Replies

I'm an atheist, too, and I have morals.

So, you're an Orthodox Atheist?

Much better to base our laws on "principles".

I say our laws are better based on logic and the Constitution, not a court decree or idols that are called principals or morals - - these are also phantasms that have a similitude to a religion.

As a matter of secular argument, the societal practice of abortion is ritual mass murder upon the altars dedicated to idolatrous vanities, a collective sacrifice to pagan idols.

But isn't it nice, that as an atheist who sees abortion as ritual murder, I can debate the topic within the Republican party and actually have a voice on the issue? This would not happen in the Demo-rat party, where I would be forced into a lock-step with the annointed to support their idolatry of ritual murder on a pagan altar...

Damn, was Thomas Hobbes a genius or what...

Part IV. Of the Kingdom of Darkness
Chap. xlv. Of Demonology and other Relics of the Religion of the Gentiles.
[14] An image, in the most strict signification of the word, is the resemblance of something visible: in which sense the fantastical forms, apparitions, or seemings of visible bodies to the sight, are only images; such as are the show of a man or other thing in the water, by reflection or refraction; or of the sun or stars by direct vision in the air; which are nothing real in the things seen, nor in the place where they seem to be; nor are their magnitudes and figures the same with that of the object, but changeable, by the variation of the organs of sight, or by glasses; and are present oftentimes in our imagination, and in our dreams, when the object is absent; or changed into other colours, and shapes, as things that depend only upon the fancy. And these are the images which are originally and most properly called ideas and idols, and derived from the language of the Grecians, with whom the word eido signifieth to see. They are also called phantasms, which is in the same language, apparitions. And from these images it is that one of the faculties of man's nature is called the imagination. And from hence it is manifest that there neither is, nor can be, any image made of a thing invisible.
[15] It is also evident that there can be no image of a thing infinite: for all the images and phantasms that are made by the impression of things visible are figured. But figure is quantity every way determined, and therefore there can be no image of God, nor of the soul of man, nor of spirits; but only of bodies visible, that is, bodies that have light in themselves, or are by such enlightened.
[16] And whereas a man can fancy shapes he never saw, making up a figure out of the parts of divers creatures, as the poets make their centaurs, chimeras and other monsters never seen, so can he also give matter to those shapes, and make them in wood, clay or metal. And these are also called images, not for the resemblance of any corporeal thing, but for the resemblance of some phantastical inhabitants of the brain of the maker. But in these idols, as they are originally in the brain, and as they are painted, carved moulded or molten in matter, there is a similitude of one to the other, for which the material body made by art may be said to be the image of the fantastical idol made by nature.

I say our laws are better based on logic and the Constitution, not a court decree or idols that are called principals or morals

Logic and the Constitution... yes. Certainly not logic alone, of course. When I say "principles", I'm referring to those outlined in the Constitution.

But isn't it nice, that as an atheist who sees abortion as ritual murder, I can debate the topic within the Republican party and actually have a voice on the issue?

So... I ask this question on every forum, and I've never received a straight answer from anyone, yet: At what point should abortion be "illegal"? From the point of conception? You appear to be very pro-life, and I'm wondering what your position is.