Court rules atheism a religion

WorldNetDaily ^

[Lexinom]

A federal court of appeals ruled yesterday Wisconsin prison officials violated an inmate's rights because they did not treat atheism as a religion.

"Atheism is [the inmate's] religion, and the group that he wanted to start was religious in nature even though it expressly rejects a belief in a supreme being," the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals said.

[TheForceOfOne]

Like light and darkness they go hand in hand.

[King Prout]

pfft.

core tenet: there is a God
not verifiable

all other tenets, core and otherwise, hinge on that primary.

[takenoprisoner]

absolutely it does mean exactly that...where the Supreme Court and lesser courts are favoring the religion of atheism over other religions.

[ThePythonicCow]

Overdue, perhaps. Huge, no. Actually, perhaps dangerous for us.

When the courts recognize secularism as a religion, then that will be huge, in my opinion.

Atheism, as an actively practiced belief system that is as certain that there is no God as the Pope is certain that there is a God, is a belief system held by a rather small set of people (fair notice - I am one of those Atheists, though a rather odd one.)

Secularism, as the lack of an actively practiced belief system, that is twisted by the left and the ACLU into the right not to be offended by any overt expression of someone else's belief system, is widely held by those on the left. Secularism puts too much 'faith' in them, the government and other large institutions, to achieve that false hope of a Heaven on Earth.

The ACLU and its leftist friends has turned the "no establishment of religion" clause in the Constitution into the claim that "secularism - the absence of any overt belief system" must be the established State Religion.

It will be a minor twist of the logic to lump the few outspoken Atheists in with the Catholics, Lutherans, Jews, Methodists, Episcopalians, and what have you.

Indeed, this is a dangerous court decision for us on the Right, as it will be twisted by the Left into the claim that they are "being fair and impartial - even Atheists are prohibited from public expression of their belief system."

While those on the right may well label the left as Atheists with a broad stroke, those on the left will easily be able to twist that label into referring to a minor and ignorable (in their view) group, along with all the traditional Christian and Jewish religions.

Such a twist may well not sell to those who are traditionally religious and conservative, but it will sound quite reasonable to the base of the Left. This is a typical example of words meaning different things to different people.

Once secularism (and its cousins socialism, Marxism and communism) are recognized as religions, then the establishment clause can be understood as prohibiting the government from establishing secularism as the state religion. It is the religion of secularism that is now the established state religion, driving out all other signs of religion such as crosses, prayers and the Ten Commandments from public spaces.

[muir_redwoods]

"believing in nothing ... is still believing in something."

Who could argue with that?

[fish hawk]

Good deal. Now they can add Evolution to that list of religions.

"When it comes to the origin of life on this earth, there are only two possibilities: creation or spontaneous generation(evolution). There is no third way. Spontaneous generation was disproved 100 years ago, but that leads us only to one other conclusion: that of supernatural creation. We cannot accept that on philosophical grounds (personal reasons); therefore, we choose to believe in the impossible: that life arose spontaneously by chance.

(George Wald, winner of the 1967 Nobel Peace Prize in Science)

[BIGLOOK]

.....thus, all public displays of Atheism are hereby banned.

[bobdsmith]

evolution isn't about the origin of life!

[general_re]

That quote is a complete fabrication. Probably the first thing that should tip you off is that there's no such thing as a "Nobel Peace Prize in Science". Just FYI.

[fish hawk]

If evolution is not about the origin of life, WHAT evolved?

[Dr.Deth]

If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice.

[JasonSC]

So now that atheism is a "religion", when would the state not be favoring one religion over another?

You believe that removing the 10 Commandments would be promoting atheism. But keeping them there would be promoting Christianity, wouldn't it? Either way, it would be unconstitutional, since atheism is now a religion. The state is going to have to pick a side.

[bobdsmith]

If gravity isn't about the origin of matter, what is getting pulled?

[Cinnamon]

Yes! Atheism has been getting a free ride from the govt. and the Libs.... what now?

[JasonSC]

"believing in nothing ... is still believing in something."

Insightful, isn't it?

[fish hawk]

At first I thought maybe you were smart. Sorry for the mistake. When you don't have a good answer, ask a question back.

[bobdsmith]

I was hoping you would see my point. The theory of evolution concerns how life changes, not where life comes from.

[trubluolyguy]

OMG the aethiests are gonna FREAK! LOL.

[muir_redwoods]

"Insightful, isn't it?"

I'm not sure, I quit smoking pot about 30 years ago, it might have made more sense then.

Maybe

[peyton randolph]

The state is going to have to pick a side.

Nope. The State should permit public displays for the religions. This means the 10 Commandments can be displayed...and athiests could put up a monument that states that there is no God.