizing.

The teen, who felt uncomfortable with what his teacher was saying, secretly taped eight classes, which revealed Mr. Paszkiewicz discussing his faith and telling his students that heavenly salvation could only be attained through Jesus Christ.

“I don’t have any problem with what he believes in,†said Mr. LaClair, who spoke yesterday afternoon at the annual summer outing of the Greater Worcester Humanists group. “But I do have a problem about him talking about his religion in a public high school and trying to convert his students.â€

Mr. LaClair graduated last spring and will attend The New School in New York City this fall, hoping one day to become a broadcast journalist. Mr. Paszkiewicz, who is the youth pastor at Kearny Baptist Church, still teaches at Kearny High.

What happened almost two years ago still bitterly divides the town of Kearny, a community of about 41,000 that’s located across the Passaic River from Newark. It also has provided further fodder in the long-running debate about the role of religion in public classrooms.

“I am saddened, frustrated, and just angry about how school officials handled the whole thing,†said Mr. LaClair.

He was surprised that most people in Kearny ended up supporting Mr. Paszkiewicz, a well-liked 16-year veteran of the school system.

Mr. LaClair said that even many longtime friends turned against him. One student sent him a death threat.

“He’s so convincing that you like to hear him talk,†said Mr. LaClair of his former teacher. “He’s charming and calming. I also think a lot of people thought that I was personally attacking Jesus and his faith. I never intended to do that.â€

Mr. LaClair, who noted that his parents did not ascribe to a particular faith and attended a variety of churches and synagogues for worship services, said he should have guessed that he might find Mr. Paszkiewicz’s course objectionable.

“My sister’s friends warned me that he often brought religion into the classroom discussion. At the time, I didn’t really think anything of it,†said Mr. LaClair, who received the 2008 American Humanist Association Pioneer Award. “But from the start, he discussed his beliefs. I let it go the first day. But then the next day, the same thing happened and I started to think that he was doing something wrong.â€

According to Mr. LaClair, Mr. Paszkiewicz, during class time, advocated the theory of creationism, denigrated the beliefs of Muslims, and said that only Christians were destined for heaven. In one discussion, Mr. Paszkiewicz observed that dinosaurs were aboard Noah’s Ark.

“He basically said that if you didn’t follow Jesus you’d go to hell,†Mr. LaClair said.

Shortly after classes began, Mr. LaClair told the school principal about his misgivings and followed up that discussion with a letter.

Nothing happened until Oct. 6, when Mr. LaClair met with the principal, Mr. Paszkiewicz and the History Department head “in a tense meeting.†Mr. LaClair’s parents were not allowed to attend.

During the meeting, Mr. Paszkiewicz denied Mr. LaClair’s charges and said that much of what he said during class had been taken out of context.

Mr. LaClair said his teacher said that he needed his job because he had four children dependent on him, including one with kidney disease.

“It was almost like he was saying that I’d be killing the kid, if I continued to push forward with my complaint,†said Mr. LaClair.

It was during that meeting that Mr. LaClair revealed, for the first time, that he had taped some of the classroom discussions.

“The whole tenor then changed, and the meeting ended soon after,†said Mr. LaClair, noting he then followed up with a letter to the school superintendent and to the local board of education. “Still nothing happened. They just wanted to sweep it under the rug.â€

Frustrated with a lack of response, Mr. LaClair told his story to the local newspaper. He said he was surprised with the response, with many charging that he had set up the teacher and that he had an “agenda†that he wanted to pursue.

It wasn’t until The New York Times reported the issue a month later that Mr. LaClair said he finally started to get some support.

Eventually, Mr. LaClair reached a settlement with school officials who allowed three prominent speakers to talk to the student body about the separation of church and state, evolution, and other related matters.

School officials also told Mr. LaClair, who ended up getting a B for his work in the course, that they had taken “corrective action†against Mr. Paszkiewicz.

“I could have sued, but that wouldn’t have helped,†said Mr. LaClair, who wants to write a book about his experience.

“If I won the case, I’d only get money. There would be no satisfaction because, even to this day, they (school officials) just don’t understand why I made an issue of what happened in those classes.â€

"I could have sued". Wow.

How does anyone learn about religion if it can't be taught? We advocate the separation of the church and state, but i can't help but think we're taking away a valuable educational resource.

To think that a teacher can't express what he believes irritates the fuck out of me.

[Hal Johnson]

C'mon, birdy, there's a definite difference there...The seperation of church and state can and should have been a fact laden discussion...not a teacher preaching to kids about his religion.

The History of the Seperation of Church and State: Listen as our teacher tries to convince you that his religion is the best.

I'd be pissed too.

Edited November 3, 2008 by Guest