”That’s how you know these people are crazy. They’re not interested in the facts, only promoting their own propaganda. You knew that the moment they tossed out the comical phrase “militant atheism.” Remember: FFRF isn’t fighting for atheists to receive special treatment. They just want atheists to be treated fairly under the law — and they go after Christians who think their faith gives them permission to ignore the rules.And that’s how you know that Mehta is lying. Along with all AtheoLeftists who demand a false interpretation of the First Amendment, Mehta thinks he can claim that the FFRF defends freedom of speech by shutting down all non-Atheist speech in public venues.
FFRF’s militancy is little more than a group of dedicated people writing letters to warn people that they are violating the Constitution. The attorneys there have no desire to stop the religious speech of individuals. They defend those rights. They don’t sue churches for holding worship services or after-school Bible clubs for meeting. They only request equal treatment under the law.
Damn near all of their lawsuits involve Christians who cross the legal line in a way that would make Fox News flip out if any other group pulled the same shit. Like public school coaches pushing Christianity on their athletes, or elected officials using their office to promote their faith, or the IRS allowing churches to get away with endorsing political candidates.
If atheists acted like the Christians that FFRF goes after, maybe Ryan’s group would have a point. As it stands, this is what a whining majority looks like when they realize they no longer get to trample over the minority without a fight.
Remember: FFRF isn’t fighting for atheists to receive special treatment. They just want atheists to be treated fairly under the law — and they go after Christians who think their faith gives them permission to ignore the rules.
Mehta claims that it is oppression of Atheism to have any non-Atheist speech in public venues. That is why it is necessary to “warn people” that they will be attacked with an expensive lawsuit if they do not bow before the Atheist financial assault.
The FFRF sues the smallest of cities and school districts with the demand that they prostrate themselves before the all-Atheist public utopia in which the Atheists can comfortably feel safe from having to tolerate any thoughts outside Atheism. (Aka “secularism”).
When Mehta refers to a “whining majority”, he is really not referring to the majority, he is referring to the tiny towns and organizations which the FFRF attacks. The FFRF does not attack large cities with “Saint” or "Angels" in their heritage and names, they attack tiny towns with a symbol of their heritage on a flag or monument. They are cowards, implementing Atheism by bullying the smallest, only.
Mehta makes this incredible lapse of rationality:
”Remember: FFRF isn’t fighting for atheists to receive special treatment. They just want atheists to be treated fairly under the law — and they go after Christians who think their faith gives them permission to ignore the rules.”That is a lie; Atheists are specifically installing official Atheism in every public place they think they can bully into it. It is true that they go after Christians, but only the smallest fry who they can bully with financial ruin. The FFRF consistently loses when they attack someone who fights back. And as for rules, neither Hemant nor the FFRF mean the First Amendment; what Hemant means is the corruption of "free speech" protection into "Atheism-only" speech protection – again called secularism, which means Atheism.
Atheists portray themselves as delicate little flowers who are oppressed by the evil Christians (see the silly pie chart at Hemant’s blog), fragile little pansies who are trampled by the presence of non-Atheist thought in their midst, so they must fight to install total freedom from non-congruence because Atheism cannot withstand actual tolerance. Because Atheists are so delicate, so fragile. The legal case against the 911 cross contained the physical illnesses (gastric distress) which afflict poor Atheists in the presence on non-Atheism. And THAT is the oppression which Atheists must fight.
But Atheists have never actually been the delicate flowers they pretend to be. Atheism has, by far, the most violent and bloody history of repression and oppression of all, when it comes to Atheists in power. Their oppression in the USA is completely transparent compared to Atheist oppression of the religious in the 20th and 21st century Atheist nations which dominated huge portions of Earth. First the Atheists eradicate the opposition; then they start on each other, all the while promoting equality.
3 comments:
Two anecdotal experiences with the FFRF from my undergraduate and post-undergraduate years in Madison, Wisconsin.
Christmastime ca. 1983, riding the city bus to somewhere. In common with most public transportation systems, the bus was lined inside and out with paid advertising. This particular year, the FFRF had paid for a holiday-themed ad featuring a lush depiction of the star of Bethlehem beaming down on a traditional manger scene, replete with an image of Mary rushing out of the manger declaring, "It's a girl!"
While to this day I'm puzzled as to the message the FFRF was trying to convey, try as I might, I just can't tease "separation of Church and State" out of it.
The second occurred some dozen years later. I was co-usher at my church with a man who ran a grocery store that had been a fixture in that part of town for decades. Every Sunday for years, this man had purchased ad space in the bulletins of our and other local churches featuring a coupon for a free quart of milk with a minimum purchase.
FFRF apparently didn't cotton to this, because it meant you actually had to -- gasp! -- walk into a church to pick up a coupon and was therefore discriminatory against atheists. So they slapped him with a lawsuit.
And Mehta thinks the FFRF is all about the Constitution? Sure it is.
These atheists are so hypocritical,it's unbelievable.
They should start rephrasing their language and refrain from using phrases that imply dualism.Such as "relax your mind and body",since the mind is part of the body in atheist parlance.Or even the term "heartache" and other terms and phrases which imply spirituality and dualism.
It's not that hard to believe,given atheist communist history that the more militant these atheists get,they'll eventually ban anything related to dualism.
Either Mehta is talking out of ignorance of what the FFRF actually does and is, or he is purposefully lying.
Always remember, in Atheist-world there is no truth, so there are also no lies; all that matters is creating a narrative in your own favor and projecting it as if it were Truth.
(which is why evolution is defended so stridently; it is the science of story telling narrative which is the ideological Scientism strut holding up Atheism).
Post a Comment