Fox Friends Outraged Over Atheists 'M...

Fox Friends Outraged Over Atheists 'Making Christmas Great Again'

There are 185 comments on the Crooks and Liars story from Dec 6, 2016, titled Fox Friends Outraged Over Atheists 'Making Christmas Great Again'. In it, Crooks and Liars reports that:

The Fox Friends on the couch are trying to express their disbelief and outrage over a billboard that uses a portion of Trump's slogan, which he apparently trademarked by Trump just six days after President Obama's reelection victory in 2012. The program director for the group American Atheists, Mr. Nick Fish, did his best texplain the billboard pictured above.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Crooks and Liars.

First Prev
of 10
Next Last
EdSed

UK

#1 Saturday Dec 31
"Making Christmas Great Again" :-)

Religion is superstition. It's outdated, divisive and far more trouble than its worth.
IB DaMann

Aldie, VA

#2 Saturday Dec 31
EdSed wrote:
"Making Christmas Great Again" :-)

Religion is superstition. It's outdated, divisive and far more trouble than its worth.
Yet everyone (save a modest few) loves Christmas.
hpcaban

Cabo Rojo, Puerto Rico

#4 Saturday Dec 31
IB DaMann wrote:
<quoted text>
Yet everyone (save a modest few) loves Christmas.
You are confusing Christmas and religion!
Eagle 12

Troy, IL

#5 Saturday Dec 31
EdSed wrote:
"Making Christmas Great Again" :-)

Religion is superstition. It's outdated, divisive and far more trouble than its worth.
Religion has been with mankind since the dawn of mankind.

Having said that I agree that some religions are man made, divisive and superstitious.

You mentioned divisiveness, also very true but so are many in atheism as they are intolerant of religious freedom.
IB DaMann

Philadelphia, PA

#6 Saturday Dec 31
hpcaban wrote:
You are confusing Christmas and religion!
The topic is "Christmas" and everyone loves it.

Mostly Christians adore the religion.
IB DaMann

Philadelphia, PA

#7 Saturday Dec 31
Eagle 12 wrote:
You mentioned divisiveness, also very true but so are many in atheism as they are intolerant of religious freedom.
I disagree. Actual atheists, such as I, are all for religious freedom.

The self-declared "atheists" that attack Christans, for example, are devoted theists, typically Marxists or warmizombies. Their faiths require their worshipers to HATE all competing religions and to HATE any who hold viewpoints that differ, even in the slightest. They have no tolerance for science or proven economics.

“Pissident Trump”

Since: Dec 16

Big Top Peee-peee

#9 Monday Jan 2
Eagle 12 wrote:
<quoted text>

Religion has been with mankind since the dawn of mankind.

Having said that I agree that some religions are man made, divisive and superstitious.

You mentioned divisiveness, also very true but so are many in atheism as they are intolerant of religious freedom.
How has any atheist subverted your or another Christians religious freedom?
Eagle 12

Troy, IL

#10 Monday Jan 2
Trumpler wrote:
<quoted text>

How has any atheist subverted your or another Christians religious freedom?
There are lots of examples. I assume you are referring to the United States. But internationally Christians were targeted, persecuted and murdered by atheist state governments.

Here in the U.S. a law enacted in Houston Texas known as the HERO law, Houston Equal Rights Ordinance (HERO). The mayor of that city at the time subpoenaed Christian Pastors sermons in order to determine if they had spoken against HERO from the pulpit.

That is a violation of the church's right of religious freedom. This was nothing more than a Gestapo tactic to censor Christians from speaking out about their opposition of letting men with male sex organs into women's public restrooms under the disguise of those who are transgender.

Actually it's a public safety issue for both transgenders and women.

If they wanted to know what was being said from the pulpit they could just attend the services. But they in city government wanted to intimidate and censor Christians. A clear violation of the us constitution.

Other more recent examples are churches and pastors being sued for refusing to marry gay couples.

Does the government now have the right to subvert what Christians believe and force them into performing acts they feel are contrary to Christian teaching?

If gay couples want to get married they have other options including Justice of the Peace, hire a gay clergy, or go to someone who will perform the ceremony. In Texas to get married all you have to do is declare yourself married in front of witnesses.

“Church of Ultimate Naked Truth”

Since: Aug 15

Science not Superstition

#12 Monday Jan 2
IB DaMann wrote:
<quoted text>
Actual atheists, such as I, are all for religious freedom.
You are declaring yourself to be an atheist.
IB DaMann wrote:
<quoted text>
The self-declared "atheists" that attack Christans, for example, are devoted theists, typically Marxists or warmizombies. Their faiths require their worshipers to HATE all competing religions and to HATE any who hold viewpoints that differ, even in the slightest. They have no tolerance for science or proven economics.
So I guess all this applies to you too.
IB DaMann

Philadelphia, PA

#13 Tuesday Jan 3
JustASkeptic wrote:
So I guess all this applies to you too.
Reading is apparently not your strong suit. Go back and look for the "that bash Christians" qualifier.

“Church of Ultimate Naked Truth”

Since: Aug 15

Science not Superstition

#14 Tuesday Jan 3
IB DaMann wrote:
<quoted text>
Reading is apparently not your strong suit. Go back and look for the "that bash Christians" qualifier.
1) You declared yourself to be an atheist.

2) You made comments regarding self declared atheists.

3) Because of 1 those comments apply to you too.
IB DaMann

Alexandria, VA

#15 Tuesday Jan 3
JustASkeptic wrote:
<quoted text>

1) You declared yourself to be an atheist.

2) You made comments regarding self declared atheists.

3) Because of 1 those comments apply to you too.
Reading comprehension is still not your strong suit, even when things are spelled out for you.

Learn what a "qualifier" is.

“ecrasez l'infame”

Since: Dec 16

Hendersonville, NC

#16 Tuesday Jan 3
Eagle 12 wrote:
<quoted text>

There are lots of examples. I assume you are referring to the United States. But internationally Christians were targeted, persecuted and murdered by atheist state governments.

Here in the U.S. a law enacted in Houston Texas known as the HERO law, Houston Equal Rights Ordinance (HERO). The mayor of that city at the time subpoenaed Christian Pastors sermons in order to determine if they had spoken against HERO from the pulpit.
....
The Houston Equal Rights Ordinance never passed.
Eagle 12

Troy, IL

#17 Tuesday Jan 3
Hedonist Heretic wrote:
<quoted text>

The Houston Equal Rights Ordinance never passed.
Thanks,

"On May 28, 2014, the Houston City Council voted 11-6 to enact the Houston Equal Rights Ordinance (HERO)."

It looks like it went to a popular vote and the citizens voted it down. See below..

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Houston,_Texa...
Amused

Lowell, MA

#18 Tuesday Jan 3
IB DaMann wrote:
<quoted text>
Yet everyone (save a modest few) loves Christmas.
I hear tell it is not so beloved in most of the middle east, particularly those places where they care a great deal about which way one faces while addressing the Great Imaginary Friend.

“Pissident Trump”

Since: Dec 16

Big Top Peee-peee

#19 Tuesday Jan 3
Eagle 12 wrote:
There are lots of examples. I assume you are referring to the United States. But internationally Christians were targeted, persecuted and murdered by atheist state governments.

Here in the U.S. a law enacted in Houston Texas known as the HERO law, Houston Equal Rights Ordinance (HERO). The mayor of that city at the time subpoenaed Christian Pastors sermons in order to determine if they had spoken against HERO from the pulpit.

That is a violation of the church's right of religious freedom. This was nothing more than a Gestapo tactic to censor Christians from speaking out about their opposition of letting men with male sex organs into women's public restrooms under the disguise of those who are transgender.

Actually it's a public safety issue for both transgenders and women.

If they wanted to know what was being said from the pulpit they could just attend the services. But they in city government wanted to intimidate and censor Christians. A clear violation of the us constitution.
The scope of the subpoena was to determine the validity of the petitions seeking the recall of HERO, in which pastors made their sermons relevant to the case by using the pulpit to do political organizing. That included encouraging congregation members to sign petitions and help gather signatures that would deny other people in society, equal rights. Tax-exempt churches cannot use the pulpit to promote a specific candidate, nor can it use the church as a meeting place for petitions to be signed that are political in nature, but can use it as forum to discuss policy. It's a very fine line. A line that was eventually sorted out and finally resolved by the vote of citizens.

As far as transgender people, your religious beliefs are irrelevant on the issue. Men have always been able to go into a woman's restroom, either as a man or disguised as a woman and assault a female.

I know it's difficult for the religious to understand this, but this has to do with people(transgenders) that are not trying to disguise who they are in order to assault men or women in a public restroom. They just want to use the bathroom.
Eagle 12 wrote:
Other more recent examples are churches and pastors being sued for refusing to marry gay couples.

Does the government now have the right to subvert what Christians believe and force them into performing acts they feel are contrary to Christian teaching?
Not as far as a belief goes, which is a matter of the mind, but yes it does as far as "acts" go. Just as it can force radical Muslim terrorists to not follow their religious imperative to kill infidels. Or force a peaceful Muslim woman to not wear her hijab for a license photo. Mormons can't legally practice polygamy either. The list is too large to fully express here.

If there was a religion in the US that held cannibalism to be one of its central tenets, they would be prohibited from practicing that aspect of their belief. People of religion can believe whatever bizarre detail in regards to their belief all they want, preach it, "pray to god about it" and declare it to be "eternal truth" but they can't force others to accept or align with their beliefs and accept those practices, legally.

I need to point this out. None of what you mentioned prohibited those people from believing what they believed as far as their religious beliefs go.

“Pissident Trump”

Since: Dec 16

Big Top Peee-peee

#20 Tuesday Jan 3
Eagle 12 wrote:
If gay couples want to get married they have other options including Justice of the Peace, hire a gay clergy, or go to someone who will perform the ceremony. In Texas to get married all you have to do is declare yourself married in front of witnesses.
I have no disagreement there, except to say, if a Christian pastor(or any religion) accepts offers from the general public to marry them, they need to put a sign on the door stating they do not marry people of the same sex etc..., or quit promoting the idea that they will marry anyone that requests a religious marriage ceremony that walks(or calls in) from the street, that is then accepted by the state as legally married, which is a right and a law and will also impact the status the married couple legally receives as far as tax purposes and so forth.

Here's an idea. Make marriage a process that requires a sworn Justice of the Peace to perform the marriage and attest to the legal union first and only that is needed. Afterward,if someone wants a religious ceremony, find a church that will marry them. That would remove the "church" or religion from the business of sanctioning a couple to be legally married by way of a religious ceremony, which, in my opinion, is close to violating or does violate church/state separation. Legally, all you need to get married would be another person, a trip to a courthouse, a witness, and a signed document.

When people get married in a church, it isn’t recognized by the government without the legal documentation. It places the religious cart in front of the legal horse when the religious ceremony is first and used as the basis of being "legally married"(generally based on the pastor filling out the legal documentation and submitted after the religious ceremony) as far as the state is concerned.

“Pissident Trump”

Since: Dec 16

Big Top Peee-peee

#21 Tuesday Jan 3
Eagle 12 wrote:
If gay couples want to get married they have other options including Justice of the Peace, hire a gay clergy, or go to someone who will perform the ceremony. In Texas to get married all you have to do is declare yourself married in front of witnesses.
I have no disagreement there, except to say, if a Christian pastor(or any religion) accepts offers from the general public to marry them, they need to put a sign on the door stating they do not marry people of the same sex etc..., or quit promoting the idea that they will marry anyone that requests a religious marriage ceremony that walks(or calls in) from the street, that is then accepted by the state as legally married, which is a right and a law and will also impact the status the married couple legally receives as far as tax purposes and so forth.

Here's an idea. Make marriage a process that requires a sworn Justice of the Peace to perform the marriage and attest to the legal union first and only that is needed. Afterward, if someone wants a religious ceremony, find a church that will marry them. That would remove the "church" or religion from the business of sanctioning a couple to be legally married by way of a religious ceremony, which, in my opinion, is close to violating or does violate church/state separation. Legally, all you need to get married would be another person, a trip to a courthouse, a witness, and a signed document.

When people get married in a church, it isn’t recognized by the government without the legal documentation. It places the religious cart in front of the legal horse when the religious ceremony is first and used as the basis of being "legally married"(generally based on the pastor filling out the legal documentation and submitted after the religious ceremony) as far as the what qualifies as a legal marriage is concerned.
Eagle 12

Troy, IL

#22 Tuesday Jan 3
Trumpler wrote:
<quoted text> The scope of the subpoena was to determine the validity of the petitions seeking the recall of HERO, in which pastors made their sermons relevant to the case by using the pulpit to do political organizing. That included encouraging congregation members to sign petitions and help gather signatures that would deny other people in society, equal rights. Tax-exempt churches cannot use the pulpit to promote a specific candidate, nor can it use the church as a meeting place for petitions to be signed that are political in nature, but can use it as forum to discuss policy. It's a very fine line. A line that was eventually sorted out and finally resolved by the vote of citizens.

As far as transgender people, your religious beliefs are irrelevant on the issue. Men have always been able to go into a woman's restroom, either as a man or disguised as a woman and assault a female.

I know it's difficult for the religious to understand this, but this has to do with people(transgenders) that are not trying to disguise who they are in order to assault men or women in a public restroom. They just want to use the bathroom.

<quoted text>

Not as far as a belief goes, which is a matter of the mind, but yes it does as far as "acts" go. Just as it can force radical Muslim terrorists to not follow their religious imperative to kill infidels. Or force a peaceful Muslim woman to not wear her hijab for a license photo. Mormons can't legally practice polygamy either. The list is too large to fully express here.

If there was a religion in the US that held cannibalism to be one of its central tenets, they would be prohibited from practicing that aspect of their belief. People of religion can believe whatever bizarre detail in regards to their belief all they want, preach it, "pray to god about it" and declare it to be "eternal truth" but they can't force others to accept or align with their beliefs and accept those practices, legally.

I need to point this out. None of what you mentioned prohibited those people from believing what they believed as far as their religious beliefs go.
Throughout history churches in much of rural North America was not only the church, but also the school and place for government meetings. In the African American communities the church is still a place where political issues are discussed.

The subpoena was meant to harass, intimidate, and discourage organization against such law. It was a Gestapo East German Police action. And because of that overreach the law failed the popular vote.

And no men haven't always been able to go into women's restrooms unchallenged. Women don't want men going into their public restrooms and pissing on their toilet seats. And there's a public safety issue for women.

On the other hand men could care less if a woman comes into their public restrooms.

It's simple actually, if you have a dangler then you go to the little boys room. If you're missing the angle of the dangle then it's the women's restroom. Or option two is wear a diaper like the astronauts do on space walks.
IB DaMann

Aldie, VA

#23 Tuesday Jan 3
Amused wrote:
I hear tell it is not so beloved in most of the middle east, particularly those places where they care a great deal about which way one faces while addressing the Great Imaginary Friend.
Absolutely. I meant here in my country.

I think celebrating Christmas in northern Afghanistan will garner a death sentence from the first jirga.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 10
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Monroe Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Louisiana Christians reclaim safe space by runn... 18 hr Eagle 12 149
Family new to Sterlington, LA seeks work, new b... 23 hr devoutfamily 1
Guy.hello? Sun Kelley 1
News Hotel worker helps catch car thief Dec 18 Smurfet 1
News Rayville man faces 12 charges (Feb '11) Dec '16 journeyforthemissing 4
News Gay Kid in Louisiana Says 'Duck Dynasty' Star M... (Jan '14) Nov '16 Trump voice for God 121
News FEMA Trailers for Sale in West Monroe, Bastrop (Feb '10) Oct '16 ThomasA 13

Monroe Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Monroe Mortgages