WOOHOO Posted December 13, 2006 Share Posted December 13, 2006 Should atheists not be considered citizens or part of this nation? (By the way, most scientists in this country are atheists.) Well, in America, we do kinda do things based off a majority, and since the majority of Americans beleive in a higher being, there you go. Do I think "under god" should be in the pledge of allegiance or not? That wasn't added until 1954 during a time of fanatical patriotism (kinda like now), so it might not be around forever. I think the point of the statement is not a Christian God, but a higher being, so whatever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hrothgar15 Posted December 13, 2006 Share Posted December 13, 2006 Well, in America, we do kinda do things based off a majority, and since the majority of Americans beleive in a higher being, there you go. Do I think "under god" should be in the pledge of allegiance or not? That wasn't added until 1954 during a time of fanatical patriotism (kinda like now), so it might not be around forever. I think the point of the statement is not a Christian God, but a higher being, so whatever. Yes, there's really no reason to argue about this religious topic (plus it's completely off-topic). I just don't believe the words should be in there, but I perfectly respect the fact that people may have differing opinions on the issue, even though I disagree with them. Now amps, on the other hand... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WOOHOO Posted December 13, 2006 Share Posted December 13, 2006 Whereas 90% of the general population has a distinct belief in a personal god and a life after death, only 40% of scientists on the B.S. level favor this belief in religion and merely 10 % of those who are considered 'eminent' scientists believe in a personal god or in an afterlife. That is just scientists. They probably would not believe in a god or higher being. Scientists are just a small group of Americans and not even all of them are atheists. I could go and find another statistic or a group of people (such as laborers or music educators) that says the exact opposite that you said. D- for effective use of statistic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitedawn Posted December 13, 2006 Share Posted December 13, 2006 there's plenty of room for this discussion over in the current events forum. come on over. can we talk about the nehlybel now? i think it will be fantastic! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hrothgar15 Posted December 13, 2006 Share Posted December 13, 2006 there's plenty of room for this discussion over in the current events forum. come on over.can we talk about the nehlybel now? i think it will be fantastic! I agree! The fact that Jay Bocook is going to add his own little twist to it makes me salivate even more... b**bs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hrothgar15 Posted December 13, 2006 Share Posted December 13, 2006 Whereas 90% of the general population has a distinct belief in a personal god and a life after death, only 40% of scientists on the B.S. level favor this belief in religion and merely 10 % of those who are considered 'eminent' scientists believe in a personal god or in an afterlife.That is just scientists. They probably would not believe in a god or higher being. Scientists are just a small group of Americans and not even all of them are atheists. I could go and find another statistic or a group of people (such as laborers or music educators) that says the exact opposite that you said. D- for effective use of statistic. Yeah, I know, I was responding to Cadetsaholic's claim calling my stating that most scientists in the country are atheists into question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raphael18 Posted December 13, 2006 Share Posted December 13, 2006 (edited) :) Edited December 13, 2006 by raphael18 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xtreme0204 Posted December 13, 2006 Share Posted December 13, 2006 #1- The solo voice is an instrument and always will be. You will never hear it over a 70 person hornline or even a filled stadium that is dead silent (people in seats act as sound dampening devices). There is no way to properly use solo voice in a design capacity without amplification. Deal with it. #2- I'm not defending Hgar in any manner, but unfortunately, Booing is allowed under the freedom of speech. However (just something to think about Hgar), so is holding it in and sending letters, emails, etc. that does not effect a field full of talented musicians who have no control over the design of the show. #3- Amplification is good. Finally I can hear the front ensemble parts and really appreciate them to a fuller extent. Also, the percussion ensemble as a whole has risen to a whole new level because of this. If this means that I have to hear some vocals, so be it. Amplification has created foreward progression in drum corps and should absolutely not be abolished. #4- Hgar even stated that a staff member probably "wouldn't listen to a couple of kids". Notice the word kids. again KIDS KIDS KIDS. He has also professed he has never marched corps before. He obviously is closed minded, YOUNG, and oblivious to accepting various mediums of music. As an educator myself, I'd hope your band director taught you better than you portray on these boards. All music is not pleasing, and not meant to be liked by every audience member. You can boo all you want, but you are not representing every audience member. I have actually found that non-musicians like last years cadet's show moreso than any other show. This is typically because they connect with it; I think everyone has read, if not heard of alice in wonderland. If this show was truly disliked by everyone who saw it, then go ahead and voice your opinion for all of us, but if it even got 1 person to enjoy drum corps that never heard of it before, then I think it worked. Now why boo at education? #5- Dude, I realize you're just using your 1st ammendment rights, but stop defacing the hard work done by lots of people (corps directors, members, support staff). Its uncool and just irritating (I'm not personally attacking you, just the statements you make). Within this topic alone, you have single handedly made at least 3 members of last year's cadets show angry, which goes to show that although you may not intend to aim your comments at the members, it's doing it involuntarily. Im sure theres an email address on the YEA website, go do it there. #6- Its bedtime and I think I made my point. G'Night DCP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hrothgar15 Posted December 13, 2006 Share Posted December 13, 2006 Sorry, but "ALICE GET READY FOR A MIND-BLOWING AFTERNOON" is not music. I can't believe that that was in a DRUM CORPS show. WTF? But I do believe that people choose to be angry...no one can really make another person angry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cadetsaholic Posted December 13, 2006 Share Posted December 13, 2006 Sorry, but "ALICE GET READY FOR A MIND-BLOWING AFTERNOON" is not music.I can't believe that that was in a DRUM CORPS show. WTF? But I do believe that people choose to be angry...no one can really make another person angry. But MAYBE it got other people interested and involved in Drum Corps who wouldn't ever had even thought about it...espn2? i also believe that the cadets did something good since people are still talking about it...what is the saying..."any publicity is good publicity!" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.