Saturday, April 17, 2010

Christopher Hitchens vs. Tony Perkins on National Day of Prayer Being Unconstitutional


April 16, 2010 on CNN
(Thanks to JSAC)

13 comments:

  1. Saying that this is a tradition which goes back to our founding fathers is a horrible argument. Does that mean slavery has some justification behind it? And like Hitchens said, people would be appalled if the government had a "National day of fasting" or other non-christian ritual.

    Either they don't understand that it's a clear violation of seperation of church and state or they feel like christianity doesn't have to abide by it.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The National Day of Prayer goes back, at best, to 1952. The last time I checked the founding fathers were long in the ground by the 1950s, making that argument an outright lie, not just a horrible argument.

    ReplyDelete
  3. This guy cited the Lemon test and stated that it focuses on coercion.  Wrong.  The Lemon test focuses on Govt. endorsement, the Lee test focuses on Coercion.  District court judges due set precedent which then gets reviewed by the higher courts.  This guy does not belong on a major television network.

    ReplyDelete
  4. You see that chin raise on him, lol, hitchens got him enraged. Man religious people are just stuck in this incredibly stupid loop of retardedness. Sigh, this guy  needs to pull his head of his self righteous ass.

    ReplyDelete
  5. <span>Ugh... WOW. Notice that Perkins tried to smile, or at least grin throughout the entire thing - and especially through his aggitation: "See kids? Christians are always HAPPY!!!"  His references to history were sketchy at best, and it's inaccurate to declare any definite number of American Christians - past or present.  In both past and present, many nonbelievers closet their views because of discrimination and persecution by Christians and other believers.
     
    What's also ignored here is the selection of nonbelievers who are actually repulsed by Christianity (myself included).  I don't have kids, but if I did, I'd be upset that they had to see their own government call them to religious action, as though it's something wholesome to take part in.  With that in mind, I'd like to know from Mr. Perkins, how he and his Christian peers would react if, to counteract, the government chose a day to ask the nation NOT to pray.  Because doing, not praying, makes this world a better place to me.  Let's see how they'd like being asked by the government to act against their beliefs, as Atheists are continually prompted to do in a plethora of instances.</span>

    ReplyDelete
  6. Why wouldn't a district judge have greater wisdom and know better than all past presidents?
    Today they have the country's entire history available for their review and even some of past presidents' private thoughts, giving a better perspective than any single president before.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Last word, always! Perfect intolerance! 

    Notice how the frc guy is smiling like an idiot and hitchens looks like he's interrogating a murder suspect

    ReplyDelete
  8. Man I am so fucking mad at that liar Perkins right now.  My face is red with anger.  Of all the lies he was telling I think the biggest one that pissed me off the most is how he kept trying to claim that a district court judge issuing a ruling that a thing is unconstitutional is somehow overstepping her bounds because only the supreme court can do that.  Well, no, actually - PETITIONING THE SUPREME COURT DIRECTLY IS NOT POSSIBLE YOU LIAR.  ANY SUCH CHALLENGE MUST BEGIN AT A LOCAL DISTRICT COURT AND ONLY GETS ELEVATED TO THE SUPREME COURT IF IT GETS APPEALED AT THE LOCAL LEVEL AND ESCALATED --- AND YOU KNOW THIS YOU LITTLE LYING PRICK GIVEN HOW MANY TIMES YOUR ORGANIZATION HAS BEEN INVOLVED IN THE SAME PROCESS YOURSELF!!!

    This is why the FFRF started their petition at their own local district - the Western Wisconsin Federal district that this judge rules over.  They know perfectly well that it will get appealed and thus eventually end up at the supreme court.  THAT'S THE ONLY NORMAL PROCESS FOR GETTING TO THE SUPREME COURT.

    This little lying putz has tried to take the normal procedure of the federal judicial system and tried to portray it as some maverick activist judge taking the law into her own hands.  Liar.

    And no, he's not merely honestly mistaken.  He knows this is how the system works because its exactly the same system he's been involved in himself before.  He's lying for the camera because he knows that his supporters *don't* necessarily know how the normal procedure works and he figures this dishonest rhetoric that this was some activist judge coming out of the blue making this ruling is a good way to rally support.  Note how he doesn't mention that she was ruling on a case brought before her by the FFRF.  Noe how he doesn't mention that given how the FFRF exists in her district that she's dealt with many FFRF cases before as part of the normal chain they are required to use to reach the supreme court.  Note how he doesn't mention that she doesn't always rule in their favor.  That would ruin his bullshit narrative that she's some maverick activist judge who did this herself on her own.

    Those who lie for political gain do not deserve respect.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Damn, The Hitch is butting heads with the religious nutjobs a lot these days. Seems like there isn't a single day that he isn't commenting on the pope or some religious law. Keep up the good work!

    ReplyDelete
  10. Some help from James Madison on the separation of church and state may be found at the positiveatheism.org page of Madison quotes. Note the section, at the page bottom, on "Phony James Madison Quotations Popularized by David Barton of WallBuilders, Inc."

    Also, Chris Rodda's book Liars For Jesus contains these lines in her discussion of Madison's "Detached Memoranda" (ch 9): "Madison made clear his objections to mixing religion and government in even the smallest ways. A few of the practices he singled out as being unconstitutional or potentially dangerous were tax supported chaplains in congress and in the military, and government proclamations of days of prayer and thanksgiving. Religious right American history authors hate this document and usually attempt to discredit it in some way before even getting to its actual content."

    According to Madison's Wikipedia page, he's the "Father of the Bill of Rights."  He's important to separation of church and state issues.

    I again link to Judge Crabb's decision.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Michael Kingsford GrayApril 18, 2010 at 2:21 AM

    Aren't you totally embarrassed by the likes of this retarded juvenile cretin?
    Why on earth do you give these idiots air-time to spew their uninformed lies?

    ReplyDelete
  12. An absolutely brilliant perfomance by Hitchens. Brilliant.

    ReplyDelete
  13. If this whole thing gets overturned and National Day of Prayer is recognized, then we should push for our national day.  We should have National Day of No Prayer.  No one would be making anyone not pray, they can pray.  BTW, I have to give credit to Stephanie who comments above for the idea.

    That would be hilarious to have a National Day of No Prayer.  How about National Day of Burning "Holy" Texts?  Well, that last one we should just have regardless if it's nationally supported.

    ReplyDelete