Bismarck Tribune - North Dakota News - A government for man alone

A government for man alone

May 02, 2008 - 04:05:32 CDT

By TED BLOTSKY
Bismarck

This is in reference to "Moneychangers" taking control in Sophia Preszler's letter to the editor (April 25). She stated that "History from the beginning of time confirms that only God-given constitutions that preserve the Bible, protect, and defend citizenry will rule in the world."

A lesson about the U.S. Constitution:

To Thomas Paine, Thomas Jefferson and Ben Franklin we are indebted, more than to all others, for a human government, and for a Constitution in which no god is recognized superior to the legally expressed will of the people.

They knew that to put God in the Constitution was to put man out. They knew that the recognition of a deity would be seized upon by fanatics and zealots as a pretext for destroying liberty of thought. They knew the terrible history of the church too well to place in her keeping, or in the keeping of her God, the sacred rights of man. They knew that all versions of the Christian Bible uphold the institutions of slavery, of polygamy, of degradation of females, of anti-Semitism and of wars of extermination. They knew that the God of the Bible calls for the stoning to death of adulterers, fornicators, witches, homosexuals, nonvirgin brides, sabbath breakers, heretics, unbelievers, the divorced and unruly children.

The founders intended that all should have the right to worship or not to worship, for our law should make no distinction on account of creed. They intended to found and frame a government for man and for man alone. They wished to reserve the individuality and liberty of all, to prevent the few from governing the many and the many from persecuting and destroying the few.

The history of Christianity is written in the blood of religious wars, inquisitions, holocausts, genocides, ethnic cleansing and wars of extermination. They knew that there is a latent spark in the breast of the true Christian theologian capable of being kindled into an inquisition at any time. And finally, they knew that to be a true believer you must hate the same people that your god hates.

News > Opinion

Printer friendly version A government for man alone

Comments

VoR wrote on May 10, 2008 12:55 AM:

" To Razors Edge, I think that I get your point. Like you, I don't believe that the 3 remaining presidential contenders are the very best potential leaders we could hope for. In fact it almost seems like anyone who wants to be the President badly enough to endure the gauntlet of a 2 year long campaign should probably be disqualified just for that reason alone. But it's the system we have and as ugly as it can and will get between now and November someone will prevail. The reality is that it all comes down to choices. I don't see anyone who fits my preferences to a tee in this field either, but I'm going to vote for one of them not just because it's my duty as a citizen, but also because our next President has an enormous task ahead of him or her. Not only the unenviable chore of repairing the devastating damage done to our international image and domestic economy over the past eight years but the next President will very likely be selecting several Supreme Court Justices too, decisions that will effect all of us for several decades. So I don't see not voting as an option. Besides if you don't bother to vote, then don't gripe, your opinion isn't worth much anyhow. Oh by the way, William Penn lived in the 17th & 18th centuries. He was in a very strict quaker (He's the guy on the Quaker Oats container) and was the owner of the colony of Pennsylvania. The guy you were referring to is Penn Gillette. "

Amused wrote on May 9, 2008 8:28 PM:

" Hillary is no woman- she has no emotion. It appears she may not be a choice much longer so what does it matter? "

Ezra wrote on May 9, 2008 7:40 PM:

" CW according to you Obama distanced himself from his pastor when he disagreed, McCain never disavowed the nut case he accepted an endorsement from. I wonder how many women will agree with your diagnosis of their thinking ability. It seems like your logic supports the Christian view that women are just not quite up to the task. Not yet has a God fearing Christian stepped up and said they will vote for Hillary or Obama. Why not, are they ungodly? How convienent that everything comes together for the right wing philosophy. CW, do you think God is a Republican or at least strongly leads that way. God is for capital punishment, stoning, and generally takes a violent stance with those that anger him. Sounds like a Republican to me. However, Jesus seem more like a Democrat with that peace and love jazz, are you sure Jesus and God are one? I see some strong family conflict going on here. God seems like more of a redneck, and Jesus seems more of the kind of guy you could have some fun with. "

dante wrote on May 9, 2008 7:02 PM:

" "it's true that john mccain's campaign sought my endorsement" rev john hagee as quoted to the NEW YORK TIMES on 3-21-08. it goes on and on. where is the outrage on this? i WONDER why mccain is geting a free ride on this one? i think we all know why. "

CWRETIRED wrote on May 9, 2008 5:00 PM:

" TO EZRA: I really don't think John McCain had a 20 year close relationship with that pastor. Obama has chosen to distance himself from Wright when it is politically convenient. As to your question on voting. I will vote for the best candidate regardless of race or gender. As long as they convey the same philosophies and vision for the future I will support them. I will say that I think there will be fewer woman who will meet that requirement. Not because they aren't smart enough or capable enough. It's because women in general make decisions based largely on emotion, while men in general make decisions base mostly on logic. Of course there are exceptions to both sides. I really think the ideal candidate would make decisions based on a balance of emotion and logic. Men who make decisons based solely on logic without compasion or understanding are risking making a big mistake. Women who make decisions based solely on emotion without applying logic are equally at risk. "

CWRETIRED wrote on May 9, 2008 4:37 PM:

" Hi Teichthesen: I am one in the same. It's great to see you back here since I enjoy your postings as well. And I totally agree with your comments. To OMAR: My beliefs are my own and I don't expect you or anyone else to believe the way I do. You are free to think I am delusional, and I am free to think you are a condemned soul if you continue your denial. But I'm not here to convince you of anything. I can't make you believe in God or miracles. You have to decide things for yourself. I do think you are confusing delusions with faith. Religious faith requires belief in things we don't fully understand nor can we explain with known science. That's what faith is. My faith has had a positive impact on my life in ways you may never experience because your mind is already closed to examining faith honestly and completely. "

Razors Edge wrote on May 9, 2008 2:47 PM:

" Jeez Ezra I go to sleep and this explodes :P. I have to say the Obama or Clinton remarck is off though. You are right that I will not vote for either one. I will not vote for McCain either. For me it's simple. I don't want the government to expand its programs even more. It has nothing to do with their color, religion (all are Christian), or gender. I'm against the farm bill too, but by even saying that will open up a can of worms. Oh well.

As for your friends. From your post it sounds like their daughter didn't "conform" to their beliefs. It also sounds like they didn't disown her, and that they support her. Did they not let her have the "freedom" of believing in what she wanted?

A famous atheist William Penn (Penn and Teller) once said he will never let a religious person in his house. Now I didn't get that. He is a libertarian and a "free thinker". He was afraid (like you) of his family being "brain washed". In your way of thinking aren't you supposed to let someone hear both sides and let them choose? Now to reverse that, I'm against the Mormon "cults" for not letting them choose. Just comes back that I hate the far left and right, "

Ezra wrote on May 9, 2008 2:28 PM:

" Dear Amused, you may be amused. When our children were young sometimes they would get an invitation to attend Sunday school, I always encouraged it. The Bible as literature is an important part of our culture. To be literate in this country you need to know some things about the Bible. The Bible undeniably contains some excellent poetry, and so Biblical references are among my favorite. The Bible says "Know the truth, and the truth shall set you free". You can't beat that for beauty. When my children asked me about religion, I told the truth. I never forced them to accept anything. Often I would say to them "Some people believe this and some believe that". If they asked me what I believed, I would tell them. I never attempted to get them to believe things no one can know. Know one can know at this point what state the mind enters after death. So why make something up and try to get your children to believe it? Once you lie to them about one thing, they will figure you lie about a lot of things. Both my children went to some of the top colleges in the country and did very well. At an early age they learned to think, and reason, they did not learn to accept things just because an authority figure wearing a magic symbol said them. "

Ezra wrote on May 9, 2008 1:30 PM:

" CW, it sounds like you had an excellent pastor, and I like his approach. My guess is that your pastor is an exception. I knew when I posted about who you would vote for what the answer would be. I appreciate your honest reply. I think if each poster would follow your example and admit who they are going to vote for we would see a remarkable similarity. All the hard core God people I predict will end up with some reason not to vote for Obama or Clinton. I will vote for Obama, the last thing we need is another four years of Bush. I like the urban legend approach you are using and the guilt by association. You never mentioned McCain and the goofy pastor he accepted an endorsement from. Remember Hagee saying God was punishing New Orleans? Believe it or not there was a time in past elections where McCain would have been my choice. You never answered the hardest part of the question, would you ever vote for a black or a woman? Now tell the truth, and don't duck this one. God will no if you are lying. "

Deb wrote on May 9, 2008 1:20 PM:

" Kate - girl, I just don't get you. First you say that you want to start your classroom day by thanking the God under which this country was founded. I disagree with you and then all of a sudden you are agnostic (or whatever you choose to call yourself).

There isn't a law that says you can't say the pledge in school - but all the children have the option to say it or not. A suit was brought by an atheist father to try to have it taken out completely - I beleive his case has been thrown out.

Apparently in MN, it's still a crime NOT to say it:
http://www.startribune.com/local/18800444.html "

Amused wrote on May 9, 2008 12:57 PM:

" Ezra-
I too would like to know why you are so afraid that your children ever be exposed to all options available. Did you give your children the option to think freely? One could construe your household as being very cult-like with a very controlling leader and one choice. That has nothing to do with FREEDOM.

Being a Lutheran myself, Confirmation classes are exactly as CW discribed them. There was plenty of "Free" thinking encouraged.

Oh, just so you know, I have FRIENDS. Not black friends, white friends, Christian friends and atheist friends. Just FRIENDS. The fact that you have to characterize yours speaks volumes!!

"

Honest Omar wrote on May 9, 2008 12:33 PM:

" CW(Ret), If Ezra is extreme, then we need more extremists like him. Tell me, do you believe literally that the laws of physics are suspended on your behalf by wishful thinking to an unseen sky spook? Do you believe literally that people can walk on water? Do you believe literally that water can be converted to wine without the intervention of some well known chemistry? Do you believe literally that women who had not had sex with Timothy the goatherd out in the haymow could literally give birth to the son of the inventor of the universe??!!
Tell me, do you believe these (and many other outlandish propositions) are literally true? Or do you recognize them as the fables that they are? The answer is important, because if you believe they are LITERALLY true, then you are the clinical definition of delusional. The fact that you may be in the majority should give us all pause. "

MamaMia wrote on May 9, 2008 12:31 PM:

" CW4RETIRED: You must have had a very liberal Lutheran pastor. The one I had was nothing like that. In Rainbow for Girls, when a member becomes Worthy Advisor, she invites all her fellow members to her church the Sunday before her induction to join her in worship. Our Lutheran pastor forbade all of us Rainbow girls who attended his church from attending. . .the METHODIST church! How harmless would it have been to let us go in the name of camraderie? I could share more stories, but I'm a recovering Lutheran, so better just let sleeping dogs lie. "

Teichthesen wrote on May 9, 2008 12:28 PM:

" CWRETIRED, Didn't you used to post as "CW4RETIRED"? I enjoy youir posts. I will vote for McCain as well. Not because I think he is a good candidate but because he represents the lesser of evils. I'm very conservative and JM just doesn't do it for me. Even my extremely liberal fiance' is afraid of a Democratic victory. Wow! We found something to agree on. "

CWRETIRED wrote on May 9, 2008 11:54 AM:

" EZRA: When I attended confirmation classes as a youth in the Lutheran Church, our pastor taught us about many different types of religious beliefs including Muslim, Catholic, buddhism, methodist, mormans, and others. We also discussed atheist points of view. He never once insisted that the Lutheran religion was the only true religion. In fact, he encouraged us to do our own research and attend other churches before committing to joining the Lutheran Church. Even though he disagreed with the atheist point of view, he told us we were the only ones who could make the decision whether or not to believe. There were not hellfire and damnation speeches. He told us faith and religious belief was a personal choice, but that we must be aware of all of the alternatives available and decide for ourselves what we wanted to believe in. He explained why he decided to join the Lutheran Church, but put no ultimatums or demands on us to do the same. His name was Pastor John Moorehead. That is being open minded and tolerant while still witnessing for your faith. Your concept is not to allow anyone to be exposed to alternatives other than the atheist point of view. Your way denies people the opportunity to examine all beliefs and decide for themselves. Yes, EZRA, you are extreme. "

CWRETIRED wrote on May 9, 2008 10:17 AM:

" TO EZRA: Thanks for proving my point with your political challenge. Nothing reveals a closed mind and prejudice like putting everyone who disagrees with you under the same label. Like VOR, I too am over 50. Unlike VoR, I will not vote for Obama or Hillary. The only reason I will vote for McCain is because I consider him the best choice of the 3. I wish we had another candidate to choose from. In the past I have voted for democrats, republicans, and independents. I will not vote for Hillary because I think her plan for nationalized healthcare will not work. She lacks character and honesty. I will not vote for Obama because I think pulling out of Iraq is the wrong answer and he will increase the size of government while raising taxes. I also question his judgement because he has had a close relationship for over 20 years with a pastor who promotes hate and racist agendas. He also admits to a friendly relationship with a self admitted terrorist. Plus, when international terrorists endorse him, that raises a red flag for me. I do not agree with John McCain on immigration or closing down Guantanamo. But I do believe he is a man of character. Your unfair assessment of all Christians only confirms your lack of understanding and intolerance. "

Ezra wrote on May 9, 2008 10:10 AM:

" CW, you characterize me as extreme. What is extreme about allowing people to think freely? What is extreme about asking people to question the validity of ancient myths? By nature free thinkers are pacifist. When did free thinkers ever persecute people? Name a time in history when people advocating freedom of thought punished someone. The persecutors have always been the gang with a religious bent. Freedom to enjoy your life unencumbered by religion is radical? Spin through the channels on TV until you see the young nuns brainwashed and imprisoned in a thought jail. Here are young women with a full life ahead of them being robbed of the chance to become all they can be, because they like the cult members of the Mormans have robbed of the right to think for themselves. Do you support the right of churches to rob the young of their freedom of thought? "

REX wrote on May 9, 2008 10:08 AM:

" Wow, Ted. I guess I never looked at things that way. Now, I have never considered myself a Christian but I may qualify after all. You see I hate my exwife and I'm betting God does too. In fact I hate her whole family and home state. I'm hoping, praying that some disaster of Biblical proportion will wipe out all life there. Well not quite all, I'd like to leave one survivor as an example of what not to be, for children. "

Southpark wrote on May 9, 2008 9:49 AM:

" Ezra, what in the world do women and black men have to do with believing in God. I will tell you right to your face I would never vote for either Clinton or Obama. It has nothing to do with being a woman or a black man. I have a lot of faith in women, I am one. My very best friend in this entire world is a black woman. So your theory has more holes than Hawk Tree. CW4 is right. You claim others are blinded by their beliefs but you are very extreme. I wound find it interesting to know this. You claim to have went to dinner with these "great" people and are happy to see the children break out of their old ways. Tell me honest Ezra, I bet you didn't tell your "great" christian friends you were happy their kids aren't turning out like them. "

Ezra wrote on May 9, 2008 9:23 AM:

" Dearest CW, Please tell what danger is posed by free thought? All I am advocating is people that can think without the restraint of religious ideology. Tell me how freeing your mind from dogma is dangerous. How could allowing your mind to consider more than what is encompassed by religious thinking be dangerous? If my historical recollection is correct people used to be put to death for thinking outside the box by the religious. Could you give me one example of a free thinker killing some because they dared to think something he did not like? "

MamaMia wrote on May 9, 2008 8:41 AM:

" Kate: When and where was the ruling made that the Pledge of Allegience could not be said in school due to the word "God" being in it? I have not heard of any such law being passed. Could you fill me in? Thanks. Also, from what I have read, the word "God" was not in the original Pledge of Allegience, but was added by congress in the '50s to sort of take a jab at the "Godless Communists". "

CWRETIRED wrote on May 9, 2008 6:16 AM:

" To Ezra: For someone claiming to be so proud of helping others escape the constrictions of "myths" and facing "reality" you sure seem constricted by your own beliefs, and you are quite obviously out of touch with reality. Your extreme views and passion to fight against religion have prejudiced your own views beyond repair. You clearly exhibit the same characteristics as those who are fanatical about religion. It's just that you are on opposite sides of the fence. Both extreme views present a real danger to the future of this country and put our freedoms at risk. Those with such extreme views on either side are so blinded by their passion, they can't see that they have developed their own constricted views. You're not emcumbered by the constrictions of religion, Ezra. You are encumbered by the self-imposed confines of your fanatical views. "

SNAP wrote on May 9, 2008 4:31 AM:

" Hey Era! You know what I really like? When I meet women who claim to be both christian and feminist! Can you imagine? "

VoR wrote on May 8, 2008 11:55 PM:

" Ezra, Looking back at my own lifetime of 50+ years so far, I have known racist and sexist people as well as their polar opposites running through virtually every stripe of theocratic, atheistic and deistic viewpoints. I do agree that more rigid dogmas are more likely to attract less tolerant people but since most religious adherents ascribe to the faith of their parents its not fair or accurate to postulate with such broad assumptions. For example, I personally am looking forward to the opportunity of voting for Barrack Obama. I would be less enthusiastic about the chance to cast my ballot for Sen. Clinton, but considering the alternative I still would. However I could hardly imagine myself voting for either John McCain or Condoleezza Rice.
"

Ezra wrote on May 8, 2008 10:02 PM:

" I would like to postulate that if most of the religious writers here told the truth, they would admit they could not bring themselves to vote for Obama, or Clinton. I am sure there would be many rationalizations, but the simple truth is you have no faith in women, or a minority. The fact that you are caught in this mind set says more about you than anything I could ever write. Please let me hear one of you who are so enamored with your God tell me you could vote for a woman or a black man. Who will be the first to step up and admit where your thinking actually leads. If this is too difficult for you, just say you would vote for a black Republican or woman. I doubt in all your loving and forgiving you could even do that. This test will show more than anything the true nature of your Christianity, and faith. "

Ezra wrote on May 8, 2008 9:57 PM:

" Back from dinner with friends. Prime rib, good company. Interesting observation. The daughter of my friends was there with her male companion. The daughter has broken out of the religious mold her parents are stuck in. She has a very different and exciting life. No longer bound by the restraining thought patterns of her parents she is enjoying a life her parents could not imagine. It give me great pleasure to see a young women my daughter grew up with living life with gusto. Unencumbered by the guilt and close minded thinking of religion she is enjoying life to its fullest. I feel reaffirmed in trying to help other people escape the close minded thought process of religion. Life is good, reality is great if you are willing to embrace it. Seeing the parents stuck in the past side by side with the children who have escaped the terrible confines of constricted thinking makes me glad my own children were free from the start. Religion is like a self imposed tomb of guilt and needless fear. So much time is wasted with ritual when one could be out enjoying the wonderful world before us. I am so glad I never wasted a Sunday dazed and confused studying mythology. If there is a God, he has been good to me. He gave me a mind, and I put it to good use rather than turn it over to a cult. "

Southpark wrote on May 8, 2008 9:32 PM:

" Ezra: I wouldnt have expected any other response from you other than the one you gave. In your mind, Santa and God are comparible. It is a simple comparison for you. For those of us with a deep faith, there is no comparison and frankly comparing Santa with God is humorous. For me to think you would get that after what you have expressed in your posts is an error on my part. I see life is black and white with you . That is your belief and your right as an American to believe that way. My argument with you is your desire to think and act as if you are the "honest" one of the bunch because you are agnostic. It is good that you recognize your good Christian friends. Most of us really do care about the welfare of others and as a member of a congregation we pool our resources to do something about the poor, the hungry, the sick , the uneducated, the abandoned children etc...We give hope to some where there is none. We give food to some where there is none. We give love to some where there is none. Yes, all in the name of our God. "

CWRETIRED wrote on May 8, 2008 6:36 PM:

" TO EZRA: You wrote: " CW, you just can't get it. I don't care what you do, but don't use my money to carve the symbols of your myths on the court house."

Obviously, you are the one that doesn't get it. Just as VOR pointed out, our country was founded on the principal that their is a supreme being or "Creator". What our founding fathers did not do is tell all of us how to worship the Creator. The founding fathers used a Bible to swear in George Washington and others. I'll let you in on another little secret. The majority of Americans still believe there is a God and that this country was founded so we could worship him as we please. You are in the minority. When you say you want to avoid exposing children or others to these "myths" you are denying them the right to make up their own minds. Just because you and the minority like you don't want to be exposed to it, you want to mandate that others are not exposed to it either. What kind of freedom is that? "

Amused wrote on May 8, 2008 6:30 PM:

" Razors edge-
I did not say you had to be religious- don't put words in my mouth. I asked questions which you did not answer. Were your ancestors religious? Could morals have been past down? Who decided right from wrong?
I certainly did not say I was better- I choose to have Hope in my life. It makes me smile.
As far as God vs. Santa- best argument in the world that at one time there was a living God. Just like St Nick. (: "

Southpark wrote on May 8, 2008 6:21 PM:

" I disagree with you Honest Omar. I believe there is a God. Just because that makes you feel anxious is your own problem. We are not here to control your anxiety. I believe in scripture and personally have had events in my life where I have felt God's presence in my life. Just because you don't see something, doesn't mean it isn't there. But this is MY own personal belief and the argument here is that it is just as honest as the agnostic or athiests beliefs. "

Southpark wrote on May 8, 2008 6:05 PM:

" Snap: Another example of pots and kettles? Enlighten me, please. "

Ezra wrote on May 8, 2008 5:36 PM:

" Thanks for the help Mr. Razor, could not have said it better myself. I am going out to dinner with some very nice Christians. Please take over for me in the meantime. Contrary to what some here may think, I will not talk religion with them. They are good people, do a lot of good for the community, and have not indicated they wish to listen to my views on religion. Even though I supposedly have an agenda, I will respect their views, because I think they are of the do no harm variety of Christians. They have never once tried to force their views on me, and their children have grown up with open minds. So everyone get along while I go to dinner with good Christians. "

Ezra wrote on May 8, 2008 5:28 PM:

" South Park, you describe Santa Clause as a fictional character made up for the sake of children. God is a fictional character made up for adults. You say there is no comparison, and then you make the best comparisons possible. You say both are made up for feel good reasons. Is astrology real, or is it made up for the comfort or amusement of adults. A lot of people believe it, so is it therefore true? Is it your position Southpark that Hinduism is true or just made up? Is Buddism true or just made up? Doesn't it seem strange to you that there are so many similairities in all the religions, but it turns out that they are all man made, except of course yours? Their book is false, their god is false, their miracles didn't happen, but yours did. They have no more proof than you do, but I should accept your truth and reject yours. How do you explain this contradiction? "

Ezra wrote on May 8, 2008 5:07 PM:

" Dear Amused. Prior to Christianity was there no right and wrong? The notion that right and wrong stem from religion is absurd. My children grew up without religion. They never broke the law, they never stole anything, and you could ask anyone who knows them and they will tell you they are good honest, moral adults. My younger daughter took it on herself to study ethics, it severed her well. Teaching right from wrong has nothing to do with religion. Tribes all over the world that do not have anything you would call religion have social values, that do not tell them to kill homosexual, or stone someone who picks up sticks on Sunday. The whole notion that morality comes from religion has no basis whatsoever in reality. If we obeyed God's laws we would be stoning someone almost daily. Lets not forget slavery was just fine with Christians in the South Prior to the Civil law, do you think the slave looked to religion so they could feel good about being beat? Nonsense utter nonsense. How can you possibly say morality comes from religion when some of the worst atrocities ever committed were done by religious groups. Right now you have Mormons abusing children and calling it religion. Were the inquisitions a lesson in morality? "

SNAP wrote on May 8, 2008 5:06 PM:

" And here comes Southpark, accusing Ezra of anger!? Another fine example of pots and kettles! "

Razors Edge wrote on May 8, 2008 4:59 PM:

" Ezra, I'll actually take this one for you.

Amused,

You don't have to be religious to "know right from wrong". You can be non-religious, and not believe in stealing, lying, or murdering. Just because you are religious doesn't mean you will never lie, steal, or murder either (look at Muslims and their jihad. They are killing innocent people).

Being religious doesn't inherently make you better than anyone else. Remember this every time you get on your high horse: the higher you are the farther you fall. "

Honest Omar wrote on May 8, 2008 4:45 PM:

" Southpark, Ezra does not know if there is one or not, just like I don't know, you don't know, your neighbor doesn't know, your preacher (shaman, snake oil salesman, et.al.) does not know, the pope does not know.......................NO ONE KNOWS!!!!!! So, when you claim certainty about matters for which there can be no certainty you make many of us very anxious. We simply believe that extraordinary claims demand extraordinary proof, and we would all be better off if we taught our children these obvious truths, instead of conditioning them to expect magical solutions to real world problems, to expect 'forgiveness' for the most egregious behaviors, and to expect that certain groups are deserving of discrimination because an ancient book compiled by superstitious Stone Age storytellers says so. Preposterous!!! "

Amused wrote on May 8, 2008 4:26 PM:

" Ezra,
You really need to leave Santa Clause alone, Make your "No God" argument laughable!
From From Wikipedia:
Saint Nicholas (Greek: Άγιος Νικόλαος , Agios Nikolaos, "victory of the people") is the common name for Nicholas of Myra, a Catholic saint and Bishop of Myra in Lycia of Anatolia (modern-day Antalya province, Turkey, though at the time it was a Greek-speaking Roman Province). Because of the many miracles attributed to his intercessions, he is also known as Saint Nicholas the Wonderworker. He had a reputation for secret gift-giving, and is now commonly identified with Santa Claus!

"

Southpark wrote on May 8, 2008 4:05 PM:

" Furthermore Ezra, if you "don't know" if there is a God or not than you clearly have doubts there is one. Otherwise, you may tend to believe he might just exist which would then make you a believer and not agnostic. "

Southpark wrote on May 8, 2008 4:02 PM:

" Ezra Ezra Ezra... there are more dictionaries in this world than just the one you look at. The one I have clearly states agnostic means "one who doubts the existence of God". First and foremost you are clearly confused as to what honesty is. If you ask me if I believe in God, I will look you in the eye and say a most definate yes. I am being completely honest. If you tell someone you don't know if there is a God, that is your honest answer. There again, your answer is no more honest than mine. I look at proof of God's existence every day. Look around and open your angry eyes and you might be able to see it too. Oh and your absurd comparison of God and Santa Claus is old already. In reading your posts you mention Santa Claus several times over. I posted earlier about what I believe is the "Santa Claus syndrome" but the online editor must not have liked what I said so therefore it wasn't posted. You simply can't compare Santa to God. As parents we play Santa so kids can feel the magic of Christmas. He is a fictional character made up for the sake of our children. Most of us have many fond memories of "Santa" . For those of us that believe, God plays a much more vital role in our lives than Santa. Also for those of us that believe, we have experienced a deeper sense of spirituality within ourselves and have experienced the peace that comes with the relationship we share with the God we believe in. So, please.... do us all a favor and leave Santa out of this. "

Amused wrote on May 8, 2008 3:49 PM:

" Ezra,
How do atheists regard the dead- If there is no reason to "be" are they just out of site, out of mind?
How do you teach a child right from wrong- is a lie or stealing really wrong? How did they write laws? Just where did morals come from?
How do you encourage a child when they have a very bad day? Is it allowed to say- Gee I "Hope" things get better?
I am pondering how it would feel to exist only for taxes and death with no real purpose..Yep, Its an icky feeling.
"

Kate wrote on May 8, 2008 3:10 PM:

" Rasmus:

To start, I didn't mean for it to sound like I was a teacher, I'm a student. But to me, being very patriotic, that a pledge to our country would help the people of America very much. And the outruling of it, just because it mentions one name....is...insane. "

Kate wrote on May 8, 2008 3:06 PM:

" DEB:
Frankly, what a nice citizen you are to preach to the youth of America like that! And for your information, and so you don't screw up again, I haven't attended church in seven years! I belong to no religion. Infact, I don't even believe in the bible. I wish for us students to have the choice on whether we want to say the pledge of allegiance or not. And when I say the pledge of allegiance, it is to my country. MY NATION! Not my "imaginary being." Maybe you should repeat it once, and you'll realize that. "

Honest Omar wrote on May 8, 2008 2:13 PM:

" Ezra, I agree with you on every point. Most of the time I simply let you speak for me, but it may make it look like you are fighting the good fight almost singlehandedly. Trust me, you are not. Let us remind them once again that 9-11 was a FAITH- based initiative.
Keep up the good work. "

Razors Edge wrote on May 8, 2008 1:39 PM:

" Ezra,

"Ronald Reagan was picking on the Communist when he said "Tear down this wall". He issued a challenge to let freedom ring. That is my position. Let people free themselves from the bonds of superstition. "

That isn't right because they didnt have "freedom". They couldn't choose what they wanted to believe in. If you remember Stalin was an atheist. He tore down the church and persecuted Christians. We have the right in this country to believe in what we want. Whether or not we agree on what we want to believe doesn't matter. We get to make that choice ourselves. There is a difference.

Cookie monster,

You are right. I dont believe in what Ezra does, but I would defend his right to say it. "

Ezra wrote on May 8, 2008 1:33 PM:

" Dearest Southpark
Agnostic
1. a person who holds that the existence of the ultimate cause, as God, and the essential nature of things are unknown and unknowable, or that human knowledge is limited to experience. You might note there is nothing in the definition regarding doubt. There is a critical difference between not knowing and doubting. If a person says there is a God, what are they basing it on? Since they have no proof, they are being less than truthful about what they know.

Good dictionaries are available on line. It strikes me that a person when asked is there a God, answers "I don't know" that person is certainly more honest than a person who says "Yes there is a God". You have a much lower standard for honesty than I do. There is no more proof for God, than Santa Clause.

"

cookie monster wrote on May 8, 2008 1:18 PM:

" WOW! Nothing sparks a flame hotter in people than religion and politics. Way I see it since we all have the right to belive what we want to belive, and have the freedom of speach as well. I belive that makes it possible to convey any belief anywhere at any time. That goes for schools and for any other public place. Freedom I love it! "

Southpark wrote on May 8, 2008 12:11 PM:

" Wrong Ezra: Agnostic means one who "doubts" the existence of God. That doesn't make someone who is agnostic any more "honest" than someone who does believe in the existence of God. "

Ezra wrote on May 8, 2008 11:10 AM:

" Razor, I am not picking on religious people. I am asking them to "Do no harm". Harm by my definition is deluding young minds. Harm is stiring up hate for minorities. Harm is asking the school system to recognize creationism. Harm is misusing societies resources. Harm is promoting population growth in underdeveloped countries that cannot sustain it. Harm is using religion to take advantage of unsophisticated people to get elected or raise money for yourself. Harm is creating a sense of guilt and fear in people who don't have the inherent ability to reason for themselves. Harm is telling non-believers that they are condemned to eternal suffering. Harm is creating institutions that imprison young people in cult like surroundings before their minds have had a chance to mature. Using your logic, one could say Ronald Reagan was picking on the Communist when he said "Tear down this wall". He issued a challenge to let freedom ring. That is my position. Let people free themselves from the bonds of superstition. "

VoR wrote on May 8, 2008 10:52 AM:

" Where this discussion runs into logical conflict is when people equate the concept of God with religion. As much as religious institutions may insist, there is no relationship between the two. The U.S. Declaration of Independence accepts the concept of a God in the phrase, (We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.)
.
It also wisely avoids the religion question except to clearly state that in the First amendment (Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.) Possibly the most eloquent definition of freedom ever written.
"

Razors Edge wrote on May 8, 2008 9:49 AM:

" Ezra,

There is a difference between atheists and agnostics. I thought agnostics believed that:

a. One who believes that it is impossible to know whether there is a God.
b. One who is skeptical about the existence of God but does not profess true atheism.

I've also heard the definition "a person who claims that they cannot have true knowledge about the existence of God, but does not deny that God might exist". A true agnostic would not pick on religious people because they know God can't be proved or disproved.

Also, don't say you don't have an agenda then say "I am not putting forth a philosophy, except one of science. An agenda is an agenda is an agenda. No matter if you call it science or religion. You are trying to force people to believe what you believe. "

Ezra wrote on May 8, 2008 9:33 AM:

" CW, you just can't get it. I don't care what you do, but don't use my money to carve the symbols of your myths on the court house. Don't put your legends up in the schools where my children go. If you want, at your expense to promote your legend, go ahead, just don't use my money. Don't ask to pay no property tax, or federal tax one your legend project. If you want a building in my town, pay taxes on it just like everyone else. If you want to be like Pat Robertson and be worth 600 million you made from selling your superstition, pay taxes on it. The Bismarck Tribune put out opinions, and they pay taxes to do it. Why should your myths be tax exempt? If I marry a 12 year old child, I would go to jail. Why don't Mormons go to jail. The Catholic Church spent over one billion of Tax Free money to keep priest out of jail. Do I get tax free money to stay out of jail? "

CWRETIRED wrote on May 8, 2008 7:43 AM:

" TO RAZORS EDGE: Excellent post. I couldn't agree with you more. Extremists in politics and religion present a very dangerous situation for the majority. That goes for the far left, far right, atheists and religious fanatics. In reference to this subject, I feel everyone has the right to make a personal choice whether to be religious or not. I also believe this country was partly on the principal that every citizen could worship as they pleased without being forced to worship in a certain way, under a certain denomination. This doesn't mean that the mention of God in government buldings should be denied or silenced. But that's exactly what the communist governments did. Atheists want to do the same thing. "

CWRETIRED wrote on May 8, 2008 7:35 AM:

" Hi Southpark. Good to see you posting. Those claiming to be atheists pride themselves on logic. My logic tells me if they are right and there is no God, no heaven, no purpose for us other than reproducing and evolving by chance, then when we die, our bodies just fall to the ground and we're done. Since I had my faith, and atheists had none, it makes absolutely no difference to any of us in the end. However, if there truly is a God, and I am right about my faith, and faith is the key to heaven, when the athiests bodies fall to the ground, there souls will be denied paradise and mine will remain in paradise forever. So even if you think in terms of primative logic, those of faith have a 50/50 chance of reaching paradise. Those with no faith have Zero chance for paradise. For those choosing to believe in no power higher than themselves, that's one heck of a gamble. "

Ezra wrote on May 8, 2008 6:47 AM:

" The word atheist has been thrown around a lot. However, the term I prefer is agnostic. An agnostic is honest, he says he doesn't know. As to what I taught my children, I told them "I don't know". The truth is I don't know, nobody does. Why is that so hard to deal with. I am not promoting anything but honesty. Once you promote, or accept on lie you are on the road to ruin. The Bush "weapons of mass destruction" was a good case in point. Once you bought that lie, all things were possible. Now look at the mess. All religions create the same delema. They start with a basic untruth, and build into a nightmare. A critical difference between my point of view and what you think my point of view is, I am not asking anyone to believe anything. I am not putting forth a philosophy, except one of science. "

Razors Edge wrote on May 7, 2008 10:37 PM:

" Ezra,

I can believe what I want, " just don't impose it on anyone. That means children..." I'm sorry, but what? Did you teach your children about atheism? Isn't that pushing YOUR beliefs onto them? Did you yell at your kids if they had an "imaginary friend"? If I cant teach my kids can I teach yours and you teach mine? I dont think youd go for that.

Another thing I'm getting sick of (and I've been nice so far) is that you group ALL religions together and ALL religious people together. Did the priest rape the alter boy because he was a Christian? No. I know plenty of Christians and non-Christians that don't rape little boys. Thailand has a lot of child prostitution and they are Buddhists. Do they do it because they are Buddhist? No.

If we want to group all atheists together based on one thing let's talk about Stalin. First thing he did is burn the church, kill over 100,000 Christians, and outlaw religious sects. He later went to kill tens of millions of other people. Did he do all of this because he was an atheist? No. See, it is easy to use on example and make a whole group look bad.

As I said in a post a long, long time ago in a galaxy far, far awaythat I believe the far right and the far left are the same. I think your posts are proving that. So I guess in essence thank you. "

Ezra wrote on May 7, 2008 9:25 PM:

" I agree with you Razor, believe what you want, just don't impose it on anyone. That means children, and that means don't ask for tax breaks to rob people. Churches should pay taxes. When they do not, they are in essence state supported. I could not get a tax break to say I do not believe, why should someone else be free from taxes if they wish to spread the idea that there are supernatural beings? I could care less what anyone wants to believe, until it leads to war and hate. Religion has that quality. "

Mom wrote on May 7, 2008 9:24 PM:

" Razor's Edge; exactly! "

Southpark wrote on May 7, 2008 9:15 PM:

" Good posts CW4. I have said it before and I will say it again, there are no true athiests. Sure, we have people that like to bask in self appreciation and believe there is nothing greater than themselves, but make no mistake, if their plane is giong down, they will soon discover the very God that they claim not to believe in. Guarantee it! "

Razors Edge wrote on May 7, 2008 9:08 PM:

" Ezra,

You said:

The problem in our society today is people who will not speak up. To me it is a duty. Bush is the result of a failure of people to act.

Failure to act? I believe the people elected him (or at least the majority). How is that a failure to act? We don't have a dictatorship, and he didn't elect himself President. For the people who didn't vote for him they can take solace that his term is almost done. Although I do fear who our next President will be looking at these 3 jokers, but that's a different discussion.

Now on to your "sharing of ideas". I have no problem with the sharing of ideas. It is the context on how you are doing it (as you put it yourself). You have stopped "talking" about this objectively a long time ago. Your rants went from trying to prove a point that you have the right to freedom from religion (you do) to attacking religion itself, and the people who believe in religion. You are behaving exactly like the people you hate because you are attacking people that don't think like you. I hate people telling me what I should do, or believe in. That goes for you, and the church. The great thing about this country is you can believe in anything you want as long as it doesnt break the law. "

Ezra wrote on May 7, 2008 7:28 PM:

" Dear Razor, I drink a lot of beers with a lot of religious people. You need to put this in context. People come to this blog voluntarily to share ideas. I realize people I meet to enjoy a beer don't want to hear me expound about my religious ideas. On the other hand this is a public forum. The problem in our society today is people who will not speak up. To me it is a duty. Bush is the result of a failure of people to act. I live by the motto "Evil prevails when good men fail to act". Religion is ruining our country and our culture. Now, to your imaginary friend. If you have someone or something you believe in, but cannot hear it, or see it, or at least no one else can, it strikes me you have an imaginary friend. It is like blue eyes. If your eyes are blue, but definition they are blue. By definition your friend is imaginary if no one but you can see him or hear him. Is Santa Clause real or imaginary. If you cannot see or hear him, I presume you think he is imaginary. It is not an insult it is just a fact. "

Razors Edge wrote on May 7, 2008 7:01 PM:

" Ezra,

I dated an atheist once, and we got along fine. In fact are still friends. We had an understanding that I wouldn't force my views on her, and she wouldn't force hers on me. I some how think I couldn't sit down, and have a beer with you because you couldn't follow the same rules. I don't want to be told "I have an imaginary friend" just like I don't need to be "preached" at and told "You aren't a good Christian". I believe in freedom from religion, and freedom to practice religion if you want to. I never thought this was a hard concept for "intellectuals". "

Ezra wrote on May 7, 2008 6:37 PM:

" No one suffers more from religion than innocent children. As I have pointed out before, it is the Mormon children who suffer from being forced to marry old men. It is young boys who suffered at the hands of priest. Should adults be allowed to force crazy ideas on children? People would be outraged if their child were subjected to the tenants of some other religion like Islam. They would be outraged because they think it is nonsense. However, inflicting their own brand of nonsense on their own children is just fine? I believe it was a great service to put warnings on cigarette packages. I believe every church should have a warning label above the door. The label should simply say "What is said in this building may or may not be true, young children may be permanently effected in a bad way from hearing what goes on inside here. They may become delusional adults and have the desire to persecute those who do not agree with them". "

Ezra wrote on May 7, 2008 6:17 PM:

" Someone please explain prayer to me. If the people Manyanmar were just hit by a cyclone why do we need to pray for them? Why does God have to be asked to do the right thing? Praying for them would be strange. We would be asking a God who is going to send them to hell for not being Christians to help them. There is something strange about all this. Why would your have to beg a good person to do the right thing? Why would God, given the choice, not help people, just because someone else did not pray? It makes absolutely no sense no matter how you slice it. Why does God need you to tell him in your prayers how great you think he is? This all sounds like something humans made up, doesn't it? "

VoR wrote on May 7, 2008 5:34 PM:

" Kate, FYI, here is the Merriam-Webster dictionary definition of religion;

Main Entry: religion Pronunciation: \ri-ˈli-jən\ Function: noun Etymology: Middle English religioun, from Anglo-French religiun, Latin religion-, religio supernatural constraint, sanction, religious practice, perhaps from religare to restrain, tie back more at rely Date: 13th century
1 a: the state of a religious b (1): the service and worship of God or the supernatural (2): commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance2: a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices3archaic : scrupulous conformity : conscientiousness4: a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith
religionless adjective

Freedom and music are NOT religions.

"

Rasmus wrote on May 7, 2008 4:43 PM:

" to Kate: Your outrage is someone else's refuge. As a teacher, your job is not to endoctrinate but to educate. No one is "discriminating" against you by not having students recite a pledge that may go against what their parents are trying to teach them. That atheist student as well as the fundamentalist student-yes, some religions forbid the pledge-should not be forced to pledge or made to feel less welcome in your classroom because of your beliefs. By the way, students can even silently pray in the public classroom as long as teachers and administrators are not leading or encouraging group prayers. "

Deb wrote on May 7, 2008 4:33 PM:

" Kate: I don't believe in God, and I don't want my daughter or son to have to pledge allegience to an imaginary being on a daily basis. They could thank Jefferson, Einstein, or Hawking on a daily basis - but not an imaginary friend. Schools are to educate. You can get all the stories about your imaginary friends and their tales of wonderment every Sunday at your fave club house with the big T on the side of it. "

Kate wrote on May 7, 2008 3:04 PM:

" In fact, I disagree with your letter. This country was founded on religion. Most all of our ancestors came here originally for religious freedom. In this land of the free, people could believe in any religion they wanted or none. Religion is primarily a strong belief in anything. Freedom is a religion. Music is a religion. And that the youth of America cannot make the pledge of allegiance to our nation in school, because its mentions the name of something this country was founded, on is a complete outrage. When I begin each day in my classroom I want to be able to thank my country for providing me with safety and a school. If this country is meant for religious freedom, then we, the citizens of the United States, should be able to mention the name of a God under which our nation was formed without discrimination. "

SNAP wrote on May 7, 2008 2:21 PM:

" Rose, Mom, and anyone else:

It's not as simple as "live and let live," not when all of humankind--believers and non-believers--are held back from advancing as a species. And yes, religion holds us all back with it's irrationality and appeal to ignorance. "

Rasmus wrote on May 7, 2008 2:10 PM:

" Ezra, as a supporter of separation of church and state, I would venture to guess that you would be seen by your opponents as a reason for injecting more religion into public life, not less. More creationism, more National Days of Prayer, more Ten Commandment monuments, more televangelists, and more religion in our Armed Forces would take care of the problems of this country, not debate. "

VoR wrote on May 7, 2008 2:06 PM:

" Jesus was a Capricorn, he ate organic foods. He believed in love and peace and never wore no shoes. Long hair, beard and sandals and a funky bunch of friends. Reckon theyd just nail him up if he came down again. Kris Kristofferson

By the way does anyone think that when Jesus comes back he want to see his believers wearing crosses? Wouldnt that be like walking up to Caroline Kennedy sporting a lapel pin of a high powered rifle, then saying, Just thinking about your dad?
"

Mom wrote on May 7, 2008 12:29 PM:

" Since this article does talk about the government and religion being separate I just wanted to point out that our correctional system of dealing with criminals was founded on religion, particularly in dealing with juvenile offenders. We still have religion mixed with government in that regard. When a juvenile here goes through juvenile court who does the court system contract through for tracking them through their probation? Luthern Social Services. If they need to be placed they might be committed to Dakota Boys/Girls Ranch (which is a Christian based center). If they are committed to the Youth Correctional Center the only thing they are allowed in their rooms in the beginning is a Bible. (I'm assuming they'd make exceptions for other religions and allow the Koran or whatever). Most rehabilitation for drugs/alcohol that people are committed to by our courts are based on the 12 step program that centers on a 'higher being'. I don't think this is necessarily a bad thing because obviously it works for some. I just wanted to point out that there are many many areas of government that do still intermix with religion. "

Mom wrote on May 7, 2008 12:21 PM:

" Ezra; as you might have noticed in my previous comments, I am not a church member. I totally agree with you on the huge amount of money that goes into these churches. Then again, it is the people's money to spend on whatever they see fit to. I'd rather see the money going to charitable purposes. My point is the faith part in itself. When people have these deep beliefs and are psychologically more 'well' because of it I think we should leave them alone and not try and take that away from them. I think for a lot of people it is a type of therapy. You mention children and what we teach them. As a mom, I'm very concerned with that. I see no harm in teaching them to deal with life in whatever way it makes them happy, productive members of society. "

Ezra wrote on May 7, 2008 10:17 AM:

" You are astute, and correct Snap. People always like the simple solution. Instead of fixing the flat tire it is much easier to pray it heals itself. "

Ezra wrote on May 7, 2008 7:56 AM:

" Dear Mom: Did you ever consider the resources wasted by religion. First, you have expensive, inefficient buildings. These buildings sit empty most of the week. The money society puts in these mythological shrines could be used for homes, hospitals, schools, and many other useful things. It is hard to believe God would put an edifice to himself over these other needs, he must just laugh at the stupidity. Next you have people who could be teaching real issues, science, and many useful skills to each other, and young people tied up spreading superstiion, and myth. What if the time people spent in church studying the Bible was instead used to teach poor children reading and math, and help people with the basic skills of life? Is this God of yours so egotistical that he wants humans to act as cheerleaders. Had people for centuries been addressing real problems rather than perpetrating old myths think how much better off we would be. What kind of example does it set for the young to have them see adults wasting time with religious ritual when the same adults could use the same time to actually help those in need? Is God an egomaniac that wants to hear the same nonsense every Sunday until the end of time? Can God be that petty? If he is I want no part of him. "

SNAP wrote on May 6, 2008 11:05 PM:

" Ezra:

I applaud your efforts, however, you cannot change believers no matter how logical your arguments. First, no one changes until he/she personally decides to change. Second, this argument is an example of existential insecurity. Often, it arises from power struggles. At other times, the insecurity results simply from the fact that two quite distinct ways of knowing, being, or thinking come into collision with each other. Instead of becoming flexible and/or malleable, it often means that the entities become rigid as they feel threatened.
Now, the evidence against the existence of a sky god and the bible as truth is overwhelming, but these evidences are ignored by the dominant culture of believers who have no leg to stand on, they were merely indoctrinated since birth (ever heard the crying babies in church, brought into the fold soon after birth?). Because religion and spiritually sells, our stores overflow with religious stuff to buy, all of which reinforce the supposed "normalcy" of the faith, but books for intellectuals written by intellectuals are ignored as stuffy old academic tomes. Belief is simple and easy and people like simple and easy, black and white. I am always disappointed that our modern society still believes in myth and magic. I can understand and forgive people from 2,000 years ago, or even 500 years ago, but I am ashamed and embarrassed by the 21st century. I do hope that someday the human race will expunge religion from the planet, but I doubt it will happen in our lifetimes. Continue to fight the good fight, but dont waste too much of your own time, it will cause you too much stress.
"

Independent Conservative wrote on May 6, 2008 5:42 PM:

" MamaMia, I posted a quick, second message last night and am unsure of what happened to it, so I'll take another crack at it. I agree with your assessment about Jesus' brilliance. And since the Bible is the only written record of anything He taught, I accept that Matthew 7:12 and John 14:6 are on equal footing. Thanks for your earlier, civil reply. "

Harold Reimann wrote on May 6, 2008 4:14 PM:

" All you opinionates have never met a true christian and wouldn't recognize one if you did. "

MamaMia wrote on May 6, 2008 11:27 AM:

" Indie: Yes, I believe that religion does guide and help many people do the right thing every day. I don't understand why they need a religion to do right, but I'm of the opinion if it works for some people, so be it. What I can't get beyond is how intelligent, careful thinking people (like yourself) can still hold on to what amounts to a fairy tale. But then again, if it works for you, so be it. I'll keep reading my science books. You have a great week, okay? "

Ezra wrote on May 6, 2008 9:22 AM:

" P.S. Mom I have known too many people who were the victims of religious inspired hate to let it continue to spread unchecked. "

Ezra wrote on May 6, 2008 9:20 AM:

" Dear Mom, I am opposed to organized religion, because of the harm it does. The other day a good friend, who happens to be very religious came by. My friend said he could not vote for a black, or a woman. It made no difference who the black or woman were. With all his religious zeal he feels this is just fine. People condem and makes the lives of homosexuals miserable, and they use religion to do it. People like Pat Robertson rob old ladies and pay no taxes on the money they steal. Religious people try to introduce nonsense into the schools such as creationism. How much hate, and how many wars, have been sponsored by religion? Sure it may give some comfort, but so does astrology, and a host of other superstitions. The midevil days have passed, it is time for humans to grow up and face reality. The crutch of religion is no longer needed. In the past it was simply a tool to exploit the ignorant masses, George Bush proved it still works today. We cannot go forward as long as we are stuck in the past with a system that allows young girls to be exploited by the Mormons, and young boys to be raped by priest. "

chris wrote on May 5, 2008 11:15 PM:

" The protections put in place separating church from state were as much to protect the church from corruption by the gov't as anything else. Church and gov't are and should always remain totally separate instituions. One cheapens the other. God has no interest in politics. And lets face it, Jesus was a liberal brown skinned man. Hard for Republicans to swallow that, but it is true. "

Rose wrote on May 5, 2008 10:46 PM:

" "Hi pot, this is the kettle. You're black." C'mon people, how is your venomous hatred of religion any better than religion itself? If you don't want to believe in God, don't. I don't want to believe in Sophia, so I don't. But I don't go around trying to convince those that do that they're wrong and that their "imaginary friend" is a fraud. I know what I believe, why I believe it, and I have peace about it. So I don't need to call people names, make fun of their faith, or prove how right I think I am. If you're at peace with your faith or non-faith or whatever you want to call it, then you too should keep it to yourself. "

Mom wrote on May 5, 2008 7:46 PM:

" Ezra; why do people's beliefs upset you so much? People find comfort in their religious faith, why do you want to take that away from them? I've seen people close to their death and their vision of a heaven seems to give them great comfort. People go through hard times in their lives and are comforted with the thought that some entity is watching out for them and loves them when no one else seems to. What harm is there in that? I've known two depressed individuals who have chosen to live (had contemplated suicide) because they turned to God instead. I don't have this faith that so many turn to and I'm kind of jealous of it. So Ezra, quit trying to make people throw away something that works for them. "

Independent Conservative wrote on May 5, 2008 6:25 PM:

" Ezra, it's not my position... it's Christianity's. If I believe it is true then it becomes arrogant? What do you think you sound like with your pontificating? You trying to grab and hold some sort of argumental highground here is a laugh when you think all religions are losing propositions, so why travel that route with me? I will reiterate: I believe biblical Christianity is the path to eternal life. I never said I wanted John 3:16 to be the law of the land. Where atheism is the state religion, however, it's not a pretty picture for independent thinkers and free expressors standing against The State. I think atheists and Christians could get along swimmingly if people were more libertarian in socio-political philosophy. I simply do not care for the backhanded remarks against Christianity when it successfully guides hundreds of millions to do the right thing everyday. "

Independent Conservative wrote on May 5, 2008 6:03 PM:

" Howdy, MamaMia... I hope you are well. All a contemporary opponent to a spurrilous sect had to do was point out in the historical records that things were being added to what this Jesus taught. I've faith that what was written by people in the first century is valid and consistent with history: a man named Jesus from Nazareth lived, taught and had followers. With the apparent "trouble" that caused around the empire after Jesus' death, I'm left to wonder why the Romans didn't just settle the matter through records... why the end of spears, swords, crucuifixion and feeding of Christians to lions? Would've been simpler to just set the records straight and help Christians see their vanity. Apparently, you, too trust the writings of men; just some who began writing too little, too late, in my opinion, but I understand that's my opinion. And I'm entitled to it. Have a great week. Gotta fly. "

Ezra wrote on May 5, 2008 4:03 PM:

" Indy Conservative. It is amazing that a special set of rules apply only to your imaginary friend. Your friend does not have to obey the laws of physics, but apparently all other religions are false when they make outrageous claims. Your hero is real but the heroes of the other religions were false prophets. As I have stated before you certainly were fortunate to find the one true religion when there were so many to choose from. Has the arrogance or audacity of your position ever occurred to you. You have the audacity to claim you are right, and every other religion is wrong. When they claim their prophet was real, and their book was authentic they are just liars, but when you put forth your man, he is real. It never occurs to you that there is no consistency in your logic whatsoever? "

MamaMia wrote on May 5, 2008 3:56 PM:

" Indie: Explain away the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ? Huh? Pretty simple. If he lived, and he probably did, he was a brilliant man who tried to turn his little world toward a better way of thinking and a better way of living. If the Romans got mad at him and hung him from a cross, which they probably did, that's the end of his story -- or should be. But noooooo. . .zealots, 100 years later, had to turn him into a god, born of a virgin (come on!) coming back from the dead to sit on the right hand of God Almighty from whence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead (yeah, right). It's just a silly story people suffering from religious fervorocity made up so they could have a cool club. Too bad they didn't leave well enough alone and just write about what brilliant ideas Jesus had and not put words in his mouth about coming though him to get to God and yadda, yadda, yadda. It's all so sad. Anyway, that's the name of that tune. Get a clue. "

Ezra wrote on May 5, 2008 3:52 PM:

" Dear Indy Conserv If your rules apply to Jesus, presumably they apply to Mohamad, Budda, ect. How do you explain them away. The myth system that perpetrates them is just like your Jesus myth. Better yet lets see you explain away Joseph Smith of the Morman cult. If you apply your logic rules to any of the other myths you will get the same outcome as you do with the Jesus myth. Please tell me one thing Hitchens was wrong about. Tell me what page is wrong? "

Independent Conservative wrote on May 5, 2008 2:50 PM:

" To NYxND: the Goldwater speech is an excellent post and, the spirit of which, is one with which I deeply agree. How dare a Dobson or Robertson try and push me around politically? I'll vote for whom I wish and according to conservative principles. I don't need or want a Pastor-In-Chief. Aside from the issues Mr. Blotsky raises, I'm concerned that my grandchildren and great-grandchildren may have to face an America in which sharia law is given a side-by-side standing with our/their judicial system based on the Constitution, given the direction other western nations are going. We sure could use a Goldwater or two around today. "

Indie Conservative wrote on May 5, 2008 2:28 PM:

" Just explain away the life, death and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth, Ezra. Reason and logic tell me that if he did not exist, much less resurrect from the dead, then someone could/would have publicly snuffed out the miserable, hoax-based and superstitious Christianity in the cradle of its infancy. Are you suggesting the Romans and Jewish leaders were too ignorant to have thought of this? By the same token I am reminded that Hitchens is too limited in his knowledge to claim absolutely that God does not exist. Am I wrong about Hitchens? Has he spent eons in a spacecraft, searching the corners of the universe at light speed, penning all his findings (or, in his case, lack thereof) for the enlightenment of mankind? No. So he can't. But if ol' Hitch had, where did the spacecraft come from? Did someone - gasp! - design it, then - gasp!- build it? What do you know... creation (requiring a creator) would be proven yet again to be the only observable explanation of how things came to be. Instead of making this about Hitchens, though, why don't you just explain the life, death and resurrection of Jesus. If you can't, then fine, just say so and I'll quit posting. "

Ezra wrote on May 5, 2008 1:41 PM:

" Dear Independent Conservative If you read Hitchens and he could not get through to you, it would be hopeless for me to try. Apparently reason does not phase you. The proposition that I prove something doesn't exist is a little difficult to understand. In case you were unaware the normal procedure is to prove something does exist. I cannot say there are no talking snakes, I have never seen one, and it strikes me as highly unlikely, but it is possible in some remote region of the universe snakes have evolved to talk. If you have evidence that one existed on this planet it would be interesting. If you cite a book that says a snake talked that is not too impressive. There are many books that allege many strange things. Once you jump off the reality ship, and onto the myth and superstition ship anything is possible. Next week you might decide Santa Clause is real, so be it. "

Independent Conservative wrote on May 5, 2008 12:25 PM:

" Well, you called it, Ezra... strike three! All I asked was for you to explain away the life, death and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth, and you failed. As for the authors you cite, since they don't know everything or have the benefit of having been everywhere in the universe, they can't absolutely say God doesn't exist. I've had the pleasure of reading Hitchens but not the other fellow. Nice to know that makes me courageous in your book. "

Ezra wrote on May 5, 2008 9:46 AM:

" Please explain your logic. Once a dog bit me. The dog did not believe in God. So the real problem that caused the bite was the fact that the dog was an atheist. The Aztecs were ripping peoples hearts out and tossing their bodies from the steps of their shrines, they must have been atheist according to your logic. Makes absolutely no sense, but neither does talking snakes, virgin births, talking in tongues, devils, angels, and a whole host of other things you believe. Also the logic that if a large number of people believe something that is untrue, that makes it so. I had no idea you could vote on truth. By your logic Hinduism is true in India, and Catholicism is true in Italy. It is a good thing we all believe in gravity. "

NYxND wrote on May 5, 2008 9:42 AM:

" Cw4: I love the argument that because Hitler and Stalin (and others) were (assumed) atheists they did their terrible deeds BECAUSE they were atheists. We could say that because they both had mustaches that that was the cause of their horrible acts. It makes sense, at least with Hitler especially since there is evidence he still clung to some of his Catholicism, that some of his actions against the Jewish population were rooted in the christian belief that they were responsible for the death of Jesus.
And I ask you how many wars were waged in the name of Atheism compared to those declared in the name of one religion or another? "

NYxND wrote on May 5, 2008 9:05 AM:

" On religious issues there can be little or no compromise. There is no position on which people are so immovable as their religious beliefs. There is no more powerful ally one can claim in a debate than Jesus Christ, or God, or Allah, or whatever one calls this supreme being. But like any powerful weapon, the use of God's name on one's behalf should be used sparingly. The religious factions that are growing throughout our land are not using their religious clout with wisdom. They are trying to force government leaders into following their position 100 percent. If you disagree with these religious groups on a particular moral issue, they complain, they threaten you with a loss of money or votes or both.
I'm frankly sick and tired of the political preachers across this country telling me as a citizen that if I want to be a moral person, I must believe in "A," "B," "C" and "D." Just who do they think they are? And from where do they presume to claim the right to dictate their moral beliefs to me?
And I am even more angry as a legislator who must endure the threats of every religious group who thinks it has some God-granted right to control my vote on every roll call in the Senate. I am warning them today: I will fight them every step of the way if they try to dictate their moral convictions to all Americans in the name of "conservatism."

Barry Goldwater (R)
Speech in the US Senate (16 September 1981) "

CWRETIRED wrote on May 5, 2008 5:41 AM:

" Ezra: It is our country. A country ruled by the majority. If you are trying to rule by minority, then yes you are interfering. When a select few are trying establish laws that force the majority to live as they want them to, they are interfering. Except for the emotional sarcasm, you still haven't responded to my point that named atheists have tried to dominate people of the world through violence. Some estabished atheist governments. In order to leave, one had to defect or die. So it's a little difficult to compare someone knocking on your door to introduce you to Christianity to those that have killed and tortured so many. The last poll I viewed stated that over 80% of Americans are religious. 76% of those are Christians. 14% do not have a religion. So as a member of the 14%, please don't tell the remaining 80% of us how to live. "

Ezra wrote on May 4, 2008 9:32 PM:

" So its your country CW, sorry for interfering. "

CWRETIRED wrote on May 4, 2008 6:47 PM:

" Ezra: You missed my point completely. If you or anyone else decides they do not believe in God or Christianity, I am not about to try and convert you. You are entitled to your own beliefs. The points I made were in response to your previous post where you stated "Tell me one thing atheist have tried to implement for everyone other than freedom from fundies. " I did just that. Not one, but several. The other point I made is that our founding fathers did indeed believe that people in America could worship God as they pleased without being forced to join a state sponsored church. Atheist want us to display our faith in the basement. Sorry, Ezra, but non-believers are a minority in this country. If it is that important to you and other non-believers, then go to country where you don't have to worry about "fairy tales". But don't force the majority to clam up because you don't believe. Don't pray in school. Don't pray at any other gatherings, but don't deny the majority their right to do so. "

Ezra wrote on May 4, 2008 5:15 PM:

" There is not end to the nonsense. First atheist, are equated with communist, now somehow if you don't believe in the talking snake you are trying to take over the world. How do people that don't believe nonsense automatically become members of some evil group. The general theme seems to be that if you do not believe in the imaginary friend concept, you are evil, and you must be a radical member of some group with bad motives. Were the people who first put forth the idea the Earth was round members of some evil conspiracy? Someday when we are no longer caught in the leftovers from the middle ages people will look back with amazement at the silly ideas now accepted by the talking snake group. "

Matt wrote on May 4, 2008 9:58 AM:

" I think that most people who claim to be athiest don't have any problem with people who hold religious beliefs. But the activist radical fringe knows that religion is the only thing that stands in the way of gaining a grip on society on a global scale. That is why every effort is being tried to destroy it, especially by finding anything it can to erode belief in it. "

Ezra wrote on May 4, 2008 9:40 AM:

" Dear CW, checked out your atheist web site. It was interesting that they aligned themselves with free thinkers. What an interesting concept. Think for yourself. Don't buy some prepackaged religious dogma. Instead of facing reality it is so simple to buy some off the shelf belief system made to exploit the very people that buy it. Religion is like a fad diet, full of promises that make it all seem so easy. Just believe, and all will be fine. Do not fear what you do not understand. A simple motto to live by. No one knows what occurs after death. Making up a scenario, and believing it does not solve the question. Adults can deal with reality, and uncertainity. Children are fooled by myth and Santa Clause tales. "

Ezra wrote on May 4, 2008 8:59 AM:

" How can you automatically be an organization if you are with a lot of people who don't believe something? Are all the people who don't believe in witches an organization? Are all the people who don't believe in talking snakes, and imaginary friends automatically a part of an organization that supports dictators in South East Asia? The logic is perverse at best. This is the same right wing logic that assumes homosexuals are recruiting others to be homosexuals. They are not, they just want to be left alone. Apparently anyone who is not Christian, is by default a supporter of communist regimes. This is something you might be able to sell to a bunch of Bush supporters, but the majority of educated people would never by such strange reasoning.
"

Ezra wrote on May 4, 2008 8:52 AM:

" Lets go for strike three. A careful examination of the Bible, by using sources outside the Bible reveals that it is a collection of stories, many of the stories were passed down long before the Bible picked them up. The garden of Eden story was widespread, as was the flood story. The story of people wandering the desert for forty years is an interesting one. The is no physical evidence whatsoever to indicate this took place. There are two good books that expose the fraud perpetrated by religion. You would not have the courage to read either. However, it would be fun to have you criticize them because you would be confronted with facts you could not handle. So try reading THE GOD DELUSION or GOD IS NOT GREAT. This is where you will strike out. Try to point to a specific incidence in either book where the author is wrong. Like most deluded by fantasy, you will not even delve into the possibility your imaginary friends are a figment of your imagination. Only read what re-enforces the fantasy. "

CWRETIRED wrote on May 4, 2008 8:22 AM:

" Ezra: Go to atheistrevolution.org. Numerous atheist lawsuits have been filed against local, state, and federal entities that would cater to atheists and not to the majority of people in this country. The Soviet Union was an atheist state before it's downfall. Stalin, Mao, and Pot Pol (killing fields) were atheists who pushed the communist agenda of an atheist state. Idi Amin declared himself "Lord of All the Beasts of the Earth and Fishes of the Seas" These atheists didn't simply knock on doors or present their views on a T.V. channel that can be changed by the viewer. The problem I have with atheist activists is that, even as a small minority in this country, they want to impose their views on the majority. This country was founded in part to practice religious freedom. Religious freedom that allows everyone to worship God as they please. No state sponsored religion such as Catholic, Lutheran, Methodist, etc. This is clear in the Declaration of Independence. It doesn't say "endowed by their creator, if you believe in one" This country's founding fathers did have a deep belief in God and made statements about the importance of God guiding our country and those who preside over it. Atheists intend to erase the very foundation of this country. They want those of faith to practice it silently in their basement. I suggest the atheist minority take a dose of their own advice.

"

Independent Conservative wrote on May 4, 2008 12:12 AM:

" Another swing and a miss, Ezra! Strike two! You're raving now. "

Ezra wrote on May 3, 2008 7:23 PM:

" What a marvelous stroke of good luck. Your soul trickled down to Earth, and by some wonderus marvel you became a Christian. As luck would have it this it the only true religion. The rest a just fakes. The Mormons, Hindus, Jews, Buddhist, and Muslims are all just agents of the Devil, and by a wonderful happenstance your soul ended up in a Christian body in a Christian country, and of course Christianity is true and all the others are just nonsense supplied by the devil. It just doesn't get any better. If they say their imaginary friend is real, it is nonsense, but yours is real. If they say their imanginary friend can do magic, why should we believe, it, but if you say your Christian imaginary friend can do magic we are fools if we question it. God surely loves you to have you succeed and win when so many others had the fate of falling into the wrong country with the wrong religion. Maybe you should go to Las Vagas, it is clear God wants you to win. Most amazing of all is how much you and God agree. The coincidences are just overwhelming. "

Ezra wrote on May 3, 2008 6:57 PM:

" Dear Independent Conservative. Perhaps there was a man named Jesus, and Perhaps there was a man named Buddha, so what? Which one should take precedence. There was a man named Joseph Smith, who started the Morman Jazz. How come you jazz is true, but the other are not. It does not make a bit of sense. There is no more reason, I should believe what Joseph Smith the Mormons said, than Jesus or Micky Mouse. None of it is true. I believe what Einstein said, it works. How is it that your guy is real and the rest are phony? "

Ezra wrote on May 3, 2008 5:41 PM:

" Dear Razor, were you ever accosted by an atheist, I have never been. Yet I can't count the fundies that have come to my door, not to mention the ones plugging the television. Please tell me of any atheist equivalent of the crooked preachers like Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell ect. I have never seen atheist proselytizing on street corners. No atheist has insisted the school system teach creationist mythology. It was not athiest that used to insist the stores be closed on Sunday. Tell me one thing atheist have tried to implement for everyone other than freedom from fundies. "

Razors Edge wrote on May 3, 2008 2:55 PM:

" Ezra,

I said the far right and the far left are the same. Just become someone is "religious" or "believes in God" does not make them the far right. Nor does someone being an atheist make them the far left.

It is those people that will sit on the street corner and yell "You are going to Hell if you do not believe in God", and on the opposite corner you will have someone yell "You are stupid for believing in an imaginary friend (your words I believe)". They are no different. They both have an agenda and are trying to get people to believe in what they believe, and they are stupid if they don't. You are an atheist? Fine. I believe in God. Fine. How hard is that?

As for electing an atheist. Abraham Lincoln, Benjamin Franklin, James Madison, and John Adams to name a few were not a Christians, I'm not quite sure being an atheist in itself won't get you elected. You just can't attack the faith of the people who you want to vote for you. I think Obama found that out with his "bitter" comment. "

Ezra wrote on May 3, 2008 9:03 AM:

" Dear Razor: Who is imposing what on whom? Racism, and religion have a lot in common. The racist did not ask the blacks to believe in racism, but they did make them ride on the back of the bus, and made sure they could not get elected to anything. You can hear racism in action right now in the current Obama campaign. Religious people in North Dakota would not permit a non-religious person to get elected Governor, and there is no question non-religious people suffer if they make their beliefs known. To make it simple non-religious people are deprived of rights. They have the right to run for office in North Dakota, but the fundamentalist will quickly spread the word, and they will be defeated. If you have followed the news lately you may have found out about religious problems in the military. There has been a scandal at the Air Force Academy regarding religion. Non- religious, or for that matter Jewish airmen know they will not be promoted or have the same opportunity as the fundamentalist airmen. How could you possibly say there is any kind of equivalency between non-religious, and religious people. Ask anyone who knows anything about Utah and you will quickly find out how non-Mormons are treated like second class citizens. Do you seriously think a Jewish person or a black could be elected in North Dakota? Do you really think someone who declared themself a non-believer could be elected? Who are you kidding? "

Independent Conservative wrote on May 3, 2008 8:55 AM:

" A swing and miss, Ezra. You had your chance and blew it. What a specious tack to take. I give you the opportunity to explain away the life, death and recurrection of Jesus of Nazareth, thereby I would forsake my belief in Him, and this is the argument I get, "This makes no sense"? Santa Claus? Zeus? C'mon. Roman history is on the side of anyone who accepts there was man from Nazareth named Jesus. I understand it takes faith from there about His message. I'm unsure what one calls it to ignore historical records. Foolishness, perhaps? I guess asking you to explain away His resurrection from death is pointless when you reject the premise He ever lived. "

Rasmus wrote on May 3, 2008 8:50 AM:

" One of the most moral people I ever knew lived by Christian ways, was a conservative, generous, and a devout atheist. No threat of eternal hellfire and damnation was needed for this atheist to do right. Could they be elected to a higher office in the US today? No. But the same could be said for a Buddhist, Hindu, Moslem, or Jew depending on the region they live in.

"

Online Editor wrote on May 3, 2008 8:02 AM:

" To CW4: I think three examples are enough to illustrate your point. "

CWRETIRED wrote on May 3, 2008 7:31 AM:

" John Quincy Adams:
Why is it that, next to the birthday of the Savior of the world, your most joyous and most venerated festival returns on this day [the Fourth of July]?" Is it not that, in the chain of human events, the birthday of the nation is indissolubly linked with the birthday of the Savior? That it forms a leading event in the progress of the Gospel dispensation? Is it not that the Declaration of Independence first organized the social compact on the foundation of the Redeemer's mission upon earth? That it laid the cornerstone of human government upon the first precepts of Christianity"?
--1837, at the age of 69, when he delivered a Fourth of July speech at Newburyport, Massachusetts.

"

CWRETIRED wrote on May 3, 2008 7:29 AM:

" Samuel Adams:
He who made all men hath made the truths necessary to human happiness obvious to all Our forefathers opened the Bible to all. [ "American Independence," August 1, 1776. Speech delivered at the State House in Philadelphia]

Let divines and philosophers, statesmen and patriots, unite their endeavors to renovate the age by impressing the minds of men with the importance of educating their little boys and girls, inculcating in the minds of youth the fear and love of the Deity and leading them in the study and practice of the exalted virtues of the Christian system. [October 4, 1790] "

CWRETIRED wrote on May 3, 2008 7:25 AM:

" Quote: John Adams:
The general principles upon which the Fathers achieved independence were the general principals of Christianity I will avow that I believed and now believe that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God.
[July 4th] ought to be commemorated as the day of deliverance by solemn acts of devotion to God Almighty.
John Adams in a letter written to Abigail on the day the Declaration was approved by Congress

"

CWRETIRED wrote on May 3, 2008 7:19 AM:

" Parts of the lesson on religion Mr. Blotsky left out. The date of the constituion is written as: "Done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven". Religion is indirectly mentioned in the oath of office, where a person is permitted to swear or affirm, taking into account those religions where swearing was impermissible. They use the Bible for this ceremony, just as George Washington did. The Declaration of Independence states: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. Might I suggest that the founding fathers intended that this country not have a state sponsored church such as they had in England. They wanted to insure citizens could worship God as they wished witout being forced to be a member of a state sponsored church. If you visit Washington, DC you will see quotes abound from our founding fathers that refer to God and the Bible. Additional quotes of the founding fathers show evidence of embracing religion. Today's anti-religious organizations want to erase that very concept. They want to erase all mention of God except in the far hidden corners of our homes. "

Razors Edge wrote on May 3, 2008 4:32 AM:

" Ezra,

If you look at your posts (and the frame you put them in) you are just as bad, if not worse, then the "religious zealots" you hate. I don't see anyone here imposing their beliefs on you. You have the right to believe in what you want. If you don't wan to go to church then fine don't. No one forces you to. If you don't believe in God no one forces you to. However, people of religious faith are forced to learn about the big bang THEORY, and the THEORY of evolution. However, there is no scientific fact to prove it. When I say that I mean that they can prove it scientifically. Science says "Something can't be created from nothing". So, here is where FAITH comes in.

Definition of religion is:

"A religion is a set of beliefs and practices generally held by a human community"

Scientists/atheists have FAITH/believe in the big bang theory (although can't be proven). Religious people have FAITH/believe in that God created Earth (again can't be proven). Now tell me what is the difference? They are both based on a set of BELIEFS! "

VoR wrote on May 3, 2008 2:36 AM:

" I only have 1 question. What is the one true religion? Someone must know. Please share your wisdom. "

Ezra wrote on May 2, 2008 9:15 PM:

" Let me clarify, if you want to believe anything you wish, that is fine. All I ask is you do not impose it on anyone else, or corrupt children with it. Secondly don't ask anyone to fight wars because your imaginary friend is superior to someone else's imaginary friend. Someone else said it here in a different fashion, but it is basically keep it to yourself. Also I don't think the thieves that operate under the guise of religion should be able to do it tax free. It give them an unfair advantage over non religious thieves. This is definitely government intervention at its worse. "

Ezra wrote on May 2, 2008 6:42 PM:

" You might as well ask me to "Explain away Santa Clause, or Zeuss". This makes no sense. I am to explain to you why your imaginary friend doesn't exist. He could be an elf, or a wizard, and then I am supposed to tell you why he isn't there, yet you are sure he is. Totally baffling. Don't forget people in other parts of the world have their own imaginary friends, how do you explain them away? Your imaginary friend is real, but Budda is just a fake? What am I missing here? "

Mom wrote on May 2, 2008 6:34 PM:

" Gee Ezra, tell us how you really feel.....(just kiddin'). I don't think there is a problem with any religion as long as people don't go crazy with it, and as long as they don't claim it's the ONLY true religion or put down others' beliefs. I look at spirituality as a healing thing for some people. Kind of like going to a psychologist once a week to put things in perspective. It doesn't really matter what is real or not (by the way...I don't know of anyone that does the talking snake thing), it's a matter of how it helps people to cope with everyday life. I personally do not belong to a church or go to one. My children aren't baptized or confirmed. Someone on here pointed out that around here that is frowned upon to not be a church goer and I tend to agree. Many of my relatives have tried to convince me to believe otherwise. When my son went to cub scouts he was upset because to earn a badge they had to do a section on faith and he didn't want to admit that we don't go to church. Why is that still in scouts I wonder? "

Rebecca wrote on May 2, 2008 6:31 PM:

" The part of the Bible that calls for stoning is in the Jewish texts. So it isn't really Christianity that is to blame for those particular passages. But, hey, hating people because they are religious is cool. It is a free country. It is interesting to note however that the zealots are the ones who write letters to the editor (both Sophia and Ted) trying to impress their self-righteous beliefs on others. And THAT is what causes war and holocaust and destruction. Not religion or philosophy, but the belief that religion and philosophy should be forced on others. It was Neitzsche, the atheist who also hated religion and inspired Hitler, who said that any morality is an illusion and that the way to greatness was to create our own morality, even if that meant lying, cheating, stealing, and killing our way there. That is the kind of zeal that kills. "

Razors Edge wrote on May 2, 2008 6:23 PM:

" I'm not going to get into this whole "is religion good or bad", but all I will say is that the far right ("bible thumpers") and the far left ("atheist zealots") are both bad. One tells you that you must believe in God or you are going to hell. The other tells you that you live in a fantasy and are wrong/stupid/brain washed/superstitious. Then they BOTH tell you that if you don't believe what they believe you are wrong. One is just as bad as the other. "

Indoe Conservative wrote on May 2, 2008 5:56 PM:

" Excuse, prove a negative. "

Independent Conservative wrote on May 2, 2008 5:02 PM:

" You're being venomous, Ezra. Wow, you sound like a guy who is trying convince himself of something. Just genuinely explain away the life of Jesus, His death and His resurrection and I'll depart faith in Him forever. And please, don't regurgitate all the tired, machinated theories conveniently birthed hundreds of years after His life that have already been picked apart by apologists like C.S. Lewis, Josh McDowell, et al. The honus is on you to disprove a negative. "

Indie Conservative wrote on May 2, 2008 4:54 PM:

" Ezra, you're an evangelist of a different message... period. You sound just like a Christian who would say they're only trying to do you a favor by getting you on the right path. No difference. I thoroughly studied Marx back in the day when it was sexy to do so in America. I don't need any equivalency lectures on the similarities of Jesus of Marxist thought. I'm no Bible-Belt hick who just fell off the turnip truck. Good Lord, Man... when you begin validating Jesus by equating Him with Marx, then you shouldn't forget He preached salvation through belief in Him alone, hell as the destiny for those who reject him; when you calim He preached anything the only historical document to claim that from is the Bible... and it's clear about what He taught. I think you're so worked int a lather on this you've lost rationality. You might as well compare Jesus of Nazareth to Groucho Marx. At least they both had a sense of humor. "

Ezra wrote on May 2, 2008 4:25 PM:

" A thought to ponder. When Jesus was executed the machinery of the time for execution was the cross. Today we use the electric chair. Had Jesus been executed in the last sixty years Christians would be going around with little electric chairs on the necklace instead of crosses. Instead of a giant cross on top of a church there would be an electric chair. Every Church would have a symbolic electric chair in the background. A little farther back an he would have been involved in a hanging. Imagine the symbolism that would result from that. Indeed this is a strange death based religion so many of us take as fact. "

Deb wrote on May 2, 2008 2:57 PM:

" Indie Conserv: I agree that there is a tendency to argue one's point to death, disregarding the fact that the ones to whom you are arguing believe just as fervently that their point is correct. If only the Christians realized they were totally wrong -- we'd all be so much better off!!! (kidding) (mostly)

you have a great weekend as well. "

Deb wrote on May 2, 2008 2:31 PM:

" Honest Omar & MamaMia:

Who is Ted Blotsky and why don't we know him? "

Ezra wrote on May 2, 2008 2:11 PM:

" How does one equate Marxism with atheism? Marxism is not a religion. Anyone who actually understands the principle Karl Marx put forth would realize to a large degree they are in line with What Jesus preached, so it seems strange to align him with atheist. Karl Marx seemed to favor the concept of sharing and taking care of the lower classes. Wasn't a lot of what Jesus taught along the same line? The atheist I know don't seek to spread atheism. My goal is to save innocent people from having religion foisted on them. Children should not be subjected to indoctrination. The polygamy mess in Texas is the result of one generation forcing their insanity onto the next. Why should my children be made to feel inferior because they do not believe in talking snakes, or that Dinasours roamed the earth the same time people did? When my children act rational and give scientific well thought answers to questions, why should they be ridiculed by children who have been taught a child was conceived by a woman who never had sex, the entire planet was once flooded, the Red Sea parted when a man waved a stick, and so on? This is bad enough, but must children be taught only one religion on Earth is true, and the rest is just a bunch of heathens going to hell? "

MamaMia wrote on May 2, 2008 1:58 PM:

" Well said, Ezra; very well said! "

Indie Conservative wrote on May 2, 2008 1:33 PM:

" Howdy, Deb... you're right about Mr. Blotsky's point. I vaguely remember that letter (I should re-read it) and, if I remember correctly, there was the typical claim about history demonstrating that the only societies able to defend the liberty of citizens are those whose constitutions preserve the Bible and something else. In response to that claim I say, "Gee, I've never heard of any other nations' constitutions that do what Prezler claims." I guess I'll have go back to history class. But there's an equal level of acrimony in these "for Christianity" and "against Christianity" letters and posts. No recognition of or credit to the civility and productivity as citizens from one side to other for and to those who are. Sad. Have a great weekend, Deb! "

Independent Conservative wrote on May 2, 2008 1:24 PM:

" Geez, Ezra, your fervor sounds like that of the thumpers... you're just pounding a different pulpit. And, yes, the Hitler/Stalin argument does stack up if critics are going to disparage all of Christianity because of Roman Catholic pedophiles. And, c'mon, Hitler's Catholicism did not drive his insanity. It is undeniable that atheistic Marxism (Stalin's motivations) has accounted for more murders/killing - of homosexuals, dissidents and independent thinkers - than any other ideology, but I would avoid laying that at the feet of atheists who enjoy living under, and furthering the aims of, capitalism. What I agree with Mr. Blotsky about is that fanatics and zealots are troublesome. Compensatory fanaticism and zealotry are poor substitutes for genuine faith. A reasonable "live and let live" philosophy is what I think we should aiming for in a pluralistic society. "

Ezra wrote on May 2, 2008 1:22 PM:

" No person stands much of a chance getting elected to any position in the U.S. unless that person pretends to believe in the talking snake, and the fantasy. When we no longer expect a politician to tell a fundamental lie to get elected we will be on the road to good government. Religion has made it imperative that good, rational people pretend like they believe total nonsense if they want to run for anything. Currently we have a president who pandered to the fundamentalist, and he has turned out by the polls taken yesterday to be the lowest regarded president in history. If you must profess to having imaginary friends to run for office you can see from the get go we are in trouble. "

Honest Omar wrote on May 2, 2008 1:07 PM:

" This is one of the most well-reasoned, concise explanations I have ever read. Thank you Ted. "

Deb wrote on May 2, 2008 1:01 PM:

" Indie Conserv: I think you missed the point where he said that it's in response to Sophie's letter - which was drenched in Biblical references and asserting that our government is Biblically based. This letter isn't backhanded at all - it's just laying it out as it is, and as it always has been: our government isn't Christian. It for people - and their abilites to do & believe as they choose. "

NYxND wrote on May 2, 2008 12:52 PM:

" Halatbis since you brought up the examples of those athiest dictatorships that brought about so much death and destruction, may I list a few that weren't godless? Let's see, there were the Romans. They had a very advanced government. From what I can gather, they often used their polytheistic religion as justification for persecuting those who didn't agree with their view. But wait, because they commanded a large empire made up of many gods and many religions it seems they had to have some tolerance within their society. How about The Roman Empire after it became monotheistic? I am unsure of the history, but I think once Christianity was declared the state religion those who had different beliefs probably weren't treat very kindly. Let's see, the Spanish Inquisition. Oh and the colonization of the new world in the name of king and God. Can anyone think of more examples? I'm sure there are more... "

Ezra wrote on May 2, 2008 12:23 PM:

" No atheist ever tried to tell me what movies I could see, what books I could read, on what days I could shop, or that I was going to hell. No atheist ever tried to tell me who I could sleep with, what I could wear, what I could watch someone wear or not wear, or if I could use birth control or not. No atheist ever demanded ten percent of my income for an organization that was full of pedophiles. No atheist ever tried to say he should be able to promote his ideas tax free. No atheist ever robbed my mother like Billy Grahm did. No atheist ever discriminated against my children because they did not believe the same fantasy. I don't owe the thumpers anything for the mess they have made. It wasn't ashiest that were killing each other in Northern Ireland. It was not atheist that imprisoned women in Catholic Laundries up until 1967 without a trial. There are no atheist telling me God caused the mess in New Orleans and New York. I have never had an atheist tell me I should hate homosexuals, blacks, and Muslims. No atheist has ever knocked on my door and asked me to share his fantasy. "

Deb wrote on May 2, 2008 12:19 PM:

" Diests/athiests were largely responsible for the ideas and writings in the Constitution and Bill of Rights - expressly to keep the various religions OUT of it, so that anyone could believe what they want. They are not "rooted in Biblical teachings" as some would have you believe. The idea was to keep your imaginary friends and talking snakes out of my government.

Great letter, Mr. Blotsky. Unfortuantely, it won't make a dent in Ms. Preszler's religious ferver, nor that of her many followers. "

NDr wrote on May 2, 2008 11:51 AM:

" Being born a Catholic, I do believe in it's general principles. But like I said, "general" principles. I believe in the 10 commandments and I believe that one of the most important things Jesus tried to teach us was to walk in his shoes. Unlike what the far righters preach, he took the downtrodden, the homosexuals, and the other supposed "sinners" under his wing and tried to show them the way. He didn't humiliate them. He didn't kill them. He didn't shun them from society. He tried to show us the way. Not force his will on us. That's the God I know. That's the God I pray to every day in my own way. Occasionally, I will go to my church. But I feel so much closer the God I know when I'm out in the outdoors taking in the beauty of the world he gave us than I do sitting in a church listening to a preacher wanting more money to upgrade their house, the church, or some other building they own. Those formal things may make some feel closer to God, but I don't. It is this that I'm so thankful to our forefathers. They guaranteed that each of us get to enjoy our God in our own way. "

Independent Conservative wrote on May 2, 2008 10:57 AM:

" The premise of this letters ignores the millions who do good in the name of Christianity; who do not see slavery, polygamy, abuse, etc. condoned in scripture (e.g., modern-day and 18-19th century Christian abolitionists); it is a backhand at Christianity in general. The tone of this letter seems to come from a basis of bad experience rather than cogent thought. "

MamaMia wrote on May 2, 2008 10:28 AM:

" Excellent letter, Mr. Blotsky, and a good answer to those right-wing Bible thumpers who insist that American is a "Christian" nation. P.S. Come on, Honest Omar, get in here! "

Halatbis wrote on May 2, 2008 9:55 AM:

" To the question--what is wrong with being an Athiest? You are free to believe what you want--God or no God--your call. However, you need not engage in telling me the error of my belief. Something to consider: the regimes of the USSR, communist China, or even NAZI germany committed atrocities that make the Inquisition look like a "Sunday School picnic" (excuse the religious reference). these were and are some of our most egregious examples of Godless societies. Talk about forcing a belief system into peoples' minds, these Godless people did it by the millions. Many did not live through it. Pick up a history book and take a look. "

Ezra wrote on May 2, 2008 9:25 AM:

" What is wrong with atheist? If someone chooses not to have an imaginary friend, like Jesus, Mohamad, God, Santa Clause, or whomever, why does that make them a bad person as this implies? This is exactly what the founding fathers wanted. They wanted a country where people could have different ideas and be accepted run for office ect. Atheist do not start organizations like Pat Robertson's church that is designed to bilk old ladies, and the guillable. Name a group that came together promoting atheism as their main goal and then went on to commit the fraud, sex abuse, and other sins of organized religion. Between the Catholic Church and the Mormons more children suffered sex abuse, than from anything any atheist ever dreampt up. I know of no atheist group that ever asked to be free from taxes, then went on to sexually abuse children. "

Halatbis wrote on May 2, 2008 9:22 AM:

" One of the great blessings of living in America is the freedom to believe whatever, and more importantly, the freedom to say and write whatever. Mr Blotsky left out the obvious--the legacy of religion--primarily the Judeo-Christian religions that set the foundation for human rights, freedoms, and equality--the very things that allow him to think and believe as he wishes. The founders of the American governmental system were well versed and rooted in biblical teachings--that may be one reason they provided a Constitution and bill of Rights that allow free thought and expression. Welcome to America, Mr. Blotsky! "

Ezra wrote on May 2, 2008 9:18 AM:

" The old Hitler, Stalin atheist argument doesn't stand up. Hitler was raised as a Catholic, and used the church to reach his ends when it suited his needs. Both Hitler, and Stalin had mustaches, so are we to say it follows all people who have mustaches are evil dictators. The argument is ridiculous, and is the kind of reasoning the fundamentalist thrive on. Come to think of it Castro has a beard, so all people with facial hair must be atheist, evil, and dictators. "

Christian wrote on May 2, 2008 8:33 AM:

" This was obviously written by an atheist! There may be those that have done horrible things in the name of there religion but that does not mean that all Christians are that way. If you knew more about Christians, you would know that Jesus taught love and acceptance, not hate. No were does it say that our nations founding fathers wanted to keep religion out of our constitution. They simply didn't want to allow for corruption of the constitution to be done by those using corrupted "religious" ideals. Without the Christian beliefs that have lead this nation through some hard times, we would not be experiencing the quality of life that we have now. "

Edward wrote on May 2, 2008 8:09 AM:

" Hey, the stoning of unruly children, that sounds like a positive solution. "

WHATEVER wrote on May 2, 2008 7:51 AM:

" Well put. Now wait for the rightwing backlash. "

DennisB wrote on May 2, 2008 7:43 AM:

" Wow Ted, you must be really old since you obviously have had in-depth conversations and interactions with Thomas, Ben and Tom. Seriously though, you lost me in the end with the Christian God tyriad. No state sponsored religion doesn't necessarily mean no religion at all. It seems to me there are a few atheists who have been responsible for atrocities--Hitler and Stalin comes to mind. "

JUST ME wrote on May 2, 2008 7:39 AM:

" My God does not hate anyone! "

Ezra wrote on May 2, 2008 7:18 AM:

" Excellent letter, if more people would be so eloquent speaking about the evils of religion, perhaps we would not be cursed with this ancient superstition "

Post Your Own Comment

All online comments are limited to 350 words total.
Comments are reviewed for taste, tone and language before posting.
Some comments may be used in the Tribune's print edition.
We value and respect your privacy, but The Bismarck Tribune might
disclose certain information to governmental entities if served with subpoena.