Quote:
|
Originally Posted by McDuffie
What is it? It's a non-belief.
A good analogy might be this:
Let's say you are on a bus with union carpenters, union electricians, union brick masons, union plumbers. You and couple other guys on the bus do not possess a blue collar skill, neither are you union members.
Well, if you are not skilled union workers what are you? You don't fit in their neat categories. Just like atheists.
The carpenters can talk about carpentry, the electricians can talk about electrical work etc. What are you guys going to talk about? Non-carpentry? Non-electrical work?
|
Sounds good to me.
Mojo, how do you feel about the fact that that article cites evidence-about teen birth rates- that is completely made up? How do you feel about the fact that it cites a court case upholding the seperation between church and state as evidence in its attempt to claim that no such seperation should exist. That itself is a glaring example of deception by omission. In short, how can you trust the author of this article to actually represent history in a trustworthy manner if you know that s/he is at the very least a sloppy journalist.
Willravel, i addressed your article in posts 36 and 37, perhaps you'd do me the honor of responding, instead of making yourself scarce. Tell me how you feel about constitutionality as a function of court interpretation?