Education

Atheists Trying to Get ‘Bible Man’ Banned From AL Public School Assemblies

Alabama School Wons Banish Bible Man Despite Atheist Demands | Freedom From Religion FoundationAtheists are clashing with public school officials in Scottsboro, Alabama, where there’s a heated debate going on over “Bible Man” and his monthly assemblies with public school children.

See, Bible Man isn’t a superhero (okay, maybe he is); he’s a story-teller. As you can imagine, it’s these stories — tales that come from the Christian Bible — that have non-believers up-in-arms.

About 35-years-ago, Bible Man began his ministry in the Alabama county. Now, decades later, it is his son, Horace Turner Jr., who is continuing the mission. Each month, he meets with elementary school children during the school day and leads them in assemblies that include Biblical stories.

Recently, the Freedom From Religion Foundation, claiming to represent a parent in the district, sent a five-page letter of complaint to officials. In it, the atheist group called for the Bible Man program to be removed from schools.

As a result of the complaint, on Jan. 30, a multitude of community members came together at a Jackson County school board meeting to support the continued presence of Bible Man in the school district. WAAY-TV has more about the event:

It was a packed house. More than one hundred people showed up to make their voices heard.

“We wanted our county to have an option for our children He’s been part of our county so long and our children appreciate and love it and we just feel that our children value it,” said concerned citizen Beverly Gilmer. [...]

While the board met, the people sang, prayed, and shared life testimonies.

To atheists’ dismay, after meeting with their lawyer, board members announced that they wouldn’t be banning Bible Man as requested. Those at the public event applauded the decision.

“We know it’s going to be a fight,” said superintendent Kenneth Harding. “But our constituents are pretty adamant about what they want for their children. Hopefully we can meet the law and keep the man, too.”

The FFRF, though, won’t be dissuaded. The group is planning to follow-up on its complaint. Annie Laurie Gaylor, the organization’s co-president, says that the decision not to ban Bible Man is “totally unacceptable.”

Alabama School Wons Banish Bible Man Despite Atheist Demands | Freedom From Religion Foundation

“We cannot put the power of religious interpretation in the hands of the Bible Man, the Quran Man or anyone else,” she continued. “We cannot offer indoctrinal classes in public schools. It’s disingenuous to say this does not violate the establishment clause of the First Amendment.”

But Alabama state Sen. Shadrack McGill (R) has a different view. If parents don’t like Bible Man, he says they should consider homeschooling their children.

“We were established to be a godly nation, a Christian nation,” McGill said. “We need God in government. We need God in the public school. The more we trend away from God, the more we suffer – morally and spiritually.”

To respond to the atheists’ criticism, the district is looking into a set policy that would allow Bible Man to stay in schools, while still complying with Constitutional values. For the time being, Turner will not be taking his program into the North Sand Mountain School, where the complaint originated from a student’s parent.

There is currently no confirmation as to whether the program will continue in other district schools while this new policy is being set.

(H/T: Alabama Live)

Comments (342)

1 2 3 4
  • Lesbian Packing Hollow Points
    Posted on February 6, 2012 at 11:35am

    “But Alabama state Sen. Shadrack McGill (R) has a different view. If parents don’t like Bible Man, he says they should consider homeschooling their children.”

    But the Constitution for the United States of America has a view different from Senator Shadrack McGill (R-AL). You cannot take general taxes to support the religious practices of anyone. For the few who object to the religiosity of elected officials via public school administration to merely pull their own children from those public schools would not end the taxation that they suffer for the support of such religiosity. And, even if the school district refunded every dime of taxpayer monies which they received from such parents TO such parents, even that would not be sufficient to overcome the school district’s Establishment Clause hurdle.

    The only way the school district can overcome the Establishment Clause hurdle needed to enable them to keep “Bible Man” in their schools is to eschew all support from public taxation and support themselves instead based solely on non-public sources of capital. Tuition paid by the parents of pupils directly, for instance.

    I really do fail to understand the illogic of you Religionists who insist on using the coercive power of the state to enforce your religions on the general public. You would not stand by as Sharia Law was used to teach public school children. Why the hypocrisy when the doctrines come from the Christian Bible?

    Report Post » Lesbian Packing Hollow Points  
    • HYPNOTOAD
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 11:45am

      Atheism is a religion, which worships Self as the supreme being. As a matter of fact, the federal courts have even ruled that atheism is a religion (Kaufman v. McCaughtry). Aatheism is a religion and Evolution is a doctrine of atheism (i.e., according to the first plank of the Humanist Manifesto)

      Report Post » HYPNOTOAD  
    • TheVoice1
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 12:03pm

      Why is Islam taught openly in our schools and included in school curriculum then ????

      Report Post » TheVoice1  
    • Lesbian Packing Hollow Points
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 12:03pm

      Atheism is a religion, but it does not replace worship of a deity with worship of self. I have no altars or shrines to myself. I worship not much at all, but I do venerate things, things other than myself. Science, the scientific method, logic, reason, and evidence based decision making.

      Report Post » Lesbian Packing Hollow Points  
    • Lonescrapper
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 12:06pm

      Here you go. Free speech for everyone – except if you disagree with a liberal. Then, as Andrew Klavan illustrated: “Shut up.”

      Report Post » Lonescrapper  
    • ghostsouls
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 12:12pm

      I really do fail to understand the illogic of you Atheists who insist on using the coercive power of the state to enforce your anti-religions on the general public, when the general public is the MAJORITY!!! Why should the few dominate what the MANY can do or not do. So, you move it across the street before, or after school, you would bitch about that next… it’s funny it only takes one of you idiots, to screw it up for hundreds of thousands. Don’t want to hear or see the bibleman, don’t go, keep your kid home that day.

      Report Post » ghostsouls  
    • hi
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 12:23pm

      But you are allowed to force gay religion on school kids. My kids saw a video in school where the narrator suggested trying out and experimenting to see if they really are straight or gay! That is not to mention the fisting video shown in Massachusettes. You just want to force all of your beliefs on us!

      Report Post » hi  
    • Lesbian Packing Hollow Points
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 12:40pm

      If you can use the law to force Christianity on this Atheist, then you open the door for the bruiser of a Muslim with the AK-47 and scimitar and bomb vest behind you to force his practice of Islam on you. You can’t permit the one and forbid the other.

      I hope this has cleared this matter up for you.

      Report Post » Lesbian Packing Hollow Points  
    • SquidVetOhio
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 12:43pm

      Christianity = An unprovable belief about God that people zealously hold dear. (Myself included)

      Atheism = An unprovable belief about God that people zealously hold dear.

      Difference = Atheism is tax payer supported.

      Report Post » SquidVetOhio  
    • Lesbian Packing Hollow Points
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 1:03pm

      As for the tyranny of the minority to which you refer, I would simply counter that you are attempting to exercise the tyranny of the majority. You are the supreme Democrat. You are at the head of the lynch mob. There is nothing about keeping religion from being taught in public schools (which is precisely what Bible Man does) that prevents Bible Man from teaching in a private school, not supported by general taxation, or in any given house of worship, or in your own house.

      In America, we have the principle of equality before the law.

      Report Post » Lesbian Packing Hollow Points  
    • ModerationIsBest
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 1:04pm

      If Atheism is a religion, not collecting stamps is a hobby.

      I don’t worship anything.

      The Big Bang theory is an accepted theory on how the universe started
      Evolution is an accepted theory on how humans came to be

      That being said, I don’t “BELIEVE”, I “THINK” that, and am open to new evidence that contradicts it. If something comes along that completely debunks the big bang theory and evolution, I will no longer think of those as accepted theories and will look for new answers.

      I have no rituals
      I have no traditions based around atheism
      I am not dogmatic when it comes to such things about atheism

      The people who say atheism is a religion do it just to say, “see, they’re exactly like us! They have religion, their religion is just atheism!”

      I could care less whether atheism is included in the textbook definition of religion. Fact is, compare the life of a Jew/Muslim/Christian, and their life and how their “religion” affects their daily routine, to how Atheism affects the day of an Atheist. They wouldn’t be similar at all.

      If something good happens I don’t say, “Thank the Big Bang Theory!” I don’t “talk” to the Big Bang Theory. I don’t pick a specific day to worship the big bang theory.

      Usually when “religions” of the world is spread out on a pie chart, Atheism is generally clumped in with a bunch of other things in the “not religious” section of the pie chart. If Atheism is a religion, shouldn’t we get our very own secti

      Report Post »  
    • ModerationIsBest
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 1:16pm

      http://www.age-of-the-sage.org/mysticism/world_religions_populations.html
      http://www.adherents.com/Religions_By_Adherents.html
      http://www.religioustolerance.org/worldrel.htm
      http://douglawrence.wordpress.com/2008/08/15/look-at-world-religions-a-pie-chart/

      Here are just a few examples of pie charts. I find it hilarious that a pie chart on the “history of religions” has a section that says, “not religious” in which Atheism is put in there.

      @SQUIDVETOHIO
      WRONG!
      If you look at Atheists like Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris, even Bill Maher and many more they always say, “I don‘t think a God exists because I haven’t given sufficient evidence.” but on numerous times have said that if God came down and gave irrefutable evidence, they would believe.

      Both Hitchens and Harris have made comments along the lines, if Jesus comes down from the clouds and started performing miracles I will say, “Wow, look at that, I was wrong and the Christians were right all along.”

      I don’t think there is a God, but I could be wrong.
      Do you think a religious person would say, “I think/believe there is a God, but I could be wrong” ?
      I doubt it

      @Ghost
      They obviously have some standpoint if 1 person can change the law. If the majority thought slavery was okay, should 1 person who thinks slavery isn’t okay not be able to try to change it?

      How would you feel if a Muslim became President and said, “May Allah bless the United states of America.” or said Allah’s teac

      Report Post »  
    • ModerationIsBest
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 1:17pm

      “Allah’s teaching affect his policies?”

      Report Post »  
    • thewatcher93
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 1:23pm

      This article doesn’t rly answer any questions, are the kids alowed to opt out of bible study, is this just a guy who is volunteering his time, who pays Horace Turner Jr to do this, there isn’t enough facts surrounding this article.

      Report Post »  
    • DYNA
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 1:30pm

      Socialism is a religion. It is embraced by those who think government or man is their source of total supply. They put their faith in it. They start to see themselves as god who have the right to lord it over others. It is oppressive because their source of total supply always becomes someone else while disdaining and attempting to shut up those who truly rely on God. And since they do not think that there is such a thing as sin with respect to God, whose only mediator is Jesus, stealing and coveting is an acceptable means to justify their dependence on and oppression of others. They hate the Truth.

      Report Post »  
    • Bad_Ashe
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 1:44pm

      @LESBIANPACKINGHOLLOWPOINTS – For someone who venerates logic and reason, you certainly need more practice with them. There is no “establishment clause hurdle” outside of the rather inconsistent application of a poor 1947 Supreme Court decision made by historical illiterates.

      Atheists applaud this constitutional perversion because it agrees with their ideology, but given your handle, I doubt you would be so supportive if the SC one day decides that the 2nd amendment only applies to militia. In fact, two recent 5-4 decisions went dangerously close to going that direction.

      You really should review history and etymology before you go posting nonsense. The establishment clause was meant to curb creation of the establishment churches (government-sanctioned, forced attendance, forced tithe) seen in pre-revolutionary America. When “establishment of religion” was referred to in the late-1700s, they were commonly referring to these institutions.

      If the establishment clause was intended to mean that religious iconography couldn’t be displayed on government property, or a governmental congress couldn’t begin with a prayer, why did the majority of the Founding Fathers pray before congress, mention God at nearly every turn, and allow religious symbols in and on government property? Why was a religiously-driven classical education the standard in most public school until the 1940s?

      How precisely does this reconcile with your “wall of separation”?

      Report Post » Bad_Ashe  
    • Mark Meed
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 1:55pm

      @LesbianPackingHollowPoints:

      The First Amendment reads in part: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof …”

      It takes significant mental gymnastic to somehow interpret this as a prohibition of the free exercise of religion by a guy telling Bible stories in a school auditorium on his own time and on his own dime. I appreciate that activist judges are capable of this and other contortions but that doesn‘t alter the fact it’s profoundly stupid and dishonest.

      BTW, have you considered, even briefly, the fact your handle could have many meanings.

      Report Post » Mark Meed  
    • whitelr
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 2:08pm

      The Bible, the Koran, the Book of Mormon, and the Tao, among others, should all be required reading in school. In the interest of education, if nothing else. As it is, only the religion of atheism is being proselytized and your comments make all too clear the attitude of the priests of atheism. I am Christian, though I was an atheist until I was 24. Christian precepts and teachings are profitable, as is much in some of the other texts. I suggest you turn the power of your mind to seeking the profit that is gained by studying at the feet of some of the greatest minds the human race has produced. The trouble with atheism is that it is an unpaved, country road way out in the sticks which forks every time an atheist gets a dim revelation. Some of the forks lead to Fascism, Stalinism, Maoism, the Khmer Rouge, etc. Being an atheist doesn’t make you smarter or better in any way than the rest of the human race. It merely gives you an excuse to rationalize whatever behavior brings you what you are lusting for. If there is no God, everything the power of your hand can command is permitted. The fact that you say you eschew “evil” behavior is an aberration in an atheist. You should jump in the rest of the way and learn what is “good”. Read, pray — and choose.

      Report Post » whitelr  
    • mcsledge
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 2:16pm

      SquidVetOhio — the Resurrected Christ has been witnessed by several within the last 200 years. He and His Gospel are very provable.

      Unprovable belief must be your version of propoganda.

      Report Post » mcsledge  
    • Therightsofbilly
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 2:17pm

      MOD says:

      “I have no rituals
      I have no traditions based around atheism
      I am not dogmatic when it comes to such things about atheism”

      Sure about that MOD?

      Report Post » Therightsofbilly  
    • Bad_Ashe
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 2:19pm

      @MODERATIONISBEST – Stop being so intellectually dishonest and engaging in the “atheist shell game” when it comes to definitions. Based on the behavior of those who hold to it, it’s clearly reasonable to divide atheists into two categories: Lower-case (a)theists are those who simply lack theistic belief, and upper-case (A)theists who build much of their ideological worldview around their atheism.

      This latter type are the ones who petition the military chaplaincy for equal representation, who have venerated the scientific method or neo-Darwinian evolution into objects of near-worship, who go on endlessly about God, or the lack thereof, who believe themselves to be somehow intellectually superior than theists, who want to build atheist “thought” centers (in some cases, temples), who pick up secular humanism awards, and who often flock to Internet message boards to show just how smart they are.

      Atheists like this often demonstrate a tendency to groupthink (free thinkers, indeed), have shared philosophical and ideological worldviews (utilitarianism, humanism), tend to venerate cornerstones of materialism (scientific method, evolution) well beyond their intended scope, and are quick to attack others when their beliefs are questioned.

      Given this rather accurate description, and that it shares many of the traits (often accusations) applied to organized religions, one could confidently say that Atheism in this form is simply a godless religion.

      Report Post » Bad_Ashe  
    • Therightsofbilly
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 2:27pm

      MOD says:
      “I don’t worship anything.
      The Big Bang theory is an accepted theory on how the universe started
      Evolution is an accepted theory on how humans came to be
      That being said, I don’t “BELIEVE”, I “THINK” that, and am open to new evidence that contradicts it. If something comes along that completely debunks the big bang theory and evolution, I will no longer think of those as accepted theories and will look for new answers.”

      Sure you do.

      And you can “think” anything you like. Nobody really cares.
      But why do insist on evangelizing about your non-beliefs to us here every day?
      Why are you not content to go through your life simply not believing?
      Why is it so important for you to drag others along with you?
      Why do you crave our acceptance?
      You say you don’t want to belong to any groups, but yet you seem to want us to join your group.
      And if there is nothing after this life, why do you care about anything?

      Report Post » Therightsofbilly  
    • Therightsofbilly
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 2:31pm

      I know, I know,

      “For goodness sakes”

      Report Post » Therightsofbilly  
    • rush_is_right
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 2:35pm

      “Attempts to ensure that there remains no established state religion and that public institutions remain secular are entirely within both the language and the spirit of the law. ”

      yeah its shocking how wrong the country was for 175 years huh?

      laughable.

      Report Post »  
    • rush_is_right
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 2:36pm

      “sec·u·lar [sek-yuh-ler] adjective”

      sigh….

      sec·u·lar·ism (sky-l-rzm)
      n.
      1. Religious skepticism or indifference.
      2. The view that religious considerations should be excluded from civil affairs or public education

      http://www.thefreedictionary.com/secularism

      2 sure sounds just like atheists….ain’t that sumthin???

      Report Post »  
    • ModerationIsBest
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 2:46pm

      @Billy

      Great examples Billy!

      Me-”I have no rituals.”

      Billy-”Sure you do.”

      Wow you got me there.

      The reason I can‘t keep quiet about being an atheist is because the religious won’t allow me to.

      I am content going through my life with not believing. I am not content with people telling me that I have to “believe” like they do or I’m heading for an eternal torture.

      I could care less if people become atheist. Unlike religions, I don‘ think you’re bad for not being an atheist and say you’re doomed for eternity for not becoming an atheist.

      I could care less about your acceptance. I can‘t crave something when I know it’s not possible.

      I don’t care if you join my “group” and I laugh at the fact that you think that’s my intent.

      I care because I want to make this life the best possible because it’s the only one I have. I want to do as little harm to other people as possible, and do the best I can to be a good person. I’m not perfect, but I try to learn from my mistakes and not repeat them. It is because I am doomed to die forever, that makes this world so beautiful to me. Being able to live forever, makes everything irrelevant to me, not the other way around. I’m sorry that you need to feel like your “soul” is going to live forever, for this life to have any meaning for you.

      Be well Billy.

      Report Post »  
    • Bad_Ashe
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 2:54pm

      @MODERATIONISBEST – For every reasonable position you have, you also post a piece of absolute atheist BS.

      When atheist groups like FFRF want their numbers to look impressive, they add those who claim as “not religious”, but when they cite prison stats, they only use those who self-identify as atheist. When it comes to perpetuating their myth that atheists are more intelligent, they again leave out the “no religion” folk.

      It seems organizations like FFRF consider atheists to be their “own section” when it benefits their propaganda, but want to lump in when it doesn’t. If you’re going to begin pointing out inconsistencies in categorization, I would start with your fellow atheists.

      Harris, the late Mr. Hitchens and that idiot Bill Maher are likely lying. If Jesus showed up, it would surely be an illusion, if he started performing miracles, it would be an elaborate hoax. At best, they would think him to be some sort of alien charlatan, a la Dawkins. Why can we assume this? Because of their existing bias regarding the nature of evidence.

      Atheists love the word “irrefutable”, when it suits them, yet there are many things the atheist believes that are not irrefutable by any means. So let me ask you this: What do YOU consider to be valid evidence? Why do you consider that evidence to be the only valid type of evidence?

      Finally, I believe there is a God, based on the evidence. I could be wrong, but I doubt it. Now please answer the above question.

      Report Post » Bad_Ashe  
    • ModerationIsBest
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 3:00pm

      @Bad

      You make great points, and I don’t deny that there are people who could possibly treat Atheism as a religion. For instance, there could be people who start to pray to Darwin(though evolution doesn’t have anything to do with how life became) so I guess people would have to “talk” to the Big Bang Theory, and worship the Big Bang Theory. That would completely illogical, but I guess people could do that?

      I find it ironic that I always hear the argument, “There are no atheists in foxholes.” and then you say there are atheists who petition military chaplaincy for equal representation.

      I did a quick search and came across, http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/27/us/27atheists.html?pagewanted=all and was surprised to see that. I was equally surprised to read, “Many chaplains are skeptical: Do atheists belong to a “faith group,” a requirement for a chaplain candidate? Can they provide support to religious troops of all faiths, a fundamental responsibility for chaplains?”

      If Atheism is a clear cut, no doubt religion, these questions shouldn’t be raised. The article also reads, ““You’re not a faith group; you’re a lack-of-faith group,” First Lt. Samantha Nicoll, an active atheist at Fort Bragg, recalled a chaplain friend’s saying about the idea. “But I said, ‘What else is there for us?’ ””

      Report Post »  
    • Therightsofbilly
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 3:04pm

      @MOD

      Sure Mod,

      Whatever you say.

      Why do so many others also seem to have the same thoughts about your comments that I do.

      I am far from being your only detractor.

      Report Post » Therightsofbilly  
    • Therightsofbilly
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 3:12pm

      Mod,

      You just can’t get anything right, can you?

      Go back and look at what it was that I replied to.

      You said “I don’t worship anything”

      To which I replied………“Sure you do”

      Report Post » Therightsofbilly  
    • ModerationIsBest
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 3:13pm

      So while there may be Atheists who act like religious people, when it comes to things like “thought centers” and are quick to attack others who think differently, when it boils down to it, I don‘t think you’ll see Atheists of any kind praying to Darwin for guidance or thanking the Big Bang when they score a touchdown or have a baby born.

      The minute you do, yeah I’ll stop calling myself an atheist because they are delusional.

      I don’t think I brought up the FFRF, and I could care less what they do, so I dunno why you mention them. As to them “fudging” numbers, I never said or implied that they don’t. Every group fudges numbers and I think it’s wrong. What’s your point?

      I merely pointed out that on a majority of the pie charts you see concerning “religions of the world”, Atheism is thrown in the “non religious” section of the pie chart.

      I can’t attest to whether or not they are lying, I can only go by their words like when Hitchens said, “All of this massive cosmological churning and destruction (which is paralleled, by the way, on our own earth where 99% of all species that have ever existed have gone extinct) could be part of a plan. There is no way an atheist could prove it’s not. But it’s some plan, isn’t it? With mass destruction, pitiless extermination, annihilation going on all the time. And all of this set in motion on a scale that’s absolutely beyond our imagination…in order that the pope can tell people not to jerk off.”

      Report Post »  
    • ModerationIsBest
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 3:42pm

      @Billy

      Sorry, maybe I’m misunderstanding you then. What do you think I worship?

      @Bad
      Well I already typed this once, but the Blaze isn’t showing here, so here we go again.
      There are many different types of evidence, I tend to lean more towards physical and scientific evidence, but I never make the claim that evidence can’t lead to the wrong answer. There is even what some people would call “personal experience(they see something and attribute it to God). I can‘t refute that it’s not God, all I can do is try to explain things that it could be. But their personal experience is not reason enough for me to “believe” something. I would argue that is one of the differences between me and most religious people, though I’m glad you are logical enough to make the claim that you could be wrong. I wish more religious people showed at least that level of reasoning.

      Let me give you a scenario here.
      Let‘s say I’m alive at the “end times.” I am still an atheist, and suddenly Jesus returns and I say, “Wow Jesus, you really are the true Son of God and you are everything that the Bible said you were.” What does Christianity teach in regards to this scenario? Does it teach that at this moment it would then be too late for me to be saved? If so, why? Wouldn’t a genuine, “I’m sorry I was such an utter fool to not see you until now, it is clear that you died on the cross for my sins” be enough to keep an all loving God from sending me to an eternal tort

      Report Post »  
    • ModerationIsBest
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 3:52pm

      “torture”

      I mean, why does it seem like Christianity/religion in general is afraid of having visible, solid proof of Jesus/savior? I mean, I hear people say, “I see God in my life everyday” but they aren’t talking about physical manifestations of a Godly being.

      I hear people say they talk to God, but the sane ones don’t say they are actually HEARING God, they talk about getting “pulled in a direction.“ or ”feeling it in my heart.”

      Why is it that when I would have physical proof, with my eyes that a “both God and man” being came down from the sky and started doing crazy things, suddenly too late to be saved? Why don’t we see people who amputated limbs get healed? Is that outside the power of God’s will?

      Why did the people in the Bible get to see Jesus walk on water, and heal the blind and do all of the other things that allegedly happened, while I am stuck looking for obscure meanings and “miracles” like “oh thank God he created man, who created medicine that saved my child“ and ”I prayed I would find a job, and I did, praise the Lord.”

      I’m heading to the gym, i’ll be back later

      Report Post »  
    • proudinfidel54
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 3:56pm

      Lesbian Packing Hollow Points, It is obvious that your hatred of Christianity is based on it’s denouncment of your sexual lifestyle. And your assertion that having Bibleman in schools is somehow against the constitution is just another example of the Liberal, Judicial, branch of the government over stepping its authority by trying to create policy that has absolutely no basis in the constitution which clearly prohibits any law from restricting a person from practicing their religious freedom as well as creating any law establishing a religion. And lets face it, I hardly think Bible Man is the result of some “Act of Congress” and therefore is not the result of any such law.

      Report Post » proudinfidel54  
    • rush_is_right
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 3:59pm

      “What does Christianity teach in regards to this scenario? Does it teach that at this moment it would then be too late for me to be saved? If so, why? Wouldn’t a genuine, “I’m sorry I was such an utter fool to not see you until now, it is clear that you died on the cross for my sins” be enough to keep an all loving God from sending me to an eternal tort”

      no the only way you could still be alive is to have the mark on you….once you get that mark, its an unalterable decision….there is no hope for you.

      Report Post »  
    • rush_is_right
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 4:05pm

      “I mean, why does it seem like Christianity/religion in general is afraid of having visible, solid proof of Jesus/savior? I mean, I hear people say, “I see God in my life everyday” but they aren’t talking about physical manifestations of a Godly being.”

      because you wouldn’t believe even if you saw…Pharoah saw….he was hardened….the pharisees saw Jesus raise someoen from the dead….didn’t matter….

      .the Lord has mercy on whom He will have mercy….not all are to be saved….its a hard truth….before Jacob and Esau were born….the Lord said the older will serve the younger…and the Lord hated Esau, and loved Jacob….because of His election….

      Report Post »  
    • ReynMansson
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 4:10pm

      HynoToadie, Atheism is a religion like abstinence is a sex position. Bill Maher

      Report Post » ReynMansson  
    • scarebear83
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 4:12pm

      “though evolution doesn’t have anything to do with how life became”

      I have problems with this. Those who claim evolution and abiogenesis have nothing to do with one another would be like saying grapes have nothing to do with grape juice. You can’t have grape juice unless you have grapes. You can’t have evolution unless you first have a lifeform to evolve. With that being said, the big bang, abiogenesis, and evolution are all connected (isn’t it the current thought that after the big bang stars and planets etc. also “evolved?”). One cannot simply cut out abiogenesis from the equation simply because they can’t explain how life first got here. But I understand why people do it. In order to hold tight onto the idea of evolution one must say the two are unrelated and demonize anyone who tries to say they are or else the whole theory falls apart. If there’s any evidence to disprove evolution, abiogenesis is it. Evolutionists know it and Christians know it. Why else say one has nothing to do with the other?

      Report Post » scarebear83  
    • Callie369
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 4:50pm

      WRONG. No tax dollars are being used to pay this person. Therefore, its perfectly legal. I just want to know when FREEDOM OF RELIGION as per the constitution will take effect. You know what I mean? “THAT THE GOVERNMENT CANNOT PROHIBIT THE FREE EXERCISE THEREOF……..

      Report Post »  
    • riverdog1
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 5:13pm

      well said lez. also hypnotoad athiesm is NOT a religeon. would it be okay if we sent in “koran guy” to spend some time with your kids? constitution, read it.

      Report Post »  
    • JEANNIEMAC
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 5:27pm

      Obama’s homosexual czar instituted a sex education program in the public schools teaching the children all about how to perform a variety of sex acts, and how any such act is acceptable. If the czar can do this, the parents who want their children to hear of goodness and morality have a right to do so.
      “public” means “the people” The parents are also the people.

      Report Post »  
    • Bad_Ashe
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 5:28pm

      @MOD – The majority of your last two posts contained “Sunday School” objections and atheist cosmic bellhop arguments. None of this really helps to further our conversation right now. There is a time to deal with this, but only after we’ve discussed evidence.

      So you “lean” toward physical evidence and scientific evidence? I assume by “scientific” you specifically mean empirical evidence via the scientific method?

      Think about the things that cannot be scientifically proven that the atheist accepts everyday…the metaphysical existence of self, and external minds, that the world we live in is real, as opposed to simulation, and ethical positions of right and wrong. Since science presupposes math and logic, they too cannot be proven by science. Even science itself cannot be proven to exist by science, and is full of unprovable assumptions.

      If the atheist were to truly live their life based only on scientific evidence, they could clearly not manage any sort of productive existence. When it comes to physical evidence, we know that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, so this too is limited.

      Everyday you exist, you make basic assumptions and you live on fundamentally proper beliefs, axioms, etc. So given this, would you agree that the atheist accepts many truths that go beyond the immediate physical evidence (what is immediately in front of them), and scientific evidence?

      Report Post » Bad_Ashe  
    • Bad_Ashe
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 5:52pm

      @MOD

      On another quick note, I’ve read that bit from Hitchens many times, and it’s still quite funny. It demonstrates that he has a poor understanding of both theology and cosmology, but still funny.

      I can’t say with certainty that Hitchens, Maher, Harris were/are lying either, but I can predict their behavior based on their previous actions regarding evidentiary arguments, their admitted biases, their intellectual dishonesty and their logical errors in previous arguments.

      As for the rest of this post, stop limiting the definition of religion to worship and deities, religion needs neither. Scientology has no deities or worship, yet it is commonly considered to be a religion. “A personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices” is one of the textbook definitions of the word.

      I brought up the FFRF to demonstrate that your categorization argument was pointless, at least when based on the behavior of your fellow atheists. This simply contributes to the relevancy of the overall point regarding Atheism as religion. It is not some psychological projection attempting to attach this label to Atheism, but rather it is inspired by the behavior of atheists themselves.

      Either way, these topics are no longer relevant. Our evidence discussion is much more compelling, so I look forward to your response.

      Report Post » Bad_Ashe  
    • Sparky101
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 5:57pm

      Just more crap from the church-burning atheists. In the past 50 years, there has been one group heaping all kinds of harm on the USA – atheists. They won’t stop until the whole place is one big cesspool. What a waste of good air.

      Report Post »  
    • ModerationIsBest
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 6:02pm

      @BAD_ASHE

      I never said that Atheists don’t. We as humans have to base our lives around generally accepted principles that have been question, tested and re-tested. The difference comes in when strong evidence comes into play that is contrary to what you assume is “generally accepted.” You have taken a rational step in admitting that you COULD be wrong. Are there more like you? Yes. Are there a lot more like you? Maybe. Are you the majority? From my discussions with people, doubtful but I can’t prove it.

      Some atheists proclaim that they can scientifically prove that a God doesn’t exist. Some say it’s fact that there is no God and nothing could ever happen to change their conclusion. I will call them hypocritical just like I do any believer that says they have factual evidence a God does exist and that nothing could ever happen to change their conclusion. That has ALWAYS been my “argument.”

      That is where the element of “faith” comes in and the fact that there are many denominations, who have their own separate “beliefs” however small makes me question the legitimacy of any religion. How can some supernatural place like “limbo” exist and then suddenly that place doesn’t exist? How dare the Catholic church create a place for the souls of unbaptized children, and then take that place away from the parents of children who died. That was a real place for those parents and a source for comfort, now it’s gone?

      Report Post »  
    • ModerationIsBest
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 6:13pm

      @BAD_ASHE

      Therefore, a discussion between you and me about evidence is irrelevant because we both agree that evidence is a good thing to help prove an argument. We both agree that evidence can be wrong.

      The Bible can provide answers.
      Answers can be wrong.
      We both agree that there is some insightful stuff in the Bible.
      We both agree that neither of us can say without a shadow of a doubt that a God does or doesn’t exist.

      Science can provide answers too. Those answers can be wrong too.
      We both agree that there are some insightful stuff in the study of science.
      We both agree that science isn’t the only thing necessary to help make this world a better place.

      We can both agree that as we stand it now we are all spinning around on a rock, trying desperately to understand our environments and give explanation for our existence in the best way we can. We should do so with honesty, empathy and humility. We should do so in abundant awareness that any of our beliefs or findings could be wrong, despite them being important to us.

      Report Post »  
    • thetommyhawk
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 6:28pm

      To LESBIAN PACKING HOLLOW POINTS; I concur with you! Your “points” are definitely “hollow”! I fail to see where your adept use of “Science, the scientific method, logic, reason, and evidence based decision making” has proved your points. I have learned over the years that to argue with one of inferior intellect, one must argue at a subterranean level and I fear that you have the advantage of experience!

      Report Post » thetommyhawk  
    • Jeremy
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 6:37pm

      It isn’t stated in this article whether or not the Bibleman assembly is a requirement for students to attend. If it is required then I agree that it is a violation of the Establishment clause but if it is optional and you attempt to make it unavailable against the wishes of those who attend then that is also a violation! this being said if other religions wish to have voluntary assemblies then they should also be allowed that is the only true way to not violate the Establishment clause.

      Report Post » Jeremy  
    • Therightsofbilly
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 7:01pm

      Hey MOD,

      I see some things in your response to BAD_ASHE that I will bring up with you at another time so as not to be a buttinsky.

      But for now let me ask………Do you consider yourself to be any more significant “on this rock” than the common ant that you unknowingly squash when you walk down the street? Or maybe as a kid, you may have even knowingly squashed a few.

      If so, why?

      If not, why?

      I do not study atheism, so I am assuming that you already have a pat answer to my question, but I am curious none the less.

      Report Post » Therightsofbilly  
    • USAF2003
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 7:02pm

      Your comment is all BS! Nothing in our constitution was written to keep christianity out of our public schools, Period. It was written to keep the GOVT from FORCING a religion on us. Plus, aren’t we supposed to give are kids both sides to everything? And if so, they get so much anti-christian, anti-American rhetoric from libturd teachers that BibleMan would be the “other view”. Keep it up AL!!!

      Report Post »  
    • ModerationIsBest
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 7:24pm

      @THERIGHTSOFBILLY

      You are making the wrong assumption then. I don‘t have a specific answer ready for this as I don’t really “study atheism”(not sure what there is to “study”). either. I have some books from atheist authors, yes but I also have some books from Christian authors including a student Bible that I received from a friend when I attended church regularly. While I enjoy reading books about atheism, it is already telling me stuff that I tend to agree with so I don‘t get as much out of it as I would reading a book from someone else’s perspective.

      Fact is, I haven’t really thought about ants in that regard(or any regard). I don‘t go out of my way to step on ants and I don’t go out of my way to not step on ants. Ants are ants. I guess by the fact that I don’t really consider ants in my daily life, that I do think I’m “more significant” then them in the terms you put it.

      Because I am a human, I can think critically, help others, etc .

      I think in general humans are more important than any animal. Does that mean we should be cruel to animals? Not at all, but I was appalled when Tucker Carlson said, “I’m a Christian, I’ve made mistakes myself, I believe fervently in second chances. But Michael Vick killed dogs, and he did [it]in a heartless and cruel way. And I think, personally, he should’ve been executed for that.”

      So to answer your question, yes I think I’m more significant then ants, why do you ask?

      Report Post »  
    • ModerationIsBest
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 7:34pm

      @THERIGHTSOFBILLY

      Feel free to make your points about things I talked with ASHE about. If you do it here, I actually know and remember what you‘re referring to instead of on some other post where I can’t remember what was said.

      ASHE and I have come to a mutual understanding(at least from my understanding lol) that we both have a certain way of thinking, and that we both may end up being wrong. That is all I cared about. So in theory, my discussion is over unless ASHE has a disagreement or makes some other argument, you won’t be butting in. Either way, I can respond to both of you.

      Report Post »  
    • Therightsofbilly
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 7:56pm

      @MOD

      Do you not consider that to be just a bit arrogant or egotistical to assume that you are even the slightest bit more important in the grand scheme of things than any other living creature?

      After all, we all “evolved” from the same primordial ooze, right?
      Nothing created us, and nothing awaits us, so we are just as insignificant as that ant.
      I mean, our ability to think is no more remarkable that the homing pigeons ability to find it’s way home, now is it?

      All living things, as well as all non-living things on this rock are just as insignificant as the other, right? The answer would have to yes if we believe as you don’t believe.

      You said you want to do as little harm to people as possible, but yet you do not care about the ant.
      How ant-i social of you. I dare say maybe even a little specie-ist.

      Now lets backtrack just a little to the post where you stated……..”I don’t worship anything”

      Still sticking with that?

      Report Post » Therightsofbilly  
    • Therightsofbilly
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 8:00pm

      Thanks, but no thanks MOD,

      I’ll let BAD_ASHE respond for himself.

      I look forward to his posts, and I don’t want to influence the discussion in any way.

      My points can wait.

      Report Post » Therightsofbilly  
    • ModerationIsBest
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 8:22pm

      @THERIGHTSOFBILLY

      Wow Billy, what happened to you? Did you get hit over the head or something? Are you trying to say that because I think myself to be more significant then an ant, that I somehow worship myself? Is that really the correlation you’re marking or am I misunderstanding you?

      Plus, what are you talking about in the “grand scheme” of things? Evolution wasn’t a “scheme” “designed” by the Big Bang and I never talk about a “scheme.” I’m confused by what you mean when talking in this sense.

      Utter nonsense.

      Report Post »  
    • Raven249
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 8:28pm

      Just a suggestion, but maybe you’d like to take a look at some of the textbooks used in times past in America. The New England Primer, for one, which cites the Bible and Biblical teachings frequently. This was in public schools, mind you, and I should think that those who helped to write the Constitution would know better than you or I what is Constitutional or not. Also, referring to the Establishment Clause, “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.” Last I checked, the Department of Education and the public school system wasn’t Congress. Otherwise, schools are the ones that can legally declare war. If this district wants to keep the Bible man, let them. Sounds to me like he’s got a lot of support.

      Report Post »  
    • binge_thinker
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 10:27pm

      Militant atheists have been aiming to eliminate crosses or Christian symbols in every corner of the hemisphere. They’ve sought to remove crosses that have marked roadside accidents were a life / lives have been lost. For a group that professes “tolerance”, “compassion” along with a kitbag full of other contemporary phony buzz words including peaceful coexistence, they show and continue to demonstrate an amazing LACK of what they preach.
      Hypocrisy much??

      Report Post » binge_thinker  
    • Therightsofbilly
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 10:48pm

      It’s OK MOD,

      Really didn’t expect you to grasp the concept anyway.

      You only seem to be able to grasp what is staring you right smack in the face.

      And that is perhaps the very reason you are an atheist.

      If you take nothing else away from my “ramblings”, just try and ask yourself what makes you any better, or of more importance than that wall outside your bedroom window. (In the NOT SO GRAND SCHEME OF THINGS) if that suits you better. Because that wall came from the same “whatever” you think you came from.

      What is so hard to understand about the fact that if we are here only by happenstance, and there is absolutely no reason for us to exist, then nothing we do here, either good or bad, means a thing.

      Why would you worry about saving resources for the future? Future of what? Who will know? Who will care? Would it really matter if the world ended tomorrow, or in a billion years?

      MOD, you finished one of posts above with this statement……..”We can both agree that as we stand it now we are all spinning around on a rock, trying desperately to understand our environments and give explanation for our existence in the best way we can”

      You may be desperate in your attempt to understand an explanation of your existence, but I am not desperate. Not in the least.

      I already understand.

      Report Post » Therightsofbilly  
    • ModerationIsBest
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 11:20pm

      @Billy

      If you believe in a God, specifically to you, the Christian God, nothing we do here means a thing. If you are a horrible person your entire life causing massive harm, and then accept Jesus, guess what, everything bad you did was just wiped clean by a God which means……it didn’t matter.

      If i’m a good person and do tons of things to help people, but don’t believe in the “true” God guess what, it doesn’t matter. I’m immediately sent off to an eternal torture, that I was “born” having.

      Why do you keep talking about schemes? What are you talking about schemes, what is this nonsense you are talking about? First get out of that thinking about schemes and maybe you can understand a little bit better. I try to be a good person here and now, because I like to be. I try not to cause harm to others because I dislike causing harm to others. I try to gain knowledge now, for my own enjoyment and understanding. I try to sight see now, because I enjoy it and like seeing nice places. Will those things go away when I die? Yes, but that doesn’t take away the enjoyment of those things now.

      This argument seems very similar to the one that, “If you don’t believe in a God, you can’t have morals” argument that I hear which is also illogical.

      Again, I’m sorry that you feel that you have to live forever for life to derive any meaning or enjoyment. Be well Billy, oh wait I forgot, you can’t be well forever, hence there is no reason for me to wish you

      Report Post »  
    • Therightsofbilly
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 11:42pm

      Good grief MOD,

      When you hear someone say “in the grand scheme of things”,………IT’S A FIGURE OF SPEECH.
      It does not mean that every single moment and event in ones life is set in stone to happen at a pre-planned time.

      Geeez………..If I say it’s raining cats and dogs………..guess what.

      Report Post » Therightsofbilly  
    • Therightsofbilly
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 11:45pm

      Oh and MOD,

      There is a fundamental flaw in your reasoning in your first paragraph.

      I’ll let you ponder it for a while, if you care to.

      Report Post » Therightsofbilly  
    • ModerationIsBest
      Posted on February 7, 2012 at 12:38am

      @Billy

      Yes, but you aren’t talking about “in a figure of speech.”

      You are talking about, if in “the end”, everyone dies and everything is ended, then “in the end” you hold no more significance then an ant. I‘m assuming that’s the correlation you make?

      I argue that “the end” doesn’t matter to me, because it’s “the end.” Why/how would I care what happens after I’m dead? How can I care that I’m as dead as an ant? I’m dead.

      I’m fine focusing on the here and now and enjoying my life, you can keep focusing on “the end.” Not surprising though, I mean as we all know, religion teaches that their “eternal” resting place is actually the most important thing. It’s no wonder religion finds a silver lining in the “end times.” Boils down to,”Wow, billions of people are dying, but look at it this way, I get to go be with God/Jesus/Allah/Zeus FOREVER”

      I ask you, if I have fundamentally flawed reasoning in my first paragraph, so much so that you felt the need to point it out, why not address it and say why you think it is flawed? Is it because you can’t give a logical response? Is it because you don’t like agreeing that a psychopathic murderer who accepts Jesus gets to go to Heaven? Or the fact that believing in Jesus gives no real justice at all? I’m sure you think I come to my own assumptions about your beliefs, if you think they’re so wrong that you comment on them, why not show why it’s flawed?

      Be well, oops I did it again.

      Report Post »  
    • Bad_Ashe
      Posted on February 7, 2012 at 1:21am

      @MODERATIONISBEST (1) – You realize that not every statement I make is to refute something you may have said. It’s obvious that much of my recent posts are simply trying to get us on the same page in regard to our working definitions and our arguments. That being said, you are being far too presumptive here, as your conclusions do not necessarily follow from what has been laid out.

      There is no “rational step” taken, as belief in God is both reasonable and rational. The inability to admit one could be wrong is often simply a matter of hubris, one which I have seen far too often in atheists, but I’ve seen this in believers as well.That being said, at least believers admit their spiritual and emotional bias, atheists maintain that they are simply messengers of reason and logic, all while emotionally rejecting the concept of objective authority like petulant children.

      On a related note, you really have it in for Catholics, no? This is the 2nd or 3rd anti-Catholic rant I’ve seen from you. But we’re not here to talk doctrine, we’re talking evidence, so let’s stay focused and move on.

      You believe our evidentiary discussion to be irrelevant because you either don’t like it, or you simply don’t understand the intended purpose of the discussion. Either way, it’s hardly irrelevant, and given your “summary”, I suspect it is the latter.

      Report Post » Bad_Ashe  
    • Bad_Ashe
      Posted on February 7, 2012 at 1:25am

      @MODERATIONISBEST (2)

      The way you’ve attempted to summarize our discussion is Bible (a telling choice) vs. Science, but this is an absurd logical leap from the content of our conversation. While your summary may or may not necessarily be accurate, it does not follow from the conversation. I’ve not mentioned the Bible in our discussion, or the value of it. I’ve been talking about defining what is or is not valid evidence for you, the atheist.

      Let‘s look at some of the salient points from the conversation we’ve ACTUALLY been having:

      You’ve admitted that you tend toward scientific and physical evidence.

      You’ve admitted that there are many other types of valid evidence.

      You’ve admitted that we live our lives believing properly basic things which are not scientifically proven, but of which there is still evidence for.

      Per your own language, you’ve stated that we live our lives around “generally accepted” principles.

      Despite all of this, when presented for arguments and evidence for God’s existence, I’ve read posts in which your retreat to the “no scientific evidence” crutch. Why the evidentiary double-standard?

      Per our recent exchanges, you‘ve admitted that you don’t live or gauge the entirety of your beliefs by this scientific standard, that you believe in generally accepted principles and knowledge, and that there are many different types of valid evidence.

      Then why all the goalpost moving then when someone mentions God?

      Report Post » Bad_Ashe  
    • Therightsofbilly
      Posted on February 7, 2012 at 1:35am

      Nope, sorry, wrong again MOD.

      I did use it as a figure of speech.

      I do not mean “in the end” you will have no more significance than an ant, I mean right now, you have no more significance than an ant. IN YOUR BELIEF SYSTEM.

      You may think otherwise, but you can not prove it.

      Report Post » Therightsofbilly  
    • Bad_Ashe
      Posted on February 7, 2012 at 1:38am

      @MODERATIONISBEST

      There is a mountain of evidence for God’s existence, but most atheists go apoplectic when presented with it, so they move the goalposts. This evidence is leveraged to form the cosmological arguments, teleological argument (that generally accepted principle you speak of), argument from consciousness, argument from reason, argument from evil, moral argument, and ontological argument for God’s existence.

      The basis for all these arguments? Scientific evidence, physical evidence, metaphysics, and philosophy.

      Until the atheist can confront their evidentiary double-standard, and until they can process this evidence and argument for God’s existence without resorting to religion-bashing rants, hand waving, and mock incredulity, they are simply being intellectually dishonest. This may even currently apply to you, but it certainly doesn’t have to.

      Be seeing you.

      Report Post » Bad_Ashe  
    • ModerationIsBest
      Posted on February 7, 2012 at 1:40am

      @Bad

      My statement was, “You have taken a rational step in admitting that you COULD be wrong.“ The ”rationality” applied here is the admittance that you could be wrong, not in your stance to whether or not there is/isn’t a God. I would disagree in your use of “hubris” as it doesn’t come down to someone being “arrogant” about what they think. It comes down to someone who is flat out, unwilling to say they could be wrong no matter the evidence.

      We agree that there are both Atheists and Religious people who refuse to admit they could be wrong. I tend to have more exposure with religious people then I do with Atheists so it’s hard for me to judge fairly which side is “worse.“ The ”popular” atheists generally admit they could be wrong, but Richard Dawkins is one that comes across like he knows for sure, whereas someone like Hitchens(does come off arrogant no doubt) and Harris say they can’t prove it one way or the other. Bill O‘Reilly is a guy that said he can’t prove a God exists, but until it is proven that there isn’t a God, he’s “sticking with Jesus.” and I commend him for it.

      I would say that the reason atheists come off like they do in regards to reason and logic is because sometimes(not all of the time), when we ask people things, it boils down to “Well that’s just what I believe.” When pointing out that their beliefs could be wrong or asked why they believe that, or why someone would think believing that is illogical, they get upset

      Report Post »  
    • Therightsofbilly
      Posted on February 7, 2012 at 2:17am

      MOD

      You do realize that when Billy O says that, he also knows that no one will ever, ever, be able to prove to him that God does not exist.

      So he will be sticking with Jesus permanently.

      He is not inferring that his beliefs could possibly be wrong.

      He is not just hedging his bets.

      You get that, right?

      Report Post » Therightsofbilly  
    • ModerationIsBest
      Posted on February 7, 2012 at 2:32am

      I don’t have “it in” for Catholics, don’t know where you got that from. My point was, that despite all of Christianity accepting Jesus, that there are many denominations that have different beliefs about their form of Christianity. I simply pointed to the Catholic church, because they flat out created another plane of existence, and then said it never existed. I‘m sorry if truth’s about Catholics comes off as “attacks” but I’m just saying things that are true. If you know of any other denominations with vastly different views, please let me know, I would like to hear it.

      I would argue that I bring up generally accepted principles that are based in science to counter what is taught in the Bible not as “proof” that a God doesn’t exist. If by “proving” a particular Bible wrong(or set of beliefs) by those accepted principles, I “disprove” that particular God, so be it, but I am not proving that there is absolutely no God in whatever form. I can even delve into the morality of a God in attempt to disprove him, but that doesn‘t mean I’m also disproving a different God. The evidence I need to disprove Christianity, is different then the evidence I need to disprove Scientology or Buddhism.

      I said personal evidence is a type of evidence, but not one that gives reason for me to believe your claims. Until I have a similar experience, your experience is not evidence to me. Therefore, I’m not moving the goalpost.

      Report Post »  
    • ModerationIsBest
      Posted on February 7, 2012 at 2:48am

      @Billy

      Perhaps, but I would argue that if you can give enough counter evidence that what the Bible teaches is incorrect, you will get to the point that some people begin to question if what the Bible says is accurate, which then leads to not necessarily that a God doesn’t exist, but that the Christian God doesn’t exist.

      It’s why you have Christians who become Atheists, or Christians who become Muslim, Mormon, etc. You also have people who never thought that the Bible was correct, and then suddenly go from Atheism to Christianity, or Muslim to Christianity, or any “conversion.”

      As I said to BAD, just because I could potentially disprove Christianity, doesn‘t mean I have then also proven that Scientology isn’t true.

      All I can go by are the claims that you make, and why I think they are wrong and give evidence that I think disproves your claim.

      The talk of God on here(and in America) is just so heavily centered around Christianity, that even I sometimes in the heat of the argument think that by disproving Christianity, that I am disproving a God altogether. It is an error that I will try to fix in later discussions.

      Then again, since you’re a Christian, I assume you think that your God is the only God, so by trying to disprove him, then by your logic I would be disproving God altogether but that is neither here nor there.

      Report Post »  
    • ModerationIsBest
      Posted on February 7, 2012 at 3:23am

      @Billy

      I derive “significance(ie meaning)” from my life for the reasons I listed above. If you can prove that ants can derive “significance(ie meaning)” from their existence for the same reasons, you may have a point. Since ants aren’t similar to me at all, you have no point.

      If you also want to go into terms of society.

      I’m sure society would agree that I am “more significant(ie important)” than an ant(though you would probably disagree lol).

      You continually wrote “in the grand scheme of things” and then wrote, “What is so hard to understand about the fact that if we are here only by happenstance, and there is absolutely no reason for us to exist, then nothing we do here, either good or bad, means a thing.”

      I don’t think I said anything I do means anything “anything” in the “grand scheme of things”. I do things because I want to, just because I have no reason for existence doesn‘t mean I can’t derive happiness or enjoyment now from those events.

      Anyways, i’m heading out for the night.

      Report Post »  
    • ModerationIsBest
      Posted on February 7, 2012 at 3:52am

      That is all very interesting evidence for a God, but some of that talks about a general God, not a specific God. I admit though that I am not up to snuff on all of those arguments.

      Some arguments derive their “evidence” from “lack of evidence” which simply boils down to, “well I can’t understand this, therefore it must be a God.” Sadly, arguing from ignorance doesn’t prove a God, but it doesn’t disprove one either.

      Secondly, most discussions I have are with people who are theist, not deists. So if a Christian/Muslim came up to me and used these arguments as their proof for the existence of a God, they could easily be proving the existence of the other ones God. If they then made the leap to use their texts to prove that their God is the one true God, I would then go and try to disprove the claims in their book. If I could somehow successfully disprove those claims, they could then fall back on the, “Well I still believe in a God” and I would then have to use evidence that is not specific to Christianity or Islam to disprove that.

      Well I am really tired, sorry if I left something out. If I did, I will try and get back to it tomorrow. See ya around.

      Report Post »  
    • Lesbian Packing Hollow Points
      Posted on February 7, 2012 at 9:09am

      @ Bad Ashe:
      Everyone celebrates the times when SCOTUS renders an opinion with which they agree and decry SCOTUS when it disagrees with them. This says nothing about the rectitude of any of those opinions, and in fact, can be seen as a tautology carrying no informational content whatsoever. Overtime, however, there is a discernible trend in the highest court toward correcting its own mistakes of the past. Just as Plesy v. Ferguson was overturned by Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas, Roe v. Wade will eventually be overturned by a future court. The court will also correct itself on its interpretation of the Commerce Clause and has already begun correcting itself on the 2nd Amendment, a trend which will continue in a positive direction.

      In similar ways, the federal government has erred in the past in ever allowing religious iconography to be displayed as naked endorsements (establishment) of religion in government buildings. Those errors are being corrected. The fact that you view the corrections as errors shows just how incorrect you are.

      Report Post » Lesbian Packing Hollow Points  
    • Lesbian Packing Hollow Points
      Posted on February 7, 2012 at 9:23am

      @ Bad Ashe:
      And I do ever so apologize for not answering your demanding questions immediately, but unlike so many Blazers, I have a real life to live.

      Report Post » Lesbian Packing Hollow Points  
    • @leftfighter
      Posted on February 7, 2012 at 1:51pm

      Wait a minute. The vast majority People want Bible Man, but a very small and very vocal minority of the People don’t, and demand that the majority capitulate.

      This is what Democracy looks like?

      Report Post » @leftfighter  
    • @leftfighter
      Posted on February 7, 2012 at 1:57pm

      @Lesbian Packing Hollow Points

      You may continue to worship self, science, or “reason” all you like (despite what you say, that’s what it boils down to) but here’s where your logic breaks down: The Consitution doesn’t expressly forbid the teaching of religion in government schools.

      Cite the Establishment Clause all you like (because I know that’s your basis) not, go look at history. Specifically, that the Bible was the standard method of teaching at the time the First Amendment was written and remained a staple in American schools for over a century.

      You won’t like hearing it, but you;re wrong.

      Now, for all of your supposed “open mindedness,” can you please stop being so closed minded regarding the free practice of religion anywhere and everywhere (as the Founders intended in the “free practice thereof” part of that clause)?

      Report Post » @leftfighter  
    • PubliusPencilman
      Posted on February 7, 2012 at 2:35pm

      LeftFighter,

      Just a minute here–you Tea Party-ers are the first to say that “freedom” is the absense of government control. You folks are constantly saying this. So, in that case, wouldn’t you say that its a bit hypocritical to claim that mandated, government-funded teachings of a specific religious practice count as “free exercise”?

      The free exercise clause is an argument against Bible Man. Do you really think that a public school child’s right to free exercise is protected when they are made to go and learn the Christian Bible at an assembly? These events are clearly coercive, and if you don’t think so, try to imagine yourself as the sole Jewish kid in your class going to these assemblies.

      Report Post »  
    • SaraD
      Posted on February 7, 2012 at 4:19pm

      @moderationisbest
      If you saw fairies pop out and sprinkle fairy dust would you believe in fairies? Of course! If you are willing to change your mind does that mean you are in denial of fairies existence? No… Let’s put our thinking caps on.

      Report Post » SaraD  
    • Lesbian Packing Hollow Points
      Posted on February 7, 2012 at 5:30pm

      @ Left Fighter:
      “Is this what Democracy looks like?”

      No. This is what a Republic looks like, where the majority does not get to trample on the rights of the minority.

      “The Consitution doesn’t expressly forbid the teaching of religion in government schools.”

      This statement is exactly as true as the statement, “The King of Mars does not like Venusian Broccoli.“ The Constitution is utterly silent on the topic of ”government schools”. If you believe otherwise, I entreat you to cite for me where it mentions them at all.

      Report Post » Lesbian Packing Hollow Points  
    • Bad_Ashe
      Posted on February 7, 2012 at 5:30pm

      @LESBIAN PACKING HOLLOW POINTS (1)

      You are in over your head here. You write of rhetorical tautology on my part, yet surely the irony is not lost on anyone that there is neither logical saliency or clarity in your response. It would also be remiss to not point out the fact that you opine upon external agreements or disagreements of SC decisions being ultimately meaningless, yet continue to palaver on about SC decisions you agree with, or future decisions you believe that you will agree with, all based on the current trend you‘ve manufactured based on cases that you’ve cherry-picked as examples.

      One can reasonably assume that this faith in the Supreme Court would be seriously shaken if they retreated on the interpretation laid out by Emerson vs. BOE. Were this to happen, it would seem to be quite the problem for you, particularly when it comes to reconciling your self-description as a “Constitutionalist” with your ideological rejection of religion in schools. This same incongruity has previously been pointed out regarding 2nd amendment decisions you likely would not agree with, and ones that came close to becoming reality.

      You are correct in your statement regarding external affirmations on SC decisions, but that is not the thrust of the point being made, the point is that your position is one that is at best a double-standard, and at worst, brainless hypocrisy.

      Report Post » Bad_Ashe  
    • ModerationIsBest
      Posted on February 7, 2012 at 5:35pm

      @SARAD

      Yes, but do you go around listing things that you don’t believe in? Wouldn’t that take up your entire life?

      Report Post »  
    • Bad_Ashe
      Posted on February 7, 2012 at 5:36pm

      @LESBIAN PACKING HOLLOW POINTS (2)

      When it comes to religious iconography, statements, etc. in government, this “error correction” argument of yours is obscenely presumptive, and is only sound if these examples qualify as errors. However, if the Emerson vs. BOE decision was itself made in error, then this situation is completely reversed.

      While our opinions may not matter in Supreme Court decisions regarding the religion clauses, we can certainly agree that the opinions, examples, and intent of those who CREATED the clauses certainly do. You call yourself a Constitutionalist, yet you flaunt a historical ignorance which betrays you at every turn.

      In my initial post to you yesterday, the salient and substantive argument regarding the Founding Fathers integration of religion into both government and education was conveniently glossed over by you. I can understand why this would be problematic to address and why you would prefer to blindly support an ex post facto Supreme Court rationalization built on false premises.

      The Constitution says nothing of “separation of church and state”, and the “wall” mentioned in Emerson vs. BOE comes from a Jefferson letter 13 years after the amendment, from a man who had nothing to do placing these religious clauses in the first place. There is zero logic in using this letter as some sort of declarative statement. Yet this is what they nonsensically did in 1947.

      Report Post » Bad_Ashe  
    • Bad_Ashe
      Posted on February 7, 2012 at 5:40pm

      LESBIAN PACKING HOLLOW POINTS (3)

      Finally, it is disingenuous to say (as the Supreme Court does) that the constitution provides no contextual definition for “establishment of religion”. The definition was quite clear in the 1700s, where establishment churches (govt-sanctioned, req. attendance, req. tithe) were directly referred to as such. This definition was not vague in the least.

      If the establishment clause was meant to be interpreted the way you (and quite selectively, the Supreme Court) interpret it, why was there religious prayer before governmental congress, why religious education in public schools, why Biblical oaths in court, etc. etc. etc.

      This is a historical fact that cannot be refuted, unless of course you are seriously contending that the Founding Fathers simply ignored their own Constitution, and that this was consequently all simply a matter of “error” for 200 years.

      I would hope that next time you will come prepared to address actual objections to your flaccid arguments, rather than rely on rhetorical bite and evasive argumentation. Finally, there is no need to apologize with that spicy hint of passive-aggressive snark, it isn‘t your fault that you’re too obtuse to know when you’re being purposefully baited.

      Report Post » Bad_Ashe  
    • Lesbian Packing Hollow Points
      Posted on February 7, 2012 at 5:54pm

      @ Bad Ashe:
      It’s Everson, not Emerson, BTW. Unless you were citing a completely different SCOTUS case relating to the incorporation of the Establishment Clause as enforcible against the states via the 14th Amendment’s Due Process Clause.

      And it was instructive, not controlling, for the SCOTUS to bring the Jefferson Letter to the Danbury Baptists into play in their decision as it was, in fact, contemporary with the authorship of the First Amendment. And that is the essence of what being a Constitutional Constructionist means.

      The founding fathers were not supermen, by any means. They had flaws and historical blindspots all their own. As such, an overarching theme in Constitutional jurisprudence has to be the preservation of liberty and not merely the comprehension of prose. As such, in any controversy where the historical writings of the Constitution’s authors are at all equivocal, the benefit of the doubt must be given in favour of permissiveness on the part of individuals, and prohibition on the part of collectives, of which, the government is merely the largest, meanest collective.

      Report Post » Lesbian Packing Hollow Points  
    • Lesbian Packing Hollow Points
      Posted on February 7, 2012 at 5:58pm

      @ Bad Ashe:
      Since there is no explicit permission given to the government in the federal Constitution, which is supreme over any clauses to the contrary in state Constitutions, to favour any subset of religions in any way, the decision must needs be made that any favouritism shown to any religion by any level of government is forbidden. Any possible claim to the contrary is merely the camel’s nose under the tent flap toward rendering the Establishment Clause as meaningless as poor SCOTUS jurisprudence has thus far rendered the Commerce Clause and Necessary and Proper Clause.

      As to the historicity of your arguments, at the time, there simply weren’t a great deal of printed books FROM WHICH to offer instruction in schools, public or private. As such, it was largely a concession to necessity that the Bible was used as a reader. The favouritism of the majoritarian Christians at the time was given the beard of such necessity. Modernity no longer clothes such naked majoritarian Democracy and the minorities are pressing their rights, as it is right that we do so.

      Report Post » Lesbian Packing Hollow Points  
    • Lesbian Packing Hollow Points
      Posted on February 7, 2012 at 5:59pm

      @ Bad Ashe:
      And I’m sure you love to bait people on the Internet. On the web, I‘m quite confident that you’re a master baiter.

      Report Post » Lesbian Packing Hollow Points  
    • Bad_Ashe
      Posted on February 8, 2012 at 1:45pm

      LESBIANPACKINGHOLLOWPOINTS (2) -

      The Supreme Court did NONE of this, it simply crafted historical fiction, and in the process engaged a host of historically ignorant and unprecedented restrictions all based on this fiction. Certainly related is the fact that the vast majority of the 1947 SCOTUS were all Democrats and Roosevelt appointees.

      Even Edward Corwin, generally considered the greatest Constitutional scholar of the 20th century, and an expert in jurisprudence agreed that this course of action was absurd, and was simply the Supreme Court trying to remake history.

      There is no equivocality here when the text is taken as written, in the context of when it was written, and based on the relevant Constitutional authors’ writings, not simply a single writing from a single author who had nothing to do with the religious clauses themselves.

      This is clearly not a conservative or historically accurate interpretation of the Constitution and is certainly not an example of letting the text speak for itself. You are allowing your atheistic bias to overwhelm your supposed Constitutional conservatism.

      To assert otherwise is simple idiocy or intellectual dishonesty.

      Report Post » Bad_Ashe  
    • Bad_Ashe
      Posted on February 8, 2012 at 1:48pm

      LESBIANPACKINGHOLLOWPOINTS (3)

      Finally, your mention of Bible usage in schools due to lack of textbooks is both dishonest and weaselly. Religiously-centered classical education was a part of the majority of public school curriculums until the Fordian models of the 1940s took over in the 1950s (we can see where that got us). Additionally, your statement that the Bible as an educational tool was some kind concession within a government founded mostly by men with theology degrees and Biblical translations under their belt is laughable at best.

      Stop being so intellectually dishonest.

      Finally, I am indeed a master baiter. I do it on the web, I do it at home. Anything worth doing is worth doing right. The wife is naturally a bit put out these days, and there has been some chafing involved, but in order to succeed at anything you need practice and determination, that‘s how I managed my two Master’s Degrees and my upcoming Ph. D in less than a decade.

      Given that, I can only imagine how much time and practice you’ve put into illogical reasoning, considering how good you are at it.

      Report Post » Bad_Ashe  
    • Bad_Ashe
      Posted on February 8, 2012 at 2:32pm

      @LESBIAN PACKING HOLLOW POINTS (FINAL) – There was a part 1, but the comment board doesn’t like it. To summarize, it basically involved informing you to stop being a pedantic tool over an obvious typo, that no historian or court doing it’s job would use a single contemporary secondary source to guide a primary one, especially when so many additional related sources are available, and that at least you admit your biases regarding the Christianity of the Founding Fathers, and your disregard for historicity and etymology.

      Be seeing you.

      Report Post » Bad_Ashe  
    • punyhuman
      Posted on February 9, 2012 at 1:29am

      So,
      MOD has no [other] gods before him [her],
      won’t fall down to worship any false gods,
      won‘t use god’s name in vain [since there isn't one available]
      probably enjoys taking a day or two off from work regularly [like weekends] to relax, gather thoughts, re-focus
      is [hopefully] fond of parents and respects parenthood,
      you’re not a murderer,are you?
      kinda curious about your thoughts about adultery, probably not a good idea overall though,
      [s]he probably doesn’t steal, because where‘s the profit there unless you’re Danny Ocean,
      lying about your neighbor would only bring wrath on your household, so no benefit there i’m guessing
      and you probably don’t covet any of your neighbors stuff, anymore than he covets your stuff.

      MOD may be an atheist, but sounds like a decent person. just stripped off all the claptrap of christianity. I’m a Christian, but hey, MOD, do what you need to do. You have my respect for it. Nobody really will know the way things ought to be till judgement comes, and that’s based on heart condition, not on politics or the name of your religion.
      Just some thoughts of mine…

      Report Post »  
    • Rebecca Olesen
      Posted on April 12, 2012 at 7:02pm

      @bitch – Just so you know, they ARE teaching Sharia law in some public schools, in California several schools also having an IMAM come to the schools every FRIDAY for Friday prayers, which are held DURING class hours. During prayer time girls on their MENSTRUAL cycle are required to sit apart and in the (gee that’s not humiliating). I don’t think that should be allowed because they are using school property, during school hours, to host islamic prayer sessions. HOWEVER, nobody else is FORCED to watch it.
      NEITHER IS ANYBODY FORCED TO LISTEN TO BIBLE MAN.
      What you are really doing is enforcing your own brand of oppression of freedom of speech against Christians. What you are saying is gay people, atheists, and every other class of person has THE FREEDOM to say what THEY think about everything, including religion, BUT CHRISTIANS AREN’T.
      The majority SHOULD have a say in things like this; people who want free speech should also have a say in this – not people like you who only want free speech for gay atheists.
      ALSO, FYI – there is NOTHING in the constitution that supports this TOTAL and complete separation of all things christian from ‘the state’ – it only says that the government shall ‘make no law’ pertaining to the establishment of a religion or keeping people from practicing their religion. NOBODY forces their religion on you or anybody else to listen, or to attend. You’re just a self entitled hateful snotty bitch.

      Report Post » Rebecca Olesen  
  • eaglekeeper
    Posted on February 6, 2012 at 11:15am

    A religion is a sytem of beliefs. atheism is therefore a religion! Isn’t banning any mention of God and banning prayer in public places in effect establishing and promoting the religion of atheism?

    Report Post »  
    • PubliusPencilman
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 11:25am

      No, it’s called secularism and institutional neutrality. By your completely inadequate definition, any code of ethics or political ideology would be a religion.

      Please stop repeating the same tired and entirely counter-intuitive arguments.

      Report Post »  
    • TheProphetZachariah
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 11:35am

      Every man is religious whether they are atheist, pagan, christian, or Muslim/satanic. Censorship of Christ is establishment of Atheism, which is unconstitutional.

      Report Post » TheProphetZachariah  
    • Lesbian Packing Hollow Points
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 11:37am

      An open field with no building upon it is not anti-building, it merely stands in its natural state, sans building.

      Report Post » Lesbian Packing Hollow Points  
    • PubliusPencilman
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 11:46am

      Zachariah,

      What if a Jew takes offense and asks that they stop teaching the Christian Bible. Does that make the school more Jewish or more Atheist, because these are very different things.

      Report Post »  
    • rush_is_right
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 12:00pm

      “No, it’s called secularism and institutional neutrality. By your completely inadequate definition, any code of ethics or political ideology would be a religion. ”

      secularism is atheism….and its not neutral when all other religions are banned except atheism.

      Report Post »  
    • PubliusPencilman
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 12:16pm

      Rush,
      Don’t you ever get tired of losing these arguments?

      Secularism is not atheism, and no reasonable person thinks it is. I personally am not an atheist, but I am entirely for a secular government. When the Bible Man assembly is replaced by “No God Man” then you’ll have a cause. In the meantime, the school is making no statement about the existence or nonexistence of God, so your “points” make no sense.

      Report Post »  
    • Lesbian Packing Hollow Points
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 12:26pm

      Secularism is Atheism like charity is Christianity. All Christians are called to charity, but not all charitable organizations are Christian in nature. All Atheists are called to secularism, but not all secular organizations are Atheist in nature.

      Report Post » Lesbian Packing Hollow Points  
    • SquidVetOhio
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 12:47pm

      Secularism is not neutral. It is anti-God. The constitution NEVER mentions secularism. You should try reading it. In fact, it explicitly says congress is forbidden from writing laws CONCERNING religion. You want them to write laws forbidding religion. We are on the constitutional side of the argument.

      P.S. Jefferson, who started the public school system, thought the Bible should be the only required book. It’s a fact Jack!

      Report Post » SquidVetOhio  
    • Lesbian Packing Hollow Points
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 12:58pm

      @ Squid Vet Ohio:
      And the case of Everson V. Board of Education incorporated the Establishment Clause as an enforceable prohibition against States via the 14th Amendment’s Due Process Clause. Since public schools are State institutions, their own rule making is likewise governed by the Establishment Clause. It is the school board in this case which ran afoul of the Establishment Clause when it approved Bible Man to hold court there.

      I’m sorry if this simple line of jurisprudence eludes you, but it is fact, it is law, and it is enforced.

      Report Post » Lesbian Packing Hollow Points  
    • Lesbian Packing Hollow Points
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 1:02pm

      *sigh*

      http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/secular

      sec·u·lar [sek-yuh-ler] adjective
      1. of or pertaining to worldly things or to things that are not regarded as religious, spiritual, or sacred; temporal: secular interests.
      2. not pertaining to or connected with religion ( opposed to sacred): secular music.
      3. (of education, a school, etc.) concerned with nonreligious subjects.
      4. (of members of the clergy) not belonging to a religious order; not bound by monastic vows ( opposed to regular).
      5. occurring or celebrated once in an age or century: the secular games of Rome.

      Is there a magic 6th definition of which dictionary.com is unaware that is known only to Religionists?

      Report Post » Lesbian Packing Hollow Points  
    • PubliusPencilman
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 1:53pm

      “You should try reading it. In fact, it explicitly says congress is forbidden from writing laws CONCERNING religion. You want them to write laws forbidding religion.”

      Actually, you should try reading it. The exact wording is “regarding an establishment of religion.” Attempts to ensure that there remains no established state religion and that public institutions remain secular are entirely within both the language and the spirit of the law.

      Please read more carefully next time.

      Report Post »  
    • rush_is_right
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 2:34pm

      “Rush,
      Don’t you ever get tired of losing these arguments? ”

      no, since you haven’t won an argument with me yet…….you may want to take the tin-foil off…

      “Secularism is not atheism, and no reasonable person thinks it is. ”

      sec·u·lar·ism (sky-l-rzm)
      n.

      2. The view that religious considerations should be excluded from civil affairs or public education.

      atheists sure do believe number 2…..in other words a distinction without a difference…don’t you get tired of losing these arguments?? hmmm??

      as far as schools not teaching atheism…..really?

      Naturalistic evolution has clear consequences that Charles Darwin understood perfectly. 1) No gods worth having exist; 2) no life after death exists; 3) no ultimate foundation for ethics exists; 4) no ultimate meaning in life exists; and 5) human free will is nonexistent.”

      Provine, William B. [Professor of Biological Sciences, Cornell University], “, “Evolution: Free will and punishment and meaning in life”, Abstract of Will Provine’s 1998 Darwin Day Keynote Address.

      Report Post »  
    • PubliusPencilman
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 3:03pm

      Rush,

      So, the Christians, Jews, Hindus and Muslims who believe in secular government are actually atheists?

      Report Post »  
    • rush_is_right
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 4:09pm

      “Rush,

      So, the Christians, Jews, Hindus and Muslims who believe in secular government are actually atheists?
      ”

      depends upon what you mean by ‘secular’ do you mean one that doesn’t have a state religion? or one like we have that is actively hostile to faith other than atheism?

      Report Post »  
    • Bad_Ashe
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 6:04pm

      @LESBIAN PACKING HOLLOW POINTS — I’m still waiting for you to drop your brilliant constitutional and legal knowledge upon my post to you in the top thread. Given the level of argument and logic shown in your other posts, I’m very much looking forward the exchange.

      On a final note, be it physical or metaphysical, the act of removal does not equate to prior nonexistence. Surely someone with your commitment to reason and logic already knows that.

      Be seeing you.

      Report Post » Bad_Ashe  
    • PubliusPencilman
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 6:33pm

      Rush,

      There you go again, dodging the question. This seems to be a pretty clear pattern. Nearly every argument we have effectively ends with me asking you a clear and direct question that you refuse to answer.

      I mean “secular” in the most common definition of the term–a strict division between church and state and an insistence on institutional neutrality in questions of faith or religion. Plain and simple. Throughout our conversation, you have insisted that this is the same as atheism, but many people of faith in this country strongly believe in the concept of secularism in government (including schools).

      So, I’ll ask again: are you saying that these Christians, Jews, Hindu, Muslims, etc., who would prefer their children not be taught the Christian Bible in public school (or any specific interpretation of it) are atheists?

      Report Post »  
    • rush_is_right
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 9:11pm

      “I mean “secular” in the most common definition of the term–a strict division between church and state and an insistence on institutional neutrality in questions of faith or religion”

      so in other words you want an atheist state. your ‘neutrality’ is an official hostility towards any other religion other than atheism….i’ve explained this before, you seem unable to understand simple english.

      “So, I’ll ask again: are you saying that these Christians, Jews, Hindu, Muslims, etc., who would prefer their children not be taught the Christian Bible in public school (or any specific interpretation of it) are atheists?”

      why don’t you list these people? oh let me guess…Barry lynn…..PAW….yeah a real ‘christian’ either a poser or a quisling…..

      how did we manage all those years, 175 or so, since the founding of the country, until 1962, when all of a sudden prayer in school was banned….were all those supreme courts wrong before then?? hmmmm????

      you want an imposed atheism….and you call it ‘secularism’ a distinction without a difference.

      Report Post »  
    • PubliusPencilman
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 9:17pm

      Rush,

      Once again you dodge the issue and don’t answer my question. Looks like I win again!

      Report Post »  
    • Lesbian Packing Hollow Points
      Posted on February 7, 2012 at 9:20am

      @ Bad Ashe:
      And non-presence, saying nothing regarding non-existence, of religious iconography, past or present, on government property is not equivalent to a statement in opposition of the religion those icons may or may not represent. But, their PRESENCE on government property IS a statement in support of just those religions represented by the icons, to the exclusion of all others, UNLESS iconography of ALL religions are represented, which is honestly a physical impossibility. The government may not make statements in support of specific religions, only general statements.

      Report Post » Lesbian Packing Hollow Points  
    • rush_is_right
      Posted on February 7, 2012 at 9:24am

      “Once again you dodge the issue and don’t answer my question. Looks like I win again!”

      uh yeah sure…how old are you?

      we’ll see who has the last laugh…

      Report Post »  
    • rush_is_right
      Posted on February 7, 2012 at 9:25am

      “UNLESS iconography of ALL religions are represented, which is honestly a physical impossibility. The government may not make statements in support of specific religions, only general statements.”

      yeah what did our founders know….

      Report Post »  
    • Lesbian Packing Hollow Points
      Posted on February 7, 2012 at 11:19am

      They knew this. ^^^^^^^^^^^^

      Unless you can cite specific sources of founding fathers attempting to extol the virtues of specific religions on the government dime.

      Report Post » Lesbian Packing Hollow Points  
    • rush_is_right
      Posted on February 7, 2012 at 12:20pm

      “Unless you can cite specific sources of founding fathers attempting to extol the virtues of specific religions on the government dime.”

      you mean like allowing prayer in public schools? or having church in the capital building? or several states having their own state religion?

      Report Post »  
    • Lesbian Packing Hollow Points
      Posted on February 7, 2012 at 3:19pm

      Rush. Say it with me now. SPEC I FIC I TY. Which religions did they specificly sanction in legislation or written policy? Did they have to be Baptist prayers? Were only Methodist services allowed in the Capitol?

      Recently, NYC’s public school system went ape[feces] and ended their long-standing policy of allowing area public school facilities to be rented to area churches for worship services outside of school hours. Provided they never discriminated on the basis of which churches practicing which religions they would rent to, such a rental agreement is in complete harmony with the Establishment Clause. I suspect someone from the NYC area Wiccan community requested worship space and the public school functionaries wigged out. “We can’t rent worship service in a public school to a bunch of witches!“ ”Well, ya know, if you’re gonna keep the Wiccans out, you’re gonna hafta throw `em all out.“ ”Done.”

      And prayer by public school STUDENTS, modulo some idiot administrators, has NEVER been at controversy. What HAS been at controversy has been prayer by public school EMPLOYEES directing the religious rituals FOR public school students. Prayer has always been and will always BE 100% A-OK for voluntary practice by children in public school. From hence forth, it will also always be 100% verbotten for adults to demand of children in public school.

      Report Post » Lesbian Packing Hollow Points  
    • Lesbian Packing Hollow Points
      Posted on February 7, 2012 at 3:19pm

      Private school is a different matter. If you want to send your kids to a religious school where they are flogged for not praying, that’s your right, so long as the flogger’s paycheck is not supported by my tax dollars.

      Report Post » Lesbian Packing Hollow Points  
  • don young
    Posted on February 6, 2012 at 11:12am

    We need to forbid all atheist from all school and any normal people,s functions.

    Report Post »  
    • PubliusPencilman
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 11:25am

      Yes. Because that’s how a free society works…

      Report Post »  
    • Mtroom
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 12:09pm

      This just kills me…No one gets this whole point…It is a school, why not teach…Here you have parents saying they don’t want this “Bible Man” because of their beliefs…Which in turn closes of their own children to think for themselves…You don’t ban this stuff, you educate the people and allow them to decide..This has become such a fight no one see’s it as education anymore..A banner on the wall, no pledge, this flag over that flag, no one talks things out…Just jump to the MSM, and sue…Why not find out how the kids feel about it?..Would they like to learn this subject?…Is it so appalling to learn about something that has been around as long as religion? It is part of every countries history…All religions should be studied, why limit it to none…Why limit it to one? I have faith in my daughter to make the right choices, no matter how many religions she learns about..Stop fighting, stand strong in what you believe in, and educate…People have for thousands of years.

      Report Post » Mtroom  
    • PubliusPencilman
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 12:18pm

      MTRoom,

      “You don’t ban this stuff, you educate the people and allow them to decide”

      And yet no alternative viewpoints are presented, so how exactly is this a matter a choice?

      Report Post »  
    • ModerationIsBest
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 1:33pm

      Last I saw in 2009, Alabama was in the bottom 8 states of high school graduations. No surprise?

      Then again, I can’t attest to if those numbers have improved drastically.

      Report Post »  
    • Therightsofbilly
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 2:34pm

      Hey MOD,

      Where was Detroit?

      Report Post » Therightsofbilly  
    • ModerationIsBest
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 3:30pm

      @Billy

      What relevance is that?

      Report Post »  
    • Mtroom
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 5:52pm

      @ repub…That’s my point exactly…You wrote it ..

      “And yet no alternative viewpoints are presented, so how exactly is this a matter a choice.”

      Couldn’t have proved it any better. Ban Bible Man, than what next?…Soon no choices left…No free thinking, learn what I tell you to learn, eat what I tell you to eat, Earn what I tell you is fair…But you keep waiting for that alternative viewpoint..not realizing the first viewpoint is your own. Everything after that is an alternative viewpoint.

      Report Post » Mtroom  
  • The_Jerk
    Posted on February 6, 2012 at 11:05am

    If they can bring the International Baccalaureate program (IB), required to teach international socialism in all of its classes, to our schools, then surely they can bring in Bible Man.

    Report Post »  
  • OneTermPresident
    Posted on February 6, 2012 at 10:52am

    Man am I tired of the continual whining and howling of atheists and gays. Me Me Me… while the country is falling apart in front of them… they want to speed the process.

    Report Post » OneTermPresident  
    • PubliusPencilman
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 11:27am

      You say, complaining about everyone else on a Conservative website. Yes, they are the ones whining. Sure.

      Report Post »  
  • Ralphbp
    Posted on February 6, 2012 at 10:44am

    Why are atheists so adamant about their disbelief? What are they afraid of? They appear to be afraid of something or someone that, in their unbelief, does not in fact exist. Once again, these unbelievers are trying to force their unbelief on the majority.
    Really, who are they trying to convince? It appears that they are only trying to bolster their own unbelief. It is much easier to assuage their conscience with no God to hold them to account.
    It is very easy to be an atheist.
    Straight is the gate and narrow the way that leads to the Kingdom of Heaven.
    Atheists are supremely lazy, they adhere to no belief and would seek to drag as many as possible into the great void of nothingness that they believe in.

    Report Post » Ralphbp  
    • imsteph
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 10:52am

      how is their anti belief in God NOT a religion?
      the fervor, the wrath they pile on anyone who doesn‘t ’believe’ as they do?

      they are the biggest lie of a cult the world has ever seen.

      Report Post » imsteph  
    • PubliusPencilman
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 11:31am

      “Really, who are they trying to convince? It appears that they are only trying to bolster their own unbelief. It is much easier to assuage their conscience with no God to hold them to account.”

      One might easily say the same about the Christians in this case. Why should Christians need to provide “Bible Man” to brainwash kids?

      The main problem with your thinking is that the absense of a “Bible Man” skit in school does not make the school atheist–it merely makes it secular and neutral. The kids are perfectly free to pursue a sectarian religious education outside of school.

      Report Post »  
    • GeorgieJo
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 11:34am

      WHAT do Atheists use for money?
      Last time I looked money said In God We Trust.
      Are they wanting to use the scheckel system or just be sheep?

      Report Post »  
    • rush_is_right
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 11:59am

      “One might easily say the same about the Christians in this case. Why should Christians need to provide “Bible Man” to brainwash kids?:”

      oh maybe freedom….which you atheists hate….

      but then why not? since atheism, and its holy racist creation myth, evolution, is taught in schools?

      Report Post »  
    • PubliusPencilman
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 12:21pm

      Rush,

      Plenty of relgions have accomodated understandings of evolution into their own beliefs. If your particular faith hasn’t, that‘s really not the public’s problem.

      Report Post »  
    • rush_is_right
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 12:31pm

      “Plenty of relgions have accomodated understandings of evolution into their own beliefs. If your particular faith hasn’t, that‘s really not the public’s problem.
      ”

      so you’re admitting evolution is just faith.

      thanks

      Report Post »  
    • PubliusPencilman
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 1:47pm

      Rush, really, you shouldn’t underestimate the importance of basic reading comprehension. Read more carefully and you might actually have some idea of what people are saying.

      Report Post »  
    • rush_is_right
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 2:30pm

      “Rush, really, you shouldn’t underestimate the importance of basic reading comprehension. Read more carefully and you might actually have some idea of what people are saying.”

      oh I know just what you’re saying….you’re not nearly as clever as you think you are….

      you just don’t the point I am making….

      Report Post »  
    • PubliusPencilman
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 3:06pm

      Rush,

      Please be quiet while the adults are talking.

      Report Post »  
    • rush_is_right
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 3:54pm

      “Rush,

      Please be quiet while the adults are talking.
      ”

      who besides me is the adult? you sure aren’t its painfully obvious by your posts….sonny

      Report Post »  
    • Chet Hempstead
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 8:02pm

      I’m not an atheist. I don’t know if there is a God or not and I don’t believe it is possible to know, and I don’t want a public school teaching that there is a God either. I don’t want them teaching only one side of any issue that is a matter of opinion open to legitimate debate.

      Report Post »  
  • Mitchm999
    Posted on February 6, 2012 at 10:29am

    I invited “Koranman” to come in and speak and tell stories on the weeks when this clown is not available. I am sure that will pass constitutional muster with everyone here.

    Report Post » Mitchm999  
    • lembrandt
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 10:32am

      Probably not since, Islam, like Scientology is a cult.

      Report Post »  
    • turkey13
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 10:44am

      One person complained – what ever happened to “We the People.” I bet the people at school would contribute to a moving fund to another country – how about Iran.

      Report Post »  
    • PubliusPencilman
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 11:28am

      Turkey,

      So, explain to me how, in the same inane post, you invoke “We the People” while also suggesting that a portion of that “we” should leave the country for not sharing your views.

      Report Post »  
    • Therightsofbilly
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 2:49pm

      @Publius

      Those old guys that actually wrote those words “WE THE PEOPLE”

      Who were those guys?

      What people were they referring to when they wrote the word “WE”

      What ever became of the portion of that “we” that did not agree with the founders?

      Report Post » Therightsofbilly  
    • RagingJudge
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 3:07pm

      Because “We the People” was written by a group of men who you fundamentally disagree with. Seeing that this is the only nation on Earth that has that sort of Christian-rooted ideal of individual liberty as the very basis for its foundation, and since there are so many other nations to choose from that would suit your desires, it is only courteous that you would let us freedom-loving types have our one nation, and you go chose your flavor of tyranny.

      Report Post » RagingJudge  
    • PubliusPencilman
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 3:15pm

      Haha. I am as much a part of “We the People” as you are my friend. Maybe if a country that allows freedom of expression, freedom of conscience and freedom of opinion is too “liberal” for you, perhaps you should think about moving.

      Report Post »  
  • A Bit of Thought
    Posted on February 6, 2012 at 10:20am

    The atheists need to stop forcing their religious beliefs on others. Just wondering – why are the atheists so afraid of Bible Man?

    Report Post »  
    • troymac20
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 10:26am

      Looks more like a public school being used to force christianity on kids.

      Report Post » troymac20  
    • ashestoashes
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 10:36am

      The nation was founded One Nation Under God and it was Freedom OF Religion…not from religion..I know some atheists that I like very much.. For a person to become a Christian..they must be called by God..some may not have been called..Others simply may have rejected Him…I guess hell loves company..but in hell..it is complete separation from God and others..Those going there will be all alone..and even at that …there will come a day when every one above the earth..on the earth and below the earth.. every knee shall bow…every tongue confess..that Jesus/Yeshua is Lord.

      Report Post »  
    • Marine25
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 10:37am

      The atheists need to stop forcing their religious beliefs on others?

      Wow. When you say ‘bit of thought’ you really mean it.

      Report Post »  
    • turkey13
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 10:41am

      Hey – why don’t we do it the American way – put it on the Alabama or all states voting machines or ballots, to make it fair. We Americans vote – to let all religons ( What local folks vote on) be in American Schools and do the Plege of Allegiance and a Prayer before school. Shootings in schools took a full genaration before they became the norm. Theres three full genarations out that have never heard a prayer or even know who God is.

      Report Post »  
    • proudinfidel54
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 10:54am

      TroyMac20 Just out for your daily troll, I mean stroll.Marine20, have you ever heard the saying there are no atheist in a foxhole, you obviously have never been under fire. as for #%*@#holeatheist, you probably think a foxhole is the promise land on your girlfriend.

      Report Post » proudinfidel54  
    • troymac20
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 11:24am

      Just slinging insults infidel….I think we see who the troll is.

      Report Post » troymac20  
    • PubliusPencilman
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 11:34am

      So, if a Jewish person is insulted by being taught the “Christian Bible” in school, that makes them… an atheist? The absense of Bible Man is not atheism, regardless of what group is speaking up.

      Report Post »  
    • riverdog1
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 5:22pm

      again athiesm is NOT a religeon it is the absense of one. it makes about as much sense as you christians are muslims because you worship god.

      Report Post »  
  • Alan
    Posted on February 6, 2012 at 10:17am

    The insane, bullying left won’t be happy until the words Bible, God, Christ and Cross are banned from the English language, and they don’t have to ever see or here it again.

    Report Post »  
    • Miyegombo Bayartsogt
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 10:35am

      As an aged rightwinger, whenever I hear the words “cross”, “Bible”, “Christ”, or “God” I know from experience some one is going to be looking to take something from someone without offering anything but empty words in return. Whenever I see “the Rev.” in front of someone’s name I know the person so called is going to get away with doing bad things nobody in society should be allowed to get away with including child rape. The sooner people take these things out of the public square, the better it will be for all of us.

      Report Post »  
    • Marine25
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 10:39am

      No. Just banned from public property and public endeavors per the Constitution. And out of scientific discourse per reason.

      Report Post »  
  • kentuckypatriot
    Posted on February 6, 2012 at 10:17am

    Why doesn’t the school simply have an “ opt out ” policy for Bible Man? To me, that would be the simplist solution.

    Report Post » kentuckypatriot  
    • cessna152
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 10:26am

      That’s what they do with every single Gay and Anti-God agendas in the schools. Then they tell us Christians if we don’t like it send your kids to private school. Well, if you Atheists don’t like it then send your kids to private school.

      Report Post » cessna152  
    • Marine25
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 10:43am

      Yeah Cessna it’s almost the same except the Constitution forbids public establishments of religion. You know, just a few lines before it forbids infringing on your right to keep and bear arms. Other than the fact that the people opposing bible-man at public school are right according to the Constitution, it’s really the same.

      Report Post »  
    • cessna152
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 10:50am

      Um, where? Please show me where there can not be an elective class on the Bible. Read the 1A, actually FORBIDDING or denying a right to Religion is Unconstitutional.

      BTW, your warped system of Atheism is a belief, so why should your belief system be taught in school? Why should mine be denied? Yeah, so much for tolerance… Please explain why I am forced to be taught your belief system but mine is “illegal”?

      Report Post » cessna152  
    • proudinfidel54
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 11:03am

      Marine25 If you are going to Quote the constitution would it not make sense to quote the whole amendment in stead of just misquoting a few lines, after all, being a “Marine”, you swore to uphold it, not to distort it.

      Report Post » proudinfidel54  
  • Rational Man
    Posted on February 6, 2012 at 10:16am

    “What students would learn in American schools above all is the religion of Jesus Christ.”
    George Washington

    “ Of all systems of morality, ancient or modern, which have come under my observation, none appear to be so pure as that of Jesus.”

    “Can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with His wrath? I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just; that His justice can not sleep forever.”
    Thomas Jefferson

    “It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religions, but on the gospel of Jesus Christ. For this very reason peoples of other faiths have been afforded asylum, prosperity, and freedom of worship here.”

    “The Bible … is a book worth more than all the other books that were ever printed.”
    Patrick Henry
    Ratifier of the U.S. Constitution

    “Cursed be all that learning, that is contrary to the cross of Christ.”
    James Madison
    4th U.S. President

    Report Post » Rational Man  
    • PubliusPencilman
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 11:44am

      That first quotation by George Washington is made up. It’s a heavily edited and misleading version of something he said to a delegate from the Delaware Indian nation:
      “My ears hear with pleasure the other matters you mention. Congress will be glad to hear them too. You do well to wish to learn our arts and ways of life, and above all, the religion of Jesus Christ.”
      This quotation clearly has nothing at all to do with the American education system. Since this quotation is clearly a lie, I suggest you cease quoting it if you want to avoid dishonoring the memory of George Washington.

      Your choice of Thomas Jefferson is an interesting one, since his actual interest in Jesus’s teachings was secular and philosophical. In fact, as you probably know, he even created his own version of the Bible (feel free to Wikipedia the “Jefferson Bible”) which literally cut out all the mystical and supernatural happenings in the New Testament.

      Patrick Henry indeed was a zealot, but he only served as the Government of Virginia before the ratification of the Constitution. As a staunch anti-federalist, he was very much opposed to the Constitution, so you subtle suggestion that he played a role in its creation is misleading.

      Your welcome for the free lesson.

      Report Post »  
  • cessna152
    Posted on February 6, 2012 at 10:15am

    Hey Atheists, you must be getting desperate. Your attacks on something you don’t believe exists are becoming numerous. You sure do spend an awful lot of money to fight something that does not “exist”.

    Report Post » cessna152  
  • Anonymous T. Irrelevant
    Posted on February 6, 2012 at 10:03am

    It’s never been about religion, it’s all about control. Get rid of the Dept. of Ed. and you get rid of avenues into the schools for these people, among other problems.

    Report Post » Anonymous T. Irrelevant  
    • atechgeek
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 10:39am

      Absolutely. The Dept of Ed is a WASTE. Another question … if atheists don’t believe, then why does the notion of a God bother them so much ? Why should a Bible offend them if they think it’s just another book? If it’s not “just another book” they either DO believe in God or they believe in censoring free speech and thought which too is very very dangerous for a society.

      Report Post »  
  • Watchyer6
    Posted on February 6, 2012 at 10:01am

    Keep the religious stuff in church where it belongs, not in public schools, eh Shadrack?

    Report Post » Watchyer6  
    • cessna152
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 10:18am

      Keep the Darwinist, anti-God/anti-US culture out of the classrooms and keep that hate in your Atheist clubs…BTW, you do know that almost 99% of all murders/killings have been caused by Atheist/Humanist regimes…right? Christians ain’t the threat to freedom and liberty, YOU ARE!

      Report Post » cessna152  
    • Rational Man
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 10:18am

      “What students would learn in American schools above all is the religion of Jesus Christ.”
      George Washington

      Report Post » Rational Man  
    • troymac20
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 10:23am

      Agree. Doesn’t belong in public schools. That’s what churches are for.

      Report Post » troymac20  
    • cessna152
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 11:21am

      So, I guess other belief systems belong in the public school but not Christianity. Care to explain how Atheism (a belief system) is okay to teach and force down the throats of innocent kids but Christianity is not? Waiting, but I suppose you won’t answer….

      Report Post » cessna152  
    • proudinfidel54
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 11:39am

      Cessna152, you hit the nail on the head with that statement, of course these demons do not want to be reminded about God in the schools, that messes up their agenda, which is, to indoctrinate all the children with their anti-christian lies such as evolution. but they do not complain about muslims because they are the biggest anti-Christian group there is.

      Report Post » proudinfidel54  
    • Tractorboy
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 12:41pm

      Not sure if your from the USA, but it was formed as a Judao-Christain nation, so under my consitution unless Bible man is trying to form a state religion, I’m cool with Bible man telling stories of gods promise and gods love. If I‘m not mistaken Isn’t school the place where young people go to learn how to do things on their own when they reach the age of consent, ie take care of themselves. What better way to learn than to here Bible stories of how to live and treat each other.

      Report Post » Tractorboy  
  • moodtd01
    Posted on February 6, 2012 at 10:00am

    The God-less heathens in this country should do with their children what us believers do with ours. When they come home from school find out what they learned that day. If what they learned goes against what we believe we tell our kids we do not believe that and why. If they have any questions we give them concrete examples and reasons.
    So why can’t the heathens do the same. Tell their kids that they do not believe in God and why. It is pretty simple really.
    I am getting terribly sick of this seperation of church and state business and the mis reading of our constitution. When will people really take a stand?
    It’s just like when I see people being interviewed for the Republican primaries, many of them, surely enough to win, want to vote for Rick Santorum. Then you see their eyes glaze over and they say, “but he is not electable, so I am voting for…” which is usually Romney but sometimes Gingrich.
    I found the Baal episode Tuesday on GBTV to be quite informative. My family and friends are sick of hearing me say, “Ba’al right there”, and point to something, someone, or even myself. They do not want me to say it they say because they do not understand. I then tell them to watch that episode and they will get it. Of course this is followed by a “NOOOO”. I should make watching Glenn Beck with me a punishment for my children. Might do them some good.
    Keep fightin the good fight. Love God! Love people. Shalom. Maranatha.

    Report Post »  
  • Mr.Fitnah
    Posted on February 6, 2012 at 9:55am

    What the world needs is Quran man , he will teach the world how to get rid of the atheists

    Report Post » Mr.Fitnah  
  • rock-n-roll-rebel
    Posted on February 6, 2012 at 9:53am

    I hope that bible man kicks some atheist’s a$$. It’s freedom OF religion not freedom from it dimwatts.

    Report Post » rock-n-roll-rebel  
  • Psychosis
    Posted on February 6, 2012 at 9:47am

    What part of. “CONGRESS. Shall make no law???? I don’t recollect congress making a law,so these athiest groups can stuff it

    Report Post » Psychosis  
    • joe conservative
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 9:58am

      Lol, I couldn’t agree more. The war on religion has become downright pathetic, even for liberal standards. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kzy7c0JUWEA

      Report Post » joe conservative  
    • Mr.Fitnah
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 10:00am

      what part of states rights don’t you understand?

      Report Post » Mr.Fitnah  
    • calonzap
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 10:22am

      You’re right, nowhere in the Constitution does it even mention the separation of church and state. It says that congress shall not establish a religion, and to the best of my knowledge our congress has never even attempted to establish a religion.

      Report Post »  
    • Marine25
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 10:23am

      The US congress and those at the state level passed laws establishing schools, and laws insisting all children attend until age 16. That makes it not only a public school, but a compulsory school. Students can not be compelled to attend a school that has established religion in any way. It is stunning how The Constitution is assaulted by religious fanatics when citizens ask to have their First Amendment Rights enforced. Students could choose to go to see Bibleman outside of school, but they also have the freedom not to go see him. Non-christians and non-believers are compelled, forced to see fictional tales presented as fact by an agent of the government. It’s not even first-year law school stuff, it’s 9th grade civics.

      Report Post »  
  • FoxholeAtheist
    Posted on February 6, 2012 at 9:45am

    I guess we should get Koranman, Book of Mormanman, and Torahman in there as well?

    Report Post » FoxholeAtheist  
    • rush_is_right
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 9:52am

      and you fascist atheists wouldn’t say boo to quranman….

      and we all know why…fascists of a feather, flock together…

      Report Post »  
    • FoxholeAtheist
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 9:58am

      Oh, you want to make a bet? You don’t know too many Atheists.

      Report Post » FoxholeAtheist  
    • JRook
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 10:10am

      @rush_is_right A) Rush is rarely right. B) Let me clue you in on something my father used to say. Your rights and opinions end at the tip of the other persons nose…cause that’s where theirs begin.

      Report Post »  
    • cessna152
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 10:13am

      This country and the culture was not built on the Koran or Mohammed…it was built on Jesus Christ. This is our culture whether you like it or not. You want to start changing cultures, move to the Middle East, China or anyplace else and tell me how that works out for ya’….

      Report Post » cessna152  
    • ashestoashes
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 10:17am

      They are teaching the Abrahamic books in a Virginia Public High School and why it is the perfect religiion as I understand..as long as the Bible can be taught.by true Christians who have an understanding of the Bible..there should be no problem.. This would give Christians an open debate forum..I see it as a definite plus..How can anyone in their right mind oppose Christianity..It teaches love. kindness. forgiveness and a repenting and a turning away from sin.. Men have perverted the gospels. That is where the Babylonian religions come from..The Bible..the Word of God coming from the true Creator.. and the truth shall set them free..

      Report Post »  
    • rush_is_right
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 10:23am

      “Oh, you want to make a bet? You don’t know too many Atheists.”

      yeah post your proof of atheists standing up to the muslims….haven’t seen any of that….

      Report Post »  
    • rush_is_right
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 10:24am

      “@rush_is_right A) Rush is rarely right. B) Let me clue you in on something my father used to say. Your rights and opinions end at the tip of the other persons nose…cause that’s where theirs begin.
      ”

      you mean like the last time we conversed…and as usual, rush was right? lol

      why don’t you post something substantive to disprove my opinions? hmmm?? you seem to have a great deal of trouble doing that….

      Report Post »  
    • cessna152
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 10:25am

      Hey Rook,
      Care to expound on all the Atheist organizations for humanity? How about any really good Atheist run governments, care to list them all? I can list all the Anti-God/Atheist/Humanist rulers that have your same belief system:
      -Hitler
      -Mao
      -Chavez
      -Castro
      -Stalin
      -Lenin
      -Marx
      -Gengis Khan
      -Nero
      Just to name a few. Gee, aren’t Atheist so peaceful? So, what do you stand for again? Who are the evil dangerous groups? It ain’t the followers of Christ because Christians were targeted and killed by ALL of those Atheists listed above. And you’re still targeting us…Hmmmm.

      Report Post » cessna152  
    • rush_is_right
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 10:27am

      “Care to expound on all the Atheist organizations for humanity:”

      I like how the atheists blame slavery on christianity all the time, when christians freed the slaves…and I sure don’t know of any atheist abolitionist societies….

      Report Post »  
    • JRook
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 10:29am

      @rush_is_right No Problem Pick a topic Einstein. Cause if Rush is your source, it should be at least humorous.

      Report Post »  
    • JRook
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 10:38am

      @rush_is_right Somewhere along the way you seemed to gain the notion that listening or repeating Rush is somehow a replacement for understanding the subject matter or actually formulating a rational thought. Selective ingestion and interpretation the facts or accepted constructs that surround the subject matter resides at even the low end of ignorance. Enjoy your session of feed the angry mob today. I have real things to do.

      Report Post »  
    • JRook
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 10:42am

      @cessna152 Okay Hitler utilized God and Religion, but that would require actually reading and being a student of history, not interpreting it based on ones own ideology. So where exactly do you place the Crusades and Inquisition in your list.

      Report Post »  
    • Therightsofbilly
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 10:43am

      ROOK

      You are too funny.
      I see you have graduated to using “Einstein” instead of “Tiger”
      You talk a good game, but never supply any proof, or links for your assertions.
      And when someone does “pick a topic”, you do a vanishing act.

      @FOXHOLE

      The reason we don’t know many atheists, is because there are not many atheists.
      You just whine a lot, so it’s seems like there are more of you than there actually is.

      Report Post » Therightsofbilly  
    • JRook
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 10:45am

      @rush_is_right So you are submitting the notion that all slave owners were atheists? Hmmm didn’t George Washington and Thomas Jefferson OWN slaves. Sir it is really not worth the time and effort as you are a lost cause. Now tell us how it was the Christians who respected and took care of the Native Americans.

      Report Post »  
    • JRook
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 10:49am

      @Therightsofbilly When individuals show nothing other than their sad attempts to filter or interpret history or subject matter based on their ideology or beliefs it really isn’t worth the effort. People need to take the time to actually read a book once and a while. Sir like the others you can google Hitler God and religion and find more than ample FACTS regarding his Catholic upbringing and references to God and religion in his speeches. They really aren’t subject to interpretation as they are what they are.

      Report Post »  
    • JRook
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 11:01am

      @cessna152 Some history for you to consider http://articles.exchristian.net/2002/10/how-many-people-have-been-killed-by.php Oh Billy with Rights feel free to check the column in terms of my provision of some facts to support placing the needle closer to the truth.

      Report Post »  
    • rush_is_right
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 11:07am

      “@rush_is_right No Problem Pick a topic Einstein. Cause if Rush is your source, it should be at least humorous.”

      any topic? ok since you’ve punted on this one….you know atheists standing up to muslims….

      lets try that racist atheist fairy tale known as evolution….

      Report Post »  
    • rush_is_right
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 11:07am

      “Enjoy your session of feed the angry mob today. I have real things to do.”

      so in other words your previous post was a lie…you don’t really want to try to debate me on a topic….wise choice.

      Report Post »  
    • rush_is_right
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 11:09am

      “@rush_is_right So you are submitting the notion that all slave owners were atheists?”

      I’m submitting the notion that Christianity freed the slaves…not atheism….which has enslaved billions….but atheists blame christianity for the slave trade….yet the atheists did nothing to end it.

      WILBERFORCE anyone? name the atheist abolitionist societies….I‘m sure it’ll be a very short list…

      Report Post »  
    • rush_is_right
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 11:10am

      “Sir like the others you can google Hitler God and religion and find more than ample FACTS regarding his Catholic upbringing and references to God and religion in his speeches. They really aren’t subject to interpretation as they are what they are.”

      so why did hitler start his own church…deutshen christen….and throw so many real christians in concentration camps? hmmmm??

      Report Post »  
    • rush_is_right
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 11:14am

      and where did foxholeatheist go? I was waiting for his proof of atheists standing up to muslims….

      Report Post »  
    • Therightsofbilly
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 11:23am

      Yes, ROOK has real things to do.
      Like move on to the next site for his next liberal spam session.

      ROOK, do you seriously consider that “exchristian” website to be proof of anything?

      Report Post » Therightsofbilly  
    • proudinfidel54
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 11:31am

      JROOK, Why is it people are always trying to insinuate that Einstien was an atheist, nothing could be further from the truth, repeatedly he wrote about God and intelligent design, one ony need to read his published papers to know this, instead of just thowing his name out there as if you has some kind of inside track to his persona.

      Report Post » proudinfidel54  
    • cessna152
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 11:50am

      I tried posting about the crusades 4-5 times and for some reason it won’t stick. I had a detailed “dissertation” but it won’t post. So the short of it, Christians were attacked by Muslims and needed help from the Romans otherwise be completely destroyed. It was out of self defense and preservation… there are more details and links if you want them.

      Report Post » cessna152  
    • qzak491
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 12:17pm

      fox hole
      People like you are still alive only because the religion you are trying to get rid of forbids murder and we follow that belief.

      Report Post »  
    • FoxholeAtheist
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 1:34pm

      Ah, so it should be taught by “true xtians”. And what exactly is a “true xtian”? What you mean to say is it should be taught by xtians who hold the same particular views and narrow minded dogmatic principles as you do.

      And yes, we do argue with Muslims. We just argue with you more because you are in the majority. As soon as they get as loud and obnoxious as you, then you will notice it more.

      Report Post » FoxholeAtheist  
    • FoxholeAtheist
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 1:44pm

      And no, it wasn’t built on Jesus, either. If it were, we would have the 10 Commandments as our Constitution. You keep calling this nation a theocracy and in the same breath you say how much better we are than somewhere like Europe, which is definitely an area of the world built upon theocracy. In fact, we were and still are an experiment in secularism. We were the first country that was secular and the rest of the world looks to us for that. We are the model that other countries try to achieve.

      It is you people who should move to a more theocratic country, like Saudi Arabia. There, you can stone to death homosexuals and non-believers to your hearts content.

      Report Post » FoxholeAtheist  
    • FoxholeAtheist
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 1:50pm

      Qzack, so what you‘re telling me is that if you didn’t believe you were going to go to hell for all eternity as punishment, you would be a serial killer. The only thing standing in your way from climbing a clock tower and picking people off is fear of eternal damnation? You are not a healthy individual. Tell me, exactly how many dead hookers DO you have buried out in the woods?

      Report Post » FoxholeAtheist  
    • rush_is_right
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 2:29pm

      “And yes, we do argue with Muslims. We just argue with you more because you are in the majority. As soon as they get as loud and obnoxious as you, then you will notice it more.”

      oh of COURSE you do….so much so that you couldn’t post any examples…..and yeah whats a few beheadings and honor killing compared to the REALLY obvnoxious christians who talk about….JESUS…oh the horror!!!

      laughable.

      Report Post »  
    • rush_is_right
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 2:38pm

      ” In fact, we were and still are an experiment in secularism. ”

      oh good then the atheists are responsible for slavery, and the mis-treatment of the indians….

      Report Post »  
    • cessna152
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 2:42pm

      Fox,

      There are hundreds of quotes from the founders about this country and God. It is the core value and morality by how the system works. Limited government is to be obedient to a higher power and that is “God”. That is not state run religion that is a government accountable for its actions. We are the only country (barely) that holds its politicians accountable. Other countries let the politicians do what they want with little recourse.

      This is our culture no matter how you twist it..we are a nation accountable to God and a government that is accountable to the people and God,

      Report Post » cessna152  
    • Therightsofbilly
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 3:07pm

      Well said Cessna

      Well said.

      Report Post » Therightsofbilly  
    • FoxholeAtheist
      Posted on February 7, 2012 at 9:58am

      Where exactly does it mention Jesus, or even a Xtian god in either the Constitution or the Declaration of Independence? I see a few references to a Deist ideology in the DoI. Even “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” aren’t mentioned in the Constitution. So, that being said, even if the founding fathers were Mussulmen themselves (”As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion,—as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen,—and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries”.), the Constitution and the United States were never founded upon the Xtian church. We are not a theocracy.

      Report Post » FoxholeAtheist  
    • FoxholeAtheist
      Posted on February 7, 2012 at 10:01am

      We don’t seem to be holding our politicians accountable to much of anything these days.

      Report Post » FoxholeAtheist  
  • SpankDaMonkey
    Posted on February 6, 2012 at 9:44am

    .
    Mao, Stallin, Hitler all used the destruction of God & Religion, as a tool to control people. When the people have no faith left in God or the Church they can be controled……….

    Why do you think Obama and the Democrat‘s use Religion only when it suit’s their position, then spend the rest of their time tearing it down?………….

    Report Post » SpankDaMonkey  
    • FoxholeAtheist
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 9:46am

      Hitler believed he was doing the work of the lord.

      Report Post » FoxholeAtheist  
    • rush_is_right
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 9:52am

      “Hitler believed he was doing the work of the lord.”

      newsflash, hitler was his own lord….get a clue.

      Report Post »  
    • Gonzo
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 9:53am

      …and he was mistaken Foxhole.

      Report Post » Gonzo  
    • SpankDaMonkey
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 9:54am

      .
      That’s because Hitler thought he was God………….

      Report Post » SpankDaMonkey  
    • FoxholeAtheist
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 9:58am

      Yes, I agree he was gravely mistaken, but yes, Hitler very much believed in god.

      “I am convinced that I am acting as the agent of our creator. By fighting off the Jews, I am doing the lord’s work”.–Adolph Hitler

      Report Post » FoxholeAtheist  
    • Rational Man
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 10:06am

      FoxholeAtheist
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 9:46am
      Hitler believed he was doing the work of the lord.
      ***********************************************************************************

      So does Obama. Maybe he will do us a favor and blow his brains out too…………..

      Report Post » Rational Man  
    • Gonzo
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 10:08am

      It’s an old and inefectual argument Foxhole, give it a rest.

      Report Post » Gonzo  
    • JRook
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 10:14am

      @SpankDaMonkey Educate yourself….http://nobeliefs.com/Hitler1.htm There is no greater ignorance than that displayed by individuals who select, filter and interpret history and facts based on their own ideology. Hilter’s fanaticism is a great example of this. Others surround us on here with their comments.

      Report Post »  
    • rush_is_right
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 10:25am

      ““I am convinced that I am acting as the agent of our creator. By fighting off the Jews, I am doing the lord’s work”.–Adolph Hitler”

      again what lord? hitler set up his own deutshen chrisen church….

      Report Post »  
    • Polarized America
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 10:29am

      oh hitler smitler ….if ur gonna tell a lie, tell a big lie ….That hitler ?

      Report Post »  
    • proudinfidel54
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 10:58am

      So holeatheist you are blameing God for the action of one man, maybe you should do like the Holocost deniers and not believe in Hitler instead.

      Report Post » proudinfidel54  
    • FoxholeAtheist
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 1:30pm

      So all of a sudden when someone shares your belief, it‘s the actions of one man and that he wasn’t ‘really’ a xtian. I could say that because Stalin and Hitler had moustaches then by that logic we must fear everyone with a moustache. I would also go on to say that there have been more crimes against humanity committed by religious people in the name of religion than non-religious people. I think my argument holds a bit more water than yours.

      Report Post » FoxholeAtheist  
    • rush_is_right
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 2:43pm

      “I would also go on to say that there have been more crimes against humanity committed by religious people in the name of religion than non-religious people. I think my argument holds a bit more water than yours.”

      really? stalin, mao, pol pot?? kim il sung….I mean seriously.

      Report Post »  
  • Smokey_Bojangles
    Posted on February 6, 2012 at 9:43am

    How about just exempting the kids whose parents want them to grow up and go to Hell? Maybe they can go watch Al Gore’s Religious Movie instead?

    Report Post » Smokey_Bojangles  
    • tmbell87
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 9:59am

      While I disagree with your assesment entirely, I respect that you are one of the few christians that will openly say that you believe atheists like myself are going to hell. That being said, you are a moron.

      Report Post »  
  • BMroxy
    Posted on February 6, 2012 at 9:41am

    this is an easy fix. In my elementary growing up we had a progam called ” do so.” our couselor came in every so often and would have this puppet that told us children, fictional stories that contained positive morals to us children. We loved “do so,” which was also the name of the puppet.

    Since atheist do not believe in anything and believe the bible to be fiction then that is what it is for them, A man coming in and telling stories from a book they hold no belief in that contains positive messages for children.

    For believers the content is more significant. Problem solved.

    Bible man should stay!

    Report Post » BMroxy  
    • FoxholeAtheist
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 9:47am

      Since Xtian children don‘t believe in Mohammed then it won’t hurt to come in and tell stories from the Koran.

      Report Post » FoxholeAtheist  
    • JRook
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 9:47am

      As long as no child has to attend the assemblies I’m ok with it. If they have not choice the objection is obvious.

      Report Post »  
    • moodtd01
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 10:05am

      They already tell stories from just about every major religion in the world in public school. The general public just usually doesn’t hear about it since most people just go about their business. This minority of atheists is trying to force their will on the majority just like the homosexuals, abortionists, and most other godless individuals.

      Report Post »  
  • Stoic one
    Posted on February 6, 2012 at 9:40am

    Bravo!

    Report Post » Stoic one  
  • oldguy49
    Posted on February 6, 2012 at 9:39am

    atheist have no fath and don’t believe in god…i don‘t brlieve in the tooth fairy but i don’t tell anyone else they can’t

    Report Post »  
    • FoxholeAtheist
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 9:55am

      Imagine if over 80% of the country believed in the tooth fairy and pushed for prayer to her in public schools. Imagine if there were a big book full of wondrous miracles about the tooth fairy and her chosen people that people used to ‘prove’ their faith in the tooth fairy and hold up their circular argument of her existence. Now turn that scenario around and make Bibleman into Toothfairybook man who visits your kids’ school in order to try to convert them to this religion. Not a mandated assembly? Imagine if the belief in the Toothfairy was so ingrained that the kids who opted out of going were ostracized and bullied and coerced into going to this assembly or maybe just joining in a pray-in to the Toothfairy before games or else face ridicule and bullying.

      Report Post » FoxholeAtheist  
    • moodtd01
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 10:02am

      @foxholeatheist. Sounds like positive indocrination to me.

      Report Post »  
    • bikerr
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 10:08am

      @FoxholeAtheist–as long as you are using imagination as your basis for reasoning,imagine this==“HELL”==!

      Report Post »  
    • oldguy49
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 10:25am

      well foxhole atheist……at least christians have values that i must as a whole agree with………..were there any at the school riot ater the superbowl game?…….

      Report Post »  
    • coffeenomics
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 10:36am

      @Foxhole.

      Look, I am from Alabama. I was brought up Atheist. I lived exactly what you are talking about. I now belong to a church and take my kids to church every Sunday and I even teach Sunday School. I am thankful that I found my own way out of the black hole my mother tried to force on me. I have forgiven her but what my mother did to me was spiritual abuse. She forced her view on me and did not allow me to attend the type of functions in question so I could even make up my own mind. Again, I am just thankful I was able to overcome my mother’s brainwashing.

      Report Post »  
    • FoxholeAtheist
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 2:02pm

      Coffee, you were an Atheist like Kirk Cameron was an Atheist. My guess is you didn’t have much of a grasp on science to begin with. You mom pissed you off and you were looking for an alternative. You were probably at a low point, knew a xtian or two, and they went to work on you.
      The reason god knows you so well is because you are your own god. Your god is your own sense of self. Ever wonder why sometimes it might be difficult for a xtian to find a ‘good’ church? You have to find people that share your own similar beliefs in order to justify your crackpot fantasies. When someone doesn’t believe or understand you, it‘s as if they are saying they don’t believe in you, personally. To convince someone that your god is real is to justify your own self center, or becoming self-centered. A person as god turns into ‘a personal relationship’ with god. He knows you so well because you know you so well.

      Report Post » FoxholeAtheist  
    • sawbuck
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 3:18pm

      foxholeatheist
      You know if you don’t like the way are country is,
      you can always pull you kids out of class and home school them..
      You are the minority in our Christian Nation. We will honor your decision
      and personal beliefs, as long as you don’t try coming off as the total authority
      on the subject…
      You have more in common with the people like Hitler
      “that has taken the word of God and distorted it for their own agenda” …!
      You choose to believe ( your own religion) and that religion is (NO GOD)…!
      In both cases knowing or unknowing people are deceived and are doomed
      to eternal damnation..!
      And any Christian following sound doctrine…
      Would not and should not try shoving Gods Word and
      The Message of Christ down your throat.. On the contrary …
      When meeting someone like you that has such disdain for the Christian Message …
      We are to shake the dust from are feet and walk away..
      And we should just remember the Bible verse that says …
      “A fool says in his heart there is no God”..!

      Report Post » sawbuck  
    • ReynMansson
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 4:48pm

      @FOXHOLEATHEIST, just a minor point of style, I think your abbreviation for Christian “Xtian” is not the best form. Think about the shorten form of Christmas “Xmas” with no “t”. I think the better choice is “Xian” without the “t” as it matches the other common usage of the “X” replacing Christ.

      Thanks

      Report Post » ReynMansson  
  • Country
    Posted on February 6, 2012 at 9:36am

    Yay for Bible man and Jackson Co. School Board.

    Report Post »  
1 2 3 4

Sign In To Post Comments! Sign In

Sign Up For Our Newsletter!

Glenn Beck Radio

Listen to Glenn Beck 24/7 Listen Now
Restoring Love