Athiesm Now protected under US Religious Freedom law - Polidicks

[QUOTE=sgman91;51576739]I'm having a tough time coming up with an example where an atheist would need their non-belief protected.[/QUOTE] [url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discrimination_against_atheists#United_States[/url] Basically, it's there to help codify the protections that other groups are given specifically for them. It's not a bad measure.

[QUOTE=Vegetable;51576925]The definition of religion is belief and worship, neither of which apply to atheism, so I don't really understand the point of this.[/QUOTE] It's basically there to protect atheists from persecution for not being religious. By classifying "Not being religious" as a religion, it ensures that people without a religion are protected in the same way as people with one.

[QUOTE=Code3Response;51572002]It's just like how pizza is considered a vegetable for school lunches. Within context it makes sense[/QUOTE] What. You'll have to explain to me how that makes any sense. :v:

[QUOTE=paul simon;51577066]What. You'll have to explain to me how that makes any sense. :v:[/QUOTE] Has tomatoes in it, therefore vegetable nutritional content

It's good to see some recognition of the atheist church.

[QUOTE=paul simon;51577066]What. You'll have to explain to me how that makes any sense. :v:[/QUOTE] We got quotas. Beforehand you wouldn't be able to just pizza as having vegetable contents because it in and of itself isn't a veggie

[QUOTE=glitchvid;51572484]Well, now it's pseudo-protected as a religion. But in truth the US has always fundamentally given protections to atheism. Freedom of religion entails the [I]freedom from religion.[/I][/QUOTE] What is a john locke

Is it just me or does this reek of irony? Aren't atheists always about not wanting to be treated like a religion?

[QUOTE=No Party Hats;51577150]We got quotas. Beforehand you wouldn't be able to just pizza as having vegetable contents because it in and of itself isn't a veggie[/QUOTE] This sounds very strange.

Come back to me when it's not illegal in PA to run for office as an Athiest

[QUOTE=mcgrath618;51578299]Come back to me when it's not illegal in PA to run for office as an Athiest[/QUOTE] It's illegal to run as an Athiest? wat I knew that trying to get into office in the States without either a spouse or a religion was hard, but I didn't think it'd be straight up illegal.

[QUOTE=BlackMageMari;51578344]It's illegal to run as an Athiest? wat I knew that trying to get into office in the States without either a spouse or a religion was hard, but I didn't think it'd be straight up illegal.[/QUOTE] It's unfortunate. [url]http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/12/07/us/in-seven-states-atheists-push-to-end-largely-forgotten-ban-.html[/url]

Like McGrath said, in some states, like Texas, Mississippi, and the Carolinas, it's illegal to hold a government office if you're an atheist. I can only hope that people get over the whole "hurr hurr fedora tipper" narrative and relalise that atheists still face some awful treatment in parts of our nation. Extending religious protections to individuals lacking one should be a no-brainer and just common sense.

[QUOTE=Scarabix;51577187]What is a john locke[/QUOTE] With the church being kept out of the state and our freedom of association how are they not intertwined? Btw we aren't taught much about john locke in America aside from what the declaration of independence borrows from him so yeh

[QUOTE=Sonador;51577072]Has tomatoes in it, therefore vegetable nutritional content[/QUOTE] So Ketchup would also count as a vegetable? Is banana milkshake considered a fruit? The U.S is strange

[QUOTE=Fouytan222;51578797]Like McGrath said, in some states, like Texas, Mississippi, and the Carolinas, it's illegal to hold a government office if you're an atheist. I can only hope that people get over the whole "hurr hurr fedora tipper" narrative and relalise that atheists still face some awful treatment in parts of our nation. Extending religious protections to individuals lacking one should be a no-brainer and just common sense.[/QUOTE] How is that legal?

[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;51579843]How is that legal?[/QUOTE] I assume it's never been challenged. So no one has bothered to change it. Our legal system works through people giving legal challenges. If no one has challenged it, then it likely won't change. That doesn't mean that it's constitutionally sound.

[QUOTE=sgman91;51579930]I assume it's never been challenged. So no one has bothered to change it. Our legal system works through people giving legal challenges. If no one has challenged it, then it likely won't change. That doesn't mean that it's constitutionally sound.[/QUOTE] This. The laws are still technically there, but they don't really matter, since they would instantly be struck down when challenged. The real barrier to an atheist holding office is the huge stigma against those who are "godless."

this is good, now it's part of law yet the part about protecting religious prisoners around world seems utopia considering the irony that US stays allied with countries where oppression of belief exist in those non-believers (atheists) are considered infidels to be jailed or even killed if they publicly state it ... but maybe it's secret plan, to have reason to finally start the right wars ... p.s. CZ is one of most Atheist countries in the world, thus seeing law advances rest of world is always pleasing, FOR THE SCIENCE !

[QUOTE=Dwarden;51580212]this is good, now it's part of law yet the part about protecting religious prisoners around world seems utopia considering the irony that US stays allied with countries where oppression of belief exist in those non-believers (atheists) are considered infidels to be jailed or even killed if they publicly state it ... but maybe it's secret plan, to have reason to finally start the right wars ... p.s. CZ is one of most Atheist countries in the world, thus seeing law advances rest of world is always pleasing, FOR THE SCIENCE ![/QUOTE] We stay allied with those countries as a matter of geopolitical convenience and opportunity. It works to benefit us in some way and them as well in the process. It's not a matter of friendship or principles, it's a matter of profit and mutual cooperative functionality. The good news as far as atheism (secularism in general) is that it's growing, and it will continue to grow in the future thanks to science and education. France, the Netherlands, and New Zealand will have secular majorities soon. The United Kingdom is going to lose its Christian majority soon as well. [url=http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/04/160422-atheism-agnostic-secular-nones-rising-religion/]National Geographic had an interesting article on this topic that they published back in April[/url]. It'd be nice if we could have a "religion" along the lines of what Auguste Comte proposed, a "religion of humanity" that celebrates science, art, culture, etc.

[QUOTE=Govna;51580414]We stay allied with those countries as a matter of geopolitical convenience and opportunity. It works to benefit us in some way and them as well in the process. It's not a matter of friendship or principles, it's a matter of profit and mutual cooperative functionality. The good news as far as atheism (secularism in general) is that it's growing, and it will continue to grow in the future thanks to science and education. France, the Netherlands, and New Zealand will have secular majorities soon. The United Kingdom is going to lose its Christian majority soon as well. [url=http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/04/160422-atheism-agnostic-secular-nones-rising-religion/]National Geographic had an interesting article on this topic that they published back in April[/url]. It'd be nice if we could have a "religion" along the lines of what Auguste Comte proposed, a "religion of humanity" that celebrates science, art, culture, etc.[/QUOTE] I don't think steps should be taken to establish atheism as a pseudoreligion. One of the most attractive things about atheism is that you feel more independent, free of any rules or views that tie you to others. You're free to love or hate anything, including any form of science, art or culture, you can show your appreciation or lack thereof or just completely ignore absolutely anything. We don't need to establish any kind of atheist identity since there isn't one. We have no common views, traditions or rituals, and we don't need to.

:snip:

All I know is, in the south and in smallerish towns, if you wear a necklace with a cross on it in plain sight, it's like being in a secret club with everyone. You do get treated a bit differently

[QUOTE=Drury;51581163]I don't think steps should be taken to establish atheism as a pseudoreligion. One of the most attractive things about atheism is that you feel more independent, free of any rules or views that tie you to others. You're free to love or hate anything, including any form of science, art or culture, you can show your appreciation or lack thereof or just completely ignore absolutely anything. We don't need to establish any kind of atheist identity since there isn't one. We have no common views, traditions or rituals, and we don't need to.[/QUOTE] But that's not what's happening it's literally just being thrown in to grant atheists legal protections and casus belli to challenge religious laws

[QUOTE=thelurker1234;51581218]But that's not what's happening it's literally just being thrown in to grant atheists legal protections and casus belli to challenge religious laws[/QUOTE] Oh, I was replying to the post before. Should have quoted.

[QUOTE=sgman91;51579930]I assume it's never been challenged. So no one has bothered to change it. Our legal system works through people giving legal challenges. If no one has challenged it, then it likely won't change. That doesn't mean that it's constitutionally sound.[/QUOTE] Apparently it's already been ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. Isn't that sufficient for the concerned states to change their shit? Or does it have to be challenged in every single state and go all the way to the Supreme Court again and again to enforce the ruling union-wide? That sounds incredibly inefficient.