The removal of "under god" from the pledge is being debated in Massachusetts supreme court!

Should they remove "under god" from the pledge?

  • Yes

    Votes: 27 62.8%
  • No

    Votes: 15 34.9%
  • I do not know

    Votes: 1 2.3%

  • Total voters
    43

☑︎#VoteDemocrat

The Original
WOAT
Supporter
Joined
Dec 9, 2012
Messages
307,466
Reputation
-34,327
Daps
618,044
Reppin
The Deep State
:smh:@the hate for atheists here, even the supposed "liberal" Bob Beckel. It's easy to say this is just a bunch of conservative Fox News dikkheads, but Dana Perino was actually the White House Press Secretary and worked for the Justice Department.



I was shocked Beckel didn't even know it was added to the pledge.

fukk all of them for that shyt.
 

☑︎#VoteDemocrat

The Original
WOAT
Supporter
Joined
Dec 9, 2012
Messages
307,466
Reputation
-34,327
Daps
618,044
Reppin
The Deep State
what rights?? :mjpls:

unborn babies being killed allover the nation but we dnt seem to support their "rights"

Which just goes back to my point

Personhood is as is undefined and can be defined anyhow..the denial of the "innate rights" of man destroys any foundation to personhood and leaves it open to any interpretation

Its open to the interpretation of the people making the laws.

Its like you don't understand that law is basically whatever people make it to be because thats all we have in our attempt to reach some sort of consensus.

Objectivity doesn't exist but we realize we need SOMETHING to move forward without revisiting the same issues.

Its like i'm breaking down poli-sci 101 to you.
And I am talking in the context of our laws

So in other words, ur picking and choosing based on what liberal media moves you to choose and support

Personhood is the focal point of many of the laws of the land but as is it is clearly undefined..and as time passes the justice system will crumble from lack of this foundation

Liberal media???

My view on abortion has NOTHING to do with "god" being in the pledge.

Personhood is undefined...BECAUSE IT DOES NOT fukkING EXIST.

I could call you a sack of meaningless molecules and you'd have a problem with it...
 

Crakface

...
Joined
May 4, 2012
Messages
18,500
Reputation
1,530
Daps
25,708
Reppin
L.A
Atheists need to get their money up. No one is trying to hear your crybaby bullshyt unless you get your ends up. fukkin clowns.

O wait, shouldnt you have a problem with money since it says

"in god we trust" on the currency? fukkin morons. O wait, so you dont carry cash in protest. See that money has power so you dont give a fukk what it says on it, Struggle movement.
 

blackslash

Superstar
Bushed
Joined
Oct 9, 2012
Messages
17,946
Reputation
-1,960
Daps
25,307
Its open to the interpretation of the people making the laws.

Its like you don't understand that law is basically whatever people make it to be because thats all we have in our attempt to reach some sort of consensus.

Objectivity doesn't exist but we realize we need SOMETHING to move forward without revisiting the same issues.

Its like i'm breaking down poli-sci 101 to you.


Liberal media???

My view on abortion has NOTHING to do with "god" being in the pledge.

Personhood is undefined...BECAUSE IT DOES NOT fukkING EXIST.

I could call you a sack of meaningless molecules and you'd have a problem with it...

This "Law" was created to prevent the violation of human rights which were established as innate

I dnt think you are understanding why I bring up "personhood"

I bring up personhood because personhood is the focal point of our justice system

As it is now..in the context of our laws..personhood is not defined...so all things are permissable because technically the govt can deem any group of people they seem fit, non persons...In light of ur nihilistic worldview ofc :mjpls:

So the constitution in and of itself is powerless and doesnt mean anything as you say the DOI doesnt either

why?

Because the very focal point of what it is purposed to serve is not established or defined solely based on our laws...which is why it references the religious concepts of INNATE rights and INTRINSIC worth
 

luvaznpoon

All Star
Joined
Apr 17, 2013
Messages
2,301
Reputation
440
Daps
4,917
Reppin
NULL
Atheists need to get their money up. No one is trying to hear your crybaby bullshyt unless you get your ends up. fukkin clowns.

O wait, shouldnt you have a problem with money since it says

"in god we trust" on the currency? fukkin morons. O wait, so you dont carry cash in protest. See that money has power so you dont give a fukk what it says on it, Struggle movement.

The same thing is said to us as black people when we speak out on racism. How do you feel about that, I wonder? :mjpls:
 
Last edited:

☑︎#VoteDemocrat

The Original
WOAT
Supporter
Joined
Dec 9, 2012
Messages
307,466
Reputation
-34,327
Daps
618,044
Reppin
The Deep State
This "Law" was created to prevent the violation of human rights which were established as innate

ESTABLISHED as innate.

You read that?

ESTABLISHED.

Humans.

You.

me.

Us.

We.

...came together and made some things we called human rights.

They're not innate.

They're not unique.

We created the standards and hold ourselves to those standards.

I dnt think you are understanding why I bring up "personhood"
I don't understand why you keep bringing shyt up that has nothing to do with "god" being in the pledge of allegiance or why you rail against nihilism (which you confuse stubbornly with apathy) ALL while invoking AN AD HOMINEM.

I bring up personhood because personhood is the focal point of our justice system

This concept, even if its relevant or not, has nothing to do with this thread.

As it is now..in the context of our laws..personhood is not defined...so all things are permissable because technically the govt can deem any group of people they seem fit, non persons...In light of ur nihilistic worldview ofc :mjpls:

What are you even saying?

This is just irreparably incoherent.

So the constitution in and of itself is powerless and doesnt mean anything as you say the DOI doesnt either

Well of course not. we add meaning to it. Thats the point.
why?

Because the very focal point of what it is purposed to serve is not established or defined solely based on our laws...which is why it references the religious concepts of INNATE rights and INTRINSIC worth
And you've lost it again.

RELIGIOUS CONCEPTS ARE NOT OBJECTIVE NOR ARE THEY SUPERIOR.

INNATE RIGHTS AND INTRINSIC WORTH OF "RIGHTS" DO. NOT. EXIST.

THEY AREN'T THERE.

THEY NEVER WERE.

WE

MADE

THAT

shyt

UP

TO

SERVE

WHATEVER

NEEDS

WE

DEEMED

NECESSARY

THESE SAME RELIGIOUS LAWS YOU WANT TO REFERENCE ARE LARGELY FORGOTTEN (WHICH YOU CONVIENENTLY IGNORE) BECAUSE HOW RIDICULOUS, INCONSISTENT, AND CONTRADICTORY THOSE EDICTS WERE.

WE CAN DO BETTER.

WE CAN BE MORE CONSISTENT.

WE CAN BE MORE INCLUSIVE.

THATS WHY THESE "RELIGIOUS CONCEPTS" ARE COMPLETE AND UTTER BULL-shyt.

RELIGIOUS LAWS ARE NOT THE BASE OF MODERN LAW.

EVEN FURTHER, RELIGIOUS LAWS ARE MERELY EDICTS HANDED DOWN BY HUMANS FROM A TIME IN THE PAST WHEN THEY USED THEIR PRESUMED POWER (WHICH DID NOT EXIST) FROM A DIVINITY (WHICH DOES NOT EXIST) TO INFLUENCE PEOPLE WHO DID NOT KNOW ANY BETTER.
 

☑︎#VoteDemocrat

The Original
WOAT
Supporter
Joined
Dec 9, 2012
Messages
307,466
Reputation
-34,327
Daps
618,044
Reppin
The Deep State
Atheists need to get their money up. No one is trying to hear your crybaby bullshyt unless you get your ends up. fukkin clowns.

Its not even about money.

Its unconstitutional.

Let that muslim representative from MN try to put "allah" on a dollar bill and see what happens.

The USA is TOO lenient towards christians.
O wait, shouldnt you have a problem with money since it says "in god we trust" on the currency? fukkin morons. O wait, so you dont carry cash in protest. See that money has power so you dont give a fukk what it says on it, Struggle movement.
you mean the part added in 1956 in response to communism?

The part that was in response to christians who feared god-less nations?

The part that is UNCONSITUTIONAL and which christians abuse simply because they want to enforce their illegal preference?
 

blackslash

Superstar
Bushed
Joined
Oct 9, 2012
Messages
17,946
Reputation
-1,960
Daps
25,307
ESTABLISHED as innate.

You read that?

ESTABLISHED.

Humans.

You.

me.

Us.

We.

...came together and made some things we called human rights.

They're not innate.

They're not unique.

We created the standards and hold ourselves to those standards.


I don't understand why you keep bringing shyt up that has nothing to do with "god" being in the pledge of allegiance or why you rail against nihilism (which you confuse stubbornly with apathy) ALL while invoking AN AD HOMINEM.



This concept, even if its relevant or not, has nothing to do with this thread.



What are you even saying?

This is just irreparably incoherent.



Well of course not. we add meaning to it. Thats the point.

And you've lost it again.

RELIGIOUS CONCEPTS ARE NOT OBJECTIVE NOR ARE THEY SUPERIOR.

INNATE RIGHTS AND INTRINSIC WORTH OF "RIGHTS" DO. NOT. EXIST.

THEY AREN'T THERE.

THEY NEVER WERE.

WE

MADE

THAT

shyt

UP

TO

SERVE

WHATEVER

NEEDS

WE

DEEMED

NECESSARY

THESE SAME RELIGIOUS LAWS YOU WANT TO REFERENCE ARE LARGELY FORGOTTEN (WHICH YOU CONVIENENTLY IGNORE) BECAUSE HOW RIDICULOUS, INCONSISTENT, AND CONTRADICTORY THOSE EDICTS WERE.

WE CAN DO BETTER.

WE CAN BE MORE CONSISTENT.

WE CAN BE MORE INCLUSIVE.

THATS WHY THESE "RELIGIOUS CONCEPTS" ARE COMPLETE AND UTTER BULL-shyt.

RELIGIOUS LAWS ARE NOT THE BASE OF MODERN LAW.

EVEN FURTHER, RELIGIOUS LAWS ARE MERELY EDICTS HANDED DOWN BY HUMANS FROM A TIME IN THE PAST WHEN THEY USED THEIR PRESUMED POWER (WHICH DID NOT EXIST) FROM A DIVINITY (WHICH DOES NOT EXIST) TO INFLUENCE PEOPLE WHO DID NOT KNOW ANY BETTER.

The aspects claimed in religion dont exist
U say innate rights and intrinsic worth dont exist

Thats why I call them religious concepts

ur picking and choosing what u want to classify as religious

But u already said we made up innate rights..which doesnt make sense if we made them up they are not innate and intrinsic

So as I said..the innate rights and undefined label of personhood withing the context of the higher law makes our constitution powerless

U say u hate religion cuz its made up false but then u'll accept some made up stuff tho right :heh:

If ur gonna be against it all then be against it all..having an outrage against religious ppl but then being okay with living by and asking of people to live by made up laws based on "made up" aspects of life such ass "human rights" which do not exist

Mr. nihilist allow people to do what they want cuz demanding otherwise on the basis of preserving these mythologies of justice, morality and the like only exposes ur contradictory behavior

:ahh: :blessed: :wow: :mjpls:
 

Crakface

...
Joined
May 4, 2012
Messages
18,500
Reputation
1,530
Daps
25,708
Reppin
L.A
Its not even about money.

Its unconstitutional.

Let that muslim representative from MN try to put "allah" on a dollar bill and see what happens.

The USA is TOO lenient towards christians.

you mean the part added in 1956 in response to communism?

The part that was in response to christians who feared god-less nations?

The part that is UNCONSITUTIONAL and which christians abuse simply because they want to enforce their illegal preference?
Words on paper are not universal truths. The reality is people do what they want, because they can. You sound like a bytch straight up. If atheists want to do something about this they have to get their money up(ironically the same money they're fighting to change) and use the power that comes with that money to lobby these things out of existence.

You think they're going to take In God We Trust and Under God out off of the bill and out of the constitution because some bytch made internet fakkit feels emotional about it? You sound naive and young and also moronic. :manny:

Citing history facts is cute but theres no power behind that so until you get your In God We Trusts up? fukk outta here. :pacspit:
 

☑︎#VoteDemocrat

The Original
WOAT
Supporter
Joined
Dec 9, 2012
Messages
307,466
Reputation
-34,327
Daps
618,044
Reppin
The Deep State
Words on paper are not universal truths. The reality is people do what they want, because they can. You sound like a bytch straight up. If atheists want to do something about this they have to get their money up(ironically the same money they're fighting to change) and use the power that comes with that money to lobby these things out of existence.

You think they're going to take In God We Trust and Under God out off of the bill and out of the constitution because some bytch made internet fakkit feels emotional about it? You sound naive and young and also moronic. :manny:

Citing history facts is cute but theres no power behind that so until you get your In God We Trusts up? fukk outta here. :pacspit:

Its not irony dumbass.

Its the fact that christians seem to think they have preference in this country...and they don't.

I'd love to see christians clench their buttholes when muslims start acting out and changing shyt in the same way christians have in this countr.y

THEN you'll understand why secularism is such an important concept.
 

Crakface

...
Joined
May 4, 2012
Messages
18,500
Reputation
1,530
Daps
25,708
Reppin
L.A
Its not irony dumbass.

Its the fact that christians seem to think they have preference in this country...and they don't.

I'd love to see christians clench their buttholes when muslims start acting out and changing shyt in the same way christians have in this countr.y

THEN you'll understand why secularism is such an important concept.
There are people in this world who know how the world works. You arent one of those people because you are a bytch. I wont give two shyts abotu secularism because i understand that people with money, sway public opinion.

The people who have the preference are the people with the money you fukkin idiot. So you want to see Christians squirm with issues in regards to Muslims but where do you fit into that because wouldnt you be just as mad at the Muslims as you are Christians. You have no fukking idea what you stand for in your own mind. Just an emotional bytch boy that needs an outlet for being a Broke Loser in real life. Get your fukkin money up faggit and maybe then you'll have an idea how real changes are made in this country. It definately isnt through whining like a bytch like you are right now. Grow up, p*ssy. :pacspit:
 

☑︎#VoteDemocrat

The Original
WOAT
Supporter
Joined
Dec 9, 2012
Messages
307,466
Reputation
-34,327
Daps
618,044
Reppin
The Deep State
The aspects claimed in religion dont exist

They dont...
U say innate rights and intrinsic worth dont exist
They dont...
Thats why I call them religious concepts
...what??????? :mindblown:
ur picking and choosing what u want to classify as religious
What?

Thats what YOU are doing.
But u already said we made up innate rights..which doesnt make sense if we made them up they are not innate and intrinsic
I never claimed they were innate. I'm saying that what people CALL innate rights were in fact created.
So as I said..the innate rights and undefined label of personhood withing the context of the higher law makes our constitution powerless
I like how you dress this sentence up to make it sound more profound than it actually is.

...and it still doesn't make any sense.
U say u hate religion cuz its made up false but then u'll accept some made up stuff tho right :heh:

Arbitrary law doesn't claim to have objective truth. Thats the point.

Plus, the supernatural tenets invoked by religion doesn't lend any credibility to its utility.

Keep trying.

If ur gonna be against it all then be against it all..having an outrage against religious ppl but then being okay with living by and asking of people to live by made up laws based on "made up" aspects of life such ass "human rights" which do not exist

My problem with religious people isn't their view on how to rule the world, its the source of where they get that inspiration.

if you wanted to say you were against abortion because of reasons you had OUTSIDE of some supernatural deity, then I'd listen to your argument.

Religious people ALWAYS will lose by invoking a supernatural third party who claims superiority over everyone in the discussion.
Mr. nihilist allow people to do what they want cuz demanding otherwise on the basis of preserving these mythologies of justice, morality and the like only exposes ur contradictory behavior

:ahh: :blessed: :wow: :mjpls:


Politicians who source their plans in reality and not from a 1st century goat herder TEND to have more valid points. :ufdup:
 

☑︎#VoteDemocrat

The Original
WOAT
Supporter
Joined
Dec 9, 2012
Messages
307,466
Reputation
-34,327
Daps
618,044
Reppin
The Deep State
There are people in this world who know how the world works. You arent one of those people because you are a bytch. I wont give two shyts abotu secularism because i understand that people with money, sway public opinion.

The people who have the preference are the people with the money you fukkin idiot. So you want to see Christians squirm with issues in regards to Muslims but where do you fit into that because wouldnt you be just as mad at the Muslims as you are Christians. You have no fukking idea what you stand for in your own mind. Just an emotional bytch boy that needs an outlet for being a Broke Loser in real life. Get your fukkin money up faggit and maybe then you'll have an idea how real changes are made in this country. It definately isnt through whining like a bytch like you are right now. Grow up, p*ssy. :pacspit:

Money isn't the issue here.

This isn't about creating policy.

its about enforcing existing policy.

BIG difference asswipe.

I'll probably evade the fact that I DEFINITELY make more money than you do a year (I'd be shocked to find out that you do), but I know plenty enough how the world works.

its the fact that I came to this board to discuss this issue....unless you don't want a message board to be used as as...message board???? :mindblown:
 

Crakface

...
Joined
May 4, 2012
Messages
18,500
Reputation
1,530
Daps
25,708
Reppin
L.A
Money isn't the issue here.

This isn't about creating policy.

its about enforcing existing policy.

BIG difference asswipe.

I'll probably evade the fact that I DEFINITELY make more money than you do a year (I'd be shocked to find out that you do), but I know plenty enough how the world works.

its the fact that I came to this board to discuss this issue....unless you don't want a message board to be used as as...message board???? :mindblown:
No you came to whine like a bytch. The policy wont be enforced. So what are you gonna do about it? Nothing. Raise awareness? :russ: fakkit you gotta pay money to raise awareness. You gotta pay money to get people to pay attention to the pointless shyt that bothers you. Taking in God we trust off of bills and pledges doesnt make anyone 1 damn dollar but it costs alot to get it done so the average person could give a shyt. Its just silly broke fukkboys like you with nothing going on in their life and their false crusades becaues you read a google article on the history of the dollar. You're a clown. Nobodies wasting money on that bullshyt but hats off to the fakkit that does. Thats a man who really wanted that shyt gone. You? Just a typical whiny fakkit..
 

blackslash

Superstar
Bushed
Joined
Oct 9, 2012
Messages
17,946
Reputation
-1,960
Daps
25,307
They dont...

They dont...

...what??????? :mindblown:

What?

Thats what YOU are doing.

I never claimed they were innate. I'm saying that what people CALL innate rights were in fact created.

I like how you dress this sentence up to make it sound more profound than it actually is.

...and it still doesn't make any sense.


Arbitrary law doesn't claim to have objective truth. Thats the point.

Plus, the supernatural tenets invoked by religion doesn't lend any credibility to its utility.

Keep trying.



My problem with religious people isn't their view on how to rule the world, its the source of where they get that inspiration.

if you wanted to say you were against abortion because of reasons you had OUTSIDE of some supernatural deity, then I'd listen to your argument.

Religious people ALWAYS will lose by invoking a supernatural third party who claims superiority over everyone in the discussion.



Politicians who source their plans in reality and not from a 1st century goat herder TEND to have more valid points. :ufdup:

But politicians tend to make reference to the mythologies of innate human rights and intrinsic worth when it comes to issues of lets say equality

Like i said..there is a reason why i continue to bring up personhood in this discussion and how its undefined in the context of the constitution , it is to convey our law's openness to have all things become permissable

But the argument is already over

Many people here dont agree with the laws of our nation(including all layers). So if ur gonna have a case for ppl here ur gonna have to reference things thats not simply just a higher law of the nation

But u cant do that with ur worldview...u can continue in ur attempt tho..but Ive made my mark in this thread

I bid u adieu :wow:

:blessed: :ahh:

:wow: Hov da gawd :wow:
 
Top