# The Public School Where Prayer Is Everywhere



## The Pink Ninja (Jan 29, 2014)

> A federal lawsuit filed last week in Louisiana contains some of the most startling allegations you will ever see against public school officials accused of unlawfully turning their school into a bastion of Christian belief. In western Louisiana's Sabine Parish, one family alleges, teachers preach Creationism and mock the theory of evolution, routinely lead their students in Christian prayer, give extra credit for Christian responses to assignments, and actively question or deride the religious beliefs of non-Christian students and parents.
> 
> I wrote about the allegations in this case over the weekend for The Daily Beast but return to this story now because it has not yet flowered into the national story it deserves to be. You simply have to read the complaint, and the other court papers, and see the photos, to believe it. This is not a case about a few student-led prayers at graduation or a Christmas display. It is not a case about one odd educator. This is a case that digs down to the foundation of the wall that is supposed to separate church and state.
> 
> ...


----------



## Mael (Jan 29, 2014)

It's Louisiana, TPN.  C'mon...this isn't even worth taking seriously.


----------



## BashFace (Jan 29, 2014)

Why can't Christians have ever done one of two things:

1: Read the Bible.
2: Have a understanding of Physics and the world they live in.

This is probably just a reaction to Pastafarianism. I mean if we taught that in schools everyone would be a Bible basher.


----------



## pajamas (Jan 29, 2014)

The south is full of retards, we know.


----------



## SLB (Jan 29, 2014)




----------



## Mael (Jan 29, 2014)

Dangerous precedents set...like historically bad precedents being set here...letting people actually wallow in such ignorance and paranoia.


----------



## BashFace (Jan 29, 2014)

Mael said:


> Dangerous precedents set...like historically bad precedents being set here...letting people actually wallow in such ignorance and paranoia.



I'm ok with Satanists because there is less of them is that what you are saying, let them be ignorant and paranoid?


----------



## pajamas (Jan 29, 2014)

That was confirmed to be homeschooling like 9 months ago for anyone wondering if that was in a real school.


----------



## SLB (Jan 29, 2014)

Still funny as fuck pajamas. 

And relevant given the fact that in the article it says they were pretty much pressured to give christian fluff for answers. "Extra credit" y'all..


----------



## Jersey Shore Jesus (Jan 29, 2014)

And Prayer is a bad thing how?


----------



## Linkofone (Jan 29, 2014)

Bring it on haters. I'll do what I want because America.


----------



## Narcissus (Jan 29, 2014)

Jersey Shore Jesus said:


> And Prayer is a bad thing how?


Stop.

The article goes into detail about how allegations state that the teachers are teaching creationism and mocking evolution and other faiths, as well as giving extra credit for Christian answers. So praying isn't the only thing going on.

As for the prayer itself, students should not be engaging in teacher-led prayers. If they want to do personal prayers, that's fine... but prayer and religion has no place in the public school system.


----------



## Jersey Shore Jesus (Jan 29, 2014)

Narcissus said:


> The article goes into detail about how allegations state that the teachers are teaching creationism and mocking evolution and other faiths, as well as giving extra credit for Christian answers. So praying isn't the only thing going on.
> 
> As for the prayer itself, students should not be engaging in teacher-led prayers. If they want to do personal prayers, that's fine... but prayer and religion has no place in the public school system.



No you stop. All my life I've been mocked by teachers who mock creationism 10 times harder then this most likely biased story and the teachers most likely didn't mock evolution like atheist teachers mock God in "non prayer" schools. I don't agree with the extra credit thing all be it that.

Yes they should be led in prayer I find it funny the things we want to take Jesus out of is screwed. Trying to take in God we trust off the money, screwed, Take Jesus out of schools, kids are shot on the daily. 

Just because you don't believe in Jesus doesn't make him any less real.


----------



## Linkofone (Jan 29, 2014)

I feel that debating over this is bad. So ... everyone should chill out.


----------



## Stunna (Jan 29, 2014)

JSJ, go away. You make us look bad.


----------



## Jersey Shore Jesus (Jan 29, 2014)

Linkofone said:


> I feel that debating over this is bad. So ... everyone should chill out.



You're right who cares I'm not wasting my time on this bullshit.



Stunna said:


> JSJ, go away. You make us look bad.



Just sit there and don't stand up for your fellow brothers/sisters.


----------



## Stunna (Jan 29, 2014)

I don't defend the wrong, kin in Christ or not.


----------



## Jersey Shore Jesus (Jan 29, 2014)

Stunna said:


> I don't defend the wrong, kin in Christ or not.



Prayer in public schools is not wrong.


----------



## Stunna (Jan 29, 2014)

See, now, no one is saying that. It's that those operating under the authority of the state should not be leading/enforcing/mandating it.


----------



## Mael (Jan 29, 2014)

Jersey Shore Jesus said:


> Prayer in public schools is not wrong.



Yes it is.  Public is supposed to be secular or at least observant of all religions to where one is not placed higher than the other.

Or is there some hidden clause in your Constitution that says it's okay to have kids treat Christianity on a higher plane than any Jewish/Muslim/Sikh/etc. students?


----------



## pajamas (Jan 29, 2014)

Jersey Shore Jesus said:


> Prayer in public schools is not wrong.


What is the first amendment?


----------



## Sunuvmann (Jan 29, 2014)

Jersey Shore Jesus said:


> And Prayer is a bad thing how?



Indoctrination and coerscion of kids with tax dollars is blatently unconstitutional.

To put it another way JSJ: How would you feel about a public school in the US giving extra credit if you said Praise Allah in your assignments? Or gave kids assignments like "Explain why Mohammed is God's chosen prophet."


----------



## Mael (Jan 29, 2014)

pajamas said:


> What is the first amendment?



The irony here is that JSJ is a Constitutifag.  But alas, it's only about them guns and that Moron Labe Second Amendment he cares about like the betashit he is.


----------



## Hozukimaru (Jan 29, 2014)

pajamas said:


> What is the first amendment?



We all know that only the second one really matters.


----------



## Mael (Jan 29, 2014)

Hozukimaru said:


> We all know that only the second one really matters.



MORON LABE, YA HALF NIGRA OBAMURR!


----------



## Sunuvmann (Jan 29, 2014)

Jersey Shore Jesus said:


> No you stop. All my life I've been mocked by teachers who mock creationism 10 times harder then this most likely biased story and the teachers most likely didn't mock evolution like atheist teachers mock God in "non prayer" schools. I don't agree with the extra credit thing all be it that.
> 
> Yes they should be led in prayer I find it funny the things we want to take Jesus out of is screwed. Trying to take in God we trust off the money, screwed, Take Jesus out of schools, kids are shot on the daily.
> 
> Just because you don't believe in Jesus doesn't make him any less real.



There's a time and a place for all things. You who claim to masturbate to the constitution should know that.

You want to pray? Awesome. You have plenty o churches to choose from. But schools which are operated by the state are supposed to be completely secular with no endorsement of one religion over another. Because, ykno, that part of the constitution of "Congress shall establish no state religion"


----------



## Mael (Jan 29, 2014)

> No you stop. All my life I've been mocked by teachers who mock creationism 10 times harder then this most likely biased story and the teachers most likely didn't mock evolution like atheist teachers mock God in "non prayer" schools. I don't agree with the extra credit thing all be it that.



Oh b'awwwwwwww you fucking imbecile.

What's next...you're going to claim blacks are by nature less intelligent than Asians or whites?

You get derided because overwhelming evidence shoots your theories down you piece of shit.


----------



## Sunuvmann (Jan 29, 2014)

On creationism, I think the multitude of scientists who have studied and repeatedly found 0 evidence disproving the theory of evolution (because thats how science works. Like the theory of gravity, the theory of evolution can be disproven some day, but all evidence and experimentation thus far have shown it valid) are a bit more versed on the subject then Jews telling stories around the campfire 5000 years ago.

Could a divine being have guided that evolution? Sure. But when a theory cannot be tested nor have any corroberating evidence, it doesn't meet the level of scrutiny required to actually teach it as something that happened.


----------



## Hozukimaru (Jan 29, 2014)

Mael said:


> MORON LABE, YA HALF NIGRA OBAMURR!



molon*.


----------



## Mael (Jan 29, 2014)

Sunuvmann said:


> On creationism, I think scientists who have studied and repeatedly found 0 evidence disproving the theory of evolution (because thats how science works. Like the theory of gravity, the theory of evolution can be disproven some day, but all evidence and experimentation thus far have shown it valid) are a bit more versed on the subject then Jews telling stories around the campfire 5000 years ago.



Tell that to the Christfags.  They'll think you're a minion of Satan.

This is why I have a hard time enabling personal ignorance.  It holds back the greater progress of humanity.



Hozukimaru said:


> molon*.



You're not getting the joke.


----------



## Hozukimaru (Jan 29, 2014)

I thought about it, after i sent my message, but wasn't sure.


----------



## Fujita (Jan 29, 2014)

Jersey Shore Jesus said:


> And Prayer is a bad thing how?



Neither here nor there

Kitchen knives aren't inherently bad, but it sure sucks when you have one stuck in your gut 

Promoting Christianity in schools like this tramples on freedom of religion by tying the government up in it and, in the case of rejecting evolution, promotes ignorance among kids.

It's also unconstitutional, for a plain and simple answer


----------



## Mael (Jan 29, 2014)

Fujita said:


> Neither here nor there
> 
> Kitchen knives aren't inherently bad, but it sure sucks when you have one stuck in your gut
> 
> ...



This nitwit is a creationist.  You were warned.


----------



## Linkofone (Jan 29, 2014)

> You're right who cares I'm not wasting my time on this bullshit.



Good. 

Should not care what other people say on this matter anyways.


----------



## Mintaka (Jan 29, 2014)

I highly doubt anyone is going to get through to JSJ.


----------



## Narcissus (Jan 29, 2014)

Jersey Shore Jesus said:


> No you stop. All my life I've been mocked by teachers who mock creationism 10 times harder


I could sit here and tell you my own personal experiences in schools where teachers mocked evolution. Granted, I have gone to private religious schools where they can get away with this, the point is our personal stories are irrelevant to this particular case because they do not change the facts here.





> then this most likely biased story


The irony in you stating this, when you try to use infowars as a valid source, is through the fucking roof.





> Yes they should be led in prayer


No they shouldn't. First of all, it would unfairly favor one religion over others, and force children of different faiths to partake in it. Second, it can easily allow the school to become a breeding ground for indoctrination.

Most importantly, religion does not enhance education in any way, which is the main purpose of school. In fact, it spreads misinformation. Evolution has scientific backing. Theistic claims do not, many of them having been debunked, or are simply unsupported.





> Take Jesus out of schools, kids are shot on the daily.


This is the most ignorant horse shit you've spouted. How delusional are you to think school shootings occur because school-led prayer and religion have been banned? Do you want me to list how many churches, which worship God, or Catholic schools have been shot up? Or had some other disaster?





> Just because you don't believe in Jesus doesn't make him any less real.


Until you can prove this, it is an unsupported assertion, and I have every right to reject it.

It is no different from claiming that because I don't believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster, that doesn't make it real.





Linkofone said:


> I feel that debating over this is bad.


Nonsense. The fact that things like this are still going on is reason enough to discuss it. Because it perpetuates ignorance and needs to be addressed.





Jersey Shore Jesus said:


> Prayer in public schools is not wrong.


No, it isn't. Which is why I said students are allowed personal prayer. It is *SCHOOL OR TEACHER-LED PRAYER* that is wrong, for the reasons already stated.


----------



## Mael (Jan 29, 2014)

Jersey Shore Jesus said:


> You're right who cares I'm not wasting my time on this bullshit.



Too bad the nation cares more about righteous plurality than you, ya fuckin' bellend.


----------



## Jersey Shore Jesus (Jan 29, 2014)

Sunuvmann said:


> Indoctrination and coerscion of kids with tax dollars is blatently unconstitutional.
> 
> To put it another way JSJ: How would you feel about a public school in the US giving extra credit if you said Praise Allah in your assignments? Or gave kids assignments like "Explain why Mohammed is God's chosen prophet."



I didn't say the extra credit thing was right but if a teacher wants to pray they should let them. Hell we had a kid in my High school days carry his prayer rug around and HAD to disrupt our class to pray to Allah, and I mean flap his rug around loudly and then hum so friggin loud. Compared to starting the day with a simple prayer and nothing more unlike us Christfags.

As I said prayer in schools is not wrong but I'm sure the teachers are having a class discussion on God creating everything with the evolution folks. Much like we have today in the forced evolution theory where in class you believe what we teach or "you need to be seen by a doctor you loon!" And that's how it is.

As we all see its either believe in Jesus side extreme or there is no God side extreme. Never a in between where no one bitches or complains just because someone prayed or taught a certain way. 




Mael said:


> MORON LABE, YA HALF NIGRA OBAMURR!



Dude you are a racist boston fuck. I mean that with my whole heart.


----------



## Mael (Jan 29, 2014)

Jersey Shore Jesus said:


> I didn't say the extra credit thing was right but if a teacher wants to pray they should let them. Hell we had a kid in my High school days carry his prayer rug around and HAD to disrupt our class to pray to Allah, and I mean flap his rug around loudly and then hum so friggin loud. Compared to starting the day with a simple prayer and nothing more unlike us Christfags.
> 
> As I said prayer in schools is not wrong but I'm sure the teachers are having a class discussion on God creating everything with the evolution folks. Much like we have today in the forced evolution theory where in class you believe what we teach or "you need to be seen by a doctor you loon!" And that's how it is.
> 
> ...



I'm imitating you, you stupid Jersey shit.  Bad enough you're the Armpit of America, you also have to be the Lobotomy of America.

And you do need to be seen by a doctor, you loon.  Creationism has not proven anything.  Thomas was fucking right after all.


----------



## Jersey Shore Jesus (Jan 29, 2014)

Mael said:


> I'm imitating you, you stupid Jersey shit.  Bad enough you're the Armpit of America, you also have to be the Lobotomy of America.
> 
> And you do need to be seen by a doctor, you loon.  Creationism has not proven anything.  Thomas was fucking right after all.



Yet I've never called Obama a ^ (use bro). So how are you imitating me?


----------



## pajamas (Jan 29, 2014)

Jersey Shore Jesus said:


> I didn't say the extra credit thing was right but if a teacher wants to pray they should let them. Hell we had a kid in my High school days carry his prayer rug around and HAD to disrupt our class to pray to Allah, and I mean flap his rug around loudly and then hum so friggin loud. Compared to starting the day with a simple prayer and nothing more unlike us Christfags.
> 
> As I said prayer in schools is not wrong but I'm sure the teachers are having a class discussion on God creating everything with the evolution folks. Much like we have today in the forced evolution theory where in class you believe what we teach or "you need to be seen by a doctor you loon!" And that's how it is.
> 
> ...


I want Based God taught in school even though it has no scientific merit but y'know it should be taught cause y'know we dig it and stuff


----------



## Jersey Shore Jesus (Jan 29, 2014)

Narcissus said:


> No they shouldn't. First of all, it would unfairly favor one religion over others, and force children of different faiths to partake in it. Second, it can easily allow the school to become a breeding ground for indoctrination.



No one is forcing you to partake the teacher is just leading the prayer over the school day.



> Until you can prove this, it is an unsupported assertion, and I have every right to reject it.



As is everyone's free will


----------



## Mael (Jan 29, 2014)

Jersey Shore Jesus said:


> Yet I've never called Obama a ^ (use bro). So how are you imitating me?



Because you're all of the same lot.  Deep down inside you see this uppity black man taking away your guns and challenging your infallible Constitution, which is a living document by the way.  You still want that white Christian America back where prayer is top priority and creationism is actually taken seriously.

Don't shit a shitter, you shit.


----------



## Jersey Shore Jesus (Jan 29, 2014)

Mael said:


> Because you're all of the same lot.  Deep down inside you see this uppity black man taking away your guns and challenging your infallible Constitution, which is a living document by the way.  You still want that white Christian America back where prayer is top priority and creationism is actually taken seriously.
> 
> Don't shit a shitter, you shit.



And how do you know that? I could be black for all you know. You just have a deep hate for Christ that's all it is when it comes to that. Your parents probably sucked raising you get over it and grow a pair.

You just assume when deep down inside you are a racist piece of shit. How about you don't shit us with that?


----------



## Mael (Jan 29, 2014)

Jersey Shore Jesus said:


> And how do you know that? I could be black for all you know. You just have a deep hate for Christ that's all it is when it comes to that. Your parents probably sucked raising you get over it and grow a pair.
> 
> You just assume when deep down inside you are a racist piece of shit. How about you don't shit us with that?





Refute that, fucker.


----------



## pajamas (Jan 29, 2014)

Jersey Shore Jesus said:


> And how do you know that? I could be black for all you know. *You just have a deep hate for Christ that's all it is when it comes to that.** Your parents probably sucked raising you get over it and grow a pair.*
> 
> You just assume when deep down inside you are a racist piece of shit. How about you don't shit us with that?


How can you hate Christ if he isn't real 

Pretty sure the dude is mad because you're so pro one part of the constitution then you are against another part. Which is a common trait in religious people, they like to pick and choose which parts of a text that suits their agenda and then act like the rest isn't even there.


----------



## Mael (Jan 29, 2014)

pajamas said:


> How can you hate Christ if he isn't real
> 
> Pretty sure the dude is mad because you're so pro one part of the constitution then you are against another part. Which is a common trait in religious people, they like to pick and choose which parts of a text that suits their agenda and then act like the rest isn't even there.



Only part of the reason I don't like him.


----------



## Narcissus (Jan 29, 2014)

Jersey Shore Jesus said:


> Hell we had a kid in my High school days carry his prayer rug around and HAD to disrupt our class to pray to Allah


That's a personal prayer, which we have acknowledged is alright. So who are you arguing against with this?

Which brings us to your next sentence:





> As I said prayer in schools is not wrong


Repeating something ad nauseum does not make it any more true than before.


*Personal prayers are not wrong.*
*School/teacher-led prayers are wrong.*
Though people should be allowed their *personal beliefs*, *religion* should not be involved in the public school system.





> Much like we have today in the forced evolution theory where in class you believe what we teach or "you need to be seen by a doctor you loon!"


The fact that you are acknowledging evolution as a theory, means you concede that it has credible evidence supporting it. By extension, this means that it *SHOULD* be taught in schools because it is an important part of science. Religion has none of this support or evidence, and consequently no place in public education.





Jersey Shore Jesus said:


> No one is forcing you to partake the teacher is just leading the prayer over the school day.


If the teacher or the school leads the student body in a prayer, then yes, you are being forced to participate in the prayer. And this still favors one belief over others, meaning it is still an unfair representation. It simply should not be in schools.





> As is everyone's free will


You have thoroughly missed the point.

Have you finished spouting this ignorant tripe?


----------



## Stunna (Jan 29, 2014)

Don't bother, Narcissus.


----------



## Mael (Jan 29, 2014)

> I didn't say the extra credit thing was right but if a teacher wants to pray they should let them. Hell we had a kid in my High school days carry his prayer rug around and HAD to disrupt our class to pray to Allah, and I mean flap his rug around loudly and then hum so friggin loud. Compared to starting the day with a simple prayer and nothing more unlike us Christfags.



Hypocritical piece of shit.


----------



## Hozukimaru (Jan 29, 2014)

Lots of people hate fictional characters, so i guess that you can hate Christ either you believe all that stuff or you don't. I think that he did exist, for the record.


----------



## Fujita (Jan 29, 2014)

Jersey Shore Jesus said:


> As we all see its either believe in Jesus side extreme or there is no God side extreme. Never a in between where no one bitches or complains just because someone prayed or taught a certain way.



...this is really quite simple 

The government (which, in this case, is public school administrators, teachers, and the like) can't promote any religion, because Constitution  

And that doesn't mean that it promotes atheism, either. It doesn't tell you that you shouldn't believe in God. It's simply neutral on the matter. You can believe whatever you want to believe, but the government cannot make laws about what you should believe, or laws that force you to abide by religious tenets 

So there really is no "no God" side here 

Students can pray, but teachers cannot use their position as teachers to encourage (or discourage) this. You can believe in creationism, but you'll have to teach your own kids that because it's not science and doesn't belong in a science classroom.


----------



## Mael (Jan 29, 2014)

The US government has time and again recognized that creationism is NOT an academic subject or an actual method of empiricism.

Furthermore in any public setting, it has zero constitutional ground as it places one actual faith over the others.  People try to do this with evolution, but evolution is not the refutation of any god or gods, simply how things work in the now.


----------



## Jersey Shore Jesus (Jan 29, 2014)

Mael said:


> Refute that, fucker.



Ever heard of the Cambrian Explosion?



pajamas said:


> How can you hate Christ if he isn't real
> 
> Pretty sure the dude is mad because you're so pro one part of the constitution then you are against another part. Which is a common trait in religious people, they like to pick and choose which parts of a text that suits their agenda and then act like the rest isn't even there.



But I'm not pro only one part. I'm saying who cares if a teacher leads in prayer there is *nothing* wrong with it.


----------



## Fujita (Jan 29, 2014)

Jersey Shore Jesus said:


> who cares



The Constitution


----------



## Hozukimaru (Jan 29, 2014)

Jersey Shore Jesus said:


> Ever heard of the Cambrian Explosion?



Wasn't that some million years before god created the world?


----------



## makeoutparadise (Jan 29, 2014)

Jersey Shore Jesus said:


> And Prayer is a bad thing how?



as a little kid in a daycare I  had to sit through "prayer time" before lunch while a steaming plate of yummy spaghetti sat in front of me getting cold. I tried picking up the fork and eating but nooo I had to wait while while looking at kids and teachers muttering to themselves.

It was then that I vowed that prayers would not stand between me and  the food or education  I so desired 

Keep that shit at church for god sakes


----------



## Hozukimaru (Jan 29, 2014)

Morning prayer at schools is good because it gives me that extra 5 minutes of sleep every morning.


----------



## stab-o-tron5000 (Jan 29, 2014)

Hozukimaru said:


> Wasn't that some million years before god created the world?



Creationists, or rather Intelligent design proponents in this case, which is just creationism reworked and re-branded, try to use the Cambrian as some sort of convoluted evidence for their bullshit.  They do this, as creationists always do, by completely misrepresenting what it is we actually do know about the Cambrian explosion, and using that ignorance as evidence in their favor.  

This is why I find it so tiring to try and have a debate or discussion with creationists like JSJ.  Creationists and their relationship to knowledge of evolution is akin to a small children who covers their eyes and thinks themselves invisible. If they can't see you, you must not be able to see them. Creationists treat Evolution the same way and think that their ignorance somehow constitutes evidence against it.

If they don't have that knowledge, it must not exist. Therefore not educating themselves about anything regarding evolution proves to them that it isn't real.


----------



## Jersey Shore Jesus (Jan 29, 2014)

Hozukimaru said:


> Wasn't that some million years before god created the world?



Some say it was the point of creation. The fact being is that thousands of creatures just appeared over a small period of time. 

I don't think God made the earth in 7 days that is laughable there IS a fossil record but I don't think we just came from nothing and I don't believe in evolution.


----------



## MegaultraHay (Jan 29, 2014)

WHY DO YOU KEEP ENCOURAGING HIM?!


----------



## Narcissus (Jan 30, 2014)

^It's not so much encouraging him, at least not intentionally. It's to address ignorance and the spread of misinformation. That, and to point of the hypocrisy (in his last post he says he doesn't believe in evolution, which has mountains of evidence, but cries victim when others don't believe in God).

But he does border on 1mmortal 1tachi levels, where he deserves no more attention than does the man standing on the corner wearing doomsday signs and a tinfoil hat.


----------



## Sanity Check (Jan 30, 2014)

> teachers preach Creationism and mock the theory of evolution
> routinely lead their students in Christian prayer
> give extra credit for Christian responses to assignments
> actively question or deride the religious beliefs of non-Christian students and parents.



Many atheists on this forum.

Preach anti-creationism and mock religious beliefs related to it
Routinely engage in atheistic, anti-religious, propaganda
Rep posts for containing Atheistic responses, no matter how ill conceived, inaccurate or misled.
Actively deride the religious beliefs of theists
Basically people in this school are accused of doing the inverse opposite of what a lot of atheist posters here do here on a daily basis.

If its no one's business what gays do in the privacy of their bedroom.

And its no one's business if a woman chooses to have an abortion, because its her body and she can do whatever she wants with it.

Then, it naturally follows, that its no one's business if a school decides to take a tougher stance on things. 

Its also ironic how people take offense to some of the things they themselves do without recognizing their own hypocrisy.



Narcissus said:


> But he does border on 1mmortal 1tachi levels, where he deserves no more attention than does the man standing on the corner wearing doomsday signs and a tinfoil hat.



That's quite the sugar coated way of saying: "1mmortal 1tachi defeated you and every atheist on this forum in every discussion and debate".

And now your plan of last resort is a pathetic defamation campaign, due to your own inability to back up anything you say.


----------



## BashFace (Jan 30, 2014)

1mmortal 1tachi said:


> Many atheists on this forum.
> 
> *Preach anti-creationism*
> *Routinely engage in atheistic, anti-religious, propaganda*
> ...



*I don't see anything wrong with any of that. You believe in what we believed in when we thought lightning come from Gods so yeah you are leaving yourself vulnerable for ridicule if you express beliefs like Christianity.*

As people misrepresent Christianity, people also misrepresent Atheism difference being Atheists are cynical and Christians are obsessive and go a little bit over the top. 

[youtube]YQ8d39xQBUg[/youtube]

How can people debate on something that they don't know, if Christians either read the bible or had an understanding of physics then they would have the choice to believe in God. Most people believe in God because they feel like they don't have a choice or because they are scared. 

If Christianity was about love and unity with God why does it have to be so barbaric and anyone who opposes is spited. I don't have evidence to back up your belief that's why I believe there is no God. 

Everything to do with religion is opinionated there is not one thread of evidence that supports either side which is why people say yeah I don't believe because there is no reason too. Anyone who believes they can win a debate about religion or thinks that someone has won a debate over religion is just being biased. 

The existence of God was used to comfort us because we were scared when there was lightning and scared seeing asteroids, are the Gods angry at us is what we used to think. I can't see how you could be so passionate and argue over religion when you have nothing to base your theories off. 

It would be like me arguing about what colour the air is and us two going into mad debate over it. Ok longitude and latitude how many kilos of dirt in that one spot. When you mention "your plan of last resort is a pathetic defamation campaign, due to your own inability to back up anything you say", That is what you call a Socrate's debate look it up and you will get what I mean. 

You have never debated religion in your life you have only uttered nonsense in response to you being infuriated by difference in belief or others sharing and embracing belief. The truth is I don't care if you believe in God I think it's stupid but I will never bash your beliefs and even if I do it all comes down to opinion. 

*Sorry to any Atheists or Agnostics for the spam...*


----------



## Nep Nep (Jan 30, 2014)

Jersey Shore Jesus said:


> No you stop. All my life I've been mocked by teachers who mock creationism 10 times harder then this most likely biased story and the teachers most likely didn't mock evolution like atheist teachers mock God in "non prayer" schools. I don't agree with the extra credit thing all be it that.
> 
> Yes they should be led in prayer I find it funny the things we want to take Jesus out of is screwed. Trying to take in God we trust off the money, screwed, Take Jesus out of schools, kids are shot on the daily.
> 
> Just because you don't believe in Jesus doesn't make him any less real.



I'm by no means a perfect Christian but what they're doing is extreme... 

Also don't whine about persecution me and you don't have a single thing on the persecuted Christians in the bible. This is small potatoes. 

A proper Christian does not seek to get in a situation like this, where we break the law and push our beliefs on others, a proper Christian would respect others beliefs. Respecting doesn't mean agreeing after all but it does mean a neutral environment where people of various faiths or lack thereof meet. 

Why should we make Atheists, Jews, Muslims etc. etc. etc. pray to someone they don't believe in during school? Hence why we don't do it.  

It's not like you still can't pray for your food or something at lunch time.  

Being Christian never meant being inconsiderate of others, it's obvious somewhere down the line they lost their way if they think that pushing their beliefs and potentially harming children by teaching them things that by the worlds standard are incorrect is a good idea.


----------



## Sanity Check (Jan 30, 2014)

BashFace said:


> *I don't see anything wrong with any of that. You believe in what we believed in when we thought lightning come from Gods so yeah you are leaving yourself vulnerable for ridicule if you express beliefs like Christianity.*



I didn't say anything was wrong with it.

Only that atheists were criticizing religious people for the same things they do, erryday.  Hypocrisy, hypocrisy!  .


----------



## Narcissus (Jan 30, 2014)

BashFace said:


> *Spoiler*: __
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Don't worry, it wasn't spam. You pointed out a lot of what was wrong in his post. It's a wasted effort though because you cannot educate the willfully ignorant and intentionally dishonest. Besides,  no one takes 1mmortal seriously.


----------



## ~Greed~ (Jan 30, 2014)

The hell.....

Even if that's from home-schooling, it's pretty freaking sad.....

The poor kid is going to grow up to be incredibly ignorant.



Jersey Shore Jesus said:


> Prayer in public schools is not wrong.



Yea, it kind of is, considering....you know, separation of church and state and all.....

...and considering who runs the public school system.....



Mael said:


> Because you're all of the same lot.  Deep down inside you see this uppity black man taking away your guns and challenging your infallible Constitution, which is a living document by the way.  You still want that white Christian America back where prayer is top priority and creationism is actually taken seriously.
> 
> Don't shit a shitter, you shit.



Most people don't dislike Obama as a president because he's black. They don't like him because they don't like how he's running the country.

Calling everyone who doesn't like Obama a racist who wants a "white Christian America"  where "prayer is top priority" is pretty fucking stupid.


----------



## Mael (Jan 30, 2014)

Onthius, you have no clue who JSJ is.


----------



## ~Greed~ (Jan 30, 2014)

No, I lurk the cafe enough to know who he is, and completely disagree with him 99.99% of the time. 

I just get irritated every time I see someone say that the only reason people hate Obama is because of his skin color. Probably because I hear it so much IRL as well. Maybe I over-reacted a bit, it's just strikes a nerve every time I hear someone say or imply it.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Jan 30, 2014)

Christians in this nation can be so entitled, so anything actually enforcing government standards of religious neutrality is looked upon as oppression.


----------



## Mael (Jan 30, 2014)

Othinus said:


> No, I lurk the cafe enough to know who he is, and completely disagree with him 99.99% of the time.
> 
> I just get irritated every time I see someone say that the only reason people hate Obama is because of his skin color. Probably because I hear it so much IRL as well. Maybe I over-reacted a bit, it's just strikes a nerve every time I hear someone say or imply it.



But I never said it was the only reason.  I said it was the elephant in the room that people feel but won't talk about.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Jan 30, 2014)

Yes, as I mentioned in another thread people get antsy when others try to point out racists exist. Like take that thread about Oprah. She didn't even say all criticism toward Obama was racist, just that there exists those that do so based on race, that he himself is a victim of racism, and certain people blew up about it.


----------



## Lucaniel (Jan 30, 2014)

> If its no one's business what gays do in the privacy of their bedroom.
> 
> And its no one's business if a woman chooses to have an abortion, because its her body and she can do whatever she wants with it.
> 
> Then, it naturally follows, that its no one's business if a school decides to take a tougher stance on things.



it doesn't naturally follow at all because there's a difference between one person, two people, and a school


----------



## Mael (Jan 30, 2014)

Seto Kaiba said:


> Yes, as I mentioned in another thread people get antsy when others try to point out racists exist. Like take that thread about Oprah. She didn't even say all criticism toward Obama was racist, just that there exists those that do so based on race, that he himself is a victim of racism, and certain people blew up about it.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Jan 30, 2014)

Related to the story though...there does seem to be this attempt (I particularly attribute it to Baby Boomers and early Gen X'ers) to re-inject religion or more accurately, Christianity, into the public classroom and take it a step further by introducing teachings based on the religion or interpretation of in history and science classrooms. Down here for example, I kinda lucked out that they were still teaching evolution in my HS for (but they still had that retarded disclaimer of IT'S A THEORY), yet by the time my little bro got into HS they removed it from the biology curriculum. He won't be able to officially learn about it until he gets into college, although he has learned it on his own time. It was also a strong Christian lobby that shanked the education on safe-sex down here. Again, something I had learned about but had been rid of by the time my bro came around in favor of abstinence-only education; which clearly doesn't work.


----------



## Mael (Jan 30, 2014)

School shootings don't happen because of a lack of prayer.  Anyone who says that is either in severe denial, extremely retarded, or some combination of the two.

School shootings happen because we're dealing with a horrid school social culture and not taking steps to appropriately address them.  Zero tolerance punishes victims more than aggressors.  Teachers are so afraid of lawsuits that they're literally hands off.  Parents won't take accountability for the actions of their kids, a horrible baby boomer project of boosting self-esteem gone horribly wrong where narcissists were born instead.  Those who are suffering are so coddled that they don't learn to take appropriate steps to adapt, evolve, or fight back (because guess what?  we're still animals and strength or the show of strength matters to where they'll respect those who fight back).  You think Charlie Luciano and Meyer Lansky were best buddies just for the sake of it?  No...it's because the former, a tough guy in all sense of the words, respected the latter's grit and refusal to back down.  So we've got kids who are battered on all sides, coddled by the internet and their parents telling them they're not fucking up and they don't need to do a thing, a school system that doesn't even tell the bullies they fucked up, no logical system of punishment that doesn't even flirt with more effective draconian measures.  Psychological issues and the need for psychological/psychiatric help is still viewed as taboo or a red flag, even in the workplace.  The hypocrisy is astounding. And to top it all off, kids who are feeling so helpless and hopeless in societies where it's more than easy to pack five pistols when you've got the cash to do so.

And people think fucking PRAYER is going to help this?

Holy shit...no wonder I think I'm leaning on authoritarianism.  Such beliefs that are actually allowed are holding back actual solutions.


----------



## Fujita (Jan 30, 2014)

1mmortal 1tachi said:


> If its no one's business what gays do in the privacy of their bedroom.
> 
> And its no one's business if a woman chooses to have an abortion, because its her body and she can do whatever she wants with it.
> 
> Then, it naturally follows, that its no one's business if a school decides to take a tougher stance on things.



_How_ does it follow?

> Person A can do X in private
> Person B can do Y in private
> Government institution C can do Z in public 

You're drawing a fallacious comparison between the people (private citizens and government officials) on the one hand, and between the acts (something that affects only people they know with their consent in the case of gay sex, and then something that affects a larger segment of the populace, likely without all of their consent) on the other.

This is like saying that 

If a gay guy can do gay things with his lover

You can and should be asked to submit to gay sex at the DMV


----------



## Mael (Jan 30, 2014)

Fujita said:


> _How_ does it follow?
> 
> > Person A can do X in private
> > Person B can do Y in private
> ...



Such is life of the Constitutifag...the inability to draw logical distinctions.


----------



## Hitt (Jan 30, 2014)

Fujita said:


> _How_ does it follow?
> 
> > Person A can do X in private
> > Person B can do Y in private
> ...



1tachi is one of the most dishonest pricks on this forum.  He's not even entertaining, like JSJ is.


----------



## Mael (Jan 30, 2014)

Hitt said:


> 1tachi is one of the most dishonest pricks on this forum.  He's not even entertaining, like JSJ is.



Also out of his fucking mind.


----------



## Xyloxi (Jan 30, 2014)

Getting kids on their knees in awe of another man? Oh please GOP, you're gayer than a public toilet in the Castro.


----------



## Jersey Shore Jesus (Jan 30, 2014)

Xyloxi said:


> Getting kids on their knees in awe of another man? Oh please GOP, you're gayer than a public toilet in the Castro.



They're are sitting at there desk you can stand and pray its what you prefer and again I say if you don't want to pray with your teacher don't pray its that simple. 



stab-o-tron5000 said:


> Creationists, or rather Intelligent design proponents in this case, which is just creationism reworked and re-branded, try to use the Cambrian as some sort of convoluted evidence for their bullshit.  They do this, as creationists always do, by completely misrepresenting what it is we actually do know about the Cambrian explosion, and using that ignorance as evidence in their favor.
> 
> This is why I find it so tiring to try and have a debate or discussion with creationists like JSJ.  Creationists and their relationship to knowledge of evolution is akin to a small children who covers their eyes and thinks themselves invisible. If they can't see you, you must not be able to see them. Creationists treat Evolution the same way and think that their ignorance somehow constitutes evidence against it.
> 
> If they don't have that knowledge, it must not exist. Therefore not educating themselves about anything regarding evolution proves to them that it isn't real.



Yet evolution has never been proven either the same with creation. It comes down to faith for both.


----------



## Mael (Jan 30, 2014)

> Yet evolution has never been proven either the same with creation. It comes down to faith for both.



Extreme lel.

Evolution has been proven at the cellular and even larger level.

Your trolling is getting weak, man.


----------



## navy (Jan 30, 2014)

Jersey Shore Jesus said:


> I don't believe in evolution.



Explain this image then.


----------



## Bioness (Jan 30, 2014)

That image isn't helping navy.


----------



## stab-o-tron5000 (Jan 30, 2014)

Jersey Shore Jesus said:


> Yet evolution has never been proven either...





stab-o-tron5000 said:


> If they don't have that knowledge, it must not exist. Therefore not educating themselves about anything regarding evolution proves to them that it isn't real.



Thank you for proving my point.


----------



## Fujita (Jan 30, 2014)

Jersey Shore Jesus said:


> They're are sitting at there desk you can stand and pray its what you prefer and again I say if you don't want to pray with your teacher don't pray its that simple.



Not

Constitutional


----------



## Sanity Check (Jan 30, 2014)

Fujita said:


> _How_ does it follow?
> 
> > Person A can do X in private
> > Person B can do Y in private
> ...



The name of the organization that runs the school is Sabine Parish.

The term parish is typically indicative of religious private schooling.

They might receive state funding, whether they do or not isn't clear.  They're not a typical public school like the article claims which would obligate them to adhere to guidelines public schools are subject to.

A school system that rejects creationism or religion is unconstitutional as it prohibits / places restrictions upon a person's freedom of religion & encourages degrading and prejudiced behavior towards traditionalism / religion and other things that represent rights or freedoms that should be protected.



Narcissus said:


> It's a wasted effort though because you cannot educate the willfully ignorant and intentionally dishonest. Besides,  no one takes 1mmortal seriously.





Hitt said:


> 1tachi is one of the most dishonest pricks on this forum.  He's not even entertaining, like JSJ is.





Mael said:


> Also out of his fucking mind.





*Narcissus* - How am I "ignorant" or "dishonest"?  Empty words you couldn't back up if your life depended on it.

*Hitt* - I disagreed with you / disproved you in the past.  You're holding a grudge.

*Mael* - You're a fascist who labels anyone that questions your pro fascist view as being "crazy".  

Anyways, if any of you have differences with me - go make a thread in the debate section or something.  

.


----------



## Fujita (Jan 30, 2014)

1mmortal 1tachi said:


> The name of the organization that runs the school is Sabine Parish.
> 
> The term parish is typically indicative of religious private schooling.
> 
> They might receive state funding, whether they do or not isn't clear. They're not a typical public school like the article claims which would obligate them to adhere to guidelines public schools are subject to.







> The U.S. state of Louisiana is divided into 64 parishes (French: paroisses) in the same way that 48 of the other states of the United States are divided into counties.





1mmortal 1tachi said:


> A school system that rejects creationism or religion is unconstitutional as it prohibits / places restrictions upon a person's freedom of religion & encourages degrading and prejudiced behavior towards traditionalism / religion and other things that represent rights or freedoms that should be protected.



I'll just quote myself



Fujita said:


> The government (which, in this case, is public school administrators, teachers, and the like) can't promote any religion, because Constitution
> 
> And that doesn't mean that it promotes atheism, either. It doesn't tell you that you shouldn't believe in God. It's simply neutral on the matter. You can believe whatever you want to believe, but the government cannot make laws about what you should believe, or laws that force you to abide by religious tenets
> 
> ...


----------



## Sanity Check (Jan 30, 2014)

Sabine Parish is listed there under 'S'.



Fujita said:


> ...this is really quite simple
> 
> The government (which, in this case, is public school administrators, teachers, and the like) can't promote any religion, because Constitution
> 
> ...



Like I said, the name of the organization is Sabine Parish the term parish implies a private school with religious connotations.  They might receive state funding.  It doesn't necessarily imply they're a typical public school or that the guidelines of a public school apply to them.

If scientists like Richard Dawkins can promote atheism and science can be interpreted as taking the side of atheism, then you're wrong about science adopting a neutral stance.

Claiming that science is something that must reject religion or creationism is also taking sides and couldn't be considered neutrality.  A true neutral stance neither denies nor accepts creationism, nor makes any claims regarding it.   

There's no real reason creationism couldn't be science.

It would be more accurate to say that most scientists today are atheists who dislike creationism on a personal level.  And they're not above allowing their personal prejudices and emotions to cloud their judgement on the topic.


----------



## Fujita (Jan 30, 2014)

What

the

actual

hell

*"The U.S. state of Louisiana is divided into 64 parishes (French: paroisses) in the same way that 48 of the other states of the United States are divided into counties."*


----------



## Lucaniel (Jan 30, 2014)

> Like I said, the name of the organization is Sabine Parish the term parish implies a private school with religious connotations.



no-one gives a fuck what it implies

what it _means_ in this case is just another word for subdivisions


----------



## Sanity Check (Jan 30, 2014)

Fujita said:


> What
> 
> the
> 
> ...



No shit?

Most of them were founded back in the 1800's and began as real parishes.

It isn't a complete coincidence that the word parish is there.

Also, if you look at their organizational characteristics, it isn't a typical public school hierarchy like the article mistakenly claims.



Lucaniel said:


> no-one gives a fuck what it implies
> 
> what it _means_ in this case is just another word for subdivisions



Subdivisions with no religious affiliation?

Is that what you're claiming?

*EDIT - HERE*:

It looks like they do receive state funding / grants -- but they do not fall under the direct jurisdiction of the state.



Looks like all of you fell for the media sensationlism.


----------



## Fujita (Jan 30, 2014)

1mmortal 1tachi said:


> No shit?



They're the equivalent of counties

And yet you harp on the name again, so I felt it was worth repeating



> Most of them were founded back in the 1800's and began as real parishes.
> 
> It isn't a complete coincidence that the word parish is there.



They were founded in French and Spanish colonies 

Clearly this means that they're still French and Spanish colonies 



> Also, if you look at their organizational characteristics, it isn't a typical public school hierarchy like the article mistakenly claims.



...does this mean it's religious or are you just stonewalling with irrelevant tripe like you are above? 



> Subdivisions with no religious affiliation?
> 
> Is that what you're claiming?



Yes



This is their typical government structure 

And hey

here's an interesting tidbit



> When the United States first organized present-day Louisiana as the Territory of Orleans in 1804, the territory was divided into 12 counties. This system proved unsatisfactory, and by 1807, the territory reorganized its *civil* government roughly according to Roman Catholic parishes in the region.


----------



## Sanity Check (Jan 30, 2014)

Fujita said:


> They're the equivalent of counties
> 
> And yet you harp on the name again, so I felt it was worth repeating
> 
> ...



Another interesting tidbit.



1mmortal 1tachi said:


> *EDIT - HERE*:
> 
> It looks like they do receive state funding / grants -- but they do not fall under the direct jurisdiction of the state.
> 
> ...



A school can be grade K to 12 accredited and not be a public school in the conventional term, which does seem to be the case.


----------



## Fujita (Jan 30, 2014)

1mmortal 1tachi said:


> It looks like they do receive state funding / grants -- but they do not fall under the direct jurisdiction of the state.
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like all of you fell for the media sensationlism.



Okay

So the local government got money and gets to decide exactly how to spend it because that's how the state government arranged it 

How does this bolster your claim that these are not civil parishes and thus subject to the Constitution's prohibition on government-sponsored religion

Or for that matter that "they do not fall under the direct jurisdiction of the state" in anything but this one case


----------



## Sanity Check (Jan 30, 2014)

Fujita said:


> Okay
> 
> So the local government got money and gets to decide exactly how to spend it because that's how the state government arranged it
> 
> ...



You're asking me to explain things to you because you lack the intelligence or education to understand it on your own?

Is that what you're saying?


----------



## Jersey Shore Jesus (Jan 30, 2014)

Fujita said:


> Not
> 
> Constitutional



How so? We are not stopping other people from praying? Its not like the teacher would lead prayer and then an hour later when the Muslim needs to pray say, "EXCUSE ME YOU SAND ^ (use bro)! WHAT DO YOU THINK YOU'RE DOING!" 

I don't think we have ever heard that happening yes?


----------



## Fujita (Jan 30, 2014)

1mmortal 1tachi said:


> You're asking me to explain things to you because you lack the intelligence or education to understand it on your own?
> 
> Is that what you're saying?



Go ahead... educate me


----------



## Mael (Jan 30, 2014)

Jersey Shore Jesus said:


> How so? We are not stopping other people from praying? Its not like the teacher would lead prayer and then an hour later when the Muslim needs to pray say, "EXCUSE ME YOU SAND ^ (use bro)! WHAT DO YOU THINK YOU'RE DOING!"
> 
> I don't think we have ever heard that happening yes?



Well to be fair you are being a colossal twat on how you downplay Christian prayer yet treat any other form of prayer as a massive inconvenience or annoyance.  

That's why I think you might need to drink bleach.


----------



## Jersey Shore Jesus (Jan 30, 2014)

Mael said:


> Well to be fair you are being a colossal twat on how you downplay Christian prayer yet treat any other form of prayer as a massive inconvenience or annoyance.
> 
> That's why I think you might need to drink bleach.



I don't think its a massive annoyance what annoys me is when I go to pray people say, "Wow you believe in Jesus go fuck yourself JSJ! You believe in such & such? You're a moron!" 

But when a muslim goes to pray its, "Oh don't say anything he might blow us up."

Which its not even about that it *WOULD NOT* be Unconstitutional if we allowed teacher led Christian pray since the USA is a *Christian nation* and anyone who does not want to take part wouldn't do such.  

Finally take Christian nation with a grain of salt. I already know all that treaty of Tripoli crap. I mean Christian nation the same way that any middle eastern nation is a Islam nation. The majority, so they say, believe in Jesus Christ.


----------



## Fujita (Jan 30, 2014)

1mmortal 1tachi said:


> f scientists like Richard Dawkins can promote atheism and science can be interpreted as taking the side of atheism, then you're wrong about science adopting a neutral stance.
> 
> Claiming that science is something that must reject religion or creationism is also taking sides and couldn't be considered neutrality.  A true neutral stance neither denies nor accepts creationism, nor makes any claims regarding it.



Science is not an establishment of religion, and that certain aspects of science may (or may not) incidentally rain on somebody's religion parade doesn't make it such 

I mean? prohibiting murder doesn't mean that the government is promoting religion just because many religions happen to have a prohibition on murder. 

You're also, for no discernible reason, substituting Dawkins's views on religion for the general body of scientific knowledge that is taught in high school classrooms



> There's no real reason creationism couldn't be science.



Oh really?



> It would be more accurate to say that most scientists today are atheists who dislike creationism on a personal level.  And they're not above allowing their personal prejudices and emotions to cloud their judgement on the topic.



And even more accurate to say that creationists are religious people who desperately want to hold onto their prior beliefs and are now manipulating "science" to fit that end 

The sad part? I'd have more basis for that statement than you do for yours.


----------



## Mael (Jan 30, 2014)

Jersey Shore Jesus said:


> I don't think its a massive annoyance what annoys me is when I go to pray people say, "Wow you believe in Jesus go fuck yourself JSJ! You believe in such & such? You're a moron!"
> 
> But when a muslim goes to pray its, "Oh don't say anything he might blow us up."
> 
> ...



You're not a fucking asshole for believing in Jesus.  I was born and raised Roman Catholic.

You're a fucking asshole for prioritizing it over the basis of what the United States public system is all about and that is secularism.  It's the same kind of idiotic behavior that states the Armed Forces were never secular entities, which is horseshit.


----------



## stab-o-tron5000 (Jan 30, 2014)

> There's no real reason creationism couldn't be science.



You're right.  The only thing holding it back is that it lacks any observations, any experiments, any data, any evidence, any facts.  There's no way to falsify it, no way to test it.  It meets not even any of the criteria to be considered a hypothesis, much less a theory.  It literally meets not one single measure of what would be required to consider something even remotely scientific. 

But yeah, put all that aside and it could totally be science.


P.S. I just realized how completely appropriate the expression on my avatars face is for this thread.


----------



## Sanity Check (Jan 30, 2014)

Fujita said:


> Go ahead... educate me



In other words, you're going to clap your hands over your ears, close your eyes and make me drag you millimeter by millimeter to a point where you have no alternative but to admit I'm right?

I hate when people do that.  It makes me think they're too cowardly and fearful of being wrong to say what they really think.  That they're going to try to bend facts and reality to conform to their beliefs, instead of shaping their beliefs to conform to what fact and reality says

If I'm willing to say what I really think and feel on a topic, even if I am proven wrong every now and then...  Why can't everyone else do the same?  

The fastest way to get to the bottom of this, is for people to be straight up and honest on what they think and believe.  But, they're usually not willing to do that.  They have to be vague, ambiguous and try to bullshit artist their way through things...  So lame.

Its simple dude.  Its usually easier to assimilate existing things into the system, than it is to do them over, completely.

Much like how christianity assimilated existing pagan holidays into their social order (easter, christmas and so on).  So, did the existing school system assimilate the existing religious parish in that area(Sabine Parish), rather than abolish it completely & rebuild from the ground up.

Its roots are religious.  It receives state funding and makes some effort to conform to state guidelines.  But, it isn't fully controlled or run by the state to the same degree other public schools are.  That's why they can get away with having so many religious connotations in their curriculum and course work.



Fujita said:


> Science is not an establishment of religion, and that certain aspects of science may (or may not) incidentally rain on somebody's religion parade doesn't make it such
> 
> I mean… prohibiting murder doesn't mean that the government is promoting religion just because many religions happen to have a prohibition on murder.
> 
> You're also, for no discernible reason, substituting Dawkins's views on religion for the general body of scientific knowledge that is taught in high school classrooms



Wait.  Did I say science was an establishment of religion?  Nope.

What I did say was that science and scientists aren't neutral, objective, unbiased in their treatment of religion.  They show favortism to an atheistic stance and tend to be prejudiced and discriminatory towards religion.  That's the current topic, one which you seem to be avoiding.

That's like saying cold isn't an absence of heat, isn't it?  If you're indoctrinating a pro materialist view that says science teaches only fact, and fact is only material, that does exclude certain things such as religion.  Exclusion is a form of promoting one agenda over another.  So, yes, the current curriculum taught in schools does exclude certain ideas and concepts which are intrinsic to religion, which could be considered anti religious.

I'm not substituting or embellishing, its a fact that most scientists are atheist.  And that they're not above allowing their religious orientation affect their work.  



Fujita said:


> Oh really?



Yes, really.  

Why don't you argue the point?

Its obvious you disagree, yet you seem afraid to say what you think on the topic.

Why are you afraid?



Fujita said:


> And even more accurate to say that creationists are religious people who desperately want to hold onto their prior beliefs and are now manipulating "science" to fit that end
> 
> The sad part? I'd have more basis for that statement than you do for yours.



Everyone manipulates or engages in delusion, making assumptions, ignorance and whatnot to cope with the unknowns of reality.  It isn't a condition reserved exclusively for religious people or any specific demographic.  

It isn't as if any one class, ethnicity, or religious group has moral high ground when it comes to the topic of rape, murder, crime and so on.  Every demographic is guilty to a degree & none are immune.

To pretend that only one group of people is guilty is usually a bigotted view.  Hitler pretending all jews were the source of evil was a bigotted view.  If you're going to pretend that only religious people have been guilty of manipulating, and that atheists never do it, that's a bigotted / prejudiced / disciminatory view.

Atheists and scientists manipulate as much as anyone.  Dawkins did it when he wrote his book The God Delusion.  He contradicted himself when he said he was against religion because it "encouraged people to not to ask questions about things".  Then he himself openly stated christianity is bad theory because it might cause us to ask: "If God exists, who made God"?  

Dawkins thus openly states he doesn't like christianity because it causes us to ask questions such as "who made God"?..  Dawkins, hence is an obstacle to people asking questions that might lead to exploration & discovery.  Even though he falsely claims to be the opposite.

Hence, what's the point in pretending that only religious people, or only atheists do it.  Everyone does it.  To say otherwise is ignorance.



stab-o-tron5000 said:


> You're right.  The only thing holding it back is that it lacks any observations, any experiments, any data, any evidence, any facts.  There's no way to falsify it, no way to test it.  It meets not even any of the criteria to be considered a hypothesis, much less a theory.  It literally meets not one single measure of what would be required to consider something even remotely scientific.



What I meant is, there's no reason a scientific investigation of creationism couldn't be done.  That would allow creationism from a scientific standpoint to be taught in classrooms, as it is one of the competing theories to the cosmological variant of anthropic theory.

.


----------



## Leeroy Jenkins (Jan 30, 2014)

There are several issues at work here. Not only is it clear that the school is in violation of the law in terms of teaching religion in school, but also in violation of the Constitution when it comes to favoring one religion over the other. It's also incredibly concerning to me the level of incomprehension Itachi has with the concept of parish being the equivalent of counties. That, my friends, seems to be the biggest issue of all of them.

And I almost forgot, America is not and never has been "a Christian Nation". That is a lie purported by extremists who seek control. It's the reason the founding documents explicitly use the word Creator, not God/Lord, etc. It also explicitly states that there cannot be any favoritism in the view of the government of any religion.


----------



## Leeroy Jenkins (Jan 30, 2014)

Also, regarding this big block of text: 
*Spoiler*: __ 





1mmortal 1tachi said:


> In other words, you're going to clap your hands over your ears, close your eyes and make me drag you millimeter by millimeter to a point where you have no alternative but to admit I'm right?
> 
> I hate when people do that.  It makes me think they're too cowardly and fearful of being wrong to say what they really think.  That they're going to try to bend facts and reality to conform to their beliefs, instead of shaping their beliefs to conform to what fact and reality says
> 
> ...






Part 1. You would be incorrect, people want you to logically argue your position. You have only put forth opinion and bullshit. 

Part 2. Taking her argument out of context isn't helping your case. Neither is incorrectly stating that cold is the absence of heat. That's not only sophistry, but ignorance of scientific stuff that even I remember and I can't reliably remember my own age.

Part 3. Classic logical fallacy at work. Trying to turn the argument on her via ad hominem.

Part 4. More unfounded claims that amount to nothing more than sophistry. Also, using Nazis and Hitler never aid your argument.

Part 5. Hickory smoked horseshit. You just ignored all the reasons why science cannot accept any of the evidence creationism tries to pass off as scientifically proveable.


----------



## Sanity Check (Jan 30, 2014)

Leeroy Jenkins said:


> Part 1. You would be incorrect, people want you to logically argue your position. You have only put forth opinion and bullshit.



Which parts of what I said are "opinion" and "bullshit"?



Leeroy Jenkins said:


> Part 2. Taking her argument out of context isn't helping your case. Neither is incorrectly stating that cold is the absence of heat. That's not only sophistry, but ignorance of scientific stuff that even I remember and I can't reliably remember my own age.



How did I "take her argument out of context"?  

You don't think cold can be defined as an absence of heat?  Why not?



Leeroy Jenkins said:


> Part 3. Classic logical fallacy at work. Trying to turn the argument on her via ad hominem.



How is it an "ad hominem"?  .



Leeroy Jenkins said:


> Part 4. More unfounded claims that amount to nothing more than sophistry. Also, using Nazis and Hitler never aid your argument.



Godwin's law, ftw.

What makes my claims "unfounded" specifically?



Leeroy Jenkins said:


> Part 5. Hickory smoked horseshit. You just ignored all the reasons why science cannot accept any of the evidence creationism tries to pass off as scientifically proveable.



What "reasons"?  Be specific.

.


----------



## pajamas (Jan 30, 2014)




----------



## Sanity Check (Jan 30, 2014)

pajamas said:


> http://i.imgur.com/LokpdN6.gif



Yay for revisionist history.


----------



## Toroxus (Jan 30, 2014)

Just gonna add this here:
Cafe, please don't associate JSJ with other gunowners. We don't like the idea of someone owning a gun when they believe in fairy-tales and imaginary people.


----------



## Aphelion (Jan 30, 2014)

[YOUTUBE]Cg_8knBHEyw[/YOUTUBE]


----------



## Leeroy Jenkins (Jan 30, 2014)

1mmortal 1tachi said:


> Which parts of what I said are "opinion" and "bullshit"?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



1. The bullshit is everything you said to cover your opinion that she is ignoring your position. She's not, she's refuting your position each time with either sources that have proven her contention or quoting her previous posts because they succinctly say why she disagrees with you. 

Claiming she's cover her ears when she sarcastically says to educate her tells me you're completely off base on what she had implied in the first place, given that it was a response to an ad hom. 

2. Cold is not an absence of heat, but movement in molecules. Slow moving molecules have less energy, which registers as cold. Fast moving molecules have more energy, registering as hot. This is thermodynamics.

Fujita clearly pointed out the flaws in your argument. For whatever reason, you continue to pursue this argument anyway and took her argument out of context, continuing your use of ad hom (in this case, against scientists - for which you currently have no source to back it up as a credible flaw in her logic). 

3. You're implying she's afraid. That's an attack on the person. That's an ad hom fallacy. 

4. Your prolific use of generalizations throughout and a reliance on one specific example for exactly one part of your argument does not create any foundation of an argument at all. It's essentially the same thing as in part 1, where you're bullshitting to cover your unfounded logic.

5. All of this: 



stab-o-tron5000 said:


> You're right.  The only thing holding it back is that it lacks any observations, any experiments, any data, any evidence, any facts.  There's no way to falsify it, no way to test it.  It meets not even any of the criteria to be considered a hypothesis, much less a theory.  It literally meets not one single measure of what would be required to consider something even remotely scientific.
> 
> But yeah, put all that aside and it could totally be science.
> 
> ...


----------



## SuperSaiyaMan12 (Jan 30, 2014)

JSJ, you're not considered an idiot because your a Christian. You're considered one here since you:

1. Continually post hypocritical shit about religion.
2. Continually post insane conspiracy theories.
3. You don't even understand how evolution, science, etc. even works and because you don't understand it, you don't even try arguing since its an argument you know you lose.
4. You constantly force your beliefs on others here. 
5. You cry wolf whenever people call you out and cry 'STOP OPPRESSING ME AND MY BELIEFS' when we are not.
6. When posters go out of their way to help you, you _take offense to it_, blow up in our faces, and then continue to spew the same stuff.


----------



## Lucaniel (Jan 30, 2014)

1mmortal 1tachi said:


> You're asking me to explain things to you because you lack the intelligence or education to understand it on your own?
> 
> Is that what you're saying?





1mmortal 1tachi said:


> In other words, you're going to clap your hands over your ears, close your eyes and make me drag you millimeter by millimeter to a point where you have no alternative but to admit I'm right?
> 
> I hate when people do that.  It makes me think they're too cowardly and fearful of being wrong to say what they really think.  That they're going to try to bend facts and reality to conform to their beliefs, instead of shaping their beliefs to conform to what fact and reality says



gotta love how the trolls get condescending the moment you ask them to explain their bullshit and waffle for ten million years, even after they've spent the last hour failing to understand that 'parish' doesn't always mean 'religiously governed'


----------



## Fujita (Jan 30, 2014)

1mmortal 1tachi said:


> In other words, you're going to clap your hands over your ears, close your eyes and make me drag you millimeter by millimeter to a point where you have no alternative but to admit I'm right?
> 
> I hate when people do that.  It makes me think they're too cowardly and fearful of being wrong to say what they really think.  That they're going to try to bend facts and reality to conform to their beliefs, instead of shaping their beliefs to conform to what fact and reality says
> 
> ...



> I ask for a straight answer, if sarcastically
> I get this much irrelevant ranting in reply
> 



> Its simple dude.  Its usually easier to assimilate existing things into the system, than it is to do them over, completely.
> 
> Much like how christianity assimilated existing pagan holidays into their social order (easter, christmas and so on).  So, did the existing school system assimilate the existing religious parish in that area(Sabine Parish), rather than abolish it completely & rebuild from the ground up.
> 
> Its roots are religious.  It receives state funding and makes some effort to conform to state guidelines.  But, it isn't fully controlled or run by the state to the same degree other public schools are.  That's why they can get away with having so many religious connotations in their curriculum and course work.



So you expect me to believe that the church runs the local governments in Louisiana 

Just because the name of the divisions, entirely equivalent to other states' counties as they are, stems from religion 

Despite the fact that they're run by officials chosen by popular election and not the church 

…riiiiiiiiiiight 



> Wait.  Did I say science was an establishment of religion?  Nope.
> 
> What I did say was that science and scientists aren't neutral, objective, unbiased in their treatment of religion.  They show favortism to an atheistic stance and tend to be prejudiced and discriminatory towards religion.  That's the current topic, one which you seem to be avoiding.
> 
> That's like saying cold isn't an absence of heat, isn't it?  If you're indoctrinating a pro materialist view that says science teaches only fact, and fact is only material, that does exclude certain things such as religion.  Exclusion is a form of promoting one agenda over another.  So, yes, the current curriculum taught in schools does exclude certain ideas and concepts which are intrinsic to religion, which could be considered anti religious.



The government is neutral in that it doesn't promote any religion or atheism as such. They don't tell you to be Catholic, Protestant, or atheist. 

That doesn't mean that they're neutral in all questions pertaining to religion. That'd be idiotic. If your religion practices human sacrifice, the government can (and should) take issue with that.

But it doesn't violate the Establishment Clause because it's not an establishment of religion that the government is supporting, it's secular law (human sacrifice is illegal, and not for religious reasons). Science is a similar case.

If you really want to you can look at this as me avoiding the issue, but this roundabout way of claiming that the government isn't being neutral is entirely pedantic because it could apply to nearly everything the government does. 



> I'm not substituting or embellishing, its a fact that most scientists are atheist.  And that they're not above allowing their religious orientation affect their work.



Given that science is about making new discoveries and questioning things? Yeah, I'm going to tend to trust the scientists a bit more on this issue. Of course, it's not like scientists are infallible or anything, being human 



> Yes, really.
> 
> Why don't you argue the point?
> 
> ...



> makes a statement without any support
> calls me afraid for not writing an essay as a rebuttal



> Everyone manipulates or engages in delusion, making assumptions, ignorance and whatnot to cope with the unknowns of reality.  It isn't a condition reserved exclusively for religious people or any specific demographic.
> 
> It isn't as if any one class, ethnicity, or religious group has moral high ground when it comes to the topic of rape, murder, crime and so on.  Every demographic is guilty to a degree & none are immune.
> 
> To pretend that only one group of people is guilty is usually a bigotted view.  Hitler pretending all jews were the source of evil was a bigotted view.  If you're going to pretend that only religious people have been guilty of manipulating, and that atheists never do it, that's a bigotted / prejudiced / disciminatory view.



So much unnecessary rambling and a Hitler reference 

[youtube]lvA3Am2xONw[/youtube]



> Atheists and scientists manipulate as much as anyone.  Dawkins did it when he wrote his book The God Delusion.  He contradicted himself when he said he was against religion because it "encouraged people to not to ask questions about things".  Then he himself openly stated christianity is bad theory because it might cause us to ask: "If God exists, who made God"?
> 
> Dawkins thus openly states he doesn't like christianity because it causes us to ask questions such as "who made God"?..  Dawkins, hence is an obstacle to people asking questions that might lead to exploration & discovery.  Even though he falsely claims to be the opposite.



Did Dawkins unleash biological mutations of terror on your family when you were a kid or something? 



> Hence, what's the point in pretending that only religious people, or only atheists do it.  Everyone does it.  To say otherwise is ignorance.



Yes, quite clearly that's what I said 



> What I meant is, there's no reason a scientific investigation of creationism couldn't be done.  That would allow creationism from a scientific standpoint to be taught in classrooms, as it is one of the competing theories to the cosmological variant of anthropic theory.



It's not a competing theory

It's pointing at gaps in science and, instead of solving them, decides that they need a cosmic band-aid

with absolutely no support for this


----------



## Sanity Check (Jan 30, 2014)

Leeroy Jenkins said:


> 1. The bullshit is everything you said to cover your opinion that she is ignoring your position. She's not, she's refuting your position each time with either sources that have proven her contention or quoting her previous posts because they succinctly say why she disagrees with you.
> 
> Claiming she's cover her ears when she sarcastically says to educate her tells me you're completely off base on what she had implied in the first place, given that it was a response to an ad hom.
> 
> ...



.

1.  It just sounds to me like you're white knighting because you have an attraction to her and feel protective.  

2.  What you're saying is if heat is defined as movement of molecules, cold is characterized by a lack of movement of molecules.  Glad we agree.

3.  I tend to think people should be proud of their beliefs & opinions.  I've noticed a lot of people disagree with me, but seem too afraid or ashamed to share why they feel that way.  Its not an attack, its an observation.  If you feel attacked or threatened, maybe there's more going on under the surface than you realize.

4.  Generalizations can be a valid form.  Its up to you to prove said generalizations are false and specify what they may be flawed.  Avoiding that step makes me wonder if you aren't too afraid or ashamed to bother trying, bro.

5.  I already responded to that above.  Go respond to my response, unless you're too afraid.  



Lucaniel said:


> gotta love how the trolls get condescending the moment you ask them to explain their bullshit and waffle for ten million years, even after they've spent the last hour failing to understand that 'parish' doesn't always been 'religiously governed'



Its not condescending to note how many of you avoid backing up anything you say.  Or to infer that fear or some other emotional responsible could be responsible.

When, in all of recorded history, has the term "parish" not implied being religiously governed?  _Never_.  Yet you persist in claiming otherwise in the way a delusional person makes baseless claims with no bearing in reality.

Then you label me a "troll" because when you have nothing valid to offer, all you can do is make shit up.


----------



## Lucaniel (Jan 30, 2014)

1mmortal 1tachi said:


> Or to infer that fear or some other emotional responsible could be responsible.



yes, it is



> When, in all of recorded history, has the term "parish" not implied being religiously governed?



right now and pretty much since louisiana worked its division out



> Then you label me a "troll" because when you have nothing valid to offer, all you can do is make shit up.



i label you a troll because you're a troll


----------



## Fujita (Jan 30, 2014)

1mmortal 1tachi said:


> .When, in all of recorded history, has the term "parish" not implied being religiously governed?  _Never_.






And that's just flat out ignoring the part where the parishes in Louisiana are clearly civil, not religious, government divisions


----------



## Leeroy Jenkins (Jan 30, 2014)

1mmortal 1tachi said:


> .
> 
> 1.  It just sounds to me like you're white knighting because you have an attraction to her and feel protective.
> 
> ...



So because I came in right after Fujita started posting totally means I'm white knighting her? Lucaniel's using Fujita's arguments against you too, is he white knighting as well? 

Who the hell is not sharing why they disagree? The amount of flawed logic you bring to the table warrants entire posts pointing them out. Various people have been bringing to your attention sources to support their logic. You have kept arguing that a parish doesn't equate to a county in the state of Louisiana for a while, despite having sources shown to you stating the fact plainly. The fact that you hold your beliefs tightly doesn't mean you can force out anything that chips at them.


----------



## Lucaniel (Jan 30, 2014)

let me refresh your memory, troll-koon



1mmortal 1tachi said:


> The name of the organization that runs the school is Sabine Parish.
> 
> The term parish is typically indicative of religious private schooling.



>"typically indicative"
>implying this is a point or proof of anything




Fujita said:


> > The U.S. state of Louisiana is divided into 64 parishes (French: paroisses) in the same way that 48 of the other states of the United States are divided into counties.



this was where fujita provided proof


1mmortal 1tachi said:


> Sabine Parish is listed there under 'S'.
> 
> 
> 
> Like I said, the name of the organization is Sabine Parish the term parish implies a private school with religious connotations.  They might receive state funding.  It doesn't necessarily imply they're a typical public school or that the guidelines of a public school apply to them.



this is where you used your dawkins-experiment-granted mutant abilities to rearrange the boneshelf in your skull so it became twice as thick and impervious to reason



Fujita said:


> What
> 
> the
> 
> ...



this is where fujita incredulously repeated her point because it wasn't sinking into your newly-fortified skull



1mmortal 1tachi said:


> No shit?
> 
> Most of them were founded back in the 1800's and began as real parishes.
> 
> ...



sadly, your skull then began to evolve into some sort of ultradense singularity




> Subdivisions with no religious affiliation?
> 
> Is that what you're claiming?
> 
> ...


then you posted a link which didn't prove what you claimed but hoped no-one would notice



Fujita said:


> They're the equivalent of counties
> 
> And yet you harp on the name again, so I felt it was worth repeating
> 
> ...



this is where fujita charged in vain to ram through that skull again with actual facts



1mmortal 1tachi said:


> Another interesting tidbit.
> 
> 
> 
> A school can be grade K to 12 accredited and not be a public school in the conventional term, which does seem to be the case.


then you tried to bring it back to your link, which proved nothing you claimed


Fujita said:


> Okay
> 
> So the local government got money and gets to decide exactly how to spend it because that's how the state government arranged it
> 
> ...



fujita, not being supernaturally dense, noticed, and asked you to explain your bullshit



1mmortal 1tachi said:


> You're asking me to explain things to you because you lack the intelligence or education to understand it on your own?
> 
> Is that what you're saying?



and this is where, having been called on your bullshit, you started waffling, baiting, and trying to condescend to cover your ass

and after all that, you claimed this:



> Its simple dude. Its usually easier to assimilate existing things into the system, than it is to do them over, completely.
> 
> Much like how christianity assimilated existing pagan holidays into their social order (easter, christmas and so on). So, did the existing school system assimilate the existing religious parish in that area(Sabine Parish), rather than abolish it completely & rebuild from the ground up.
> 
> Its roots are religious. It receives state funding and makes some effort to conform to state guidelines. But, it isn't fully controlled or run by the state to the same degree other public schools are. That's why they can get away with having so many religious connotations in their curriculum and course work.



with not one iota of proof to back up what is basically a total guess on your part


----------



## Fujita (Jan 30, 2014)

1mmortal 1tachi

Surely you can provide some sort of simple proof that the church runs Sabine Parish instead of all this floundering about with etymology


----------



## Agmaster (Jan 30, 2014)

"EDIT - HERE:

It looks like they do receive state funding / grants -- but they do not fall under the direct jurisdiction of the state.



Looks like all of you fell for the media sensationlism."

Uhm, is that to say they get tax funded without having to listen to the government?


----------



## navy (Jan 30, 2014)

Im waiting JSJ.


----------



## Lucaniel (Jan 30, 2014)

surely the fact that the ACLU is asking the Department of Justice to investigate the district based on its alleged non-compliance with Title IV, part of the Higher Education act, implies that Sabine Parish _is_ answerable to the government?

or it would be a waste of time, wouldn't it?


----------



## navy (Jan 30, 2014)

Agmaster said:


> "EDIT - HERE:
> 
> It looks like they do receive state funding / grants -- but they do not fall under the direct jurisdiction of the state.
> 
> ...



Wrong link.


----------



## Sanity Check (Jan 30, 2014)

Fujita said:


> > I ask for a straight answer, if sarcastically
> > I get this much irrelevant ranting in reply
> >



I gave you a straight answer.

I used to be able to type 160-170 wpm.  It might look long -- that's just an optical illusion.

You got the short version.

Sarcasm is a typical behavior trait of every "A-class" poster that migrated into the cafe from the battledome.  



Fujita said:


> So you expect me to believe that the church runs the local governments in Louisiana
> 
> Just because the name of the divisions, entirely equivalent to other states' counties as they are, stems from religion
> 
> ...



No, I expected you to recognize the religious leanings of a school that gives students extra credit for answering bible questions on tests and had the motto "We believe God exists" on its official website.

But apparently you didn't get it.



Fujita said:


> The government is neutral in that it doesn't promote any religion or atheism as such. They don't tell you to be Catholic, Protestant, or atheist.
> 
> That doesn't mean that they're neutral in all questions pertaining to religion. That'd be idiotic. If your religion practices human sacrifice, the government can (and should) take issue with that.
> 
> ...



You're saying the united states government which allows wealthy billionaires like Warren Buffett to pay 17% taxes, while requiring the poor and middle class to pay upwards of 30% taxes is neutral or unbiased?  

No one's claiming the government should allow religious human sacrifice, nor would such infer neutrality.

What's wrong with policies of neutrality applying to nearly everything the government does, btw?

Neutrality also implies a lack of endorsement.  The government doesn't endorse religion, it also should not endorse atheism to maintain neutrality.  Separation of atheism and state can be as important as separation of church and state as Stalin and his atheistic purge of christianity has shown.



Fujita said:


> Given that science is about making new discoveries and questioning things? Yeah, I'm going to tend to trust the scientists a bit more on this issue. Of course, it's not like scientists are infallible or anything, being human



People expand their knowledge and understanding of the universe by asking questions and answering them.

Erecting barriers to that process, limits human understanding and comprehension and tends to be a narrow minded and prejudice based thing.

Whether its scientists posing questions about the universe or people posing questions about God or religion, there's seldom a valid reason to limit or prevent people from asking legitimate questions, unless one happens to be a dictator or totalitarian regime that wants to prevent independent thought in order to better control people.

Or has some other agenda that is opposed to peoples best interests.



Fujita said:


> > makes a statement without any support
> > calls me afraid for not writing an essay as a rebuttal



What statement did I make that lacked support?



Fujita said:


> So much unnecessary rambling and a Hitler reference
> 
> [youtube]lvA3Am2xONw[/youtube]



Godwin's law, ftw.

.



Fujita said:


> Did Dawkins unleash biological mutations of terror on your family when you were a kid or something?



No, why?



Fujita said:


> Yes, quite clearly that's what I said



Glad we agree on something.



Fujita said:


> It's not a competing theory
> 
> It's pointing at gaps in science and, instead of solving them, decides that they need a cosmic band-aid
> 
> with absolutely no support for this



Statistically, its far more likely that life was a guided & premeditated event than one that arose simply due to natural occurrences.

In the way that components necessary to build a car or maintain a satellites orbit are statistically more likely to be guided and premeditated events than natural ones. 



Lucaniel said:


> yes, it is
> 
> *right now and pretty much since louisiana worked its division out*
> 
> i label you a troll because you're a troll



If it isn't a school with deeply religious roots, what is it?

How am I a "troll"?  Use science to explain your answer & provide evidence.


----------



## Lucaniel (Jan 30, 2014)

> No, I expected you to recognize the religious leanings of a school that gives students extra credit for answering bible questions on tests and had the motto "We believe God exists" on its official website.
> 
> But apparently that's above your comprehension.



>still providing no proof that the school is run by a church and not the government
>still relying on innuendo, ambiguities and limp condescension to paper over the cracks


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Jan 30, 2014)

Damn, 1tachi this is a low even for you.


----------



## pajamas (Jan 30, 2014)

every goddamn post


----------



## Fujita (Jan 30, 2014)

1mmortal 1tachi said:


> I gave you a straight answer.



No 



> I used to be able to type 160-170 wpm.  It might look long -- that's just an optical illusion.
> 
> You got the short version.
> 
> Sarcasm is a typical behavior trait of every "A-class" poster that migrated into the cafe from the battledome.



filler

don't care 



> No, I expected you to recognize the religious leanings of a school that gives students extra credit for answering bible questions on tests and had the motto "We believe God exists" on its official website.
> 
> But apparently you didn't get it.



Congratulations, you've proved that the school has religious leanings 

Now



Fujita said:


> 1mmortal 1tachi
> 
> Surely you can provide some sort of simple proof that the church runs Sabine Parish instead of all this floundering about with etymology



so that we know that the religious leanings are meant to be there instead of added in violation of the Constitution 



> You're saying the united states government which allows wealthy billionaires like Warren Buffett to pay 17% taxes, while requiring the poor and middle class to pay upwards of 30% taxes is neutral or unbiased?
> 
> No one's claiming the government should allow religious human sacrifice, nor would such infer neutrality.
> 
> ...



Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you: 1mmortal 1tachi running up into the bleachers, getting viciously beaten by the marching band, then crawling back out of the bleachers into the opposing end zone, no football in hand, and declaring a touchdown 

In other words

You addressed not a word of what I said  



> People expand their knowledge and understanding of the universe by asking questions and answering them.
> 
> Erecting barriers to that process, limits human understanding and comprehension and tends to be a narrow minded and prejudice based thing.
> 
> ...



"Blah blah blah since the dawn of time blah blah thought control"

Not pandering to claims without evidence isn't totalitarianism 

It's how things generally work


----------



## Lucaniel (Jan 30, 2014)

> How did that link "not" prove what I claimed?
> 
> What makes you think you can say that as if it were an undisputable fact?
> 
> ...





> You're trying too hard, bro.



**


----------



## Lucaniel (Jan 30, 2014)

seriously though, the obtuseness, nonsensicality and general weirdness of your rebuttals ("use science to prove that my claim which cites no evidence is a guess") has gone beyond tolerable levels

where's mega?

cleanup on aisle 3


----------



## Deleted member 222538 (Jan 30, 2014)

Boo hoo Itachi. I dont need to say anymore. Everyone has already ripped you to shreds. It's time to take that sleeping pill and go night night.


----------



## Fujita (Jan 30, 2014)

1mmortal 1tachi said:


> Both carry religious connotations:



> carry religious connotations
> civil, non-religious administrative districts nonetheless
> thus giving a concrete example (besides the Louisiana one you keep sidestepping) of why your appeal to etymology is a horrendous argument



I'm dying here 



> The school asks blatant religious questions on tests for extra credit. Its own website said: "We believe God exists".
> 
> Are these things one would expect a public school to engage in?



No no no

See, I've provided evidence that Sabine Parish is a civil administrative district

You need to provide evidence of the opposite, since that is, of course, the basis for your entire argument

Right now what you're doing is saying that stealing must not be against the law because people steal


----------



## Sanity Check (Jan 30, 2014)

Lucaniel said:


> seriously though, the obtuseness, nonsensicality and general weirdness of your rebuttals ("use science to prove that my claim which cites no evidence is a guess") has gone beyond tolerable levels
> 
> where's mega?
> 
> cleanup on aisle 3



Couldn't back up you running your mouth.

Now, cry to mods and whine?  

Tsh.



Normality said:


> Boo hoo Itachi. I dont need to say anymore. Everyone has already ripped you to shreds. It's time to take that sleeping pill and go night night.



What did I get "ripped to shreds" on specifically?

None of you could name a single thing.



Fujita said:


> See, I've provided evidence that Sabine Parish is a civil administrative district



A civil parish is a term used in europe.

Sabine Parish is a school in the united states, a country that doesn't use the term civil parish.

What now?

Try reading your own links:

In England, a civil parish is a territorial designation which is the lowest tier of local government below districts and counties, or their combined form, the unitary authority. It is an administrative parish, in contrast to an ecclesiastical parish.

A civil parish can range in size from a large town with a population of around 80,000 to a single village with fewer than a hundred inhabitants. In a limited number of cases a parish might include a whole city where city status has been granted by the Monarch. Reflecting this diverse nature, a civil parish may be known as a town, village, neighbourhood or community by resolution of its parish council. Approximately 35% of the English population live in a civil parish. As at 31 December 2010 there were 10,479 parishes in England.[2]​
Specifically the part where it says:  _IN ENGLAND_.


----------



## Lucaniel (Jan 30, 2014)

1mmortal 1tachi said:


> Couldn't back up you running your mouth.
> 
> Now, cry to mods and whine?
> 
> Tsh.



even in the weird alternate reality you inhabit, how exactly do you think _i_ need to back anything up when you have yet to provide a single shred of evidence for anything you claim, and when pressed on this, come up with nonsensical chestnuts like "prove i'm guessing with science" instead of conceding?


----------



## Deleted member 222538 (Jan 30, 2014)

Itachi, you need to deep clean them eyes. I recommend bleach for a job such as that.


----------



## Sanity Check (Jan 30, 2014)

Lucaniel said:


> even in the weird alternate reality you inhabit, how exactly do you think _i_ need to back anything up when you have yet to provide a single shred of evidence for anything you claim, and when pressed on this, come up with nonsensical chestnuts like "prove i'm guessing with science" instead of conceding?



How do you know I didn't provide evidence?

Like I said, you're more biased than Fox News.  I couldn't expect objectivity nor accuracy from most of you.  Much less honesty.

Why don't you go cry and whine to the mods now, big baby.



Normality said:


> Itachi, you need to deep clean them eyes. I recommend bleach for a job such as that.



Yawn?


----------



## Fujita (Jan 30, 2014)

1mmortal 1tachi said:


> A civil parish is a term used in europe.
> 
> Sabine Parish is a school in the united states, a country that doesn't use the term civil parish.
> 
> What now?



more blubbering about etymology 

Let's recap:
> you say that Sabine Parish is a religious entity because it has "parish" in the title
> presented with evidence that parishes are the Lousiana equivalent of counties (and are also civil, not religious, entities), you continue to harp on about religious connotations 
> presented with evidence that Sabine Parish is administered through popular elections, you then decide to turn to the school 
> you claim that because the school has religious leanings, it must be a private religious school, despite having yet to prove anything of the sort about Sabine Parish, which was your only concrete evidence for it being a private religious school in the first place
> you then act like the option of the school having religious leanings and openly defying the law with those leanings just doesn't exist, thus begging the question 



> Try reading your own links:
> 
> In England, a civil parish is a territorial designation which is the lowest tier of local government below districts and counties, or their combined form, the unitary authority. It is an administrative parish, in contrast to an ecclesiastical parish.
> 
> ...



> asks for a time in "all of history" when parish hasn't "implied being religiously governed"
> whines when I bring up England in reply


----------



## Lucaniel (Jan 30, 2014)

1mmortal 1tachi said:


> How do you know I didn't provide evidence?



by looking



> Like I said, you're more biased than Fox News.  I couldn't expect objectivity nor accuracy from most of you.  Much less honesty.



hey, if you can't get objectivity, accuracy, or honesty, you can at least get sanity, which puts everyone here one ahead of you 



> Why don't you go cry and whine to the mods now, big baby.



you do get that when i said "mega, cleanup on aisle three" in a _post_, that wasn't some kind of bat-signal and mega is not going to be alerted by it, right? it's what they call banter

i get that you need to swiftly start saving face and going for an internet tough guy act is an easy route, but you need to be careful that you don't swing, miss, and fall into the role of internet aspie instead


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Jan 30, 2014)

This degree of fuckery...it goes beyond trolling, it's like some kind of psychosis.


----------



## Sanity Check (Jan 30, 2014)

Fujita said:


> more blubbering about etymology
> 
> Let's recap:
> > you say that Sabine Parish is a religious entity because it has "parish" in the title
> ...



Thanks for sharing that bit of revisionist history.

1.  I said the name Sabine Parish dating back to the 1800's meant it had religious roots & implications.

2.  I also said that it was more like a private school with state funding than a normal public school like the article, yourself and political spin claimed.

3.  A "Louisiana equivalent of a county" doesn't exclude the possibility of religious affiliation.  There are plenty of churches, buddhist temples and mosques in civil counties.  The fact that something is located in a civil county is no indication it isn't a religious institution, hence you're claiming otherwise is inaccurate.

4.  The topic of Sabine Parish being administered through elections never came up.  But if it did it would be irrelevent because elections and religion are not irreconciliable nor mutually exclusive things.

5.  I claimed Sabine Parish is a private school with religious leanings because its located in a small, rural community, with likely too little tax funding for the state to be able to afford to run a public school the way it does in other areas with larger populations and tax revenue.  Also because it is known that the Parish receives grants from the government, which indicates it operates as a separate entity where it doesn't receive the normal funding via treasury the way it would if it were a normal public school.  I also pointed out how the school implements religious teachings in its curriculum and is known to have the motto "We Believe God Exists" on its own website.  Despite all of these facts you argued to the contrary.

6.  What the fuck does this mean?:



> you then act like the option of the school having religious leanings and openly defying the law with those leanings just doesn't exist, thus begging the question



Be more specific.  I don't even know what the fk you're talking about.

7.  The word parish, in the united states, always carries religious connotations.  Europe is a different story.  You can't prove the word Parish doesn't carry religious connotations in the united states, by pointing out how places in europe use the term as you mistakenly tried to do.



Lucaniel said:


> by looking



That response is like asking someone how they know God exists.

And they respond: "I just know".

Vague.  Ambiguous.  Etc.



Lucaniel said:


> hey, if you can't get objectivity, accuracy, or honesty, you can at least get sanity, which puts everyone here one ahead of you
> 
> you do get that when i said "mega, cleanup on aisle three" in a _post_, that wasn't some kind of bat-signal and mega is not going to be alerted by it, right? it's what they call banter
> 
> i get that you need to swiftly start saving face and going for an internet tough guy act is an easy route, but you need to be careful that you don't swing, miss, and fall into the role of internet aspie instead



Heh.

Do you know how many people have said things like that to me.

Who I later had the pleasure of seeing them eat their own words?

What's this about an "internet tough guy" act?  .  I did no such.


----------



## Fujita (Jan 30, 2014)

1mmortal 1tachi said:


> 1.  I said the name Sabine Parish dating back to the 1800's meant it had religious roots & implications.



Yeah...?



> 2.  I also said that it was more like a private school with state funding than a normal public school like the article, yourself and political spin claimed.



And you have zero proof for this



> 3.  A "Louisiana equivalent of a county" doesn't exclude the possibility of religious affiliation.  There are plenty of churches, buddhist temples and mosques in civil counties.  The fact that something is located in a civil county is no indication it isn't a religious institution, hence you're claiming otherwise is inaccurate.



...it excludes the possibility of "parish" bolstering your baseless claim that this is a private school at all



> 4.  The topic of Sabine Parish being administered through elections never came up.  But if it did it would be irrelevent because elections and religion are not irreconciliable nor mutually exclusive things.



> civil government
> run by a council chosen by general elections
> not by a church administration, which is how a religious parish would be structured
> so the general structure contradicts your appeal to the use of the word "parish"



> 5.  I claimed Sabine Parish is a private school with religious leanings because its located in a small, rural community, with likely too little tax funding for the state to be able to afford to run a public school the way it does in other areas with larger populations and tax revenue.



so many assumptions

no evidence



> Also because it is known that the Parish receives grants from the government, which indicates it operates as a separate entity where it doesn't receive the normal funding via treasury the way it would if it were a normal public school.



Let it be known that receiving federal disaster recovery money implies that, under normal conditions, the school does not receive funding in the "normal" way 

Did you even bother reading your own source? 



> I also pointed out how the school implements religious teachings in its curriculum and is known to have the motto "We Believe God Exists" on its own website.  Despite all of these facts you argued to the contrary.



Which could happen in either a religious school or a public school flouting the Constitution 



> 6.  What the fuck does this mean?:



You made a broad claim

I answered in similarly broad terms and waited for BUT ENGLAND

You did not disappoint 



> 7.  The word parish, in the united states, always carries religious connotations.  Europe is a different story.  You can't prove the word Parish doesn't carry religious connotations in the united states, by pointing out how places in europe use the term as you tried to do.



Good thing I didn't do that, then! 

And again 



> When the United States first organized present-day Louisiana as the Territory of Orleans in 1804, the territory was divided into 12 counties. This system proved unsatisfactory, and by 1807, the territory reorganized its civil government roughly according to Roman Catholic parishes in the region.



They organized their _*CIVIL*_ government in accordance with how the parishes were arranged


----------



## baconbits (Jan 30, 2014)

Mael said:


> Yes it is.  Public is supposed to be secular or at least observant of all religions to where one is not placed higher than the other.
> 
> Or is there some hidden clause in your Constitution that says it's okay to have kids treat Christianity on a higher plane than any Jewish/Muslim/Sikh/etc. students?



I understand your implication but realize that the rejection of religion in the public sphere is also a religious act.  What really should happen is an allowance of religion in school by the kids with no sanction so long as it doesn't impede education.  Teachers should be allowed to say what they believe but not teach it as a subject or attempt to indoctrinate, the same way they should handle their political beliefs.


----------



## Sanity Check (Jan 30, 2014)

Fujita said:


> And you have zero proof for this



How many public schools are allowed to have extra credit bible questions on tests in subjects that are non religious related?

How many private schools are allowed to have extra credit bible questions on tests in subjects that are non religious related?

It doesn't matter whether or not I can find a web page that proves what I say, right now.  Probability wise, evidence I'm correct is likely to emerge at some point, if it hasn't already.



Fujita said:


> ...it excludes the possibility of "parish" bolstering your baseless claim that this is a private school at all



The term civil doesn't exclude religion, nor does it exclude religious private schools.



Fujita said:


> > civil government
> > run by a council chosen by general elections
> > not by a church administration, which is how a religious parish would be structured
> > so the general structure contradicts your appeal to the use of the word "parish"



Councils can be church administrations.



Fujita said:


> so many assumptions
> 
> no evidence



More observation than assumption.

You probably don't know that the per student cost of running some public schools is higher than the per student cost of harvard tuition.

Luckily for you, I do know.

Per student costs of public schooling can be extremely high, rural and sparsely populated areas may well be unable to afford them.  

Hence rather than a normal public school, it is statistically likely that an existing private school with state funding would make more sense in sparsely populated rural areas, that don't have the tax revenues to fund the extremely expensive public schooling model.

That's not an assumption, its an educated guess.  Is that more or less than what you have?  Hm.



Fujita said:


> Let it be known that receiving federal disaster recovery money implies that, under normal conditions, the school does not receive funding in the "normal" way
> 
> Did you even bother reading your own source?



I read it.

Remember, I never claimed receiving federal disaster cash meant they don't receive funding, normally.  



Fujita said:


> Which could happen in either a religious school or a public school flouting the Constitution



Right.

Which is more likely from a statistical perspective?  Why?



Fujita said:


> You made a broad claim
> 
> I answered in similarly broad terms and waited for BUT ENGLAND
> 
> You did not disappoint



It was broad, I didn't specify america.

Still, if someone is claiming the term parish (in america) implies religious leaning stance, you're not making the best counter case by pointing out that doesn't apply in england.



Fujita said:


> Good thing I didn't do that, then!



What did you do, then!?



Fujita said:


> They organized their _*CIVIL*_ government in accordance with how the parishes were arranged



The term civil doesn't exclude religion.

If it did, two gays marrying under a 'civil union' might never step foot in a church.  Is such the case...?


----------



## pajamas (Jan 30, 2014)

1mmortal 1tachi said:


> That's like...  Iraq's spokesperson who claimed the "infidels are dying by the thousands" when the united states invaded Iraq.



and your point is...


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Jan 30, 2014)

baconbits said:


> I understand your implication but realize that the rejection of religion in the public sphere is also a religious act.



No it isn't, and it's not about rejection of religion in the public sphere, but the fact that the state is not supposed to endorse any religion. 



> What really should happen is an allowance of religion in school by the kids with no sanction so long as it doesn't impede education.



Which has always been allowed, making it clear you didn't follow the story. It is one thing if groups of students by their own voluntary practice express themselves religiously, but the school has no business endorsing any religion. 



> Teachers should be allowed to say what they believe but not teach it as a subject or attempt to indoctrinate, the same way they should handle their political beliefs.



Then you should have no issue with enforcement of secular ideals when it comes to the state.


----------



## Sanity Check (Jan 31, 2014)

pajamas said:


> and your point is...



You're full of empty words and hot air that mean nothing as you yourself have zero belief and confidence in what you've said.


----------



## 073 (Jan 31, 2014)

wow, such a highly intelligent kid


----------



## pajamas (Jan 31, 2014)

1mmortal 1tachi said:


> You're full of empty words and hot air that mean nothing as you yourself have zero belief and confidence in what you've said.


oh god you're so weird


----------



## Sanity Check (Jan 31, 2014)

pajamas said:


> oh god you're so weird



Your user id is #8.

That means you were the 8th person to join this forum.

You could be a mod, dupe, troll or just an asshole.

Maybe all of the above?

Seriously though, zero belief & zero confidence.  That describes you perfectly.


----------



## pajamas (Jan 31, 2014)

1mmortal 1tachi said:


> Your user id is #8.
> 
> That means you were the 8th person to join this forum?
> 
> ...





i think i have confidence


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Jan 31, 2014)

1mmortal 1tachi said:


> Your user id is #8.
> 
> That means you were the 8th person to join this forum?
> 
> ...


----------



## PikaCheeka (Jan 31, 2014)

What the fuck?

The Bible never mentions dinosaurs and the Behemoth couldn't possible have been an elephant or a rhino either.  Also, people thinking a "day" for God = 24 hours when God stands outside of time. 

I hate this kind of thing because it always just leads to anti-Christian sentiment and bigotry. People look at that and will use it as "proof" that all Christians are idiots even though it's full of BS that very few Christians even believe. This is the work of a moron, sure, but they in no way represent an entire religion.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Jan 31, 2014)

"Very few Christians"? I think you're mistaken. A GREAT DEAL of Christians believe that, among other things...


----------



## Sanity Check (Jan 31, 2014)

Seto Kaiba said:


> "Very few Christians"? I think you're mistaken. A GREAT DEAL of Christians believe that, among other things...


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Jan 31, 2014)

That kinda doesn't work since I'm not Christian. 

Like I said, psychosis. See a doctor or psychologist, man.


----------



## Sanity Check (Jan 31, 2014)

Seto Kaiba said:


> That kinda doesn't work since I'm not Christian.
> 
> Like I said, psychosis. See a doctor or psychologist, man.



You're an atheist who believes _A GREAT DEAL_ of delusional and ridiculous things irrationally projecting onto others.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Jan 31, 2014)

1mmortal 1tachi said:


> You're an atheist who believes _A GREAT DEAL_ of delusional and ridiculous things irrationally projecting onto others.



The fact that you bring up me being an atheist in respect to any personal beliefs I may have only furthers my point about your psychotic irrationality. As you have been explained to multiple times, to be atheist is a matter of lack of belief; anything that goes beyond that falls under other distinctions. So what I believe would be ultimately something separate from my _lack of belief_ in a deity, as the 'atheist' distinction only describes the latter and nothing more.

Although, I would like for you to list the GREAT DEAL of things I irrationally belief in and project onto others. Because I think you're only going to further solidify my point about how you've gone into the territory of psychotic behavior. Actually, I know you are.


----------



## MakeEmum (Jan 31, 2014)

pajamas said:


> That was confirmed to be homeschooling like 9 months ago for anyone wondering if that was in a real school.



Apparently this "Science Quiz" is from Answers in Genesis


----------



## Sanity Check (Jan 31, 2014)

Seto Kaiba said:


> The fact that you bring up me being an atheist in respect to any personal beliefs I may have only furthers my point about your psychotic irrationality. As you have been explained to multiple times, to be atheist is a matter of lack of belief; anything that goes beyond that falls under other distinctions. So what I believe would be ultimately something separate from my _lack of belief_ in a deity, as the 'atheist' distinction only describes the latter and nothing more.
> 
> Although, I would like for you to list the GREAT DEAL of things I irrationally belief in and project onto others. Because I think you're only going to further solidify my point about how you've gone into the territory of psychotic behavior. Actually, I know you are.



You claim atheism is a mere "lack of belief".

Then demand that I be ignored and not taken seriously, because I'm a christian and believe in creationism.  Because you can't cope with that or co-exist with it, anymore than those bigotted against gays feel an overwhelming need to demand homosexuals be denied a right to marry and censored from having a right to an opinion.

This shows that your stance is not a lack of belief, but rather intolerance and bigotry towards those with a view different from your own.

You irrationally believe Obama would raise taxes on the rich, fix healthcare, that healthcare reform would "save americans 300 billion" because the CBO said so, gun control is the correct policy to pursue, that the economy is recovering, economic growth is really what the official numbers say they are, and numerous other things.

Go back to whatever hole you crawled out of before I respond to you seriously.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Jan 31, 2014)

1mmortal 1tachi said:


> You claim atheism is a mere "lack of belief".



That's the definition.



> Then demand that I be ignored and not taken seriously, because I'm a christian and believe in creationism.



Well, no. It's because you're blatantly dishonest, and detached from reality.



> Because you can't cope with that or co-exist with it, anymore than those bigotted against gays feel an overwhelming need to demand homosexuals be denied a right to marry and censored from having a right to an opinion.



Oh, thank you for proving my point about your psychosis. I don't recall actively campaigning for a restriction or even removal of your rights. As you have a right to believe what you want but do not expect anyone to take it as truth when you lack the evidence for them. 



> This shows that your stance is not a lack of belief, but rather intolerance and bigotry towards those with a view different from your own.



Perpetual victim living in his own reality. Psychotic. 



> You irrationally believe Obama would raise taxes on the rich, fix healthcare, that healthcare reform would "save americans 300 billion" because the CBO said so



You're scrambling and it becomes evident. 



Obama has raised taxes on a few things, the rich will see more taxes as a result of the healthcare law. The CBO report is about a long-term projection, which means it is entirely too soon to discredit them. Yet this is exactly my point; you don't live in the reality everyone else does.

I know you'll ignore this because of that, and because of your dishonesty. 



> , gun control is the correct policy to pursue,



Elaborate and proceed to make a further fool of yourself.



> that the economy is recovering, economic growth is really what the official numbers say they are, and numerous other things.



Nope, and nope. At least not on a significant level; however, the numbers are there for you to see, so some growth is happening. There's even a thread today that I express what I really care about economically. 



Seto Kaiba said:


> Well, it is good news I guess? Unemployment and average wages are what I care more about though.



Again, your trademark dishonesty. You deliberately lied.



> Go back to whatever hole you crawled out of before I respond to you seriously.



You already are, which is the sad thing about it.


----------



## Aphelion (Jan 31, 2014)

Why the fuck can't people grasp the concept that not mandating prayer =/= _banning_ prayer 

Also...If solid evidence is found that supports creationism as a scientific theory, then by all means teach it in schools.  This evidence has not been found.


----------



## Sanity Check (Jan 31, 2014)

Seto Kaiba said:


> That's the definition.



*Atheism - a lack of belief in God*

That's the new age definition atheists embrace to avoid defining their stance as faith based or belief.  They also favor it as they mistakenly believe it allows them to avoid a burden of proof.



Seto Kaiba said:


> Well, no. It's because you're blatantly dishonest, and detached from reality.



What am I dishonest about?

Its accurate to say, you have no legitimate reason to criticize me.

You say I'm "dishonest" to fabricate fake reasons, as you have no real ones.

Why believe in metaphysical, imaginary, invisible, dishonesty in your backyard?



Seto Kaiba said:


> Oh, thank you for proving my point about your psychosis. I don't recall actively campaigning for a restriction or even removal of your rights. As you have a right to believe what you want but do not expect anyone to take it as truth when you lack the evidence for them.



Weren't you one of those who claimed I should never be taken seriously?

That's a form of censorship, bro.

Censorship is a removal of rights.



Seto Kaiba said:


> Perpetual victim living in his own reality. Psychotic.



I'm not a victim.

But, some of you are behaving in a bigotted fashion by attempting to censor or marginalize certain posters simply for having different views, opinions or beliefs.

That's no different from homophoboes marginalizing gays for being different.



Seto Kaiba said:


> You're scrambling and it becomes evident.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



What am I dishonest about?  I never get a straight answer to that question.  Why is that?

Can you name a single cost estimate the CBO has been remotely accurate on?  A broken clock might be correct twice a day, there's more evidence for a broken clock being accurate than there is for the CBO.

Yet, ridiculously, you continue to believe the CBO in blind faith, despite a clear and apparent lack of evidence for the CBO ever having been accurate on anything.



Seto Kaiba said:


> Elaborate and proceed to make a further fool of yourself.



Gun control is too broad a topic.

Suffice it to say, I think gun control is ridiculous and irrational, and you likely have the opposite view.



Seto Kaiba said:


> Nope, and nope. At least not on a significant level; however, the numbers are there for you to see, so some growth is happening. There's even a thread today that I express what I really care about economically.



You believe real growth is happening.  That could be considered ridiculous and irrational.



Seto Kaiba said:


> Again, your trademark dishonesty. You deliberately lied.



I'm sure in your heart, you believed the economy was recovering and growth as occurring as atheistic state deity worshipper apologists often do.

You've learned not to argue with me, or be totally honest what you think on the topic of economics/business because you know I've disproved you numerous times on the topic in the past.


----------



## Lucaniel (Jan 31, 2014)

> Weren't you one of those who claimed I should never be taken seriously?
> 
> That's a form of censorship, bro.
> 
> Censorship is a removal of rights.


----------



## Sanity Check (Jan 31, 2014)

Lucaniel said:


> http://i.imgur.com/8JmdTNS.jpg



Is this one of those instances where a person with zero personality or identity repeatedly posts memes or images due to them lacking the independent thought processes necessary to comment on something?.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Jan 31, 2014)

1mmortal 1tachi said:


> *Atheism - a lack of belief in God*
> 
> *That's the new age definition atheists embrace to avoid defining their stance as faith based or belief.  They also favor it as they mistakenly believe it allows them to avoid a burden of proof.*
> 
> ...



Look at this guy. Just seriously. He's _psychotic_

It serves absolutely no purpose to make a substantiated argument against him because he'll deny anything that doesn't fit into the specific parameters of a reality he's crafted for himself. Even on matters pertaining specifically to one's personal opinion, he won't even acknowledge what runs contrary to what his impressions are.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Jan 31, 2014)

How does something this stupid make a ten page thread?


----------



## Hitt (Jan 31, 2014)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> How does something this stupid make a ten page thread?



Exhibit A)  JSJ
Exhibit B) 1mmortal 1tachi.

There's your answer.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Jan 31, 2014)

Hitt said:


> Exhibit A)  JSJ
> Exhibit B) 1mmortal 1tachi.
> 
> There's your answer.



Thank God sedated peon isn't here...this would look like a fucking Stephen King novel.


----------



## Sanity Check (Jan 31, 2014)

Seto Kaiba said:


> Look at this guy. Just seriously. He's _psychotic_
> 
> It serves absolutely no purpose to make a substantiated argument against him because he'll deny anything that doesn't fit into the specific parameters of a reality he's crafted for himself. Even on matters pertaining specifically to one's personal opinion, he won't even acknowledge what runs contrary to what his impressions are.



Seto Kaiba has to invent invisible, imaginary, fantasy worlds in his backyard to pretend he has something valid to say.

You were never the real "heart of the cards" anyway, dude.

Linkofone is 10x the yugioh duelist you will ever be.



Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> How does something this stupid make a ten page thread?



Stupidity begets stupidity?

Doesn't matter.  I'll go to sleep, wake up and forget it ever happened.

.



Hitt said:


> Exhibit A)  JSJ
> Exhibit B) 1mmortal 1tachi.
> 
> There's your answer.



1mmortal 1tachi solo'ed.

Fujita may have been a draw, though.  

Maybe one of the few cafe posters that can hold their own.


----------



## Lucaniel (Jan 31, 2014)

1mmortal 1tachi said:


> Is this one of those instances where a person with zero personality or identity *repeatedly* posts memes or images due to them lacking the independent thought processes necessary to comment on something?.



what a lot of implying based on one reaction image

i think you might be mad


----------



## Sanity Check (Jan 31, 2014)

Lucaniel said:


> what a lot of implying based on one reaction image
> 
> i think you might be mad



I've never made a conscious effort to bully or screw with people on the internet, as some of you are now.

If you really think I'm mad why don't you give me your home address and we can find out.

*edit* - I imagine most internet trolls and e-bullies to be fat, unsociable, relics who could never imagine behaving in real life the way they do online.  I doubt many, if any of you are in a position to back up anything you say in the real world.

Yet you persist in talking, hoping I get upset and have a meltdown or lose my cool.  So you can pretend you're a shark swimming through an electronic ocean, and that you somehow matter within the grand scheme of things, maybe to deny your own insignifcance and what a total loser you are?

But who is to say, any of that amounts to more than a game of lets pretend on your part?


----------



## Aphelion (Jan 31, 2014)

1mmortal 1tachi said:


> I've never made a conscious effort to bully or screw with people on the internet, as some of you are now.
> 
> If you really think I'm mad why don't you give me your home address and we can find out.
> 
> ...


.



Lucaniel said:


> i think you might be mad






.


----------



## Narcissus (Jan 31, 2014)

Holy hell, 1mmortal got owned harder than usual in this thread. 


baconbits said:


> I understand your implication but realize that the rejection of religion in the public sphere is also a religious act.


That's horse shit.

Seto already refuted this thoroughly, but just to reiterate, that is not a religious action. Nor is it rejecting religion. It is an enforcement of separation of church and state.

Your argument for what you think should be allowed has no ground to stand on.


----------



## Unlosing Ranger (Jan 31, 2014)

Seto Kaiba said:


> Damn, 1tachi this is a low even for you.


----------



## Sanity Check (Jan 31, 2014)

Narcissus said:


> Holy hell, 1mmortal got owned harder than usual in this thread.  That's horse shit.
> 
> Seto already refuted this thoroughly, but just to reiterate, that is not a religious action. Nor is it rejecting religion. It is an enforcement of separation of church and state.
> 
> Your argument for what you think should be allowed has no ground to stand on.



Narcissus swoops in and responds to the only post he believes he has a prayer (no pun intended) of refuting.

Why don't you respond to my posts, Narcissus?

I'm sure there are plenty of posts I made in the cafe you disagree with.

Yet, it would seem you're too afraid to publicly disagree with me where everyone might see the outcome.

Why don't you try backing up your claims that I'm "dishonest" and respond to my posts so I can kindly expose you for the fraud you are?


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Jan 31, 2014)

1mmortal 1tachi said:


> I've never made a conscious effort to bully or screw with people on the internet, as some of you are now.
> 
> If you really think I'm mad why don't you give me your home address and we can find out.
> 
> ...


----------



## Sanity Check (Jan 31, 2014)

[sp][/sp]

.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Jan 31, 2014)

State-sanctioned genocide, with religious motivation. Hitler wasn't atheist, Germans were by and large Christian and it was appealing to divine that the people rallied under the Nazi regime.

State-sanctioned systematic discrimination and violence, religious motivation; The KKK originally known as the 'Christian Knights'. 

State-sanctioned systematic discrimination and violence, religious motivation; Russian Orthodoxy a strong influence and backer of anti-LGBT laws

A single individual critical of religion that doesn't advocate any restriction of the rights of the religious, clearly a monster on the level of Hitler.

See a doctor.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Jan 31, 2014)

Seto wants to go in your churches and burn your bibles from your hands.


----------



## Narcissus (Jan 31, 2014)

Seto Kaiba said:


> State-sanctioned genocide, with religious motivation. Hitler wasn't atheist, Germans were by and large Christian and it was appealing to divine that the people rallied under the Nazi regime.
> 
> State-sanctioned systematic discrimination and violence, religious motivation; The KKK originally known as the 'Christian Knights'.
> 
> ...


I doubt there is a doctor in the world that can cure what he has.


----------



## neko-sennin (Jan 31, 2014)

To the Religious Right:



Do you mean freedom of religion?

...or just freedom of _your_ religion?


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Jan 31, 2014)

Who's against short dress wearing goth girls?


----------



## Pliskin (Jan 31, 2014)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> Who's against short dress wearing goth girls?



Fat goth girls.


----------



## Lucaniel (Jan 31, 2014)

1mmortal 1tachi said:


> I've never made a conscious effort to bully or screw with people on the internet, as some of you are now.
> 
> If you really think I'm mad why don't you give me your home address and we can find out.
> 
> ...





1mmortal 1tachi said:


> What's this about an "internet tough guy" act?  .  I did no such.



hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm


----------



## Lucaniel (Jan 31, 2014)

1mmortal 1tachi said:


> Why don't you respond to my posts, Narcissus?


it's probably because they're all so ridiculously stupid


1mmortal 1tachi said:


> Yet, it would seem you're too afraid to publicly disagree with me where everyone might see the outcome.



also, dear god, but you are pathetic

right on the heels of your ass-devastated ranting about how everyone criticising you is a fat basement dweller (apparently having 12 and a half thousand posts on an anime forum has no bearing on your right to cast the first stone as long you have a persecution complex) 

and that limp stab at psychoanalysis with your "you just wanna make me have a breakdown so you can feel like a shark!" blabber

right on the heels of all that, you're going to now start challenging people to e-duels and act like it's some gladiatorial contest and someone might be "afraid" to "publicly disagree" with you 

you probably don't even see the colossal irony of that


----------



## Hitt (Jan 31, 2014)

And the saddest part is, 1tachi will have learned nothing from his ass handling in this thread.

Just like he didn't the last hundred times this has happened to him.

He'll just go on thinking in his own little world that he owned everyone and he'll continue to always be right, and we "just cannot be helped".


----------



## Mael (Jan 31, 2014)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> Who's against short dress wearing goth girls?



Not everyone is a reddit 10, my good chum.

Take it from a guy who spent his high school at a Catholic school.


----------



## teddy (Jan 31, 2014)

Wow. thread blew up real quick and turned into a public mauling


----------



## Narcissus (Jan 31, 2014)

Anyone who claims creationism should be considered a science, doesn't deserve to be heard. Because that level of stupidity and ignorance simply should not be entertained.

Nor will it ever be considered a science, so you're fighting a battle already lost.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Jan 31, 2014)

THAT SOUNDS LIKE A DENIAL OF RIGHTS NARCISSUS; ALTHOUGH ATHEISTIC STATE DEITY WORSHIPERS LIKE YOU WOULD DO THAT

YOU KNOW WHO ELSE DENIED RIGHTS?

HITLER.


----------



## SLB (Jan 31, 2014)

Lol, Seto. Glenn Beck, I'm assuming?


----------



## dynasaur (Jan 31, 2014)

? said:


> Wow. thread blew up real quick and turned into a public mauling


cafe and religion do not mix.


----------



## stab-o-tron5000 (Jan 31, 2014)

I'm used to seeing itachi go off the rails a bit (ok, a lot), but shit, this was a full blown decent into madness. 

*ii:* Why can't a circle be a square?

*others:*  Because a square has a set definition that makes it a square and...

*ii:*  You athiests just want to enforce you definition of square on everyone else.  Just because your atheist religion tells you a circle can't be a square doesn't mean it can't!

*others:*  No really.  They're two different things that have an agreed upon definition.  A square has four equal straight sides and four right angles, a circle...

*ii:*  You know what also has four equal sides and right angles!?  *SWASTIKAS!!!*

*others: * I just... the fuck?  What!?

*ii:*  I WIN!


----------



## navy (Jan 31, 2014)

Best thread of 2014 by far.


----------



## SLB (Jan 31, 2014)




----------



## BashFace (Jan 31, 2014)

1mmortal 1tachi said:


> I didn't say anything was wrong with it.
> 
> Only that atheists were criticizing religious people for the same things they do, erryday.  Hypocrisy, hypocrisy!  .



Why point that out when its common knowledge that Christians mock Evolutionism or Richard Dawkins and Atheism mocks Christianity? It's not hypocritical its to do with the basis for the belief.  What the fuck? 

It's strange how Christians believe that Evolutionism is wrong even though that could be adapted to their belief by saying God is responsible for it. Whereas there is nothing in our belief that suggests God exists( its anti our beliefs) however this is hypocritical for us to disagree with. 

The reason people criticize is because they are passionate about their beliefs. You expressing your annoyance over that just means that your being vengeful and spiteful or you have no concept of Atheist beliefs. Either way I can't see you understanding why Christians criticizing Atheism is wrong. 

It's an Atheists belief that there is no God so they can criticize whereas a Christian has no reason to criticize an Atheist ever, there is nothing in your religion that should make you want to do that. If I'm gonna burn in hell  then that's my problem. You or any Christian criticizing Atheism is wrong because there isn't any reason except being vengeful because your religion also suggests forgive and forget which is ironic.

@ImmortalItachi

That's hilarious because fundamentalist Christians hate everyone of those.  Jews, religions that oppose and minorities were back further in time when if you weren't Christian you weren't accepted I don't think I needed to tell you that they hate gays as well.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Jan 31, 2014)

Just to be nitpicky, 'evolutionism' isn't an actually term, that was made up by the religious creationists because they cannot conceptualize anything that would disprove or contradict aspects of their faith other than that it must be another religion itself. 

Also, there aren't any universal atheist beliefs; just one universal characteristic of disbelief in a deity of any kind. Not to say a group of atheists can't share common personal values and beliefs beyond that. It's why I'm so one the fence about so-called atheists organizations. You'd be surprised the number of people that don't know the most basic things about the theism/atheism and agnosticism/gnosticism matter, and certain groups don't help.

It's why you have certain people using the term 'atheistic state deity worshipers', which contradicts itself.


----------



## Narcissus (Jan 31, 2014)

For JSJ


----------



## BashFace (Jan 31, 2014)

Seto Kaiba said:


> Just to be nitpicky, 'evolutionism' isn't an actually term, that was made up by the religious creationists becauase they cannot conceptualize anything that would disprove or contradict aspects of their faith other than that it must be another religion itself.
> 
> Also, there aren't any universal atheist beliefs; just one universal characteristic of disbelief in a deity of any kind. Not to say a group of atheists can share common personal values and beliefs beyond that. It's why I'm so one the fence about so-called atheists organizations. You'd be surprised the number of people that don't know the most basic things about the theism/atheism and agnosticism/gnosticism matter.



I can understand what you are saying there I understand that Atheist's have no beliefs but if there were to be a belief. It would be a belief of a life without control over it by a deity or a belief that there are no deities even though that is considered disbelief I can see it as otherwise because of the passion or emotional responses generated by the theories or whatever bla ba bla. I'm sure you get it you seem intelligent.


----------



## navy (Jan 31, 2014)

What's funny is these people don't realize that even Christain and religious universities teach evolution in their biology classes.

You can get away with this bullshit in elementary school, but I dare you to try to teach biology like this past a grade school level.


----------



## Sanity Check (Feb 1, 2014)

You know, I don't have time to reply to all of these posts.

Suffice it to say, most posters on this forum are atheist.

Atheists are typically the most brainless and least educated and informed demographic in this section, if not the entire forum.

They can never back up anything they say (LOL as if anyone cares about that) or provide facts or reasons to substantiate their prejudiced absolutism.

They can never do anything other than talk shit or spread rumors about people who have different views, because they're too fanatical and weak minded to debate their stance in a mature and rational manner.  Like 12 year old children.

But, they persist in headbutting the wall, anyway.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Feb 1, 2014)

1mmortal 1tachi said:


> You know, I don't have time to reply to all of these posts.
> 
> Suffice it to say, most posters on this forum are atheist.
> 
> ...



Keep cryin'.


----------



## Sanity Check (Feb 1, 2014)

Seto Kaiba said:


> Keep cryin'.




Like you were crying here when I refuted you?:



If I cared, I bet I could easily find 20 other examples of me refuting each and every one of you.

I don't know whether you're going to fool anyone into believing your revisionist bullshit, other than you.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Feb 1, 2014)

1mmortal 1tachi said:


> Like you were crying here when I refuted you?:
> 
> 
> 
> ...





Lucaniel said:


> it's probably because they're all so ridiculously stupid
> 
> 
> also, dear god, but you are pathetic
> ...



1tachi may actually be a genuine psychotic.


----------



## Sanity Check (Feb 1, 2014)

Seto Kaiba said:


> 1tachi may actually be a genuine psychotic.



Give me a direct response or stfu.

You're devaluing your username below even NF standards.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Feb 1, 2014)

1mmortal 1tachi said:


> Give me a direct response or stfu.
> 
> You're devaluing your username below even NF standards.



You didn't make an argument. The most you did was lose your head and go on a rant about my 'atheistic state deity worshiping' ways. Not to mention in your trademark dishonesty, conflated a citation of reliable sources like the CBO for forecasts and predictions as being the equivalent to treating them as omniscients.

The only person on your side is you and the reality that you've made up in your head to escape this one. See a doctor.


----------



## Hitt (Feb 1, 2014)

Just keep believing you won 1tachi...delude yourself to hell and back.  It's exactly what I predicted you'd do.  Not that that was a hard prediction.

The only one in here who is pathetic other than JSJ is you, 1tachi.  You're the fool who thinks he fooled everyone else.


----------



## Thor (Feb 1, 2014)

Narcissus said:


> For JSJ



Typical Atheists. Criticize peaceful Christianity because they know they won't get murdered like they would if they criticized Islam. Atheist COWARDS.


----------



## Hitt (Feb 1, 2014)

Thor said:


> Typical Atheists. Criticize peaceful Christianity because they know they won't get murdered like they would if they criticized Islam. Atheist COWARDS.



Oh look another sad troll enters the fray.

Not that I think you believe any of the tripe you post, but just to address it anyway.  If this was 700 or so years ago "peaceful" Christianity would've been more than happy to murder anyone who dared criticise the religion.  It's the main reason the founding fathers structured the US government the way they did.  

Also, atheists all over will happily criticize Islam like all religions.  It's just that over in the western world, Christianity dominates, so it gets most of the attention.


----------



## Mael (Feb 1, 2014)

> Criticize peaceful Christianity



Thor you really have to quit trolling.  You're just not good at it.


----------



## Sanity Check (Feb 1, 2014)

Seto Kaiba said:


> You didn't make an argument.



You, like everyone in this thread who tries to whine on me is so full of shit.  

You aren't doing anything other than stalling and trying to waste my time.

I gave you plenty of factual and evidence based arguments & claims & you had no reponse to them.

Like when I said the evidence suggests the CBO is wrong far more often on its program predictions than it is right.  That's a fact.  

Do you have anything other than bs and delusional, fantasy stories to offer?.


----------



## Mael (Feb 1, 2014)

11tachi confirmed for troll.


----------



## BashFace (Feb 1, 2014)

Thor said:


> Typical Atheists. Criticize peaceful Christianity because they know they won't get murdered like they would if they criticized Islam. Atheist COWARDS.



How dare you call Atheist's cowards it's more cowardly to flip on your back when confronted with religion then to be aware of reality. I can't believe your serious, :ignoramus Atheists murder each other more than Christians and other religions kill each other. Atheist's are badass like The Bounty Hunter and Hulk Hogan. I have to say Thor has given the best arguments however I don't think I can outdo this.  

Debating religion gets silly when people are to stubborn and there's no evidence to support either argument they are just theories that we make up in our head. Christianity was and probably still is a coping mechanism but anyways these are all of my religious standpoints that have evidence so therefore are factual and undeniably truthful:

[youtube]9gSQg1i_q2g[/youtube]

This is Immortal Itachi and him saying how awesome him and Christians are:
[youtube]S_IAqwrvEuU[/youtube]


----------



## Narcissus (Feb 1, 2014)

No one takes 1mmortal 1tachi seriously. 

He got slammed in this thread along with JSJ, and his whining doesn't change that. More importantly is the issue of the thread, and both of them are on the losing side.


----------



## SuperSaiyaMan12 (Feb 1, 2014)

Narcissus said:


> No one takes 1mmortal 1tachi seriously.
> 
> He got slammed in this thread along with JSJ, and his whining doesn't change that. More importantly is the issue of the thread, and both of them are on the losing side.


They live in their own little world. Even if you put facts, figures, etc. in front of them, they ignore it. If you point out their hypocrisy, they ignore it. If you point out their logical fallacies, they ignore it. They literally seem to be living in their own little world.


----------



## Narcissus (Feb 1, 2014)

SuperSaiyaMan12 said:


> They live in their own little world. Even if you put facts, figures, etc. in front of them, they ignore it. If you point out their hypocrisy, they ignore it. If you point out their logical fallacies, they ignore it. They literally seem to be living in their own little world.


Indeed.

Thankfully everyone knows this about them. The important thing though, is not to try and convince *THEM* of anything. That would be an exercise in futility. The main goal is to expose their ignorance and stop them from spreading misinformation. Seeing the results in this thread alone, we have accomplished this.


----------



## Sanity Check (Feb 1, 2014)

There are definitely some delusional people in this thread.

Thankfully, I can relax, knowing its not me.


----------



## Lucaniel (Feb 1, 2014)

narc you even got the ones from the obd convo


----------



## Narcissus (Feb 1, 2014)

Lucaniel said:


> narc you even got the ones from the obd convo


I've still got it Luc. 

And to think this list is extremely incomplete. 

I should revisit the convo sometime.


----------



## TheCupOfBrew (Feb 1, 2014)

Oh Christianity, why you so cray?


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Feb 1, 2014)

atheistic state deity worshipers!


----------



## Sanity Check (Feb 1, 2014)

10char..


----------



## Narcissus (Feb 1, 2014)

Seto Kaiba said:


> atheistic state deity worshipers!



This thread has been more fun than a long time. The ass-handling was glorious, and it provided some comedic gold.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Feb 1, 2014)

1mmortal 1tachi said:


> You know, I don't have time to reply to all of these posts.
> 
> Suffice it to say, most posters on this forum are atheist.
> 
> ...



I just realized, he pretty much implied anyone that disagreed with him as an atheist. CTK and Saiyaman included...

The way he goes on about atheists though reminds me of a video of this mentally ill woman that found her way into a town hall meeting and went on these odd ramblings about homosexuals, making all these connotations on the basis of their identity, none of which made any sense. "atheistic state deity worshipers"...


----------



## TheCupOfBrew (Feb 1, 2014)

We should crucify those Atheist.


----------



## Sanity Check (Feb 1, 2014)

Narcissus said:


> This thread has been more fun than a long time. The ass-handling was glorious, and it provided some comedic gold.



If you repeat it enough.

Maybe you'll convince yourself its true!



Seto Kaiba said:


> I just realized, he pretty much implied anyone that disagreed with him as an atheist. CTK and Saiyaman included...



I say _atheist_ because I know most of this collective whining comes from atheists who are _still mad_ about me disagreeing with them and occasionally proving the wrong back in 2010 - 2011 when I was more active in threads.

It wasn't meant as an absolutist blanket statement.

Thx.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Feb 1, 2014)

1mmortal 1tachi said:


> If you repeat it enough.
> 
> Maybe you'll convince yourself its true!
> 
> ...



Its indicative of your psychotic state of mind and deranged view on, and obsession with, atheists. You constantly bring it up like some kind of tic, even on issues where the matter isn't even mentioned or relevant. See a doctor.


----------



## TheCupOfBrew (Feb 1, 2014)

1mmortal 1tachi said:


> If you repeat it enough.
> 
> Maybe you'll convince yourself its true!
> 
> ...



Wut? **


----------



## Sanity Check (Feb 1, 2014)

Seto Kaiba said:


> Its indicative of your psychotic state of mind and deranged view on, and obsession with, atheists. You constantly bring it up like some kind of tic, even on issues where the matter isn't even mentioned or relevant. See a doctor.





I would guess 80% to 90% of you are atheists.

So, I say......  atheist.

That's deranged?  .


----------



## BashFace (Feb 1, 2014)

[youtube]Nkb6jex6-80[/youtube]

Both noticeable things about this are on-topic although I don't know what the fuck is going on. I'm like way back in page 4 or something those were some crazy days. 

This is me now :
[youtube]qINXELZS-ME[/youtube]


----------



## TheCupOfBrew (Feb 1, 2014)

So our so called 'whining' is due to you proving atheists wrong in the past; even if we weren't involved in that?


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Feb 1, 2014)

1mmortal 1tachi said:


> I would guess 80% to 90% of you are atheists.
> 
> So, I say......  atheist.
> 
> That's deranged?  .



I WOULD PRESUME YOU ARE ALL ATHEIST (Because you disagree with me!)

ATHEISTS ARE THIS

ATHEISTS ARE THAT

ATHEISTS ALWAYS DO THIS

ATHEISTS ALWAYS DO THAT

ATHEISTS WORSHIP THE STATE DEITY IN CONTRAST TO A REAL GOD

ATHEISTS ARE LIKE HITLER!


----------



## Thor (Feb 1, 2014)

Atheists wouldn't DARE mock Islam.


----------



## Narcissus (Feb 1, 2014)

Seto Kaiba said:


> Its indicative of your psychotic state of mind and deranged view on, and obsession with, atheists. You constantly bring it up like some kind of tic, even on issues where the matter isn't even mentioned or relevant. See a doctor.



If anything, his obsession shows how deeply scarred he is over getting his ass handed to him so often by atheists. He's pretty hung up, while we point and laugh.

No doctor can help him though.


----------



## Sanity Check (Feb 1, 2014)

Iron Man said:


> So our so called 'whining' is due to you proving atheists wrong in the past; even if we weren't involved in that?



You're beginning to sound like Flow, when he says something he should already know the answer to.



Seto Kaiba said:


> I WOULD PRESUME YOU ARE ALL ATHEIST (Because you disagree with me!)
> 
> ATHEISTS ARE THIS
> 
> ...



Who sounds deranged?  .



Narcissus said:


> If anything, his obsession shows how deeply scarred he is over getting his ass handed to him so often by atheists. He's pretty hung up, while we point and laugh.
> 
> No doctor can help him though.



You continue stacking bs on bs, to build yourself a house of cards.

I'll continue stacking truth upon truth.

Let's see if your house crumbles before mine does.


----------



## Byrd (Feb 1, 2014)

What is even going on


----------



## Narcissus (Feb 1, 2014)

Byrd said:


> What is even going on



1mortal 1tachi is frustrated.


----------



## Sanity Check (Feb 1, 2014)

Narcissus wears glasses 5 inches thick and has an obsessive compulsive habit of speaking the opposite of truth.

Many others here share his disorder.


----------



## Lucaniel (Feb 1, 2014)

interesting thing is that 1mmortal 1tachi is still here busily trying to save face


----------



## SuperSaiyaMan12 (Feb 1, 2014)

Thor said:


> Atheists wouldn't DARE mock Islam.


Atheists mock Islam all the time.


----------



## Sanity Check (Feb 1, 2014)

Lucaniel said:


> interesting thing is that 1mmortal 1tachi is still here busily trying to save face



Why would I need to save face?

No one with any credibility has said anything negative about me.


----------



## Aphelion (Feb 1, 2014)

1mmortal 1tachi said:


> Why would I need to save face?
> 
> No one with any credibility has said anything negative about me.



How exactly does one attain "credibility" in a random discussion on an anime forum?


----------



## Narcissus (Feb 1, 2014)

Lucaniel said:


> interesting thing is that 1mmortal 1tachi is still here busily trying to save face



He can't help trying to salvage what is left of his dignity. 

Should I post some more quotes showing how no one respects him and watch his frustration grow further?


----------



## Lucaniel (Feb 1, 2014)

narc, go right ahead



1mmortal 1tachi said:


> Why would I need to save face?
> 
> No one with any credibility has said anything negative about me.



>why would i need to save face?
>tries to save face


----------



## Sanity Check (Feb 1, 2014)

Please Narcissus.

Waste all your precious time and energy re-posting garbage no one cares about.

Maybe you'll spend enough time on this that you'll neglect your studies and flunk out of school.

Was you, wasting time on this, supposed to be a threat?


----------



## Aphelion (Feb 1, 2014)

1mmortal 1tachi said:


> Please Narcissus.
> 
> Waste all your precious time and energy re-posting garbage no one cares about.
> 
> ...


----------



## Louis Cyphre (Feb 1, 2014)

relevant...


----------



## BashFace (Feb 1, 2014)

1mmortal 1tachi said:


> *Who sounds deranged? * .
> 
> You continue stacking bs on bs, to build yourself a house of cards.
> 
> ...




*Everyone who says they have evidence or that their statement is valid.*

Did you know that both statements from either side (Christianity or Atheism) are just as valid and these things we debate each other over, are ideas that we come up with in our heads or have been created in someone else's head? 

God doesn't exist because there's no evidence to support that he does if you say the Bible says or can you see the world around you those are both opinionated or subjective. Can you not see how it's possible that the book was written by a person. Because people write books sometimes about deities I don't know how it's hard to believe that the book was written by man when the whole of Greek mythology was written by man which I find interesting story wise.

Atheism there is nothing to disprove God apart from the sheer ridiculousness of the claim. So unless you are antagonizing I wouldn't waste your breath I think that I could convert someone who's Atheist to Agnostic but a christian will always believe in this nonsense. unaware that there is a way out. Scared and being dictated by the illusion of war in his country. That's me done I argue or debate to much about this shit.



1mmortal 1tachi said:


> Maybe you'll spend enough time on this that you'll neglect your studies and flunk out of school.



I can assure you Atheism or Agnosticism is not associated with people who are unintelligent there is a religion however it starts with C. When did people start insulting each other rather than debating.  this is a good example of what happens on an international level stubborn, passionate people versing cynical people with pretentious behavior towards Christians. Although Christians are wasting passion and hope on something that doesn't exist they believe they are standing up for something. 

This is quite funny or entertaining however I'm doubting my posts will be given much thought I will probably just be insulted for calling Christians stupid.


----------



## Sanity Check (Feb 1, 2014)

BashFace said:


> I think that I could convert someone who's Atheist to Agnostic but *a christian will always believe in this nonsense*.



That's not a fact.

Its a prejudiced and discriminatory stereotype.

It takes the form: "all christians are mindless, brainless, delusional".

Its like saying: "all blacks and mexicans are criminals".

Its an ignorant and bigotted stance.

Its also the stance Narcissus and most in this thread whining about me support.

Coincidence?.



BashFace said:


> I can assure you Atheism or Agnosticism is not associated with people who are unintelligent



The dumbest people I've come across on the internet and this forum are all atheists.

In real life, everyone I know who was relgious that converted to atheism.  It was almost like they became mentally retarded one day and lost whatever common sense they had.

/Real talk.


----------



## TheCupOfBrew (Feb 1, 2014)

Immortal Itachi, King of Ad hominem...


----------



## Sanity Check (Feb 1, 2014)

Iron Man said:


> Immortal Itachi, King of Ad hominem...



What "ad hominem"?

UFC 169 prelims start soon..  when it does, I'm gone, btw.


----------



## TheCupOfBrew (Feb 1, 2014)

1mmortal 1tachi said:


> What "ad hominem"?
> 
> UFC 169 prelims start soon..  when it does, I'm gone, btw.


----------



## Sanity Check (Feb 1, 2014)

No.

What did I say that was an "ad hominen"?

BTW.

Would someone mind making an "Anti 1mmortal 1tachi" fanclub in the FC section?

I could use the exposure.  Thx.


----------



## Narcissus (Feb 1, 2014)

1mmortal 1tachi said:


> Please Narcissus.
> 
> Waste all your precious time and energy re-posting garbage no one cares about.
> 
> ...




Your frustrated meltdown is delicious. From your emotional response, you clearly care. 

As with the last list of quotes, if you need context just click "view post."


Saufsoldat said:


> We both know that you refuse to acknowledge basic logic, so why should I bother? You still compare religion to race, you make ridiculous claims like that the meta-analysis predominantly used studies from the middle-east and Japan.
> 
> You are the most dishonest person I've ever met in this forum, so what's holding me back are concerns for my own sanity if I should indeed give you the time of the day.





Borel said:


> 1mmortal 1tachi said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...





Borel said:


> There's a subtle difference between thinking and believing what you're told and not accepting extraordinary claims without evidence to back them up. Actually, just to be absolutely sure you get this I'll drop the sarcasm and rephrase: There's a gigantic difference between thinking and believing what you're told (by the way, no one ever told me to doubt religion) and not accepting extraordinary claims without evidence to back thm up.
> 
> You know what? I'm actually undead Napoleon ressurected by aliens in order to prepare their invasion by sabotaging humanity's infrastructure from the inside. Don't believe me? There is evidence for it, just go look for it. Your reluctance to believe is just unjustified blind faith.





Trism said:


> 1mmortal 1tachi, your blatant dishonesty and ignorance has been getting worse and worse as the thread has gone on. You've fail to understand how the burden of proof works, and why your assertion about our "negative claim" is false, and thus irrelevant. Vynjira has shown that you are incorrectly using the sources you're citing, hence your ignorance.
> 
> I suggest you stop this display of ignorant and dishonest debating.





Vynjira said:


> You ignore or twist everything that disagrees with your position.





blk said:


> From which burden of proof i flee? Show me what claim i'm not backing up in this debate.
> 
> Because i can definitely show which claims you are not backing up:
> 
> ...





navy said:


> You're an idiot.  I already said I believed it to be true and you throw out retarded statements like, "Considering you have nothing that says its false other than your atheistic pro deity state worship apologetics, how would you justify being a denier?" How am I a denier when I said I believed it?
> 
> Quit being the most dishonest guy on this forum. You cant follow anything logically. Now your self delusion has brought in religion.
> 
> ...





Narcissus said:


> 1mmortal 1tachi said:
> 
> 
> > Shades of a bizarro mirror world  thread.
> ...





Wolfgang Grimmer said:


> 1mmortal 1tachi said:
> 
> 
> > Shades of a bizarro mirror world  thread.
> ...



Notice how in the last two examples, 1tachi lies, linking something that got debunked within the very link to try and bash atheists.


----------



## BashFace (Feb 1, 2014)

1mmortal 1tachi said:


> That's not a fact.
> 
> Its a prejudiced and discriminatory stereotype.
> 
> ...



All blacks and Mexicans are criminals.  
That's fact. I believe they are so they are. I'm not racist it's true because I believe. Like peter pan you just gotta believe they are and they start running to the nearest Bottle-O to do it over. 

People aren't dumb because they don't agree with you that just makes you stubborn if you persist I argue passion for you but it gets to a point where surely you can understand how silly the things are that you say. I had a shot at both sides then for their ignorance and you bother me with such pettiness.

I would have to say that you are one of the dumbest I have met on here or at least in the stupid area if you get so upset and you know that you are so passionate about it then why bring it up and argue and make yourself unhappy which makes me think that you are not only naive but you aren't even self aware. When I argue now I don't even feel like using grammar because I'm above you. I don't even feel like I have a big ego in making that claim so let that be your revelation. You can't call someone dumb off their beliefs. 

[youtube]0mjIO5YVaxo[/youtube] 

Some are Christians some are Atheist and Agnostic. Stop being ridiculous I cant even feign ignorance to antagonize you because I feel sorry for you. I would be so sad if I had to live a life like yours. Why do you argue people on religion when you know it upsets you so much. 

You are abusing people and when you mention some of the dumbest people are Atheist. I thought you were dumb off of the first post you sent and I said no it's ok he's naive, in denial or stricken by this world. When you mention stupidity to me it would seem like you were implying that I was stupid but either way you needed to hear what you had coming.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Feb 1, 2014)

> atheistic pro deity state worship





> *atheistic pro deity state worship*





> *atheistic pro deity state worship*





> *atheistic pro deity state worship*



dotdotdot.


----------



## BashFace (Feb 1, 2014)

If your trying to represent Christianity as well your doing a terrible job your coming off as all of the things you despise about the stereotypes of Christianity.

Also Ad Hominen doesn't really apply here that's more for Courtrooms *there's no way to discredit someone's character unless they give glimpses of it online. If you do that during a debate you have already broken character and lost essentially unless it supports your debate.* But if you rage out and abuse people then yeah it's not really Ad Hominem. I can tell your short fused so anyone who wouldn't take advantage of that in a real debate is just stupid.

*Like this:*
[youtube]0fvUabknNow[/youtube]


----------



## Fenrir (Feb 1, 2014)

I swear this guy is impervious to common sense.


----------



## Byrd (Feb 1, 2014)

I'm lost in the sauce, like what exactly is being argued against...

My opinion personally is that I do believe and God and Jesus Christ but what is mention in the OP is crazy and goes against the very teachings of the bible. But aye every person has the right to chose what or what not they believe in... Free will or what not..

Christians don't force their beliefs on others.... they don't mock others for believing differently. Whats mention in the OP is wrong indeed. I don't see how as a christian you can stand up for it


----------



## BashFace (Feb 1, 2014)

Alpha~13 said:


> I swear this guy is impervious to common sense.



I have tried but hes in to much denial.



Then this is me:


----------



## pajamas (Feb 1, 2014)

this gif just comes true everyday


----------



## TheCupOfBrew (Feb 1, 2014)

All your arguments are composed of ad hominem.


----------



## Fujita (Feb 1, 2014)

Not to interrupt

but

1mmortal 1tachi, let me direct you to the 2012 Louisiana School Directory, courtesy of the Louisiana Department of Education 



I could let you sift through this 

Or



Negreet High, right there on the list of public schools

Only match, by the way, and this document also includes private schools 

Negreet High is a public school

Now,  



> According to the complaint filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana, C.C enrolled in Negreet High School, which serves students in kindergarten through twelfth grade, earlier this year as a sixth-grader and quickly became the target of harassment by school staff. His science teacher, Rita Roark, repeatedly taught students that the Earth was created by God 6,000 years ago, that evolution is "impossible," and that the Bible is "100 percent true."



Inb4 but 2012 document


----------



## Fenrir (Feb 1, 2014)

Byrd said:


> I'm lost in the sauce, like what exactly is being argued against...
> 
> My opinion personally is that I do believe and God and Jesus Christ but what is mention in the OP is crazy and goes against the very teachings of the bible. But aye devery person has the right to chose what or what not they believe in... Free will or what not..
> 
> Christians don't force their beliefs on others.... they don't mock others for believing differently. Whats mention in the OP is wrong indeed. I don't see how as a christian you can stand up for it


Pretty much my thoughts here too.

But damn 1tachi, throughout this argument your head has been so far up your ass you can't even smell your own shit anymore. You really haven't done much besides guess, derp and throw around ad hominems. A lot. And then when faced with logic you go off your rocker. Speak sense or speak nothing.


----------



## Jersey Shore Jesus (Feb 1, 2014)

I love how everyone argues with Immortal then when he starts to make sense it goes into attacks on his person and ad hominem none of which pertains to the argument that Immortal is clearly winning.


----------



## SuperSaiyaMan12 (Feb 1, 2014)

'When he starts to make sense'? He makes NO sense. JSJ, like I said, you and Itachi live in your own little deluded world where common sense doesn't exist.


----------



## Kisame (Feb 1, 2014)

1mmortal 1tachi said:
			
		

> If I had evidence, why would I share it?
> 
> Wouldn't it be better to leave you ignorant to guarantee you burn in hell in the afterlife?


----------



## Sanity Check (Feb 1, 2014)

Narcissus said:


> Your frustrated meltdown is delicious. From your emotional response, you clearly care.



"Fustrated meltdown"?

You severely underestimate how boring you are.

.



BashFace said:


> All blacks and Mexicans are criminals.
> That's fact. I believe they are so they are. I'm not racist it's true because I believe.



You are a racist.

Good to know.



BashFace said:


> If your trying to represent Christianity as well your doing a terrible job your coming off as all of the things you despise about the stereotypes of Christianity.



Give me an example of me being a "bad stereotype" of christianity.

It sounds like you're speaking nonsense.



BashFace said:


> Also Ad Hominen doesn't really apply here that's more for Courtrooms *there's no way to discredit someone's character unless they give glimpses of it online. If you do that during a debate you have already broken character and lost essentially unless it supports your debate.* But if you rage out and abuse people then yeah it's not really Ad Hominem. I can tell your short fused so anyone who wouldn't take advantage of that in a real debate is just stupid.]





Sounds like you're tying your own mind into knots trying to reason through this.



Byrd said:


> My opinion personally is that I do believe and God and Jesus Christ but what is mention in the OP is crazy and goes against the very teachings of the bible. But aye every person has the right to chose what or what not they believe in... Free will or what not..
> 
> Christians don't force their beliefs on others.... they don't mock others for believing differently. Whats mention in the OP is wrong indeed. I don't see how as a christian you can stand up for it



Originally, I didn't defend it.  I said what they're doing is so different from what existing school curriculum does.  



Iron Man said:


> All your arguments are composed of ad hominem.



Where, specifically?



Fujita said:


> Not to interrupt
> 
> but
> 
> ...



Way to grasp at straws.

1.  A public "high school" that includes grades kindergarten to 12.
2.  A public school that teaches creationism and doesn't teach evolution.

Clearly you've substantiated your claim the school in question is a "normal" and "conventional" public school.

Nah, not really.  Way to focus on the unimportant unsignificant topics to avoid the key ones I refuted you on.



Alpha~13 said:


> You really haven't done much besides guess, derp and throw around ad hominems.


 
Show me where I used "ad hominems".



Jersey Shore Jesus said:


> I love how everyone argues with Immortal then when he starts to make sense it goes into attacks on his person and ad hominem none of which pertains to the argument that Immortal is clearly winning.



Pretty much.

They're just a bunch of hormone rage driven bullshit artists who say things like... 

"1mmortal 1tachi is dishonest!  Wahh!"

"1mmortal 1tachi makes ad hominen arguments!  Boo hoo hoo!"

Then, if you ask them specifically where and how these things happened, they never give you a straight answer.



SuperSaiyaMan12 said:


> 'When he starts to make sense'? He makes NO sense. JSJ, like I said, you and Itachi live in your own little deluded world where common sense doesn't exist.



I made sense right here:



Go respond to that post.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Feb 1, 2014)

Byrd said:


> I'm lost in the sauce, like what exactly is being argued against...
> 
> My opinion personally is that I do believe and God and Jesus Christ but what is mention in the OP is crazy and goes against the very teachings of the bible. But aye every person has the right to chose what or what not they believe in... Free will or what not..
> 
> Christians don't force their beliefs on others.... they don't mock others for believing differently. Whats mention in the OP is wrong indeed. I don't see how as a christian you can stand up for it





BashFace said:


> I have tried but hes in to much denial.
> 
> 
> 
> Then this is me:





pajamas said:


> this gif just comes true everyday





Iron Man said:


> All your arguments are composed of ad hominem.





Fujita said:


> Not to interrupt
> 
> but
> 
> ...





SuperSaiyaMan12 said:


> 'When he starts to make sense'? He makes NO sense. JSJ, like I said, you and Itachi live in your own little deluded world where common sense doesn't exist.





Shark said:


>



All of you are atheistic pro deity state worshipers! DON'T TRY TO ARGUE OTHERWISE!


----------



## Sanity Check (Feb 1, 2014)

1mmortal 1tachi said:


> If I had evidence, why would I share it?
> 
> Wouldn't it be better to leave you ignorant to guarantee you burn in hell in the afterlife?



Ha.

A lot of you have bad attitudes where you mistakenly believe people are obligated to spend their precious time & energy teaching you things you're too lazy to bother learning for yourself.

I said that to encourage people to think for themselves and to realize they can never really trust anyone to think for them, if they aren't willing to think for themselves.

It was said out of love, not the opposite.  

Not that I expect anyone to grasp that.

People aren't that smart.


----------



## Hyperion1O1 (Feb 1, 2014)

1mmortal 1tachi said:


> Ha.
> 
> A lot of you have bad attitudes where you mistakenly believe people are obligated to spend their precious time & energy teaching you things you're too lazy to bother learning for yourself.
> 
> ...



People aren't obligated to give out evidences when making a claim but that makes the claim invalid.

Why?

Proof is necessary to prove a claim. If there was no need to provide proof, then there would be a shit ton of claims that can or can not be true and that would make discerning the truth a lot harder.

And its already hard to find out the truth these days.

Fuck it, I'm just wasting my time.


----------



## Unlosing Ranger (Feb 1, 2014)

Hyperion1O1 said:


> Fuck it, I'm just wasting my time.



1mmortal 1tachi, a waste of time.


----------



## Louis Cyphre (Feb 1, 2014)

Unlosing Ranger said:


> 1mmortal 1tachi, a waste of time.



> Mount Fuji (or someone else) show evidence
> Dismiss it without any decent reason
> I WIN
Repeat this events endlessly and you can sum this thread.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Feb 1, 2014)

Louis Cyphre said:


> > Mount Fuji show evidence
> > Dismiss it without any decent reason
> > I WIN



His trademark dishonesty.


----------



## Aphelion (Feb 1, 2014)

1mmortal 1tachi said:


> A lot of you have bad attitudes where you mistakenly believe people are obligated to spend their precious time & energy teaching you things you're too lazy to bother learning for yourself.



If you are 100 percent certain that Christian doctrine is true, then yes I would.  Unless you are so morally bankrupt that you think your "precious time" is more important than whether or not someones immortal soul is subjected to an eternity of torment


----------



## Sanity Check (Feb 1, 2014)

Hyperion1O1 said:


> Proof is necessary to prove a claim. If there was no need to provide proof, then there would be a shit ton of claims that can or can not be true and that would make discerning the truth a lot harder.



How would someone know what was proof and what wasn't if they had to rely on someone else to tell them what is what, due to them not being able to understand the topic on their own terms.



Louis Cyphre said:


> > Mount Fuji (or someone else) show evidence
> > Dismiss it without any decent reason
> > I WIN
> Repeat this events endlessly and you can sum this thread.



1.  Fujita tries to prove its a "normal" public school.
2.  To achieve this, she posts evidence that says it caters to grades kindergarten to grade 12.
3.  How many public schools do you know that teach kindergarten to grade 12?  

I don't need to say anything, she's contradicting herself by posting evidence that proves its not a normal public school, as I've said all along.



EntangledHive said:


> If you are 100 percent certain that Christian doctrine is true, then yes I would.  Unless you are so morally bankrupt that you think your "precious time" is more important than whether or not someones immortal soul is subjected to an eternity of torment



The point is people should learn to rely on themselves and learn to think for themselves.

It doesn't matter whether or not I, or anyone else had answers.

People should never be in a position where they have to rely on others to do their thinking for them, if they can avoid it.


----------



## Narcissus (Feb 1, 2014)

Jersey Shore Jesus said:


> I love how everyone argues with Immortal then when he starts to make sense it goes into attacks on his person and ad hominem none of which pertains to the argument that Immortal is clearly winning.


He has never made any sense. Of course, endorsement from you of all people only serves to make him look even worse, if that's possible.


----------



## Fujita (Feb 1, 2014)

1mmortal 1tachi said:


> Way to grasp at straws.
> 
> 1.  A public "high school" that includes grades kindergarten to 12.
> 2.  A public school that teaches creationism and doesn't teach evolution.
> ...



Hahahaha, oh wow 

Let's not have revisionist history here, shall we?



Fujita said:


> _How_ does it follow?
> 
> > Person A can do X in private
> > Person B can do Y in private
> ...



Here's where it all started, with me talking about how your comparison between private individuals and government institutions didn't work.



1mmortal 1tachi said:


> The name of the organization that runs the school is Sabine Parish.
> 
> The term parish is typically indicative of religious private schooling.
> 
> They might receive state funding, whether they do or not isn't clear.  They're not a typical public school like the article claims which would obligate them to adhere to guidelines public schools are subject to.



In reply to this, you drew a tenuous connection between the organization running the school being called a "parish," evidently not knowing that that's Louisiana's equivalent of a county, including the "typically indicative" there so that, of course, if you happened to be wrong in making a statement with absolutely no backing, you could then fall back on this.

You then say that they're not a typical public school and say that they might not be subject to public school guidelines… with of course nothing to support this claim.  



1mmortal 1tachi said:


> Like I said, the name of the organization is Sabine Parish the term parish implies a private school with religious connotations.  They might receive state funding.  It doesn't necessarily imply they're a typical public school or that the guidelines of a public school apply to them.



Here you return to the implications of the matter, still ignoring what the term actually means here or actually providing any sort of proof for your wild accusations. You then say that they "might" be funded by the state… based on your assuming that they're some sort of private (or semi-private) religious school. Again, based on your misinterpretation of how "parish" is used here. Or at least, I'd imagine that's the basis for it. Perhaps you're also talking about the fact that they teach creationism - I'll address that later 



1mmortal 1tachi said:


> Also, if you look at their organizational characteristics, it isn't a typical public school hierarchy like the article mistakenly claims.



I'd assume you mean the K-12 thing 

Which means… jack shit, really, as far as the school being publicly funded goes. I would imagine that this has to do with the size of the community, not where they get their school funding from.   



> It looks like they do receive state funding / grants



Yes, the article says that. This is also disaster relief money- essentially, not a day-to-day basis thing and provides absolutely no evidence for how they typically receive funding  



> but they do not fall under the direct jurisdiction of the state.



which the article says nothing about, beyond saying that the local governments will have some degree of autonomy _with the disaster money_

You've pulled this claim completely out of your ass 



> Looks like all of you fell for the media sensationlism.



And here you accuse the media of blowing things out of proportion. So, while you're deliberately vague up there, you're definitely drawing conclusions here, or at least expecting people to act like you are, even if you won't fully commit

……………………

Okay, so now moving on the marvelous bit of insane troll logic you've dumped on us here: the claim that it's likely to not be a normal public school because it teaches creationism and has religious roots 

Now, I honestly don't even _need_ to address this because you've yet to provide a shred of actual evidence for your point of view, choosing instead to deal in vague, roundabout logic and probabilities because you really don't have an argument 

So burden of proof would really lie on you

However...

The argument only works given the premise that everything is in working order, and no laws are being broken. But that's what's being contested here! You're begging the question. No sane lawyer would argue, when his client was accused of stealing, that people are far more likely to own objects in their possession and that therefore chances are that his client didn't steal. No, he'd provide alibis or proof that the object in fact belongs to client. 

You need to provide proof that the school district is privately funded, or otherwise not beholden to the typical laws governing religion in public schools

You have failed spectacularly in that endeavor


----------



## Fujita (Feb 1, 2014)

1mmortal 1tachi said:


> To achieve this, she posts evidence that says it caters to grades kindergarten to grade 12.



Quote me on this

Because that is not at all what I've argued


----------



## Leeroy Jenkins (Feb 1, 2014)

1mmortal 1tachi said:


> Ha.
> 
> A lot of you have bad attitudes where you mistakenly believe people are obligated to spend their precious time & energy teaching you things you're too lazy to bother learning for yourself.
> 
> ...



To say this to a group of people who have presented ample proof and pointed out the errors in your logic is the height of ignorance and arrogance. The fact that you cannot acknowledge any of the proof or any of the flaws in your thinking is indicative of you not being capable of being taken seriously and I honestly am flabbergasted this thread is still going. I know handicapped kids who are more accepting of new information than you are.

I am really goddamn cranky tonight.


----------



## Freechoice (Feb 1, 2014)

> This thread


----------



## Aphelion (Feb 1, 2014)

1mmortal 1tachi said:


> The point is people should learn to rely on themselves and learn to think for themselves.


Providing compelling concrete evidence to someone who is not aware of it really isn't "thinking for them."



> It doesn't matter whether or not I, or anyone else had answers.


Yeah, it's not like providing them would affect the probablity that someone will spend the afterlife in eternal bliss or eternal torment


----------



## Fenrir (Feb 2, 2014)

Hahaha, 1tachi is still blub blub blubbing.

When does he come out for air I wonder. Probably why it's so apparent all his brain cells are dying.


----------

