Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Dillon
Sorry for the confusion.
Just as much as religious people read the Bible in ways (not what it actually says, but what they want it to say) that to suit their own ends; they also read into the Constitution the same way.
As referenced in the OP, Lars and his caller claimed the 1st Amendment (reading into it what they want it to say, not what it actually does) supported the religious display but not the atheist display. Then claiming it was hate speech and was tantamount to being agents of the government in proliferating that particular belief, they concluded it was an unconstitutional display.
That position is a special pleading fallacy. Holding others to their rules while not holding themselves equally accountable.
Edited to add - Oh, or maybe it's a good time to let the conversation rest.
The "I'm right...you're wrong" mentality previously mentioned by one of your cohorts.
Anyhow...
Thanks for the response.
|
I wholeheartedly agree with everything in this response. However, and correct me if I'm wrong, your replies to some of the previous posts gave the impression you felt those posts were guilty of the same fallacy. I suspect this is incorrect.
I'm happy that greater clarity is making its way into the discussion, but I'll be away the rest of the day. Look forward to seeing where this is heading a few hours from now.
Edited to add - Or perhaps this is a good time to let the discussion rest. Happy hedons to all until later.