8 12

LINK Today’s Supreme Court Case Threatens to Turn Nonreligious Americans into Second-Class Citizens | American Atheists

Washington, D.C.—October 6, 2020—Today at 11 am ET, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear livestreamed oral arguments in Tanzin v. Tanvir, a case that has received scant media attention but could have far-reaching consequences for church/state separation, warns the civil rights organization American Atheists.

snytiger6 9 Oct 9

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account


Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.


Well, guess I'm joining The Satanic Temple.

Nunya Level 6 Oct 10, 2020

If they implement hard opressive tactics, Imigh tjoin the Unitarians... I expect the Stantanic Temple will be a target.

@snytiger6 To be a Universalist Unitarian you have to profess a belief in a God. I don't like lying. Satanists & Buddhists don't require that. So I'd take up one or the other.

@Nunya Accordign to the website (of the Portland Oregon Unitarian church), they have many atheists in their congregation.

@snytiger6 I guess some Unitarians are more liberal than others. To join in KY you have to profess a belief in God.

@Nunya They also had Buddhists. They dotn' believe in any god either.


I can see it happening. As well as if you are anything else but Christian you will be punished.


Hahaha. You’ll be okay. Don’t be such an alarmist.

Has something slipped from your memory perhaps?
Think 'Inquisitions, witch hunts, trials and those impromptu burnings and executions from centuries passed.'

@Triphid it’s 2020. That’ll never happen. Enjoy a beer and a hit and relax. You’ll be okay.

@CourtJester Knock it if you must but never ever underestimate the sway religion have/can have on Governments and Institutions such as the Courts of Law.

@Triphid that’s why we have the 2nd amendment too. Unless you’ve let the Democrats talk you out of your own personal protection. If that’s the case... you should be scared.

@CourtJester I think it's hilarious that you think owning a few machine guns & hand grenades are going to protect you from the U.S. army.

@Nunya Yeah and just how many of these fundie style Christians, etc, does he think are Non-Firearms owners as well?

@Triphid My point is that even if every armed American militia went up against the U.S. army together, they would be wiped out in short order. The army doesn't need guns, they have strategic strike drones, a vast network of spies, & biological weapons. Do you really think owning a few weapons is protecting anyone from any government crackdown?

@Nunya hahaha. You’ll be okay.

@Nunya Machine guns and hand grenadines are illegal. What level of retarded are you?

@CourtJester Machine Guns are not illegal, it is just very hard and expensive to get a license to own one. To legally own a machine gun one must get a Federal Permit, pass a background test and pay a hefty tax.

My neighbor owns a fully automatic Browning, and has the license.

Tell that to the Jews and Gypsies in Germany before the 2nd World War and how they were "cleanse" for not being Christians.

This is how that starts...

@Alienbeing Commonly illegal. Poor wording on my part. They are definitely not largely available to the general public due to the cost and restrictions.

@CourtJester They are not "commonly" illegal (whatever that is supposed to mean) at all. To legally own on all you need to do is pass a background check and pay a hefty tax. They are largely available to the public as anyone who has not been convicted of a crime or mental illness (the same as other background checks for many weapons) and pays a tax can legally on one.

Your original comment did not qualify anything it said they were illegal...... period. Now interjecting cost is silly. Using that argument, a Rolls Royce vehicle is illegal for exactly the same reason.

@CourtJester They're legal in the U.S. [] And I personally know people who own both, so....(Yes, live hand grenades are illegal, but hand grenade enthusiasts separate the detonation mechanism from the grenade & somehow that apparently makes it difficult to prosecute.) Grenade launchers, on the other hand, are legal to own. People use them to "launch flares." My point is that owning weapons is not going to protect you from any government that wants to eradicate you regardless of the type of weapons you choose to legally or illegally possess.


So much for the bit " America, land of the Free."
Yep, you are Free just so long as you are NOT Black, Native American, Atheist/Agnostic, of Foreign Extraction, etc, etc.


For a specific investigation, I don't have a problem with what the agents did. For the routine treatment of Muslims, no. As far as a precedence setting law, no.


There may be more going on here than discrimination. Per the article: "several Muslim men who were approached by FBI agents and asked to inform on their congregations. When the men refused to comply, they were put on the “No Fly” list without justification". The FBI doesn't just harass Muslims for the fun of it. The FBI may not choose to reveal their sources and methods, but it is reasonable to believe that the FBI questioned these guys because they were involved in a plot. Either someone informed on them or their communications revealed terrorist activity. If the FBI sought to put would-be terrorists on a no-fly list, that makes perfect sense to me. It is up to AA to explain why they are interested in this case. While white supremacists are a much bigger problem, Muslim terrorism hasn't gone away.

Why is it reasonable to believe in the FBI, after all they do torture people and intimidate.

@Jolanta I think it is the CIA that does the torturing. A part of me feels a bit surreal arguing about which government eagency does torture.

@snytiger6 I think they both do it. Torture, coerce. lie and use threats.

@Jolanta You asked why it was reasonable to believe in the FBI. That question requires a two- or more sided answer. The FBI are a form of law enforcement, and subject to corruption, incompetence and illegal and even immoral behavior. On the good side, note the arrest of the militia members seeking to harm Governor Whitmer.

On the bad side, it is certain that FBI agents violate the rights of citizens (by abuse or torture as you note) to further their investigation. John Durham's investigation appears to be politically motivated and is thus immoral, corrupt and possibly seditious. Similarly, Mueller's investigation refused to investigate Trump's financial status, and shelving the counterintelligence investigation. Here we're looking at incompetence as well as corruption and treason.

Comey's publicizing the reopening of Clinton's email investigation was incompetent at least, and certainly political and immoral. Comey's silence on Trump's links to Russia ahead of the election was again, incompetent, political, immoral and seditious. It was seditious in that by depriving the electorate of an understanding of Trump's collusion with the Russians and his status as a foreign agent, he subverted the election and democracy.

The FBI is part of the Deep State and I contend some or all of these anti-democratic FBI actions or inactions were coordinated by still deeper players, probably within the CIA secret government that works more directly with the real power brokers.


Hang in there my people, we will overcome, our numbers are growing and they aren't going to stand up to us.


Atheist are treated in the 2020s like communists were in the 1950s. The new McCarthyism.

It is true that the Christian right is tryign to make atheists the new boogeymen.

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:542030
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.