Arizona School District Says Atheist Group Can’t Offer ‘After School Satan Club’ Without Sponsor

Satan-compressedTUSCON, Ariz. — At least for the present, an Arizona school district has rejected an atheist group’s “After School Satan Club,” a national effort that was launched in order to make a point about Bible clubs in public schools, as it notes that the organization must have a faculty sponsor in order to proceed with its application.

“Recent media reports have brought attention to a request by The Satanic Temple to hold an ‘After School Satan Club’ at Roskruge Bilingual K-8,” the Tuscon Unified School District wrote on its website this week in a post entitled “To the community: Satanic Temple club NOT offered on a TUSD campus.”

“Our legal counsel has referred the organization to our policy requirements regarding after school clubs,” it said. “The suggested club does not currently meet the minimum requirement of having a faculty sponsor for the operation of any student club on a Tucson Unified School District campus.”

As previously reported, Satanic Temple Co-Founder Doug Mesner, who goes by the name Lucien Greaves, outlined on a website dedicated to the effort that its goal is to place clubs in districts where Child Evangelism Fellowship (CEF) is hosting after-school Good News Clubs.

“All of the districts we’ve approached are nearby to local chapters of The Satanic Temple, and each school district has hosted, or is now hosting, Good News Clubs in their schools,” he said.

“The Satanic Temple does not advocate for religion in schools. However, once religion invades schools, as The Good News Clubs have, The Satanic Temple will fight to ensure that plurality and true religious liberty are respected,” the group’s website also outlines.

“This being the case, we are sure that the school districts we’ve approached are well aware that they are not at liberty to deny us use of their facilities, nor are they at liberty to deny us any level of representation in the schools that they afford to other school clubs—such as fliers, tables, brochures, and school-wide announcements,” Greaves said.

He explained that districts across the country have been sent letters about The Satanic Temple’s intentions to offer the club in schools.

“It’s important that children be given an opportunity to realize that the evangelical materials now creeping into their schools are representative of but one religious opinion amongst many,” Greaves said. “While the Good News Clubs focus on indoctrination, instilling them with a fear of Hell and God’s wrath, After School Satan Clubs will focus on free inquiry and rationalism, the scientific basis for which we know what we know about the world around us.”

But the Tuscon Unified School District says that The Satanic Temple doesn’t have a faculty sponsor for the club, and therefore, the After School Satan Club will not be offered at Roskruge Bilingual. It pointed to its club policy, which reads, “With the principal’s approval, a school club may be formed (1) if it is determined there is student interest, and (2) providing the club is sponsored, co-sponsored, or monitored by a faculty member.”

The Satanic Temple told the Arizona Daily Star that it is working to find a sponsor as directed.

However, the district also advised in its public statement that it has asked The Satanic Temple to remove its name from its website. It asserted that the After School Satan Club website incorrectly states that the club is being offered at Roskruge, but the site only lists the school as being among the locations where the group has “offered to present our curriculum.”

Other schools listed on the site include Still Elementary School in Cobb Springs, Georgia, Chase Street Elementary School in Panorama City, California and Watkins Elementary School in Springfield, Missouri.


A special message from the publisher...

Dear Reader, our hearts are deeply grieved by the ongoing devastation in Iraq, and through this we have been compelled to take a stand at the gates of hell against the enemy who came to kill and destroy. Bibles for Iraq is a project to put Arabic and Kurdish audio Bibles into the hands of Iraqi and Syrian refugees—many of whom are illiterate and who have never heard the gospel.Will you stand with us and make a donation today to this important effort? Please click here to send a Bible to a refugee >>

Print Friendly
  • Reason2012

    Satanism is not a religion – by their own name they show they’ve merely picked the evil part of Christianity and in a vile show of mockery pretend to honor that, which is really just a hate group and can trivially be denied on that charge.

    • Jalapeno

      They are legally considered a religion and are protected on the same level as Christianity.

      • Sharon_at_home

        It’s getting a faculty sponsor that will inhibit them from creating these “school groups” AND student interest. Quite a good chance at a rejection in the short run. I don’t imagine the courts want student clubs without faculty monitoring them – and volunteer faculty at that.

        • King Arthropod Pendragonfly

          It’s getting a faculty sponsor that will inhibit them from creating these “school groups”

          Nope — the school MUST allow them, even if they have to appoint a faculty sponsor.

          • Sharon_at_home

            Then I feel very sorry for the appointed sponsor. So the only thing that might inhibit them is that no children are interested?

          • King Arthropod Pendragonfly

            And/or parents not signing the permission slip, yeah.

          • wandakate

            Let’s hope and pray that’s the bottom line. WE DON’T WANT THE CLUB, THERE IS NO INTEREST HERE!!!!!
            Parents need to teach their children correctly, without the groundwork, they won’t know which way to turn and will turn to evil. GODLY morals need to be instilled into them at an early age. Train up a child in the way he should go, and when he is old he will not depart from it. If the parents don’t want the “club” then it’s highly possible that the children won’t either! Isn’t that common sense?

      • Reason2012

        What is the god they pray to?
        Please cite the holy book that claims this god exists and is the creator and is to be worshiped. When was it written? Who wrote it?
        Please cite their churches where they have worship services and pray to this god every Sunday, sing songs to this god and so on.

        • Jalapeno

          Please state where a religion needs to worship a deity or have a holy book in order to legally be counted as a religion.

          • Reason2012

            So you really don’t know what “religion” means, do you?
            re·li·gion
            rəˈlijən/
            noun
            the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods.
            Thank you for proving my point.

          • Jalapeno

            Did you see where I put in the word “legally”?

          • Reason2012

            Keep running from the point, hun.

          • Jalapeno

            Show me where a religion must be a supernatural one in order to be legally considered a religion.

            The SCOTUS has repeatedly said otherwise…so…I’m curious where you’ve gotten this idea.

          • axelbeingcivil

            If you got that definition from the Oxford Dictionary, which I believe you did since it’s a direct copy-paste, then maybe you should’ve looked and noticed that there’s other definitions of the word?

            Religion: “A particular system of faith and worship”

            Faith: “Strong belief in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual conviction rather than proof”

            Worship: “Great admiration or devotion shown towards a person or principle”

            I mean, Jalapeno is right here; there is a legal definition as well. Language is an evolving thing, common definitions shift and change over time (very few people use gay to mean happy nowadays, for example). The legal definition is the one that matters for the purpose of law.

            But even if you were right, you’d still be wrong because the dictionary gives a definition of religion that can involve any belief system that contains a strong spiritual conviction. Kinda hard to exclude Satanists from that category.

            While I’m at it, the definition you applied up there also wouldn’t apply to Buddhists, who believe in no creator deity nor actively seek to worship any spiritual powers, yet I doubt you’d say Buddhism isn’t a religion.

          • C_Alan_Nault

            You forgot to include ALL the definitions of faith. I’ll correct your omission.

            Faith:
            1. confidence or trust in a person or thing: faith in another’s ability.

            2. belief that is not based on proof: He had faith that the hypothesis would be substantiated by fact.

            3. belief in God or in the doctrines or teachings of religion:
            the firm faith of the Pilgrims.

            4. belief in anything, as a code of ethics, standards of merit, etc.:to be of the same faith with someone concerning honesty.

            5. a system of religious belief: the Christian faith; the Jewish faith.

            6. the obligation of loyalty or fidelity to a person, promise, engagement, etc.: Failure to appear would be breaking faith.

            7. the observance of this obligation; fidelity to one’s promise, oath, allegiance, etc.:

          • C_Alan_Nault

            You forgot to include ALL the definitions of religion. I’ll correct your omission.

            Religion:
            noun
            1. a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.

            2. a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects:
            the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.

            3. the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices: a world council of religions.

            4. the life or state of a monk, nun, etc.: to enter religion.

            5. the practice of religious beliefs; ritual observance of faith.

            6. something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience: to make a religion of fighting prejudice.

          • axelbeingcivil

            I don’t think any of that disagrees with what I said. A lot even corroborates it. Though I don’t think they’re from the same dictionary I used.

            Still, kudos for adding more complete info.

          • C_Alan_Nault

            You musty have missed definitions 2, 3, and 6.

            2. a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects

            3 the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices

            6. something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience

            Something can be called a religion without any requirement for any supernatural entity ( god/goddess)

          • axelbeingcivil

            I know. I specifically made that point. You may be replying to the wrong person.

          • C_Alan_Nault

            If that’s the case, my apologies. Hopefully the person it was meant for will read it and understand it.

          • George T

            Are you gay? I heard that you were gay.

          • MarkSebree

            Why should that matter in the slightest?

          • C_Alan_Nault

            Looks like the coward removed his comment. I did see it in my email.

            My reply would have been “Why? Are you looking for a date for Saturday night?”

          • MarkSebree

            I have seen all his posts removed. That means that Christian News network has banned him.

          • james blue

            Nontheistic religions???

          • MarkSebree

            Buddhism comes to mind for that. It does not actually contain a deity.

          • https://disqus.com/home/channel/theangryatheist/ ⥢☆ Michael [G-13]☆ ⥤

            It’s got more gods than Carter has little liver pills.

          • MarkSebree

            That’s Hinduism. Which is also older than Christianity.

          • getstryker

            Oh, how about at the IRS when applying for tax exempt status?? From the Church of Satan website:

            Support the Church of Satan

            Donations:

            Please note that donations to us are not tax deductible.

          • Jalapeno

            They never pursued tax exempt status because they don’t believe that churches should be exempt from taxation.

          • getstryker

            Oh yeah, that comment is just absolutely, totally ‘believable’ . . . uh huh!!! I answered your question – lets see: legitimate actual churches, recognized by the IRS, (government agency) have ‘tax-exempt status’ – and yet, Church of Satan does NOT – NOT a church – just a belief system. Hummmmmmmmm

          • Jalapeno

            You need to APPLY for tax exempt status.

            Do you have evidence that they applied and got rejected..or that a churches legal protections are dependent on that exemption?

          • getstryker

            Personally, I could care less . . . the Church of Satan is NOT recognized by any government agency that would give it legitimacy or by any persons that matter to me – if you and your ilk want to ‘recognize’ it – have at it. You have a right to Freedom OF Religion – go for it.

          • Jalapeno

            So..as I said, they’re protected equally and treated equally by the government.

            They are ELIGIBLE for tax exempt status, as are all other churches. The fact that they did not apply does not change that, and it does not mean that they are not legally a religion.

          • getstryker

            What ever – who cares??? !!!

          • Jalapeno

            Did you know that the Church of Satan is legally able to perform ceremonies?

            Seems like that’s government recognition to me.

          • getstryker

            Big deal . . .I can get an ordination to perform marriage ceremonies over the internet for a couple of bucks and no other qualifications . . . so what – still doesn’t make ’em a legitimate church.

          • Jalapeno

            You get the ordinations by going and applying to be a minister of a RELIGION.

            The church needs to be legally considered a church in order to be able to ordain people. The Church of Satan has legally ordained people.

          • getstryker

            OK, last time – spin it any way you like – they are NOT a church, recognized by any government agency, certainly not the IRS which recognizes and gives tax-exemptions. You claim they never applied – that just shows that they are not only financially ignorant but devoid of spiritual discernment of which is the winning side of religious belief. Stupid on both counts. Backing Satan is a lousy bet – eternity lasts a long time. You can believe it or not.

          • Jalapeno

            I just pointed out that they are capable of ordaining ministers to legally marry people, which only churches can do. Therefore..they are considered a church by the GOVERNMENT.

            ” You claim they never applied – that just shows that they are not only financially ignorant but devoid of spiritual discernment of which is the winning side of religious belief. ”

            They don’t believe that churches should be tax exempt. Just because YOU don’t agree with those beliefs doesn’t mean that they aren’t beliefs.

          • getstryker

            What part of ‘last time’ did you not understand. I have things to do. Bye

          • Jalapeno

            Sure. I provide an example of a government agency that acknowledges them as a church and suddenly it’s a “I’m right but can’t be bothered”.

            Go figure.

          • getstryker

            Remember I mentioned being ‘ordained’ over the internet??? From the SatanicChapel(dot)org:

            “How To Become Ordained
            After you fill out the following form, your request will be promptly reviewed by the pastoral staff of the Universal Life Church.”
            Church of Satan does NOT ordain by their own authority – they farm it out to that farce outfit!
            As far as ‘tax exemption’ . . . if they can’t qualify because they are NOT a recognized religion, then NOT applying and claiming some BS altruistic reason is just another part of the cultic ‘snow job’ in action.

          • Jalapeno

            Can you not tell the difference between the Satanic Chapel and the Church of Satan?

          • getstryker

            Take a sniff . . . same ‘truurd’ – same smell.

          • Jalapeno

            Yeah, silly facts.

            There are Satanic churches that can ordain their own ministers.

          • getstryker

            To be ‘ordained’ to a position within the organization is no different than being ‘appointed’ as the door keeper at a Masonic Hall. It’s hardly an act with ‘official recognition’ from anyone outside the organization.

          • Jalapeno

            If a church can ordain their own ministers, it means the church has recognition with the government.

            There are satanic churches that can ordain their own ministers.

          • TheKingOfRhye

            “they are NOT a church, recognized by any government agency,”

            How about the US Army? Right on the Church of Satan’s website, there’s a reproduction of a piece of a 1978 Department of the Army pamphlet on religions, “Religious Requirements and Practices of Certain Selected Groups. A Handbook for Chaplains” to be exact, that gives information on Satanism.

          • getstryker

            Wow . . . that settles it. And if you look on a roll of toilet paper in an Army latrine, you see instructions on how to use it too. The fact that the U.S. Army acknowledges that people may practice a cultic belief is NOT a government recognition of Satanism as a mainline religion or have any other ‘legal’ significance. Arlington Cemetery will put a pentagram on a headstone . . . so what?

          • TheKingOfRhye

            “…NOT a government recognition of Satanism as a mainline religion”

            Well, what’s your definition of “mainline religion”? Is that even a question of any sort of legal recognition? I think the Church of Satan themselves would even say they’re not trying to be one of the bigger religions in the country, if that’s what you mean.

            But, anyway, there’s really no such thing as an “officially recognized religion” in this country, in the first place. The fact is, though, the Church of Satan has just as much legal recognition as any other religion, in that they do qualify for tax-exempt status even though they have refused it. (and no, that’s not a matter of “financial ignorance”, they believe all churches should be strictly taxed)

          • getstryker

            This entire string of comments concerned 501c3 tax exemption . . . we are all getting off on ‘rabbit trails’ There are folks out there smok’n ‘pot’ and calling it the First Church of Cannabis. Indiana recognizes it but it does not get 501c3 designation or tax exemption as a ‘mainline church’ would. Go find three other people and ya’ll suck eggs and call it a ‘church’ – still no 501c3 status. If we’re gonna discus this subject – lets stay off the ‘bunny paths’

          • TheKingOfRhye

            Just answer me this: What sort of legal recognition do the so-called “mainline” religions get that something like the Church of Satan does not?

          • getstryker

            501c3 status. Yea, yea, I know – they didn’t apply. I’ve already addressed that bunch of BS to someone else.

          • TheKingOfRhye

            And you were wrong, when you said it was because of their “financial ignorance.”

            From their website (outlining their “five-point plan”): “The second point is the enforcement of strict taxation of all churches. This would remove the government sanction of religion and force these parasites to live off of their own members alone, and if they can’t, then they will perish as they should. The Church of Satan has never pursued tax-exempt status and challenges all the rest of the world’s churches to stand on their own feet. Let us expose the vampiric nature of the organized religions and see if they can withstand the light of day.”

          • getstryker

            Ok, last time – 501c3 is a change to the tax code – churches are exempt from all direct taxation by the Federal government – First Amendment – Congress shall make NO law, etc., etc. (including taxes on churches) The Johnson Amendment to the tax code in 1954 is a empty threat sold to churches not to engage but a small minority of their time and speech discussing politics or politicians positions pro or con. No church has ever lost it’s 501c3 status – it’s unconstitutional – see The Pulpit Freedom Sunday initiative. Churches want IRS to sue – they’ll take it to the Supreme Court. No 501c3 church has EVER lost it’s exemption. Actually, they NEVER needed it to begin with but they were sold ‘a bill of goods’ years ago. Personally, the Satanic bunch can whine all they want – government does NOT subsidize mainline churches – it has no power to tax them to begin with. IMO, the 501c3 code will disappear under Trump – count on it.

          • TheKingOfRhye

            Well, that’s mostly a whole other issue here, whether that 501c3 should exist or is needed….not really what I’m talking about, I’m just saying it would apply to the COS or the Satanic Temple (the group that was talked about in this story – I edited my earlier comment, I got them confused with the Satanic Chapel), if they went for it.

            I don’t understand why you keep mentioning “mainline churches” though. I didn’t see anything in that tax code about a church having to be “mainline” to get the exemption. It seems to me that if the government did declare some churches “mainline” and some not, that would be in clear violation of the First Amendment. Like you said, “Congress shall make no law, etc, etc”

          • getstryker

            ‘Mainline’ is a term I used to differentiate between ‘well-known, large, denominational churches’ ie. Catholics, Methodists, Evangelical, etc. and less well know cult groups. You are correct, the term does not appear in the tax code – ‘churches’ that apply for the 501c3 tax exemption are generally the prominent denominations. They are ‘in error’ to do so. There is no taxing authority of any church – authority is given when a church applies for exemption (from a tax they do not owe) There is more to it than this little blurb from me is going to say but it’s true. Anyone that tells you different (tax people included) have their own agenda.

          • MarkSebree

            “No church has ever lost it’s 501c3 status”

            Actually, some churches have. And it was taken to the Supreme Court.

            The Landmark Church in Binghamton, N.Y. lost its tax exempt status in 1995 because of the newspaper adds against Clinton in 1992.

            Bob Jones University lost its tax exempt status in 1983 because of its racial discrimination policies.

            Basically, somebody lied to you.

            The Pulpit Freedom Sunday Initiative is a set of far right wing dominionists who want to turn churches into a political machine for the far right. They will NOT help you if your church gets audited, and your church should be if they are breaking the law. The only reason that it has been able to go on as long as it has is because the IRS has been strapped for cash by Congress to hire enough people to enforce the law, and because they have been dragging their feet about updating their internal regulations and procedures, which has lead to another lawsuit against the IRS.

            The government subsidizes churches by not taxing them. Everyone else has to make up that money that they churches do not pay, especially on property tax. And the government does have the power to tax churches. The government would not be showing any favoritism towards religious establishments by doing to, since they would be treated just like everyone else.

            The 501c3 tax code would have to be repealed by Congress since it is a part of the law. Trump could not unilaterally revoke it.

          • getstryker

            Yes, I am familiar with the Bob Jones U. case – a ‘racial discrimination case’ as you pointed out. Clearly a violation of ‘public policy’ – however, no entity since 1978 has lost its exemption for violating public policy, much less any church. That’s 38 years.

            The Pulpit Freedom Sunday imitative is interesting . . . I note that the IRS claims ‘lack of funds’ – that’s very interesting – rather convenient excuse to NOT prosecute since the pastors videoed their sermons and sent them to the IRS. Hummmmmm – strange? There’s all the evidence.

            Ah yes, the old cry to – “tax ’em, tax ’em all” – Hey, if they can do it, the politicians should go for it. It would be interesting to see if it gets thru Congress before millions of Christians vote ’em out of office. When you have a slimy government as wasteful as this one has been – is taxing churches, who are seen as providing services to the poor, homeless and needy, really a good idea? They will get little sympathy from angry voters.

            Thank you for sharing your thoughts . . . you may be right or not . . . time will certainly tell all.
            May God Bless you and yours.

          • MarkSebree

            There may be the evidence, but the procedures internal to the IRS are dated, and in need of revision by court order. Until the IRS makes these policy revisions, they cannot legally audit any church, especially for violations of the tax code related to pulpit politicking. And the IRS has been dragging its feet about making those revisions for years.

            Additionally, if the IRS does not have the money to pay its auditors to investigate these churches, then it is a given that they are lacking the funds to do so. In the past 15 years, the IRS has cut its staff rather significantly, mostly during the Bush years.

          • getstryker

            It may very well be as you say . . . if so, I’m quite sure that no one on my side of the fence is shedding a tear about it. Still, I would be quite interested to see what happens in the courts should the IRS pursue the matter. Time will tell.

          • MarkSebree

            Actually, it is almost certainly “as I say”, since I have actually done some research on this and I have followed some court cases dealing with it. In 2009, a federal court ruled that the IRS could not audit a Minnesota church because the person authorizing it was not of sufficient rank. This is because when the IRS restructured itself in 1998, it did not designate officials who could institute audits under the Church Audit Procedures Act of 1984. (Note: I do not think that any other type of 501(c)(3) organization requires that audits be cleared by a high ranking official, which means that this is another favoritism item that churches receive from the IRS that other non-profits get.) That is a 9 year gap right there where they did not have anyone authorized before the lack was caught.

            The Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) sued the IRS Commissioner because of their policy of non-enforcement of the electioneering restrictions against churches and religious organizations, as well as seeking to order the commissioner to authorize a high ranking official within the IRS to approve and initiate audits against churches and religious organizations who were accused of violating those electioneering laws. (FFRF vs Koskinen) An agreement was reaching with the IRS on this case in July 2014, and the case was dismissed “without prejudice”, meaning that its could be re-established if the IRS does not get its act together soon.

          • getstryker

            I want to apologize for not referencing the source of my claims that the 501c3 tax-exempt status had never been lost by any church. The Bob Jones Univ. case involved ‘public policy violations’ – you were correct, however, my comments should have included that churches are ‘tax-exempt’ from the moment of conception when they begin to act as a church. Churches CAN but DO NOT have to have a ‘tax-exempt letter’ from the IRS. They are ‘tax-exempt’ regardless. In addition, ‘no church (5o1c3) has ever lost its ‘tax-exempt’ status for ever ‘endorsing or opposing’ a political candidate or for ‘endorsing or opposing legislation’ known as ‘lobbying’. Although there is much written at the time of the Landmark Church case, the reference material provided paints a different picture of the eventual legal outcome.
            Although the video is about 35 minutes long, it makes its point in the first 12 minutes or so. Search YT for this title:
            “Take Back America: Silence is NOT an Option!”
            with Mat Staver, Chief Counsel for Liberty Counsel.

          • MarkSebree

            Mat Staver is not a valid source for anything dealing with religion and the separation of church and state. The goal of the Liberty Counsel (an Orwellian name, btw) is to muddy the waters of the separation of church and state, and to fight for far right christian/dominionist privilege over all other religions.

            I am also aware that churches receive preferential treatment from the IRS, from the fact that they do not have to fill out any forms to get their tax-exempt status, to the fact that they do not have to fill out many of the annual forms that the IRS requires of other tax-exempt organizations, to the fact that the IRS is very reluctant to audit churches or investigate complaints of violations of the tax code.

            About the Landmark Church case:
            www dot and dot com/2000/05/4497/
            www dot publiceye dot org/body_politic/news/irs90331.htm

            Here is the actual court decision:
            https://www dot cadc dot uscourts dot gov/internet/opinions.nsf/9888DDAD36DC5A1885256F180065A922/$file/99-5097a.txt

            You might want to check your reference material for bias. If you are relying on anything that is from the Liberty Counsel, then bias is a given.

          • getstryker

            Your wholesale dismissal of Liberty Counsel is quite disturbing and portrays a virulent bias on your own part. Your description of their actions and intent shows a massive hostility toward that organization and the principles it stands for. A pro bono legal firm defending religious liberty across the country stands on its own merit. I could just as easily apply a acidic description to the ACLU, FFRF, or many other such groups. I don’t like them either. It is obvious that there is nothing to be gained by either of us continuing this discussion. I will close with this.
            My personal belief is that despite the ‘lack of funding’ excuse the IRS uses, in reality, if this were brought to the Supreme Court and honest judges reviewed it, the whole thing would be overturned. Good Night.

          • MarkSebree

            The Liberty Counsel does NOT defend religious liberty. This is evident in the cases that they take and their positions that they publish. The Liberty Counsel seeks to defend religious privilege and inequality, religious discrimination against Christians and religions that they do not like (i.e. non-Christians and more liberal denominations), as well as discrimination against homosexuals, Muslims, and others. They also seek to overturn the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, and allow government officials to discriminate against people because their religion tells them to, rather than serving all citizens equally under the law as the law requires them to.

            I am hostile towards the Liberty Counsel because by their actions, I have seen what they stand for. They stand against the US Constitution. They stand against equality. They stand against government neutrality towards religion. They stand against basic decency and core American values. They stand for dismantling the US Constitution. They stand for instituting a theocracy or theonomy with their far right wing, oppressive beliefs in charge.

          • getstryker

            You and I will also have to ‘agree to disagree’ on this matter. You are, of course, entitled to your opinions, just as I am. I thank you for sharing your thoughts along with the others that have expressed their viewpoints. We are at opposite poles and no amount of discussion or debate will change either of our stated positions. Good night.

        • C_Alan_Nault

          Please cite the evidence that any god exists.

          “Who wrote it?”

          Who wrote the various books of the Bible? We don’t know.

          • Reason2012

            Hello. Good question. No doubt it’s by faith we come to God / Christ. However, there are reasons why we’ll be without excuse when we face God and try to tell him “how were we supposed to know?”

            The Bible is the only ‘religious’ book that dares to make prophecies, several hundred that have come true after the fact of them being written down, even up to thousands of years later.

            Although it is not a science textbook, there are dozens of scientific facts in the Bible that scientists didn’t and couldn’t figure out until hundreds and thousands of years later, figured out by “goat herders”, again testimony to its divine origin.

            The grave of all false religions’ prophets has their bones – the grave of Christ is empty.

            You can_kill thousands in the name of a false religion and people of that country will bend over backwards to help you build a church where you did it. You dare mention Christ, hand out a tract, and you’re met with the utmost hatred. Look how those following islam / sharia law slaughter Americans and the government continues to defend islam / shariah law, which is mind boggling, except in the light that the world hates the real truth of God and loves false religions.

            People who profess faith in Christ have major changes instantly from the inside out that they were unable to overcome over a lifetime.

            It won’t really make people believe who need to reject the truth of God, but we know all we need to know – but the world seeks to keep us blind to the truth of God. When we face Him, it won’t work to say “well how was I supposed to know?” We know all we need to know and will be without excuse when we face God.

            As Jesus pointed out, which hardly any churches will let people know:

            Luke 12:4-5 “And I say unto you my friends, Be not afraid of them that kill the body, and after that have no more that they can do. But I will forewarn you whom ye shall fear: Fear him, which after he hath killed hath power to cast into hell; yea, I say unto you, Fear him.”

          • C_Alan_Nault

            ” However, there are reasons why we’ll be without excuse when we face God and try to tell him “how were we supposed to know?””

            With no evidence to prove god exists, there’s no reaon to be any more concerned with that scenario than with Odin not having us taken to Valhalla because we didn’t die gloriousy in battle, or Zeus not allowing us to enter the Elysium Fields because we didn’t live a righteous life.

            The Bible is the only ‘religious’ book that dares to make prophecies, several hundred that have come true after the fact of them being written down, even up to thousands of years later.”

            Other religious books also make prophecies. And rather than making the claim hthat hundreds of them have come true, present a few examples.

            “there are dozens of scientific facts in the Bible that scientists didn’t and couldn’t figure out until hundreds and thousands of years later”

            Such as?

            There are many pasages in the Bible that are completely wrong about the science.

            All of the animals boarded the ark “in the selfsame day” (Genesis 7:13-14). Since there were several million species involved, they must have boarded at a rate of at least 100 per second.

            When the animals left the ark (Genesis 8:19), what would they have eaten? There would have been no plants after the ground had been submerged for nearly a year. What would the carnivores have eaten? Whatever prey they ate would have gone extinct. And how did the New World primates or the Australian marsupials find there way back after the flood subsided?

            Jacob displays his (and God’s) knowledge of biology by having goats copulate while looking at streaked rods. The result is streaked baby goats (Genesis 30:37). The author of Genesis (God?) believed that genetic characteristics of the offspring are determined by what the parents see at the moment of conception.

            Camels don’t divide the hoof (Leviticus 11:4).

            The bible says that hares and conies are unclean because they “chew the cud” but do not part the hoof (Leviticus 11:5-6). But hares and coneys are not ruminants and they do not “chew the cud.”

            Bats are birds to the biblical God (Leviticus 11:13-19 & Deuteronomy 14:11-18).

            Some birds have four feet (Leviticus 11:20-21).

            Insects are said to have four legs in Leviticus 11:22-23.

          • Reason2012

            // With no evidence to prove god exists, there’s no reaon to be any more concerned with that

            The evidence was given – ignoring it doesn’t make it not exist.

            // Other religious books also make prophecies.

            Cite 10 specific ‘prophecies’ that came true hundreds or thousands of years exactly as written AFTER it was written down, not in the same writing.
            You won’t because there aren’t any.

            // And rather than making the claim that hundreds of them have come true, present a few examples.

            Simple google search and you can read pages and pages about it. Google bible prophecies.

            // Such as?

            Simple google search “scientific facts in the bible”. Read all about them.

            // There are many pasages in the Bible that are completely wrong about the science.

            Not at all – just ignorance on the part of those claiming it contorting what the Bible actually says.

            // All of the animals boarded the ark “in the selfsame day” (Genesis 7:13-14).
            // Since there were several million species involved, they must have
            // boarded at a rate of at least 100 per second.

            You don’t need ALL species of reptiles, ALL species of felines and so on. Speciation would take care of it in no time. Faulty assumption to say the least that ALL species needed to be on the Ark.

            And where did all the extra fish come from to feed the 5,000? They only had a few fish, as it were. So using your logic, that makes the Bible a lie as well. Or it means that’s another miracle from God.

            // When the animals left the ark (Genesis 8:19), what would they
            // have eaten? There would have been no plants after the
            // ground had been submerged

            You do realize we’re talking a supernatural event, so if needed, God can make sure vegetation would have been available and animals multiply just like the fish above.

            // And how did the New World primates or the Australian
            // marsupials find there way back after the flood subsided?

            I’ll answer your question with a question – how did the two to seven of each major type of animal find their way to the Ark to begin with? So now it’s a problem that they “find their way” anywhere else after the fact? Hardly.

            // Jacob displays his (and God’s) knowledge of biology by
            // having goats copulate while looking at streaked rods. The
            // result is streaked baby goats (Genesis 30:37).

            Please tell me what’s going on, in detail, in chapter 30 that leads up to this event rather than picking that one verse.

            // Camels don’t divide the hoof (Leviticus 11:4).

            Long been addressed. If you were sincere in having it addressed, you could read on countless explanations that go into great detail.

            As one site puts it: “In the verse before (Leviticus 11:3) it is clear that a cud-chewing animal could only be eaten if it ‘parteth the hoof, and is clovenfooted’. The NIV translates it as one ‘that has a split hoof completely divided’. Camels have an elastic pad at the bottom of their hoof, which helps prevent it from sinking into the sand. This pad means the hoof is not in fact fully divided. This straightforward distinction between the camel’s hoof and that of the cud-chewing animals they would be permitted to eat was easily obvious to the Israelites on simple visual inspection.”

            // Bats are birds to the biblical God (Leviticus 11:13-19 & Deuteronomy 14:11-18).

            The Hebrew word that was translated “Bird” means “flying creatures” not “birds” in our English sense. Again easy to find out if you even bothered searching on it.

            Fowl for “bat” was translated from the Hebrew word ofe, which can also mean flying creatures, not JUST birds.

            When the Bible means bird only, the Hebrew word tsippôr is used instead.

            // Some birds have four feet (Leviticus 11:20-21).

            See above: flying creatures. Flies, wasps, bees.

            // Insects are said to have four legs in Leviticus 11:22-23.

            Grasshopper / locust kind.

            I would think again – it won’t work for any of us to pretend to have a reason to tell God “well how was I supposed to know?” That you spend time attacking belief in God is perhaps the best evidence you could personally ask for – when I used to not believe, I never wasted a moment of my time on the subject of God since I truly did not believe.

          • C_Alan_Nault

            “The evidence was given – ignoring it doesn’t make it not exist.”

            And saying it exists does not make it exist. Instead of merely claiming it exists, tell us what some of this alleged evidence is.

            “Cite 10 specific ‘prophecies’ that came true hundreds or thousands of years exactly as written AFTER it was written down,”

            No need to. My comment was to your statement “The Bible is the only ‘religious’ book that dares to make prophecies”.

            And instead of saying there are hundreds of prophecies that came true exactly as written, present some samples.

            Just remember, a prophecy that “comes true” because people were aware of the prophecy & worked to make it come true don’t count as evidence that the prophecy came true… otherwise, I could make a prophecy that I will be eating chicken for lunch tomorrow, then enter a restaurant & order chicken for lunch…. would that mean I made an accurate prophecy?

            “You don’t need ALL species of reptiles, ALL species of felines and so on. ”

            You DO unless you accept evolution… and evolution doesn’t work that fast.

            “You do realize we’re talking a supernatural event, so if needed, God can make sure vegetation would have been available and animals multiply just like the fish above.”

            You do realize that if you are going to use the supernatural as an explanation ( an explanation that doesn’t actually explain anything) it simply makes the god of the Bible look like a world-class moron. God could have simply erased all the sinners from existence & left Noah and his family untouched. No need for a flood, an ark, saving all other animal life.

            In any event, you cannot have it BOTH ways. You can’t make the claim that ” there are dozens of scientific facts in the Bible” then use the supernatural as an explanation when science shows how what the Bible says couldn’t have happened as the Bible says it happened.

          • C_Alan_Nault

            “I’ll answer your question with a question – how did the two to seven of each major type of animal find their way to the Ark to begin with?”

            You are the one making the claim that the story of the flood & ark are true, you are the one that has to explain how it was done.

            “Please tell me what’s going on, in detail, in chapter 30 that leads up to this event rather than picking that one verse.”

            Please explain how a mature goat looking at streaked rods could result in striped goats being born.

            “Some birds have four feet (Leviticus 11:20-21).

            See above: flying creatures. Flies, wasps, bees.”

            Flies, wasps, and bees have 6 feet.

            Insects are said to have four legs in Leviticus 11:22-23.

            “Grasshopper / locust kind.”

            Grasshoppers and locusts have 6 legs.

            Camels don’t divide the hoof (Leviticus 11:4).

            “Long been addressed”

            So you claim.

            “I would think again – it won’t work for any of us to pretend to have a reason to tell God “well how was I supposed to know?” ”

            I would think again – it won’t work for any of us to pretend to have a reason to tell Odin “well how was I supposed to know I had to die in battle to enter Valhalla” — or tell Zeus “how was I to know I had to live a righteous life to enter the Elysium Fields”? There is as much evidence for those beliefs as there is for belief in the Bible’s god.

            “That you spend time attacking belief in God is perhaps the best evidence you could personally ask for – when I used to not believe, I never wasted a moment of my time on the subject of God since I truly did not believe”

            And I don’t care what a person chooses to believe. But when they try to have their beliefs taught in public schools, or try to have laws & legislation enacted to follow their religious beliefs or post & spread their beliefs on public forums I will respond.

            Believe whatever you like, but no one else is required to respect those beliefs and if you make your beliefs known outside of your home or place of worship anyone who wants to is free to question, dismiss, or mock those beliefs.

          • Reason2012

            The Bible was not meant to be a science book, but there ARE scientific facts in there that they had no way of knowing, that scientists could not figure out until up to thousands of years later, which proves the Bible’s divine origin and will leave us even more without excuse before God. For example:

            1 Only in recent years has science discovered that everything we see is composed of invisible atoms. Here, Scripture tells us that the “things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.”

            2 Medical science has only recently discovered that blood-clotting in a newborn reaches its peak on the eighth day, then drops. The Bible consistently says that a baby must be circumcised on the eighth day.

            3 At a time when it was believed that the earth sat on a large animal or a giant (1500 B.C.), the Bible spoke of the earth’s free float in space: “He…hangs the earth upon nothing” (Job 26:7).

            4 Solomon described a “cycle” of air currents two thousand years before scientists “discovered” them. “The wind goes toward the south, and turns about unto the north; it whirls about continually, and the wind returns again according to his circuits” (Ecclesiastes 1:6).

            5 The great biological truth concerning the importance of blood in our body’s mechanism has been fully comprehended only in recent years. Up until 120 years ago, sick people were “bled,” and many died because of the practice. If you lose your blood, you lose your life. Yet Leviticus 17:11, written 3,000 years ago, declared that blood is the source of life: “For the life of the flesh is in the blood.”

            6 Encyclopedia Britannica documents that in 1845, a young doctor in Vienna named Dr. Ignaz Semmelweis was horrified at the terrible death rate of women who gave birth in hospitals. As many as 30 percent died after giving birth. Semmelweis noted that doctors would examine the bodies of patients who died, then, without washing their hands, go straight to the next ward and examine expectant mothers. This was their normal practice, because the presence of microscopic diseases was unknown. Semmelweis insisted that doctors wash their hands before examinations, and the death rate immediately dropped to 2 percent. Look at the specific instructions God gave His people for when they encounter disease: “And when he that has an issue is cleansed of his issue; then he shall number to himself even days for his cleansing, and wash his clothes, and bathe his flesh in running water, and shall be clean” (Leviticus 15:13). Until recent years, doctors washed their hands in a bowl of water, leaving invisible germs on their hands. However, the Bible says specifically to wash hands under “running water.”

            7 Luke 17:34–36 says the Second Coming of Jesus Christ will occur while some are asleep at night and others are working at daytime activities in the field. This is a clear indication of a revolving earth, with day and night at the same time.

            8 “During the devastating Black Death of the fourteenth century, patients who were sick or dead were kept in the same rooms as the rest of the family. People often wondered why the disease was affecting so many people at one time. They attributed these epidemics to ‘bad air’ or ‘evil spirits.’ However, careful attention to the medical commands of God as revealed in Leviticus would have saved untold millions of lives. Arturo Castiglione wrote about the overwhelming importance of this biblical medical law: ‘The laws against leprosyin Leviticus 13 may be regarded as the first model of sanitary legislation’ (A History of Medicine).” Grant R. Jeffery, The Signature of God With all these truths revealed in Scripture,how could a thinking person deny that the Bible is supernatural in origin? There is no other book in any of the world’s religions (Vedas, Bhagavad-Gita, Koran, Book of Mormon, etc.) that contains scientific truth. In fact, they contain statements that are clearly unscientific. Hank Hanegraaff said, “Faith in Christ is not some blind leap into a dark chasm, but a faith based on established evidence.” (11:3 continued)

            9 The prophet Isaiah also tells us that the earth is round: “It is he that sits upon the circle of the earth” (Isaiah 40:22). This is not a reference to a flat disk, as some skeptic maintain, but to a sphere. Secular man discovered this 2,400 years later. At a time when science believed that the earth was flat, it was the Scriptures that inspired Christopher Columbus to sail around the world

            10 God told Job in 1500 B.C.: “Can you send lightnings, that they may go, and say to you, Here we are?” (Job 38:35). The Bible here is making what appears to be a scientifically ludicrous statement—that light can be sent, and then manifest itself in speech. But did you know that radio waves travel at the speed of light? This is why you can have instantaneous wireless communication with someone on the other side of the earth. Science didn’t discover this until 1864 when “British scientist James Clerk Maxwell suggested that electricity and light waves were two forms of the same thing” (Modern Century Illustrated Encyclopedia).

            There’s many more than this. We will be without excuse when we face God – forgiveness is available now, but will not be when it’s too late. You do realize the devil would do all he can to deceive as many as he can, do you not? Jesus spent more time warning about avoiding hell than about gaining heaven. Please think on these things.

          • George T

            Grow a pair and prove that God does not exist. Don’t reply with some blah blah blah bullcrap. Just prove it or shut up.

          • MarkSebree

            “Grow a pair and prove that God does not exist.”

            There is no need to prove that something does not exist, especially when there is no objective evidence that it does, and no logical reason to think that it does. It is up to the person making the positive assertion to support their claim.

            You are again trying to commit the logical fallacy of shifting the burden of proof. You have failed. It is still your responsibility to prove objectively that your deity exists. Your “bullcrap” of trying to shift the burden of proof does not change this. Therefore, it is up to you to “prove it or shut up”.

          • C_Alan_Nault

            Looks like he deleted his comment.

          • MarkSebree

            No, the site did.

          • George T

            I want to be an atheist. Please tell me how God or Jesus cannot exist.

          • MarkSebree

            There is no reason to think that they exist.

          • C_Alan_Nault

            Okay…prove to me that they can’t exist.

          • TheKingOfRhye

            First off, there’s no reason why one can’t be an atheist and also believe Jesus existed. And, you don’t have to demonstrate that something CANNOT exist to not believe in it.

          • wandakate

            Total believe in something that cannot be seen is called FAITH, and TRUST…It’s actually more difficult to not believe in GOD than it is to believe in Him. More simple and more practical as well. I would chose good over bad!!!

          • MarkSebree

            Actually, I find it more difficult to believe that any deity does exist since there is no evidence that anyone has existed, and there is no logical reason to suppose that one does exist.

            It is neither simple not practical to believe that your deity exists.

            “Good” and “Bad” have nothing to do with religion. They are societal and personal values that people place on actions, and can vary due to innumerable variables.

          • wandakate

            FYI: GOD (there is only one), is like the wind. We feel the breeze, we see the trees swaying/blowing but we do NOT actually see the wind. GOD is like that, (the wind), we do NOT actually see GOD, but nonetheless He’s there. Our very breath comes from Him. Our spirit returns to Him at our death (like it or not). He’s coming back (JESUS) to judge mankind (ready or not), and right now we determine our eternal fate of the Kingdom of GOD or of hell (with satan and the demons), but it is our own free will that will place us there, b/c GOD never sends anyone to hell, they send themselves, so there is NO blame on anyone. GOD wants us to confess, repent, and forsake our sins. He wants ONLY good for you and I, not bad.

          • C_Alan_Nault

            ” GOD (there is only one)”

            So you claim. Others make different claims.

            What evidence can you present to prove your claim?

        • TheKingOfRhye

          Oh, those things are required for something to be a religion? Tell that to all the people around here that constantly tell me atheism and evolution are religions, then.

          “Please cite their churches where they have worship services and pray to this god every Sunday”

          Wait a minute, and it’s a requirement they have to go to church on Sunday in particular? Wouldn’t that basically disqualify everything but Christianity? (or is that what you’re trying to do?)

      • james blue

        Even if they were not they would still have the same first amendment rights as an anti religious group as a religious group would,

    • C_Alan_Nault

      Apparently you don’t know what the definition of religion is.

      Religion:

      1) a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects
      2) the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices
      3)the practice of religious beliefs; ritual observance of faith.
      4) something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience:

  • james blue

    Don’t hold out much hope for the school’s rejection in court.

  • Emery Pearson

    Where can one find a hardback of The Satanic Bible? I am interested.

    • axelbeingcivil

      Amazon has copies for sale if you want hard copies, but it may be available in digital format as well.

  • Nidalap

    Awww! Having trouble getting a sponsor? Don’t fret. At the rate our society is sliding down this slope, you’ll probably get some soon…

    • MarkSebree

      Did the superintendent even put out a call to see if any of the faculty would sponsor this club? Or did he just state that no faculty would without making any inquiries? If he did communicate the request to the school’s faculty, did he do so in a neutral manner, or did he explicitly or implicitly project that any faculty member who did sponsor this club would receive poor reviews and obstruction of anything that they wanted or needed to do, thus creating a hostile working environment?

      These questions are important, and nobody seems to have asked them.

      • Nidalap

        They just put forth this club idea to make a point. They weren’t even serious about it in the first place. Let’s not give this matter more gravity than it deserves…

        • George T

          Atheists are really cowards.

      • peanut butter

        I’m sure this subject was the talk of the school. And Christians band together to protect their children from evil. So, yeah, they all knew about it and boldly declined. If you don’t believe me, don’t berate… call the school and I’ll bet you they will tell you the same thing.

        • MarkSebree

          What about people who believe that the Christians’ particular beliefs are themselves evil? Or one group of Christians thinking that the beliefs of another group of Christians are “evil”? Who is protecting who then?

          It is also possible that anyone who spoke out in favor of the club feared that they would be discriminated against, berated, harassed, have their homes and property vandalized, have their children bullied by other students, teachers, and the administration, and other things that “good Christians” are known to do to those that show the hypocrisy and narrow-mindedness of “Christians” to them.

    • wandakate

      The bible warns us that in the end of the age satan will be taking over. He’s busy 24/7 with the demons to corrupt the minds and hearts of our children and our adults as well. Our morals are SHOT, and we don’t know right from wrong. We don’t know a good candidate from one that’s not good. We don’t read and study scriptures anymore, we don’t love our neighbor as ourselves, we don’t want to be our brother’s keeper, we don’t do unto others as we would want them to do unto us. Therefore we are turning into an “evil” generation of human souls (people).
      Without GOD in our lives, our country is bound to continue to go down, down, down, and it’s happening fast as one can see IF they are paying attention. These people (satan’s people), want to take over and they will do so if we fold, if we allow them to, if we don’t stand our ground and stick to our guns (so to speak).
      We can either stand up for what is right (GOD) or we can lay down and roll over and go along with this evil world’s way of doing things (satan’s way). It’s up to us. But judgment day is coming, and we are all accountable.

  • Grace Kim Kwon

    Children should be made to go to Jesus, NEVER to Satan. “Jesus said, ‘Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to sin, it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were drowned in the depth of the sea. Woe to the world because of offenses! For offenses must come, but woe to that man by whom the offense comes! Let the little children come to Me, and do not forbid them; for of such is the kingdom of heaven.'” (Matthew ch. 18,19)

    • C_Alan_Nault

      Long as you’re going to quote verses from the Bible, let’s not forget these gems:

      When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property. (Exodus 21:20-21 )

      Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephesians 6:5 )

      Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Timothy 6:1-2 )

      And some of the Bible’s dietary suggestions:

      2 Kings 18:27 (KJV) But Rabshakeh said unto them, Hath my master sent me to thy master, and to thee, to speak these words? hath he not sent me to the men which sit on the wall, that they may eat their own dung, and drink their own piss with you?

      Isaiah 36:12 (KJV) But Rabshakeh said, Hath my master sent me to thy master and to thee to speak these words? hath he not sent me to the men that sit upon the wall, that they may eat their own dung, and drink their own piss with you?

      Ezekiel 4:12 (KJV) And thou shalt eat it as barley cakes, and thou shalt bake it with dung that cometh out of man, in their sight.

      • Grace Kim Kwon

        The Holy Bible is just and right. Read God’s Word seeking salvation and truth.
        * The 1st quote: Less punishment for accidents and manslaughter. Even today, some criminals of manslaughter go free.
        * The 2nd quote: Addressing to today’s employees. Slaves were treated better than the employees of today’s perv secular nations.
        * The 3rd quote: Work ethics. Employees obey good employers. It is the right and good thing. The Holy Bible elsewhere commands disobedience to evil humans. (Acts ch.4)
        * The 4th and 5th quotes: Pagan king’s evil against Israel revealed, talking junks like today’s secularists do. A historic fact.
        * The 6th: Excrement has been used as fuel on Planet Earth throughout history. Read the following verse. A visual symbolic act to show that Israel sinned against God and thus defiled themselves.

        Read the entire Bible: “The fool has said in his heart, ‘There is no God.’ They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none who does good.” (Psalms 14)

        • C_Alan_Nault

          “The 1st quote: Less punishment for accidents and manslaughter. Even today, some criminals of manslaughter go free. ”

          The passage is talking about your treatment of a human being you own as property.

          Do you think it is moral to own another human being as property? Yes or no?

          “The 2nd quote: Addressing to today’s employees. Slaves were treated better than the employees of today’s perv secular nations. ”

          The passages are not talking about employees. The passages are talking about owning human beings as property… property you can buy and sell, and any children your property have are born as slaves.

          Do you think it is moral to own another human being as property? Yes or no?

          ” The 3rd quote: Work ethics. Employees obey good employers. It is the right and good thing. ”

          The passage isn’t talking about employees. It is talking about human beings owned as property.

          Do you think it is moral to own another human being as property? Yes or no?

          “The Holy Bible elsewhere commands disobedience to evil humans. (Acts ch.4) ”

          Not relevant to what we are discussing here.

          “Excrement has been used as fuel on Planet Earth throughout history. ”

          The passage doesn’t say to burn it as fuel, it says to eat it.

          “Read the entire Bible”

          I have ( can you even list the Bible’s ten commandments?). Both testaments condone slavery.

          Do you think it is moral to own another human being as property? Yes or no?

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            Point 1: If you know that human being is not another’s prorperty, stop supporting abortion. The Holy Bible teaches every human life belongs to God.
            Point 2: Masters were employers, therefore the Biblical work ethics are the best. Someone always plays the brain and others the labor force. It won’t change. Get the essential meaning and message.
            Point 3: Yes, it is relevant. No submission to villains, even risking life.
            Point 4: You didn’t read the text. Read it. It says to use it as fuel. Anything can be used as fuel.

            No, you haven’t read the Holy Bible. Don’t lie. The Holy Bible tells everyone is equal before God and that everyone has liberty in God. The Lord knows secular nations would treat certain humans as slaves and property always anyway; so the Holy Bible teaches to beat them and free everyone. (Proverbs ch.24)

          • peanut butter

            Should have told him to read the history of baking, too. Needs to learn how desert people who had no wood to burn would use animal dung for fuel. It was also used to fire clay pottery.

          • C_Alan_Nault

            “Point 1: If you know that human being is not another’s prorperty, stop supporting abortion. ”

            Non sequiter.

            “Point 2 & 3: Masters were today’s employers, therefore the Biblical work ethics are the best. ”

            Wrong. In the Bible, slaves were the property of their owners, as were any children the slaves had. They weren’t employees, they could be beaten to death. They could be passed down as permanent inheritance.

            Some slaves were indentured servants, but that only applied to Hebrew males owned by other Hebrews. Their slavery was temporary, to pay off debts. Female Hebrews remained slaves for life, as did non-Hebrews.

            And the new testament condones slavery.

            “Point 4: Yes, it is relevant. No submission to evil authorities, even risking life. Man must submit to God alone for freedom and right living ”

            And according to the Bible, we are supposed to be subject to every human institution. All authorities (laws and governments) are from God. ( Romans 13:1-4 & 1 Peter 2:13-14)

            “The Holy Bible tells everyone is equal before God ”

            Sure it does, and some are more equal than others.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            Slavery has been a mean of survival while mankind was pagan illiterate. God commanded everyone not to abuse slaves; that’s the overall teaching, unlike today’s US companies that suck the human blood and abuse children. Americans don’t understand because you never went through real hunger or thirst, always blessed with plenty food from God. Christians always protected you well and now you have no idea on the Earth’s real life and are repaying the good with evil to the Christians.

            Americans live well only because of the excellent Christian system, not because they are more diligent than the rest of mankind. Americans must stop attacking the life-saving Christianity this century; it’s so evil. If the authorities collide with God, Christians choose God. Read the entire text of Romans ch.13 and 1 Peter ch.2, not the few verses. Sodomic USA is a definite villain; obedience to the lawless US Sodomites would be a treason against God this century. Sodomic USA needs laws to protect religious freedom since Sodomic Americans in all levels ignore the US Constitution.

          • C_Alan_Nault

            “Slavery has been a mean of survival while mankind was pagan illiterate.”

            The point is the Bible is claimed to be the word of god & is claimed to be a book of moral teachings.yet this god who was so obsessed with details gave strict rules & laws regarding what we can & cannot wear ( you aren’t supposed to wear clothes made of more than one type of fabric… this’d mean if you wear a jacket that has some leather parts on it, you are sinning), how beards and hair are to be trimmed, and detailed instructions on what we can & can’t eat BUT this god didn’t say that slavery was wrong, or even that you should try to avoid slavery.

            “God commanded everyone not to abuse slaves; that’s the overall teaching, ”

            According to the Bible, god’s teaching regarding the treatment of slaves includes not being allowed to beat them to death unless they don’t die from their injuries for a day or so:

            When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property. (Exodus 21:20-21)

            ” unlike today’s US companies that suck the human blood and abuse children. ”

            I am talking about the Bible’s slavery, owning another human being as property… not some metaphorical slavery. And The Bible says NOTHING about slavery being wrong.

            Do you think owning another human being as property is moral? Yes or no?

            “you never went through real hunger or thirst, always blessed with plenty food from God. ”

            a) how do you know I never went through real hunger or thirst?

            b) god didn’t give me plenty of food. And if you are going to say that having plentiful food is because of god, you must also accept the opposite: that not having enough food is because of god

            “Christians always protected you well ”

            Explain this comment.

            “and now you have no idea on the Earth’s real life”

            As opposed to what? Some imaginary life?

            ” and are repaying the good with evil to the Christians.”

            Explain how my not believing in a god is repaying Christians ( repaying them for WHAT???) with evil. Why Christians? Why not Hindus of Hebrews or Muslims or Wiccans or Buddhists or Sikhs?

            “Americans live well only because of the excellent Christian system, ”

            What is this alleged Christian system? Explain what the hell you are talking about.

            “Americans must stop attacking the life-saving Christianity this century; it’s so evil.”

            WTF are you talking about?

            “Read the entire text of Romans ch.13 and 1 Peter ch.2, not the few verses. ”

            No need. The issue is slavery.

            Do you think owning another human being as property is moral? Yes or no?

            “Sodomic USA is a definite villain”

            Explain how people engaging in oral or anal sex is a villain ( sodomy refers to oral or anal sex with a partner of the opposite gender or the same gender).

      • peanut butter

        And as long as you are quoting the Bible only to start an argument, try to do it alone in your room. Boy, you atheists sure don’t get it. Scripture is supposed to be studied for edification, not arguments.

        • Grace Kim Kwon

          Amen. Atheists lack honesty and humility. They have no intention of finding the truth and that’s their detrimental nature.

          • C_Alan_Nault

            What evidence do you have that the Bible is the truth?

            What did I post that was dishonest?

            Humility? Theists believe the entire universe was created by god for them, and that this god follows their every action & thought, and this god can intercede for them if they pray to him. Their beliefs are the exact opposite of humility

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            Admitting one’s own sinfulness and acknowledging the Creator God is honesty and humility on any creature’s part. It’s a fact that God will bestow His justice upon all atheists.

          • C_Alan_Nault

            “Admitting one’s own sinfulness ”

            Sin is defined as a transgression of a divine law. For the word sin to have any meaning in the real world, it must fiorst be proved a deity exists then it must be proved what that deity’s laws are.

            “and acknowledging the Creator God”

            Which one? There are many religions with many different creator gods or goddesses.

            “It’s a fact that God will bestow His justice upon all atheists.”

            It’s a fact that many people believe this. But until you can prove this god exists, any claims you make about the god can be dismissed.

            Can you even clearly define the god you believe in?

        • C_Alan_Nault

          “Scripture is supposed to be studied for edification, not arguments. ”

          Explain how these passages are edifying:

          “However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance.”

          “When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property.”

          “Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. ”

          “Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts.”

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            It meant no starvation, as all property was highly valued. And gertting out of the status of slavehood was easier than getting out of the status of 99% of today’s secular nations. God told us to get legal freedom where possible since all are free in Christ. The 3rd paragraph is about certain protection of the criminals of unintentional manslaughter, since murder of anyone was carried out by the execution of the murderer, not just jail time or fine. The 5th and 6th are for servants and emplyees and those who work under any authorities; all vocations were put together there – read the entire chapter and the entire Epistle.

          • C_Alan_Nault

            “It meant no starvation, as all property was highly valued. ”

            Do you think it is moral to own another human being as property? Yes or no?

            “And gertting out of the status of slavehood”

            That only applied to MALE Hebrew slaves owned by other Hebrews. They served for 6 years and were released on the 7th year. They were serving a term of indentured servitude.

            Female Hebrew slaves ( and any children they gave birth to as slaves) remained slaves for life. Non-Hebrews ( and any children they had) remained slaves for life.

            ” was easier than getting out of the status of 99% of today’s secular nations.”

            Oh? List these 99% of today’s secular nations that allow slavery.

            “God told us to get legal freedom where possible since all are free in Christ. ”

            And god ( according to the Bible) also condoned slavery ( both testaments of the Bible condone slavery) and said if you beat your slave to death you will be punished unless the slave doesn’t die for a day or two.

            “The 3rd paragraph is about certain protection of the criminals of unintentional manslaughter, since murder of anyone was carried out by the execution of the murderer, not just jail time or fine. The 5th and 6th are for servants and emplyees and those who work under any authorities; all vocations were put together there – read the entire chapter and the entire Epistle.”

            Not necessary, this can be broken down to a simple question: do you believe it is moral to own another human being as property? Yes or no?

  • Frank Dorka

    Wait. You associating atheists with deist believing Satanists is just wrong. As atheists we do not believe in a higher power…ANY higher power. Just Christians lying as usual to make atheists seem more sinister to the following. Shame.

    • George T

      Most atheists are child molesters.
      -FBI crimes and statistics 2013

      • Frank Dorka

        Over 99.7% of American prisoners polled said that they were religious.

        “FBI crimes and statistics 2013”
        Where?
        Another CHRISTIAN liar.

        • axelbeingcivil

          He’s a troll, man. Don’t waste your breath. Just flag the post and move on.

    • wandakate

      IF there is NO higher power then where are you getting your breath from? I know you’re going to say from the oxygen in the air, we breath it and live. But in reality GOD gave you your breath when you were born and he’s the one that is capable of taking that same breath away from you at your death. Your life is in His hands, you’re just not (unfortunately) away of that.
      GOD gives life, and GOD takes it away, blessed be the name of the LORD. You are one breath away from your eternity. One breath away from heaven or hell. Christians don’t lie as usual, they don’t hate anybody.
      JESUS said that He can come to make our lives more abundant (in spiritual matters). I hope you and others will realize the “TRUTH”, b/c only the truth will set you free.

      • C_Alan_Nault

        You have made many claims, what evidence can you present to prove the claims?

        You believe a god exists, can yo even define this god clearly?

  • George T

    The problem is that 99.9999% of atheists are not allowed around children.

    • MarkSebree

      And you base this delusion on what, exactly? Your ignorance? Your prejudice? Some right-wing site that does not know what they are talking about?

      A great many atheists have children, and most have never been in trouble with the law. It is estimated that approximately 30% of millennials are atheists, agnostics, or otherwise non-religious. That millions of people right there. In the older generation, atheists and agnostics make up around 6% of the population, which is around 15 – 20 million people.

      And here is another kicker. The Federal Bureau of Prisons reports that atheists make up less than 1/2% of the prison population, meaning that they are effectively underrepresented in the prison population compared to the general population. This implies that as a group, they are very law-abiding and do not get into trouble with the police very often.

      So, what are you basing your assertion on, given that it is not factual evidence?

  • Reason2012

    Human beings read, write, talk, publish books, design and fly airplanes and more, and:

    Our ancestors were supposedly apes, so that means they are claiming populations of apes could eventually, over generations, learn to read, write, talk, publish books, design and fly airplanes and more if you just “give it enough time”.

    Our ancestors were supposedly reptiles before that, so that means they are claiming populations of reptiles could eventually, over generations, learn to read, write, talk, publish books, design and fly airplanes and more if you just “give it enough time”.

    Our ancestors were supposedly amphibians/frogs before that, so that means they are claiming populations of amphibians/frogs could eventually, over generations, learn to read, write, talk, publish books, design and fly airplanes and more if you just “give it enough time”.

    Our ancestors were supposedly fish before that, so that means they are claiming populations of fish could eventually, over generations, learn to read, write, talk, publish books, design and fly airplanes and more if you just “give it enough time”.

    This is what they call “reality”.

    Behold the anti-science mythology of fish to mankind evolutionism.

    • TheKingOfRhye

      And all of that has what exactly to do with this story????

      Anyway, evolution doesn’t claim that reptiles/amphibians/fish could do all those things if “given enough time”, it claims that humans EVOLVED from those, THEN did all those things.

      And I didn’t include apes when I said “reptiles/amphibians/fish” because we still are apes, actually.

      • Reason2012

        // evolution doesn’t claim that reptiles/amphibians/fish could do all those
        // things if “given enough time”, it claims that humans EVOLVED from those,
        // THEN did all those things.

        So you admit the embarrassing belief system where they think some populations of fish, populations of reptiles, populations of frogs and so on could eventually “evolve” to learn those things, if you just add the magic ingredient of “enough time”.

        And how often do they try to say “well we’re still apes” or “we’re still fish”.

        Behold the anti-science mythology of fish to mankind evolutionism.

        • TheKingOfRhye

          I’m still trying to figure out why you felt an anti-evolution rant would be appropriate here, but whatever….

          “So you admit the embarrassing belief system where they think some populations of fish, populations of reptiles, populations of frogs and so on could eventually “evolve” to learn those things, if you just add the magic ingredient of “enough time”.”

          That just illustrates that you have some serious misconceptions about what evolution means. For one thing, humans didn’t evolve from any species that’s still around today, we just have a common ancestor, as all life does. How you think that means something like “evolution says we’d eventually have human-like fish, given enough time” I honestly don’t understand. (if that’s not what you’re saying, sorry if I misunderstand) If present-day fish evolved into something with human-like intelligence, they wouldn’t be present-day fish any more.

          “And how often do they try to say “well we’re still apes” or “we’re still fish”.”

          Well, I’ve never heard anyone say we’re still fish, but we ARE apes.

          “Hominidae, in zoology, one of the two living families of the ape superfamily Hominoidea, the other being the Hylobatidae (gibbons). Hominidae includes the great apes—that is, the orangutans (genus Pongo), gorillas (Gorilla), and chimpanzees and bonobos (Pan)—as well as human beings (Homo).”

  • George T

    I love Jesus

  • C_Alan_Nault

    Keep up the good work that Jesus asked us to do.

  • C_Alan_Nault

    Atheists are usually too scared to confront anyone in public. We usually just try and change laws and intimidate people by court action.

  • peanut butter

    The ‘Good News Club’ just got GOOD news. In your face, satan!

  • C_Alan_Nault

    Love Jesus as he loves you