Tuesday, August 21, 2007

Now for something completely different...

A lovely bit from MMO to the Supreme Court:

"YOUR PETITIONERS ARE ATHEISTS and they define their life-style as follows. An Atheist loves himself and his fellowman instead of a god. An Atheist knows that heaven is something for which we should work now — here on earth — for all men together to enjoy. An Atheist thinks that he can get no help through prayer but that he must find in himself the inner conviction and strength to meet life, to grapple with it, to subdue, and enjoy it. An Atheist thinks that only in a knowledge of himself and a knowledge of his fellowman can he find the understanding that will help to a life of fulfillment. Therefore, he seeks to know himself and his fellowman rather than to know a god. An Atheist knows that a hospital should be built instead of a church. An Atheist knows that a deed must be done instead of a prayer said. An Atheist strives for involvement in life and not escape into death. He wants disease conquered, poverty vanquished, war eliminated. He wants man to understand and love man. He wants an ethical way of life. He knows that we cannot rely on a god, nor channel action into prayer, nor hope for an end to troubles in the hereafter. He knows that we are our brother's keeper and keepers of our lives; that we are responsible persons, that the job is here and the time is now."

~ Madalyn Murray (later O'Hair), preamble to Murray v. Curlett, U.S. Supreme Court, April 27, 1961


At 1:14 PM, Blogger StickyKeys Says: said...

I understand that atheists want to show that they're not blood hungry mongrels like they think people assume they are, but I don't understand the need to do it at the expense of people of faith. I mean, there's more virtue to pointing out where we agree than trying to trivialize our practices that focus on faith isn't there?

The whole "We build a hospital where you build a church" thing? I'm sure there are several believers that also believe hospitals are necessary, we just think churches are necessary too. "We believe in action instead of prayer." but what happens when you can't act? When there is something going on outside of your control?

It just seems so divisive instead of joining and controversial for controversy sake. Very "nyah, nyah" instead of "please take time to try and understand me".

Which to an extent I get, because atheists are angry and they need a chance to vent those frustrations and lash out, but as a plea to the Supreme Court? Seems a bit of a counterproductive representation.

At 9:17 AM, Anonymous It's Me... Maven said...

First Amendment ensures freedom of religion AND freedom FROM religion.

Just thought I'd toss that in there:)

But then again, what do I know? Currently, the top item on my blog is a post about foodstuffs at a party I had this weekend, and everything was shaped like penises.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Number of online users in last 3 minutes