Secularizing Christianity: The Struggle Against Theocratization

I must say that it is truly inspiring to join a web community such as this; intelligent humans participating in constructive and respectful thought. I am not new to the life-style of atheism, but Christmas has brought me around (once again) to the sad truth that so many of us still believe in any type of omnipotent being. I'm glad there are people in the world who share the same beliefs as I do and I'm more than happy to read the incredible intelligence of all who are present.

Thank you everyone,

Mason

I suppose the council is taking a different interpretation of the bumper sticker suggestion, "Keep it Secular, stupid".

Next blog post? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c6tmsxdSUkY&feature=relmfu

"If the theocrats win at secularizing the Lord’s Prayer then how long before every government meeting begins with the newfound secular and generic prayer?"

I couldn't agree more. One additional question to add if chrstian secularization goes unabated, how long before Article VI, paragraph 3 below is rewritten? This is after all, the end goal for the christian right, to gain control (dominion) and rewrite the constitution to form a christian theocracy.

"The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States."

Keep up the good fight. You have my full support.

More proof the christian right is dead set on making the U.S. a christian theocracy. Our buddy Newt convened a conference call with reporters on Saturday to expand on his call for Congress to subpoena judges or even abolish courts altogether if they make "wrong-headed decisions."

Gingrich argued that the judicial branch has grown far more powerful than the nation’s founders ever intended and said it would be well within the president’s authority as commander in chief to ignore a Supreme Court ruling that he believed was incorrectly decided.

And just what "wrong-headed decisions" does Newt feel warrants the presidents ignoral on supreme court rulings? He said he developed his proposals after the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in 2002 ruled that reciting the phrase “one nation, under God” in the Pledge of Alliance in public schools infringed on the separation of church and state. “I was frankly just fed up with elitist judges imposing secularism on the country and basically fundamentally changing the American Constitution,” Gringrich said.

Newt also goes on to say that school prayer and the 10 commandments should be allowed back in schools and courthouses. I guess if you cannot beat the judicial branch to get your evil mythology into the mainstream, all one has to do as president is ignore or even disband or abolish the judicial system. Tyranny anyone? Despotism much?

Thanks for showing your true colors Newt and shackling yourself to the far right wing theocrats.

By the way Newt and all you christian right theocrats, if you continue to fight for the 10 commandments to be displayed; please make sure you request the ones that would appear on your mythical, imaginary stone tablets. Most of you probably do not even know there had to be a 2nd set made. So if there were an arc of the covenant which held these imaginary tablets they would NOT hold the commandments you all think. It is right there in your inerrant bible christians. Exodus 34, please review for yourself. I personally would love to see the 10th commanment displayed for all to see in public so you religionists would have to hide your head in shame each time you walked by.

Fyi, your 10th commandment would read: "Thou shall not seethe (boil) a kid in it's mothers milk." LMFAO. Fantastic law for all of us to follow, wouldn't you agree?

Why are atheists so obsessed with Christianity while ignoring Judaism, the spiritual predecessor of Christianity?

On March 4, 2002, U.S. Sen. James M. Inhofe (R-Okla) made the following speech on the floor of the Senate titled PEACE IN THE MIDDLE EAST

In it, he cited 7 reasons why the US should support Israel. Reason #7 is below:

"7. The seventh, and most important, reason why we ought to support Israel is because G-d said so.

Look it up in the book of Genesis. In Genesis 13:14-17, the Bible says: The L-rd said to Abram, “Lift up now your eyes, and look from the place where you are northward, and southward, and eastward and westward: for all the land which you see, to you will I give it, and to your seed forever....Arise, walk through the land in the length of it and in the breadth of it; for I will give it to thee.”

That is G-d talking.

The Bible says that Abram removed his tent and came and dwelt in the plain of Mamre, which is in Hebron, and built there an altar before the L-rd. Hebron is in the West Bank. It is at this place where G-d appeared to Abram and said, “I am giving you this land” — the West Bank. This is not a political battle at all. It is a contest over whether or not the Word of G-d is true."

Got that? He talking about God, the Bible and all those other "myths" like God talking to Abraham, and cutting special real estate deals with him. And he's doing it on THE FLOOR OF THE UNITED STATES SENATE!!

Where were the brave atheists then? Why weren't you challenging the separation of synagogue and state? Oh yeah, you were probably too busy attacking easy targets like nativity scenes. Challenging Israel is way too scary. You sure don't want AIPAC and the ADL on your back.

Is it really atheism or just antiChrist?

Atheist billboards we'll never see:
https://sites.google.com/site/dogsandoldmen/home/atheist-billboards-we-l...

Ahh, the christians crying yet again that they are under attack. If you would only pay attention. Requesting political leaders to remain nuetral with regards to religion while perfoming their duties from their elected position IS NOT ATTACKING RELIGION. It is merely upholding the constitution and law of our country. So cry me a river.

Buy a clue.

It's fascinating to me how you decide what comments to "allow" on your site even if they are not inflammatory in any way. All the while hollering free speech. Hypocrites. I'll see if you post this one, probably not.

Or are you unfamiliar w/the fact that Judaism is the backbone of Christianity.

I'm aware of that fact, just like I'm aware of the fact that many Jews reject Christianity and continue to live as observant Jews under the Torah and/or Talmud. That's what "Judaism" usually means today. So where's the negative posts about them? How about some articles criticizing circumcision, dietary law, unshaved beards, mixed garments, bans on tattoos, Moses Maimonides, the Temple Mount, Wailing Wall etc.

Gee, you're concerned about Mary Baker Eddy and Christian Science? How about a deconstruction of the racist Talmud on this site for those Jews who follow that direction? Or at least post ONE ARTICLE from the link I sent about that Orthodox “family magazine,” Fountains of Salvation, which suggests that Israel will create death camps for Palestinians in order to wipe them out like Amalek. Fair enough?

Or is it just that it's a lot easier (and politically safer) to make Christians responsible for the objectionable scriptures in the OT, so as not to offend Jewish people? The fact that you accuse me of being anti-Semitic seems to imply that. Why so defensive? Have you ever accused anyone of being anti-Christian or anti-Muslim?

Don't like the levitical ban on homosexuality? Don't blame the Jews, blame the Christians.
Don't believe in Creation or the Flood? Don't blame the Jews, blame the Christians.
You think the Mosaic law was overly racist, homophobic, anti-woman and brutal? Don't blame the Jews, blame the Christians.
You think the entire Bible is bunk? Don't blame the Jews, blame the Christians. And so on.

Of course, many Christians are willing and able to reply to those concerns, but the fact that Jews are "passed over" (so to speak), while Christians are solely held responsible for these difficult passages seems rather biased.

So to ask what empirical evidence I have is a childish effort on your part.

No it isn't. You just made a statement you couldn't back up. So you made a guess and were wrong. I can tolerate that. No need to call me childish because I challenged you.

You think arguing with a Theist is like arguing with a child? Well, if I were to judge all atheists by Buckeye and Krystalline, with their snarky tone, I'd have to conclude that arguing with an atheist is like arguing with a woman.

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5245/5255223553_ef896c413f_b.jpg

Why do you Christian's always feel the need for everyone to pay homage to your religious belief's? Why aren't you able to believe quietly??? Why do you feel the need for everyone around you to know you are Christian and believe the same thing? Are you that insecure in your belief's that you constantly have to feel validated by those of us who no longer believe??? It looks that way to a lot of us.

We must insist that such obviously sectarian symbols as the cross, and obviously sectarian prayers such as the Lord's Prayer, not be supported by the government in any fashion. It is a tried, tested, and proven method to incrementally establish a desired behavior, or ideology.

Juanchin wrote: "All things that exist could not have come out of nothing but rather they show the undeniable traces of an intelligent design"

What, or who, was the intelligent designer of God?

This question may have been asked and answered many times already. I am new to this forum and have not read very much of its contents yet. I apologize if my question is redundant.

What is the best defense? A good offense? NO. It is a better all around strategy. Don’t offend your opponents. Many Christians are highly offended at any restriction on their right to practice their beliefs anywhere at any time as demonstrated by some of the comments here. They are equally offended by any suggestion of fair and equal treatment, allowing others to practice their beliefs anywhere at any time. So be smart and outwit them!

When someone wrote a Letter to the Editor of my local paper saying that Creationism should be taught, and religious instruction brought back to public schools. I sent a Letter back. I said I have no problem with Genesis being taught in public schools as long as the Creation Myths from other religions and cultures are also taught and that they aren’t taught in Science class. I also said I have no problem with religion being taught in public schools, as long as children are taught the basics about ALL the world’s religions and secular philosophies. I went on to say that I think it is vital that children learn about ALL the worlds religions and secular philosophies IF they are to become responsible, well rounded citizens. That did put an end to the discussion, at least in our local paper! The choice isn’t Christianity or NOTHING. It can be between EVERYTHING or NOTHING. And you can bet most Christians will choose NOTHING over EVERYTHING.

I think a similar tactic should be taken with symbols such as the cross. There are crosses and other memorials along roadsides in Illinois where people have died in car accidents. One of the nicest is a metal sun flower. Some people have a need to make public shows of their grief, piety, whatever. AND I think it is important that we all be reminded of the atrocities that happen in our country. Surely some creative person out there can come up with a secular symbol that could be suggested as an alternative. I wouldn’t use the American Flag as the symbol because I think that blind patriotism can be just as harmful as blind theism. AND where people from many nationalities have suffered such as at the world trade center, an American Flag doesn’t honor them fairly or respectfully. It doesn’t have to be a CROSS or NOTHING.

As for the Ten Commandments. No problem, post them alongside the codes of conduct from ALL (or at least a few other) religions and secular philosophies. Better still just post “Do not do to others what you would take unkindly from them.” That is from Confucius and has appeared in some form or another in most religions and from those wonderful pre-Christian, Pagan Greeks! AND it pretty much covers everything: thou shalt not lie, cheat, steal, murder, profiteer, abuse verbally/sexually/physically, or force your religious beliefs on others since you wouldn’t take it kindly if they forced their views on you….etc. Again there are other options between the Ten Commandments or NOTHING.

My buddy Newt is at it again today saying: "It's pretty simple: marriage is between a man and a woman. This is a historic doctrine driven deep into the Bible, both in the Old Testament and in the New Testament, and it's a perfect example of what I mean by the rise of paganism."

To Newt us pagans are eroding the moral fabric of society by not respecting and adhering to the doctrines of the bible. If the doctrines of the bible are so perfect, historic and rightous Newt and his christian dominionist and theocrat flock; why are you not advocating for the return of slavery, the return of women to second class citizenry, the return of stoning to death if caught working on the sabboth, or for adulterers, or for blasphemers and finally why no outrage over us pagans not condoning the "right" to commit genocide to secure the promised land? All of this and more evil are not only mandated to you in your bible, but also committed by your god.

It is because YOU do no believe in those evil things either. Truth is, you only long for the return to biblical worldview if the issue is something YOU believe in. It has absolutely NOTHING to do with what you think your god believes in. Therefore, in essence you are not a true believer of your god and his teachings if you can dismiss or ignore with your own reason and logic that which does not sit well with your conscience.

So if YOU can determine which historic doctrines you will follow, why the need for a god again? Say it with me religionists: "There is no god, and the bible is irrelevant". Good answer. You're getting it now.

Gn:6:7

Random thought/question:

Many of the Founding Fathers had shed the belief of Jesus and the salvation by faith crap and adopted a deist position. This is pretty clear. We all know these men were well read, educated, great thinkers, had inquisitive minds, and many even were involved in science.

Well, if the Founding Fathers knew even half of the science we know today, how many of them would still cling to the deist position and how many would reach the educated and reasonable view scientists now have in this enlightened age and adopt the agnostic or atheist position?

The religious white could no longer beat their dead horse of the Founding Fathers establishing this country as a Christian nation. Would these great men then lose the reverance which they currently possess and be labeled as heretics and be attacked?