Florida Freethinkers » atheism

The Younger Generation of Atheists

Andrew Bernardin — Thu, 01 Dec 2011 16:30:40 +0000

I believe the internet and mass media will provide salvation. Not immediately, and not of the religious kind. Rather it will help repair the slurred reputation of atheists. In the least, future generations will become more aware of many non-believing role models. Such as Harry Potter. Actually the fictional character did believe in all sorts of fantastic make-believe. But the actor who played Harry seems refreshingly down-to-earth.

Sphere: Related Content

No related posts.

Is God Redundant?

James Williamson MD — Mon, 01 Nov 2010 15:18:33 +0000

In his latest book, The Grand Design, Stephen Hawking examines this question. Professor Hawking says that a new series of theories makes a creator of the Universe redundant. This conclusion has led to full-throated outrage and denial from many in the religious community.

But there is no reason for believers to be at all surprised by this development. It has been building for centuries in Christianity’s ongoing battle with science. The information in this book just adds further confirmation to the conviction among scientists that the concept of a deity is not necessary to explain any scientific phenomenon.

To be sure we all agree on the meaning of redundant, let’s examine the definitions in the Oxford American Dictionary: 1. Superfluous 2. No longer needed.

Does showing that a deity is redundant prove that he/she/it is non-existent? After the presentation of background information, I’ll examine this question.

The origin of modern science can be traced to the 16^th century. Prior to that Christian theology had a clear field in explaining the interactions of matter. And the explanations were largely supernatural. The Christian god had a lot on his plate: creating the Universe, creating life, and long term intimate maintenance of these creations. The Bible, which believers said was the direct word of God, was promoted as the only source needed to interpret the true nature of the material Universe and how it worked.

As modern science progressed, major discrepancies became apparent between Christian beliefs and scientific findings about the Universe. The Bible described the Earth as flat. It was round. The Bible put the Earth at the center of the Universe with the Sun rotating around it. Actually, the Earth was in the far reaches of an ordinary galaxy, just one among many billions of others, and the Earth rotated around the Sun.

Catholic scholars proclaimed that almost all natural phenomena were under the direct control of God and that these phenomena often conveyed a message from the almighty. Early in the seventeenth century, Majoli, a bishop in southern Italy, produced a huge work, Dies Canicularii, or Dog Days, which remained a favorite encyclopedia in Catholic lands for over a hundred years. In discussing thunder and lightning, he compares them to bombs against the wicked, and says that the thunderbolt is “an exhalation condensed and cooked into stone,” and that “it is not to be doubted that, of all instruments of God’s vengeance, the thunderbolt is the chief.” As scientists discovered the natural forces controlling the weather, the branch of science called meteorology was born, and the ecclesiastical pronouncements were revealed as mythological nonsense.

And so it went with all the ideas derived from deity and Bible beliefs about how the material Universe operated. The above examples just scratch the surface in indicating how science won each and every battle with Christian theology. This story is interestingly and beautifully documented in a classic book that I think should be a part of every freethinkers library. The book is entitled A History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom and was written by Andrew D. White. First published in 1896, it sounds as if were written today except for the scientific discoveries that have occurred since that time. This classic is part of the Great Minds Series published by Prometheus.

I challenge anyone who has read this book to still say that science and Christian theology are compatible. One statement is particularly enlightening:”The general principle in accordance with which all these theories were evolved was most clearly proclaimed to the world by St. Augustine in his famous utterance: ‘Nothing is to be accepted save on the authority of Scripture, since greater is that authority than all the powers of the human mind.’ Following this precept of St. Augustine there were developed, in every field, theological views of science which have never led to a single truth – which without exception, have forced mankind away from the truth, and have caused Christendom to stumble for centuries into abysses of error and sorrow.”

By 1859 science showed conclusively that Biblical claims about how the matter in the Universe was arranged and operated were uniformly erroneous. Consequently, the alleged deity of Christianity lost his job of being, in effect, the maintenance engineer of the Universe. But he still commanded the awe and respect of humanity because of his role as the creator of the Universe and life on Earth.

In 1859 Charles Darwin published his belief-rattling seminal book, On the Origin of Species, which showed that evolution by natural selection explained the development of life on Earth, and showed that a creator was not involved in this natural process. Since Darwin’s time the continued accumulation of information on this subject has now made evolution one of the best documented of all scientific concepts. Therefore, another job of supreme importance was eliminated from the deity’s resume, that of the creator of life.

Edwin Hubble discovered in 1929 that matter was not static but was hurtling outward from a central point. Scientists continued accumulating information that confirmed that the Universe started as a discrete spontaneous explosion, a process that was labeled the Big Bang by Fred Hoyle in 1949. Scientists say this process occurred spontaneously out of nothing, a process that does not violate any law of physics.

Science has now conclusively shown that the Christian deity is unnecessary as a mechanical engineer of the Universe or as the creator of the Universe or life on Earth. He joins the large ranks of the unemployed.

Clearly, as Stephen Hawking said, a deity concept is redundant to explain the behavior of matter. But does this redundancy mean that the deity is non-existent? Not necessarily, by itself. He could still exist in some hypothetical supernatural realm, lounging about. Nonetheless, the lack of any proven effect on the material world does make his existence very unlikely. Even if such an entity existed, I doubt that people would be interested in a deity that could not directly benefit them.

I was very fond of the writings of the late brilliant biologist, Stephen Jay Gould, and own many of his books. On one point, however, he was grievously in error. He promoted the idea of non-overlapping magisteria. He said that religion and science deal with entirely different approaches to truth, and that one didn’t encroach on the other. But religion has never confined its beliefs to some nebulous spiritual sphere. Religion has regularly expressed dogmatic pronouncements about the material Universe. In effect, theologians have actively promoted an alternative “science,” a pseudoscience.

In retrospect, the fatal flaw of Christian theologians was engaging in combat with science about the material Universe, battles that they have always lost. If they had confined their claims to some spiritual location that was safe from scientific investigation, it would not have been possible to show that God was redundant.

Sphere: Related Content

No related posts.

Hitchens-D’Souza Debate at UF

Pamela Dodd — Fri, 02 Apr 2010 11:28:53 +0000

Dinesh D’Souza and Christopher Hitchins will debate the controversial tenants of Christianity and Atheism on April 6th at 8 pm at the Phillips Center for Performing Arts at the University of Florida in Gainesville. Tickets are free.

More info here: http://www.sg.ufl.edu/accent/

Sphere: Related Content

Hitchens and D’Souza to Debate at UCF

God’s Unemployment

Andrew Bernardin — Thu, 25 Mar 2010 15:23:32 +0000

If the Judeo-Christian god is first in line, with none others before him, that line should be at the unemployment office. Not because we need him to provide jobs, but because he doesn’t. There are thousands upon thousands of unemployed fathers and mothers who pray and wait in vain these days for any half-crappy job — preferably one that makes it possible with great restraint and resourcefulness to both buy food and pay the electric bill.

I know about unemployment offices because two times in my life, when a young adult, I had the demeaning privilege of asking for assistance in finding a job.

That there are unemployment offices across our land being visited by Christians is evidence to me that their god ought to get in line because he needs a job he can succeed at.

Truth is, thanks to public education, science, technology and the forward march of civilization, there is much less work for a god to do. The work has not been shipped overseas, but has been transported from the supernatural realm to the natural, where things get done. Insuring bountiful crops, curing disease, punishing transgressors for their “sins” (crimes) — for these we’ve got agribusiness, the medical profession, and penal systems. Etc. Etc.

For centuries the role of gods has been shrinking. What jobs are left? To provide humans something mindless to say after a person sneezes?

Sphere: Related Content

No related posts.

FL Governor Crist Assaults Atheist; Apology Demanded

Pamela Dodd — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 21:02:54 +0000

For Immediate Release
Tuesday, March 9, 2010

ST PETERSBURG, Fla.—Governor Charlie Crist has been accused of assaulting a man for identifying himself as an atheist during a campaign event held in St. Petersburg. On Friday, March 5th, University of South Florida graduate student Michael Middlebrooks approached the Governor downtown and was greeted with a smile and a handshake until he mentioned he does not believe in a god. Crist reportedly became irate, ripping a campaign sticker off the man’s shirt that was placed there by a staffer moments earlier, and then shouting over his shoulder (as he turned his back), “I feel sorry for you!”

Atheists of Florida President John Kieffer sent a letter to Governor Charlie Crist on Monday asking that he issue an apology to the man targeted for this mistreatment.

“Imagine instead if you had ripped a campaign sticker off some other religious minority,” Kieffer wrote, “say a Jew or a Muslim, shouting, as you did here, that you felt sorry for them. The outrage in such a case would create newspaper headlines around the world.” He continued by referring to the event as an attack on a minority worldview which is an affront, an outrage, and possibly even qualifies as a hate crime “because [Governor Crist] committed this battery while denigrating [the victim's] personal religious worldview.”

Kieffer’s letter is available for public view at the Atheists of Florida web site (http://www.AtheistsofFlorida.org), along with a discussion area where others may read or contribute their own comments.

Rob Curry is a native of St. Petersburg and serves as Executive Director for Atheists of Florida. He added, “Crist should be ashamed of such boorish behavior. His actions and words this past Friday deeply dishonor the town we both call home by making it the setting for a grotesque mockery of his constitutional duty to treat all Florida citizens with equal respect under the law.”

Atheists of Florida members have been actively seeking to end official government prayers at Tampa City Council meetings since January, and more recently at Lakeland City Commission meetings. Their stance is that government should be neutral with respect to religion, neither advocating nor discouraging religious beliefs and rituals.

About Atheists of Florida
Atheists of Florida, founded in 1992, is a nonprofit, educational corporation created to heighten public awareness about atheism and to monitor state/church separation issues throughout the state. The organization is a founding member society of the Atheist Alliance International.

Atheists of Florida serves the needs of a growing nonreligious community of reason whose members disagree with supernatural doctrines while valuing personal liberty as a precious heritage for everyone. Recent national surveys show that 16% of the American population is nonreligious, an increase from 14% two years prior.

Objectives include: (a) advocating state/church separation, (b) defending the civil rights of atheists and others with minority views on religion, (c) educating the public to dispel common misconceptions about atheism, (d) offering social support for atheists, (e) encouraging an inclusive sense of community, inspiration, mutual understanding and respect, and (f) promoting freedom, honesty and integrity

Contact:

John Kieffer
President
(813) 919-9161

Rob Curry
Executive Director
(727) 851-6452

Sphere: Related Content

No related posts.

The Charitable Atheist

Ann Frier — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 18:11:38 +0000

Most people don’t have to think very hard to come up with organizations they believe are compassionate and moral. Churches and faith-based organizations usually come to mind. It’s a misconception, however, that “religion” is the only measure of morality and that only religious people do good work.

There are also many secular/atheist charitable organizations in the United States and around the world made up of caring, compassionate, moral, ethical, intelligent people doing tireless work to ease pain and suffering and educate and promote peace. Think of Doctors Without Borders, Amnesty International , Oxfam International, The American Red Cross, and The Union for Concerned Scientists, to name a few. Many secular, atheist, agnostic, nonreligious individuals also quietly contribute to charities of their choice and to their communities.

It’s not surprising, however, that nonbelievers have not been acknowledged as participants in charity. Historically, our communities have been structured so that churches are the main means for large numbers of people to gather to promote and implement charitable work. The following quote from the web site Beingism.org makes this point:

It may be that nonreligious individuals are less likely to form communities than their religious counterparts. Certainly, the lack of a preexisting community (such as an established church) is a relative hindrance to community-building. No doubt also willingness to question pervasive social norms, particularly when they are part of belief systems from which most people derive emotional, social, and/or financial support, probably tends to accompany an individualistic (rather than community-oriented) approach to life. In addition, social stigma reduces the community resources available to nonreligious people, both financially (e.g., nonreligious institutions are not given the same financial benefits as faith-based organizations) and socially (e.g., fear of discrimination leads to increased difficulty in reaching out to find others with similar values). Unfortunately, these factors have fractured communities of nonreligious people, making it extremely difficult for them to agree upon or articulate a positive vision for the future or to create change. This lack of community also leads religious communities to conclude that nonreligious people are without ethics.

One of the biggest myths still being perpetrated is that atheists/nonbelievers are selfish, immoral heretics. The very word ‘atheist’ conjures up images of Hitler, Pol Pot, and Stalin. Take Bill O’Reilly’s Fox News interview with Richard Dawkins. O’Reilly implied that it was ‘atheism’ that led these heinous men to commit crimes against humanity. Mr. Dawkins was given little time to rebut this stupidity.

Religion is everywhere. We are inundated with religious television programming seven days a week. Religious pundits regularly demonize and dismiss secular humanists, atheists, agnostics, and those who are nonreligious, leaving no room for further dialogue or understanding. The Internet has many sites educating the public about nonbelief, but I doubt that many Christians or other religious folks visit these sites. If they do, it’s to excoriate what is said there, not to understand it.

Few religious people have any grasp of the challenges that atheists must deal wth. People risk losing their jobs, family, friends, and their standing in their community when they go public about their nonbelief. They’re left to feel that they exist in a secret, underground, fringe community whose freedoms are in jeopardy if they speak their truth. I think most religious people would be shocked to learn how many nonbelievers there are in the US. Some are probably sitting in pews on most Saturdays or Sundays, right next to believers.

Nonbelievers come from every walk of life. We’re teachers, lawyers, doctors, nurses, technicians, engineers, gardeners, janitors, soldiers, homemakers, florist, bankers (good ones), politicians (also good ones), you name it. What distinguishes us is that we have learned to THINK FOR OURSELVES; we are free thinkers. We don’t need religious dogma to tell us how to do good work or what it means to be a moral, compassionate human being.

Most atheists who donate their time, money, and energy to charity are not motivated by the wrath of a supernatural entity, by institutionalized pressures to do good work, or by expected Earthly or Heavenly rewards. Yes, there are atheists/nonbelievers who are hateful, inhumane, and mean spirited, just as there religious people who are hateful, inhumane and mean spirited too. These negative descriptors are not synonymous only with atheism.

It must be frightening to religious believers to realize that the number of nonbelievers is growing. Due to the prevailing ignorance perpetuated by believers with a vested interest in maintaining the status quo, it’s time for organizations of nonreligious freethinkers to do whatever they can to educate the public and dispel the age-old myth that atheists/nonbelievers are immoral, selfish, and not charitable. Atheists need to become more vocal and visible in numbers, not just as lone activists doing anonymous good works, not for recognition per se, but for educational purposes so that anyone now and in the future can be free to choose not to believe.

Sphere: Related Content

FL Governor Crist Assaults Atheist; Apology Demanded

Ricky Gervais on Atheism

Pamela Dodd — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 12:57:40 +0000

No related posts.

Get Out There and Sing!

Lori Blough — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 13:34:22 +0000

Lately I’ve been listening to the archived episodes of the Skepticality podcast. A few weeks back I heard a good quip, one that I’ve been thinking a lot about in the meantime. Unfortunately I’ve managed to forget not only the exact quote, but also the guest who quoted it as well.

Leaning hard on my poor old memory, I’ve narrowed it down to either Michael Shermer, director of the Skeptic’s Society, or Phil Plait, president of the James Randi Educational Foundation and good astronomer. Maybe.

Still, it went a bit like this… It’s okay to preach to the choir, but every once and a while you’ve got to get out there and SING!

Many of us freethinkers (and I’m not exempting myself from this by any means) spend an awful lot of time getting together in meetups, blogs, or forums and talking about how we feel. We’re fed up. We want change. We’re disappointed, frustrated, and even angry. We have a bit of a reputation, deserved or no, of being grumpy, and of always talking about how damned grumpy we are. Of course, the atheists and freethinkers I know are not particularly grumpy or angry, at least not more or less than anyone else. Some of us are pretty friendly and sometimes even, I hate to admit it…downright perky. But when religion begins to step on civil rights or muck about in politics or insinuate itself into our educational curriculum, well, then we do get angry. And, since these things happen pretty frequently, we get grumpy pretty frequently, and we have a whole lot to say about it.

But at some point we have got to get beyond just talking – or grousing – and get out there and DO something!

Are you worried about creationism sneaking into the school science curriculum? Donate some science materials to your school, volunteer as an aid, offer to come in to show-and-tell with your telescope, give a lecture on the scientific method, or, if you can, run for your local school board.

Are you tired of being misrepresented in the news or in TV programs which are entirely one-sided in favor of a religious point of view? Write letters to the editor or producer, get your local meetup group to send a mass of letters, write opinion pieces for local papers or newsletters, or make story suggestions to local news personalities.

Do you have a skill or talent that might help? Write a blog, a song, a book , or an article; create a podcast, a short movie, or an online video; craft an atheist comedy routine and go to open mic night; become a motivational speaker and quest speak on a podcast or news program, if that’s how you roll!

If you don’t have the time to begin a project on your own, see how you can help someone else; offer your talents or at least your assistance to a local atheist or skeptic organization. And of course, never, ever cease writing to your local government representatives – remind them that you exist and that you vote.

There are unlimited ways that you and I can get involved. Even if you don’t have a lot of time, the occasional letter or donation can go a long way. To find out more, or for many, many other great ideas, visit some of our favorite secular and skeptical sources of information like those listed on the main page of this site; find out where you might best be able to help. And, of course, also take a peek at the inspiration for this piece, Daniel Loxton’s “What Do I Do Next?”.

It’s fine to keep on preaching to the choir – we love to hear from you, and we all need to vent from time to time – but, now what are you going to do about it?

Sphere: Related Content

No related posts.

Starry Night: My Thoughts on Death

Andrew Bernardin — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 15:04:21 +0000

There is a preacher for every intelligence level. On the feeble fringe of the bell curve you’ve got the droolers watching Pastor Benny Hinn on cable TV perform his forehead-shoving healing miracles. Toward the other end of the believer IQ spectrum you’ve got well-groomed men who can tie a real tie and confident women capable of dividing 60 by 4 without a calculator or paper and pencil. In church these second class of folk hear, in passing, about the miracles that occurred back then . . . in another time and place, or, in other words, out of the range of what can be verified. Their spiritual leader talks about themes relevant to today: loving thy neighbor, setting a good example for thy children, etc.

On one pole you’ve got folks praying to win the big power ball drawing in this life. On the other pole are generally better educated and more affluent people who know, on some level, it is futile to ask their god for a specific favor today. And so they go to church and read their dusty Bible and perhaps lead Saltine cracker lives because their toast points and caviar will arrive many tomorrows later–when they close their eyes for a final time.

One of my aunts spent her last years in a nursing home. Throughout life she had a personality that was half kindness, half spitfire. Her good cheer stayed with her to the end. Pretty much. Some might say that she remained relatively upbeat because she knew, as she herself repeated, that she was “going to a better place.” In my aunt’s case, the literal interpretation of her words was absolutely true. Most cemeteries are far more beautiful, cheery, and peaceful than your average intensive care unit or nursing home.

Sometimes, when envisioning my last moments, I think it would be nice to have a little bit o’ religion. On the verge of the big good-bye, while other people can think “Jesus is waiting” (with open arms rather than a dope slap), what will I do? A Porky Pig imitation? Th-th-th-that’s all folks! Will I squeeze my wife’s hand, smile a sad smile, and tell her, again, how much I love her and have loved her and enjoyed our life together?

For those who cherish life, death sucks. There is no denying it. Why try? Oh sure, we can rationalize that without death, life would be meaningless and good parking spots even harder to come by. But the tough truth consists not of the fact of death alone, but also of the value we place on life. If we didn’t care about life, what would death matter? It’s a question of cognitive dissonance: of holding two conflicting perceptions in your mind at once. Without the two–both the love of life and the finality of personal death–no discomfort would arise. Normally, people resort to a number of strategies, conscious or unconscious, to deal with the discomfort cognitive dissonance brings. They deny; they lie; they distract themselves; they suck on their thumb and wait for the conflict to slip from their mind.

What do you do?

I suppose I could ease my own cognitive dissonance by de-valuing life, by convincing myself that life is shit, so why be bothered with the fact I will one day lose it. Or maybe I could deny that death will be the end of me. No death, no loss of all I value. But it seems to me that imagining a heavenly-life end-run around death might, beyond the possible reduction of death-bed discomfort, cause problems years before. By believing in a more important next life, the value of this life gets down-graded from first class to economy. Compared to an eternity in heaven, what is a bunch of decades on earth worth? Next to unending paradise, why get worked up over roughly seven dozen rides around the sun on a spinning planet? Worse yet, with a better life waiting, a person may be more willing to squander his or her life on earth. And perhaps the lives of others.

Imagine three people standing on the deck of the sinking Titanic. All life boats have been dispatched. As if descending slowly downward in an elevator without walls, the freezing ocean waters rise. There is no way out; death is certain. One person paces back and forth. He screams frantically into the wind, No, no, no! This is not fair! I can’t die! It isn’t right! The second person takes a seat on the tilting floor. He believes that after the cold waters have caused his heart to stop beating he will be plucked from this world into a next. Yes, he’s apprehensive about the suffering he may endure, but his god awaits. The third stands, hands to the railing. He watches his frosty breath drift over black waves toward a distant darkness punctuated by stars. Although he does not protest the coming of his final night, neither does he abandon his love and appreciation for the great opportunity he had. When to his neck in frigid water, he marvels at the taste of salt spray, the weight of clothing, the buoyancy of flesh.

I aim to be the third person. Sure, my inner pacing man will undoubtedly be there too, at least in the background of my mind. But with sufficient emotional maturity I can keep his cries from distracting me, of subtracting from those final precious moments as they count down to none.

Sphere: Related Content

Life Just Is…And So Is Death!

A Spiritual Journey to Atheism

Pamela Dodd — Fri, 22 May 2009 17:07:34 +0000

As a child, I always had a deep reverence for the Presbyterian Church I attended in the Philadelphia suburbs. It wasn’t so much the religious teachings that inspired me as it was the ambiance – creaky wooden floors, hard brown pews, arched doorways and windows, a pleasant musty smell, rich stained-glass, colorful tapestries, graceful floral arrangements, stirring organ music, and other artifacts found mainly in houses of worship.

I felt peaceful in that space, even if the droning minister in the pulpit was a bore. At age 13, as I was being confirmed on Palm Sunday, the minister collapsed and died of a heart attack in front of us. Despite this emotional experience, I soon began to question in myself many of the church’s teachings. Why, I wondered, do I always have to go through Jesus to get to God? How is it possible that everything could be done in Jesus’s name? Most preposterous to me as I reached my teen years was the notion that somehow almost 2000 years before I was born, Jesus had died for my sins. I remember thinking, that doesn’t make any sense. If anybody’s going to die for my sins, it’s going to be me.

My creeping doubt came to a head during the early 1960s, when our next minister participated in one of the first civil rights marches, in predominantly Black Chester, Pennsylvania. This outraged the White Republican church members, many of whom were in upper management in large Philadelphia-area corporations. Having somehow received a sensitivity gene in a family with an extremely bigoted father, at age 20 I was proud of what our minister had stood up for. But my support and that of my mother in a subsequent church tribunal was not enough to save the minister from losing his pastorate. Hypocrisy abounded in that church. I was ripe for change.

When I was 23, I converted to Reform Judaism shortly before I married a Jew. This seemed like a natural progression to me, since Jesus played no part in the Jewish religion and I could be directly connected to a God that seemed less vengeful and more whatever I wanted him or her, or it, to be. I also became painfully aware of anti-Semitism, my first taste as a formerly clueless WASP of the sting of discrimination.

Judaism had it’s own set of mesmerizing artifacts and rituals, but after another 23 years my commitment to theism seemed to have run its course. I yearned for a spirituality that I could practice daily without the pronouncements of some venerated supernatural being on high.

Living at the time in Ann Arbor, Michigan, I had my pick of religions to try out. I attended Siddha Yoga services for a time, and then the Korean Zen Buddhist temple. The latter seemed more to my liking. Buddhism has no gods. It’s more a sane psychology for living than a religion in the typical Western sense of the word. Many people who attended services at the Zen temple were also Christians or Jews or other theistic religions. They had no difficulties incorporating the Zen lessons into their theistic dogma.

In 1998 I moved from Michigan to Florida. While there are ethnic Buddhist temples in the state, none are easily accessible for me so I practice on my own. Living in the so-called Bible Belt, I again feel the discrimination of being in the minority. Only recently have I begun to identify myself publicly as an atheist.

Years ago, when I was living in the Northeast US, religion didn’t have a prominent place in the national discourse. We all coexisted amicably without the need to force our religious views on each other. There was no public outcry that spoke of the Christian foundations of our nation. It was clear to all of us, without having to talk about it, that religion was something separate from the public sphere.

These days a very vocal minority of fundamentalist Christians has been trying to change that. Their inaccurate interpretations of our founding documents threatens to turn us against each other in a way our founding fathers never intended.

We are not a Christian nation, though many Christians worship freely here. I, like everyone else, have had the luxury of worshipping however I want. Or of not worshipping at all. No one should be discriminated against for what they do, or do not, believe. Religion and spirituality are private matters and should stay that way. That practice has served us very well for over 200 years. Why mess with it now?

Technorati Profile

Sphere: Related Content

No related posts.