Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules - You must read(Updated!)

DISCLAIMER

You agree to NOT use this site or its affiliated sites, services you may have access to as a result of being a member here (subscriber or otherwise), to post items (images, textual material, etc.) that are pornographic in nature, illegal in the United States and/or the country you reside in, support or encourage illegal activities (e.g., terrorism), advertise for your own personal profit, or send unsolicited messages (i.e. SPAM) to members or non-members.

AND

You agree that if any clause or component of this document is found to not be legally binding in a court of law of proper jurisdiction then the remainder of this document shall remain fully binding and in full force.

AND

You agree to NOT hold Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. (makers of the forum software), uspoliticsonline.com, sites affiliated with uspoliticsonline.com, its administrators, its moderators, others associated with its operation, and its owners liable for any and all of the following (in whole or in part):
Personal insults/attacks by other members.
The content posted by other members, whether directed at you personally or a label/classification you associate with. This includes remarks you consider to be libelous or slanderous in any way.
Any financial or time loss due to your participation here or as a result of something you read at this site, including posts/PMs by other members and feature(s)/software available at the domain uspoliticsonline.com.
The dissemination of any personal information about you as a result of either your negligence (e.g. staying logged into a computer that others have access to) or willingness to post such information on a public and or private forum, private message or chat box. This includes using your real name or other details that could allow other members and/or the general public to determine your true identity. You are prohibited from using your real name on these forums, either as your username or in posts / PMs you write.

FORUM RULES, IN ADDITION TO THE DISCLAIMER

1. These rules apply to all sections of USPOL, including public and private forums, blogs, and visitor messages.

2. You cannot attack and/or personally insult someone. You cannot bait other forum members; this includes referring to posters by derogatory terms. Please, remain courteous and respectful to all forum members at all times. You agree to take responsibility for reporting such posts when you come across them. Please, use the ignore feature if need be. Any member who intentionally and continually posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response, or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion, may be regarded as a “troll” by staff, and have their account suspended or banned.

3. You cannot harass (sexually or otherwise) other members. This includes malicious, slanderous, or defamatory comments. If you are not sure if something you write is inappropriate or not then don't say it. Err on the side of caution.

4. Copying and Pasting Articles, and Starting New Threads. You cannot simply cut and paste in posts or when starting threads. You MUST provide the identifying information (source, author, date, and URL). You must also offer some original thoughts along with the cut and paste. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts from the article. Excerpts really shouldn’t be more then a paragraph or two. Furthermore, if you use images or other copyrighted material in your posts or signature you must have permission of the copyright holder unless you know for a fact that the image is in the public domain. In addition:
a. It must include the identifying information; e.g., where available, the author, the publication, the date, the URL.
b. The member must offer some context, including: How did you hear of this article? What is your opinion? Why is it important to you? Why should it be important to forum readers? The more context you provide, the more you assist others in gauging the excerpted information's significance.
c. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts, not the whole thing or even the majority of the whole thing to encourage people to read the entire article.

A violation of any of the above will result in the deletion or closing of the post or thread and could earn you a warning or suspension. If you have any questions concering any of the above please PM a moderator and we will be happy to clarify.

5. You cannot post the same thing in multiple forums. You must not open similar threads about the same or a similar topic. You cannot spam the board or send unsolicited messages to members via PM, email or any other means.

6. Do not post off-topic. You cannot derail a thread with off topic posts.

7. You cannot shout in posts. This includes posting in all CAPS, bold, lIkE tHiS, and extra large font. Posts should also be one color, although you may use an additional color for highlighting ideas you wish to address.

8. You may not alter quotes in a way that misrepresents what was originally said.

9. Multiple accounts are not allowed. If you are found to have more than one account all accounts will be permanently terminated.

10. You cannot have a user name, avatar, signature, or post images that are deliberately offensive. That includes the display of overly explicit or graphic images that may not be suitable for minors.

11. Signatures can not have more than three lines of text, with a font size no larger than "4", and no more than two font colors. Images in signatures cannot be any larger than 800 pixels wide x 200 pixels tall. Animated images are not allowed.

12. You are prohibited from taking any action to disturb the use of the services by others, distribute material that contains viruses, spyware or any other malicious code or harmful programs. This includes interfering with the working of the network, attempts to gain unauthorized access to a service or other computer systems that are part of the site or any other site, by use of the available services.

13. Discussion of moderation actions in public and/or private forums is not permitted. Moderation actions include warnings, suspensions and the editing or deletion of posts. If a member has a concern about a moderation action, he or she is invited to address it with the board staff via Private Message. This rule exists to protect the privacy of all posters with regards to disciplinary action. The moderator team will never publicly discuss the warnings/suspensions of any posters, and we ask that you return the favor, whether about yourself or another poster. Posting about moderation actions in the public forums constitutes a violation. You are free to discuss a moderation action via Private Message with the moderator involved, but you may not harass or abuse the moderators (as already specified in the forum rules). In practical terms, this means that once a moderator tells you his or her decision is final, no further PMs about that moderation action are permitted. If you have a concern about a moderation action, you are free to appeal to a Forum Administrator via Private Message. You may only discuss moderator activities or discussion of moderation with staff member if you chose to private message and are not under any circumstances allowed to use the PM function to forward or promote moderator discussion in regards to specific forum action, amongst other regular members. Administrators do reserve the right to read said PMs and may do so ; if that results in discovery of messaging between posters of such moderator discussion then it will lead to the same violation being received for discussing said moderator actions on the forum. If you receive a message to the effect of having been given moderator information, please report it to a member of staff. Engaging back in that discussion with the original violator will earn you just as stiff a sanction.

14. Do not ignore moderators or administrators. Do not repost something a moderator or administrator has deleted. You cannot have moderators or administrators on your ignore list.

15. Only post in English. Short passages in foreign languages may be acceptable if its use seems helpful for the ongoing discussion and when there is no indication of a potential violation of the forum rules. Always provide a translation into English in such cases. In case of doubt, the incident will be regarded as a violation, no matter of the actual meaning of the foreign language text.

16. The use of words/comments etc. written by other posters, without approval of the poster in your personal signature is not allowed nor are references, by name, to other posters allowed.

17. Please pay attention to announcements by Forum staff that will be found in the "Welcome! / News & Announcements" forum from time to time.

18. Use of "liar", "lies", "lying", etc. Accusing someone of being a "liar" or similar accusations towards other posters will generally be regarded as implying an insult and therewith as a violation of the forum rules. "I question the validity of your statement because...", "That's not the truth" or "you are wrong about that" are sufficient for any decent discussion if you want to disagree with somebody's assertions.

19. Thread opening restriction for new members. In order to control SPAM, new members must have moderator approval to start their own threads.

20. Thread titles must relate to the discussion within. Do not make misleading titles, or titles such as "Guess what..." or "You'll never believe this...". Members need to be able to identify the general gist of the thread via the title. Profanity in thread titles is not permitted.

21. Forum members are instructed to use forum tools and abilities for their intended purposes and no other. If members identify a forum glitch or weakness of any kind that allows you to see or do something you know you shouldn't, please report it. Being aware of any unintended access to the Forum and failing to take appropriate steps to notify staff of said access issues, will create a presumption of seeking to take advantage of the issue, will result in either account suspension, or banishment.

22. Any link to a site that contains graphic content, must contain a warning describing what a person might reasonably expect to view if they click on said link. No graphic pictures are to be posted on the Forum.

23. Threats or advocations of violence toward a public figure, or member of the Forum, will not be tolerated. Conversation about revolution or the like is not prohibited by this rule; directly calling for violence is, eg “It's time to kill every <redacted> that voted for the bill,” is not permitted.

24. Accounts with no posts will be deleted after 30 days. Inactive accounts with low post histories may be deleted after one year.

25. Private forums are something offered to members that decide to contribute directly to this site via donations. These donations help immensely in keeping this site up and running. Private forums are designed to allow the contributing member discuss whatever he/she wants to and to have the power to direct that discussion in whatever way he/she chose. They were not designed nor are they intended for simply talking trash about members that don't have access to the forum. While the targeted members cannot see the forum or the comments, it creates a negative atmosphere that really isn't necessary. If you want to totally rip apart ideas, ideologies, political parties, etc. that is fine. We simply ask that you don't use the private forums as a means to attack other members that aren't privy to such comments. It is difficult enough to have a political discussion forum because the discussion of politics is inherently heated as people are so passionate about their beliefs...the ones that take the time to come to such a site in the first place at least. The idea of private forums is so people of similar political persuasions can discuss whatever they want without fear of being attacked. Nonetheless, we hope that a certain level of maturity would foster itself within such an arena and not simply lend itself to a bashing forum.

Private Forums are governed by all of the above Forum rules. In addition:
  • Private forums that essentially become abandoned homes will be subject to deletion, donation or reorganization. Just like elsewhere in life, clubs sometimes lose their vitality and purpose for a myriad of reasons. If it becomes clear that a private forum has clearly lost its vitality and nobody is going to really use it anymore, owners are advised to consider whether to reuse the forum for something new and productive rather than let them linger or notify the Administration that the forum should be rearranged for other purposes, closed, merged with other compatible private forums, donated to others for new purposes, etc. Do not be concerned that your forum must be a membership and post count race with others to avoid falling under this policy; the question is whether your forum has actual vitality instead of being 'brain dead.'
  • Additionally, private forums may only be owned by subscribed members in the Platinum or Diamond categories.
  • Should the owner of a private forum be banned, quit USPOL or otherwise abandon the forum the PF will be transferred to another owner or closed.
  • Propriety of private forums. Administration staff will determine the desirability of a proposed private forum and enact any conditions upon it to ensure its purpose is productive.
  • Any and all instances of sharing accounts by allowing someone else to log in under their own account so they can see into private forums for which they are otherwise not permitted to access, will be deemed violation of the double account rule and all caught doing so will be permanently banned.
  • Relaying private forum posts and information to other posters who are not members of the particular private forum for any negative or destructive purpose (eg mean-spirited gossip, fueling interpersonal disputes, etc), is not permitted, and will constitute a violation of the Forum rules.
  • For purposes of monitoring USPOL Terms of Service Administrative staff (not Moderators) will have access to Private Forums.
  • All Private Forums must have at least one active Administrator as a member for purposes of handling issues which cannot be addressed through moderation permissions.
  • Discussion of moderation activities is prohibited on the open site and is likewise prohibited in Private Forums.

26. The administrators and moderators reserve the right to edit and/or delete a post,and/or close a thread, and/or delete a thread at any time if of the opinion that the post is too obscene, inappropriate, or the discussion has run its course.

27. 'Back seat moderating' is not allowed. If you take issue with another poster's contribution to the forum, you're welcome to report any posts you think are out of line, but you should not bring it up publicly within the forum.

28. Images in posts (whether embedded or hot linked) must be reasonable in size. 800x800 should be considered a good rule of thumb. Excessively large images make it difficult for users on mobile devices to load pages. If necessary please simply link to very large images using the URL tags. In addition, the following images are not permitted (including, but not limited to pages with images or videos containing):
  • Strategically covered nudity
  • Sheer or see-through clothing
  • Lewd or provocative poses
  • Close-ups of breasts, buttocks, or crotches

29. Any solicitation or communication involving sports betting / gambling / online casinos / bookies and or internet based card or slot machine systems or sites will lead to all said content being physically removed from the site and server, and will lead to any and or all parties involved being permanently removed and banned from the site to the farthest extent possible. This includes any links to any form of bookmaker, casino, any type of game or match or event where money transfers on the outcome or link of any sort to wire act violations and or anything in violation of either the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, or the Federal wire Act. This applies not only to the open forum but all and or any chat rooms, articles, private messages and or private forums. All content that violates this rule will be deleted, without notice.

CONSEQUENCES

Failure to comply with any of the forum rules may result in your posts being edited or deleted and/or your account being temporarily or permanently banned from the forums. U.S. Politics Online uses a warning system that generates an automated Private Message to members when they are in violation of Forum rules. The decision to issue a warning is left to the discretion of the moderator or administrator handling the violation. If a member does not agree with an action taken by a moderator, they can appeal to an administrator after seeking clarification from the moderator who issued the warning/infraction and appealing to them in the first instance. Members MAY NOT harass a moderator or administrator by sending excessive PMs when they are discussing an appeal.

Violations are assigned a point value. Points are valid for 30 days. When a members earns 10 points, their account will be automatically suspended: five (5) days for a first suspension; ten (10) days for a second suspension; and twenty (20) days for a third suspension. If a member incurs an additional 10 points after having served three periods of suspension, then they will be permanently banned from the Forum.

Point values are as follows:
Zero (0) points – Warning
Two (2) points - Minor infraction / Non post infraction (minor) / Off topic posts / spamming
Four (4) points - Academic dishonesty / Baiting / Discussing moderator or administrator actions / Implying an insult / Minor insults / Moderate infraction / Non-post infraction (moderate) / Thread dumping
Six (6) points - Direct insult at another member / major infraction / Non-post infraction (major)
Ten (10) points - Act of criminality, or advocating thereof

The administrators and moderators also bear the right to issue warnings, temporarily suspend or ban posters for continued trolling or other serious misconduct (eg. professional spamming) even if the poster has not yet reached the maximum warning points or suspensions level. Other options if the above consequences do not seem adequate include placing the member in a moderation queue, which means all posts will have to be approved before they are posted to the board.

PRIVACY POLICY

All information obtained by the end user via the registration process is for internal purposes only and will not be sold to or shared with any third parties. However, if the end user participates in illegal activities and a court of proper jurisdiction orders U.S. Politics Online to release certain information about said user then we will act according to the law. Furthermore, no information will be released on threat of a lawsuit, attempted or actual intimidation, or due to any other reason except as notated in the first sentence of this paragraph. Nonetheless, keep in mind that the information we do have is very limited and generally only consists of the IP address a member uses.

SUBSCRIPTIONS

U.S. Politics Online offers several subscription plans to help cover the operational costs of the site. As a thank you for your donation, you will receive special added benefits meant to enhance your U.S. Politics Online experience. Plans vary in price, starting at only $0.05/day, and benefits vary with the price. Benefits include ability to go straight to new posts, to search the forum, larger avatar, private forums, invisible mode, photo gallery, email, web hosting, and no advertisement banners. Please, click here for more details.
See more
See less

Atheism television

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Atheism television

    The First Atheist TV Channel: In Your living room!

    In partnership with Roku, American Atheists will launch the first channel dedicated exclusively to atheist, humanist, freethought programming

    http://www.atheists.org/page.aspx?pid=329

    Heard about this yesterday on MSNBC, and it seems the religion of atheism is going to get its on tv channel, so you are not limited to just Christian television.

    So we now have a purely faith based religion who disses the faith based monotheistic religions, while thinking incorrectly that the atheist belief isn't grounded in faith, in an assumption.

    The head atheist on MSNBC said that the morality that comes from religion is insufficient, and a greater morality would come from atheists. Well, what do you think? It seems a bit daft to me, but then atheism is daft, so at least there is some consistency here.

    I guess what bothers me about the religion of atheism is that it is a faith that their assumptions are factual, while many of those materialistic assumptions have already been proven false, by the same science that they profess so much belief in. And atheism will have to forever remain in a materialistic universe that now appears to be based upon energy and information. And information isn't matter. Information needs a source, and that source is not material. Not matter. So a good atheist must also incorporate tunnel vision and faith. Perhaps their egos are so large as to negate anything other than themselves, and that is the root of atheism. That masquerades as something else.

    Anyways, if I can get it, I will watch this new channel to see them worship, and I am sure they will make Dawkins a high priest or something.

  • #2
    Re: Atheism television

    Why are you bothered about this?
    The scaremongering about atheism in the US is mind boggling.

    Also atheism isn't a religion as it's the entire point of atheism.

    מה מכילות החדשות?


    • #3
      Re: Atheism television

      Originally posted by PeterUK75 View Post
      Why are you bothered about this?
      The scaremongering about atheism in the US is mind boggling.

      Also atheism isn't a religion as it's the entire point of atheism.
      Go to any of the religion threads and find one of his posts for your answer.

      מה מכילות החדשות?


      • #4
        Re: Atheism television

        I'm an atheist and even I wouldn't watch an atheist tv channel.
        I can't understand what the content would be other than a discussion about why god doesn't exist and that sounds like rubbish telly.

        מה מכילות החדשות?


        • #5
          Re: Atheism television

          Originally posted by PeterUK75 View Post
          I'm an atheist and even I wouldn't watch an atheist tv channel.
          I can't understand what the content would be other than a discussion about why god doesn't exist and that sounds like rubbish telly.
          Peter: do you have a soul? I ask in all earnestness.

          מה מכילות החדשות?


          • #6
            Re: Atheism television

            Originally posted by tsquare View Post
            Peter: do you have a soul? I ask in all earnestness.
            I don't believe they exist so no.

            מה מכילות החדשות?


            • #7
              Re: Atheism television

              Originally posted by PeterUK75 View Post
              Why are you bothered about this?
              The scaremongering about atheism in the US is mind boggling.

              Also atheism isn't a religion as it's the entire point of atheism.
              The reason that people get upset about this sort of thing is that it is a method of indoctrination. It tries to take what we as Christians believe and trash it. We believe that there is an afterlife and that Christ died so that we may live on eternally. We believe that God wants none to perish and shows like this make spreading that belief more difficult. Any time a group forms that challenges Christian beliefs, it makes it more difficult for people to investigate and accept Christ. We really do want you to have eternal live but we can't save you.

              מה מכילות החדשות?


              • #8
                Re: Atheism television

                I don't really care that the Atheists get their own TV show.

                It it shows they care more about the Christian messages they hear than they're willing to acknowledge and it will do zip to my faith or to the potential of faith in non-believers.

                If they want to display their ignorance of spiritual matters on TV for all to see (and the deluded to cheer), let 'em: it's not like we only have Christian stations now. The Hindus have a Roku channel, the Mormons have several, the Buddhists have one... Scroll through Roku's channel guide sometime: A veritable cornucopia of alternate religious choices.

                מה מכילות החדשות?


                • #9
                  Re: Atheism television

                  Athiests aren't displaying an ignorance of spiritual matters, they reject a spiritual reality bound by theism.

                  An atheist channel sounds dreadfully boring to me but aside from that I have no issue with it.

                  מה מכילות החדשות?


                  • #10
                    Re: Atheism television

                    Originally posted by PeterUK75 View Post
                    I don't believe they exist so no.
                    Then by your understanding, there is nothing that separates you from the other beasts of nature. True?

                    מה מכילות החדשות?


                    • #11
                      Re: Atheism television

                      Originally posted by PeterUK75 View Post
                      Why are you bothered about this?
                      The scaremongering about atheism in the US is mind boggling.

                      Also atheism isn't a religion as it's the entire point of atheism.
                      Atheism is based upon faith, as is religion, except for Buddhism perhaps. No faith involved in Buddhism at all, it is experienced based, drawing from a change in human consciousness called satori or enlightenment. Or at least that is how it originally started off, to be corrupted by later people, which is illustrated by the different sects.

                      Now you and other atheists may claim that it a purely scientific conclusion, but that is utter rubbish, for it rests upon materialism, which is a particular assumptive belief system, which contains its own dogma. Obviously you are not aware of the dogma involved, nor the assumptions upon which some of the dogma is grounded.

                      I don't see the scaremongering you are referring to, and atheism really doesn't bother me, except when atheists try to use scientific materialism as certain proof. There is some dishonesty going on in this, and that does bother me. I don't like dishonesty. But I would not have to believe in a Creator in order to detest dishonesty.

                      Atheism is a belief system that arose as a reaction to theism. It is a reaction, and did not find its birth in the same manner as religions were birthed. So far, we have seen organized atheism, a replacing of theistic religions only in authoritarian gov'ts who's leaders saw religion as the opiate of the masses. And so religion was replaced with another belief system, atheism, which replaced a higher moral authority with that of the relative morality of competitive, ambitious, deeply self centered man.

                      The actual truth is that atheists really do not know the truth if there is a Creator or not. They claim they do, and some are even quite militant about it. So, in this sense there is little difference, at that level between those of religion and those of atheism. Both require faith, one a faith that God does exist, the other a faith that the science that supports atheism is capable of negating a Creator. Since materialism negates God with its very first step, it of course what atheists have faith in. Yet materialism cannot explain or bring understanding except in a limited sphere, while what lies outside of that sphere, the same materialism is moot, and not useful at all. In fact, one has to cast it aside in order to try to get some understanding of what lies at the root of reality, at the subatomic level. So any argument such as atheism is based upon a very limited framework, i.e. materialism. And yet this does not stop atheists such as Dawkins from making claims with his mouth that he cannot actually prove or back up. He will not debate scientists like Sheldrake, and he would have never debated the notable physicist David Bohm, but there are many others in the field of physics who he would not debate in regards to this issue. For he would be shown up for what he is, and what every atheist is. Their arguments are based upon scientific dogma, upon assumptions, that cannot be proved. So, atheism is little more than a faith that tries to appear to be factual, based upon absolute evidence.

                      מה מכילות החדשות?


                      • #12
                        Re: Atheism television

                        Originally posted by PeterUK75 View Post
                        I don't believe they exist so no.
                        How about telepathy? Now, a materialist, a genuine one would have to negate telepathy, yet Sheldrake shows through experiments that man's best friend is telepathic. Dogs. But this is so contrary to the materialistic view of reality, and so all they can do is to call Sheldrake a heretic. Yet the results of his experiments says otherwise, and it illustrates the power of dogma in science. So they dismiss the results of those experiments Sheldrake has done, and they have too, for if they accepted it, it would wreak havoc upon their beliefs.

                        מה מכילות החדשות?


                        • #13
                          Re: Atheism television

                          Originally posted by reality View Post
                          Go to any of the religion threads and find one of his posts for your answer.
                          Yes, if he were to actually read them, he would know that I do not believe in an anthropomorphic god. That religion to me is all about a change in the consciousness of man, that occurred in the Eden story, a myth that points to an inner change that separated man from the Creator, and that real salvation is a return to a prior consciousness, which heals man inwardly, so he isn't so chaotic, fragmentary inwardly which is reflected in human society and the evils that have always been present, due to the inner state of consciousness. That the only way the world can ever change for the better is for man to change, which is the real purpose of religion.

                          And that any concept of God is impossible, for IT is beyond thought, time, and people that have concepts generally end up murdering others in God's name. Atheists would not murder in his name, but in their own ego's name, in order for some sort of gain or gratification of the self image, which the brain creates, and we identify completely with. The self image that separated man from God in ancient Eden.

                          But this thread is about atheists feeling a great need to indoctrinate, and in this sense, they along with the faith, are little different from organized religion. Religion has nothing to do with indoctrination, if it is genuine. For Truth doesn't require indoctrination, it can only be experienced, seen, but one has to discard all things in order to see it. For if not, you can only see what you already know, that is stored in memory. That is just the way the brain works, but one can understand this, by simple self observation. And then one can move beyond this, and if one does, atheism is just another belief, like religion as we know it.

                          מה מכילות החדשות?


                          • #14
                            Re: Atheism television

                            Originally posted by JDJarvis View Post
                            Athiests aren't displaying an ignorance of spiritual matters, they reject a spiritual reality bound by theism.

                            An atheist channel sounds dreadfully boring to me but aside from that I have no issue with it.
                            Well, I doubt it would be boring, but it would have to be grounded in materialism, which is chock full of dogma, just like religion. And I would watch it out of curiosity, to see what methods of indoctrination are being used. And if they even admit their own dogma, which I doubt that they would. So, it would have to indulge in dishonesty, and tunnel vision.

                            Now a man can believe anything that he wants, but NOT if he is trying to use materialism as his proof. For it proves nothing, and must always arrive at a conclusion that god does not exist for materialism in its first step denied the creator, and that all could be explained by matter and processes governed by laws, with no law giver. But then you have that incoherence of QM, and telepathy. For science has had to admit that we will never grasp all that goes on at the quantum level, and the limitations seem to involved consciousness itself.

                            מה מכילות החדשות?


                            • #15
                              Re: Atheism television

                              Originally posted by Good1 View Post
                              I don't really care that the Atheists get their own TV show.

                              It it shows they care more about the Christian messages they hear than they're willing to acknowledge and it will do zip to my faith or to the potential of faith in non-believers.

                              If they want to display their ignorance of spiritual matters on TV for all to see (and the deluded to cheer), let 'em: it's not like we only have Christian stations now. The Hindus have a Roku channel, the Mormons have several, the Buddhists have one... Scroll through Roku's channel guide sometime: A veritable cornucopia of alternate religious choices.
                              And so now we can add a new religious channel. I am sure we will even get to watch and listen to their high priests. I am sure there are groups of atheists that meet, so as to reinforce their beliefs, and to rave about the evil of theistic religions, while forgetting that the nations that adopted atheism as a belief had no qualms about murdering millions of their own people. For if man is the only measure, then like the monkeys in a Kipling novel, they will just holler, "we all say it is so, so it must be true"..

                              מה מכילות החדשות?

                              Working...
                              X