@AtlLiberal - you kind of contradicted yourself. You said that the religious people have their success due to "non-existent Wall of Separation". If this wall exists - how can it be non-existent? If it doesn't exist - what wall are you talking about? Also, you claim to be "stunned" based on what you "suspect"... probably would be much more accurate to actually find out how things are by talking to these folks, since if you're only "suspecting" - you could be all wet... and that's not reason to be stunned. And depending where you live in this great nation of ours - the bumper stickers of the left definitely outnumber the bumper stickers of the right... simply because the left tends to be ...

@AtlLiberal - you kind of contradicted yourself. You said that the religious people have their success due to "non-existent Wall of Separation". If this wall exists - how can it be non-existent? If it doesn't exist - what wall are you talking about? Also, you claim to be "stunned" based on what you "suspect"... probably would be much more accurate to actually find out how things are by talking to these folks, since if you're only "suspecting" - you could be all wet... and that's not reason to be stunned. And depending where you live in this great nation of ours - the bumper stickers of the left definitely outnumber the bumper stickers of the right... simply because the left tends to be 'louder'. Don't believe me? Visit Seattle area and you'll see for yourself.

Your second comment about the religious people being afraid to lose their "status" - what status? They go to church and they have faith? What's their status? They have some special privileges that you don't? What are you talking about? If anything - they can bashed and beaten in the media and from people like you - that's about the only privilege that's out there these days. According to polls a staggering number of Americans consider themselves religious and this the part that drives the tiny, but loud number on your side, crazy.

Personally, I'm not a religious person, like most Americans are, since being brought up in an atheist state makes it pretty difficult to change... so I'm certainly no expert in terms of how the religious population feels on these various topics... perhaps someone from that audience would be willing to comment and either agree with my personal observations on the subject or set me straight.

@AtlLiberal - you kind of contradicted yourself. You said that the
religious people have their success due to "non-existent Wall of
Separation". If this wall exists - how can it be non-existent? If it
doesn't exist - what wall are you talking about?

And it appears to me that you are either reading impaired or have never been exposed to sarcasm before.

Also, you claim to be
"stunned" based on what you "suspect"...

What is stunning is your total lack of reading comprehension - again.

If anything - they can bashed
and beaten in the media and from people like you

Oh, so Christians can't be critized? "Bashed and beaten"? That's funny. By your own a...

@AtlLiberal - you kind of contradicted yourself. You said that the
religious people have their success due to "non-existent Wall of
Separation". If this wall exists - how can it be non-existent? If it
doesn't exist - what wall are you talking about?

And it appears to me that you are either reading impaired or have never been exposed to sarcasm before.

Also, you claim to be
"stunned" based on what you "suspect"...

What is stunning is your total lack of reading comprehension - again.

If anything - they can bashed
and beaten in the media and from people like you

Oh, so Christians can't be critized? "Bashed and beaten"? That's funny. By your own admission "a staggering number of Americans consider themselves religious", they are in charge of the government and set the agenda for this country.

Your second comment about the religious people being
afraid to lose their "status" - what status?

Again, your lack of reading comprehension is apparent. Privilege status.

Personally,
I'm not a religious person, like most Americans are, since being
brought up in an atheist state makes it pretty difficult to change...
so I'm certainly no expert in terms of how the religious population
feels on these various topics... perhaps someone from that audience
would be willing to comment and either agree with my personal
observations on the subject or set me straight.

What is obvious is that you are a troll. It is not reasonable to take you seriously. If you wish to have an honest conversation, fine. By your inane comments it is apparent that that is not your intention. How old are you? twelve?

English is a second language for me (actually 3rd, if you want to get technical) and you continue to make contradicting statements. You said I had some strong language there and implied that my English might be a problem, which logically makes no sense - if one doesn't have a language, how can one make strong statements? But philosophy aside... since you can't take literally what I clearly stated (i.e. your profile vs. the comment you made, although your English should be impeccable based on your bloviating)... I'll quote here from your profile:

I attempt to be empathetic towards people while at the same time
standing my own moral, ethical, and philosophical ground. I'm open to
con...

English is a second language for me (actually 3rd, if you want to get technical) and you continue to make contradicting statements. You said I had some strong language there and implied that my English might be a problem, which logically makes no sense - if one doesn't have a language, how can one make strong statements? But philosophy aside... since you can't take literally what I clearly stated (i.e. your profile vs. the comment you made, although your English should be impeccable based on your bloviating)... I'll quote here from your profile:

I attempt to be empathetic towards people while at the same time
standing my own moral, ethical, and philosophical ground. I'm open to
conversation if it is indeed two way.

Then part of your comment, and I quote again:

...it appears to me that you are either reading impaired or have never been exposed to sarcasm before... What is obvious is that you are a troll. It is not reasonable to take you seriously...By your inane comments...

Now do you see it? If you don't... it's your ideology blocking your vision, that's all (no sarcasm here, in case you were wondering).

I'm not a liberal, but I have much admiration for true liberals, like Bill Gates. He doesn't yell like you do, he doesn't insult like you do, yet he does a great amount of good for many, many people and that can only inspire admiration and respect from normal people. You and your kind are the people who don't do anything (if you don't count yelling etc.) productive... and thus give liberalism a bad name... that's about the extent of it. You certainly won't make any converts to your 'ideology' from anyone with a brain, simply because you don't do what you supposedly preach... and being a phony never accomplished anything long term.

You can hate this country, it's founding principles and everything USA accomplished in the past 200+ years, and as much as you'd hate to admit it - it's not your ideology that was responsible for al

if one doesn't have a language, how can one make strong statements

You calledd me a hypocrit (that's the strong language part) then you demonstrated an inability to understand what I had written, not that you don't "have a language" but that you confused, either mistakenly or maliciously, what I was saying. Yes I do try to be empathetic but not when I'm being attacked. I am open to 2 way conversation but that's not the sense I got from your reply.

Let me back up...When I mentioned the "non-existent Wall of Separtation" (in quotes) that was an ironic statement. You took it literally.

Next you made a claim about my being stunned about what I suspect. Again incorrect. What I f...

if one doesn't have a language, how can one make strong statements

You calledd me a hypocrit (that's the strong language part) then you demonstrated an inability to understand what I had written, not that you don't "have a language" but that you confused, either mistakenly or maliciously, what I was saying. Yes I do try to be empathetic but not when I'm being attacked. I am open to 2 way conversation but that's not the sense I got from your reply.

Let me back up...When I mentioned the "non-existent Wall of Separtation" (in quotes) that was an ironic statement. You took it literally.

Next you made a claim about my being stunned about what I suspect. Again incorrect. What I find incredible and what stunned me is that without the Wall of Separation religion would be much weaker in the US than it is now. It is one reason that religion is so strong in the US. That is what my statement meant which you so tortuously interpreted.

Right after this you made a comment about "status" I thought I explained that but evidently not. You mouthed unsuppored claims that christians were bashed and beaten in the media. That's ridiculous and is usually used by the Far Right to further the myth of christian persecution. This is inane when 85-90% of the population is christian, They are in charge of everything. That is reality. To claim persecution is silly.

Nex you attempted to prove my hypocrisy. Your attempt simply doesn't make sense. You selectively quoted parts of my profile that suited your liking. I stand my what I wrote. Perhaps next time you should explain that your knowledge of English is limited. People will cut you some slack.

Are you familiar with the term troll? That's how you come across. Sorry if you are too thin skinned to accept that. And being empathetic doesn't mean bending over and letting others screw you.

Personally,
I'm not a religious person, like most Americans are, since being
brought up in an atheist state makes it pretty difficult to change...
so I'm certainly no expert in terms of how the religious population
feels on these various topics... perhaps someone from that audience
would be willing to comment and either agree with my personal

observations on the subject or set me straight.

You're above comment was very misleading. You state you are not religious and then claim growing up in an atheist state. You don't mention that you are being literal. Most people here have hear this (being in an atheist state) used repeatedly by the Religious Right as a d...

Personally,
I'm not a religious person, like most Americans are, since being
brought up in an atheist state makes it pretty difficult to change...
so I'm certainly no expert in terms of how the religious population
feels on these various topics... perhaps someone from that audience
would be willing to comment and either agree with my personal

observations on the subject or set me straight.

You're above comment was very misleading. You state you are not religious and then claim growing up in an atheist state. You don't mention that you are being literal. Most people here have hear this (being in an atheist state) used repeatedly by the Religious Right as a derogatory comment about their perceived persecution by the "secular, leftist news media". The rest of your comment then appears to be a sarcastic diatribe. That is what prompted the majority of the accrimony that ensued. Does this clear up anything? Do you understand how your comment could be taken in a negative light? You appear to be on the attack right from the start. Would not anyone defend themself?

I still maintain that there is a problem with your interpretation of what I wrote. Your parsing of my sentence structure was strange to say the least. You incorrectly interpreted what I wrote in a manner which seemed to be mocking. Again, who would not defend themselves? You appeared to be accusatory right from the start and the further the conversation went the more ugly it became.

What's funny is that you accuse me lacking in comprehension due to my English... and yet what I wrote was what I meant and you thought it was 'misleading', when in reality, if you just read it as it was written, instead of trying to interpret it as something else - you'd see nothing misleading there. You're the one who's misleading yourself by trying to interpret something that shouldn't be so. And yes, what I claimed was EXACTLY what it is - I was born and raised for many years in USSR... which you should know was a very atheist country. There's NO interpretation needed and no sarcasm implied here. But if you still feel misled... perhaps it's time for you to brush up on the old queen's ...

What's funny is that you accuse me lacking in comprehension due to my English... and yet what I wrote was what I meant and you thought it was 'misleading', when in reality, if you just read it as it was written, instead of trying to interpret it as something else - you'd see nothing misleading there. You're the one who's misleading yourself by trying to interpret something that shouldn't be so. And yes, what I claimed was EXACTLY what it is - I was born and raised for many years in USSR... which you should know was a very atheist country. There's NO interpretation needed and no sarcasm implied here. But if you still feel misled... perhaps it's time for you to brush up on the old queen's lingo... so you won't feel misled and opine more intelligently.

As for me 'parsing your sentence structure' - what I quoted was precisely what you wrote and just because I didn't quote the entire comment, the meaning of the words I did quote doesn't change, simply got rid of some water there, to make it more precise of what I was talking about. Trying to be more astute, if you know what I mean...

Well, as far as parsing goes, why don't we look at the exchange concerning the Establishment Clause which is interpreted as the Wall of Separation between church and State. You wrote:

You said that the religious people have their success due to
"non-existent Wall of Separation". If this wall exists - how can it be
non-existent? If it doesn't exist - what wall are you talking about?

You're response appears to be a result of your taking literally my ironic remark concerning the "Non-existant" Wall of Separation. I didn't mean that it didn't literlly not exist. My comment was a response to the commonly held notion among the Religiou Right that the Establishment Cla...

Well, as far as parsing goes, why don't we look at the exchange concerning the Establishment Clause which is interpreted as the Wall of Separation between church and State. You wrote:

You said that the religious people have their success due to
"non-existent Wall of Separation". If this wall exists - how can it be
non-existent? If it doesn't exist - what wall are you talking about?

You're response appears to be a result of your taking literally my ironic remark concerning the "Non-existant" Wall of Separation. I didn't mean that it didn't literlly not exist. My comment was a response to the commonly held notion among the Religiou Right that the Establishment Clause (aka, the Separation of church and State) as implemented today goes too far. The Right often exclaims that the "Wall of Separation" is a fiction. Now it seems to me that your having grown up in the USSR would be perfectly able to understand what the power of the state can do to surpress religion. That is what the Wall of Separation is supposed to guard against.

Now, is it plain that you took my comment completely wrong?