Elementary School Bible Club Ceases Following Complaint From Atheist Activist Group

child prayer pdBREA, Calif. — A Bible club at an elementary school in California is no more following a complaint from a prominent professing atheist group that seeks to combat what it believes are violations of the “separation of Church and State.”

Earlier this year, the Wisconsin-based Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) sent a letter to the Brea Olinda Unified School District after it was contacted by a parent who expressed concern that their son might feel pressure to join.

According to the correspondence, Club Monarch had been included in the weekly newsletter at Mariposa Elementary School and is listed on the online school calendar. There had been posters on the wall advertising the club as well, and the school’s principal had spoken about the option to parents during a back-to-school night.

“If a school chooses to allow outside groups to host after school programs on its property and an outside group decides to create a religious program, there must be no school involvement in the organization or promotion of that religious program,” FFRF wrote. “That means that the district cannot promote Club Monarch on its website, its school walls, to parents at back-to-school night, and cannot coordinate sign-ups for the club in the school office.”

The organization sent a second letter in March after submitting a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request and discovered that Mariposa Elementary School had sent home registration forms for parents and that teachers had helped to plan and coordinate the meetings. Superintendent Brad Mason also spoke at the club on one occasion.

“It is impossible for this club to continue in a constitutional manner. The club and the school are inextricably entangled,” FFRF wrote. “The Brea Olinda USD can no longer allow teachers and other staff to take advantage of their positions and access to children to proselytize and attempt to convert students to Christianity. Club Monarch must be disbanded.”

On Aug. 26, the atheist organization received notice from attorneys for the district that the club has ceased its activities.

  • Connect with Christian News

“Club Monarch has ceased to operate at Mariposa Elementary School and does not operate at any other district school sites,” wrote Todd Robbins of Atkinson, Andelson, Loya, Ruud and Romo. “We trust that this resolves the concerns expressed in your organization’s original letter dated March 1, 2016.”

FFRF applauded the move.

“The operation of a religious club at an elementary school with the collusion of school principal and staff was way beyond the pale, and we’re pleased we played a role in putting an end to it,” Co-President Annie Laurie Gaylor said in a statement on Thursday.

As previously reported, in 1647, the Massachusetts Bay Colony passed “The Old Deluder Satan Act,” which required that children be taught to read so they could learn to read the Bible.

“In being one chief project of that old deluder, Satan, to keep men from the knowledge of the Scriptures, … and that learning may not be buried in the graves of our forefathers in Church and Commonwealth, the Lord assisting our endeavors, it is therefore ordered by this court and the authority thereof, that every township in this jurisdiction, after the Lord hath increased them to the number of fifty householders, shall then forthwith appoint one within their town to teach all such children as shall resort to him to write and read,” it read in part.

The first textbook used in the American colonies even before the nation’s founding, “The New England Primer,” was largely focused on the Scriptures, and was stated to be popular in public and private schools alike until approximately the early 1900’s. It used mostly the King James Bible as reference, and spoke much about sin, salvation and proper behavior.

“Save me, O God, from evil all this day long, and let me love and serve Thee forever, for the sake of Jesus Christ, Thy Son,” it read.

Many of the Founders’ children learned to read from the primer.


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
  • Marc Jarett

    Thank you FFRF!

    • Stuart

      Seriously? Thank you for what? How weak have your nation become in that you are grateful for stopping a kiddies club which does not agree with your sensibilities…..and all because some kid may feel pressured to join? Hard to believe this stupidity….

      • Cady555

        Yes. I am thankful that groups like FFRF protect the religious freedom of all public school students. Likewise, Protestant and Catholic families in Utah are thankful to the ACLU and similar organizations that put a stop to Mormon religious instruction in public schools in Utah.
        Every child in this country has a right to attend public school free of proselytizing.

      • Marc Jarett

        Thank you FFRF for upholding the constitutional principle of church/state separation, keep up the good work!

      • raytheist

        It is morally wrong that any child should feel pressure to join a religious (or any other) club.

        The problem was not that the club existed, but that it was being given preferential treatment by the school. They didn’t even need to close the club down (that was the school’s choice, not FFRF), but just make sure it was treated exactly like every other club.

      • Cozmo the Magician

        No it was stopped because it was BREAKING THE LAW. Actually, the school was breaking the law. Also, they did not even have the proper insurance needed to legally rent the school property. IOW, they expected that they should not have to follow the rules that ANY after school program has to follow. They were not shut down because people did not like it. They were shut down because they and school violated the law.

      • Mario Strada

        Please read the real story. You are not fully informed about this matter.
        As far as breaking up the club, they were not forced to break it up. They were just asked to follow the rules. Like the other clubs.
        If they cared about the students, they would have adapted to the rules as they were and kept providing their service. Instead it had to be disbanded. It is not clear if that was because of insurance or because they wanted the whole thing to look like they were the victims, but if the other clubs at the school can follow the rules, so can they.

      • lady_black

        Exclusionary religious clubs have no right being promoted by school authorities. The government does NOT exist to promote your beliefs. Nobody is stopping kids from doing anything they want. But you Goddies need to play by the same rules as everyone else. The school may not promote you.

      • (((dagobarbz)))

        “…all because some kid may feel pressured to join.”

        EXACTLY!

  • james blue

    Reading the headline I expecting to be commenting that as long as other clubs are allowed there shouldn’t be a problem, but the issue here wasn’t the club, it was, if the article is accurate, the school promoting it to excess. Now it could be that the principle mentioned this club along with others at the back to school night, in which case there wouldn’t be a problem, but the article does make it sound like the club was being pushed.

    There was no reason to close the club, but if the school was promoting it with a preference not enjoyed by other clubs then THAT aspect needed to be dealt with.

    • Michael C

      I think the problem is that it wasn’t actually an official student run after school club.

      I think it was an outside group that the school allowed to use their facilities and gave them access to school children.

      • james blue

        Even that wouldn’t be objectionable if it wasn’t school promoted.

        • lady_black

          Yes, it would be objectionable.

          • james blue

            Why?

          • (((dagobarbz)))

            Do you really have to ask why giving outside groups access to school children is a bad idea?

          • james blue

            Yes.

            I’ll go first with my case

            The parents decide if they want their child to join. Whether it is a “good news” club, a sports club that the school doesn’t offer like judo, a group that teaches children to play musical instruments, or a private pre/post school “daycare” operation. The only difference between these concerns operating on school premises or their own premises is location. It is okay for these clubs to send flyers home to make parents aware and as long as the concern makes it clear as to if it is open only to students or if they allow outsiders. It’s okay for the school to list them in a non school section on their website.

            I feel I need to stipulate that before having any connection to the school other than public use of the buildings, the groups should be vetted to ensure they are child friendly. For example if it was an outside group running an anti drug program, it should only be advertised to students if it was limited to students.

            What is not okay is things like groups standing outside schools and approaching unaccompanied minors or schools pushing certain clubs as appears to have been the case in the above article.

          • (((dagobarbz)))

            Religion belongs in church. judo, music, daycare are non-religious activities a school may endorse.
            How would you like an Islamic outreach in your school?
            Or…YOGA CLASSES?

    • Adrivalka

      Perhaps, they understood that it was better than to leave the door open to other religious clubs applying for their right to have similar clubs such as the Satanic Temple. LOL!

  • Ed

    Here is some legal enlightenment which I shared with the FFRF:

    Dear FFRF 8/23/16

    You asserted that Bibles violate the Establishment Clause of the United States Constitution, which reads, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.”
    Since the Constitution has no law pertaining to religion, how can you claim that the universities are doing something constitutionally unlawful?

    You also said: “you must remain neutral”
    Since schools and universities do not force nor encourage or discourage religion, they are NOT proselytizing but merely provide individuals the right to choose by having Bibles which they can choose to read or ignore, they ARE neutral.

    Individuals (who have the RIGHT to choose), not the state, must determine what religious texts are worth reading.
    “individuals” include EVERYONE, not just you.

    You are entitled to share your beliefs but if you force them upon any entities, you are guilty of violation the constitutional provision known as: “separation between state and church.”

    I just wanted to give you some friendly advice, I also apologize for the non-existent anger which you may perceive from this letter. Thank you.

    • King Arthropod Pendragonfly

      The FFRF employs lawyers; you don’t seem to be familiar with all the case law that makes this club unlawful.

      • Jolanda Tiellemans

        But, but it’s religion. They don’t need to follow the rules.

    • Anthony_Nonamous

      Hi Ed,

      As a piece of your own friendly advice, interpreting constitutional law is not something that amateurs can do easily or well without research and dedication. Church and state law based on the Establishment Clause is notorious for being complex and contradictory.

      What you have written, above, will not be taken seriously by anyone with any background in this subject. If you’re okay with that, by all means, keep on truckin’.

      • http://www.bing.com/ Martin Smit

        Indeed. In order to fully understand the constitution, you need to be a homosexual atheist.

        • Anthony_Nonamous

          Just as the founders intended.

        • Mario Strada

          Whatever you say, just as long as you bring back that Tonka truck and that Barbie doll my kids let you borrow last week at recess.

        • http://127.0.0.1 3lemenope

          You seem to be obsessed with homosexuals and atheists. What is up with that?

        • Lexical Cannibal

          Can confirm; am bisexual agnostic. Only halfway there.

    • Uzza

      “You asserted that Bibles violate the Establishment Clause”
      Uhh, no. This is simply untrue. A poor way to start out.

    • Ambulance Chaser

      Despite the self congratulatory smugness with which you write, none of that is legally relevant or correct. There is an enormous amount of First and Fourteenth Amendment jurisprudence that you’re ignoring. Too much to go into here.

      But to start you off, I recommend you review Incorporation Doctrine, and Everson v. Board of Education.

      • Guest✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

        “Self congratulatory smugness” – oh, the irony! 🙂

    • lady_black

      This has nothing to do with Bibles. It’s about law. Government does not exist to, and may not promote your beliefs.

  • Cady555

    Hmmm. What exactly is the relevance of a law passed by the Massachusetts Bay Colony in 1647 while the colonies were still part of Great Britain?

    As most people with even the most basic knowledge of American history are aware, the United States of America was founded in 1776, and the Constitution of the United States of America was ratified in 1789.

    Our Constitution prohibits the use of government authority to promote religious belief. Public Schools cannot promote religion. You are free to send your children to religious schools if that is your preference.

    • Ambulance Chaser

      None. It bears no relevance whatsoever to this matter.

    • tubi11

      It appeases the mouth-breathers and causes them to send money.

    • bowie1

      It also says anyone may NOT prohibit the free exercise thereof.

      • Ambulance Chaser

        Luckily no one is doing that.

        • bowie1

          I’m not sure about that. Anyway, Bible Clubs are usually after school hours like other extra curricular activities (e.g. athletics, etc.) and sponsored by an outside organization such as I.V.C.F. All these activities are strictly voluntary and some students may go home once the school bell rings.

          • Lexical Cannibal

            And that’s fine and everything, but that’s not the issue at all. The issue is that the school was giving them preferential treatment that no other club was getting, religious or otherwise.

            Neither was this club forced to shut down; on order to fall back into legal compliance, all they had to do was follow the same rules as all the other clubs. THEY chose to shut down, rather than follow the rules.

          • wandakate

            Which made NO sense whatsoever. It should have been a regular club, just like any other club, no special treatment at all. We seem to have a problem with following the rules don’t we? Humans can tend to be stubborn or somewhat hardheaded.

          • Kelly Samuelson

            FFRF stated that ‘the club must be disbanded’ (that means forced to shut down). Be sure you read and understand everything before you comment please.

          • Lexical Cannibal

            What the FRFF wants from them and what is legally required of them is not necessarily the same thing. The school was very sue-able for its preferential treatment of a Christian club, but resolving that treatment shouldn’t be especially difficult, even going the extra mile and removing the people responsible for that treatment from relations with the club. At that point, FRFF would have a *far* less appealing case, needing to now prove that the damage caused by the school’s entanglement goes beyond the direct benefits of the preferential treatment, and as long as they could be satisfied that the school was keeping a professional distance, would very likely not pursue further action.

            (that means no, they weren’t and one visit to a halfway decent lawyer might have told them that.)

      • Cady555

        No, it says the – government – may not prohibit free exercise of religion. This does not mean that a church can take over a public school and conduct a worship every day from 9:00 am to noon. “Hey, aren’t they free to exercise their religion?” It means those acting with government authority (teachers, administrators) must protect the religious freedom of students. Every student. Even (gasp) non christian students.

        School employees cannot instruct or encourage students – any student – to perform a religious exercise (e.g. pray).

        School enmployes cannot tell students that one set of religious beliefs are preferable, government approved or will make them better than people with less approved religious beliefs.

        When children are compelled by government authority to attend school, school employees cannot then subject them to religious proselytizing.

        In schools, the government may not interfere with the free exercise of religion by students. This means those acting with government authority cannot promote religion or allow outsiders to promote religion on school property.

    • violetteal

      One of the first acts of Congress in our new nation was to send missionaries into the wilderness to teach the natives about Christ and to start schools to teach the English language. No one then seem to think that it contradicted the constitution.

      • Cady555

        Citation please, from a credible source, because that is simply not true.

  • Amos Moses

    satanists will do what satanists will do …… question is ….. what wont they do ……….

    Nothing …………

    • Patrick Dunn

      Uh, okay . . .

    • MarkSebree

      What does that have to do with the article, besides expressing your own prejudices?

      • Amos Moses

        “besides expressing your own prejudices?”

        and you are not prejudiced against evil ………. so let it live at your house ………..

        • MarkSebree

          You are right in the sense that I try to avoid letting the evil that you represent “live in my house”. I try to work against ignorance, intolerance, and bigotry, among other things.

          However, you did not answer my question. What does your tangent and non sequitur statement have to do with the article or anyone else’s comments? You calling other people who do not believe as you do “satanists” when even minimal research shows that they do not worship your mythical being “Satan” shows that you do not have a real argument to support your position, so instead you try to demonize the opposition by calling them “evil” or implying that they are “evil” when they are just encouraging a government agency to follow will established law that is meant to protect everyone, especially children who do not have the intellectual or emotional means to protect themselves, and who are required to be at that location and obey the authority figures present.

          • Amos Moses

            “I try to work against ignorance, intolerance, and bigotry, among other things.”

            and yet you are here promoting it by your statements …………

            “You calling other people who do not believe as you do “satanists” when even minimal research shows that they do not worship your mythical being “Satan” shows that you do not have a real argument to support your position”

            There is no middle ground …….. you either submit to God or you serve satan … satan cares not if you worship him …… you serve him if you do not follow God ……..

            so you say “myth” ………. is that a theological, scientific, or personal opinion …………

          • MarkSebree

            “and yet you are here promoting it by your statements …………”

            Where have you seen me promoting the ignorance inherent in religion?

            “There is no middle ground …….. you either submit to God or you serve satan … satan cares not if you worship him …… you serve him if you do not follow God ……..”

            Sorry, by I am not bound by your ignorance and intolerance, nor am I bound by your religious beliefs. I “serve” neither your mythical deities. I prefer reality over your fantasy.

            The fact of the matter is that NOBODY is bound by your beliefs, no matter what you think.

            “so you say “myth” ………. is that a theological, scientific, or personal opinion …………”

            Lexical. The Bible fits the definition of a mythology perfectly, since the stories within fit the definition of myths.

          • Amos Moses

            “Where have you seen me promoting the ignorance inherent in religion?”

            Your own question …….. answers the question ……….. “the ignorance inherent in religion?” …… intolerance, bigotry, ignorance …… and it is so easy to spot ….. because the ones crying their eyes out against intolerance, bigotry, ignorance ……….. are the biggest offenders …….

            “The fact of the matter is that NOBODY is bound by your beliefs, no matter what you think.”

            But you seem to think others should be bound by yours ….. and that is intolerance, bigotry, ignorance …….. the very things you say you are against ….. and now you are a liar ….

            “The Bible fits the definition of a mythology perfectly, since the stories within fit the definition of myths.”

            so personal opinion ………..

          • MarkSebree

            “Your own question …….. answers the question ……….. “the ignorance inherent in religion?” …… intolerance, bigotry, ignorance …… and it is so easy to spot ….. because the ones crying their eyes out against intolerance, bigotry, ignorance ……….. are the biggest offenders …….”

            You need to work on your writing style. Ellipses (the dots in the middle of sentences) represent where you left out part of what someone else said.

            Sorry, but I am not subject to your delusions, and I have studied history. Religion, especially Christianity in Europe, has long been used to promote ignorance, promote bigotry, promote injustice, promote misogyny, promote racism, and promote just about every other policy that is meant to hold people back and hold them down. Decrying ignorance, misogyny, bigotry, and intolerance does not mean that one is promoting them.

            “But you seem to think others should be bound by yours [beliefs]….. and that is intolerance, bigotry, ignorance …….. the very things you say you are against ….. and now you are a liar ….”

            Where have I been promoting my personal beliefs? Where have I been claiming that anyone is subject to them? It is a FACT that in the USA, nobody is bound by anyone one else’s religious beliefs. This is enshrined in the First Amendment’s Conscious Clause which guarantees that people can follow their own beliefs without hinderance. The main restriction on this is that they cannot use the government to promote or favor their religion, or disparage or discriminate against other religions, and this is enshrined in the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.

            You, however, have been stating and implying that everyone is subject to your personal opinions about your religious beliefs, no matter what their beliefs are or what their religion is. This makes you quite intolerance, which is why I keep reminding your that nobody except yourself is subject to your beliefs.

            “”[Lexical.] The Bible fits the definition of a mythology perfectly, since the stories within fit the definition of myths.”

            so personal opinion ………..”

            No, objective fact. Apparently, you have trouble understanding what other people write. “Lexical”, since you do not seem to understand that word, means the dictionary definition of the word in question. In this case, the words in question are “myth” and “mythology”. “Mythology” simply means a collection of myths. And “myths” are generally stories about deities, demigods, magic, and similar stories used to help explain the beliefs and laws of a people. Look the words up if you do not believe me. Merriam-Webster and Dictionary dot com are reasonable and unbiased sources, in case you need someplace to start.

          • Amos Moses

            “No, objective fact. ”

            you have presented no objective “fact” …… so personal opinion ….. if you have objective fact ….. that would make it a scientific opinion …… so which is it ………

            “Where have I been promoting my personal beliefs? ”

            read your own statements …. it is all your personal beliefs ……….

            “You, however, have been stating and implying that everyone is subject to your personal opinions about your religious beliefs, ”

            We all serve someone or some idea ………. and so do you ………. i follow God …… you follow satan or his followers ……… but you are a subject of one or the other ………. there is no middle ground ……….

          • MarkSebree

            “you have presented no objective “fact” …… so personal opinion ….. if you have objective fact ….. that would make it a scientific opinion …… so which is it ………”

            I see that you did not pay attention to my advice on your writing style.

            Actually, I did present the objective fact that your religious tome is an example of a mythology, and the stories inside were myths. The definitions of these words can be found in any English dictionary, and I invited you to look them up. I even gave you a short form of the definitions. If you think that your religious text is not a mythology, then you should actually try to support your claim rather than evading the question and tossing ad hominems at the people that tell you the truth that you do not want to hear.

            “read your own statements …. it is all your personal beliefs ……….”

            Again, no. Those statements are not my personal beliefs, the facts as defined by our laws. You can hold any beliefs that you want, but you cannot expect anyone else to abide by those beliefs, nor to be bound to them. That is what religious freedom and religious liberty actual is.

            “We all serve someone or some idea ………. and so do you ………. i follow God …… you follow satan or his followers ……… but you are a subject of one or the other ………. there is no middle ground ……….”

            You follow your own opinions, and you claim that they come from your deity in order to keep other people from questioning those opinions. That does not work. You then try to demonize anyone that does not agree with you implicitly by claiming that they follow your imaginary deity of evil, so that you have a lame excuse for not considering their opinions or supporting yours.

            I am not subject to any of your imaginary beings, nor am I subject to your beliefs. Your series of logical fallacies do not impress me. You are using the excluded middle, appeal to belief, non sequiturs, ad hominems, and others. And you have done nothing to answer the questions you were asked, nor to support any of your claims.

          • Amos Moses

            “Actually, I did present the objective fact”

            a “definition” is not evidence of anything much less “fact” ……… i have made no claim ….. you are the one making a claim it is a lie ….. so disprove the lie ….. it is done everyday in any court …… if you are unable …. fine … just admit it ….. IF it is myth … should be an easy task …… but this is a christian site and christians are here discussing things about christianity ….. the default here …. the A Priori is that scripture is true and i do not need to defend the truth ….. and ad hominems are personal attacks ….. there have been no attacks on you …. you disagree with the premise ….. that is not an attack ……. the adhominems HAVE come from YOU ………. re: “intolerance, bigotry, ignorance” ….

            “I am not subject to any of your imaginary beings, nor am I subject to your beliefs.”

            absence of evidence is not evidence of absence ….. and whether you can see it or not ….. like gravity ….. you are subject to it ……

          • MarkSebree

            “a “definition” is not evidence of anything much less “fact” ”

            Actually, in this case, it is an objective fact which other things, in this case whether something meets that definition, can be measured. What’s more, I was referencing not a personal definition, but rather a definition which comes from unrelated and authoritative sources.

            Definitions are used in courts every day. The laws define what the crime is, and what is necessary to be accused of that crime. Contracts define the terms used within them as well, so that all are clear on what is said and what something means.

            There is actually no a priori that the scripture is true. You are assuming that it is true because you want it to be true. However, the scripture does not hold true for anyone that does not believe in that religion or in your personal interpretation of your religious tome. There is no reason to think that any deity exists, and there is no objective evidence that one does.

            As far as evidence that the Bible is a mythology, lets first be clear on the definition of what a myth is, since you do not seem to know.

            From the Merriam-Webster Dictionary online:

            Myth:
            a story that was told in an ancient culture to explain a practice, belief, or natural occurrence

            a usually traditional story of ostensibly historical events that serves to unfold part of the world view of a people or explain a practice, belief, or natural phenomenon

            a person or thing having only an imaginary or unverifiable existence

            From Dictionary dot com:

            a traditional or legendary story, usually concerning some being or hero or event, with or without a determinable basis of fact or a natural explanation, especially one that is concerned with deities or demigods and explains some practice, rite, or phenomenon of nature.

            Now let’s look at the Bible. Traditional stories, check. mostly without determinable basis, check. Tries to explain natural phenomenon, check. Includes deities and demigods, check. Explains practices and beliefs, check.

            The Bible fits the definition of a collection of myths, i.e. a mythology, quite exactly.

            “he adhominems HAVE come from YOU ………. re: “intolerance, bigotry, ignorance” ….”

            Actually, I have been directing them at your beliefs, not at you. The ignorance comes from the fact that Christianity, especially right wing Christianity, has a long history of suppressing and denying knowledge and research about the world. Copernicus, Kepler, Galileo, evolution, human sexuality, global warming, and many more people and subjects have been denied or persecuted Christianity’s desire to keep people from learning about how the world really works.

            Intolerance and bigotry are also hallmarks of right wing Christianity. Besides the verses in the Bible which call for the death of people who believe differently, there are also verses which call such people “fools” and other things in order to give believers a reason to shut their ears to other beliefs. Additionally, Christian beliefs have been used to justify denial of rights to many groups, as well discrimination against them. These include, but are not limited to, blacks, Jews, gays, atheists, women, Muslims, non-Christians, and pretty much anyone else that the Christian does not like. You use your religion to try to claim that everyone is subject to your beliefs, but you are not subject to anyone else’s, which is counter to US law and the US Constitution.

            And, of course, your deity is petty, hateful, and jealous. The Jealousy is explicitly admitted in Exodus. The pettiness is seen all through the Bible, from the myth about Adam and Eve being ejected from the Garden of Eden, to the mythical Flood, to how he keeps “hardening the heart” of the Egyptian pharaoh when Moses is petitioning for the release of the Hebrew slaves, to how he treats anyone that disagrees with his so-called prophets. The hatefulness is seen in how calls for so much genocide in the Hebrew conquests.

            “absence of evidence is not evidence of absence ….. and whether you can see it or not ….. like gravity ….. you are subject to it ……”

            However, gravity can be measured and tested. There is evidence of its existence. There is no evidence of the existence of any deity, nor is there a logical reason why one should exist.

            And I am not subject to your personal beliefs or your personal religion. You can lie about it all you want in claiming that I am, but they remain lies.

          • Amos Moses

            “There is actually no a priori that the scripture is true.”

            the A Priori HERE, is that it is ………

            And while all the rest of that is very interesting, and your personal opinion ……. it does not prove that the bible is myth ………..

            “However, gravity can be measured and tested. There is evidence of its existence. ”

            No …….. its effects can measured and tested ………. but its existence cannot ….. prove to me that the love for your wife, assuming you are a man, exists …… if i take all of the radioactive material, place it in a giant ball of lead ….. it still exists ….. but you cannot detect it, measure it, nor can you see it …… but it still is ….. absence of evidence is not evidence of absence ……

          • MarkSebree

            “the A Priori HERE, is that it is ………”

            Sorry, but your own mind does not change the facts.

            “And while all the rest of that is very interesting, and your personal opinion ……. it does not prove that the bible is myth ………..”

            Actually, the overwhelming, objective evidence is that the bible is a series of myths, i.e. a book of mythology. It is not just my personal opinion. I was referencing well known aspects of the Bible. Pretty much the entire book of Genesis is nothing more than a series of myths, for example. Much of Exodus is as well. I mean, come on. You don’t think that a guy could find a suitable stone on a mountain to create tablets from, and then carve those tables with his rules for his people in a few days?

            “No …….. its effects can measured and tested ………. but its existence cannot”

            If it exists in reality and is objective in nature, then it is its existence can be measured in some fashion and proven.

            “prove to me that the love for your wife, assuming you are a man, exists ”

            I am a man, and I am single. No wife. I also use my real name.

            However, love is subjective, not objective. It exists only in the mind of the person feeling the emotion. If you are claiming that your deity has an objective existence, rather than is nothing more than a product of your own mind, then you need to provide some objective proof of its existence, which means that your “proof” cannot require the observer or evaluator to believe as you do.

            “if i take all of the radioactive material, place it in a giant ball of lead ….. it still exists ….. but you cannot detect it, measure it, nor can you see it …… but it still is ….. absence of evidence is not evidence of absence ……”

            However, the lead ball can be dissected, and evaluated, subjected to spectroscopic, radioscopic, and chemical tests to determine the existence of the radioactive material, as well as which radioactive material it is, and even which isotope it is. For that matter, the decay elements of the radioactive material can be found and analyzed as well. This means that objective evidence of the radioactive material is detected and measured.

            The same cannot be said for your deity. No objective evidence of its existence has ever been presented, and there is no logical reason to suppose that it does exist.

          • Guest✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

            You’re rambling and none of your contentions are logical. 🙂

          • Amos Moses

            “Actually, the overwhelming, objective evidence is that the bible is a series of myths,”

            you cannot even tell us what the bible is about …….. and you reject it in any event …… so your opinions of it are less than useful ….. and meaningless ………

            “No objective evidence of its existence has ever been presented, and there is no logical reason to suppose that it does exist.”

            Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence ………..

          • Guest✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

            You talk too much, and much of what you say is wrong. Amos is right, and he’s smarter than you are.

          • Guest✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

            Again, you’re just rambling and none of what you say makes sense. You’re probably boring at parties.

          • Guest✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

            You deal in fiction. All your posts are mythology.

          • MarkSebree

            No, that is Amos’s and your posts that deal in fiction and mythology.

          • Guest✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

            You’re just throwing out everything you can think of hoping something will stick, yet you’ve not presented anything factual to back up your claims.

          • Guest✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

            You have trouble understanding Amos Moses because he’s smarter than you are.

          • MarkSebree

            Where are when has Amos shown that he is more intelligent than I? His writing style is atrocious and disjointed, which inhibits the transfer of his ideas. He refuses to address the questions he as been asked, and he keeps engaging in logical fallacies. I have run rings around him a number of times.

          • Guest✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

            God says atheists are fools. Like I said, Amos Moses is smarter than you are.

          • MarkSebree

            Actually, the men in power who wrote that section of the Bible said that atheists were fools in order to keep their ignorant followers from listening to people who did not believe as the men in power told the followers to believe, because of the followers listened and actually started to learn things that were verifiable and factual, then the followers would likely not remain followers.

            Amos has not shown that he is smarter than anyone, especially me.

          • Guest✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

            No, God Himself has said you are a fool.

            Amos Moses is wise.

          • MarkSebree

            You have yet to show objectively that your deity even exists.

            Occam’s Razor shows that it is far more likely that men wrote that passage to keep their followers from listening to non-believers that were wiser and more knowledgeable than they were. After all, if those followers actually began to think for themselves, they would be more likely to see through the con job that the priests were laying on them, and walk away.

            After all, it has certainly worked on you.

            Amos has yet to show any wisdom.

          • Guest✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

            You are straying off topic badly, Mark. Logic isn’t your strong suit.

            Amos is smarter than you are.

          • Guest✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

            You don’t know what you’re talking about. You’re just spouting nonsense because you don’t want to let go of your sins.

          • MarkSebree

            What sins? Prove that I have sinned according to my beliefs. I am not subject to your beliefs, which means that you cannot use them as your basis. And if you claim that I am subject to your beliefs, then YOU become subject to mine and everyone else’s.

            I know exactly what I am talking about, and I have consistently back up my claims, which Amos continually discounts.

          • Guest✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

            Sin isn’t based upon your beliefs. It’s based upon violation of God’s standards.

          • MarkSebree

            In other words, you cannot prove that I have sinned according to my beliefs.

            Sin is based exclusively on belief. And “God’s standards” is nothing more than the opinion of the person making the statement based on his interpretation and opinions of his mythology.

            The concept of “sin” has no objective reality. It is purely subjective in nature. Within a mythology, if you change the opinions about the interpretation of the mythology, say between clergy or between denominations, then you change what is considered to be a sin and what is not considered to be a sin. That is why some Christians, for example, consider abortion to be a sin, and others do not. Why homosexuality is considered to be a sin by some, and not by others. And so on for pretty much every major social and political position in the USA.

            And when you change mythologies completely, you can completely change what is and is not considered to be a sin. And in this, the list is nearly endless because of the wide variety of religion and religious beliefs in this world.

            All of this means, assuming that you have read and can understand it, is that what is and is not a sin is nothing more than a personal opinion wrapped up and presented in a manner with the intention of controlling other people’s thoughts and behaviors, and to keep the presenter’s words and motives from being questioned.

            You are basically stating that I and everyone else is subject to your opinions about our behavior according to your opinions about your religious beliefs, and yet you are not likewise subject to anyone else’s similar opinions about your behavior according to their opinions about their mythologies. This is an extremely arrogant and prideful position that you are taking. It also shows the inherent weakness of your position.

          • Guest✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

            Dude, your beliefs are meaningless. God’s truth is all that matters.

          • MarkSebree

            My opinions matter at least as much as yours do. And my opinions matter more when dealing with my life and my beliefs.

            Your opinions about what is the “truth” is what does not matter. Attributing your personal opinions to your imaginary friend in order to keep them from being examined or questioned does not work. No matter what you attribute to your deity, it will still be taken as being nothing more than your personal opinions since that is all they are.

            And you are showing the hubris and arrogance I mentioned in the previous post. You think that everyone is subject to your personal interpretation of your beliefs, but you are not likewise subject to everyone else’s interpretation of their beliefs. You are showing that you want your beliefs to be given special privileges that are not available to anyone else, no matter what other people believe or what the laws of this country say.

            That is arrogance and hubris.

          • Guest✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

            I deal in facts, not opinion, and you are not the topic of the discussion, so stay on topic.

  • http://www.bing.com/ Martin Smit

    Atheists hate children. At least these ones do.

    • Cozmo the Magician

      Back that up with even one bit of evidence and you might have a point. OTOH, the FFRF is not just atheists , they are people of any/none/all beliefs who protect our children from obvious violations of the law.

      • http://www.bing.com/ Martin Smit

        Okay, so they’re homosexuals who just want to get at the children before an illegal religion teaches them morality.

        • tubi11

          No, they’re Americans who value the separation of church and state. Some of them might be homersexuals, I don’t know and it doesn’t matter. Surely any religion has ample opportunity to teach them morality at, you know, a church? Or temple, synagogue, mosque, etc.

        • Croquet_Player

          I think you’ll find that it’s overwhelmingly clerics, not atheists, who routinely abuse children.

        • lady_black

          Hahahaha. Flagged.

    • tubi11

      No, FFRF hates groups that think they don’t have to follow the rules because they are special. In other words, they oppose the granting of special rights and support equal rights.

    • Mario Strada

      No, we like children very much, especially served in a marinara sauce with Fava beans and a glass of Chianti.
      We just think that too much religion makes the meat tough. Otherwise we love children.

    • Croquet_Player

      Then I’m due back an awful lot of very nice gifts for birthdays, graduations, and all kinds of things. The children will be very disappointed.

    • lady_black

      I like children. Properly prepared.

      • Croquet_Player

        Potatoes. Listen, I’m sure we can all agree that a baby is perfectly delicious, baked, stewed, or fried. I don’t wish to start an argument. It’s an unimpeachably delicious dish. It really becomes a question of what to serve next to it. I’m suggesting potatoes, because, much like babies, they can be served in a billion different ways, and everyone loves them. I’m not certain, but I but I think the New York Times is publishing a retrospective of baby dishes and accompanying sides, circa 1951 – 1984. Old school! Super excited!

  • Uzza

    Minor correction, the FFRF isn’t an “atheist activist group”. It’s a non-profit dedicated to the separation of church and state, whose membership includes every religion. A petition they filed in my town was led by a Baptist pastor and a Hindu temple.

    • violetteal

      FFRF is a terrorist organization bent on destroying the fabric of our nation.

      • Ambulance Chaser

        Define “terrorist.”

        • Uzza

          non-christian?

        • violetteal

          Terrorism is the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes. FFRF is not using violence but they are using threats and are coercing those with things like lawsuits to get their way.

          • MarkSebree

            However, that does not make them “terrorists”. They do this at the behest of someone who actually has legal standing. A threat of a lawsuit, where the letter goes to those in authority, gives those who the group believes to be in the wrong a chance to fix the problem cheaply. A well written challenge to practices will cite multiple relevant court decisions which shows that they are in the wrong. Additionally, the right to petition the government for redress of grievances is guaranteed in the First Amendment. And a public school is part of the government.

          • violetteal

            The point is, the FFRF is by it’s very nature antagonistic toward any group that supports religion. The use the system founded by people of good faith that was designed to protect those who wish to practice their religions in public, against the system. It’s classic, voting in a monarch thus ending democracy. It’s psychologically damaging to any person who wished to be free, having a an adversary force you into servitude.

          • MarkSebree

            “The point is, the FFRF is by it’s very nature antagonistic toward any group that supports religion. ”

            No, that is not correct. The FFRF is antagonistic towards any group that tries to mix religion and government, since that is a violation of our laws..

            “The use the system founded by people of good faith that was designed to protect those who wish to practice their religions in public, against the system.”

            Our system of government was founded by educated men who used the principles of Enlightenment and Reason to create a new system of government where religion held no sway. And there is a difference between those who wish to practice their religion in public, and those that wish to use the government to force their religious beliefs onto others. The FFRF goes after the later, not the former.

            ” It’s psychologically damaging to any person who wished to be free, having a an adversary force you into servitude.”

            That is why the FFRF fight against those that wish to chain the minds of the people and force them into servitude to their religion. And that is why theocrats target schools, especially elementary schools. Children that young do not have the mental defenses to protect themselves against the religious proselytizing of their teachers and principals, and they are required to be there as well.

            Keep in mind that anything that you wish to allow for Christianity also becomes available to every other religion, including Satanism, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, and every other religion since the government and government agents are required by law to treat all religions exactly the same.

          • violetteal

            The name is Freedom FROM Religion Foundation. They’ve told me all that they need me to know and what their goals are for the USA. It’s an atheist zealot group. Given enough power, they’d be no different than ISIS.

          • MarkSebree

            Actually, they are a lot different than ISIS. However, Christianity has shown in the past that if they are given enough power, they do act much the same as ISIS. That history is why our Founding Fathers created a secular Constitution and government, and why the First Amendment includes the Establishment Clause before the Conscious Clause.

            Of course, if you do not think that having the freedom to not have other people’s religious beliefs imposed on you, there are plenty of countries which have theocracies and theonomies for you to visit or move to.

          • Guest✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

            That’s incorrect. Christianity does things like build hospitals, feed the hungry, clothe the naked, and help the poor. Christianity makes the world a better place. ISIS tries to destroy it.

            George Washington said, “Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity,
            religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man
            claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these
            great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of
            men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought
            to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their
            connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked:
            Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the
            sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments
            of investigation in courts of justice ? And let us with caution indulge
            the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion.
            Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds
            of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect
            that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.”

          • MarkSebree

            “That’s incorrect. Christianity does things like build hospitals, feed the hungry, clothe the naked, and help the poor. Christianity makes the world a better place.”

            So do the Muslims. in the Middle East mostly.

            Christianity does not make the world a better place if you are not a Christian. History has shown that Christians in power act much the same as ISIS does towards those who do not agree with them. And it continues right up until today. Countries where Christianity has nearly autocratic/theocratic control create some very, very harsh and oppressive laws against peoples that they do not like, such as homosexuals.

            “ISIS tries to destroy it.”

            Actually, for Muslims of the correct persuasion, ISIS controlled territory is relatively safe. Basically, ISIS wants what Christianity and Islam both had in the Middle Ages, absolute control over a large geographical region. The trouble is that it is much harder to get control over a geographical region these days because of rapid travel and high tech weapons.

            One things that both ISIS and present-day far right wing Christians think is that they are the “chosen one’s” of their deity, and thus want Armageddon to happen, thinking that they will survive it and/or ascend to their respective “heaven”. In that sense, they are both nihilists and extremely dangerous.

          • Guest✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

            None of the good deeds I mentioned were done prior to Judaism and Christianity. Anyone who does those deeds are mimicking Christians.

            You are clueless about ISIS.

          • violetteal

            Untrue an all counts. ISIS is a terrorist group that wants to rid their world of all dissent and subjugate people to their ways of thinking and living. FFRF is similar; they don’t use bombs but they use the legal system and monetary threats to achieve their goals.
            Our founding fathers sought to eliminate a state religion. The idea that a republic with many kinds of faiths and creeds could live together in for the common good was their goal. Read the writings.
            The only theocracies in the world are Muslim one, accept for the Vatican. If I’m wrong, you’ll be sure to fact check me on that. Nations and states use religion to control people in order to exploit them. The US acknowledged God as a sovereign over the universe, as a law giver to protect humanity from the failures of government and organized religion. A higher authority over a king or president, empowers the people to not fear the government; keeping government in check. When you take the law-giver out of the equation; you have tyranny. Look at all of the dictators in the past 4500 years, and you’ll see men who placed themselves above God.

          • Mark Mullen

            No different then Isis? Do you have children?(I hope not, if your teaching them things like that…) I really hope you have the tiniest grain of perspective somewhere in your soul. How many people has FFRF killed again? This was really a silly thing to say…

          • Guest✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

            None of what you said is true.

          • MarkSebree

            In your opinion. Reality is not subject to your opinion.

          • Guest✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

            My opinions are based on reality, not the other way around. You, on the other hand….

          • MarkSebree

            “My opinions are based on reality, not the other way around. ”

            Really? From what I have read of your posts, you opinions tend to be ignorant and ill-informed, and little to no relationship to reality.

            “You, on the other hand….”

            I base my opinions on the real world, and not some Bronze Age mythology written to control nomads and goat herders, and others lacking any sort of liberal education.

          • Guest✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

            Still no science, huh, Mark? 🙂

          • (((dagobarbz)))

            Every definition of terrorism involves violence. Look it up for yourself.
            Your argument is fail, all the violence seems to be coming from Jesus’s unChristian followers.

          • violetteal

            I did look the word up. Violence is one way of committing terror but not the only way.

          • (((dagobarbz)))

            You don’t get to ignore inconvenient definitions, dear. Terrorism, in all the definitions, involves violence. You’re not Funk or Wagnall, so just suck it up and admit you’re wrong.

      • MarkSebree

        So, supporting the law and the US Constitution is being a “terrorist organization” and being “bent of destroying the fabric of our nation”? You have very interesting definitions of those words, and I doubt that you will find your definitions in any mainstream dictionary.

        Calling out Christian privilege is using lawful means is not being a “terrorist organization”. Asking schools to follow the law is not trying to “destroy the fabric of our nation”. And the right to petition the government for redress of grievances, which includes public schools since they are part of the government, is enshrined in the First Amendment.

        • violetteal

          They are not defending the constitution or our laws. They are trying to remove any and all references in public and eventually private life that which is Christian and Jewish. Using the very things that protect freedom in order to kill it is terrorism.

          • MarkSebree

            And who are the FFRF trying to kill?

            The FFRF are defending the US Constitution. The government is forbidden by the First Amendment from promoting or disparaging any religion, including Christianity. This public school was promoting Christianity through the actions of the administration.

            Besides, your claim that the FFRF want to remove “all references in … private life that is Christian and Jewish” is nothing more than your fears amplified by right wing pundits who want to transform the USA into a theocracy or theonomy. They are the ones that are using the very concept of “religious liberty” in order to kill it, and kill religious freedom along with it.

            By the way, “public” in this sense means expression of religion by government officials while they are at work or while they are wielding the authority of the government in any capacity. I.e. “public officials”. Those same people off the clock and speaking for themselves have the same rights to follow their own beliefs as everyone else.

            When has the FFRF EVER gone after truly private expressions of religion? Expression of religion which did not involve on the job as a government employee or official, and which do not involve “public accommodations”, which means service to customers while running a business open to the public. The first runs afoul with the Establishment Clause, and the second runs afoul with business law and the Civil Rights Act.

          • (((dagobarbz)))

            1. Yes, they are upholding secular laws regarding secular schools.
            2. Do you know what hyperbole is? One example here, “…They are trying to remove any and all references in public and eventually private life…”

            No, “they’re” not. You’re implying that, some day, the gummint gonna come for your bibles along with your guns. That’s just silly. As silly as your use of the word “kill it” to describe a group that was illegally promoted by some school officials; a group that refused to abide by requirements.
            That’s hyperbole, blowing something out of proportion in order to elicit a dramatic reaction. Nobody’s killing anything, and the boogey man isn’t going to invade your home to search for bibles and crosses.

            I am sure parents of students are happy their kids are protected from outside groups seeking access to their little minds.

      • (((dagobarbz)))

        Yeah, in the same way the Constitution is a terrorist document bent on destroying the fabric of our nation…lol

  • Adrivalka

    Good job FFRF!
    When are these religious individuals are going to learn to adhere to the law.

    • wandakate

      You seem to be concerned about individuals adhering to the laws of the land (man made laws), but are you as concerned about the Moral Laws of GOD, which are the 10 commandments? Do they matter anymore? I don’t think they are invalid, or obsolete or irrelevant. People disregard the BIG 10, but those were GOD’s laws. What’s more important. Where are our priorities?

      • Worf

        Our priorities are with the laws and constitution of the United States. The 10 commandments are not law to anybody that doesn’t believe in your god, nor do they have any bearing on the law of this country.

        Only 2 of the commandments are actually laws (and they are common sense laws in any civilized society, long predating the bible), and the first 4 commandments are distinctly unconstitutional. You can follow them if you want, but you can’t expect others to.

        • wandakate

          And my GOD knew that most people would reject the laws that He provided, and that’s why He created a Heaven and a Hell. It’s our choice which place we choose to spend our eternity.

        • wandakate

          Other people are responsible for their own salvation or none at all. Others are going to be accountable whether they were believers or not. We are in charge of our own fate. We have a free will to make our own decisions. People can choose the LORD or they can reject Him, it’s totally up to them, and they seal their own fate by whatever decision they make.
          ALL 10 commandments are relevant whether people want to adhere to them or not…GOD is ultimately in charge, not humans, not you and not I. GOD gives life and GOD takes it away. I understand that not everyone believes that, but again that is their choice that they make according to what they know or how they perceive things.

  • Mario Strada

    This club had a privileged status in the school in respect to the other clubs. Is that correct?

    The FFRF only asked that the club follow the rules like the other clubs, i.e. no preferential treatment such as:
    ===========================================================
    — The club was mentioned in the weekly newsletter,” where students were told to “Stop by the office to sign up.” No other club received that treatment.

    — The club’s meetings were listed in the school calendar. Other clubs were not.

    — The principal personally promoted the club to students and parents.

    — The club began meeting a mere five minutes after the end of the school day, a perk not reserved for other groups.

    — School officials gave out Club Monarch registration forms and helped coordinate collection of those forms.

    — School officials planned club meetings using official school email address. Can’t do that.

    — The Superintendent spoke about “sharing… the heart of Jesus with the children”.

    ===========================================================
    This is textbook preferential treatment.

    But what is very telling about this group is that once they were caught breaking the law (Yes, this is breaking the law.) instead of complying with the rules and stop pushing their religious club on public school students, they disbanded it.

    2 Guesses:

    1) It makes for a better narrative.

    “Atheist group forces Christian club to disband”

    sounds a lot more gratifying, from a martyr’s point of view than

    “Atheist group makes Christian club follow the rules. (Like everyone else)”

    2) Obviously the club was never there for the benefit of the students. If that was the case, those in charge would have bit the bullet but kept it alive to service the students.
    Instead they threw a issy fit and closed it down. That tells me the “good of the students” was never a factor in this. It was pure and simple indoctrination.

    It is shameful, it was illegal and the way it was wind down was so they could get the last bit of mileage out of the story.

    This is christian persecution in the USA. Being told not to break the law.
    There are real persecute christians in lands far away. These people cheapen their struggle.

    • Jolanda Tiellemans

      And they claim that homosexuals want special rights.

    • Chet

      They should’ve stood their ground, continually lifting up the Lord Jesus Christ of Calvary, and let the threat work its way through the courts. And the will of God Almighty be done as opposed to being fearful of anti God anti Christ forces of darkness. No more fainting in the face of liberal atheistic adversity only to drop and roll over. Stand Up, Stand Up for Jesus Ye Soldiers of the Cross…

      • Jolanda Tiellemans

        They broke the law, but I’ll guess the law applies to anyone but not to Christians.

        • Chet

          No law was broken, that’s your opine. However, Christians are to obey the law as long as such law does not conflict or run contrariwise to God’s law, i.e., abortion and homosexual marriage… The USA was founded upon Judeo Christian precepts of God’s Word, so, no conflict there. What is obvious under America’s “fundamental transformation” is a movement to separate the Almighty from modernist society altogether and replace it with secular humanism and other man made “religions”. But, it will not succeed… Only the Lord Jesus Christ saves man’s eternal souls, and none other can do so… And this applies to all men everywhere without exception.

          • Uzza

            Are Christians obligated to obey laws against murder since these run contrary to God’s law given in Deuteronomy 17 to kill non-believers? Does the same hold for Muslims, whose Quran 9:5 gives the same command?
            With half the student body trying to kill the other half, it might be difficult for any learning to take place.

          • disqus_bvzyOg5eso

            You need to re-read it again. As is says… If a man or woman living among you in one of the towns the Lord gives you is found doing evil in the eyes of the Lord your God in violation of his covenant, and contrary to my command has worshiped other gods, bowing down to them or to the sun or the moon or the stars in the sky, and this has been brought to your attention, then you must investigate it thoroughly. If it is true and it has been proved that this detestable thing has been done in Israel, take the man or woman who has done this evil deed to your city gate and stone that person to death. On the testimony of two or three witnesses a person is to be put to death, but no one is to be put to death on the testimony of only one witness. The hands of the witnesses must be the first in putting that person to death, and then the hands of all the people. You must purge the evil from among you.

          • Uzza

            Yes, it says that if you witness someone worshiping other gods, you must kill them. By US law, that is murder. Now my question was, are Christians bound to obey God’s law and thereby commit murder?

          • Jolanda Tiellemans

            But what is very telling about this group is that once they were caught breaking the law (Yes, this is breaking the law.) instead of complying with the rules and stop pushing their religious club on public school students, they disbanded it.

            Try again.

          • Chet

            Offering such activity is by no means pushing same. Not being closer to the particular matter than what one can read here, as perhaps you are, I have no idea why they cancelled this activity. Perhaps it was better than to compromise the truth being offered, or, more likely, they became afraid in the face of liberal atheistic adversity and opted to drop and roll over such as many such Christians are wont to do these days. That is as opposed to daring to be a Daniel and taking a stand for righteousness, despite the threat or persecution and/or suing…

          • Jolanda Tiellemans

            If they just had complied by the rules there wouldn’t have been any problem. No suing, no nothing. But instead they disbanded the group.

          • Chet

            And if atheistic liberals had just left the group alone as opposed to scaring them, things would be carried on, interested children would be blessed and no one would be hurt or otherwise displaced as a result. The Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ of Calvary is for man’s good, everywhere, and not his hurt… Thanks for the exchange of ideas.

          • raytheist

            “he Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ of Calvary is for man’s good,”

            That is an opinion. History is full of evidence to the contrary.

            If the group had followed the rules and not been given preferential treatment, their club would have been able to remain.

          • Chet

            Remember your words when the issue of Islam or lgbtxyzf or homosexual gatherings commence…

          • Jolanda Tiellemans

            The group got preferential treatment which is not given to any other group, hence FFRF pointed that out. And Christians accuse homosexuals of wanting special rights. Just follow the rules and there are no problems, don’t follow the rules and you get suit, simple.

          • Chet

            And when the Christians get threatened, dare to be a Daniel, honor the Lord and allow him to fight the battle in lieu of giving up and rolling over…

          • (((dagobarbz)))

            Keep it in church,. Just because there is a pool of unchurched children attending a mandatory public school, this doesn’t mean they’re there to be exploited by proselytizers.

            You’re missing the reason for the objection. Trying to impose your religious beliefs on other people’s children in a secular setting is like peeing in your neighbor’s swimming pool. If you can’t tell the difference between a pool and a toilet, stay home.

            You really have “no idea why they cancelled this activity?” I thought the writer made it pretty clear; they did not want to abide by regulations relating to this sort of activity.

            It sounds like this group thinks they should get special treatment because, religion, and they canceled their program rather than abide by the law.
            That’s a real fine lesson they’re teaching the kiddies by example there.

            Ignore laws you don’t agree with, and blame others, play the victim. There’s a good reason right there to keep these people away from students.

          • Chet

            Sorry, but one indwelt by the Holy Spirit takes his Lord with him everywhere… Christ resides within the Christian, and not in brick and mortar…

          • (((dagobarbz)))

            Yeah? Then expect to get your snout slapped by a figurative rolled up newspaper if you can’t keep it to yourselves.

            Other people’s kids aren’t your religious fodder.

          • Stuart

            Ignorance rears its ugly head so clearly in people like you…you don’t agree with something so you become ugly….that ugliness comes from your heart..parents send their kids to church….like some parents do not send their kids to church…because you don’t agree with Christianity what gives you the right to determine what others believe? Your argument is simple peasant mentality…s.eriously

          • (((dagobarbz)))

            I thought it was pretty clear. Our kids aren’t in school for your convenience. What’s ignorant about comprehending the difference between your church and a public school?

            I’d say the peasant mentality is oozing from your side of the line, insisting your silly superstitions somehow supersedes secular law.

            You are completely free to send your kids to a religious school or Church. Nobody is stopping you.
            Hands off our kids…why is that message so difficult for you to grasp?

          • (((dagobarbz)))

            My mother used to refer to this behavior as “cutting off your nose to spite your face.”

            They done took their ball and went home. Good riddance.

          • Stuart

            The law…the law…the law….are you a cop? Is the law that much of a focus? Can you give me an indication where you have fought against…let’s say ……the law against racism? The law against animal cruelty? I could go on….but seriously…..the law? The root here is your prejudice….

          • Jolanda Tiellemans

            So you’re saying we should ignore the law when it comes to Christians? And they claim that homosexuals want special rights.

          • wandakate

            If one reads the scriptures they will find that ALL of this is supposed to be happening during the end of days, the period of time just before the return of CHRIST. They will be lovers of self, blasphemous, unruly, lovers of everything but GOD. They will be boastful and proud. These seem to be the signs of the times that we’re now finding ourselves in.
            Many people want GOD on the very back burner. Another religion (of self) and another JESUS is what they want. What our country was founded on and what it is now has become two different things. These people who were supposed to be Christians are falling away, they are lukewarm, and they have backslidden. They are weak in their faith and they are caving into the evil ones and what society is putting before them instead of holding onto their faith and GOD…They are folding under pressure, shame, shame, shame…
            Satan and the demons are very pleased and happy right along with the FFRF organization.
            It’s all the works of satan (the god of this evil world). JESUS will return and He alone will set all of this straight, and punishment will abound. Only those who put on the whole armor or GOD and stood their ground will have crowns and rewards in the end. JESUS said that His reward would be with Him. He will assign to each one according to his WORK! He told us we MUST “persevere” till the end. Our WORK is to proclaim the coming Kingdom of GOD on earth. There is no other way to the Kingdom than through JESUS CHRIST. Judgment day will come and they will all be accountable, even though they don’t think they will be.
            Christians MUST stand up for what is right and for the truth and for what they believe, otherwise there will be no Christians left. Everything that has been right will be wrong, and all that has always been wrong will all the sudden be right. It’s looking like to be the signs of the times are fast approaching. If every Christian would stand up stand up for JESUS as well as the members of the FFRF do, then GOD would be very pleased with us. We would then hear at that time, “Enter into the Kingdom that my FATHER has prepared for you from the foundations of the earth.”

          • Chet

            Amen and Amen. Hasten the day Lord Jesus!

          • wandakate

            Thank you. It’s wonderful to see somebody else of like mindedness. This and much more is what I wrote in my new books that were just published back in May of this year. There were 4 manuscripts that I combined into two books. Book 1 and 2 are together and book 3 and 4 are together. I am getting the same Amen response from them. NOW is the time to stand up for JESUS, our time is shorter than it was yesterday. So many are weak, falling by the wayside, and not standing up for the truth of the word. Keep the faith Chet…His rewards are going to be with Him to give according to our “works” shall be. Rev. 22: 12 and 14. The ones who DO the commandments are the ones that will be blessed as well.

          • Chet

            God bless you and may your new books be very successful in sales and equipping the saints for service as they Keep On The Firing Line.

          • wandakate

            Thanks for the good word. The main problem is obedience. We need a change of heart. People want GOD on their terms, not on His terms. They don’t seem to want the “TRUTH”. They have lived a lie of tradition for all these years and don’t wanna change. They seem to be too lazy to make any effort to learn the bible truth. Do you think the 10 commandments are relevant for today. Are they valid? Should we be following them? Most people disregard them entirely and just do whatever feels good. Sin is the transgression of the law isn’t it?

          • Chet

            At the root of this drawdown from things of God Almighty and the Lord Jesus Christ is atheistic liberalism, most recently taken real hold while America has undergone “fundamental transformation” from her Judeo/Christian roots. And if dems continue to rule from the WH, well, America as was once known will no longer be. That’s why, it’s clearly Trump for me, not that my faith is in man, any man, per se but the good Lord works through leaders and I pray he’ll do just that via this gentleman, all for His Glory and Honor, the sake of America and her allies, especially so, Israel.

          • wandakate

            Well the ONLY sensible choice would be Trump. I don’t put my faith in ANY man, only in GOD. Man can not save us, only GOD is capable of doing that. We are to be in the world but NOT of the world. Let’s just pray that all will be okay b/c this is a very tight race indeed.

          • (((dagobarbz)))

            I like how you CAPITALIZE FATHER and JESUS CHRIST, yet spell out Satan, a proper name that should be capitalized, in all lower case.

            It sounds like the people who wrote all this down knew that at some point, religion would be marginalized and ultimately discarded as we learned more about the mysteries of our world.

            Nobody today thinks stars are holes in the firmament through which shines the glory of Heaven…

          • https://disqus.com/home/channel/theangryatheist/ ≐Ṁ𝒾𝕔ⓗa𝖊𝗹 𝑮-13≐

            But, they do think that, or other such “stuff”.

          • (((dagobarbz)))

            lol, they’re not biased or anything. Then again, I deliberately don’t capitalize god, because it gives them a mad.

          • wandakate

            Capital letters get our attention. They also can refer to something important, something or somebody meaningful. GOD, JESUS CHRIST, HOLY SPIRIT etc. are in caps as to show respect to that name, whereas the name “satan” doesn’t deserve any respect in my humble opinion. Not even a capital S. He came to kill, steal and destroy souls and that is what him and the demons do 24/7 with NO regard for anybody.
            I have written books and all through them I have reserved the Capital letters for “respect” and “awe” to the LORD, and none whatsoever to satan. They are written throughout the books like this
            JESUS-GOD-LORD-HOLY SPIRIT etc. (all caps)
            satan/demon (all lower case letters).
            Respect deserves CAPS, whereas no respect deserves nothing more than normal lower case letters…

          • (((dagobarbz)))

            “the name “satan” doesn’t deserve any respect in my humble opinion. ”

            How very humble of you. Do you know what ‘hypocrisy’ is?

          • boneheadaudio

            On the internet, ALL CAPS IS JUST YELLING!

          • MarkSebree

            Not quite. Judicious use of capitalized words can also be for emphasis. Since we are limited to simple text, there are not really very many ways to call attention to an important point. A word or two being capitalized can be for emphasis and to call attention to that word.

            And other traditional use of a word being capitalized is when that word is being defined by a dictionary or in a dictionary-like fashion, i.e. WORD: and then the definition. These are also often set apart by blank lines above and below the definition(s).

            It is when longer phrases, sentences, and paragraphs are capitalized that the connotation is that the writer is “yelling”.

          • wandakate

            YES thank you very much. Must have been two minds running on the same channel as you are saying basically the same thing that I was telling him all along. Like-mindedness is a great thing.

          • MarkSebree

            I have been dealing with text only electronic communications and newsgroups for 30 years, since before the internet was invented. The rules go back to at least the ’70s and ArpaNet/Darpanet.

          • Guest✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

            You love to hear yourself talk at parties, don’t you?

          • MarkSebree

            No. I am the silent one that you would never notice at parties. However, that is non sequitur to this discussion.

          • wandakate

            Capitalized words are used to call our “attention” to something relevant, something we deem important. When it’s just one single word as in “JESUS”, then it’s not to be considered yelling, only if it was an entire sentence then it certainly could be considered “yelling”.
            JACK AND JILL RAN UP THE HILL TO GET A PAIL OF WATER… there is then a difference. Being petty solves nothing.

          • (((dagobarbz)))

            Wait…are you saying that your doctrine supersedes the laws of the land if you don’t agree with them?

            Here’s the secular take :
            If you don’t approve of abortion, don’t get one.
            If you don’t approve of marriage equality, don’t get gay married.

            It’s your choice, but it’s our choice as well. You don’t get to choose for us.

          • Chet

            And neither do secular humanists, the forces of anti God anti Christ choose for Christians and Jews…. And don’t take our tax money to fund abortions.

          • (((dagobarbz)))

            How can you be this ignorant?
            We aren’t the ones breaking the law, and no tax money funds abortions.
            NO. PUBLIC. MONEY.
            You can look it up, but then you’ll find you’re wrong. Plus you won’t have that to whine about any more.

            No tax money is used to fund abortions. Get it?

          • Chet

            Check PP and you’l need go no further, got it…

          • (((dagobarbz)))

            You mean that health clinic that provides services to lower income citizens? The clinic where abortions make up 3% of all their services?
            The clinic that cannot take public money to fund abortions?

            THAT Planned Parenthood? Or does PP stand for something else?

          • MarkSebree

            Public Proselytizing?

          • (((dagobarbz)))

            Pro Priapism?

          • Chet

            There are quite a number of places that provide women’s health services but do not engage in abortion, period. American’s tax dollars could just as easily be directed elsewhere and services yet provided to all in need.

          • (((dagobarbz)))

            Actually, there are not. PP is the largest network of women’s health clinics in the nation and no, there are not “quite a number of places” besides them. In many communities, they’re the only facility available.

            In Texas, where they closed most clinics, women are dying of pregnancy-related problems, the death rate has doubled and Texas is now up with third world countries where pregnancy related deaths are concerned.

            Why do you think it’s okay to deny women health care and let them die?

          • Chet

            No sane person thinks such, man. Do you also know the number of unwanted babies denied the opportunity to be born alive? Just asking…

          • (((dagobarbz)))

            Non sequitur.

    • Stuart

      Really sad that people like you spend so much time on kiddies clubs and Becky the law when all around you your laws are being broken….by your politicians, by your collegues, in fact by your society….yet this is one that you take on…it is telling…your prejudice is clear…..you should take up something that saves lives….fight against racism….fight hunger and disease…but yet thisis your issue…you are very sad….and it would seem that there are many like you….your claim of indoctrination …..do you have kids? What story do you tell them…that there is no God or do you like many tell them thatthe truth is relative….and that is not your form of indoctrination? Do you not realise that belief inChrist is a choice that many kids when they grow up choose not to make? Even after your so called indoctrination?….no…it your prejudice talking and this has a root….butthis you are welcome to deny…please remember this…one day you will be confronted with this simple fact….whether I’m right or wether you arre right….if I’m wwrong then the lights go out…if you are wrong….and I am right….your eternity will be very hard….blessings….focus rather on that which uplifts the downtrodden. Instead of treading on others because you dont agree with their beliefs….and don’t be ry hte law if most of your time you don’t truly care about the law in reality

  • Maltnothops

    You have to wonder why this club felt it wouldn’t be able to prevail in the marketplace of ideas unless it cheated.

  • Croquet_Player

    Well done, Freedom From Religion Foundation. Children have a right to be free from proselytizing in school.

  • Reason2012

    Google public school islam and see how islam is forced upon kids and FFRF does nothing – shows you they are really anti-Christian but pro-islam.

    • james blue

      Hmm…. I posted 4 links from the first google results page of FFRF going after Muslims, but it is now in “Hold on, this is waiting to be approved by Christian News Network.” limbo.. suffice to say they actually do. If it seems they go after Christians more often that’s probably because there are more incidents for them to go after.

      • Reason2012

        And yet google public school islam : kids still being forced to learn all about islam while FFRF goes after optional activities. if they were sincere the first ones you go after are the cases where it’s forced on every kid, not instead the optional activities that only those who want to go to will go to. Facts expose their anti-Christian motive.

        • james blue

          That’s what I did google.

          Teaching about religions in school, the tenets etc. isn’t the same as promoting a religion.

          Regardless your claim that they do not go after Muslims is factually incorrect.

          • Reason2012

            So when it’s islam you call it “teaching” even when it’s forced on every kid, no way to opt out. When it’s Christianity, even when it’s optional and parents have to go out of their way to opt in, you call it “promoting”

            Thank you for proving my point: anti-Christian to the core.

          • james blue

            In your bubble I’m sure you believe that.

          • Jolanda Tiellemans

            When I was in highschool, yes we learned about different religions in history class, Christianity, Islam, Hinduism and so on. On the other hand, I never went to any class learning any religion. See the difference here?

          • Reason2012

            They are not learning about islam AND Christianity – they are learning just about islam in those schools. In some cases they go to mosques, dress in their religious gear, are taught to pray and more. Please cite where they have a field trip to a church, are taught to pray to Christ and more as well.

          • Jolanda Tiellemans

            So you know what kids learn in every public school in your country, state?

        • King Arthropod Pendragonfly

          kids still being forced to learn all about islam

          Learning? I can understand how you would find that horrible.

          • Reason2012

            How is it you find learning about Christianity horrible? So much for that claim…

          • King Arthropod Pendragonfly

            You really can’t read, can you?

          • Jolanda Tiellemans

            I have no problem with kids learning about Christianity, Islam, Hinduism and so on. I have a problem with kids being forced to attent any religious class. See the difference?

          • Reason2012

            Yet this was an optional activity.
            Parents had to go out of their way to sign a permission slip to allow their kids to attend.
            So this was not in any way forced.
            Yet here you are attacking that right.
            See the difference?

          • MarkSebree

            The problem was the preferential treatment that the club got from the school and the principal. That is the point that you seem to keep missing.

          • Reason2012

            Oh so now it’s no longer “hey you can’t do that during lunch” to “well you can, but you’re getting preferential treatment”
            You guys jump from one claim to another every time your previous one was refuted. Thank you for showing everyone else the deception used to attack Christianity in schools while islam continues to flourish untouched by these same activists.

          • Uzza

            I’ve been reading all your comments. You keep insisting that ” the Constitution protects our rights to free exercise of religion”. You also claim that children are being forced to learn Islam in schools.
            Assuming that were the case, since they are freely practicing their religion by doing so, why do you object to it?

          • Reason2012

            Precisely my point. Why ARE these supposed “no religion in school” activists ok with entire schools being forced to be subjected to islam while raging over an OPTIONAL Christian activity that parents have to go out of their way to sign a permission slip before their kids can ever do so? Now why don’t you ask them why they’re ok with such mandatory ISLAM in some schools while pretending to be indignant at such an optional Christian activity instead.

          • Uzza

            You’ve ignored my question. Why do you oppose mandatory instruction in Islam in schools?

          • MarkSebree

            Uzza,

            I doubt that they will admit it, but it is probably because it is not mandatory instruction of Christianity. They are all about Christianity getting preferential treatment by the government and public schools, and they also scream “foul” when they are called on their behavior and told that they have to play by the same rules as everyone else.

            Besides, they can never point to instances where that has actually happened. When you dig into the instance, you find that it was instruction ABOUT Islam, often in conjunction with a Comparative Religions class, a current events class, or a Medieval History class.

          • Uzza

            SHHHH ( cats, bags, …. )

      • Nidalap

        This site doesn’t allow posting of links. It’s annoying, but you can replace the dots with semicolons and maybe throw a space in there…

    • lady_black

      No. Islam is not forced upon anyone. Teaching kids that Islam exists is not promotion of religion.

      • Reason2012

        Yes, when it’s teaching about Christianity in an optional parents must go out of their way to opt in, it’s “forcing”. When it’s islam, forcing every single student to learn about it, no way to opt out, it’s called “teaching kids it exists”.
        Thank you for proving my point – it’s nothing less than anti-Christian hate, while islam continues to be forced in more schools to all kids.

        • lady_black

          NO, it is NOT. End of story. Every kid in this country knows Christianity exists. When they are learning about other cultures, it would be very difficult to explain the culture without explanation of the dominant religion, whether it’s Islam, Judaism or Shintoism. This is NOT promotion of religion.

        • Jolanda Tiellemans

          Mmhmm, strange, I have friends who have kids in public schools and no one is forced to learn Islam, although they learn about Islam in history class. I think they learning about the Crusades now and weren’t there Muslims involved?

          • Reason2012

            I didn’t say ALL schools. That you pretend because there’s one school that does not force islam on all the kids means there are not any that do is disingenuous. Google public school islam.

          • Jolanda Tiellemans

            They go to different schools, so more then one.

    • King Arthropod Pendragonfly

      Google public school islam and see how islam is forced upon kids and FFRF does nothing

      Google “Professor Daoud Nassimi” and “Freedom From Religion Foundation” and get back to us.

      If you have any actual examples, feel free to post them.

      • Reason2012

        So you’re implying when you google public school islam nothing shows up. Thank you for showing everyone else how dishonest anti-Christian activists are. That schools are STILL forcing islam on every kid, during class time, exposes your claims as false.

        • King Arthropod Pendragonfly

          So you’re implying when you google public school islam nothing shows up.

          No. Can you read?

          That schools are STILL forcing islam on every kid, during class time, exposes your claims as false.

          What’s the name of a school that does this?

        • Jolanda Tiellemans

          Same here, nothing shows up which tells me that Islam is forced onto kids in public schools. Oh and those sites that have a problem with it are Christian sites or anti-Islam sites. No surprise there.

  • Reason2012

    “If a school chooses to allow outside groups to host after school programs on its property and an outside group decides to create a religious program, there must be no school involvement in the organization or promotion of that religious program,” FFRF wrote.

    So if the activity is during school, they’ll claim it has to instead be after school.

    If’ there IS one after school, they’ll attack it for a different reason.

    Where is the law that says a school cannot point out what activities are being offered at that specific school?

    Where is the law that says a school cannot be in any way involved in an activity that is held at their own school if it’s religious?

    The fact is the Constitution protects our rights to free exercise of religion – not “well you’re only free to do it when and were we let you” by those who hate that right. That they try to claim this is illegal and stop it should be met with a lawsuit – it’s that simple.

    • King Arthropod Pendragonfly

      So if the activity is during school, they’ll claim it has to instead be after school.

      It can’t be during school; public schools can’t host religious clubs during classtime.

      If’ there IS one after school, they’ll attack it for a different reason.

      They attacked this one for many specific reasons.

      Where is the law that says a school cannot point out what activities are being offered at that specific school?

      School officials promoted this religious club. They can’t do that.

      That they try to claim this is illegal and stop it should be met with a lawsuit – it’s that simple.

      Go ahead — the school would lose and have to pay the FFRF’s legal fees.

      • Reason2012

        // It can’t be during school; public schools can’t host religious clubs during classtime. //

        Please point to the law that says this free exercise of religion is illegal in a school that chooses to do so.

        // School officials promoted this religious club. They can’t do that. //

        They MENTIONED it because it IS a club at their school. Please show the law that restricts free exercise of religion where they cannot inform others of activities that are going on at their school.

        PS Google public school islam: kids are being forced to, during school, learn about islam, dress in islamic garb, visit mosques and more. During school time. Officials promote it. Those facts betray your claims. So much for their claim to be about freedom from religion instead of freedom from Christianity that they really are.

        • King Arthropod Pendragonfly

          Please point to the law that says this free exercise of religion is illegal in a school that chooses to do so.

          A public school can’t “choose” to follow a religion any more than it has freedom of association to only admit white students.

          But since you can’t find it, try McCollum v. Board of Education (1948)

          They MENTIONED it because it IS a club at their school.

          School officials promoted joining this club. They were pushing Christianity.

          PS Google public school islam

          No. YOU made a claim, so it’s up to YOU to back it up. Name SPECIFIC INSTANCES — you know, real schools, real people involved, dates. No handwaving claptrap.

          kids are being forced to, during school, learn about islam, dress in islamic garb, visit mosques and more. During school time. Officials promote it.

          Then cite some of them.

          Those facts betray your claims.

          You’ve given ZERO facts.

          • Reason2012

            McCollum v. Board of Education (1948)

            Where’s the law that says this free exercise of religion is illegal in a school that chooses to do so. Such a law would contradict the Constitution – so still waiting for that law.

          • King Arthropod Pendragonfly

            Where’s the law that says this free exercise of religion is illegal in a school that chooses to do so.

            “This is beyond all question a utilization of the tax-established and tax-supported public school system to aid religious groups to spread their faith. And it falls squarely under the ban of the First Amendment (made applicable to the States by the Fourteenth) as we interpreted it in Everson v. Board of Education”

            A public school doesn’t HAVE freedom of religion.

          • Reason2012

            So you cannot cite any such law, but only show how they claim the First Amendment prohibits free exercise of religion, rather than affording free exercise of religion, as if free exercise of religion means, “only when and where we let you”
            Thank you for proving there’s no such law.

          • King Arthropod Pendragonfly

            So you cannot cite any such law

            I did. Supreme court opinions are case law.

          • getstryker

            Search these headlines:

            Texas Students forced to dress in burqas, then taught to …

            “· … then taught to call Muslim terrorists “freedom fighters … students to dress up in Islamic garb and then … the Islamic religion in our schools. … ”

            Colorado students forced to wear Islamic garb on school …

            There are many more . . .

          • King Arthropod Pendragonfly

            All shot down as rightwing nonsense by snopes dot com.

          • getstryker

            Nice try but NO sale . . . a ‘January 2015 Colorado field trip for students . . . ‘ is NOT what I referred to. Check out the ‘headlines’ and articles I included in my previous comment and the video/pictures included with each article.

          • King Arthropod Pendragonfly

            There’s more than one snopes article shooting them down.

            Do you seriously think a public school could or would try to indoctrinate Islam into people’s children? Really? You’re that paranoid?

          • getstryker

            There are reports from media sources, videos, pictures, eye-witness accounts, student/parent reports, etc., and you rely on ‘Snopes’ to rebuttal that evidence. Really??? Paranoid – hardly !!!

          • King Arthropod Pendragonfly

            There are reports from media sources, videos, pictures, eye-witness accounts

            All right-wing hysteria that resulted in no successful lawsuits.

            If it’s really happening, where are the lawsuits?

          • getstryker

            Hahaha . . . I don’t play little troll games . . . the evidence is out there – do your own research. We’re done!

          • King Arthropod Pendragonfly

            the evidence is out there – do your own research.

            YOU made the claim, YOU back it up.

            The lawsuit Eklund v. Byron Union School District from 2003 was lost by the right-wingers. The supreme court declined to review their case in 2006, and since it only takes 4 justices to vote to hear a case, that case couldn’t even get 4 conservative justices to vote to hear it.

          • Uzza

            “Do your own research” is just an alternate spelling of “I’m wrong, you’re right.”

          • King Arthropod Pendragonfly

            “Do your own research” is just an alternate spelling of “I’m wrong, you’re right.”

            No, it’s up to each person to back up their own claims.

          • Jolanda Tiellemans

            “I don’t play little troll games . . . the evidence is out there – do your own research. We’re done!”

            Is alternate spelling of “I can’t refute it”

          • getstryker

            Spin it anyway you like there cupcake. It does NOT change the ‘truth’. There are reports from media sources, videos, pictures, eye-witness accounts, student/parent reports, etc., You want to deny it, that’s up to you.

          • King Arthropod Pendragonfly

            Eklund v. Byron Union School District. The side claiming Islamic indoctrination in public school lost. The appeal lost. The appeal to the supreme court was rejected.

            That’s the truth. Media can report anything, but courts issue rulings.

          • Guest✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

            He’s a previously banned member. I hope they nab him this time, too. He’s become terribly boring.

  • Reason2012

    There is no such thing as “separation of church and state” in the Constitution. That phrase came from the time a Pastor wrote a letter to Jefferson expressing his fears that Jefferson would in some way restrict religious freedoms. In response to these fears, Thomas Jefferson wrote a letter back to indicate that he would in no way restrict the freedom of religious expression because he saw a wall of separation between church and state.
    So actually the phrase means the exact opposite of what a few claim it means: it re-iterates the First Amendment, that government shall make no laws prohibiting the free exercise of religion.
    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; No law was passed here forcing schools to have such an after school activity..

    Congress/government also cannnot make a law prohibiting the free exercise thereof.

    People at a school can decide to, for example, have an optional religious activity, and no one can force them not to.

    People at a school can decide NOT to have one and no one can force them to.

    But in a Christian nation, the populace will be personally choosing to have such activities often. Those that do not like this can start voting in a large number of people that believe differently and hope it changes.

    That’s liberty.
    That’s freedom.
    That’s the Constitution many died to create.
    That’s the United States of America.

    Start understanding the Constitution, the First Amendment and the lie about “separation to church and state” and take back our right to honor and worship God as people in positions of leadership personally choose and see fit to on a case by case basis.

    • lady_black

      Uh yeah. Good luck with that. The court will eviscerate any people you vote in who push this nonsense.
      Ever heard of Kitzmiller v. Dover? Yeah… The voters “rewarded” the school board members who voted to teach creationism with votes for their opponents.
      It’s about time you realized that you can’t just do anything you please with votes. The country doesn’t work that way. There are hundreds of years of constitutional jurisprudence on issues of excessive church-state entanglement. They are not on your side.

      • Reason2012

        Where did I say a word about teaching a course in creation by God?

        • lady_black

          You didn’t. I DID.
          Stop deflecting. Government cannot promote religion in ANY way, whether it involves teaching creationism, or promoting after-school Jesus clubs, and all your Jesus reasons do not overcome the secular law of the United States.

          • wandakate

            One day it will be “judgment day” by JESUS CHRIST and the government won’t have a word to say on that day, they lose.
            The government runs the show today but in the end JESUS will be the ultimate judge of ALL humanity, then what?
            Satan is now the god of this evil world, however JESUS is coming to take possession of this world away from him (see Revelation 11:15-19). The graves will open, the Ark of the Covenant will then be seen. It won’t be the governments of this world any longer, but it will then turn into the Kingdom of GOD.

          • lady_black

            Any day now, I’m sure. Aaaaaany day now.

          • wandakate

            Actually according to scripture (the Holy Bible) the man of sin (the lawless one) the antichrist MUST come first and the great falling away (of the church) MUST also happen “BEFORE” the arrival of JESUS CHRIST. So, we MUST have these “two” things first and then He will appear, call up the dead in their graves and that is the rapture. They all ALL 3 events that will happen at once.
            1.The great glorious appearing of JESUS.
            2.The 1st resurrection of the dead.
            3.The rapture of the saved saints (dead and alive)
            So, it’s NOT going to be any day now, but it’s going to happen in His timing.

          • lady_black

            Yeah. Sorry, but there isn’t any such thing as “the” antichrist, and no mention of any rapture. The rapture is completely made up, and not anyplace in your Bible (which itself is made up).
            You must understand, the original followers awaited the return of “Jesus” in their own lifetimes. 2000 + years later, they are still waiting.
            There is no “man of sin” and most likely no Jesus either. So, pony up proof, or it’s a fantasy. That’s fine and all. Believe whatever you like. Start expecting others to entertain your fantasies, and we’re going to have problems.

          • Jolanda Tiellemans

            Be afraid, be very afraid.

    • Nedd Kareiva

      I see you’re under heavy assault from the fond supporters of the evil FFRF. You are not alone. I stand with you. The leftists here love citing court rulings (some of which, if not many, are quite flawed), the bogus “separation of church & state” and a host of other bits of rubbish, yet each time most of them attempt to make their points, they almost without exception ignore the 1st Amendment’s “prohibiting the free exercise thereof”. When the FFRF or others of their sordid ilk (but they are arguably the worst) sends all their letters threatening whoever is in their path, they are essentially “prohibiting the free exercise thereof” of those who voluntarily choose to have their voice(s) heard. They also, generally speaking, want public officials to check their rights at the door of any government entity. They really want the Judeo-Christian God out of existence so their atheism can be the center of everything. It is an honor to wear this badge against these attack mutts (I mean dogs) and it’s an honor to be side by side with you against them. The God of the Holy Scriptures (which the FFRF and these leftists hate) bless you real good.

      • Reason2012

        Good points. I just point out their hypocrisy at giving islam free reign to be forced on all kids during class time in schools, while they go after optional activities where kids learn about Christianity that parents have to go out of their way to opt IN, so others who were not aware of their hypcorisy and dishonest claims see the truth, showing how they’re really not about freedom from religion, but instead defending islam while attacking Christianity.

        It’s funny: people try to claim “how can we know what God’s truth is?”, looking at different religions. But the unsaved world shows it every day: they hate His truth (Christianity) but love the false religions because they are of the world (islam).

        May God bless!

        John 15:18-19 “If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before it hated you. If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you.”

        • King Arthropod Pendragonfly

          I just point out their hypocrisy at giving islam free reign to be forced on all kids during class time in schools

          This isn’t happening

      • Ambulance Chaser

        Yes, we cite court rulings. Because that’s how the law works. I don’t know how you can say they’re “flawed.” Who decided that? You? Does your opinion about the law supersede the Supreme Court’s?

        • wandakate

          GOD’S laws supersede the Supreme Courts, and without His breath of life none of them would be alive. They are ALL only humans, and they are ALL just one breath away from their eternity, literally just one heartbeat away.
          Ultimately in the end GOD will be the winner, the Supreme being…

          • Ambulance Chaser

            I am unaware of any ruling, statute, or Constitutional provision that states “God’s Law” supersedes the Supreme Court.

          • wandakate

            Oh I see. Well are you then aware that GOD and His Moral laws were here way before the members of the Supreme Court were? There was NO Supreme Court when GOD wrote the laws on 2 tablets of stone and placed them inside the Ark of the Covenant…Ahhhhh, I bet you weren’t aware of that were you?
            Way way back GOD wrote the 10 Commandments on two tablets of stone with the finger of GOD. They were our laws for eternity. Now I know that people of today disregard them (break His laws), but that doesn’t mean they weren’t made and it also doesn’t mean that we’re not to obey them. Sin is the transgression of the law.
            Many people won’t, many people don’t obey them, but judgment day will come anyway ready or not. GOD isn’t dependent on man, man is dependent upon GOD for every breath we take so the sooner we’re humble and do what we’re suppose to be doing the better off we’ll be.
            Without the intelligence that is provided them by the Almighty they wouldn’t have enough sense to make any laws. Give credit where credit is due.

          • Jolanda Tiellemans

            Well are you then aware that GOD and His Moral laws were here way before the members of the Supreme Court were? There was NO Supreme Court when GOD wrote the laws on 2 tablets of stone and placed them inside the Ark of the Covenant.

            Well that was the past, we now live in the present.

          • Ambulance Chaser

            “Oh I see. Well are you then aware that GOD and His Moral laws were here way before the members of the Supreme Court were? There was NO Supreme Court when GOD wrote the laws on 2 tablets of stone and placed them inside the Ark of the Covenant…Ahhhhh, I bet you weren’t aware of that were you?”

            I’m aware that you BELIEVE that, but until you’ve proven that it’s all true, I see no reason to care.

          • Guest✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

            History proves that the Old Covenant was written prior to the US and its Supreme Court. 🙂 History is your friend. 🙂

          • Ambulance Chaser

            A) Irrelevant.

            B) That’s not how evidence works. You don’t get to just announce something without citation, say it’s proof, and then act like I’m wrong.

          • Guest✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

            a.) History is not irrelevant, and history proves that you are wrong. God’s laws WERE written prior to man’s.

            b. The dates prove you wrong. That’s how evidence works. History is like a weapon – it’s very easy to win with indisputable facts.

          • MarkSebree

            Even better. The US Constitution states that it is the Supreme Law of the USA. That means that it overrules any religious law.

          • Ambulance Chaser

            Yeah but she’s going to ignore that too.

          • Guest✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

            Like you ignore history, basic logic, and common sense? 🙂

          • Guest✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

            Untrue. Again, from George Washington, “Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity,
            religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man
            claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these
            great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of
            men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought
            to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their
            connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked:
            Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the
            sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments
            of investigation in courts of justice ? And let us with caution indulge
            the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion.
            Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds
            of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect
            that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.”

          • Guest✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

            You’re also unaware of your own existence, so…. 🙂

          • Jolanda Tiellemans

            Too bad, your God’s law has no bearing in the real world. Maybe you wished it was so, but helas.

          • wandakate

            You are so right, it’s very unfortunate that the majority of people in the real world don’t honor or obey GOD anymore, how very true.
            The truth of the matter is that this is satan’s world, he’s the god of this present world and that is the reason. People are deceived, they are programmed and they are brainwashed into other things other than GODLY things.
            JESUS created “hell” for that purpose. The ones who come to their senses and see the light will be okay, however the ones that don’t unfortunately will not. It’s their choice in the end, as we all have a free will to accept or reject our creator.
            Yes, I do wish it was so, but I know it’s not so, and it most likely won’t be in my lifetime.
            I have to account for myself only as do you and the others. I hope I make the right choices and will be counted worthy in the end.

          • Jolanda Tiellemans

            The truth of the matter is that this is satan’s world, he’s the god of this present world and that is the reason. People are deceived, they are programmed and they are brainwashed into other things other than GODLY things.

            LOL!!! Seriously? Yes of course you’re serious.

            That you can’t think for yourself and need a God and a book to do the thinking for you, doesn’t mean everyone does. I’m very capable of thinking for myself and make my own decision, don’t need any God, Satan or book to do that for me.

          • wandakate

            Arrogance and pride is what I am reading here in your comment. I can’ think for myself, good for you. You are capable of making your own decisions too and I hope you will make some reasonable ones before your life is over.
            You do have a free will that is true. The good book says in Psalm 14…THE FOOL HAS SAID IN HIS HEART, THERE IS NO GOD. THEY ARE CORRUPT, THEY HAVE DONE ABOMINABLE WORKS, THERE IS NONE WHO DEOS GOOD.
            SO, you don’t need a book (like the bible) and you don’t need GOD, but yet without knowing it you are worshiping satan. It’s either GOD or satan, heaven or hell, right or wrong, up or down. There are NO other choices.
            I hope you get right with GOD while you still can.

          • Jolanda Tiellemans

            You are capable of making your own decisions too and I hope you will make some reasonable ones before your life is over.

            I do,every day.

            It’s either GOD or satan, heaven or hell

            Don’t believe in either of them. So no use in telling me all this, but hey you get a 7 for effort.

            I hope you get right with GOD while you still can. Many will choose never to do that b/c they love the world and the things of the world and the ways of the world more than they will ever love GOD, therefore they have sealed their own fate for eternity.

            My family and friends are more important to me then your God, Christ, whatever. Oh my, I’m shaking in my boots. LOL!

          • boneheadaudio

            Yeah? Well, you know, that’s just like uh, your opinion, man.

            Yeah? Well, you know, that’s just like uh, your opinion, man. – YouTube

        • Nedd Kareiva

          My response was not to you so MYOB. But yeah, my opinion about the law (at least some of it) does supercede that of the High Court. The qualifications of Justice Kagan to be on the court, while not constitutionally verboten, is suspect, given her lack of extensive legal experience. Plus any justice who has a conflict of interest in a legal case is required UNDER LAW to recuse themselves. Justices Kagan & Ginsburg performed same sex marriage nuptials before hearing the federal case on it. OBVIOUS conflict of interest but no, they refused to step aside. So yeah, AC (fitting Disqus title), I have some smarts about the courts, YES is the answer.

          • Ambulance Chaser

            “My response was not to you so MYOB. But yeah, my opinion about the law (at least some of it) does supercede that of the High Court.”

            So, how many cases a year get appealed to you from the Supreme Court? Where can I read your rulings?

            Funny that my Constitution says that the Supreme Court is the final word on all matters of law in the United States. It doesn’t mention you at all. I guess I have the abridged version.

          • Nedd Kareiva

            I would suggest you read and reread Article III, Section 2 as to the High Court having the final word on all matters of law. Don’t let that phrase “with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make” get in the way of your interpretation and agenda.

            Maybe after you do so you can find some more useful things to do than argue with someone knowledgeable on these matters whose mind you will be unable to change.

          • Ambulance Chaser

            “I would suggest you read and reread Article III, Section 2 as to the High Court having the final word on all matters of law. Don’t let that phrase “with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make” get in the way of your interpretation and agenda.”

            So Congress passed a law that gave you higher authority than the Supreme Court?

          • Nedd Kareiva

            The Constitution was written to keep all the three branches (Judicial, Legislative & Executive) in check, silly.

            “So Congress passed a law that gave you higher authority than the Supreme Court?”

            Again, you need to find some better use of your time than make such an asinine statement, silly.

    • Ambulance Chaser

      That’s your interpretation of the Constitution. A different one has been handed down by the Supreme Court, and built on and tracked for over a hundred years, by succeeding Supreme Courts.

      Guess which interpretation holds the force of law?

      • Reason2012

        Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

        means

        Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

        To “interpret” it as “it’s illegal for your free exercise of religion except when and where we let you” is not an ‘Interpretation” but a perverting.

        • Ambulance Chaser

          No one said that, but I suspect you know that.

          But whether they did or not isn’t the point. Whatever the Supreme Court ruled the Constitution says IS what the Constitution says. Not what I say, or the homeless man down the street says, or even–and I’m sorry to break this to you–what you say.

          No lawyer has ever won a case by saying “I know the case law is against me, but all the case law is wrong. Because I say so.”

          • rsdfwd

            Non sequitur.

            “Whatever the Supreme Court ruled the Constitution says IS what the Constitution says.”
            ————-
            Show me THAT in the Constitution.

          • Ambulance Chaser

            Article III, Section 2:

            “In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.”

          • rsdfwd

            So does the Constitution say that slavery is OK or not?

          • Ambulance Chaser

            It forbids slavery in the 13th Amendment.

            How is this relevant to the topic?

          • rsdfwd

            Before that? It is relevant because the SC can modify the Constitution at will, has, and still is. The only two options are impeachment and the Congress removing certain area from its jurisdiction. Justices are appointed not for life, as is commonly assumed, but upon good behavior.

          • Ambulance Chaser

            What point, exactly, are you trying to make here? What does whether the Constitution forbids slavery before or after the 13th Amendment have to do with it?

          • Guest✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

            So when the Supreme Court ruled a black man was sub-human, you were down with that? Bigot.

          • Ambulance Chaser

            It doesn’t matter whether I was or am “down with that” or not. At the time it was law. That ruling was then superseded by the 13th and 14th Amendments and the Civil Rights Act of 1866, which I approve of.

          • Guest✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

            Thanks for proving you’re a bigot.

          • Ambulance Chaser

            What part of what I said indicates that I’m a “bigot?”

          • Guest✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

            The part where you think the law is the law even when it calls black men sub-humans.

          • Ambulance Chaser

            I’m sorry that you don’t like reality, but your discomfort with it doesn’t change it.

          • Guest✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

            Just as I thought – you haven’t presented any facts. You’re a racist and proud of it.

          • Ambulance Chaser

            What “facts” would you like me to present?

          • Guest✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

            Anything to support your claim (s). 🙂

          • Ambulance Chaser

            I’m sorry, let me back up to this point. Are you arguing here that, if I don’t like/agree with a certain law, I should simply pretend it doesn’t exist?

          • Guest✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

            I’m stating that just because the Supreme Court makes a ruling doesn’t make it good or right or one to be obeyed. Just like Martin Luther King, Jr. said, unjust laws need to be broken.

          • Ambulance Chaser

            Okay, I didn’t disagree with that. But unjust laws are still laws.

    • Tim White

      In a word, no. The Danbury Baptist Association wrote to Jefferson because they were concerned that the religious majority in their state would attempt to make their religious beliefs the law of the state, thereby regulating all other religions (namely the Baptist’s) to second class status. At the point of their writing, Congregationalism was the official state religion of Connecticut.

      Jefferson assured them that that would not happen, by referencing the wall of separation between church and state.

      It is pointless to argue whether or not such a concept exists, as the Supreme Court has determined it does.

      The fact that the phrase itself is not in the Constitution is irrelevant, much like the phrase “Freedom of Religion.”

      That phrase is not in the Constitution, but I think few could reasonable argue that the concept is not inherent to the First Amendment.

      • Reason2012

        Except what I wrote is searchable – your claims cannot be backed up anywhere.

        • Tim White

          Of course they can. You merely have to look them up. Read both the letter that the Baptists wrote, and Jefferson’s response.

          That the Supreme Court has determined that a wall exists between church and state can be readily shown by reading their rulings on the matter.

          The phrase “freedom of religion” can be shown to not be in the Constitution simply by reading it.

          Granted, you won’t find such information on sites devoted to denying them, but that hardly means they don’t exist.

    • King Arthropod Pendragonfly

      There is no such thing as “separation of church and state” in the Constitution.

      The supreme court doesn’t agree:
      The first of the two Clauses, commonly called the Establishment Clause, commands a separation of church and state.
      That’s from section II A of the opinion in Cutter v. Wilkinson (2004)

      • rsdfwd

        Hey, logician wiz – an external Supreme Court quote does not put the text in the Constitution. You seem to blinded by your hatred.

        • King Arthropod Pendragonfly

          Hey, logician wiz – an external Supreme Court quote does not put the text in the Constitution.

          And I didn’t say it did. But the supreme court does say that separation of church and state is in the constitution. You have to understand what words mean.

  • bowie1

    In Canada a certain Christian group says they can still are allowed to have a Bible Club in a high school that is sponsored by an individual teacher. They also operate on college and university campuses.

    • Tim White

      With respect, what does Canada have to do with this issue?

  • Reason2012

    Search on public school islam and read about how even now in some schools islam is being forced on all the students – not even an ability to opt out. And the FFRF goes after instead an OPTIONAL activity where students parents’ have to go out of their way to opt IN. It shows that FFRF is really anti-Christian and pro-islam.

    • Tim White

      The FFRF is a responsive organization, meaning that they respond to those complaints brought to their attention.

      If you actually have evidence, or even just a sincere belief, that schools are forcing Islam on students, bring it to their attention.

      For instance, they filed a complaint against Northern Virginian Community College, asking them to investigate one of their professors classes on Islam when they felt it crossed the line from mere education to indoctrination when they were informed of it.

      In other words, they’ve done exactly what you claim they never do.

      • Reason2012

        // The FFRF is a responsive organization, meaning that they respond to those complaints brought to their attention. //

        People have complained. Fascinating how you sit there and defend entire schools having islam forced upon them by pretending not one person has complained. That’s a first.

        • Tim White

          That isn’t what I’m doing, and I’ll thank you not to lie about it. I pointed out one example where the FFRF has done exactly what you claim they don’t do.

          Have the people you mentioned actually asked the FFRF to investigate, or have they merely had their fifteen minutes with Todd “I’ll lie about anything to do with Christianty” Starnes?

        • Jolanda Tiellemans

          Mmhmm, I found it googling FFRF complained against Northern Virginian Community College. So it shouldn’t be so hard for you to find it too, right?

    • Nidalap

      Hmm…ever wonder what would have happened if you could have taken one of the propaganda-laden citizens of 1930’s Germany aside and asked if they thought maybe Hitler was being a little hard on the Jews?
      Probably would have sounded very similar to what you’re seeing here…

    • (((dagobarbz)))

      “Forced.”
      And no links.
      I’m not buying what you’re selling.

  • (((dagobarbz)))

    Heh. Teach ’em to read and then tell them ‘Only read this one book.’
    Yeah, how’d that work out?

  • https://disqus.com/home/channel/theangryatheist/ ≐Ṁ𝒾𝕔ⓗa𝖊𝗹 𝑮-13≐

    Thankfully, Thomas Jefferson largely put an end to that rubbish. Yet, still we fight these religious over reaches. Keep your god, out of our secular schools.

  • Grace Kim Kwon

    Children need Bible clubs in schools. Public schools were created so that all children can learn the Word of God firsthand. Americans have no freedom if they don’t have the Holy Bible. Man was not born into immorality’s slavery but to be free to glorify God. Secular West enslaves mankind with abnormal immorality if it doe not follow the Holy Bible. Slavery to sin or freedom by God’s truth. It’s one or the other; there is no middle ground.

    • Jolanda Tiellemans

      If Christian parents want their children to learn the bible, they should sent them to a Christian school or homeschool them. Religion has no place in public schools.

      • Grace Kim Kwon

        Atheism and immorality should not be imposed in public schools, either. It is unfairness. Secular West lost its way by giving more status to evils( blasphemies and immorality) than to the Good(Christian morality).

    • http://www.nomorebadtown.com NoMoreBadTown

      “Children need Bible clubs in schools.”
      Need? No, they don’t.

      “Public schools were created so that all children can learn the Word of God firsthand.”
      No, they weren’t.

      “Americans have no freedom if they don’t have the Holy Bible.”
      Yes, we do.

      “Man was not born into immorality’s slavery but to be free to glorify God.”
      That doesn’t sound like freedom to me.

      “Secular West enslaves mankind with abnormal immorality if it doe not follow the Holy Bible.”
      No, it doesn’t.

      “Slavery to sin or freedom by God’s truth. It’s one or the other; there is no middle ground.”
      False dichotomy. There is a 3rd choice: neither.

    • Cady555

      No. Children do not need Bible clubs in school. You may not use public schools to proselytize my children.

      You are free to raise your children with whatever belief system you prefer. You may not impose your beliefs on other people’s kids.

      Why is this so hard to understand?

      • Grace Kim Kwon

        Children need Bible clubs in public schools because the Holy Bible is life-giving truth. It is unfair that only atheism and Sodomism is taught in public schools in the West. The Westerners including Americans have no morality apart from Christianity. If Christianity is not taught in the West, the secular culture teaches only blasphemy, infanticide and immorality. Why don’t you get it? Evils( atheism, homosexuality, Satanism, etc.) should not have the same right with the Good( Christianity). The Good must be taught to children and not evils.

        • Cady555

          I am far more moral than most professional christians.

          Regardless, keep your morbid death cult away from my kids.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            You are not moral at all. You promote blasphemy, infanticide, and Sodomy. You have no rights to prevent your children from knowing God. They belong to God and not to you. You are a mere parasite in USA. Read Psalm ch.14 and John ch.3 and Romans ch.1 & 8.

          • Cady555

            Such kindness. Such humility. Such amazing love. Jesus must be so proud of you. (Or not). As I recall, the gospels are one story after another where Jesus praises religious people who declare themselves to be righteous and special.
            Oops. Scratch that. Jesus said nothing of the sort. I humbly suggest you read that bit about a splinter and a plank. Then read the rest of your book.

            The one thing that is certain is that my kids do not belong to you and you have no right to feed my kids your brand of religion.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            The Holy Bible calls atheists evil fools. Jesus scolded those who bar children from coming to Him; He even cursed those who make children stumble. You must read the entire Gospel if you have honesty and are interested in what Jesus said and did. Atheists expect Christians to be good; Christians do not expect any good from the atheists but wish their safety and salvation because atheists always harm themselves and those who are around them.

          • Cady555

            LOL. Abusers always try to gaslight their victims by redefining abuse as love.

            You say “Atheists expect Christians to be good.”

            That’s funny, atheists expect no such thing. Based on evidence, I expect christians to act exactly as good and as bad as every other human. Religion makes no real difference either way, except for some extra hypocrisy and judgmentalism.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            You are wrong. Atheists expect Christians to be good and merciful. You just do not wish Christians to speak out the truth to you. American atheists are a spoiled species. You don’t know the real world on Planet Earth because you grew up in Protestants’ nicest protected and civilized world. You have everything good from the beginning and essential because of the Christian Britons and the hard-working Christian pioneers. Stop repaying the good with evil to the Christians.

          • Cady555

            I do not expect Christians to be good or merciful or truthful. I’ve known too many Christians.

            They are just like everyone else. Some good, some bad and some willing to lie about anything to sell their product.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            You know nothing essential. Christians are the only God’s people on earth to sacrifice self for the sake of God instead of self’s good. Christians alone are the only practical, realistic people on Planet Earth who know that self contains no good at all. (Romans ch.1-8) The reason Western Sodomites single out Christians for bullying this century is because Christians alone do not retaliate and seek everyone’s good by their doctrines unconditionally for all time everywhere. The West has no morality apart from Christianity; it’s just lost and barbaric like the rest of mankind if it has no Christianity. You must repent of your sin and believe in Jesus to get saved. Atheists only have death and despair. Christianity has the Light and Life. “The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy; I(Jesus) have come that they may have life, and have it to the full.” (John ch.10)

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            “But Jesus called them to Him and said, ‘Let the little children come to Me, and do not forbid them; for of such is the kingdom of God. Assuredly, I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God as a little child will by no means enter it.'” ( Luke ch.18)

  • Gena B

    There are better places to hold Bible meetings than a secular school. Kinda like worshiping in a pagan temple

  • http://www.nomorebadtown.com NoMoreBadTown

    Isn’t this why Sunday School exists?