All Comments (58)

http://yomayonifigasebe.com yomayonifigasebe

@ Mr. Mark

About Christian music: my thoughts exactly!!

Christian music *was* fantastic -- in the Middle Ages when everyone was Christian. Nowadays, evangelicals produce music of exactly the quality you'd expect from an insular minority.

Uh Oh seems a tad confused! As do many of the readers here. I admit, we all get confused sometimes. But, you people absolutley kill me. This man has said not a single word about "infringing" on anyones freedom! He is very simply stating that Christians have a viewpoint just like everyone else. So, Christians are to "respect" the beliefs and ideologies of everyone? Can we disagree? Is that still ok here? Are there really no absolutes in this world anymore? You compare this man to abortion bombers? Wow, thats very respectful. The only "infringing" I see going on here is being done by those who have decided to reject the idea that there is a God, and to bash anyone who says they love Him. Look, Christians just understand that there is a God who really does love us, and who really does have better idea's than we do. Christians surrender, unapologetically, to the one who made us. Truth is not relative folks! You can all get together and vote that the shirt I'm wearing right now is not blue. But, guess what, it is, and will remain so. It wont change colors. You can even call it "red" if you'd like. But, the color will remain the same. God is very real, and He alone determines who He is and what He's like. He won't vanish just because you say He isnt there! HE LOVES YOU! Christians have, throughout history, completely misrepresented the God of the Bible, many times. But, what does that have to do with who God really is? We're all just people, people who need a savior. I, for one, apologize for those of my faith who have painted an ugly picture of who Jesus is to the world. I'm quite sure I've done it myself, plenty. Just one question: Have we really ended up in a place in this nation where the God of the Bible is not welcome in conversations about who we are as a people? Really? Norrie Hoyt, you think the Inquisition is making a comeback? Shoot, I agree. Looks like we're in the delivery room right here!

This guy, Mr. Hall, should read a history book, get a dictionary, and be content with the absolute religious freedom that he has, and not try to grab others' freedom away from them.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KeZB2EsPqGE&feature=related

Mr. Mark: LOL

What used to set my wife off was 'Christian punk'. Not only was it bad, it was the quintessential oxymoron.

BTW, in my house, romantic music was The Clash, Sex Pistols, Youth Brigade, etc. LOL

One need not read Darwin or Russell or Hitchens or Harris, nor hold degrees in cosmology and biology to realize that god doesn't exist.

No, the proof is much simpler than that, and it can be summarized in two little words:

"Christian rock."

Surely, if there was a god, such assaults on his creation would not be permitted.

;)

GaryD writes: "I've got a TV with upwards of 200 hundred Channels of the 200 5 have anything upon them that one could remotely call Christian programming or even programming aimed in the general direction of Christians and most of those have gotten it entirely wrong. Whose message is being heard and whose isn't?

If you were older than 15 you would remember a time when TV was considerably less restrictive than it is now. You're getting the dark age you want but you apparently aren't old enough to realize it is happening.

For Mr. Hall's edification:

1. Abraham founder/father of three major religions was either the embellishment of the lives of three different men or a mythical character as was Moses, the "Tablet-Man" who talked to burning bushes and made much magic in Egypt.

1.5 million Conservative Jews and their rabbis have relegated Abraham to the myth pile along with most if not all the OT. http://www.simpletoremember.com/vitals/ConservativeTorah.htm

2. Jesus, the illiterate Jewish peasant/carpenter possibly suffering from hallucinations, has been characterized anywhere from the Messiah from Nazareth to a mythical character from mythical Nazareth to a mamzer from Nazareth (Professor Bruce Chilton, in his book Rabbi Jesus). Analyses of Jesus’ life by many contemporary NT scholars (e.g. Professors Crossan, Borg and Fredriksen, On Faith panelists) via the NT and related documents have concluded that only about 30% of Jesus' sayings and ways noted in the NT were authentic. The rest being embellishments (e.g. miracles)/hallucinations made/had by the NT authors to impress various Christian, Jewish and Pagan sects.

The 30% of the NT that is "authentic Jesus" like everything in life was borrowed/plagiarized and/or improved from those who came before. In Jesus' case, it was the ways and sayings of the Babylonians, Greeks, Persians, Egyptians, Hittites, Canaanites, OT, John the Baptizer and possibly the ways and sayings of traveling Greek Cynics. http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/theories.html

For added "pizzazz", Catholic/Christian theologians divided god the singularity into three persons and invented atonement as an added guilt trip for the "pew people" to go along with this trinity of overseers. By doing so, they made god the padre into god the "filicider".

3. Luther, Calvin, Joe Smith, Henry VIII, Wesley et al, founders of Christian-based religions, also suffered from the belief in/hallucinations of "pretty wingy talking flying fictional thingie" visits and "prophecies" for profits analogous to the myths of Catholicism (resurrections, apparitions, ascensions and immaculate conceptions).

"The issue here may be that for the first time in a long time, people with a God-centered worldview are in positions where their voices are being heard and their issues are being recognized."

Now that's just obscenely off-the-mark. Christians have had a voice that has been far too loud in American politics these past 30 years. It is now coming to an end. It only seems to some head-in-the-sand types that their voices are louder because moderate republicans are leaving the party rapidly leaving only the lunatic fringe. This will mean the death of the GOP and the death of the religious right.

"Being a Christian is not life enhancement that can be put on and taken off like a sweater. It is who I am. It is how I think, believe, and act. There is no separation when thoughts of politics come to question."

But being a christian does not change how one thinks and acts. If it did then there would be a significant difference between christians and non-christians with respect to drug addiction, spousal abuse, incarceration, divorce and the rearing of healthy children. In fact there is none. Whats more atheists beat all-comers handedly.

How out of touch with world history can one be? Following centuries of Christian leaders imposing their wills on European governments and populations, and their fomentation of wars against each other and so called "infidels" in the Crusades, the founding fathers wisely sought a separation of church and state.

Even so, Christianity continued to have a predominant influence on American society. For one to say that finally, Christians are being heard, is beyond ludicrous, it is absolutely preposterous. Christians have had their way in the U.S. since the republic began. Presently, as people of other faiths and people of no faith, clamor to be heard, Christians like this naive young man play the victim. I imagine he is like so many other Baptists in the south, personally unfamiliar with with people with different points of view, consigned to growing up surrounded by an insular and provincial culture where being different is not tolerated. That persons of other faiths and no faiths seek to level the field infuriates them. Fundamentalist Christians are outraged at the thought that they may one day no longer be the dominant cultural force in the land. Their position that their theology is right and everyone else's is wrong is beyond arrogant, it is evil, intolerant, and insufferable.

For seven years, we have suffered at the hands of a chief executive who considers himself a devout conservative Christian. What have we to show for it: two horrible wars, loss of our privacy, a self-righteous government spying on its own people, attempts to turn public tax obtained funds over to religious institutions and private church schools that have no standards of performance whatsoever.

Now comes the presidential candidate who is a Baptist minister, one who has said that the consititution needs to be amended in order to acknowledge its own subserviance to the Christian Bible. This is exactly what the founding fathers sought to avoid, a theocratic state. That is the type of government that exists in Iran. It is what the fundamentalist Christians seek; it is what Huckabee seeks, to rule at will, able to call on his interpretation of his bible to justify any decision. Garbed in their religious piety, these who pretend a desire "just to be heard" actually seek to dominate all others and to make all others live by their code of morality, ethics, and behavior.

The Old Testament calls for a woman who dares leave her home while menstruating to be stoned. This is not an isolated example of the confliciting values we would face. The so called evangelical candidate calls for this bible of his to replace our constitution as the document which guides our society. Such people are not patriots, they are enemies of the state, those who seek to subvert the constitution and democracy. They are not the pacific and gentle sheep they would have us believe. They are wolves in sheeps' clothing; they are dangerous; and they must be stopped.

Al writes "Nothing wrong with a person being religious or secular."

Well no, Al, that's exactly the problem. It isn't an either/or proposition. Secularism is what allows us all, believer and non-believer alike, to live in a country with a government that's supposed to strive to represent everyone. You're making the same mistake as Hr. Hall. I also see a lot of posters claiming that secularism is about mutual respect. It's not. That's also one of the primary points of secularism. I don't have to like or respect what other people believe, but I do have to respect their rights as individuals to believe it and to have the same protection under the law as anyone else. That people have such a difficult time respecting people whose beliefs are diametrically opposed to their own is precisely why secularism is so vitally important to our system of government and to our individual freedoms - freedoms that are in grave danger due to the kind of rampant ignorance displayed in Mr. Hall's essay.

MARK HALL:

A definition of Christianity by you is in order, as most churches and persons claiming to be Christian are anything but.

Most salient of all is the deafening silence from the churches on the matter of war. It seems the churches are the first to wave flags zealously and sing "Onward Christian Soldiers," while blessing those who march off to war.

Jesus never killed anyone, neither did he advocate killing anyone, nor did he sanction killing anyone. He laid down his life rather than kill (he had the power even on the cross to annihilate mankind), and he commanded his disciples to follow his example. Countless thousands did just that for the first century anno domini, because "they loved not their lives unto death." Then, about 300 AD, an apostate church came up with the false doctrine of "just wars," and ever since then ersatz Christians have been marching to the drum beat of war.

The so-called culture of life is opposed to abortion ostensibly because life is sacred, but that same culture is pro-war. At what particular age is it morally acceptable to kill an individual?

Many of the respondents clearly didn't read the original article by Prof. Berlinerblau. In his article, it seems apparent that his primary use of the term secularism in this article is clearly a worldview in its own right, as the Rev. Hall claims. Even if it is a completely unbiased and "true" worldview (whatever "truth" means given our limited abilities to decipher the universe), it's still a way to view the universe.

In the original post, Prof. Berlinerblau points out several distinctly different uses of the word, but it's pretty clear that the main thrust of his post is in regards to an atheistic secular viewpoint. He looks for support from liberal Christians and others to help defend his turf, but his secularism is one where all faith-based world views are incorrect, but tolerated.

Garak:

"Mr. Hall--You lost this battle when the Founding Fathers set up the USA as a secular state."

Right on!

Any talk beyond is just wasted time. There really is no need for a crystal ball to to get this one straight.

Al,

I agree.

terra

Nothing wrong with a person being religious or secular.

Nothing wrong with having Faith or a kind of allegiance to something greater than a person's current ability to fully comprehend. Or not.

When religiously inclined people sense that all religions are ultimately suspended from a marvelous complex of creative powers, which taken as a whole forms a great Unity or radiant Totality, then there will be no conflict among creeds or sects.....which all spring from the same Fountain.

But each must grow in time into a greater understanding & perspective through release of their soul's potential. How this happens is of little importance.

In my view the benevolent conspiracy of nature will insure the inevitable in the right season.

Dude,

If you don't even understand the basic definition of secularism, you are waaaaaay over head here. Here's a hint ... look up a word (in the dictionary) before your write an essay about it.

Otherwise, best you just stick to Sunday school and choir where everything is simple enough for you.

Secularism bad, god good.

Poor kids.

"I've got a TV with upwards of 200 hundred Channels of the 200 5 have anything upon them that one could remotely call Christian programming or even programming aimed in the general direction of Christians and most of those have gotten it entirely wrong. Whose message is being heard and whose isn't?"

GaryD, it would be really nice if you'd try using punctuation once in a while, so that one didn't have to analyze your sentences to try to figure out what you meant.

Your argument above might have some validity if the other stations were preaching atheism. They aren't. I don't know of a single one of those, but I can find plenty of televised church services and revivals. Get real.

What utter cast Iron gall. You live in a republic in which nearly ninety percent claim to be Christian and are then surprised to learn that the elected CEO of the land almost always makes some pretense at being Christian whether he is or not. Are you that obtuse or are you just being pugnacious?

I've got a TV with upwards of 200 hundred Channels of the 200 5 have anything upon them that one could remotely call Christian programming or even programming aimed in the general direction of Christians and most of those have gotten it entirely wrong. Whose message is being heard and whose isn't?

The statement by Mr. Hall appears to criticize the secular woldview as somehow being anti-Christain. I would rather consider it as a view that respects all religions or lack of religion as being equal within the framework of the government. That, it seems to me, to be the view that underlies our constituion. Until or unless one can look at the secular worldview as just that, we are doomed to have heartfelt but otherwise non-productive discussions. Secularism is NOT anti-religious anymore than a vegetarian is anti-traffic laws. Rather it holds that because all religions as well as no religion is acceptable within the government, the government should not take any particular religious point of view.

The statement by Mr. Hall appears to criticize the secular woldview as somehow being anti-Christain. I would rather consider it as a view that respects all religions or lack of religion as being equal within the framework of the government. That, it seems to me, to be the view that underlies our constituion. Until or unless one can look at the secular worldview as just that, we are doomed to have heartfelt but otherwise non-productive discussions. Secularism is NOT anti-religious anymore than a vegetarian is anti-traffic laws. Rather it holds that because all religions as well as no religion is acceptable within the government, the government should not take any particular religious point of view.

And here I thought no one could write a more uninformed and poorly reasoned essay than Chuck Colson. I stand corrected. As others have pointed out already, it might be a good idea to understand what secularism is before starting to opine about it. Perhaps when our money carries the motto "There is no god!" and the phrase "under atheism" is inserted into the pledge of allegiance you might have a valid reason to start whining about not being represented by your government. Of course then you'd probably think secularism is a damn good idea. And Christians wonder why the rest of us have such a dim view of Christianity these days. Ugh.

Mr. Hall--You lost this battle when the Founding Fathers set up the USA as a secular state. If you can't handle this, renounce your citizenship and leave. You may believe in fairy tales and imaginary friends, but we don't. In your face, buddy.

Mark Hall wrote:

"The issue here may be that for the first time in a long time, people with a God-centered worldview are in positions where their voices are being heard and their issues are being recognized."

Are you kidding me? Christianity had a, what, 1000 year or more run before it got any sort of dissent that wasn't punishable by death. You have a few decades wherein public policy is marginally released from the stranglehold placed upon it by religious superstition and you have the gall to say that now your "voices are being heard and issues are being recognized."

Respectfully, Sir, when the church publicly rejects and throws out of its midst the lying, stealing, anti-freedom hypocrites who combine religion and politics in violation of the constitution we'll listen.

Until you stop coddling the behavior of people who go to church on sunday, and run a mercenary operation called blackwater on monday, or who work in congress bashing gays only to seek out homosexual sex in airports you're a hypocrite and a fundamentalist right wing-nut. Until you stop covering for mega-church rock-star clergy who hire male prostitutes only to have their bretheren clergy claim they are "healed and no longer gay" a few weeks after their hypocrisy comes to light, you're a hypocrite yourself by omission. When you support a president who claims to be christian but outs CIA agents to cover lies that kill hundreds of thousands and put our finest men and women in harm's way, you are a right wing nut.

When you reject them forcefully and publicly we'll begin to listen.

Until then in my eyes you are a fundamentalist, right wing nut hypocrite wack job.

Please reject the hypocrites. You can forgive anyone - but make them change before you put them back up on a pedestal or vote for them.

I agree with Michael Dishnow. It's your "my way or the highway" INTOLERANCE of others that cause you to be lumped with the fundamentalist and extremists.

Christ's Christianity of love, inclusion and tolerance has been high jacked with hateful forms of neochristianity all the way from Dobson, Robertson, Haggard, Craig, et. al. to the seemingly innocuous youth minister who know his religion and only his religion is right and all others are wrong and evil.

By definition, Christians claim:

1) There is no truth except their interpretation of the new testament bible and perhaps the Christianized old testament, formerly known as the Jewish Torah.

2) Their belief system is based solely on "faith" that is not measurable as the sole criteria for truth, because they say so!

3) Because they seem to have little faith that their faith will be deemed valid, Christians have a need to convert all others to their faith by whatever means necessary.

4) Because they seem to have little faith that their faith can withstand anyone acting in ways that challenge that faith, it is vital to enact laws to make all peoples live according to their faith to prevent anyone of their faith losing faith in their faith...whew!

5) Because humanists (secularists) frequently deny that anyone has the right to kill and maim fellow humans; it is vital to those who want to kill, maim, torture, do preemptive wars, genocide, etc. to have a faith based blessing to do their inhumane acts! The Jewish Old Testament is of coursed one long endless list of genocides and murders done with the guidance and blessings of their God Yahweh.

Of course you know the Bible is the word of Devil. Saying it's the word of God is the only deadly sin, blasphemy. The Bible tells you that and therefore you have no excuse for blaspheming, saying the Bible is God's word.

http://www.hoax-buster.org/sellyoursoul for what the Bible says about God. The being in the burning bush was arguably Lucifer the biggest Devil of them all, the one that would be God, throw God out the way Christians throw God out.

You say the word God but the being you have in mind is the one in the burning bush which the Bible says is Devil. That's blasphemy and there is no excuse for it's right there in the Bible. Enjoy your ill gotten gains using the Bible for hell is forever.

"But maybe we are finally moving toward a time when Christians aren’t lumped into groups with extremists and labeled as "fundamentalists” and the "religious right" and could just be recognized as people with a different worldview. Somehow I feel that we aren't quite there yet."

As a Christian (and church youth director) I'd like some clarification on this statement. You make it sound as though no Christian should be "lumped" (aka viewed/called/labeled) as an extremist. Now, I'll agree that some non-Christians view all Christians as extremists (we aren't). However, you can't deny that there are extremist Christians in our society, some with very powerful lobbies (Pat Robertson and believers of the "Jesus Camp" variety being well-known examples). There are also moderate and progressive Christians (see Jim Wallis, Tony Campolo and the Red Letter Christian movement). Where do they get lumped? I'm not interested in labeling any religious person, but if it walks like a duck and talks like a duck you can't ignore the fact that it's a duck.

At the same time you're "lumping" Christians together as a group with a worldview that opposes secularism. How are you defining secularism? If a secular society is one in which people of all religions/views are allowed to equally and respectfully dialogue about their differences, freedom of religion exists, and where no religion holds sway over the government's actions, you can count me in as a secularist, a "Christian Secularist," that is.

It's been pointed out that a few American Presidents were deists, a term with which I am familiar but really had never looked up. Sadly, deism, which seems mostly rational (except for the assumption that there are any devine beings at all) doesn't seem to exist today (well, lets say it's less well known than Tarot reading and leave it at that). I'd point out that still leaves 100% of American Presidents as religious folks, with 90% being Christians.
Of course I should say "calling themselves Christian" as is one judged by there acts, few Presidents seem to have any religious beliefs at all. If President Bush believed in the 4 Gospals, would he really act in the way he does? Seems to me that most people who call themselves "Christian" behave no more morally than anyone else - in fact they do whatever they please and "have a good reason" for whatever it is they do. If they get caught, then "Christ forgives them" and they keep doing it.
Instead of religion serving as a moral or ethical compass, it's just as excuse for abusing power.

I am simply unsure whether Mr. Hall has a full understanding of the word 'secular' as it applies to religion. He appears to not understand that the term secular, like the scientist's term 'null hypothesis', connotes the absence of a thing or idea. In this particular case, an absence of religion. Secularism isn't a 'something' any more than a zero is a real number. Secularism is a state of 'not being' something else. A state waiting to be filled with a thing or idea.

One might suggest that Mr. Hall seek a reeducation program to remediate the gaps in his education, but I suspect that Mr. Hall is already full...

This pastor's writings illustrate the problem with religion. The religious people have their all encompassing view of the universe and therefore there is no separation of church and state and other pesky safeguards. Today's Christians do not realize what Christian control over the state can lead to, such as the killing of untold many people in Europe during the days of the Spanish Inquisition for instance, or the killing of many during the Crusades. I am not sure what justification they have for today's version of Christianity, the same bible is still being used so violence is certainly not out of the question.

God-centered worldviews have been heard from forever, whether we think in terms of millenia, centuries, decades, years or months. Today's situation is what we've gotten from it. Time for a change.

feel the jesus love a flowin. yes christian america you are coming in load and clear!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/community/mypost/index.html?newspaperUserId=LL817&plckUserId=LL817

more american jesus love being shared with the world:

http://search.japantimes.co.jp/member/member.html?mode=getarticle&file=nn20080212a1.html

Casting Crowns has to be the worst band I've ever heard in my life. Now I see where the inspiration comes from.

thump that bible up beside your head. christian nation heard loud and clear. christian lies backed up with bombs. sorry woman and children you didnt convert before you became collateral damage. the christian should give up thier funds if they want to prove thier faith. or is it shallow waters that they walk upon. healthcare for all denied...oh jesus dont lay your hands on me i forgot my insurance card. Housing for the poor and homeless. how many carnations of your christ did you pass by today? pick up your stone and rush with the crowd, make sure to pull your pants up! christian america we hear you loud and clear.

Marc and DZ,

Don't forget about George Washington (Deist), John Adams and John Q. Adams (Unitarians) and Abe Lincoln (Deist, at best).

As was pointed out in a previous post: With both Houses of Congress, the Presidency and Supreme Court firmly Christian, it sounds rather disengenuous for some in the Christian community to claim exclusion from the public square.

On the other hand, as a secular humanist (gasp!), I haven't experienced any persecution either. (If I wanted to run for public office - assuming I developed a sudden case of sociopathy - then, of course, there would be a problem.)

Fortunately for all, the grand old American trait of leaving others the hell alone seems still to be firmly in play, so we should all relax a bit and not be too anxious to assume victimhood.

This whining by Mr. Hall, that "it's about time Christians are being heard" makes me want to puke.

Have you noticed, Mr. Hall, that it is not possible to run for President unless you are a Christian? And if you are not "Christian enough" you have no chance of being elected anyway.

In what parallel universe are you living in?

It is just amazing how ignorant christians can be. Our current commander in chief being ignoramus number one. And then when people call christians out on it, they blather on about being "persecuted" and that we're a "Christian Nation." It is truly mind boggling.

Mr. Hall, I encourage you to educate yourself about the Constitution and the founding of this great nation. You also may want to study up on what is known as the "Enlightenment."

But believe me, your lack of understanding of what it means to be secular does not speak well of your understanding of what it means to be American. Or of what it means to be Christian for that matter.

Marc Edward:

Point of fact - two Presidents, Jefferson and Madison, were not Christian.

It's pathetic that the Christians continue to whine that somehow they are persecuted in the USA when in fact every President and V.P. ever eleceted have been Christian. 99% of every seat in congress have always been held by religious folks. The only religious persecution in America is carried out by religious people, not secularists.
Does Mr. Hall believe political leaders should make public policy based on religious beliefs? No doubt it's easy for our President to rationalize the countless deaths he's caused because he assumes the good people will all go to heaven. I don't want public policy made by people who think that if they screw up "God will sort it out".
I can point to many problems that the USA has overcome through rationality. I'd love to see Mark Hall point to any national crisis that was solved through a single faith and religion.

It's pathetic that the Christians continue to whine that somehow they are persecuted in the USA when in fact every President and V.P. ever eleceted have been CHristian. 99% of every seat in congress have always been held by religious folks. The only religious persecution in America is carried out by religious people, not secularists.
Political leaders should not make public policy based on religious beliefs. No doubt it's easy for our President to rationalize the countless deaths he's caused because he assumes the good people will all go to heaven. I don't want public policy made by people who think that if they screw up "God will sort it out".
I can point to many problems that the USA has overcome through rationality. I'd love to see Mark Hall point to any national crisis that was solved through a single faith and religion.

Mr Hall,

You seem to be making the argument that Secularism is basically a religion (world view) unto itself.

My response to that idea is that Secularism is a religion (world view) in the same way that not collecting stamps is a hobby.

Rejection of superstition does not imply any particular world view at all, it just shows basic intelligence.

This is one of the most un-American and anti-American essays that I've read in some time. Virtually all of the persecuting and discriminating ever done in this country have been perpetrated by Christians. The 'persecuted Christian' canard is almost too much to bear. I was sent to jail in 1969 for being an atheist - maximum security no less. If you haven't been jailed because you're a Christian, you should probably shut up.

Wow. It's scary to think that someone with such a puny understanding of the world is actually interacting with kids. WAPO should drop this guy from the panel and find someone who is intellectually and emotionally capable of dealing with the US constitution and its (admittedly crippled) role in America.

My experience, I am 64 years old and was raised a Catholic, has been one of dismay every time I have had occasion to run into staunch Christians, Catholic or Protestant. That they tend to be INTOLERANT, especially towards people with a secular worldview, is the understatement of the century.

With the exception of the Buddhists, religious folks seem to think it is their right, indeed duty, to convince others of the errors of their ways. Often this fervor goes beyond any reasonable length and spills over into the absurd. I only have to think of jettisoning of reason and science in recent years to appease the vocal fundamentalist crowd. The influence of conservative Christians in the US is way out of proportion to their numbers.

I have never felt the ill will of secular humanists or freethinkers; neither has interfered with my rights under our constitution. I cannot say that for many of the Christians I have encountered, especially in recent years.

I was going to comment on this braying barnyard denizen, but others have stated the points quite well.
He does have that "do as we say and it will be fine..." attitude of the mafia about him.
While we do not, yet, have more than isolated Christian terrorism in the USA (assault on gays, the occasional fire of bombing of abortion clinics, the Episcopal church in NY state burned down by the Evangelical...) I do see the double standard being used towards the "poor persecuted" (Christian majority) and the noisy evil liberal others.

The USA is in for some difficult times, and these hypocrites are going to need to be convinced to knock off their anti American rhetoric, and stop their brownshirts

I'm astounded by this. And you "teach children"???

Secularism is NOT a world view... It is a universal *respect* (not tolerance which Christians love to preach), I repeat "RESPECT" for the fact that many people hold many differing views on religious philosophies.

Secularism guarantees you the RIGHT to pursue your Religion as long as it does not impinge upon the liberties of others.

Secularism guarantees you the right to pursue *your* religion without interference from other religions or the State.

The key is RESPECT for all religions, not to "tolerate" them as so-called Christians claim.

And in the land of the Free, can't we agree that Freedom is your RIGHT to be different??

Or is Freedom merely the Tyranny of the Masses?

Pastor Hall,
I'm in agreement with GaryD here, regarding the public square issue.

But I think the real trick is to 'remain neutral' in regard to all religious points, or to people who hold no religious points at all.

In such a theoretical environment, "secular" is probably the best definition of the word. In that, Automath has my vote--a framework within which all can exist.

But I also can appreciate the points made by Norrie and Athena, that we should be careful before we make victimization claims, or persecution claims. I've recently downloaded the Constitution--that government document by which we are governed and by which we live as a society--and there is a striking lack of anything relating to any particular religious sect. This was intentional, and for that we should celebrate.

How can you comment on secularism if you don't even know what it means??

Dude, I have news for you. Christians are being heard loud and clear every single day. Six of nine Supreme Court Justices are Christians. The majority of Congress is Christian. The President and VP are Christians. They meet once a week with Fundamentalist Christian ministers.

My advice - quit whining about how Christians are being "victimized" because they can't run roughshod over the rights of the other 75% of the country who are of other faiths. When people's kids are being taken away from them, losing jobs and face harassment in their homes and businesses because they are Christians, THEN we'll talk about persecution!

Gary D.,

Quite right!

Particularly when you include the Cathars. They called themselves Christians, but the Pope disagreed.

Best to you.

Automath the problem lies in how one chooses to use the word. I for one have no problem whatever with secularism if it is intended to mean that government remains neutral between all religious viewpoints. However if as is far to often the case it is going to be used as a club to deprive the religious of their place in the public square than it is no longer neutral but rather a curious form of Aparthied.

Um Norrie 90% of those burned at the stake were burned because they didn't have the same Christian World view as the Pope. There is a bit of a difference there.

I'd disagree with the idea that secularism is a worldview. It seems to me to be a framework within which different worldviews and none can co-exist. As a secularist I attempt to view the world as is and as others witness it by approaching life through a multitude of possible worldviews. However some people prefer to constrain their outlook on life via one particular worldview. Secularism is where the public space is open to all worldviews.

If the secular is being over-ridden by any one worldview then this is at the expense of others and the framework in which those other worldviews can exist.

"The issue here may be that for the first time in a long time, people with a God-centered worldview are in positions where their voices are being heard and their issues are being recognized."

Yes, its been quite a while since the Grand Inquisitors burned people at the stake for having non-Christian worldviews.

Are we headed that way again?

Wouldn't be surprised.