Can Christian Electronic Designers Design?
in [Design]
|
From: D from BC on 21 May 2010 22:18 In article <16idnYKOC-J9kUzWnZ2dnUVZ_iydnZ2d(a)earthlink.com>, regor(a)midwest.net says... > I don't consider "libtard" to be harsh name calling. To me it's simply > liberal nonsense. The president calling for prayer happened by George > Washington in 1795 and up till last week wasn't declared to be > unconstitutional. If Atheists want to overrun the country and send it to > hell in a handbasket, go right ahead, that's what's happening. > National Prayer Day is an endorsement like National Pepsi Drinking day. National Pepsi Drinking day puts pressure on all to drink Pepsi. It's also unfair to Coka Cola drinkers. Yes...It's the start of the big Atheist plan to take over everything. 1st little things. And then progressing to a future where Christians are turned into Soylent green to feed Atheists. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soylent_green Crispy Christians! Yum.. :P -- D from BC British Columbia
From: life imitates life on 22 May 2010 00:07 On Fri, 21 May 2010 18:55:07 -0700, D from BC <myrealaddress(a)comic.com> wrote: > >If you grew up in Indian, you'd be programmed during childhood to >believe in something else. >You're a product/victom of childhood indoctrination. >It's your Christian parents that are delusional. Why will a big cat save a distressed animal from drowning or being eaten, and then befriend it for life? Why will a domesticated cat 'save' a little plastic army man from a dish of water?
From: D from BC on 22 May 2010 23:01 In article <qulev55lonospp73pag7movh0g27euqgms(a)4ax.com>, pasticcio(a)thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org says... > > On Fri, 21 May 2010 18:55:07 -0700, D from BC <myrealaddress(a)comic.com> > wrote: > > > > >If you grew up in Indian, you'd be programmed during childhood to > >believe in something else. > >You're a product/victom of childhood indoctrination. > >It's your Christian parents that are delusional. > > > Why will a big cat save a distressed animal False animal behavior. You need to explain this part first. > from drowning or being > eaten, and then befriend it for life? > > Why will a domesticated cat 'save' False animal behavior. You need to explain this part first. > a little plastic army man from a > dish of water? -- D from BC British Columbia
From: D from BC on 23 May 2010 04:02 In article <16idnYKOC-J9kUzWnZ2dnUVZ_iydnZ2d(a)earthlink.com>, regor(a)midwest.net says... > > The president calling for a day of prayer hasn't been determined to be > unconstitutional throughout the entire life of this country through March > 2010, but in April 2010 it was declared unconstitutional. Why not for over > 200 years and why so this year? Is it not that over the years God's enemies > have eroded the "establishment of religion" into "separation of church and > state"? Compared to 'Religious Freedom Day' a government with a 'National Prayer Day' comes off as promoting/endorsing/advertising religion(the Christian religion wink wink.). A government that promotes religion is a country showing signs of being pro-supernatural. Using the supernatural has never been good at running countries. God and bibles are insufficient to run a country. Theocracies suck. > > Reasons I disagree with the Judge > 1 The national day of prayer doesn't establish a religion, if it did that > would be unconstitutional. A truly secular government has no purpose in making a day for the religious to do a religious exercise. > 2 It does not force or even try to force anyone to pray. It unfair to the nonreligious that there's no 'Religious Freedom Day'. > 3 It does no harm to those who don't want to pray. Yes it harms. Watching people pray is like watching the mentally ill. It's very disturbing and creepy. Praying people reminds me of the Cargo Cult. > 4 The opposition to it is a hate group that is intolerant of only > Christianity. That's normal. Anything opposing Christianity is bad. > 5 It has not been considered unconstitutional until 2010, after many > decisions that redefine and erode our constitution to mean what it never > meant. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Establishment_clause You're not supposed to warp the US First Amendment to whatever you like just like you warp the bible to whatever you like. > > RogerN > Christian engineers are ridiculous in that they have to indoctrinate their kids in Christianity before they can grow up and chose a religion or non-religion. -- D from BC British Columbia
From: D from BC on 23 May 2010 22:29
In article <4ftqt5h11t9dnndt2l2t38lldhaktmja0n(a)4ax.com>, jfields(a)austininstruments.com says... > >That stems from the idea of 'you get what you deserve' or fair justice > >served or the crime fits the punishment. > > --- > You've got it backwards, I think, since it's based on that once the > rules have been written and you understand them, regardless of whether > you agree with them or not, the punishment for transgression fits the > crime. > --- > > God made horrifically bad rules that are insane in a modern society. God's silly rule is death to children that hit their mother or father. Exodus 21:15 King James Bible 'And he that smiteth his father, or his mother, shall be surely put to death.' God's rule is extremist to any people at any time. The punishment is excessive. The punishment does not fit the crime. If you're from out of town, sleep with the farmers wife and don't know the rules, you're a dead man. Death for adultery. Leviticus 20:10 Christian engineers are ridiculous to believe that all of God's rules make sense. -- D from BC British Columbia |