Forums

ForumsWorld Events, Politics, Religion, Etc.

Atheists and Homosexuals

Posted Nov 1, '12 at 9:24pm

Dark123456789

Dark123456789

23 posts

Those laws sort of make sense considering that in the American anthem are the words "in God we trust". So... if you are an atheist and you don't believe in your own countries anthem why should you hold office?

I can see the logic behind those laws.

Government should not be determined by religion. Using religion to decide how the world should be run is forcing religious beliefs on people. Those laws mere remnants of the primitive past where people thought that difference meant evil. Those laws should be abolished.

 

Posted Nov 1, '12 at 9:28pm

Freakenstein

Freakenstein

8,206 posts

Moderator

Those laws sort of make sense considering that in the American anthem are the words "in God we trust". So... if you are an atheist and you don't believe in your own countries anthem why should you hold office?

Please don't say that this is part of America's anthem, because it really isn't.  This was imprinted on coins the 1800s I believe after Reconstruction. Afterwards, there was a very, very recent change to the Flag adding "Under God" to the Pledge in 1957 during the Red Scare. This was to somehow reassure ourselves that we aren't "like the Russians and not like Communists".

This shouldn't even be here, let alone be used as a reason for Religious requirements.

 

Posted Nov 1, '12 at 9:34pm

chives1

chives1

28 posts

But also in the Bill of rights it says we have freedom of religion, and frankly if you don't believe in a Supreme Being and that's your religion, fine with me. It seems that some people seem to see things more clearly without religion, such as Galileo when he was trying to figure out what sunspots were.

Christopher Schiener, a fellow astronomer, was trying to figure out what the mysterious spots over the sun were at the same time as Galileo, however he held in his belief of the Catholic Church's doctrine that the heavens were perfect. He argued that the spots were other planets and moons passing between the Sun and the Earth were the cause, but Galileo, less influenced by the doctrine, studied the spots and found out that they seemingly contracted near the edge, so he proved they were flat objects on the surface of the sun.

So religion can cloud people's minds from the truth, as it has been proved many times in history. As for gays, if religion is saying that homosexual marriage is a sin or a bad thing, and the Supreme Being who told us these principles created and does not directly strike down these gays, then why should we?

 

Posted Nov 1, '12 at 9:40pm

VonHeisenbourg

VonHeisenbourg

215 posts

Please don't say that this is part of America's anthem, because it really isn't.

In my own opinion if you quote something out of an anthem that has been there for many years it is in my belief a very definite part of the anthem.

This shouldn't even be here, let alone be used as a reason for Religious requirements.

All I have to say is that for the aforementioned reason I disagree.

 

Posted Nov 1, '12 at 9:49pm

nichodemus

nichodemus

12,167 posts

Knight

For many, the two are conflated.

 

Posted Nov 1, '12 at 9:52pm

nichodemus

nichodemus

12,167 posts

Knight

Frank has a definite point. When people claim that God and religion were what America was built on, and cite the anthem, they haven't actually acknowledged that such a change is very recent if we consider the whole span of American history.

 

Posted Nov 1, '12 at 10:54pm

VonHeisenbourg

VonHeisenbourg

215 posts

When people claim that God and religion were what America was built on, and cite the anthem, they haven't actually acknowledged that such a change is very recent if we consider the whole span of American history.

I don't consider that relevant, what I do think that is that if you disagree and don't support your modern  day anthem you probably shouldn't run for or be allowed to run for office.

 

Posted Nov 1, '12 at 11:09pm

Devoidless

Devoidless

3,553 posts

disagree and don't support your modern  day anthem you probably shouldn't run for or be allowed to run for office.

So do all of your Canadian officials really believe in swearing an oath to the Queen of England? To quote the Oath of Allegiance:

I, [name], do swear that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second, Queen of Canada, Her Heirs and Successors. So help me God.

Not just the sodding Queen, but a god as well! Even if you a nonreligious, they have one for you as well.

I, [name], do solemnly, sincerely and truly affirm and declare the taking of an oath is according to my religious belief unlawful, and I do also solemnly, sincerely and truly affirm and declare that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II.

So either way, they are pledging allegiance to a Queen that has had no power in your country nor hers for an awful long while.

 

Posted Nov 1, '12 at 11:13pm

Freakenstein

Freakenstein

8,206 posts

Moderator

I don't consider that relevant, what I do think that is that if you disagree and don't support your modern  day anthem you probably shouldn't run for or be allowed to run for office.

When such beliefs include confirmation of a higher being even though the very basis of the constitution of that State separates religion from the State? Hopskotch.

 

Posted Nov 1, '12 at 11:20pm

VonHeisenbourg

VonHeisenbourg

215 posts

@devoidless

I hope this isn't considered spam, but my comment to your last post is: touché    :D

he very basis of the constitution of that State separates religion from the State?

Also a good point, one that I hasn't thought of previously (even though it was mentioned

Not that this'll mean much, but I now rescind my previous statements of having to support an anthem to be allowed to enter office.

I now understand why the laws are in place, but disagree with them. I know this doesn't mean much/anything but that is just my two cents :)

 
Reply to Atheists and Homosexuals

You must be logged in to post a reply!