Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
What I don't understand is how a supposedly college educated person can be gullible enough buy into the Christian myth, believe the tides, moon, and sun are proof of a divine intervention.
You might want to contact the college you attended and negotiate a refund. Secondly, when you interview a guest why don't you give them a chance to respond?
Awwwwww...BillO, the guy is IN the senate now, and while you're stuck flinging mud at anything that moves in your impotent rage, he's actually making policy and history.
Listen guys if anybody tells you that this country was founded on religion, ask them to read the treaty of tripoli on wikipedia, where our founding fathers state
As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen; and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, ......
@spiegelElectro Article 11 of the Treaty of Tripoli, according to Prof Frank Lambert was merely an assurance that the treaty was a commercial agreement between two sovereign rather than religious entities. It is no more relevant to the discussion than is the fact that the 1783 Treaty of Paris was made "In the name of the most holy and undivided Trinity."
The jesus people want to control the government and they will do ANYTHING to do so. Lets take a look forward and see what this will mean when they win. Ohh my, its not a judge any more. Its a Priest. Thats OK though because god will tell him who is innocent or guilty. The jesus people will rule the USA because there seem to be more of them. Forget the law. The folks that can get the biggest voter blocks are right no matter what. Just wait until you have to genuflect before you go to court.
this country was not founded on secular principles, it was founded on non-secular principles. God is acknowledged in BOTH the united states constitution and declaration of independence. The founders all believed in god and founded this nation on judeo-christian philosophies
bill. i hope one day you will be shocked one day to hear the pledge without god, and when your jaw drops a godless piece of currency will be flipped into your mouth and down your throat, once and for all silencing that shithole mouth of yours, you certifiable pinhead.
@AgreeneyedFox Unfortunately I can't reply on that particular youtube page because I was blocked by that fool GodKillerAtheist. But first off, no matter what you believe, his video is lame. He's trying too hard to be a fire starter, but his argument is just embarrassing. In response to you, I don't appreciate your demeaning tone. If you want to know why being religious is more reasonable and rational than atheism, I'll gladly explain. but don't be an ass, i have no time for that.
@AgreeneyedFox Well there is no inarguable proof of God, I'll not deny that. But there is also no inarguable proof that God does not exist. Using the rules of rhetoric and rational thought, it must be assumed something exists unless proven otherwise. It is almost impossible to prove that something does not exist. Considering this in combination with the theory of hell and eternal damnation, it would be unwise to reject God. Even if it is purely out of fear, fear is rational.
@XxVINCEROxX like i said i was curious to see what you had to say, so, my question is: which god exactly? there are loads of them. do i sense pascal's wager here? there are many things wrong with that. it's a false dichotomy, it ignores different gods, other heavens, other hells, it assumes said god can be tricked into thinking you believe in just to cover your ass... and no, fear is not always rational. i can't fit all i want to say in a comment so PM me back.
@AgreeneyedFox Is there proof of ghosts? aliens? no. is God in that same category? there was no proof of giant squid before they were discovered, only folk tales. there was no proof of machu picchu until it was discovered. there was no proof of distant planets until we had the capabilities to discover them. there was no proof that the earth was round for many centuries. The lack of tangible evidence doesn’t even remotely disprove existence.
@XxVINCEROxX this in combination with the hell notion makes a convincing argument for faith. To blindly, and yes it is blindly, reject God in the face of such negativity if you are wrong is very courageous, or foolish. whichever one you choose to ascribe to yourself, neither one associates well with ration or reason. atheism is as blind a decision as faith, with much more to lose and much less to gain, thus it is the less rational choice of the two.
@XxVINCEROxX The argument you're referring to is known as Pascal's wager, the problem with it is it assumes faith or one religion to determine if being faithful is a good choice. The problem with this is there are many religions, and an infinite number of possible religions. So in actuality even if a god or gods does/do exist by choosing one blindly you are still incredibly likely to choose the wrong one and be punished (assuming that punishment for lack of faith is in the religion).
@xMorpse Well right, thats a horse of an entirely different color. If you want me to get into the discussion of choosing religions, I will, but that's not my argument here. This logic doesn't explain why one should pick a certain religion over atheism, but I think this type of logic does prove that it is more rational and reasonable to believe in a higher power than to believe in a complete lack of such presence. Which god to pick is related, but isn't a necessary focal point of this thought.
@AgreeneyedFox It seems funny that atheists are so quick to scorn and ridicule those that don't follow their "beliefs". But they treat their atheism as if it is a religion, and they act in the same smug, narrow-minded attitude that they accuse of people of faith. If you are atheist, you lack belief, you should not care whether others believe and you should definitely not fight for the atheist cause, because if they're is a "cause" at all, then you have a belief.
@BastEternal Ok I watched the first two minutes then got bored. I get the picture. I disagree with any level of legal prejudices against atheists, just as I disagree with many laws and political issues currently in place. This video only proves my point though: we shouldn't care what others choose to believe, whether its religious people caring about atheists and making laws against them or atheists caring about religious people and being entitled and pretentious pricks about it. It's all bad.
@BastEternal Yes it's human nature, but so is feeling that your own race/ethnicity is superior to another, but society doesn't stand for acting on prejudices. Why should it be different for faith beliefs? Just because we care and disagree with another person's beliefs doesn't mean we don't have to check ourselves and train ourselves not to attack them for it. Almost every religious debate I've had has been by atheists trying to provoke a battle. Insecurity breeds hostility.
@BastEternal What I said was that every religious debate that "I" have ever had has been that. I'm not usually one to start that kind of shit, but I will put my two cents in when the topic is brought up. I agree with you though that no belief, or lack of belief, should merit the infringement of someone's rights. However, a lot of atheists treat their atheism like a religion and are often more aggressive, derogatory, and close-minded than people of faith. It certainly does go both ways.
@XxVINCEROxX "However, a lot of atheists treat their atheism like a religion and are often more aggressive, derogatory, and close-minded than people of faith."
How so?Atheism is not a religion,it's lack of a belief.Religion is dogma.
Problem is Christians don't see what they're saying as derogatory or aggressive. They pity via praying. They send you to hell and call it a warning. Or say if you don't believe in god, you don't believe in ANYTHING.And then you wonder why atheists get angry?
@XxVINCEROxX Christians: you have no moral values, you're idiots if you don't believe in god /watch?v=9hTnmZkHnTE, you're going to hell, you have no purpose in life.
"No morals, no purpose, going to hell." Whydoes "you're going to hell" bother me? It's not that I fear a hell - it's that someone out there follows a religion that says I am going to suffer and be tortured forever, and the CHRISTIAN IS OK WITH THAT BECAUSE GOD SAYS SO.
And then you wonder why atheists react as they do?
Atheism is by it's very nature open minded, it's based on science, mans greatest achievement of being open minded. Open minded is looking at all the evidence and making a rational decision based on it (or the lack of it). Since religion defies logic, reason, and science, they're going to treat you like an idiot, for being so insanely close minded. Close minded is believing something absolutely, for no good reason whatsoever, and actively blocking out reality.
So no, it's not really going both ways. Religion hates and kills and is always "right" based purely on dogma and intentional ignorance. Atheists hate based on the evil and sadistic history and basis of religion, and it's deeply detrimental effect on society, and the fact you just won't STFU about your ridiculous close minded fairy tales and how we're going to be tortured for eternity for not closing our minds like you.
@Ryakki Hmm you really don't read much on the issue do you? I studied religious philosophy in college and I assure you that the bulk of my essays revolved around science and logic/rhetoric to show the likelihood of god. I could use more science and logic in my defense of god than you could in your attack, I encourage you to take me up on this offer...you might learn something. It's those who don't learn as much as they can about the issue (atheists AND theists) that are close-minded. Secondly,
@XxVINCEROxX Religion has hated and killed in the past, but those responsible are condemned by their religions. There has been just as much or more secular, even anti-religious killings in world history (i.e. genocides and communist persecutions) so that argument isn't even truthful. Finally, I have never said that anyone will be tortured for eternity. You must be confusing me with others on this page. I only argue from a scientific and logical perspective. What happens when we die is not
@XxVINCEROxX up to me to say. I simply want to make the debate an intellectual one and provide an educated perspective on the theistic side (which I'll agree is severely lacking on youtube pages), so that people can make up their own minds about what they believe...but at least they hear strong cases from both sides.
Don't pretend that science and theism are compatible. It just insults us both.
There are deistic arguments that claim to be scientific in nature, although they are logically unsound... and there is no path leading from the deistic arguments into theistic arguments.
Science is taking the latest conclusions reached through the scientific method, and treating them as objective reality. Since there is no evidence or positive experimentation for god, it is treated as a negative.
@Ryakki Well don't you sound very close minded, ironically. Science and deism are certainly compatible, and deism and theism do in fact have a clear transition. But I'll agree that which religion is correct is an extremely complicated matter. However, it's rather easy to show the likelihood of a deity, and it's largely science that is used. I think it may do you some good to discuss it. I will not be logically unsound.
Closed minded is being dedicated to a certain conclusion with little or no evidence. Open minded is making a rational conclusion based on the full spread of evidence.
The irony when a theist calls a secularist close minded is staggering.
@Ryakki No, close-minded is adhering to a belief (no matter what evidence you have or don't have) and being unwilling to listen or accept the possibility of the contrary. You can be correct about something and still be close minded, if you just insult your opposition and never hear them out and respond intelligently. On to the point at hand, I think you are close minded because you actually think science is an opposition to a god, and you think deism and theism are unrelated. You are greatly
@XxVINCEROxX mistaken. Now if you think you know enough about the issue to discuss it with me, I'd love that. But if you'd rather stick to your beliefs and shut yourself off from alternative perspectives, that's fine with me as well. It's your loss in the end.
I've looked at all sides honestly and openly between science and religion, and made my conclusions until new evidence presents itself, and the "argument" is so one sided I feel dishonest calling it an argument... even in parenthesis.
@Ryakki Well first off, you named argument in quotations not parenthes(e)s, but I'm just being an ass. Secondly, it doesn't seem like you have looked at all sides because then you'd know the nature of science in this debate. Bluntly, science deals only with the natural world, god (whether he exists or not) lies only in the supernatural, so science even in it's very nature cannot account or even claim to account for god. But science can be used to show whether a god is necessary or not, and I
@XxVINCEROxX personally have found that science's currently held theories on the foundations of the universe and the formation of life actually show more likelihood that there exists a god, I'll explain it if you want. You see, science and god are not opposites, they are on different planes, they don't really deal with each other and science certainly can't disprove god. It can disprove certain religions, but not the notion of a god.
There is no supernatural. If there is evidence for a previously unknown phenomenon, it becomes science. If god suddenly appears, is verified, and says, "Sup"... he gets to be in a science book.
Your artificial and dishonest label does not validate your argument.
@XxVINCEROxX "This video only proves my point though: we shouldn't care what others choose to believe, whether its religious people caring about atheists and making laws against them "
Oh so atheists shouldn't care if religious people make laws against them? Right, so just bow down our heads and just let them go about doing whatever they want? Are you kidding?
Several of you have stated that we are a secular nation. If you study the history of this nation, not the abridged version in today's text books, you will see very clearly that we were founded on Christian principles. The concept of separation of church and state was originally intended to keep government out of churches (like a national church), but the concept was twisted around as the result of a court case in the '60's.
@jmasfamily you are confusing culture with religion yes our western society is founded on christian values but it is also founded on the enlightenment
There is no such thing as "America's secular founding principles" anyone who disagrees doesn't know American history and/or has some sort of strange phobia of religion, like many Atheists do.
Our founders came here to practice free religion, not to ban it. Religion is in our founding documents, our moral fabric is based on Judeo-Christian values. I am not christian, but to say we should abolish mentioning religion is pandering to leftist garbage that is degrading our once powerful society into a bunch of PC pussies.
to searenne-the first Christians who came to America did not come here to promote secularism, they wanted a Godly country without the government telling them which "religious organization" they could worship God in (there is a vast difference in where to worship and whom to worship). Reread your documentation, it is all above God and following him.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
To slammy001-Sorry, but you are mistaken and have your historical facts wrong. Our country WAS based on Christian principles as can be seen in all of the founding documents on which our government is based. It has always given God the place He deserves as Creator and guiding force. The secularism of our country was started by left-wing, liberal, atheistic people such as Madeline Murray O'Hare (btw, her "people" of the atheist persuasion eventally did her in for her money). Sad, but true.
So it bothers you that God is mentioned? Does' sitting "Indian Style" bother you. (Should it be criss cross apple sauce) 3 "Nice" mice, (instead of blind) Enough Already!
America DID NOT have a secular founding...even if secularist and liberals are trying to re-write history. This country was founded by Christians fleeing a government-run religion. They wanted the freedom to worship (not get rid of their Christian roots) as they saw fit and not be told how to by the government. People like Al F. are only trying to make our society as amoral as they are. It will never happen-even though it has gotten so much worse over my lifetime. Shame on us.
While it is true that American itself is a christian nation in that the majority of the population is christian, the government of the United States is a secular entity.
Exactly. That's what secular means. The government doesn't endorse a religion so the people are free to worship freely. Read the Establishment Clause in the Constitution. The government enforcing Christianity, Islam, Judaism, atheism, or any other religion/non-religion is unconstitutional. You're saying America wasn't founded on secularism while appearing to promote the secularism that brought the first Christians here.
How can we have a republic if the principles of our government are derived from a theological monarchy? If you believe the Universe is a monarchy, how can you say that a republic is the best form of government?
Hey yo, and dick with this...uggh! Word is born Fight the war, fuck the norm Now I got no patience So sick of complacence With the D the E the F the I the A the N the C the E Mind of a revolutionary So clear the lane The finger to the land of the chains What? The land of the free? Whoever told you that is your enemy?
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
So Al Franken thinks that all references to God should be taken out even though our country was founded because by people who wanted to practice Christianity without oppression and who modeled their country after Christian philosophy?
Oh, ok.. gotcha. Stick to being a comedian because that's what most liberals are, just people with jokes..
To TheMBthree: From the 1st Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." "In God We Trust" on our money kind of feels hypocritical to me. Personally, I don't care, but there's a point to be made there.
It sure is fun to crow your confident falsehoods isnt it? You make the sheep think you actually have a clue what you're talking about. You couldnt be more wrong about the founding fathers. They were almost all christians. They wove in general religious terms into our founding documents because most people in America were christian.
And WTF does christianity have to do with the african slave trade? Nothing is the answer. You're pushing hate for no good reason.
yes.. and we should remember the good ol' days when we practiced christianity with zeal! ah the puritans. such a great bunch of people. real moral characters with their witch burning and exile of hundreds who didn't conform with the opinions of the clergy in their town.
our founding fathers understood the dangers of mixing religion with government. see the first amendment, the sixth article of the constitution, and the writings of thomas jefferson and thomas paine for more detail.
He who blasphemes the father will be forgiven, he who blasphemes the son will be forgiven, but he who blasphemes the holy spirit will not be forgiven. It seems to me that Franken is pretty critical of the Father, but O'Reilly is the one who usually attacks the spirit.
you fool sarah palin will forge an aliance with all islamic nation and together they shall use nuclear wepons to destroy global warming. its the hardon collider that will destroy the earth!
Wow, that's about the most reasonable expression of an opinion on the issues mentioned that I've heard out of anybody--in a culture of lawsuits and talking heads spouting moral outrage--and Bill manages to take so much issue with it that he can't even express himself. Good thing this clip was so brief; I can't stand to watch him for more than about 2 minutes, no matter how amusingly wrong he is.
How can people take him seriously for his opinions. I mean Franken was correct in his estimations saying he thinks they probably shouldn't be there. And he followed that up by saying that he won't do anything about it, because it's not that big of a deal. He picks his fights. Maybe Bill could learn something from him before he goes on another tirade against Ludracris or whatever bullshit cause pops into his head this week.
Christians think because they're the majority that they are right. It disgusts me everytime I hear the pledge or look at my money.. I'm going to start crossing out god on every dollar bill I get whos with me?
I don't know what Franken said that O'Reilly found objectionable. "Under God" was added to the Pledge in the 50's, as was "In God we Trust", and constitutionally speaking, they shouldn't really be on our coin or in our pledge - but it's not exactly one of the big issues of the day.
America has to be getting smarter if we can elect people like Al Franken into office after religious propaganda like BIll O the misinformation clown here puts them down
fuck you spammer I'm a MAN that just goes to show your the type to pick up a transvestite at a bar. I'm sure you enjoy that kind of thing there is always some scum bag theist like you always getting caught hiding in the closet
If this is the best O'Liely has on Franken, that's quite pathetic. His reaction to the clip is more appropriate for someone spouting Nazi propaganda. Most democrats probably agree with Franken- probably shouldn''t be there, but I don't care.
So i guess beheading troops and journalist isn't torture?Guess what ill take waterboarding anyday.Fuckin pussies are runing this country..This isn't europe so stop trying to make it like it is.
If your troops had not started a war in Iraq they would be safe. If you accept torture then that makes you complicit. America used to be a beacon.That light went out Bush and Cheney have put back the cause of democracy years and have been responsible for the recruitment of thousands of more terrorists. Read Richard Clarkes book. BTW I live in europe, I have good health care and good public services, tiny gun crime and freedom of speech, and decent education. What have you got?
Buddy im not going to listen to some brit tell me about troops and everything else..When your country has a strangle hold on northern Ireland..Umm we have freedom of speeach also..And we also don't have kings and queens which is useless on your part.And since you have this great health care how come everyone in your country has fucked up teeth.
So i'd be more concierned about nothern ireland than what our troops are doing.
Depends on what you consider torture is. I mean we know torture would be cutting someones head off, by the way idiot, it isn't troops that were getting their heads chopped off it was workers and media. The UK is a joke, how mucxh you pay for a gas tax? Your health care sucks, you have big gun crime and your economy is in the shitter.
In 2006 17,000 people were murdered in the USA. In Britain in 670. As for health care, I had a major stroke this year which resulted in a two month stay in hospital, I have had major therapuetic and diagnostic treatment package and it has resulted in an almost full recovery at the cost of £0.00. The trouble with some Americans is that just because you think you are number doesn't make it so. As for the economy being in the shitter,people in glass houses should not throw stones.
Hmmmm I see facts dont weigh heavily here. 5 x 670 = 3350 That is 5 times less crime than you. Sadly 47 million of your people do not have medical insurance and those that do have issues about having care denied by the money grabbing insurance companies. I am happy that your happy, but I would live here anyday rather than over there. Don't get me wrong I like America and have visited it often, but Canada is a much better place to live. More European.
Oh I'm sure they will, and they will be great schools built by the lowest bidder with shoddy workmanship which should turn to rubble with the first earthquake and if all goes according to plan 70% of their students and faculty will "tragically" perish. Thus punnishing them for studying in the first place.
Man wouldnt it be awesome if Franken wins the recount to become senator of Minesota.
Can you imagine Al Franken, Bernie Frank, Chris Dodd, Chuck Schumer, etc, all of whom BillO had invited into going into his program just to ambushed and bullied them publically with fabricated outraged.
Maybe they can combine forces to re-instate the Fairness Doctrine and bring down FoxNews.
Man it will be so great of it happens, maybe OReilly and Hannity get a Diarrhea that last for four years.
Apparently Al Franken is a pinhead for daring to suggest that government-backed religious expression should maybe, just maybe, not have been put in place.
Franken is projected to win the election? Source please.
Franken lied about O'Reilly not growing up in Levittown. He lied when he told people Rush called Chelsea Clinton the white house dog. He lied about Bush being guilty of treason. He also lied on his taxes. I could go on and on.
He admitted he made a mistake about Oreilly's town (like anyone cares either way). He corrected his taxes and in fact paid more than was necassary. Bush is guilty of treason for several things (torture, the war, etc.)
These things are so ridiculous. Do you think Rush and O'Reilly always tell the truth?
1.Obviously Franken cared or he wouldn't have made a BIG deal out of it right? 2. He CHEATED on his taxes. 3. If Bush is guilty of treason why hasn't he been charged?
George Washington said we should not torture, it would be treasonous. Bush tortured. Why hasn't he been charged? Because it takes a majority to do it. People have tried over and over. Once again, your logic is awesome.
Who did Bush torture, show me the proof. It takes a majority to charge someone??? LOL you are a hoot. So If I murder someone it will take a majority of how many people to charge me?
We tortured many many suspected terrorists. Many who were innocent. Are you fucking joking? The congress (a majority) must bring him up on charges. The republicans have been blocking this for years. Do you not know how government works?
Hey loon, who is this WE shit? I asked you to show me proof that BUSH tortured prisoners and what did he do to them. I mean we know Americans were tortured because there is video of them getting their fucking heads chopped off. Do you consider making someone listen to loud music torture?
The election had 3 million voters. Right now Coleman is ahead by 150 votes. That 67% is a bullshit poll, not the actual votes. Pull your head out of your ass.
We tortured at Guantanamo Bay. Bush came out and said it. He spoke about PARDONING his cabinet for torture so they couldn't be tried for treason when the new congress gets sworn in. hahaha. Did you actually think a police officer could walk up and arrest the president? hahahahaha
There was a mandatory recount. If Coleman is ahead after the full recount then Franken has lost. Follow the law.
LISTEN CLOSELY: Bush said he has thought about pardoning his cabinet for condoning TORTURE. Are you going to tell me no one was tortured at Guantanomo Bay? Even Bill O'Reilly said they were. People without trials, without possibility of release, were tortured. Matt Lauer asked Bush to his face if they waterboarded. Bush said he COULDN'T REVEAL THE TECHNIQUES. You are in denial.
Hey loon, they did the recount and Franken still lost, face reality.
Pay attention for another lesson:
Sure some terrorists were tortured by some rogue military staff but that had nothing to do with Bush you banana head, they have been tries are are serving time in jail. That's right Bush has no obligation to tell the media how they interrogate terrorists. Are you 12 or something because you sure sound like it.
What is your problem??? I'm not sure if your a radical liberal or just an idiot.
I never said 67% voted for coleman,, but if 67% of those in minnestoda THINK Coleman will win, it is likely to happen.
In terms of torture... if the techniques used to harshly interrogate the terrorists were revealed, then they can be ready for it... negating their value... WISE UP.
But the poll is pointless. Perception means nothing. The number of votes will be decided for sure by Dec. 19. That's what counts. I will gladly accept the truth no matter which way it leans.
No one can be ready for waterboarding. You slowly drown over the course of hours with a wet towel over your face. Try breathing through a wet towel sometime. Also, torture makes people give false information if they don't have the real answers. That's why america has to rise above pointless brutality.
Several news outlets. They look at the difference as it stands (150+ Coleman), then they cancel out the 6500 contested ballots (assuming each will be overturned and counted for the opposite person, as if SOP) This puts Franken slightly ahead. But we won't know until the courts look it over.
You can drown from waterboarding. It also gives people Post traumatic stress disorder. We're talking about the torture of people who have not been tried in court. Would you mind if we did this to you?
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Neosaigo 1 day ago
Bill,
What I don't understand is how a supposedly college educated person can be gullible enough buy into the Christian myth, believe the tides, moon, and sun are proof of a divine intervention.
You might want to contact the college you attended and negotiate a refund. Secondly, when you interview a guest why don't you give them a chance to respond?
A fan...
mojo1517 2 months ago
"They don't come any worse!"
Wow Bill. If that's the worst you can imagine, maybe we aught to send you to North Korea.
(I'll pay for your ticket, as long as it's one-way..)
GuacamoleKun 3 months ago
Let's try putting "Bill O'Reilly is an idiot" on coins instead.
carmium 6 months ago
Awwwwww...BillO, the guy is IN the senate now, and while you're stuck flinging mud at anything that moves in your impotent rage, he's actually making policy and history.
Boy, its gotta suck to be you.
singring76 6 months ago
Bill'O the clown is the biggest pinhead around
xadam2dudex 6 months ago
Can somebody explain to Bill O'reilly that this is a secular nation with freedom of religion.
Thinker9713 7 months ago
In the wise words of Snoop Dogg,"Fuck Bill O'Reilly!"
Thulgore 1 year ago
Listen guys if anybody tells you that this country was founded on religion, ask them to read the treaty of tripoli on wikipedia, where our founding fathers state
As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen; and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, ......
spiegelElectro 1 year ago
@spiegelElectro Article 11 of the Treaty of Tripoli, according to Prof Frank Lambert was merely an assurance that the treaty was a commercial agreement between two sovereign rather than religious entities. It is no more relevant to the discussion than is the fact that the 1783 Treaty of Paris was made "In the name of the most holy and undivided Trinity."
nnjhansen 10 months ago
The jesus people want to control the government and they will do ANYTHING to do so. Lets take a look forward and see what this will mean when they win. Ohh my, its not a judge any more. Its a Priest. Thats OK though because god will tell him who is innocent or guilty. The jesus people will rule the USA because there seem to be more of them. Forget the law. The folks that can get the biggest voter blocks are right no matter what. Just wait until you have to genuflect before you go to court.
qixxxz 1 year ago
this country was not founded on secular principles, it was founded on non-secular principles. God is acknowledged in BOTH the united states constitution and declaration of independence. The founders all believed in god and founded this nation on judeo-christian philosophies
giambi152003 1 year ago
bill. i hope one day you will be shocked one day to hear the pledge without god, and when your jaw drops a godless piece of currency will be flipped into your mouth and down your throat, once and for all silencing that shithole mouth of yours, you certifiable pinhead.
AgreeneyedFox 1 year ago
@AgreeneyedFox Unfortunately I can't reply on that particular youtube page because I was blocked by that fool GodKillerAtheist. But first off, no matter what you believe, his video is lame. He's trying too hard to be a fire starter, but his argument is just embarrassing. In response to you, I don't appreciate your demeaning tone. If you want to know why being religious is more reasonable and rational than atheism, I'll gladly explain. but don't be an ass, i have no time for that.
XxVINCEROxX 1 year ago
@XxVINCEROxX religious? reasonable? rational? the three Rs? ...i'm too curious to pass this up so go.
AgreeneyedFox 1 year ago
@AgreeneyedFox Well there is no inarguable proof of God, I'll not deny that. But there is also no inarguable proof that God does not exist. Using the rules of rhetoric and rational thought, it must be assumed something exists unless proven otherwise. It is almost impossible to prove that something does not exist. Considering this in combination with the theory of hell and eternal damnation, it would be unwise to reject God. Even if it is purely out of fear, fear is rational.
XxVINCEROxX 1 year ago
@XxVINCEROxX like i said i was curious to see what you had to say, so, my question is: which god exactly? there are loads of them. do i sense pascal's wager here? there are many things wrong with that. it's a false dichotomy, it ignores different gods, other heavens, other hells, it assumes said god can be tricked into thinking you believe in just to cover your ass... and no, fear is not always rational. i can't fit all i want to say in a comment so PM me back.
AgreeneyedFox 1 year ago
@AgreeneyedFox Is there proof of ghosts? aliens? no. is God in that same category? there was no proof of giant squid before they were discovered, only folk tales. there was no proof of machu picchu until it was discovered. there was no proof of distant planets until we had the capabilities to discover them. there was no proof that the earth was round for many centuries. The lack of tangible evidence doesn’t even remotely disprove existence.
XxVINCEROxX 1 year ago
@XxVINCEROxX this in combination with the hell notion makes a convincing argument for faith. To blindly, and yes it is blindly, reject God in the face of such negativity if you are wrong is very courageous, or foolish. whichever one you choose to ascribe to yourself, neither one associates well with ration or reason. atheism is as blind a decision as faith, with much more to lose and much less to gain, thus it is the less rational choice of the two.
XxVINCEROxX 1 year ago
@XxVINCEROxX The argument you're referring to is known as Pascal's wager, the problem with it is it assumes faith or one religion to determine if being faithful is a good choice. The problem with this is there are many religions, and an infinite number of possible religions. So in actuality even if a god or gods does/do exist by choosing one blindly you are still incredibly likely to choose the wrong one and be punished (assuming that punishment for lack of faith is in the religion).
xMorpse 1 year ago
@xMorpse Well right, thats a horse of an entirely different color. If you want me to get into the discussion of choosing religions, I will, but that's not my argument here. This logic doesn't explain why one should pick a certain religion over atheism, but I think this type of logic does prove that it is more rational and reasonable to believe in a higher power than to believe in a complete lack of such presence. Which god to pick is related, but isn't a necessary focal point of this thought.
XxVINCEROxX 1 year ago
@AgreeneyedFox It seems funny that atheists are so quick to scorn and ridicule those that don't follow their "beliefs". But they treat their atheism as if it is a religion, and they act in the same smug, narrow-minded attitude that they accuse of people of faith. If you are atheist, you lack belief, you should not care whether others believe and you should definitely not fight for the atheist cause, because if they're is a "cause" at all, then you have a belief.
XxVINCEROxX 1 year ago
@XxVINCEROxX "you should not care whether others believe"
I beg to differ.
watch?v=w4fQA9mt-Mg
BastEternal 9 months ago
@BastEternal Ok I watched the first two minutes then got bored. I get the picture. I disagree with any level of legal prejudices against atheists, just as I disagree with many laws and political issues currently in place. This video only proves my point though: we shouldn't care what others choose to believe, whether its religious people caring about atheists and making laws against them or atheists caring about religious people and being entitled and pretentious pricks about it. It's all bad.
XxVINCEROxX 9 months ago
@XxVINCEROxX It may be bad, but it is what it is. Caring about how others think is human nature.
BastEternal 9 months ago
@BastEternal Yes it's human nature, but so is feeling that your own race/ethnicity is superior to another, but society doesn't stand for acting on prejudices. Why should it be different for faith beliefs? Just because we care and disagree with another person's beliefs doesn't mean we don't have to check ourselves and train ourselves not to attack them for it. Almost every religious debate I've had has been by atheists trying to provoke a battle. Insecurity breeds hostility.
XxVINCEROxX 9 months ago
@XxVINCEROxX "but so is feeling that your own race/ethnicity is superior to another,"
I disagree. That's more of a learned behavior than human nature.
When a belief infringes on my rights, or when that belief results in pity or scorn, I surely will say something.
"Almost every religious debate I've had has been by atheists trying to provoke a battle."
Oh, and telling me I'm going to hell and that I'm an infidel worthy of death is not provoking a battle? It goes both ways.
BastEternal 9 months ago
@BastEternal What I said was that every religious debate that "I" have ever had has been that. I'm not usually one to start that kind of shit, but I will put my two cents in when the topic is brought up. I agree with you though that no belief, or lack of belief, should merit the infringement of someone's rights. However, a lot of atheists treat their atheism like a religion and are often more aggressive, derogatory, and close-minded than people of faith. It certainly does go both ways.
XxVINCEROxX 9 months ago
@XxVINCEROxX "However, a lot of atheists treat their atheism like a religion and are often more aggressive, derogatory, and close-minded than people of faith."
How so?Atheism is not a religion,it's lack of a belief.Religion is dogma.
Problem is Christians don't see what they're saying as derogatory or aggressive. They pity via praying. They send you to hell and call it a warning. Or say if you don't believe in god, you don't believe in ANYTHING.And then you wonder why atheists get angry?
BastEternal 9 months ago
@XxVINCEROxX Christians: you have no moral values, you're idiots if you don't believe in god /watch?v=9hTnmZkHnTE, you're going to hell, you have no purpose in life.
"No morals, no purpose, going to hell." Whydoes "you're going to hell" bother me? It's not that I fear a hell - it's that someone out there follows a religion that says I am going to suffer and be tortured forever, and the CHRISTIAN IS OK WITH THAT BECAUSE GOD SAYS SO.
And then you wonder why atheists react as they do?
BastEternal 9 months ago
@XxVINCEROxX
Atheism is by it's very nature open minded, it's based on science, mans greatest achievement of being open minded. Open minded is looking at all the evidence and making a rational decision based on it (or the lack of it). Since religion defies logic, reason, and science, they're going to treat you like an idiot, for being so insanely close minded. Close minded is believing something absolutely, for no good reason whatsoever, and actively blocking out reality.
Ryakki 7 months ago
@XxVINCEROxX
So no, it's not really going both ways. Religion hates and kills and is always "right" based purely on dogma and intentional ignorance. Atheists hate based on the evil and sadistic history and basis of religion, and it's deeply detrimental effect on society, and the fact you just won't STFU about your ridiculous close minded fairy tales and how we're going to be tortured for eternity for not closing our minds like you.
Ryakki 7 months ago
@Ryakki Hmm you really don't read much on the issue do you? I studied religious philosophy in college and I assure you that the bulk of my essays revolved around science and logic/rhetoric to show the likelihood of god. I could use more science and logic in my defense of god than you could in your attack, I encourage you to take me up on this offer...you might learn something. It's those who don't learn as much as they can about the issue (atheists AND theists) that are close-minded. Secondly,
XxVINCEROxX 6 months ago
@XxVINCEROxX Religion has hated and killed in the past, but those responsible are condemned by their religions. There has been just as much or more secular, even anti-religious killings in world history (i.e. genocides and communist persecutions) so that argument isn't even truthful. Finally, I have never said that anyone will be tortured for eternity. You must be confusing me with others on this page. I only argue from a scientific and logical perspective. What happens when we die is not
XxVINCEROxX 6 months ago
@XxVINCEROxX up to me to say. I simply want to make the debate an intellectual one and provide an educated perspective on the theistic side (which I'll agree is severely lacking on youtube pages), so that people can make up their own minds about what they believe...but at least they hear strong cases from both sides.
XxVINCEROxX 6 months ago
@XxVINCEROxX
Don't pretend that science and theism are compatible. It just insults us both.
There are deistic arguments that claim to be scientific in nature, although they are logically unsound... and there is no path leading from the deistic arguments into theistic arguments.
Science is taking the latest conclusions reached through the scientific method, and treating them as objective reality. Since there is no evidence or positive experimentation for god, it is treated as a negative.
Ryakki 6 months ago
@Ryakki Well don't you sound very close minded, ironically. Science and deism are certainly compatible, and deism and theism do in fact have a clear transition. But I'll agree that which religion is correct is an extremely complicated matter. However, it's rather easy to show the likelihood of a deity, and it's largely science that is used. I think it may do you some good to discuss it. I will not be logically unsound.
XxVINCEROxX 6 months ago
@XxVINCEROxX
Closed minded is being dedicated to a certain conclusion with little or no evidence. Open minded is making a rational conclusion based on the full spread of evidence.
The irony when a theist calls a secularist close minded is staggering.
Ryakki 6 months ago
@Ryakki No, close-minded is adhering to a belief (no matter what evidence you have or don't have) and being unwilling to listen or accept the possibility of the contrary. You can be correct about something and still be close minded, if you just insult your opposition and never hear them out and respond intelligently. On to the point at hand, I think you are close minded because you actually think science is an opposition to a god, and you think deism and theism are unrelated. You are greatly
XxVINCEROxX 6 months ago
@XxVINCEROxX mistaken. Now if you think you know enough about the issue to discuss it with me, I'd love that. But if you'd rather stick to your beliefs and shut yourself off from alternative perspectives, that's fine with me as well. It's your loss in the end.
XxVINCEROxX 6 months ago
@XxVINCEROxX
I've looked at all sides honestly and openly between science and religion, and made my conclusions until new evidence presents itself, and the "argument" is so one sided I feel dishonest calling it an argument... even in parenthesis.
Ryakki 6 months ago
@Ryakki Well first off, you named argument in quotations not parenthes(e)s, but I'm just being an ass. Secondly, it doesn't seem like you have looked at all sides because then you'd know the nature of science in this debate. Bluntly, science deals only with the natural world, god (whether he exists or not) lies only in the supernatural, so science even in it's very nature cannot account or even claim to account for god. But science can be used to show whether a god is necessary or not, and I
XxVINCEROxX 6 months ago
@XxVINCEROxX personally have found that science's currently held theories on the foundations of the universe and the formation of life actually show more likelihood that there exists a god, I'll explain it if you want. You see, science and god are not opposites, they are on different planes, they don't really deal with each other and science certainly can't disprove god. It can disprove certain religions, but not the notion of a god.
XxVINCEROxX 6 months ago
@XxVINCEROxX
There is no supernatural. If there is evidence for a previously unknown phenomenon, it becomes science. If god suddenly appears, is verified, and says, "Sup"... he gets to be in a science book.
Your artificial and dishonest label does not validate your argument.
Good call on the parenthesis though.
Ryakki 6 months ago
@XxVINCEROxX
Supernatural is just another word for fake. If it's real, even if it's extraordinary, it's part of the natural world. Part and parcel of reality.
Ryakki 6 months ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
@XxVINCEROxX "This video only proves my point though: we shouldn't care what others choose to believe, whether its religious people caring about atheists and making laws against them "
Oh so atheists shouldn't care if religious people make laws against them? Right, so just bow down our heads and just let them go about doing whatever they want? Are you kidding?
BastEternal 9 months ago
Several of you have stated that we are a secular nation. If you study the history of this nation, not the abridged version in today's text books, you will see very clearly that we were founded on Christian principles. The concept of separation of church and state was originally intended to keep government out of churches (like a national church), but the concept was twisted around as the result of a court case in the '60's.
jmasfamily 1 year ago
@jmasfamily
Treaty of Tripoli Article 11
As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.
The treaty was read aloud in it's entirety and unanimously approved by the US Senate.
243t3ty356134 1 year ago
@243t3ty356134 dude youre a troll
bigboyhunter1 1 year ago
@bigboyhunter1 You're a fool.
243t3ty356134 1 year ago
@243t3ty356134 get some sex son youll be ok
bigboyhunter1 1 year ago 3
@jmasfamily you are confusing culture with religion yes our western society is founded on christian values but it is also founded on the enlightenment
Arunfoyomoney 1 year ago
lol
144mtl441 1 year ago
That's my senator! Great to see he irritates O'Reilly.
steveminne 1 year ago
Uh Bill.......why the fuck is Al Franken a pinhead exactly?
brpowerful 1 year ago
Billo THE CLOWN...Great for comedy, not much else.
artwdog 1 year ago
Pinhead doesn't even begin to cover you Bill!
Ucorn 1 year ago
I would vote for Al Franken as "Emperor for a day" if he would use the position to exile Billy O'Silly from the planet earth.
GetMeThere1 1 year ago
There is no such thing as "America's secular founding principles" anyone who disagrees doesn't know American history and/or has some sort of strange phobia of religion, like many Atheists do.
RedBloodReign 1 year ago
Bill O.Reilly is a deluded American and should be fired... What a dick.
StayGold42 1 year ago 2
I am proud that Al Franken is my Minnesota Senator. I'm glad our state came together and voted for him.
MyPaperBleedsInk 1 year ago
Attention every moron who approves of this video:
Our founders came here to practice free religion, not to ban it. Religion is in our founding documents, our moral fabric is based on Judeo-Christian values. I am not christian, but to say we should abolish mentioning religion is pandering to leftist garbage that is degrading our once powerful society into a bunch of PC pussies.
VegasBilgeRat 1 year ago
Lol it was put in the pledge as a moral booster.......
google it..
Grensinlos 1 year ago
I like Al Franken's glasses. Anybody know where I can get some of those?
meshumekha 2 years ago
It's a SECULAR NATION for fucks sake.
dan012345 2 years ago 39
@dan012345, speaking of 'fucks sake', Al Franken likes gerbils inside of his person.
TAXtheAtheist 1 year ago
@dan012345
"Supposedly" it should be a secular nation.
But U.S. politicians, violate the amendment that they both claim to love.
Mariet31 1 year ago
to searenne-the first Christians who came to America did not come here to promote secularism, they wanted a Godly country without the government telling them which "religious organization" they could worship God in (there is a vast difference in where to worship and whom to worship). Reread your documentation, it is all above God and following him.
myfathershandiwork 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
To slammy001-Sorry, but you are mistaken and have your historical facts wrong. Our country WAS based on Christian principles as can be seen in all of the founding documents on which our government is based. It has always given God the place He deserves as Creator and guiding force. The secularism of our country was started by left-wing, liberal, atheistic people such as Madeline Murray O'Hare (btw, her "people" of the atheist persuasion eventally did her in for her money). Sad, but true.
myfathershandiwork 2 years ago
Comment removed
cowboysfan782008 2 years ago
please show me where the constitution mentions the pledge allegiance or in god we trust and i'll change my views.
atheistpunk72 2 years ago
So it bothers you that God is mentioned? Does' sitting "Indian Style" bother you. (Should it be criss cross apple sauce) 3 "Nice" mice, (instead of blind) Enough Already!
cowboysfan782008 2 years ago
YEAH!!!! SENATOR-ELECT FRANKEN!! Guess the people of Minnesota decided they wanted a "pinhead" to represent them in the Senate!
marcostar57 2 years ago
America DID NOT have a secular founding...even if secularist and liberals are trying to re-write history. This country was founded by Christians fleeing a government-run religion. They wanted the freedom to worship (not get rid of their Christian roots) as they saw fit and not be told how to by the government. People like Al F. are only trying to make our society as amoral as they are. It will never happen-even though it has gotten so much worse over my lifetime. Shame on us.
myfathershandiwork 2 years ago
While it is true that American itself is a christian nation in that the majority of the population is christian, the government of the United States is a secular entity.
slammy001 2 years ago 3
"and not to be told how to by the government."
Exactly. That's what secular means. The government doesn't endorse a religion so the people are free to worship freely. Read the Establishment Clause in the Constitution. The government enforcing Christianity, Islam, Judaism, atheism, or any other religion/non-religion is unconstitutional. You're saying America wasn't founded on secularism while appearing to promote the secularism that brought the first Christians here.
searenee 2 years ago
How can we have a republic if the principles of our government are derived from a theological monarchy? If you believe the Universe is a monarchy, how can you say that a republic is the best form of government?
vinnyhernia 2 years ago 6
This has been flagged as spam show
tannersanta 2 years ago
You know what's REALLY hard to believe? That anyone as hateful, closeminded, loud, pushy, stupid, ignorant, and crazy as Billy O' has their own show.
GuppyPal 2 years ago 4
Must... stop... watching... Bill O'Reilly videos!
I'm going to punch a whole through my monitor just from listening to his convoluted, confused, anti-american drivel.
ReverendLondo 2 years ago 4
LMAO ur Awesome Bill
EaglePacifist 2 years ago
god i hate bill o' reilly. i don't like al fraken. but i really can't stand o' reilly
charlsielem 2 years ago
what a fucking dickface bill orielly is!
nathanomgnathan 3 years ago 3
FUCK BILL O'REILLY
MarcusMuhgee 3 years ago 4
This comment has received too many negative votes show
So Al Franken thinks that all references to God should be taken out even though our country was founded because by people who wanted to practice Christianity without oppression and who modeled their country after Christian philosophy?
Oh, ok.. gotcha. Stick to being a comedian because that's what most liberals are, just people with jokes..
TheMBthree 3 years ago
To TheMBthree: From the 1st Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." "In God We Trust" on our money kind of feels hypocritical to me. Personally, I don't care, but there's a point to be made there.
nordyj2001 3 years ago 4
oh, you mean the christian philosophy of killing off most of the natives and carting slaves from Africa?
You didn't listen to what he said. he said IT WASN'T IN THE PLEDGE UNTIL THE 50s.
Ask yourself why not.
MOST of the Founding Fathers of your so-called christian base weren't christian and were fleeing countries that had monarchical and religious rules.
wth kinda junk are you learning from, old war stories or the latest PC version of history?
tillo2008 2 years ago 6
@tillo2008
It sure is fun to crow your confident falsehoods isnt it? You make the sheep think you actually have a clue what you're talking about. You couldnt be more wrong about the founding fathers. They were almost all christians. They wove in general religious terms into our founding documents because most people in America were christian.
And WTF does christianity have to do with the african slave trade? Nothing is the answer. You're pushing hate for no good reason.
VegasBilgeRat 1 year ago
yes.. and we should remember the good ol' days when we practiced christianity with zeal! ah the puritans. such a great bunch of people. real moral characters with their witch burning and exile of hundreds who didn't conform with the opinions of the clergy in their town.
our founding fathers understood the dangers of mixing religion with government. see the first amendment, the sixth article of the constitution, and the writings of thomas jefferson and thomas paine for more detail.
charlsielem 2 years ago 4
People still buy into the myth that our founders wanted a Christian nation...that's willful ignorance for you.
OllyakaEnfillade 2 years ago
Message for TheMBthree:
You're a dumbass.
GuppyPal 2 years ago
@TheMBthree: You're a retard. Go back to school.
Drucef 2 years ago
You tell 'em Al!
Zadius 3 years ago
Fuck Bill O'Reilly. He doesn't know what he's talking about and he's making a non-story into a lie.
Tylonous 3 years ago
I don't get it what's so bad?
tominator452 3 years ago
He who blasphemes the father will be forgiven, he who blasphemes the son will be forgiven, but he who blasphemes the holy spirit will not be forgiven. It seems to me that Franken is pretty critical of the Father, but O'Reilly is the one who usually attacks the spirit.
good4usoul 3 years ago
Maybe America should change the pledge to "One nation not under God" just like they changed it in 1956 and see the how much of a hypocrite Bill is.
themanwhoknew 3 years ago
Global warming, Islam and nuclear weapons, Sarah Palin. I wish I had been born a little sooner so that I could enjoy this time before the world ends.
olafsirpab 3 years ago 3
you fool sarah palin will forge an aliance with all islamic nation and together they shall use nuclear wepons to destroy global warming. its the hardon collider that will destroy the earth!
pigmonkey1 3 years ago
Wow, that's about the most reasonable expression of an opinion on the issues mentioned that I've heard out of anybody--in a culture of lawsuits and talking heads spouting moral outrage--and Bill manages to take so much issue with it that he can't even express himself. Good thing this clip was so brief; I can't stand to watch him for more than about 2 minutes, no matter how amusingly wrong he is.
hotshot977 3 years ago 2
Al Franken for president. It's about time we take religion back out of politics. It will destroy this nation if we don't.
ceanderson79 3 years ago 37
How can people take him seriously for his opinions. I mean Franken was correct in his estimations saying he thinks they probably shouldn't be there. And he followed that up by saying that he won't do anything about it, because it's not that big of a deal. He picks his fights. Maybe Bill could learn something from him before he goes on another tirade against Ludracris or whatever bullshit cause pops into his head this week.
nicknufsik 3 years ago 2
Bill is such a tool. He sucks.
kaduisaui 3 years ago 4
Christians think because they're the majority that they are right. It disgusts me everytime I hear the pledge or look at my money.. I'm going to start crossing out god on every dollar bill I get whos with me?
thePANDEMlC 3 years ago 3
I don't know what Franken said that O'Reilly found objectionable. "Under God" was added to the Pledge in the 50's, as was "In God we Trust", and constitutionally speaking, they shouldn't really be on our coin or in our pledge - but it's not exactly one of the big issues of the day.
Fordi 3 years ago 3
The more people with "faith" react to what atheists have to say.
The more they enable the atheist messege.
The more they give it merit and worth.
If you christians had a faith that was as tough as you claim.
None of this shit would matter.
You would be threatened by virually nothing.
It is the fact that you are threatened by this which is testiment to how worthless your faith really is.
FilletofHinduCow 3 years ago 2
This is true.
M51Galaxy 3 years ago
Yeah...pinhead doesn't even begin to describe O'Reilly.
blaziermissy 3 years ago 2
America has to be getting smarter if we can elect people like Al Franken into office after religious propaganda like BIll O the misinformation clown here puts them down
GodKillerAtheist 3 years ago
Al Franken lost, zipper head.
topcat42 3 years ago
I know I was being sarcastic. Notice the statement about Americans being smart....(smart asses maybe)..
OH and the zipper head comment is out of place I'm a white dude not Vietnamese bub.
GodKillerAtheist 3 years ago
Well then if your an American that makes you a smart ass in your delusional world.
Nothing is out of place with you.
topcat42 3 years ago
why don't you just fuck off you dumb cunt!
You just look like a jack ass.
GodKillerAtheist 3 years ago
Gee did I strike a nerve you freak? Go lay in the corner before you hurt yourself and don't forget to stick the pacifier back in your mouth.
topcat42 3 years ago
yes you hit the Dumb Ass nerve now Fuck off you stupid spammer
GodKillerAtheist 3 years ago
You still here? I told you to be a good girl and go lay down.
topcat42 3 years ago
fuck you spammer I'm a MAN that just goes to show your the type to pick up a transvestite at a bar. I'm sure you enjoy that kind of thing there is always some scum bag theist like you always getting caught hiding in the closet
GodKillerAtheist 3 years ago
you are a mouse.
topcat42 3 years ago
I'm starting to think you're just trying to flirt with me from all the replies you keep sending me.
GodKillerAtheist 3 years ago
GKA... with the trollfeeding. Just let the idiot go; he's not worth the trouble.
topcat: grow the fuck up.
Fordi 3 years ago
but Orally ... you're a DICKHEAD
sage0857 3 years ago
If this is the best O'Liely has on Franken, that's quite pathetic. His reaction to the clip is more appropriate for someone spouting Nazi propaganda. Most democrats probably agree with Franken- probably shouldn''t be there, but I don't care.
Spairert 3 years ago
So i guess beheading troops and journalist isn't torture?Guess what ill take waterboarding anyday.Fuckin pussies are runing this country..This isn't europe so stop trying to make it like it is.
jmo18799 3 years ago
These loons could care less about Americans getting their heads chopped off, they only care about the terrorists.
topcat42 3 years ago
If your troops had not started a war in Iraq they would be safe. If you accept torture then that makes you complicit. America used to be a beacon.That light went out Bush and Cheney have put back the cause of democracy years and have been responsible for the recruitment of thousands of more terrorists. Read Richard Clarkes book. BTW I live in europe, I have good health care and good public services, tiny gun crime and freedom of speech, and decent education. What have you got?
HEPHAESTUS393867 3 years ago
Buddy im not going to listen to some brit tell me about troops and everything else..When your country has a strangle hold on northern Ireland..Umm we have freedom of speeach also..And we also don't have kings and queens which is useless on your part.And since you have this great health care how come everyone in your country has fucked up teeth.
So i'd be more concierned about nothern ireland than what our troops are doing.
jmo18799 3 years ago
Depends on what you consider torture is. I mean we know torture would be cutting someones head off, by the way idiot, it isn't troops that were getting their heads chopped off it was workers and media. The UK is a joke, how mucxh you pay for a gas tax? Your health care sucks, you have big gun crime and your economy is in the shitter.
topcat42 3 years ago
In 2006 17,000 people were murdered in the USA. In Britain in 670. As for health care, I had a major stroke this year which resulted in a two month stay in hospital, I have had major therapuetic and diagnostic treatment package and it has resulted in an almost full recovery at the cost of £0.00. The trouble with some Americans is that just because you think you are number doesn't make it so. As for the economy being in the shitter,people in glass houses should not throw stones.
HEPHAESTUS393867 3 years ago
"In 2006 17,000 people were murdered in the USA. In Britain in 670."
LOL what a hoot, you have what 60 million people? We have 300 million.
We have the best doctors and hospitals in the world, when people need the best health care they come here not the UK.
Just letting you know how your economy sucks, you were the one bragging on your country.
topcat42 3 years ago
Hmmmm I see facts dont weigh heavily here. 5 x 670 = 3350 That is 5 times less crime than you. Sadly 47 million of your people do not have medical insurance and those that do have issues about having care denied by the money grabbing insurance companies. I am happy that your happy, but I would live here anyday rather than over there. Don't get me wrong I like America and have visited it often, but Canada is a much better place to live. More European.
HEPHAESTUS393867 3 years ago
Thats not always true, England does have the top neuroscience facility in the world.
M51Galaxy 3 years ago
France is also a great medical/science/mathmatics and philosophy driven country.
They have the oldest medical university in the world, Paris Medical University, founded in like the 16th century. lol
crazyness.
FilletofHinduCow 3 years ago
I know. We have some great universities too. I wonder if China will get some in the future?
M51Galaxy 3 years ago
Oh I'm sure they will, and they will be great schools built by the lowest bidder with shoddy workmanship which should turn to rubble with the first earthquake and if all goes according to plan 70% of their students and faculty will "tragically" perish. Thus punnishing them for studying in the first place.
<--(expert at dry cleaned humor)
FilletofHinduCow 3 years ago
Man wouldnt it be awesome if Franken wins the recount to become senator of Minesota.
Can you imagine Al Franken, Bernie Frank, Chris Dodd, Chuck Schumer, etc, all of whom BillO had invited into going into his program just to ambushed and bullied them publically with fabricated outraged.
Maybe they can combine forces to re-instate the Fairness Doctrine and bring down FoxNews.
Man it will be so great of it happens, maybe OReilly and Hannity get a Diarrhea that last for four years.
JerezJulio 3 years ago 3
seperation of church and state?
runningoutofinc 3 years ago
Apparently Al Franken is a pinhead for daring to suggest that government-backed religious expression should maybe, just maybe, not have been put in place.
gremlinn7 3 years ago 2
They do come worse, Billy. YOU!. And Al Franken kind of sounds like Heath Ledger as the Joker in The Dark Knight.
ZombieX13 3 years ago
Wow, the only pinhead I saw was BillOFathead.
ItzMeRon 3 years ago 3
Thank goodness for Al Franken.
nyXdeathXangel 3 years ago 2
I don't understand how does saying that make Al Franken a pinhead?
coolzac 3 years ago 2
Too bad O'Reilly is a liar liar liar liar liar liar liar. And Franken is right... as usual.
torin006 3 years ago 2
Too bad Franken is a moonbat lying sack of shit and lost the election.
topcat42 3 years ago
We'll see about the election. Franken is projected to win the recount right now. Please name some of Franken's lies.
torin006 3 years ago 2
Franken is projected to win the election? Source please.
Franken lied about O'Reilly not growing up in Levittown. He lied when he told people Rush called Chelsea Clinton the white house dog. He lied about Bush being guilty of treason. He also lied on his taxes. I could go on and on.
What has O'Reilly lied about?
topcat42 3 years ago
He admitted he made a mistake about Oreilly's town (like anyone cares either way). He corrected his taxes and in fact paid more than was necassary. Bush is guilty of treason for several things (torture, the war, etc.)
These things are so ridiculous. Do you think Rush and O'Reilly always tell the truth?
torin006 3 years ago 2
1.Obviously Franken cared or he wouldn't have made a BIG deal out of it right? 2. He CHEATED on his taxes. 3. If Bush is guilty of treason why hasn't he been charged?
Still waiting for the O'Reilly lies.
topcat42 3 years ago
hahahahahahaha. Your logic is amazing.
George Washington said we should not torture, it would be treasonous. Bush tortured. Why hasn't he been charged? Because it takes a majority to do it. People have tried over and over. Once again, your logic is awesome.
torin006 3 years ago 2
Who did Bush torture, show me the proof. It takes a majority to charge someone??? LOL you are a hoot. So If I murder someone it will take a majority of how many people to charge me?
Gotta love moonbats.
topcat42 3 years ago
We tortured many many suspected terrorists. Many who were innocent. Are you fucking joking? The congress (a majority) must bring him up on charges. The republicans have been blocking this for years. Do you not know how government works?
torin006 3 years ago
Hey loon, who is this WE shit? I asked you to show me proof that BUSH tortured prisoners and what did he do to them. I mean we know Americans were tortured because there is video of them getting their fucking heads chopped off. Do you consider making someone listen to loud music torture?
topcat42 3 years ago
Oh, and he electro-shocked and water-boarded people, among other things. This is common knowledge. Cheney talked about it. Rumsfeld talked about it.
torin006 3 years ago
Bush electro- shocked people? LMAO who is he Jack Bauer?
topcat42 3 years ago
Bush hasn't been charged with treason because congress has no spine.
MonkeyFinger23 3 years ago
LOL keep telling yourself that.
topcat42 3 years ago
Hay man, its not written in stone that the sua torture.
And coleman will win the election.... so say 67%of minnesotans (rasmussen reports 5/12)
12oink12 3 years ago
The election had 3 million voters. Right now Coleman is ahead by 150 votes. That 67% is a bullshit poll, not the actual votes. Pull your head out of your ass.
We tortured at Guantanamo Bay. Bush came out and said it. He spoke about PARDONING his cabinet for torture so they couldn't be tried for treason when the new congress gets sworn in. hahaha. Did you actually think a police officer could walk up and arrest the president? hahahahaha
torin006 3 years ago
Hey pal face the facts, Franken lost. Take you beating like a man for christ sakes.
Bush came out and said it? Show me that video you utter retard. Where the fuck do you get your info from, Randi Rhodes?
Gotta love moonbats
topcat42 3 years ago
There was a mandatory recount. If Coleman is ahead after the full recount then Franken has lost. Follow the law.
LISTEN CLOSELY: Bush said he has thought about pardoning his cabinet for condoning TORTURE. Are you going to tell me no one was tortured at Guantanomo Bay? Even Bill O'Reilly said they were. People without trials, without possibility of release, were tortured. Matt Lauer asked Bush to his face if they waterboarded. Bush said he COULDN'T REVEAL THE TECHNIQUES. You are in denial.
torin006 3 years ago
Hey loon, they did the recount and Franken still lost, face reality.
Pay attention for another lesson:
Sure some terrorists were tortured by some rogue military staff but that had nothing to do with Bush you banana head, they have been tries are are serving time in jail. That's right Bush has no obligation to tell the media how they interrogate terrorists. Are you 12 or something because you sure sound like it.
topcat42 3 years ago
Fuck off you mother fucker...
What is your problem??? I'm not sure if your a radical liberal or just an idiot.
I never said 67% voted for coleman,, but if 67% of those in minnestoda THINK Coleman will win, it is likely to happen.
In terms of torture... if the techniques used to harshly interrogate the terrorists were revealed, then they can be ready for it... negating their value... WISE UP.
12oink12 3 years ago
But the poll is pointless. Perception means nothing. The number of votes will be decided for sure by Dec. 19. That's what counts. I will gladly accept the truth no matter which way it leans.
No one can be ready for waterboarding. You slowly drown over the course of hours with a wet towel over your face. Try breathing through a wet towel sometime. Also, torture makes people give false information if they don't have the real answers. That's why america has to rise above pointless brutality.
torin006 3 years ago
you are wrong once again..
Of course you can prepare for torture...especially waterboarding.
Their are techniques to combate the effect of allmost all interrogation techniques.
Waterboarding may not be called torture because it doesnt actually do any physical harm to the victim.
The us military get waterboarded as preparation in the middle east.
You are wrong once again my friend.
The fact is you said that franken is projected to win//where the hell did you get that from??
12oink12 3 years ago
Several news outlets. They look at the difference as it stands (150+ Coleman), then they cancel out the 6500 contested ballots (assuming each will be overturned and counted for the opposite person, as if SOP) This puts Franken slightly ahead. But we won't know until the courts look it over.
You can drown from waterboarding. It also gives people Post traumatic stress disorder. We're talking about the torture of people who have not been tried in court. Would you mind if we did this to you?
torin006 3 years ago
Does anyone know what date this is from?
Salydra 3 years