I stand shoulder to shoulder with religious people to keep us all free. The government on any level must never be our pulpit.

In middle and high school you do not have recess, when are you supposed to be able to pray?

Let’s be accurate here. Most of the prayer-in-the-schools boosters are christians–folks that don’t need to prayer toward Mecca five times a day. So, let those kids pray before school, or after. This is a lame argument.

Unfortunately, there are always some people who would like to throw out the First Amendment so they could have their religion be the official religion of the country. They have tried doing this in little steps so that others would not get too alarmed and would not fight back. The acts that put “In God We Trust” on money and added “under God” to the Pledge of Allegiance were two examples of these little steps toward a government sponsored religion. This would not be good even for Christians, because if it ever happens then even Christians will not be able to worship in the way they want, but will be told how to worship by the government. When was the last time you completely agreed with everything the government does? No, I don’t think you would like it.

Like you, most atheists don’t feel offended if they see “Merry Christmas” or “Happy Hanukkah” in private stores. That is the freedom of the store owners and conflicts over such things are silly. If school kids want to pray in public school, they should be allowed to do so during their recess when those who want to can, and those who don’t want to don’t have to. The problems there happened when prayer was being held during class time and everyone was basically forced to pray whether they wanted to or not. That was forcing religion down the kids’ throats and was not fair and was against their freedom to choose.

So Trent I hope you can see that these efforts to keep religion and government separate are protecting your rights as a Christian as much as the rights of Jews, Buddhists, Moslems, Hindus and atheists.

We all must be free or no one is free.

Thank you for asking about this. It’s important to everyone.

Atheist are trying to have in god we trust taken out, and are also tryin to modify the pledge of allegiance . What kind if since does this make. Does the word god really offend people when they see it on money.

“In God We Trust” is the national motto of the United States per an act of Congress in 1956. The phrase “under God” was added to the Pledge of Allegiance by an act of Congress in 1954. Both acts contravene the First Amenment to the Constitution of the United States, which states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion….” The reason why an atheist would find both acts offensive, aside from their unconstitutionality, is that their clear intent was and is to imply that one has to believe in God in order to be a good American, and therefore, that no atheist can be a good American.

That is the sense it makes. Do you understand the point?

I’ve come to agree with Darwin who refused a request to denounce religion by saying that any such Crusade was wrong and that the best way to affect change was a gradual spread of knowledge.

The spread of Darwin’s knowlege has been much too gradual for my taste.

As Spencer Tracy noted in Inherit the Wind, we are marching backward. At some point one needs to speak up to stop this decline.

Our point of views are different. The few areas where religious folks talk about science are irrelevant to the exponentially-growing body of data. I don’t feel threatened – I write and talk about my atheism all I want with no fear. Christians I know work, volunteer for Katrina, 911, the tsunami, raise families, have dinner parties, vote – in other words, except for their faith their lives are like my own. If your belief system impels you to help others who am I to criticize it?

Much of the anger is resentment at the political success of the Right. The author of Freakanomics says it’s a decling base due to abortion and birthrates – who knows? I heard no protests when Clinton whined about prayer, redemption, God, “preaching to the saved”, etc. I’ve come to agree with Darwin who refused a request to denounce religion by saying that any such Crusade was wrong and that the best way to affect change was a gradual spread of knowledge.

thanks for your comments
AR

I think you will find plenty of atheists agreeing with you about avoiding needless, arguably pointless, battles. Still,I don’t see what anyone can do about “reeling in” the more agressive litigants out there. They aren’t under anyone’s control.

One thing I have often found, though, is that when I take a look at the documents actually filed in the courts, the arguments are a lot more moderate or reasonable than anything we ever see in the media reports. Not always, though.

You also said that earlier scientist atheists were well liked and avoided bashing religion. I used to believe that was a preferable approach myself. I no longer believe that. I am now convinced that someone must start kicking back at the religious extremists who have caused significant harm and threaten to do worse.

What has convinced me that a more aggresive atheism is needed is the violence of 9-11, the resultant religious-based call for vengeance, the billions of tax dollars given to “faith” based entities, the billions of tax dollars “forgiven” (not assessed against) religious corporate entities and properties, the stranglehold on scientific / medical issues, and the erosion of public education in the name of religion. Add to that religious based violence by “anti abortion” assassins and venomous religious “demonstrators” who harass mourners at funerals for veterans.

As far as I can tell, the religious crazies in the US are eager to turn the US into a far-right “Christian” Taliban. Speaking softly has done nothing to stop the religious loonies. The honorable tolerance of religious freedoms has morphed into an evisceration of all other civil rights. So it seems that the only alternative is to start screaming. I wish the situation were otherwise.