@beetle – you may only have to send a clearly written letter of disapproval to the superintendent or principal. A mother of 3 in my local CFI chapter recently did something similar (regarding reading the Jesus story at Christmas time). All it took was a letter. If they give you the run around, just mention the ACLU.

The founding fathers often referred to ‘providence’ rather than God – of fate, or destiny, rather than a specific deity. Christians kind of gloss over that. It’s one of those pesky facts that gets in the way of the point they’re trying to ram down our throats.

http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/index.asp?PID=707

“Do you think of God as being…?”

9% – Like a human being with a face, body, arms, legs, eyes, etc.
41% – A spirit or power that can take on human form but is not inherently human
27% – A spirit or power that does not take on human form
8% – Other
15% – Do not believe in God/Not sure

Do you think God…?”

29% – Controls what happens on Earth
44% – Observes but does not control what happens on Earth
8% – Neither observes nor controls what happens on Earth
18% – Do not believe in God/Not Sure

We use the fundamentalist definition of god because that is what we are talking about.

Fundies (and theists in general) believe in an actual being when they refer to god. We do not believe in this being. We do not believe in gods. Thats the definition of an atheist.

We don’t even need the word god except to refer to what we do not believe in. Why would we use it to mean something else?

This guy seems to be trying to hold onto a word for which he has no use, so he is giving it new purposes and is suddenly surprised that the rest of the world hasn’t done so also.

As for “objective and enduring standards of right and wrong that are binding on this country”, he needs to a) realise that this just ain’t so, and b) needs a new word. I suggest Nfangelfoon. It rolls off the tongue and as far as i know doesn’t have any current meaning.

But back to the “objective and enduring standards of right and wrong that are binding on this country”. Exactly what standards are they? No torture? No spying on innocent citizens? No healthcare for the poor? No starting wars of choice? No detention without charge? Need I go on? These are all measures put in by President Bush (or not changed by him) that were broadly supported by the right wing of the country. Clearly at least the 30%ers think these are fine, whereas i know there are many liberals in the states who find these as wicked and vile as I do.

The USA has NO objective standards of right or wrong otherwise these issues would be settled.

Don’t even get me started on gay marriage or abortion.

Objective standards my arse.

objective and enduring standards of right and wrong

Has this guy read the Bible?

Let’s replace the word God with Leprechaun and define Leprechaun as “a system of government that provides freedom and liberty for all”

Let’s try that: One Nation under “a system of government that provides freedom and liberty for all”

That works better for me.