Atheist Speakers Assaulted at Hawaii State Capital for Objecting to Senate Prayer

[Grinch]

Atheist Speakers Assaulted at Hawaii State Capital for Objecting to Senate Prayer

On April 29, 2010, activists Mitch Kahle and Kevin Hughes were assaulted by Ben Villaflor, the Senate Sergeant-At-Arms, and State Sheriff’s Deputies, for objecting to unconstitutional Christian prayers used to begin each session of the Hawaii State Legislature. Hughes was injured in the attack and was taken to the hospital for x-rays and treatment. Kahle was arrested and prosecuted, but was ultimately vindicated when Judge Leslie Hayashi found Kahle “NOT GUILTY” and ruled that: “The Senate’s [Christian] prayers violate the constitutional separation of church and state.”

[YOUTUBE]4h7ekCD6uE4[/YOUTUBE]

Mitch Kahle, president, Hawaii Citizens for the Separation of State and Church



"A religion and government watchdog group founded in 1997 to oppose the Christian supremacy movement and defend the constitutional separation of state and church."

HCSSC Accomplishments

"Forced City and County of Honolulu to order removal of 25-foot-tall cross erected by St. Jude's Catholic Church without a permit in violation of sign ordinances."

Spoiler: Click to toggle

These guys are alright with me.

To be quite honest, I feel that they did not go about it the right way (as in interrupting in the middle), although due to the enforcement's reaction I won't rule that the disruption was unwarranted.

It is ridiculous how they went straight for the camera when security started restraining the man who was escorted out.

[Bleeding Kansas]

Well, I would have hoped they'd fight back. Guess not.

[Raptor Ribs]

I don't get why they were attacking the camera. Fucking idiots. Oh noes, god forbid they catch police arresting someone who just screaming wildy inside a public building. Even if he had a good reason for yelling (which he did) that still is not an appropriate reaction. The police did nothing wrong, (well, not in the video anyways). The only people who were really being retarded were the ones attacking the camera.

[Mutant Funk Drink]

Religious people are fucking nuts and will do just about anything to infiltrate the government. The funny thing is they'll attack atheists, yet they defend Islam which is dead set in destroying Christianity and any other belief against them.

[Hydroponichronic]

I was hoping the activists would pull some kung-fu shit on the guards, but I was sorely disappointed. Pussies.

[Grinch]

Originally Posted by Raptor Ribs

I don't get why they were attacking the camera.

I understand law enforcement restraining and escorting a protester out of the building, yet the suits proceeded to hit the camera and and call the activity illegal before it appeared that anything had happened. Although the police enter the frame @ 1:56 piled on Kahle, I am not quite clear as to what provoked them.

[HAS]

Originally Posted by Mutant Funk Drink

The funny thing is they'll attack atheists, yet they defend Islam which is dead set in destroying Christianity and any other belief against them.

Really? Christians defending Islam?

Well, I'd imagine some of the leftist ones do. Probably because they can't come up for a good argument as to why the Bible is true but the Quran is not. This is especially funny because leftist Christians base all of their beliefs on popular opinion and know nothing about the Bible.

That being said. I hear far too many liberal atheists defending Islam. Islam is a million times more dangerous than Christianity today and should not be tolerated.

Someone who ignores the Quran's commands to kill is not more Muslim than someone who obeys them. Islam has not been perverted by extremists. Some weirdos just desire to appear Muslim while living as civilized people.

I can't imagine anyone arguing that Unitarians or gay churchgoers are "more Christian" than fundamentalist Baptists.

[Mutant Funk Drink]

Originally Posted by HAS

That being said. I hear far too many liberal atheists defending Islam. Islam is a million times more dangerous than Christianity today and should not be tolerated.

That's true.

You bring up some good arguments in your post. Good shit.

[TruthWielder]

What fucking chuckleheads.

[Soupa]

they did it wrong; 2 wrongs don't make a right.

[SHH]

Americans are stupid.

[Trousersnake]

Originally Posted by Mutant Funk Drink

Religious people are fucking nuts and will do just about anything to infiltrate the government. The funny thing is they'll attack atheists, yet they defend Islam which is dead set in destroying Christianity and any other belief against them.

These Atheists allowed themselves to get beaten up for the free publicity, so they're not not much saner.

[Raptor Ribs]

Originally Posted by Trousersnake

These Atheists allowed themselves to get beaten up for the free publicity, so they're not not much saner.

Nope. But their principles are more correct, despite their individual sanity.

[TruthWielder]

Originally Posted by Raptor Ribs

Nope. But their principles are more correct, despite their individual sanity.

Yeah, "christian supremacy" and its dangers. Oh no. Fuckin Richard the Lionhearted is going to break down my door and chop my head off with his great sword. Get a clue.

[Raptor Ribs]

Originally Posted by TruthWielder

Yeah, "christian supremacy" and its dangers. Oh no. Fuckin Richard the Lionhearted is going to break down my door and chop my head off with his great sword. Get a clue.

What the fuck are you talking about?

The religious people have no justified reason to be participating in politics. They are a supposedly a spiritual religion, they should have nothing to do with making laws and the city decisions. They are there illegally. Its against the law to mix church and state.

The other guys are totally justified in their point. They have the law, and logic on their side, despite their own sanity.

What don't you understand.

E: And if you don't think Christianity is a deadly dangerous religion then you know jack SHIT about Christianity. Theres more blood on jesus's hands then on hitlers. Ever heard of the crusades? Or the other thousand religious wars waged by christians?

[DJ Meaty Cheeks]

Oh noes they insulted my imaginary friend!

[The Crucial Squeegie Lip]

atheism is for non believer faggots

jesus is my homeboy

[Jamie "fuck constipation" Lee Curtis]

Oh no, a man is making a ruckus- Quick, arrest him!

There, now we're safe again.

[TruthWielder]

Originally Posted by Raptor Ribs

What the fuck are you talking about?

The religious people have no justified reason to be participating in politics. They are a supposedly a spiritual religion, they should have nothing to do with making laws and the city decisions. They are there illegally. Its against the law to mix church and state.

The other guys are totally justified in their point. They have the law, and logic on their side, despite their own sanity.

What don't you understand.

E: And if you don't think Christianity is a deadly dangerous religion then you know jack SHIT about Christianity. Theres more blood on jesus's hands then on hitlers. Ever heard of the crusades? Or the other thousand religious wars waged by christians?

Alright, since you want to engage in a serious discussion I will gladly have one with you.

What the constitution explicitly states is that there will be no established religion in government and that the government will not impinge on anyone's freedom of religion. This is a civil liberty, to have whatever form of religious beliefs you deem fit. To say that religious people should not be participating in politics is in direct opposition to this stance.

First amendment: "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."

Because someone is spiritual does not mean, in any way, that they deserve to be kept from public office or otherwise given prejudicial treatment. That is banal and sad.

So again, what law do they have on their side? What part of the law tells me I have the right to stop people in prayer at any time? What part of the law says atheism is the only religious affiliation someone should or could subscribe to? America is culturally Christian. That doesn't mean you have to be Christian. No one had to be in that room during the prayer. No one had to bow their heads and pray. No one was foerced to do anything. You, on the other hand, talk about forcing others to rid themselves of their religion. Who's unconstitutional again?

As to my knowledge of Christian history I'm quite sure it overshadows yours. The difference between you and I being that I know a label called "religion" does nothing to tell me the inherent worth of a person nor does it tell me, in our modern age, about their propensity to warfare. Especially in regards to developed nations.

Josef Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao Tse Tung...all genocidal conquerers and all atheists. Yet unlike you I'm intelligent enough to understand that who or what they spoke to in their beds in the dead of night is the LEAST of their issues.

Again, get a clue.

[Raptor Ribs]

Originally Posted by TruthWielder

Alright, since you want to engage in a serious discussion I will gladly have one with you.

What the constitution explicitly states is that there will be no established religion in government and that the government will not impinge on anyone's freedom of religion. This is a civil liberty, to have whatever form of religious beliefs you deem fit. To say that religious people should not be participating in politics is in direct opposition to this stance.

First amendment: "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."

Because someone is spiritual does not mean, in any way, that they deserve to be kept from public office or otherwise given prejudicial treatment. That is banal and sad.

So again, what law do they have on their side? What part of the law tells me I have the right to stop people in prayer at any time? What part of the law says atheism is the only religious affiliation someone should or could subscribe to?

As to my knowledge of Christian history I'm quite sure it overshadows yours. The difference between you and I being that I know a label called "religion" does nothing to tell me the inherent worth of a person nor does it tell me, in our modern age, about their propensity to warfare. Especially in regards to developed nations.

Josef Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao Tse Tung...all genocidal conquerers and all atheists. Yet unlike you I'm intelligent enough to understand that who or what they spoke to in their beds in the dead of night is the LEAST of their issues.

Again, get a clue.

LOL WUT?? I never said religious people shouldn't be allowed to participate in politics. I said religion has no place in politics and it fucking doesn't. A priest has every right to come to the meeting, listen, and give his opinions, but he doesn't have the right to force everyone to listen to his service. Thats what his church is for.

Also, why the fuck are christians the only religious people allowed to taint the government? Shouldn't muslims be allowed to give massive speeches every time the city wants to make a decision? No, and they are not allowed to. Why is Christianity the exception?? If it was any other religion preaching, such as one you didn't believe, I bet you would have a problem with it.

As for the history part of your post, I don't understand. I'm not sure what your point is. Historically Christianity has abused its power time and time again. Why is the modern age any different?

You don't seem to get the underlying point here. Should we have a prayer service at the DMV? How about before a movie theater starts its movie? No. Because it doesn't have ANYTHING to do with those issues. Just like it doesn't have anything to do with politics.

E: I hate arguing with religious people because they are so illogical. No form of prayer should be taking place in city business, as not everyone is the same religion, and it would be unfair to everyone who isn't christian. OR at the very least, people of other religions should be allowed to make a public statement before the meeting starts too. Thats only fair and democratic. But then we would have hundreds of different statements before anything could be done. WHY?? There shouldn't be any prayer taking place there, its illogical. If you can't see that then you are fucking retarded.

Its also offensive to others, ever think about that? I don't have kids, but if I did I wouldn't want them exposed to the retardation of Christianity, and that means I also wouldn't want them to participate in politics since the two go hand in hand, and thats not fair or democratic. If some rag head was up there preaching before every city council I'd bet you'd have a totally different stance on this, you hypocritical religious dumb fuck.

[Mutant Funk Drink]

Originally Posted by TruthWielder

Josef Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao Tse Tung...all genocidal conquerers and all atheists. Yet unlike you I'm intelligent enough to understand that who or what they spoke to in their beds in the dead of night is the LEAST of their issues.

Actually, Hitler was Roman Catholic.

As far as other dictators go, they didn't kill in the name of atheism. If they did, that'd be one thing. Religion and actions can be mutually exclusive. Someone who's religious can do horrible things without being influenced by the bible. Atheists can do bad things without being influenced by, um, atheistic beliefs(i'm not sure how often that happens). The difference between genocidal atheists and religious wars is that the religious wars are arguably done in the name of a certain religion. I don't remember Stalin, Pol Pot, or Mao killing people in the name of atheism; rather they killed in the name of communism and wanted to remove peoples' religions because then the only thing left for the people to worship would be the government.

[SHH]

Originally Posted by Mutant Funk Drink

Actually, Hitler was Roman Catholic.

As far as other dictators go, they didn't kill in the name of atheism. If they did, that'd be one thing. Religion and actions can be mutually exclusive. Someone who's religious can do horrible things without being influenced by the bible. Atheists can do bad things without being influenced by, um, atheistic beliefs(i'm not sure how often that happens). The difference between genocidal atheists and religious wars is that the religious wars are arguably done in the name of a certain religion. I don't remember Stalin, Pol Pot, or Mao killing people in the name of atheism; rather they killed in the name of communism and wanted to remove peoples' religions because then the only thing left for the people to worship would be the government.

He didn't mention Hitler. You point is still valid though.

[Raptor Ribs]

Originally Posted by SHH

He didn't mention Hitler. You point is still valid though.

TruthWielder is just fucking retarded. I read his last post and laughed, because he wasn't actually arguing the issue at hand.

"Because someone is spiritual does not mean, in any way, that they deserve to be kept from public office or otherwise given prejudicial treatment. That is banal and sad."

He thinks we are saying to banish religious people from the government, . In reality we are saying those religious people shouldn't be allowed to force religion into politics. If you're religious, cool, come to the city council and give your thoughts. But don't try to turn a city meeting into a god damn prayer ceremony, they have churches for that.

TruthWielder, go molest some alter boys you stupid fuck.

[Struwwelpeter]

Yeah I'm sure some of the tough guys here would have fought back against the guards.

[Raptor Ribs]

Originally Posted by Jim "fuck latinos" Carrey

Yeah I'm sure some of the tough guys here would have fought back against the guards.

no one would have. There were actual police there, and quite a few of them. If it was just some old ex boxer attacking the camera with no backup I might have run up and kicked him in the spine, then run away. But not with popo right on scene haha.

[Mutant Funk Drink]

Originally Posted by SHH

He didn't mention Hitler. You point is still valid though.

True, but he said:

...all genocidal conquerers and all atheists.

I also forgot to mention the historic religious conquerors, but it seems like he deleted his post so I won't put in the effort. Haha.