All Comments (140)

http://moreaboutmen.com/abc/e/

http://moreaboutmen.com/abc/e/

http://moreaboutmen.com/abc/e/

prwmo ydiq gydxcpjq usqnw cnvxmdi ltcn fbcleh

hello world!

m461k

m461k

I am a kenyan citizen and I sat for kenya certificate of secondary education last year and currently want to persue my career in Voronezh State Medical University since I wanted to become a cardiologist but I am financially unstable.I believe you will enable me realize my dream.Thanks in advance.

I am a kenyan citizen and I sat for kenya certificate of secondary education last year and currently want to persue my career in Voronezh State Medical University since I wanted to become a cardiologist but I am financially unstable.I believe you will enable me realize my dream.Thanks in advance.

I am a kenyan citizen and I sat for kenya certificate of secondary education last year and currently want to persue my career in Voronezh State Medical University since I wanted to become a cardiologist but I am financially unstable.I believe you will enable me realize my dream.Thanks in advance.

m447k

Your religious view's should have no baring on how you report the news, this is America. Your reporting news, not your religious faith, so it should be kept to yourself. Same with politics, I see to many political leaders pushing religious views on the rest of us, shouldn't happen at all. The rest of us are not of that faith, but belong to other faith's that have different laws. One person's religious law's do not apply to other's with different religious laws.

Keep it to yourself. It's okay if you talk about your faith with those of your own faith, but I see to much belittling of people by faith's such as Christianity towards other faith's. It's like the military banning the Wiccan faith symbol from head stone's. Totally wrong! I've seen to many think they are better than other's, when in fact I've seen other faith's with higher morals than the one's pointing fingers. It's better to keep your religious views to yourself and other's of your own faith. If we are harming other's then that is something that should not happen.

Also, some religious people don't even want to discuss anything, all they want to do is dictate and won't listen to other's pointing out conflicting information. I get door knocker's all the time, and all they have to say is that the book is a guide, a guide for what, discrimination and hate? I discussed issues on the book, and they couldn't even answer them because they only know the book, they don't know historical facts.

I think that kind of energy can be put to better use, such as the homeless problem in our own "great" country, the high crime rate that is brought about by teaching our children that killing is okay. Children should be raised that killing is wrong, no matter what the situation. However, they are taught, "an eye for an eye." What ever happened to "though shalt not kill?" I suppose it's not convenient at this time? When will it be, or are we just picking and choosing what we want to say and/or discuss?

Deanna
Funny I haven't looked at E FAV as a female. No problem, one just forms a mental picture when reading their posts. I find her gentle and responsive without being curt or condensending. I haven't been at this very long myself and find it interesting. I am not against people of faith just those that use it against other people like gays or the many forms of non-believers to try to gain an advantage. This has been the history of christianity. I was raised a catholic but can't follow the teachings of the church. For one it is mysogynistic. What I have found is the more people claim to be a hard and fast christian the more hate filled and intolerant they are. I became disallusioned with religion a long time ago. Are you aware that some 36 members of the house of representitives gathered in front of their office supposedly our "house" and declared this a christian nation and it was time americans took this country back for christ. These are elected officials declaring the allegiance to their god and not the america people or the constitution. My problem is with them and for sure not you. You can defend your church and defend your beliefs and I will listen. So far what I hear from you is you are on a search. Well I've been on that search and still am and hopefully will not give it up. People of faith can't understand that so they fear and shun us. Unwilling to discuss for fear they will go to hell or worse yet face their own beliefs. TTFN

JWEST: First of all, THANK YOU for the review of Prothero's book and position by AU! Norrie was right that Prothero's bias was showing when he listed the Bible before world religions -- and I totally missed it.

Also, I owe you a thank you for recommending the kinder, gentler atheists. The recommendation I mentioned above did NOT come from a review of Dawkins' book, it came from a post by you on another thread. [found it when I went looking for EFAVE's earlier questions to me on my faith, which I'd managed to lose]

I'm sorry you took personally my comment about people who choose to misunderstand what I say. You've been around this blog quite a bit -- probably way more than I have. While there are many courteous, intelligent, concerned people posting, including you, you can't fail to notice that there are also people so rigidly confined by their beliefs, dare I say prejudices, that anyone whose position differs from theirs is immediately a target for verbal abuse.

E-Favorite's questions to me require me to reflect carefully on what I do and don't believe, and how that informs my actions and world view. She's asking tough questions, which I'm willing to try to answer. But we're not playing 21 questions, and any conclusions we may reach will come rather far down the road. This will not be easy for me because some of what I'm going to be doing is "thinking by writing." Actually, I could ignore the potshots by zanies. What would be difficult would be to ignore intelligent questions that require answers. For now, I think it's best that this quest remain a dialogue.

I'll keep an eye on what's happening in Texas, as well as Tennessee, and I'll use E-Fave's letters as I am able.

Peace!

I copied this from the web site www.au.org.. These author of this said it batter than I can..

Learning About The Bible: A Choice, Not A Command
March 13th 2007

The fact that Prothero got a book contract to proclaim biblical illiteracy a major problem does not mean that it is.

Stephen Prothero, chair of the Religion Department at Boston University, thinks classes on the Bible should be mandatory in public high schools. In his new book, Religious Literacy: What Every American Needs to Know – and Doesn’t, Prothero outlines his argument.

Prothero’s thesis is provocative – and it may sell a few books – but he is misguided. In a press release issued today through the Christian Newswire, Prothero says, “We have a major civic problem on our hands.” He goes on to endorse mandatory Bible classes and the book The Bible and Its Influence published by the Bible Literacy Project, as the remedy.

Prothero makes it sound easy. It won’t be. The Bible is not just another book. People can’t agree on which version of the Bible is best or even what the Bible is. Fundamentalists see it as the absolute word of an all-powerful God, inerrant and infallible. Moderates and progressives disagree, viewing the Bible as a mix of spiritual truth with some metaphor, poetry and history thrown in. Muslims respect Jesus as a prophet but don’t consider the Bible divinely inspired. Atheists reject it all together.

Few public school teachers are prepared to chart a course through these stormy waters. And so far, many of those who have attempted it have capsized. Over the years, Americans United has encountered too many horror stories concerning courses that supposedly teach about religion but become a cover for some group’s dogma.

In 1994, Americans United investigated Bible classes in several North Carolina public schools. One teacher told a newspaper in Greensboro, “I feel the Bible is God’s word to us and can change people’s life.” Asked what he had learned in class, one boy replied, “I’ve learned how Christ died on the cross for our sins.”

This was not an isolated incident. Time and again, Americans United and other groups have had to warn communities or sue them over alleged “teach about the Bible” courses taught in a sectarian manner.

The Bible and Its Influence tries to steer clear of sectarianism, but its treatment of this delicate subject still falls short. The book tends to whitewash history, presenting the Bible and Christianity in an overwhelmingly positive light. Its discussion of the development of church-state separation in colonial America is wholly inadequate, reflecting a subtle “Christian nation” bias. (It doesn’t help that the textbook was funded by religious conservatives and has been endorsed by several Religious Right activists.)

There are other problems with Prothero’s thesis. The fact that Prothero got a book contract to proclaim biblical illiteracy a major problem does not mean that it is. Any type of ignorance is unfortunate, but why should public schools be expected to take time away from studying science, math, literature, history and other subjects to add Bible courses to an already overcrowded plate?

The irony is rich. Americans claim to venerate the Bible, even if they don’t know what’s in it. It is a perennial best-seller, often bought but apparently not read. Americans flock to houses of worship on the weekends where the Bible is discussed. How is it that America, the most religious of the Western nations, can contain so many people who are incapable of naming the Gospels or who don’t know who delivered the Sermon on the Mount?

If not knowing this material is deemed a crisis, perhaps it is America’s clergy, not public school teachers, who should respond. The fact that many Americans are apparently content with an interest in the Bible that is a mile wide but an inch deep is of no concern to the public school system.

Prothero (or more likely his book publicist) is guilty of hyperbole. An inability to recognize a passage from an Old Testament book hardly amounts to a “major civic crisis.” The fact that less than half of all eligible voters turn out on election day is a major civic crisis. People feeling alienated by their government and coming to believe that their vote or voice will make no difference is a major civic crisis. Americans losing faith in their leaders due to scandals and the influence of monied special interests is a major civic crisis.

There is a place for religion in public schools. Americans United has consistently advocated the objective teaching about religion in the social studies, history, art, music and literature courses when appropriate. In the late 1980s, we even sponsored a five-year project to help teachers do a better job of this.

But cordoning off the Bible into a special, now mandatory, course and expecting every public school in America to be able to pull this off is to court disaster. Worse, it will toss more gasoline on the already raging fires of the “culture wars.”

By Rob Boston

To Jwest et.al.

In the interest of full disclosure - here is the bad news and the good news about teaching religion in the public schools

http://scienceblogs.com/omnibrain/2007/03/chuch_norris_is_going_to_kick.php

Bad News : Chuck Norris and his wife are promoting bible courses in the public schools as needed and supreme-court supported return to the biblical foundations upon which our fine country was built.

Good News: the video is so smarmy that only goner fundamentalists can watch it without puking.

Non-Believers and Moderate Christians - Start writing letters!

JWest: E-Fave is exactly right. E-Fave has asked me a number of questions about my "faith," which, if I answer them truthfully, may offend others and/or give rise to diatribes and attacks from those who might disagree with my interpretations. It's not that I fear attacks -- E-Fave is not about to let me off with answering in cliches or religious rhetoric.

That said, E-Fave has proved to be a person who has consistently probed and questioned my statements. In addition, as stated, s/he asked a number of questions about my "faith" on another thread, and indicated that there would be more to come. In my on-going quest to refine and define my faith, I would rather focus on discussing/debating with one person than try to argue on many fronts with any number of people all at the same time.

Know that I am very concerned about your situation in Texas and wish you well in your efforts to combat the attacks of the religious right on the 1st amendment.

Peace

Jwest - nice to see you here. I believe Deanna was referring to a question I asked about her faith on another thread that she didn't want to answer publicly. She mentioned it here, bcause she "saw" me here.

E FAV
Deanna seemed to want a little privacy so I'll give it to you all. She said.
"but I'd rather do it one-on-one. If we decide it's likely to be of use or interest to others, we could always submit it as a Guest Voice. I just don't want to deal with random attacks by people who choose to misunderstand what I say".

Deanna - thanks for your feedback on the letters.

As for a kinder, gentler atheist author, I strongly suggest Dan Dennett who wrote "Breaking the Spell - Religion as a natural phenomenon."

Regarding Mr Mark - I've seen him recently on the Cal Thomas thread.

I've responded to your address and look forward to hearing from you.

Jwest - I hope you come back.

E Fave: Thanks for a GREAT, I mean totally AWESOME pair of letters. I will "borrow" them and put them to good use.

JWest: To echo E-Fave, I apologize for upsetting you more. If you read my words as condescending, please accept my sincere apology for that as well. I can understand your fear of the RR. As I said before, they scare the hell out of me. Dobson's quest to "capture and control the minds of our children"; Pat Robertson's absolutely obscene remark calling Ariel Sharon's stroke "God's retribution for dividing His (God's) land"!!! I leaped up and shouted at the TV: God DOESN'T DO that!!!" To say I was outraged would be putting it mildly. Unfortunately, except for my outburst and bringing it to the attention of friends, I did nothing constructive about it. Now, with E-Fave's example before me, I've got to start writing letters, beginning with one to Pat Robertson -- no matter how tardy it might be.

I have, in fact, visited AU's site. It's where I picked up Dobson's quote. And I plan to support them financially. Thank you for suggesting the other site. Just to keep the issue in focus, here's a quote on the AU site from Falwell that will curl your toenails:

"Modern U.S. Supreme Courts have raped the Constitution and raped the Christian faith and raped churches by misinterpreting what the founders had in mind in the First Amendment of the Constitution...[W]e must fight against those radical minorities who are trying to remove God from our textbooks, Christ from our nation. We must never allow our children to forget that this is a Christian nation. We must take back what is rightfully ours."

Nice language for a "religious" leader, don't you think? And the last I heard, he had no education in the Law, let alone Constitutional Law, plus there are plenty of writings extant from the Founding Fathers about their fear that religion would try to take over government.

That's why the First Amendment states, "CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW RESPECTING AN ESTABLISHMENT OF RELIGION, OR PROHIBITING THE FREE EXERCISE THEREOF."

The U.S. government is specifically prohibited from making any laws that would discriminate for or against ANY religion. They can't pass laws that give preference to or outlaw Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism, Islam, Atheism, OR Christianity. And they can't pass laws prohibiting any of us practicing our own religion [or not]. What the RR is trying to do is get laws passed that would favor their twisted version of Christianity -- which the 1st Amendment clearly defines as unconstitutional, and would prohibit the rest of us from espousing any other beliefs -- also clearly prohibited!

You seem to think I am walking around with blinders on, uncritically buying into whatever my particular church espouses. I can assure you that this is certainly not the case. I am actively pursuing knowledge to help me refine my beliefs. I LOVE Danny's statement: "Learning ANYTHING is beneficial. As someone pointed out to me in another thread, the bible says, "study all things and keep what is good". It's what I'm trying to do.

I am also reading Richard Dawkins' The God Delusion, suggested by an atheist on another thread. I'm finding Dawkins' rhetoric a bit over-the-top, and I detect an underlying sense of elitism, but I keep going. Somewhere in a review of Dawkins' book, a fellow atheist suggested that Dawkins and Sam Harris are not the best spokesmen for Atheism and suggested some other, kinder, gentler proponents of Atheism. I'll probably track them down after I finish Dawkins. As I said to E-Fave earlier in this thread, my faith is between ME and God. But my faith is nothing if I don't KNOW what I believe!

Believe it or not, the atheist who suggested Dawkins' book and I have become friends, as has E-Fave and a few others. Our friendship blossomed because, as "A Hermit" mentioned on the original thread where we all met, our conversation proved his assertion that it was possible for an atheist and a believer to have a constructive conversation while remaining courteous and respectful. I think E-Fave will back me up on this, as we've run into each other on several different threads and have grown to respect each others' fairness and courtesy in sharing our views.

Which brings up a question for E-Fave: Have you been able to track down Mr. Mark posting on any one of the threads on a consistent basis? I fear he was correct in predicting his return to employment would seriously curtail his posts. He's commented once on this thread. I'd like to track him down and discuss The God Delusion with him. Also, would you be averse to sending an e-mail to stopnshop@comcast.net with instructions on how to contact you? I've done a lot of thinking about your questions about my faith, and I'd love to pursue the conversation -- but I'd rather do it one-on-one. If we decide it's likely to be of use or interest to others, we could always submit it as a Guest Voice. I just don't want to deal with random attacks by people who choose to misunderstand what I say.

Peace!

Jwest – I have no concern that you’re anti-Christian and share you concern about the religious right trying to take over our secular government. You have plenty of company here for that.
We differ about the likelihood of it happening. I think it’s less likely than it has been and you don’t.

I’m concerned that I’ve gotten you upset. Didn’t mean to, was attempting to calm you down. That obviously didn’t work. So, I’ll just drop it. But first, I want you give you some positive follow-up to the Romney affair. After his “faith” comment, I sent a protest letter to his campaign. Here it is:
________

“I was very disturbed to see the clip of your recent visit to Florida in which you made the statement, ‘We need to have person of faith lead this country.’ This implies you think that a person of any religion, would be preferable to an atheist or agnostic president, irrespective of their qualifications and their respect for the US Constitution.

There’s no need to single out non-theists, as none will be running for president, at least in the 2008 election. Certainly all the candidates will profess their faith in God, either out of sincere belief, or out of the concern that they could not be elected if they professed otherwise.

It’s an insult to all the loyal Americans who love their country but don’t believe in a supernatural being to state that a “person of faith” is needed to lead the country. Please retract this statement.
Thank you.”

[Then, when I heard that he made a different kind of comment the following week, I wrote again. Here’s an excerpt from the second letter, 2/28/06:]

“I was very pleased to hear that in your recent visit to Iowa, you said, ‘I don't try to distinguish people based on their faith or lack of faith. Instead I look at what they're contributing and supporting this great land and our citizens.’ This is a vast improvement over your statement in Florida last week…to learn from your mistakes is a good thing. We certainly don’t need another intransigent occupant of the White House.
__________

Maybe he changed his tune because he got a ton of complains; maybe mine was the only one and
he thought it had merit, or maybe he just wised up on his own. Whatever, he changed his tune to assert that religion does not define what makes a good American. THIS IS GOOD NEWS.

Please feel free (anyone) to crib from my letters whenever you hear any candidate for office, or any current officeholder make a statement like Romney’s original one. It’s consciousness-raising – people need to be informed that certain attitudes are no longer socially acceptable.

I am patiently waiting for the next candidate, Republican or Democrat, to make a crack like that. I’ll be all over them and hope you will be too.

E FAV and Deanna
Their are many people in america that don't see any harm in what is going on in this country today as far as religion is concerned. What's the harm they ask me. They don't concern themselves with politics and are not up on issues. They leave the governance of this country to elected officials and go about their lives in ignorant bliss. Today all of our polticians are being given religiuos test and our politicians stand up and proclaim for all to here JC is my lord and savior. You guys start paying closer attention to this. Plus I have a couple of web sites for you to visit in your spare time. one is www.au.org. The other is www.about.com go to relilion and spirituality then select agnostisism and atheism and just read some of what is happening in the US from that perspective. Don't worry Deanna it won't try convert you. It's just more information to gather for your future discussions. Maybe by seeing anothers point of view you won't be so condensending. The supreme court of Texas is heavily far right christian men who have swore to uphold god's laws. This IS happening in your state as well. The religious test is given to all politicians today and if they don't say the right thing, they will not get elected. So these greedy self centered people will say and do anything to get elected. What can you do, what can we do. Get informed, stay informed. Counter those that apply the religious test by letting the politician know you want him/her to represent constitutional law not whoever's god's law. Mitt Romney, a mormon, was told by someone in an audience he was speaking to said "JC is my lord and savior and then something to the effect and I paraphrase your religion is bad religion. To which Romney said that it is important that a man of faith run for office and be elected This is all religious bigotry 101. Now Romney has told the american people that only people with faith in the supernatural are fit to be elected to lead this nation. It is average god fearing americans that are encouraging this religious bigotry giving powwer to the RR types. You both use the word fear when discribing me if that is what you want to think fine. You are both at fault for trying squash dicussion. Others read how you answer me and maybe you itimidate them with what you say to me. I do not fear and I'm sorry both of you are sloughing this off as anti-christian rhetoric from a non-believer that is afraid. wrong answer

Jwest - I didn't know things were so bad in Texas (though somehow, I'm not surprised, either) and certainly I understand how that would affect your views.

I hope you're feeling a little better now that my views have been seconded by Deanna, a dedicated Christian.

I predict that IF things get worse in Tx, things will right themselves soon enough - like they did in Kansas and PA. There may be some dark days ahead, but if Texas wants to remain part of the union, it will have to tow the line. I bet there are more people in Texas who feel strongly about staying part of the USA than there are people who feel strongly about following a fundamentalist Jesus.

JWest: I have to agree with E-Fave about stopping the RR. There are many, many citizens of these United States who are rising up and taking action to prevent the RR from co-opting the ideals of democracy and the Bill of Rights and cramming their sick, twisted "theology" down our throats.

I don't wish to be tiresome, but let me quote myself from a couple of days ago:

HUMILITY, RESPECT, COMPASSION, LOVE!! Do you see any of these values being espoused by the religious right?! I certainly don't, and quite frankly, it scares the hell out of me! THEY scare the hell out of me!! See my post on James Dobson's quote above at 2 am on March 20.

As E-Fave said so eloquently before, the alternative is IGNORANCE, and that just plays right into the hands of fanatics of all stripes.

Your overwhelming fear of the RR is obvious, but I think you're jumping to conclusions about their ability to fulfill their agenda. With all due respect, I think your fear of the RR is paralyzing your ability to do something constructive and rational about stopping them. This is a country of laws and, as heavily stacked with conservatives the U.S. Supreme Court has become, I don't see any of the Justices endorsing a theocracy as a constitutionally-sanctioned form of government.

Hard as they might try -- and successful as they might be in persuading the poorly educated and, therefore, easily swayed, that the Apocalypse is upon us if we don't adopt every item on their crazy agenda -- there is no way rational theists of all denominations, atheists, people committed to civil rights, and others concerned about securing the continued freedoms U.S. citizens enjoy are going to stand idly by and let them win!

We have the Constitution on our side, and we have lawyers spoiling for a fight. Most of us can barely wait for the RR to hand themselves their own head on a platter. They're doing such a good job making fools of themselves, it's almost as if our efforts, beyond vigilance and lawsuits, will not be necessary to topple them. Well, maybe just a tiny tap on the shoulder.

That said, I must echo E-Fave: Think about this -- besides not permitting classes on comparative religion in the schools, what do you propose DOING to stop the religious right?

DANNY: Amen. Amen I say! Your words are a balm to my soul! Would that more Christians who believe as you and I do would speak up and call the religious right to task for intentionally twisting the teachings of Christ to suit their particular prejudices. Thank you for thoughtful input.

JWEST: Allow me to clarify something from my prior post about my church's youth ministry program. First of all, am I one of those dedicated adults who has given generously of their time and talents to get and keep this program going? Unfortunately, NO! I am active in my church, but I am also aware of my own tendency to want to behave like the pious Pharisee in Matthew 6, so I make it a point to choose service that is as "invisible" as possible.

My only direct involvement with W.O.W. was to accept a 3-year call to serve on the church's governing council with the express intent of keeping the Urban Outreach Ministry program on everyone's radar. My term is, thankfully, complete, and I'm not sure I achieved my objective, but having scaled back my activities in many areas of service, I hope to spend some time on the streets with the kids this summer.

Also, naming the ministry was left up to the youth. They came up with a variety of possible names, then I believe they discussed the pros and cons of each before deciding on W.O.W. You see, the majority of the adults in the congregation think our kids are pretty special -- and very capable. So we don't worry much about letting them plan worship, organize and run programs, and come up with new ideas for activities for them -- and for the entire congregation.

In fact, in debriefing every week of W.O.W. and at other times when members of the congregation are providing feedback on programs or whatever, the number one comment from the youth is how grateful they are to be in a church where the adults treat them like sentient human beings. Not only are they there in droves for Sunday worship, they are also there for mid-week services in Advent and Lent. They feel so at home at St. John's, they regularly invite their friends, and many of their friends keep coming back! Lest you think these are all squeaky clean, thoroughly indoctrinated, robotic believers, let me tell you that there are plenty of tattoos, piercings, unusual hair cuts and colors, and interesting attire among our youth, and they are very vocal when they disagree with something the church is doing. They're teenagers! We would be fools to expect anything different.

In closing, allow me to reiterate an important point I made about the program that may have been overlooked, since I do tend to blather on. Please pay special attention to the phrases I have now put in caps: The lessons these young adults are learning in RESPECT FOR OTHERS, ACCEPTANCE OF DIFFERENCES, AND LEADERSHIP BY EXAMPLE are priceless. To me, ONE OF THE KEY ELEMENTS of the program IS THAT THERE IS NOT PROSELYTIZING OR PREACHING.

E-FAVE: Thank you for the quiet, sincere vote of confidence. It kept me from a hasty retort to JWest -- one that I would surely regret later.

E-FAVE & JWEST: Can the kind of program that is inspiring our youth to befriend and help those less fortunate be done by a secular organization? OF COURSE IT CAN! Scouts, 4H, FFA, international exchange programs, programs sponsored by a variety of adult service organizations... These kinds of programs are also possible through the YMCA and YWCA and their Jewish equivalents, as well as many other denominations. For that matter, what's to stop a group of concerned parents and other adults from a neighborhood getting together with their youth and developing a service program?! Please take note that I do NOT include organized youth sports. At least in the area of the country where I live, these programs foster aggressive, bullying behavior. All my 5th grade boys were convinced they were going to grow up to be professional football players. To make sure they were ready when the time came, they mimicked the behavior they saw on TV every Saturday and Sunday. I am VERY GLAD to see that NFL players are now doing public service announcements to plug giving back to the community -- and the most egregiously bad behavior is being penalized.

I'm afraid that the U.S. as a society is doing a very poor job teaching our children of every age those three important qualities I enumerated above: RESPECT FOR OTHERS, ACCEPTANCE OF DIFFERENCES, and LEADERSHIP BY EXAMPLE.

I think it probably started in the 1960s as a reaction to many things: demonstrations, both peaceful and otherwise, for civil rights for African-Americans, equality for women, against the U.S. involvement in Viet Nam, and political scandals. It accelerated in the 70s as celebrities started practicing serial monogamy without regard for committed relationships. And then there were all those children born to unmarried women with revolving-door husbands, and raised by the hired help, often illegal immigrants who loved children but spoke little or no English. Add to that the corporate greed and corruption of the 80s and 90s, and you have to be 60 or older to have lived in an era where common courtesy and respect for others were COMMON.

I know I sound like a cranky old codger, and part of me feels that way too. But most of me is overjoyed that there are still parents who love their children, teach them respect and self-control, and live their lives as an example to their own children. Would that there were more families like that [and I'm not talking about the Cleavers or Ozzie and Harriet. I have no desire to go back to the 50s. Much has been achieved to give the needy and down-trodden a leg up, but there is still much to be done.]

I'm not saying confrontation does not have it's place, but I do believe we can achieve better results with less heated argument and more calm, respectful cooperation and negotiation.

End of Today's Sermon.

Wishing you joy, peace, and happiness. Be kind to others, but don't forget to be kind to yourself.

E FAV I live in Texas. It is very close to becoming that theocratic state we all oppose. The have already passed the religious freedom act and it ramification are not to clear at this point. It's just a foothold. But one of the provisions of this religious freedom act is to give access to our tax base to churches. We will not be able to afford them. They are very close to approving school vouchers which as you know will give tax payer money to mega-churches, and in the pockets of millionaire preachers. I think they need two votes and by all questimate they have enough vote to pass it. I hope your state isn't as foolish as mine. Religious intrusion in all aspect of government affairs is already rampant and I'm afraid embedded by law. Look at each congressperson and see how deep in bed they are with the RR it will scare you. I'm sorry I left you with the impression that I was for comparative religion or any other kind of religious study in our public schools. I am against any and all forms of religious teaching in our public schools. I said, once again, "IF" I were to teach I would anger many. My point wasn't well received I can see. I would do it in such a manner as to show how cruel religion is. How selective its adherents are to following tenets. How manipulative religion is and control of the masses is all its been used for. If some feel the spirit then fine, you can feel the spirit without the government putting into laws.

Jwest - I feel the heat -- and see big fire trucks all around with their hoses trained on the RR. Some are moderate Christians who can't stand what the fundies are trying to do to their religion and their country. Some are atheists who are not about to let their country to taken over by any religion. Some are loyal government employees of any or no religion, just doing their job, which is to protect the constitution.

There's been a huge response. Local attempts to co-opt secular government become national spectacles. RR figures become national scandals (Delay, Reed, Haggart).

Think about this -- besides not permitting classes on comparative religion in the schools, what do you propose DOING to stop the religious right?

E FAV, I think you under estimate the viciousness of the RR. My research into their intent is pretty solid. I listen to what they have to say. And a complete and non-disputed take over of this country for their savior is what they want. There are many religious politicians holding influential positions that can had has made important decisions concerning what they call religious freedom bills. These are called the culture issues but they have made huge headway in getting their people elected and these culture bills are very close to getting approved if not alreadt approved by congress. Pres. Bush as many religious right people in key governmental positions that are pushing faith based agendas. Pat Robertson, James Dobson and the like get millions of accounted for tax dollars to enforce religious programs down our throats and we can't do anything about it. Religion means different things to different things to different people. People have what I call selective christianity. That is they use the parts that benefit them and reject what they can't adhere to. Except for the extreme, and they have it all wrong, IMHO, nobody really practices the teachings of Jesus Christ. They think they do, but they don't. I've been watching this going on for for a long time. With these religious politicians like Brownback, Musgrove, Sessions, and many more they are winning right now. The old proverb you can't tell when the waters getting hot until it's too late, well at my age, I can feel the heat. Sounds like you can't

Jwest - I have all the same fears that you do. I just think teaching about religions will ultimately be beneficial, not harmful.

I don't think it will necessarily be easy to get going (though apparently it has been easy in some school districts) but I think it will be well worth the effort.

Not all “believing” parents will be as reasonable as Danny B, perhaps, but enough will be to have an impact on others. It doesn’t need to be your nightmare of fundamentalists against democracy.

And finally, finally, Americans will start to learn the difference between teaching and preaching.

Also regarding my post above...

"I surely wouldn't have converted (which hasn't happened anyway), but furthermore I might have developed a bias against these faiths. I might be taught to generalize, stereo-type, and jump to conclusions."

This, most importantly, wouldn't teach me anything about my own faith anyway!

Thanks for the kind words Deanna and E Favorite!

I was thinking more on this topic and something occurred to me.

When I was a kid, (when there was no cable tv), I used to watch Davey and Goliath on Sunday mornings all the time. This program was produced by The Lutheran Church. It had a good message, but was never (as I recall) overtly religious.

Likewise, I always used to enjoy those PSAs from the The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. They were always well put together and poignant little "films" with a good message. They were also (as I recall) not overtly religious.

My parents raised me as a Catholic. Having been exposed to these things, and having enjoyed them did not cause me to convert, or even consider it.

That being said; if adults around me had been in a constant uproar about it all the time, how might that have affected me as a child?

I surely wouldn't have converted (which hasn't happened anyway), but furthermore I might have developed a bias against these faiths. I might be taught to generalize, stereo-type, and jump to conclusions.

These two pieces of programming successfully shared Christ's most basic message without pointing it out as such, or by using any particular religious "slant" or "trick".

Why couldn't the same be done in teaching ABOUT different religions. The more we know about each other, the better we can learn to live together in peace.

Then parents at home can clarify what is "our" belief and why.

Learning ANYTHING is beneficial. As someone pointed out to me in another thread, the bible says, "study all things and keep what is good".

E FAv I believe I said If I were to teach a comparative religions class I would anger christian parents. Because I would teach all, inclusive, total, everything. I've been following the christian rights ideas and lawsuits and basicly their agenda. What I'm saying is simple. Once you bring the bible into public schools the RR can use that as a government mandate and proceed to abuse it. What do I fear? I fear pitting brother against brother in this country over religious issues. I fear a majority religion that has no compassion or soul for that matter. I fear the indocrination of our youth to some notion that only thru the supernatural can one do good. You on the other hand sound like your sitting on the fence. I don't fear religion, but it is a powerful force that has been abused by mankind since they invented it. It give excuses for bad behavior.

Danny B - ditto what Deanna said.

Deanna - ditto to some of what Jwest said, more or less, but NOT this " You are teaching these kids that they can't do this on their own, that without divine guidance this type of humanity doesn't exist." Also don't agree with what is said after that.

I think your WOW group sounds great. Feeling that I know you somewhat, and know liberal churches, I doubt you're teaching them what Jwest suggests, but are rather putting your good works in a Christian context. I believe the church can do wonderful work and it's my hope that someday (soon) this kind of work will go on without at some level having to profess belief in supernatural events - while keeping the Christian (or whatever) context.

Jwest - I'm keeping after you, if for no other reason to point out how your fears show through your thinking. You mention classes in comparative religion, then go on to say "Keep the bible out of public education" as if that's what a class in comparative religion would be. You are convinced the worst would happen even though you've heard teachers on this forum relate their positive experiences and have seen national examples of reason ultimately reigning over attempts to proselytize. I think a public debate about this is good and needed, to bring all these fears and misconceptions out.

Deanna, do you think people can't do these things without first labeling what you are doing 'WOW" without the reward of god smiling on you and blessing you. With the thought that this program won't work unless it is a christian program. Don't you think it is possible that people can help other people without religion ever coming into play. I do it all the time. Not for a heavenly reward but because being nice to others and helping them is just the right thing to do. You are teaching these kids that they can't do this on their own, that without divine guidance this type of humanity doesn't exist. I have stories and stories and stories of acts of kindness from all kinds of different people and never once was the reason based on a deity. Plus have you ever read Matthews 6:5, 6:6. You sound like the hypocrite they talk about.

Deanna
I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm against teaching or bring or doing anything with the bible in public schools. I'll fess up, I work in a university and I see how woefully unprepared some students are for the rigors of college. I think what I said was let me teach a comparative religion class and all kinds of christian parents would complain. Keep the bible out of public education. It would be a distraction. Ps there's an interesting discussion on cal thomas' page about the end of the world.

Wow! Take a day off to continue an on-going study of the Gospel of John with two dear friends and celebrate a husband's birthday, and the blog grows by something like 40 comments! I am encouraged and joyful that so many intelligent people are thinking hard about this serious issue of combating religious ignorance!

DANNY B.: Thanks for your comments. You're helping believers demonstrate that we're not all bigoted, narrow-minded idiots who fear anyone or anything that might undermine our "faith" -- a faith based on a very small, limited God.

JWEST: I really can't endorse teaching a comparative religion course that would get into the minute details of specific practices. In the first place, as I have already stated before, the JOB of public education is teaching children to read critically, write coherently, select and correctly perform the mathematical computations required by a given situation, understand the basic laws of science, understand the history and governmental structure of the U.S., plus learn something about world history and perhaps master the basics of a foreign language.

From my point of view [as a former 5th grade teacher], a report card on U.S. public education would reflect our abysmal performance, showing mainly D and F, with a few scattered C-. There are many reasons for this failure to achieve our basic goals, but certainly one is the limited amount of time teachers have to devote to teaching the core curriculum because of mandates from all levels of government, plus appeals from NGOs, to teach our children things they should be learning at home.

At the beginning of every school year, I would sit down and block out my week. Starting from a 7-hour day, I would deduct 1/2 hour each for lunch, recess, and Music/P.E./Library from every day. On paper, that left me four and 1/2 hours of "instructional time." Except I really only had 2-1/2 hours to actually teach my entire class?! Surprised? So was I for the first couple of years, then I just became resigned to making the most of the time I had. The other 2 hours were "lost" to an anti-drug program, a series of classes aimed at preventing sexual harassment and/or abuse, character education, school-wide presentations on fire safety, food safety, protecting yourself during tornadoes and other natural perils, fire drills, lock-down drills [in case a non-custodial parent under a restraining order or other potentially violent/ disturbed person entered the school], and assemblies to allow students from other grade levels to showcase the results of a major unit of study.

Add to that the fact that most of my students with special needs were out of the classroom for a minimum of 30 minutes per day, and my "bright" students were out of the classroom for an hour each week, and the indeterminate amount of time spent on "crowd control" [herding approximately 25 11-year-olds from one place to another without incident]. Even if my entire 150 minutes of instructional time was in one solid block [which it most certainly wasn't], I would be hard pressed to squeeze adequate instruction in math, reading, language arts, science, and social studies into that time.

And my situation was far from unique! I had big kids who could deal with personal hygiene issues unassisted and could work independently. Teachers of younger children had a different set of mandated in loco parentis education programs, plus their children were far less independent.

Thirty hours (one hour a day for six weeks) at the sophomore or junior level as part of the Social Studies curriculum is about all I would be willing to allow. That would limit teaching to only the major tenets of each of the world religions with a statistically significant following. Atheism: (true Atheism, Science as the foundational source, and the Oriental moral belief traditions which posit no divine); Monotheism: Judaism (Orthodox, Conservative, and Reformed); Christianity (Eastern Orthodox, Roman Catholic, and Protestant); and Islam (Shia and Sunni, plus any others I'm unfamiliar with); Deism (don't know of any organized adherents in the 21st century, but this was historically a recognized position on God, and is worth addressing); and Pantheism.

Sorry to be so long-winded, but I think you see my point.

E-FAVE: Hello, my friend! Given that adolescents are hard-wired to rebel against adult authority, it would not surprise me at all that a vaguely high percentage would use this class as an excuse to desert the faith of their fathers. It is the rare child who makes it from 10 to 20 without abandoning religion. I abandoned the practices of my childhood religion at 19 (upon transferring to a college 100 miles away from my parents). My beliefs had probably started crumbling before then, but by my late 20s, they were in ruins because they could not stand up to intelligent, rational examination.

There is an unfathomable chasm between what children are taught to believe about Jesus and the reality of God in Christ. We teach children about a God they can understand, but we fail to teach adolescents about the God who is! At least most churches and parents fail.

There is a three-day retreat ministry called Teens Encounter Christ, modeled on the Cursillo movement for adults, that brings teens face-to-face with the ineffable, incredible, boundless, sacrificial love of Jesus Christ and His call to us to be, like Him, servants of mankind -- to love one another, even as He has loved us. You would be amazed at the impact this program has on most of the high-schoolers who participate! This is not religious indoctrination, although it may sound like it to you. Adolescents choose to attend [they cannot be forced to attend by parents or pastors] and they take away from the experience what they choose to take. It is the rare participant who is unaffected, but certainly some are turned off by the experience. On the other hand, many are turned on and tuned in to faith in a way that continues to blow my mind!

Our congregation of about 400 "giving units" [That's how we count them, so I can't give you a number for individuals. A "giving unit" is a single individual, or a couple, or a family with children of all ages] has an active youth group of over 60 middle- and high-schoolers! And by active, I mean they participate in programs to visit the elderly, lead worship at a local homeless shelter,as well as in our own congregation, work with the younger children, you name it, they'll do it. And they return to serve on and lead the three retreat weekends every year.

Finally, and for me, most importantly, our congregation has launched a youth ministry called Win Our World, WOW for short, and it is nothing short of WOW!!! Ours is a downtown church, and we are surrounded by homeless shelters and other agencies serving the underprivileged and needy. Rather than flee to the suburbs, we have committed to growing where we are planted. Long a part of our Vision for the future of the church is an urban outreach ministry. Three years ago, as part of a larger capital campaign, the church committed to raising $300K in seed money for the creation of a stand-alone 501(c)(3) to accomplish these goals. As with everything, there were and are those who aren't as committed to this program as others are, and much of the money pledged to the capital campaign was diverted to bricks and mortar projects by gifts specified for restoration of stained-glass windows and other memorials.

Undeterred by lack of funds, our youth minister and several very committed adults developed WOW.
Essentially, youth groups arrive at our church on a Sunday evening and leave late Friday afternoon. During that time, they participate in daily worship services and bible studies, developed by the youth in our congregation and other alumni of the program. Then its out to the streets and surrounding service agencies to do whatever needs doing. They have cleaned toilets, picked up uncounted cigarette butts, painted rec rooms and bedrooms in various shelters, played with children from needy homes at day cares and after-school programs, hauled the famous "Water Wagon" up and down the streets, offering a cup of cold water, a smile, and a friendly face to the many homeless people who spend their days on the streets, helped deliver meals to homebound seniors, helped out at senior centers, you name it -- they've probably done it.

The adults provide the logistical and financial support. In preparation for the summer, the youth leaders are given training in conflict resolution and facilitation skills. The youth minister and another very committed adult arrange what the kids will do when with all the participating agencies -- and solicit other agencies to participate. Then it's up to the kids. They are following the command of Jesus from Matthew 25: "Whatever you have done unto the least of these, you have done it unto me." They are learning that we are all God's beloved children, and they are ministering to those who are less fortunate. At this very moment, youth groups from several states are signed up for this summer, an attorney who is a member of the church is putting together the paperwork for 501(c)(3) status, plans are underway for fund raisers, an anonymous donation in excess of $10K has been made and designated specifically for the work (not bricks and mortar), and a non-denominational foundation committed to raising up young leaders is standing by, checkbook in hand, ready to fund the remainder of the costs for five weeks of WOW this summer. In addition to raising up Christian leaders in our own congregation, we are equipping youth from other congregations in other cities and states to start their own W.O.W. programs.

The lessons these young adults are learning in respect for others, acceptance of differences, and leadership by example are priceless. To me, one of the key elements of the program is that there is no preaching or proselytizing. These beautiful children are the feet, hands, face, and heart of Christ. They don't have to say a word. Their actions speak for themselves.

Will these teenagers' faith survive the transition into adulthood? Only God knows. I believe we all, like Saul of Tarsus, come to a point in our lives where we face Christ on the road to Damascus. What becomes of faith -- whether it is created, strengthened, or destroyed -- is between us and God. What I do know about these adolescents is that they will come to that point better prepared to decide because they are not relying solely on "Jesus loves me, this I know; for the Bible tells me so."

BTW, E Fave, my religious faith is important to ME and to God. The religious faith of others is important to me in an abstract sense. Their religious faith is between them and their god. I try to live my life as an example, and perhaps through my example, some may be led to faith in Christ. But I refuse to force my beliefs on others and I abhor the religious rights' war on the First Amendment, not only because I believe it is both legally and morally wrong, but also because it is raising up a version of Christianity that is horrifying to non-Christians and deeply at odds with the core values of Christ's teachings. Plus, ALL Christians are becoming linked with these fanatics in the eyes of others.

HUMILITY, RESPECT, COMPASSION, LOVE!! Do you see any of these values being espoused by the religious right?! I certainly don't, and quite frankly, it scares the hell out of me! THEY scare the hell out of me!! See my post on James Dobson's quote above at 2 am on March 20.

As you said so eloquently before, the alternative is IGNORANCE, and that just plays right into the hands of fanatics of all stripes.

I wish there were another way so that public school teachers would not be burdened with yet another mandated in loco parentis program, but we need to teach kids that humans have found more than one way to God and the differences need to be respected. God will be the final judge [or not, if you're an atheist] on whether any of us got close to getting it right.

Peace and Love!

Franco wrote: "Jesus is alive. Buddha is dead!" This is the argument Christians often use, but it deprives Christians of understanding. For Buddhists, Zoroastrians, Muslims, and Baha'is their founder is decidedly NOT dead. The living reality of these messengers of God is just as real to these believers as is Jesus' resurrection to Christians. Thus, the New Testament itself in 1 Cor. 15:42-44 states: "So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption: ...It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body." I know that the Buddha, Zoroaster, Muhammad, and Baha'u'llah are alive just as surely as I am that Jesus also is alive. One deathless divine reality lives and is revealed in them.

E Favorite,

"Are you saying you wouldn't be upset with the school for teaching the course, but as a "believing" parent, you would step up religious discussions at home and get clergy involved with your child?"

Yes, exactly! In this hypothetical scenario, I would consider the parents lucky that their child opened up to them on this in the first place.

I also don't think that this means the parents weren't doing their duty in the first place, just that this would be the "red flag" for them to reconsider thier approach to teaching their beliefs to their child.

I would not hold this against the cirriculum. If anything I would, at the very least, be glad that they were developing into a "thinking person". This is the chance to teach them that they cannot accept information from only one source in making such a decision.

Jwest - I've had similar experiences, but none so grave as yours.

I agree that there are people "at work today in this country that want a theocracy" and I think we need to fight them, not just fear them.

Enforced ignorance is not the way to enlightenment.

I would like to visit on you all a little experience I had one day while walking through a beautiful part of the Alsac/Lorriane (sp) area of eastern central France. It was a very pleasant summer day and me and some very close German friends were having a great adventure walking from old castle to old castle. Picnicing along the way drinking great french wines and eating cheeses and breads in the forest and just wrapped up in shear joy the adventure brought. At the time I was a catholic and like most catholics I was half practicing half avoiding the responsibilities of my faith. We came across a bronze plaque that commemorated the catholic church, the Bishop of the day, ordering the slaughter of every man women and child and all their farms homes animals and crops. All because they refused to obey his orders to convert to the catholic church. It changed my life forever. I started finding more and more information about those kinds of slaughters and discovered that this was part of the 50 year religious wars france experienced during the 1500. If I remember clearly now. Europe has gone through the atrocities of these types of battles and the US hasn't. I am afraid we could be heading in that direction if we are not careful and guard our liberties well. There are forces at work today in this country that want a theocracy, just ask Newt Gingrich, he claims we are and always have been a theocracy and states Americans need to assert themselves back to its christian nation roots. We have never been a christian nation and hopefully never will be. The founders worked hard to make sure that is so.

Jwest - you say "the last 10 + years about religion in public schools has been bad things like the Kansas and Dover school boards."

Kansas and Dover were scary and awful, but they turned out right in the end - everyone involved in Kansas got voted out of office and in Dover, a Republican judge chastised the Christians involved for lying.

This is what makes me optimistic - the crazies try, but they ultimately fail and are made a laughing stock of in the process. These cases become BIG NEWS. Anything they try again (and I agree, they will try), will be big news - and will ultimately fail.

E FAV I respect your confidence in the system. Everything I have read over the last 10 + years about religion in public schools has been bad things like the Kansas and Dover school boards. Christians just will not be able to see anything wrong with what they do. I don't trust them. If I was allowed to teach this class I would do a good job and give every belief system in the world a fair and equal shot. And I'm sure I will p**** off most christian parents. From everything I see and heard in today's America we are under attack from the religious right. Lots of money and lawsuits. The supreme court is hearing a case that will not allow anyone to challenge the government's faith-based initiative in a court of law. If the supremes side with the right then they will be free do do anything they want with out legal recourse. This of course is absurd but in listening to some of the argument the supremes seem to think there is merit in this case for the right. And some think the supremes will vote in favor of not allowing the lawsuits. A lot more is at stake here then just teaching the bible in public schools, when all things added up it amounts to giving christianity the strenght it will need to impose themselves as the dominate religion in the country. That's what I fear. Protest will be meaningless. Politicians like Bush will just call everything a faith-based program and that will be the end of religious liberty in this country. No courts no protection. Look it up. No to bible study in public school. If people are ignorant of religions then so be it. You will not be able to smarten them up with one bible course.

Jwest - I think I understand your point and your concern.

I think that when it comes to directly teaching a course about religion, things will be different from the start. Teachers will be told, some maybe for the first time, what is and what is not permissible with students regarding religion. There will be parent-teacher meetings in advance to make it crystal clear what the class is about. EVERYONE will be watching. Religion teachers who proselytize will get caught faster than that biology teacher did.

I'm not saying it will be perfect, but ultimately, I will it will work. If it's not tried, the alternative is continued misinformation and ignorance.

E FAV
My whole thesis on this is we cannot trust some teachers to not teach the bible in the poselytizing mode. In my profession high schools groups visit often. Not only do I see teachers with big crucifixes around their necks, ( no problem there ) but in more then a few instances these teachers "lead" their students in a little prayer in the name of jesus christ before anything begins. They don't see the harm in it. We are a mixed culture here and more then not, it might be Hindu giving the presentation. I do not trust over zealous teachers to not look at teaching the bible in the sunday school mode. The class will never be comparative religions in most schools. It will be Sunday school. I don't know how to make my point any more clear.