Dana Perino on Fox: "Atheïsts don't have to live here"

Initiate
User avatar
Posts: 110
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 10:47 pm

PostMon Sep 09, 2013 3:39 am » by Synkronizer



Upload to Disclose.tv


Some disturbing opinions...

Nice slip-up around 1:40 :alien51: :twisted:
IMO, Greg (guy with glasses) has the best argument in this particular 5-person discussion.

Source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/06/dana-perino-fox-news-atheists_n_3882597.html?utm_hp_ref=mostpopular

Freedom of belief doesn't appear to be important to Fox News host Dana Perino, who suggested that if atheists don't like having "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance, well, "they don't have to live here."

Massachusetts' highest court is currently hearing a case against the Pledge brought by atheist parents, who feel that due to its religious wording, atheist children "are denied meaningful participation in this patriotic exercise." The case specifically involves the phrase, "under God," which was not actually a part of the original phrasing of the Pledge.

Regarding atheists, Perino said during a live segment, "I'm tired of them." She continued, "I remember working at the Justice Department years ago when I first started right after 9/11 and a lawsuit like this came through, and before the day had finished, the United States Senate and the House of Representatives had both passed resolutions saying that they were for keeping ‘under God’ in the pledge."

"If these people really don't like it, they don't have to live here," she concluded.

Co-host Bob Beckel agreed, "Yeah, that's a good point."

Is it, really?
"The adult public's taste is not necessarily ready to accept the logical solutions to their requirements if the solution
implies too vast a departure from what they have been conditioned into accepting as the norm." - Raymond Loewy

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 2382
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2012 9:16 am

PostMon Sep 09, 2013 4:55 am » by mediasorcery


perhaps those parent would prefer it if it said, "under satan"?
the story of life is quicker than the blink of an eye, the story of love is hello and goodbye, until we meet again my friend.

Initiate
User avatar
Posts: 384
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2011 12:56 pm

PostMon Sep 09, 2013 10:15 am » by Chillitiger


Why cant it just say. "In the eyes of man". Are we that piss poor we can't look after ourselves.

I am not for or against a God. But Man should be first anyway. If we put ourselves first we might not look elsewhere for the solutions. I am pretty sure we are capable. And if there is a creator, Would not that be what it would want anyway.

As a Father I want my son to be self sufficient.

If he is still hassling me for my approval when he is old enough to know better, That will just give me the shits. And it also means I didn't teach him well enough to begin with.

Make it about us and move on. i'm sure God won't mind.
Yes i'll admit it.... I think Max Keiser is a LEGEND

Writer
Posts: 65
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2008 2:15 am

PostMon Sep 09, 2013 6:38 pm » by T0ne2


Gentlemen, please pay close attention: :owned:
http://youtu.be/42dODPOolSA

Super Moderator
User avatar
Posts: 19007
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 9:22 pm
Location: In your grill

PostMon Sep 09, 2013 7:25 pm » by Slith


Image

I'm just here for the popcorn Image

Initiate
User avatar
Posts: 110
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 10:47 pm

PostSat Sep 21, 2013 12:29 am » by Synkronizer




What a load of poppycock!

I'm no better than the cockroach that lives under my sink? I you believe in a 'Creator', isn't the cockroach a product of that same creator? Oh right, it doesn't have the same 'un-alienable rights' that mankind has, therefore man must be a superior species.

I do not believe in a 'creator of life'. I could believe in some sort of 'kickstarter' of the human species, but that doesn't give any human the right to say that his or her religion or lack thereof is any better than the next person. If mankind was created by a creator, all humans should be treated equal by any other human. If there is a creator, we couldn't fathom the depths of his/her/its knowledge. Thinking 'He' would be angered by any of our (non)believe-systems is merely projecting human emotions onto 'Him'. I find that ignorant and arrogant. Anyone that proclaims to be the voice of the creator is IMO deranged or has some personal gain. They do not spread love, toleration, acceptance, open-mindedness and introspection. They promote external control, fear and want funding. If there is an alien species that created us, they are laughing so hard they're pissing they're pants (if they wear any).

I am viciously opposed to any form of organized or state-funded religion and I do not think the concept of 'government' is created by that supposed 'God'. It is a man-made concept evolved from the physically strongest person in charge to the most funded person and best-connected person in charge. And that's where the clergy enters the picture. They're backing the ones they gain the most from and tell the population that it's sin to do otherwise. Hence, more control.

If there is a creator. Would you worship him, or try ask him for the reason he allows all that pain and suffering in his creation? I think the second option would be more interesting and if anyone claims to communicate with him, let him come forward....
"The adult public's taste is not necessarily ready to accept the logical solutions to their requirements if the solution
implies too vast a departure from what they have been conditioned into accepting as the norm." - Raymond Loewy

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 6387
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 10:00 pm
Location: Zin-Uru

PostSat Sep 21, 2013 12:45 am » by Kinninigan


Synkronizer wrote: poppycock!




i have been dying to use this word in a sentence!








:mrgreen:
It was written in prophecy that a Gelfling would end Skeksis rule...
Image
https://www.youtube.com/user/kinninigan



  • Related topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post
Visit Disclose.tv on Facebook