Atheist Flag to Be Raised Over New Hampshire Ten Commandments Monument

Photo Credit: Facebook

SOMERSWORTH, N.H. — A request from a local member of a national professing atheist organization to temporarily fly an atheist flag over a Ten Commandments monument in New Hampshire has been granted, and is scheduled to be hoisted next month.

As previously reported, the city council of Somersworth voted to reinstall a nearly 60-year-old Ten Commandments display after it was toppled by an unknown vandal in August 2016. The council also approved a plan to add historic markers and two flagpoles next to the biblical monument to help “neutralize” its presence. Groups can apply to have their flag displayed for a month.

“It is my intention to honor the history of the monument, the sensitivity surrounding the monument and its role in history, but at the same time balance the question of constitutionality surrounding it,” said Mayor Dana Hilliard.

The Ten Commandments are displayed on a small city-owned traffic island named Citizen’s Place, located next to Somersworth City Hall. Atheist activists have argued for years that the monument is unconstitutional.

“The First Commandment alone makes it obvious why the Ten Commandments may not be posted on government property,” wrote the Wisconsin-based Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) in a 2013 letter to the Somersworth mayor and city council. “The government has no business telling citizens which god they must have, how many gods they must have, or that they must have any god at all.”

Although FFRF’s attempts to remove the Ten Commandments display have been unsuccessful, the secular group on Tuesday announced that they will soon be “hoisting a first-of-its-kind flag” on one of the nearby flagpoles to protest the monument.

“We believe the town needs to ‘honor thy First Amendment,’” stated FFRF Co-President Annie Laurie Gaylor. “With such a religious shrine glaringly on display, we have to present our viewpoint.”

  • Connect with Christian News

In an interview with the New Hampshire Union Leader, Gaylor described the Ten Commandments display as “an affront to our Constitution and an affront to the people who don’t believe in the Bible.”

While the national headquarters of FFRF specifically said in its press release that the effort is to “protest [the] New Hampshire town’s Ten Commandments display,” local resident and FFRF member Richard Gagnon, who requested the flag on behalf of the group, said that it is not.

“It’s not a protest,” he told the Union Leader. “I applied on behalf of FFRF because I wanted to express in a positive way that we are here.”

On Wednesday, Mayor Hilliard voiced support for the atheist-honoring flag, which features a red “A” on a blue background.

“As … a Catholic, I look forward to standing with fellow believers and non-believers and celebrating our common bond with humanity,” he said in a statement.

“Citizens Place was created to honor and celebrate all members of our society who embrace democratic values,” the mayor added. “I look forward to continuing that practice and modeling why Somersworth is the most open community in the state.”

The atheist flag was initially scheduled to be raised on Dec. 4 to celebrate the winter solstice, but the flag-raising has since been postponed to Jan. 2, according to local reports. Once it is raised, the atheist flag will remain on display until the end of the month.

Although Hilliard said approving the flag was a “no-brainer,” dozens of online commenters have since voiced opposition to the atheist flag.

“Atheists and minority faiths should not be persecuted, but a community doesn’t have to display or express every minority faith that exists among them,” one wrote. “That’s not how democracy works.”

“There is no Constitutional mandate for the separation of Church and State,” another chimed in. “What the Constitution does mandate is that the federal government shall not establish a state Church, nor shall the government interfere in the Church’s business, nor shall the Church interfere in the running of the government. Nowhere does it say that people have to leave their religion at home or in the church building.”


A special message from the publisher...

Dear Reader, because of your generous support, we have received enough funds to send many audio Bibles to Iraqi and Syrian refugees displaced by ISIS in the Middle East. Many have been distributed and received with gladness. While we provide for the physical needs of the people, we seek to provide the eternal hope only found in Jesus Christ through the word of God. Would you join us by making a donation today to this important work? Please click here to send an audio Bible to a refugee family >>

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
  • Amos Moses – He>i

    If God does not exist:

    1. The Nazis were not wrong – its just your opinion

    2. Love is no better than rape – might be unfashionable but not wrong

    3. Blowing up innocent people watching a marathon is not morally different than feeding the poor – it just your opinion

    4. Religious crusades are not wrong – because there is no standard for righteousness

    5. Tolerance is no better than intolerance – why tolerate anything

    6. There are no human rights – it is just your opinion – there is no objective morality

    7. Atheist cannot justify morality

    ~Frank Turek

    • Worf

      1. “I say: my Christian feeling tells me that my lord and savior is a warrior. It calls my attention to the man who, lonely and surrounded by only a few supporters, recognized what they [the Jews] were, and called for a battle against them, and who, by God, was not the greatest sufferer, but the greatest warrior. . .”
      Adolf Hitler – April 12, 1922

      The vast majority of nazis were christians.

      2. If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her.
      Deuteronomy

      3. Google “Christian terrorism”

      4. “The First Crusade (1096-1099) spawned horrors the likes of which none of the crusaders had ever experienced. And they were horrors of their own making. Of the massacre in Jerusalem, a contemporary observed, ‘The knights could hardly bear it, working as executioners and breathing out clouds of hot blood.'”

      The crusades were a horror show of dogmatic violence on all sides. Christian hands are soaked in blood.

      5. Why can you not tolerate people that are trying to have equal rights and fair representation, even if they do not share your religion?

      6. & 7. Atheists are equally capable of being as good as religious people. I would argue that the person that needs an imagined god to be good is the less fundamentally moral. Normal humans are good because they have empathy. Not because of threats of eternal torture or bribes of eternal happiness.

    • Worf

      I posted a reply to each point directly, but some snowflakes needed a safe space from facts and got my response censored.

      • Amos Moses – He>i

        ¯_(ツ)_/¯ …….. a-theists have no complaint ……….. and no basis for a complaint ……… it is all just their opinion ……………

        • Mark P

          So instead of talking to atheists and trying to understand their point of view, you close your eyes, plug your ears and scream out, declaring what their point of view must be, according to you.

          You represent some of the worst that humanity has to offer.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            nope … i tell them what they tell me and they do not like hearing it ….. because really … they all say the samethings ….. and i have pretty much heard it all before ….. and the behavior you describe …. re: “you close your eyes, plug your ears and scream out, declaring what their point of view must be, according to you.” …. that is your very apt description of them …..

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            FYI ….. “You represent some of the worst that humanity has to offer.” … is just another appeal to an OBJECTIVE MORAL STANDARD that you say DOES NOT EXIST ……

    • Pfruit

      You are correct. There is no objective morality.

      • Amos Moses – He>i

        nope …. A-THEIST CONSTANTLY make appeals to it …… but they have no basis to do so …………..

        • Silas Jennings

          I STILL don’t know what an “A-theist” is…

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            so what …. what makes you think you can appeal to any ultimate standard ….. you reject that standard …………

          • Silas Jennings

            My standard is the English language, you reject THAT standard.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            nope … you have no basis to appeal to ANY standard ……….. FAIL ……….. and FYI …. ACCORDING TO YOU ……. the language can change at a moments notice ….. so it is NO STANDARD AT ALL …………… FAIL AGAIN ………..

          • Silas Jennings

            I fail? OK, Amos. I fail. But you are the guy who is going to have to put up with people asking you what on earth an “a-theist” is, because it’s something you made up yourself. Have fun.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            and the answer will be just what i told you ….. you have no basis to appeal to ANY STANDARD ….. as you have REJECTED truth and standards ….. and my response to your “not understanding” is ….. SO WHAT ………….

          • Silas Jennings

            I never said I rejected truth. You said that. The problem is what you’re calling “truth”. I don’t believe a LOT of what you say precisely because it’s the opposite of truth.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            you reject scripture …. you reject God ….. you reject truth ….. you reject the ultimate standard they represent ….. but then you think you have some basis and right to appeal to it and have it apply to you ………. and you are a hypocrite and a liar …………..

          • Silas Jennings

            I don’t reject God, I reject YOUR God. And religion does not own morality. My own morality is just fine, I don’t feel any need to wantonly cause other people hardship merely because I don’t allow myself to be threatened by some supernatural element.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            nope ….. you REJECT THE STANDARD and you have no right or basis to make an appeal to it ………… but i will give you that it is not the property of religion …… it is the property of GOD ….. so tell us who “your god” is and we can dispense with this nonsense ……..

            ” I don’t allow myself to be threatened by some supernatural element.”

            i see …. so YOUR GOD is not a super-natural being or element …… so NO GOD AT ALL ….. and again ….. YOU ARE A LIAR ………….. and you wantonly desire to appeal the the MORAL STANDARD of GOD …. but then deny who he is …. and that makes you a thief …………

          • Silas Jennings

            Yes, Amos. I don’t believe in the same God you do. I reject it on the premise that everything about such a God is cruel and unusual. I don’t reject the concept of a God, but it would be so far removed from the one you believe in that we could not begin to compare them. I find your morality to be morally bankrupt.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            right … so a God of YOUR OWN MAKING ….. or in reality …. YOURSELF ….. and you think you have any authority to make a standard ….. you are a liar and a thief and now you declare yourself to be an OUTLAW …. making your own law ….. because you reject the STANDARD OF OBJECTIVE MORALITY ….. nope … your god is your belly …. you have just confirmed it ….. your are a law and morality unto NO ONE BUT YOURSELF ………..

            NARCISSISM …………

          • Silas Jennings

            No, I didn’t make a God, and no, I don’t think I’m a God. The fact is, I don’t know if there’s a God, and in fact, neither do you. That’s why it’s called faith.
            Let’s see, what else did you get wrong…I’m not a liar. I’m not a thief. I’m not an outlaw, and I didn’t declare myself to be one. My God is not my belly. In fact I don’t have a God at the moment.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            IS there an OBJECTIVE MORAL STANDARD and if so WHO HAS SET IT …………..

          • Silas Jennings

            No, and nobody.

      • Amos Moses – He>i

        so if someone steals your car …. ¯_(ツ)_/¯ ….. and you have no basis for complaint ……. good to know …..

        • Silas Jennings

          Logic fail.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            well … dont be so hard on yourself ….. if you have no ultimate standard ….. then you have no right to appeal to it ….. nor do you have any right to have it apply to you … and you are on your own ….. SO WHAT …………

          • Silas Jennings

            There’s nothing wrong with my ultimate standard. I have empathy, and know how to treat people as I would wish to be treated myself, and don’t require a supernatural element.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            you HAVE NONE … and you have to STEAL from the one that does ………..

          • Silas Jennings

            So according to you, someone who grows up and never learns about God is just going to turn into an axe murderer.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            nope … ALL MEN …. are murderers and liars and thieves and adulterers and idolaters …. and they were born that way …… and the only thing in this entire creation that prevents it from going all out MADMAX Beyond Thunder Dome ….. is Gods restraining force ….. that you reject ………

          • Silas Jennings

            Correct, I think to believe in an entity that monstrous is absurd on a monumental level. A God I chose to believe in would be far more reasonable.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            IS there an OBJECTIVE MORAL STANDARD and if so WHO HAS SET IT ……………

        • Mark P

          The fact that there is no objective morality doesn’t mean that society and individuals don’t get to protect themselves and their property.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            the only way for you to do that ….. is to appeal ….. TO OBJECTIVE MORALITY …… that same OBJECTIVE MORALITY ….. you say …. DOES NOT EXIST …… so FAIL …………..

        • Pfruit

          The complaint is based on the rules of the society we build.

          If you lack the empathy and intelligence to functionally participate, that is your failing, not societies.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            no, no, no, no, no ….. YOU SAID … “there is no OBJECTIVE MORALITY” …… so now you want to INVENT ONE ….. and all you are doing is making things up as you go ….. so fine ….. if the “society” ….. that “we build” ….. decides it is “okey-dokey” to send Jews to camps where they can be slaughtered ….. and we have ALL THE EMPATHY IN THE WORLD for our “society” ……and the “society” “agrees” ….. this is the right thing to do ….. then we are a-okay and right and good to do so ……

            do i understand your system correctly ……………..

          • Pfruit

            Everything about society is invented by humans. Religion, law, morals, the concept of justice…everything.

            Because there is no objective morality, the onus is on human society to invent one and maintain it. Morality is currently modeled on empathy.

            “sending Jews to slaughter camps” is an idea lacking in empathy. This is unacceptable to modern morality.

            However, if a theist were to get it into their empty head that “God demands we send Jews to slaughter camps”, then by your sad little definition of morality, this would be a just action. Your religion blinds you to the immorality of this action because you are incapable of thinking for yourself. You are incapable to experiencing empathy because you have to think about what is moral and what is not, and then justify that thought.

            If believe something to be moral or immoral, you have to justify it. When empathy for fellow human beings is used as the benchmark for morality, the result is a more moral society.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            “Because there is no objective morality, the onus is on human society to invent one ”

            you just said “there is none” …… so how can you “invent” a thing you say does not exist ….. either it exists and you do not like it …… or ….. as i said ….. you are just making things up as you go …… AND YOU DID NOT ANSWER THE QUESTION ……….

            if the “society” ….. that “we build” ….. decides it is “okey-dokey” to send Jews to camps where they can be slaughtered ….. and we have ALL THE EMPATHY IN THE WORLD for our “society” ……and the “society” “agrees” ….. this is the right thing to do ….. then we are a-okay and right and its good to do so ……

            do i understand your system correctly …………….. IS THAT RIGHT OR NOT ……………

          • Pfruit

            If you’re too obtuse to understand a concept, just excuse yourself from mature conversation.

            Mathematics was invented by humans to describe numerical relationships. Unless you’re arguing that mathematics doesn’t exist, (and at this point, you just might be immature enough to make that argument) then you can’t argue that empathy and morality can’t also be invented.

            Modern secular morality is based on empathy. Empathy is the valuation of human happiness over human suffering. Modern morality values human health and happiness over human suffering.

            To use your bizarre and immature example, yet again, to “send Jews to camps where they can be slaughtered” is an action lacking in empathy. This is unacceptable to modern secular morality because it does not emphasize human happiness.

            The problem with religious morality is that it is based on the whims of a non-existent god, whose wishes are parroted by a human who simply decrees whatever base desire they have as “the will of God”. This system does not emphasize human happiness. This system is easily corruptible and exploitable.

            It is up to *all of us* as human members of society, to place human happiness and the empathy for our fellow humans as a priority in our society. This is the right thing to do.

            Stop with the deliberate obtundity. It’s degrading to whatever semblance of intellect you posses.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            “Mathematics was invented by humans to describe numerical relationships.”

            nope …..mathematics was CREATED by God ….. men only DISCOVERED what ALREADY EXISTED …… so FAIL on that point …… start again …………

          • Pfruit

            There’s a saying about playing chess with pigeons.

            You officially just shit on the board.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            TOS violation ………………………

          • Pfruit

            You’re a sad, worthless human

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            that requires an OBJECTIVE MORALITY to make that judgement ….. you got one ……..

    • Worf

      May I ask why my reply keeps getting censored but his hateful comment is not?

      • Amos Moses – He>i

        gotta say …. i agree that what you are bringing up should not be removed ……. but their house and their rules …………

    • Worf

      I will try this again:

      1. Most nazis were christian.

      2. The bible commands women to marry their rapist.

      3. Google “christian terrorism”

      4. Google “Crusade Massacre Jerusalem”

      5. Why does this article not want atheists to be tolerated?

      6&7. Atheists are just as capable of being good. It comes from empathy, not religion.

      • Amos Moses – He>i

        1. most nazis were bullied into being part of the “party” and the vast majority were not part of the hierarchy of government ( and most of those were homosexuals and pagans and may as well have been atheists) …..

        2. the bible DEMANDS that a woman be honored if their honor was taken from them and DEMANDED the “rapist” BE RESPONSIBLE for her …. for her ENTIRE LIFETIME …….

        3. Google is not a reliable source of christianity ….. but in any event …… has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the point made and a RED HERRING ….. a-theist have no basis for complaint ….. it is just their opinion …..

        4. (see # 3.)

        5. (see # 3.)

        6. & 7. (see # 3.) & there is ABSOLUTELY NO PROOF of “empathy” being a basis for doing good ….. go back to # 1. …… nazis had ALL KINDS OF EMPATHY ….. for NAZIS …… and you are making several errors ….. but most basically LOGIC errors …………

        • Worf

          I find it wholly disturbing that you think it is ok to force a woman to marry and live with her rapist. That is disgusting and torturous to the woman.

          From that statement alone I have determined that you are not a human worth engaging with.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            who said anything about living with them ….. and ….. “I find it wholly disturbing” ….again ….. ON WHAT BASIS ……….. you have NO MORAL STANDING to find ANY OBJECTION to it ….. not even “empathy” ….. which is a fallacious FRAUD of a reason ….. in fact it is NOT REASONED at all ………..

          • Silas Jennings

            Because you keep clinging to this idea that a person who doesn’t believe in the same God as you can be a decent a moral person. The golden rule works just fine for most people without a personal religion. Why do you think atheists aren’t running around raping and killing? Kind of spoils your whole hypothesis, doesn’t it?

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            “who doesn’t believe in the same God as you can be a decent a moral person.”

            you do not believe in any god as i recall …. except YOURSELF …. and AGAIN ….. SO WHAT … you have no BASIS WHATSOEVER to appeal to any ultimate standard ……… so WHO CARES what you think of it …………….

            “Why do you think atheists aren’t running around raping and killing? ”

            mostly because christians keep them in line ….. and THERE IS AN ULTIMATE STANDARD ….. that even in your rejection of any ultimate standard ….. YOU KNOW AND ACKNOWLEDGE THERE IS ONE …… and that makes them all LIARS ….. as we have said and as scripture says …… but just for fun ….. lets look at a few of the prominent a-theists of the last century ….. shall we …..

            Joseph Stalin – 10 and 20 million Soviets and German prisoners of war died under his regime, depending on how many famine victims you count, from Gulags, execution, and forced resettlement.

            Mao Zedong – killed unknown tens of millions of Chinese, most of them in public executions and violent clashes.

            Pol Pot – 2 million Cambodians, or as much as 20% of the population, died from execution, disease and starvation.

            hmmmmm ….. all well known a-theists ….. and they did not seem to have any problems in rejecting any ULTIMATE STANDARD that you CONTINUALLY APPEAL TO ….. but have no basis to do so …….

          • Silas Jennings

            You’re trying to say that in order to have any kind of decent morality you have to believe in God, and that’s simply not true. Not every atheist is like Mao, Pol Pot or Stalin, and you know that I could effortlessly point to just as many religious dictators who caused a lot of death.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            you are an a-theist ….. you have no basis to make any appeal to the standard of God ….. and you do it continually ….. and that makes you a thief …………..

          • Silas Jennings

            No, I am not an a-theist, which doesn’t exist, nor am I an atheist. I am an agnostic. Because unlike yourself, I don’t claim to know anything/everything. I don’t observe the standards of your God, because II don’t believe in the God you do.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            a difference …. with no difference …………..

          • Silas Jennings

            Not to you, no. Which has an impact of approximately zero in my life.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            IS there an OBJECTIVE MORAL STANDARD and if so WHO HAS SET IT …………….

          • Silas Jennings

            No there isn’t, and it doesn’t need to be set by anyone. Morality can exist outside of religion, and does.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            “”No there isn’t”

            okay …. so if there is not ….. then guess what …. you have NOTHING TO COMPLAIN ABOUT ….. and it is all just YOUR OPINION ………….. and why are you here BELLY-ACHING about things you have NO RIGHT TO COMPLAIN ABOUT ………………. it is after all ….. JUST YOUR OPINION …. as there IS NO STANDARD for you to complain about ………… just some garbage you made up in your head ….. and that is mental illness …. and lawlessness ……..

          • Silas Jennings

            Guess what? I can complain about injustices just like anyone else
            because I understand what it is to have empathy like every other human
            being. My standard is basic human decency.

            Also, there’s no need to scream at me.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            you cant EVEN EXPLAIN WHY it is injust from a consistent a-theist worldview without STEALING from a christian worldview …… so you have no basis for any complaint whatsoever ….

          • Silas Jennings

            Why don’t you explain why it needs God, and more specifically, the God you believe in?

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            this is a conversation about YOUR WORLDVIEW ………. not mine ….. we have been over that before ….. you cannot justify nor can you even explain why it is unjust WITHOUT an appeal to a higher ULTIMATE MORAL STANDARD …… and all you have …. FROM YOUR WORLDVIEW ….. is just your own faulty opinion as to why it is “unjust” ….. and you have no complaint ………….. because you cannot explain it, justify it, or show where it come from and WHY ………

          • Silas Jennings

            You know nothing about my worldview, and you do this every single time – go on the attack rather than defend your own position. You’re making a very broad and ridiculous statement when you claim that only Christians have decent morals, and I want you to defend that. You could start by telling me why atheists aren’t looting and pillaging on a regular basis.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            you TOLD ME your worldview and now you are going to sit there and deny you did ……….. REALLY ….. and you are again a liar and a thief ………….

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            again ….. WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE A-THEIST worldview ….. YOUR worldview ….. why do you want to continually change the subject we started on ….. oh wait …. i know ….. BECAUSE YOU CANNOT EXPLAIN IT ….. just as i said …. you cannot be consistent in your own worldview without STEALING from a christian worldview ….. stay in your own lane, keep your eyes on your own paper ….. sorry ….. you cant because you are a liar and a thief ……

          • Frank Atkin

            “you have no basis to make any appeal to the standard of God ..”
            Unbelievers can and do have standards of morality and ethics. Do you really think that you have a monopoly on that?

            “… and that makes you a thief …”
            I find this degrading and insulting. Not to mention libel and slander. And maybe I should throw in propagandist lie.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            “Unbelievers can and do have standards of morality and ethics”

            no they do not ….. they have THEIR OPINION …. and that is not an OBJECTIVE MORALITY …. it is no MORALITY AT ALL ….. as it shifts with the wind and the tide and the times ….. and they cannot make ANY JUDGEMENT of anyone elses MORALITY ….. and what Hitler and Stalin and Mao and Pol Pot did …. THEY HAVE NO COMPLAINT ….. and what happened in the Crusades …. they have no complaint ….. and what happened on 9-11 ….. NO COMPLAINT ……

            BUT ….. they think they can judge God and christians for holding to an OBJECTIVE MORALITY ….. and they (a-theists) are all LIARS and HYPOCRITES …………..

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            explain to me how Kim Jung Un ….. an a-theist ….. firing missiles over Japan ….. and threatening to nuke other countries including the US ….. having all the EMPATHY in the world for his country and himself …… EXPLAIN to me in YOUR WORLDVIEW …. how his lack of religion is stopping him from doing what he is doing ….. and then explain to me how you would explain it to him as to why he should not ……

            THE FACT IS YOU CANNOT …………….. and your worldview is a FRAUD ………..

          • Frank Atkin

            Religion is not a necessary ingredient for morality. Secular entities are perfectly capable of devising regulations, laws, and rules of conduct. Examples are FCC, FAA, DMV, CC&Rs, rules & regs of various clubs, military code of uniform justice, etc. These organizations do not have religious references, yet are perfectly capable of designing rules.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            “Religion is not a necessary ingredient for morality”

            YOU are talking about religion ….. i am talking about OBJECTIVE MORALITY ….. why do you need to change the subject ….. oh yeah …. BECAUSE YOU cannot defend your position …….. and in fact … YOU cannot even explain where morality comes from …. where good comes from ….. where evil comes from ….. if you can then do so ….. but absent a christian worldview ….. YOU CANNOT ………………

        • TheKingOfRhye

          I find the position you’re taking (the position you logically have to take to make the arguments you are) to be absolutely reprehensible. You’re basically saying you have no empathy, or at least that if you do, you don’t use that to determine if anything is right or wrong, and in fact your only measure of right or wrong is “what God said”. In other words, morality is just following orders?

          You like to bring up Nazis all the time….well, in the Nuremberg trials, they weren’t buying “I was just following orders” as a defense.

          PS. Arguments like that make me fervently hope the person making them never does lose their faith, because it makes it sound like their faith is the only thing keeping them from being an ax murderer or something.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            “I find the position you’re taking (the position you logically have to take to make the arguments you are) to be absolutely reprehensible.”

            and that REQUIRES an OBJECTIVE MORAL STANDARD …… is there such a thing in your worldview ………..

          • TheKingOfRhye

            “that REQUIRES an OBJECTIVE MORAL STANDARD”

            Why? Are you saying it requires an objective moral standard for me to decide if I approve of something or I don’t? Maybe you require that, but I don’t.

            BTW, I think you’ve spoken to me enough to know what my answer to your question is.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            “I think you’ve spoken to me enough to know what my answer to your question is.”

            right …. so the answer is …. ITS JUST YOUR OPINION as to it being “reprehensible” ….. SO WHAT …. WHO CARES ….. because if you have no OBJECTIVE MORALITY ….. then it is all JUST YOUR OPINION ………. and i do not care ………….

          • TheKingOfRhye

            I never said it was anything other than “just my opinion”, and I gave you the reasons why I have that opinion.

      • meamsane

        Is “being good” an objective standard? If there is no objective morality, then “good/evil” is according to personal whim/opinion. So what is is simply the way it should be, so no reason to complain.

        • Worf

          Or, you know, that empathy thing. “I don’t want to hurt you and I hope you don’t want to hurt me”

        • Bob Johnson

          It need not be a personal whim/opinion, it can just as easily be a societal whim. You know like Buddhist countries. Look to Japan for a nice orderly society without your Christian objective morality.

        • Maxwell Edison

          Why are you wasting your time?

          Look, a reasonable person understands morality isn’t defined by individual choice. It’s the type of thinking that leads to such behavior as shooting a police officer who is serving a warrant. The alleged human felt he was doing the right thing by taking the officer’s life. If morality isn’t objective, then who are we to say murdering anyone, let alone a cop, is wrong?

          There’s no way to respond to this in a rational, reasonable way. Only sidestepping and pretzel logic.

          So just ignore them.

          • Barry Wom

            It’s called having basic bloody human empathy and doesn’t need anybody’s religion.

          • Boris Oldman

            You are sick.

      • Maxwell Edison

        1. There’s no evidence they were anything but pagan.

        2. A) No it doesn’t. Deuteronomy 22:28-29 says the man who raped her must pay her father money and then marry her.

        • Worf

          1. “A census in May 1939, six years into the Nazi era and after the annexation of mostly Catholic Austria into Germany, indicates that 54% considered themselves Protestant, 40% Catholic, 3.5% self-identified as “gottgläubig” (lit. “believers in God”, often described as predominately creationist and deistic), and 1.5% as non-religious.”

          2. ” he shall pay her father fifty shekels[a] of silver. >>He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her<<. He can never divorce her as long as he lives."
          No mention of any choice.
          B) Matthew 5:18-19

          3. " A number of terrorist attacks were attributed by Bruce Hoffman to individuals and groups with ties to the Christian Identity and Christian Patriot movements, including the Lambs of Christ. A group called Concerned Christians was deported from Israel on suspicion of planning to attack holy sites in Jerusalem at the end of 1999; they believed that their deaths would "lead them to heaven"."

          4. Can you clarify, or was that just a personal attack rather than an argument?

          5. This article is entirely christians not wanting to tolerate atheists. Demanding equal rights and representation is not showing intolerance. Telling people they shouldn't count as much because they are in the minority is.

          • Maxwell Edison

            1. And how many of those themselves professed themselves members of the Nazi Party?

            2. Irrelevant.

            3. But what did these alleged Christians actually do since 2001?

            4. What do you know about the Crusades?

            5. Atheists have continuously shown an intolerance for Christians and Christianity. And no single organization has demonstrated this more than the Freedom From Religion Foundation.

          • Worf

            1. Considering something like 15 million Germans voted the nazis into power, I would guess quite a few.

            2. Ok. It was a side point anyway.

            3. The 90’s not recent enough for you? That’s a bit overly picky. Well, YOU might not consider them terrorists, but I consider shooting up or bombing abortions to be acts of terror.

            4. Not a huge amount, but enough to know that the christians acted like monsters in Jerusalem.

            5. Christians have been violently intolerant of atheists for thousands of years. The FFRF is just a bunch of constitutional lawyers that focus on religious rights. And their success rate shows that the law is on their side.

          • Maxwell Edison

            1. Means nothing other than speculation.

            3. Those were criminal acts. They were also rightfully condemned by Christians at large.

            4. Which means you are ignorant of the Crusades. Pull up Robert Spencer and the Crusades on YouTube. It’s 46 minutes long but you’ll fully understand just what the Crusades actually were.

            5. Lie of the day.

          • Worf

            1. It means 15 million people in a country that was 95% or more christian voted for a man that was using old christian antisemitic rhetoric to turn them against the jews.

            3. They were individual attacks with the intent to instill fear in certain people over a dogmatic ideal. Terrorism. And the condemnation is not the point being made. Every muslim I know condemns all terrorism, and every atheist I know condemns the behavior of Stalin.

            4. Sorry if I take the word over legitimate historians over a guy that was banned from the UK for “making statements that may foster hatred that might lead to inter-community violence”.

            5. There was no lie. Which part do you mean?

          • Maxwell Edison

            1. Where are you getting this 95% number? What you are asserting has nothing to do with reality: The Nazi party did not endorse or subscribe to Christian philosophies. Just because you want so badly to paint Christians in a negative light to justify your hate doesn’t make it so.

            3. a) That’s an opinion. Need to provide proof.
            b) Now why don’t I believe you?

            4. In other words, you would rather be ignorant. And are you actually defending Islam while attacking Christians?

            5. The part that begins with, “Christians” and ends with “side.”

          • Worf

            1. I already showed you:
            “A census in May 1939, six years into the Nazi era and after the annexation of mostly Catholic Austria into Germany, indicates that 54% considered themselves Protestant, 40% Catholic, 3.5% self-identified as “gottgläubig” (lit. “believers in God”, often described as predominately creationist and deistic), and 1.5% as non-religious.”
            54% + 40% = 94% plus however many of the gottgläubig that considered themselves christian of some sort.

            3. Proof of what?
            b) Don’t believe what? You really need to learn to clarify your responses.

            4. Using legitimate historical sources does not make me ignorant, and I’m not defending islam. I think the crusades were bad from all sides. The muslims were monsters, but so were the christians. If you think the christians were 100% the good guys, then you need to find less biased sources. Christians tend to paint the history of the crusades with them being the glorious and righteous and the muslims as nothing but evil invaders, but that is a whitewash to preserve the christian image.

            5. You seriously believe christians never mistreated atheists? You are clearly WAY more ignorant of history than you seem to think you are. Might I recommend using sources that are not biased toward christians? Again, they tend to twist history to make themselves look better than they really were..

            Either you are a troll, or you are stuck so deep in historical ignorance that there is no hope of getting out. Either way this debate is no longer worth my time. Read some non-christian history books and get back to me if you would like to continue.

          • Maxwell Edison

            It’s not worth your time now because you’re on the losing end (as per usual) and wish to cut and run.

          • Silas Jennings

            He is doing neither. In fact it is usually yourself who blocks.

          • Bob Johnson

            You are using Robert Spencer as a historical expert on the Crusades.

          • Maxwell Edison

            Yes. And?

          • Bob Johnson

            It wasn’t a question, simply a statement of fact.

    • MCrow

      1. Why would your god be offended by genocide? Should we be giving him credit for the idea?

      2. Objectively, rape results in trauma. Trauma should be avoided for the benefit of the species as a whole. Also, god forced women to marry their rapists and treats women as property, so…

      3. Again, detrimental to the species as a whole vs beneficial to the species as a whole.

      4. Again, should we be crediting god for the idea? I get the feeling it’s more about plagiarism.

      5. You clearly tolerate nothing outside your narrow world view, so I fail to see how your god is any better.

      6. Human rights don’t exist in any real, tangible way, it’s true. That’s why we make them and enforce them, because we want to ensure prosperity as a species.

      7. Sure we can. There are numerous cases of it, in fact.

      • Amos Moses – He>i

        we are not talking about God ….. we are talking about how a-theists CANNOT maintain a CONSISTENT WORLDVIEW and not LIE AND STEAL from a christian worldview in some type of fake moral outrage they cannot even justify and explain muchless anything else from THEIR OWN worldview ……….

        • MCrow

          I’m pointing out that if we’re stealing from a Juedeo-Christian worldview, rape and genocide are viable options according to the Bible and that Christians, in fact, steal from a worldview not their own. Ditto slavery and granting basic humanity to women.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            nope … off topic ….. keep YOUR eyes on YOUR own paper and quit trying to CHEAT …… this is about the A-THEIST worldview and THEIR explanation (actually a FAILURE to explain) ANYTHING that they claim to be able to explain ……….

          • MCrow

            Morality stems from creating stability in society. Morality changes and evolves as human understanding changes and evolves. There is no absolute morality. And before you go off on your examples, let me illustrate.

            Murder: Murder is unlawful killing. Specifically unlawful. Execution, war, self-defense, and accidental deaths are not murder as they are not strictly unlawful.

            Genocide: God commanded Israel to commit genocide. Again, unless your qualm is that we aren’t giving him credit for the idea, genocide in the name of God is a Biblical morality. We as a race looked on at the Holocaust and realized that exterminating an entire race was wrong (as it could happen to anyone) and created a crime for it.

            Slavery: Slavery was condoned and had laws in the Bible. It was part of society. We as a civilization decided it was wrong.

            Rape: Rape was, again, condoned in the Bible as a way to get a wife you wanted. Oh, you have to provide for her? What if…and use your imagination here, the rapist just decided he didn’t want to and was a deadbeat husband? We as a culture decided that women were not property, but people, and thus rape was a violation and a crime.

            So again, we aren’t stealing from a Christian worldview. We are forming a worldview despite Christian influence.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            so “murder” can change ….. REALLY ….. thats where you want to go with YOUR FRAUD of a system ….. and you wonder WHY you are called a LIAR and a THIEF ……….. because MURDER “changes and evolves as human understanding changes and evolves” “There is no absolute morality.” ….. FRAUD, FRAUD, FRAUD …… and you CANNOT EVEN acknowledge the FRAUD you just wrote ……….. LIAR, THIEF, FRAUD ……..

            explain to me how Kim Jung Un ….. an a-theist ….. firing missiles over Japan ….. and threatening to nuke other countries including the US ….. having all the EMPATHY in the world for his country and himself …… EXPLAIN to me in YOUR WORLDVIEW …. how his lack of religion is stopping him from doing what he is doing ….. and then explain to me how you would explain it to him as to why he should not ……

            THE FACT IS YOU CANNOT …………….. and your worldview is a FRAUD ………..

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            so “murder” can change ….. REALLY ….. thats where you want to go with YOUR FRAUD of a system ….. and you wonder WHY you are called a LIAR and a THIEF ……….. because MURDER “changes and evolves as human understanding changes and evolves” “There is no absolute morality.” ….. FRAUD, FRAUD, FRAUD …… and you CANNOT EVEN acknowledge the FRAUD you just wrote ……….. LIAR, THIEF, FRAUD ……..

            explain to me how Kim Jung Un ….. an a-theist ….. firing missiles over Japan ….. and threatening to nuke other countries including the US ….. having all the EMPATHY in the world for his country and himself …… EXPLAIN to me in YOUR WORLDVIEW …. how his lack of religion is stopping him from doing what he is doing ….. and then explain to me how you would explain it to him as to why he should not ……

            THE FACT IS YOU CANNOT …………….. and your worldview is a FRAUD ………..

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            so “murder” can change ….. REALLY ….. thats where you want to go with YOUR FRAUD of a system ….. and you wonder WHY you are called a LIAR and a THIEF ……….. because MURDER “changes and evolves as human understanding changes and evolves” “There is no absolute morality.” ….. FRAUD, FRAUD, FRAUD …… and you CANNOT EVEN acknowledge the FRAUD you just wrote ……….. LIAR, THIEF, FRAUD ……..

            explain to me how Kim Jung Un ….. an a-theist ….. firing missiles over Japan ….. and threatening to nuke other countries including the US ….. having all the EMPATHY in the world for his country and himself …… EXPLAIN to me in YOUR WORLDVIEW …. how his lack of religion is stopping him from doing what he is doing ….. and then explain to me how you would explain it to him as to why he should not ……

            THE FACT IS YOU CANNOT …………….. and your worldview is a FRAUD ………..

          • MCrow

            Murder does change. You say abortion is murder, yet it is legal, therefore doesn’t fit that definition. Some people say that execution is nothing but state sponsored murder. Defining murder is tricky, since it’s not just “one human kills another,” as there are numerous exceptions.

            Kim Jung Un is, simply put, a narcissistic dictator. It’s actually pretty simple to explain: humans are predatory and aggressive by nature. We are also social creatures. Aggressive and predatory is expected, but aggressive and predatory toward other humans is detrimental to our survival as a species.

            As to why he’s not nuking people, simple: self-preservation. With rare exception, most people have very strong survival instincts. He knows, beyond a doubt, that if he attacks someone, that’s going to be the end of himself and his country.

            And if it happens, which I only have your word and the word of a widely discredited tabloid it will, then I will continue as I always have: working, giving time and aid to those around me, and where possible, giving to those further away. I don’t wield any kind of authority to change things that level, but I can do what I have the power to do. It’s not grand, it’s not going to save the world, but it’s what I can do.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            again … FRAUD ………..

          • MCrow

            What, specifically, do you disagree with and why?

          • Maxwell Edison

            Mocking Christians and Christianity. Flagged.

          • MCrow

            Exodus 21:7-11: Women can be sold as slaves.
            Leviticus 25:44-46: Slaves can be bought and traded for so long as they were not Hebrew.
            Ephesians 6:5-8: Slaves are to obey their masters, and doing so is the will of God
            1 Timothy 6:1-2: Slaves are to be obedient so as to not damage the Christian cause.

            1 Samuel 15: God orders genocide and is angry when it is not carried out.
            Book of Joshua: God orders the extermination of 31 kingdoms: men, women, and children.

          • Maxwell Edison

            Flagged for deliberate distortion of God’s word and trolling.

          • Barry Wom

            We are tired of you, too. Why don’t you get lost?

          • Maxwell Edison

            Flagged for harassment. Again.

            Not impressed.

          • Barry Wom

            Christianity was not mentioned. At all.

      • Maxwell Edison

        Blasphemy. Flagged.

        • MCrow

          I can cite the verses again, if you’d like

          • Maxwell Edison

            Ever hear the proverb, “When you find yourself in a hole, stop digging?”

            Stop digging.

          • MCrow

            I have, and it never made much sense to me since that would make mining incredibly difficult. Similarly, I’m bringing up points and getting nothing but attempts to silence in return, so I rather feel I’m on to something.

          • Maxwell Edison

            Nah.

      • Amos Moses – He>i

        1. i do not have discussions of scriptures with a-theists and non-believers …. as they do not know or understand what they are reading …..

        2. You have no moral standard of any reliable sort or OBJECTIVE MORALITY to say any of the things you just said ….. and for you to say them … REQUIRES AN OBJECTIVE MORALITY ………..

        • MCrow

          Careful, Amos. You’re verging dangerously close to a gnostic heresy by claiming that only true believers gain a secret knowledge to understand scriptures.

          I do not, in fact. Most of these things were, at some point in history, not crimes or viewed as morally wrong. Now they are, because we as a species have come to certain conclusions. Namely, do not do anything to another person that you would not want done to you. It’s the basic foundation of morality, and repeated in numerous cultures. Some people don’t, and are handled by society, either legally or through social punishment.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            nope ….. not even close to that line ….. there is no secret ….. you are BLIND AND DEAF to what it says ….. you cannot understand what you cannot hear and cannot see ….. and again ….. the rest of what you say REQUIRES AN OBJECTIVE MORALITY ….. and you have none ….

          • MCrow

            You’ve declared that any non-believer is not able to properly interpret information, and only true believers can access it. That is the basis of gnostic belief

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            nope … Those of God hear His voice ….. you are not and do not ….. and that is SCRIPTURE …… not gnosticism ………..

          • MCrow

            Cite the passage saying you need special insight to read the Bible

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            again …. did not say “special insight” …… you can read it ….. it just will not speak to those who cannot hear the voice of Father/Son/Holy Spirit ….. you are deaf and blind ….

            Hearing His voice …. and those not His sheep will not hear …. “But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep”
            10:14 I am the good shepherd, and know my sheep, and am known of mine.
            10:15 As the Father knoweth me, even so know I the Father: and I lay down my life for the sheep.
            10:16 And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd.
            10:17 Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again.
            10:18 No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father.
            10:19 There was a division therefore again among the Jews for these sayings.
            10:20 And many of them said, He hath a devil, and is mad; why hear ye him?
            10:21 Others said, These are not the words of him that hath a devil. Can a devil open the eyes of the blind?
            10:22 And it was at Jerusalem the feast of the dedication, and it was winter.
            10:23 And Jesus walked in the temple in Solomon’s porch.
            10:24 Then came the Jews round about him, and said unto him, How long dost thou make us to doubt? If thou be the Christ, tell us plainly.
            10:25 Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not: the works that I do in my Father’s name, they bear witness of me.
            10:26 But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you.
            10:27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:
            10:28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.
            10:29 My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father’s hand.

            and blindness of scales before their eyes …..
            9:13 Then Ananias answered, Lord, I have heard by many of this man, how much evil he hath done to thy saints at Jerusalem:
            9:14 And here he hath authority from the chief priests to bind all that call on thy name.
            9:15 But the Lord said unto him, Go thy way: for he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel:
            9:16 For I will shew him how great things he must suffer for my name’s sake.
            9:17 And Ananias went his way, and entered into the house; and putting his hands on him said, Brother Saul, the Lord, even Jesus, that appeared unto thee in the way as thou camest, hath sent me, that thou mightest receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost.
            9:18 And immediately there fell from his eyes as it had been scales: and he received sight forthwith, and arose, and was baptized.

            Rom 11:25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.

          • MCrow

            Doesn’t say we can’t understand what’s written in the Bible. You are just claiming special insight: you need a super special ability (the Holy Spirit) to understand what is plainly written. That’s the start of gnostic belief, no matter how you cut it.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            understanding the words is not knowing the meaning behind the words and being able to know the meaning of what Christ said ….. and being able to hear Christ through those words …… it definitely does …..

          • MCrow

            Then maybe the Holy Spirit should teach everyone that the slavery passages aren’t quite right. Or that the discrimination against women isn’t quite right.

            Or, hey, crazy idea, maybe could have just said “slavery is wrong.”

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            well … that is the separation of the sheep and the goats that scripture talks about that you cannot hear … so scripture and the Holy Spirit is doing its job …….

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            oh … and Isaiah …..

            35:4 Say to them that are of a fearful heart, Be strong, fear not: behold, your God will come with vengeance, even God with a recompence; he will come and save you.
            35:5 Then the eyes of the blind shall be opened, and the ears of the deaf shall be unstopped.

          • MCrow

            Also, if morality is objective, why did God create laws to perpetuate what is considered immoral behavior?

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            God did not …. God ALLOWED men to make laws …. and ALLOWED them to make TERRIFICALLY bad laws …. for certain purposes of God ……. and JUST AS i SAID ….. you do not know what you are reading as you are DEAF AND BLIND to what scripture says …… and your darkened heart hears what it wants to hear ….. and not what God has to tell you …..

            and you have no complaint ……….

          • MCrow

            The fact is that, with your statement, we could remove the supernatural entirely and come to the same conclusion. Humans made the laws, humans changed the laws, humans wrote those laws into a book that became a holy text

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            nope …. the hands that wrote it were mens hands …… but the author is the Holy Spirit …..

          • MCrow

            Then the Holy Spirit authored laws that oppressed women, encouraged slavery, and were responsible for genocide

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            nope …. more of your lies ……. and mischaracterizations …….

          • MCrow

            The laws are there. The text is there.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            and so is your misreading and mishandling of the text ….. as is your judgement for doing so ……

          • TruthvLIes

            And according to atheists the Bible was written by goat herders. You know, those people who could not read and write.

          • MCrow

            Varied authors, actually, and the Pentateuch was written by Moses, who was an educated member of nobility. After that, Israel maintained a scribe caste (the Levites) in order to maintain records. It was also their method of maintaining positions of authority within their society, so…

            In short, I don’t claim they were written by goat herders, so don’t put words in my mouth.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            you would have to have an OBJECTIVE MORALITY to even make that statement …. and you do not …. you deny one exists ….. so JUST YOUR OPINION …….

            oh ….. BTW …..

            The Frenzy Over Jerusalem Has Begun. Erdogan Threatens Trump ‘In Five To Ten Days We Will Gather The Muslim World In Istanbul And We Will Deal With The Issue Of Jerusalem’

            ever watch the “Walking Dead” ….. i mean other than being one …… about the end of episode one this season ….. Negan meets Father Gabriel and they are surrounded by the dead and Negan asks him if he has a certain pair of pants on ……. i hope you have yours on …….

          • MCrow

            This is what I’m trying to show you: there is no ‘objective’ morality. You claim there is, but as human understanding has changed, so has Christian morality. Slavery? A-Ok by a lot of Christians for the vast majority of its existance. Oppression of women? Still happens in a lot of circles. Christian morality changes with the times. I’m sorry you think that the last 20 years is an indicator of the entirety of Christian history. I assure you, it isn’t, and it’s not a pretty picture.

            As for doomsday…I’ve survived more predicted apocalypses than times I’ve had the flu. Want to know the difference?

            The flu made me miss work.

            Just further proof that you have nothing but fearmongering to encourage people to follow your religion. It’s sad, really. Jesus preached such radical compassion and social reform. You sit there and spout end time predictions. No wonder religion is dying.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            slavery has not ended … and it is not perpetuated by christians … christians ended it …. not a-theists with “EMPATHY” …… woman treated as human being and not as chattel …. that came from the Jews ….. and it is not perpetuated by christians … christians ended it …. not a-theists with “EMPATHY” ….. NOPE …. ATHEIST and PAGAN values have changed ….. and it is not perpetuated by christians … christians ended it …. not a-theists with “EMPATHY” ……….

          • MCrow

            Slavery and discrimination against women are written into the text of the Bible and were used to support both as an institution

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            again …. NOPE …. and that is YOUR mischaracterization of what is there …..

          • MCrow

            The Bible was used to justify slavery, discrimination, and segregation. Christians still, to this very day, have sects that argue against interracial marriage as being un-Christian. Slavery was fought because we saw that slaves were human beings. Christians tried to perpetuate it in America.

            Women are still fighting Christians on equal rights. Christians still try to treat women as belonging only as homemakers instead of equal members of society. Giving women the vote, fighting for them to have equal say? Most of the voices on the opposing side wear a cross.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            does not matter WHAT IT WAS USED TO JUSTIFY ….. FAIL …. those that did that will answer for that misuse …. AS will you ………….

  • SOMERSWORTH, N.H. — “To protest a Ten Commandments
    display in a small New Hampshire town, a national professing atheist
    group will sponsor the raising of an atheist flag over the monument next
    month.” Hmmmmm,odd. It’s not about “protest”. It’s about equality for non believers,who have contributed to this Nation & This State,and are sick not being equally represented every time a Pagan Holiday rolls around that has been converted into a Christian one. Funny how you religious types seem to conveniently overlook that every year,but have no problem complaining,when non believers,or other religious groups,ask for equal representation.

    • Amos Moses – He>i

      sorry … we do not understand the basis of your complaint ….. if an a-theist has nothing to believe in ….. then what is there to “represent” ….. i guess a big ZERO ….. FYI ….. the US was not founded to give safe haven to anarchists and the unlawful ……

      • Mark P

        Who said we have nothing to believe in? Being an atheist only means that the person doesn’t have a belief in any god. And it has nothing to do with being an anarchist or unlawful.

        I’m an atheist and there’s plenty of things I believe in. Human decency, education, egalitarianism, democracy, rule of law, due process, science, reason and enjoying life without harming other people.

        • Amos Moses – He>i

          “Being an atheist only means that the person doesn’t have a belief in any god”

          GREAT …. and sorry to tell you ….. there are a literal TON of corollaries that come right along with that ….. and one of those is …. you do not get to APPEAL TO OBJECTIVE MORALITY as a basis for any complaint ………….. and you have none …………

          • DoorknobHead

            THE MYTHICAL DEVIL IS IN THE REAL DETAILS
            I do agree with you in part, and so does science (something we get to appeal to), in that there are many corollaries related to being an atheist or living in a secular society (though, not a TON, because…and sorry to tell you…corollaries don’t weigh anything).

            > Data correlations show that in almost all regards the highly
            secular democracies consistently enjoy low rates of societal
            dysfunction, while pro-religious and anti-evolution America performs
            poorly (GS Paul 2005)
            > Secular societies are less rapey [that’s the breaks, eh, kid]
            > Atheist societies have better educated populations
            > Secular societies have less human disturbances which result from dogmatism, devout shoulds, oughts and musts and extreme religiosity or true believerism which is essentially emotional disturbance (Ellis, 1980)
            > The less religious the societies the happier the inhabitants

            …Well, isn’t that SPE-CIAL…

            CHECK THE RETURN ADDRESS ON THOSE PAYCHECKS, SIR
            Who would possibly argue so hard for a more theocratic society? I don’t know? Could it be … SATAN? How CON-veen-ient. Are you sure you are working for the right ‘guy’? I keep seeing examples of religion expressed in ‘merica, often through the ‘morals’ of political theocrats, and I keep seeing a good metaphorical fit with the Christian version of Satan. You are without a doubt not going to any heaven. I believe that. Say hi to “Satan”.

          • TruthvLIes

            A couple of your claims are incorrect. Sweden which is a thoroughly secular country had at the last report 66,000 rapes up from about 10,000 a few years ago.

            Research shows that people whose lives are anchored by religion are more happy, less likely to fall foul of the law and lead more productive lives.

          • DoorknobHead

            Um, but who are those rapes committed by — I think we both know — secular peoples or a newly introduced religious community? Well, actually, I hope this is a matter of ignorance and not knowledge, otherwise there would be purposeful dishonestly going on here.

            The second point is somewhat correct. The happiness curve is a U shape, not a straight line. Those that are most secular, and those that are most religious (also read, most delusional or cloistered away from reality) are the happiest. It is often the people that are in the middle that suffer the most on many of the happiness scales. But at what cost is it if people report being happy on the religious end. Studies indicate the cost is high. Do you have any sources as references?

          • Bob Johnson

            Actually all those additional rapes are because Sweden changed the law regarding what constitutes rape. Basically it often turns what use to be counted as one case into many cases.

          • DoorknobHead

            That sounds like a possible factor as well. Inflated numbers not consistent with historical usage attributed to the term due to potentially regressive or progressive policies. So how does it make scientific claims incorrect if apples are being compared to oranges? Is there a real change in actions, or a change in reporting? Studies are often very careful in defining terms to avoid these errors. References?

          • TruthvLIes

            Incorrect.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            ” (though, not a TON, because…and sorry to tell you…corollaries don’t weigh anything).”

            sure … it was a literary device ……….

          • DoorknobHead

            Sure it was a literary device. Mine was comedy, even if it is only I that laughs, it is enough for me. It could also be considered a prime to entice ejaculate [literary usage] from a well of absurdities. (laughs)

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            “Could it be … SATAN? How CON-veen-ient.”

            satan …. the devil …. is GODS devil and he is on GODS leash ….. and he only does what GOD allows him to do ……. so not ……….

          • DoorknobHead

            ‘cept the god and devil are fictional and metaphorical and only exists within the weak mind of humans. In this metaphor, I propose either the leash is held by the opposite party, often supposed, or it is a two-ended leash, such as might be described at the conclusion of Anatole French’s, “Revolt of the Angels” and the dream sequence.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            “‘cept the god and devil are fictional and metaphorical a”

            is that a scientific or theological statement ………..

          • DoorknobHead

            Scientific statement. Science DOES have something to say about god or the devil…there has never in the history of history been any sound evidence for any god or the devil. The god hypothesis is a failed hypothesis. Facts is facts.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            “there has never in the history of history been any sound evidence for any god or the devil.”

            absence of evidence is NOT evidence of absence ……….. now by your OWN STANDARD ………. that being “science” ….. describe your experiment ……. where are your data runs and how did you perform this experiment to determine your results ….. what were the controls you had in place …… what data did you throw out and on what basis ….. where is your PEER REVIEWED STUDY ….. and who read that study and approved its publication and where can it be found …………… because you are claiming science …. this is the current scientific methodology science recognizes ….. show me what you have ………..

          • DoorknobHead

            IT IS A CON, MAN
            “Absence of evidence is NOT evidence of absence” which is still not evidence, which is the problem to begin with, no evidence. Science isn’t in the business of proving negatives — I’m sure you have been told this many times, but chose to not understand it. There are no verifiable, repeatable, predictive fingerprints of any god left upon reality for science to see and use to make predictions — as would be expected if a thing does not exist in the first place. Science has nothing, and that is the point. There is nothing to have. UR Conned.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            YOU are the one claiming things like NO EVIDENCE … the BURDEN is on YOU …. so YOU are the CON, MAN ….. if you are going to CLAIM SCIENCE ….. then SHOW THE SCIENCE …… “Science isn’t in the business of proving negatives” ….. well then WHY DID YOU CLAIM IT …..

          • DoorknobHead

            PROOF IS IN THE PUDDING, OR IN MATHEMATICAL SOUP
            The claim is, there has never been any evidence for any god (or magic, or the efficacy of incantation spells, or walking on water, or the dead coming alive after three days, or viable theological arguments for god). Where is the Nobel Peace Prize for any evidence of god? Not one piece of evidence, and this regardless the fact that scientific theories needs all kinds of evidence which can be used to make reliable predictions. You should know there would be a Nobel Peace Prize, because many scientists have been believers and would love to have gathered such evidence. [aside: technically science does not deal in “proofs”, though colloquially this term is often bantered about. The term “proof” is a term that is more applicable to mathematics]. God does not win the prize — it is just the fact of reality.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            science, belongs to God …. as does math, reason, logic, and the entirety of creation ……… and you have no pudding …. if you did YOU WOULD SHOW IT as YOU MADE THE POSITIVE CLAIM of non-existence ………

          • DoorknobHead

            SOMETIMES ZERO ISN’T ZERO BUT IS THE SAME AS ZERO
            Since god is a myth as there is no evidence or sound reasons to think otherwise, it does not compute that science, math, reason and logic, etc belongs to god, unless, like many do believe, god is created by man, and man is not created by gods. I might also claim fairies, unicorns or teapots orbiting Jupiter does not exist. My belief is strong in this, and I am around 99.999…% percent sure with an unknown amount of nines behind the decimal point. I am an agnostic atheist, which means I don’t believe, even though I can not claim I have 100% knowledge a god does not exist, but the lack of knowledge allows my to belief to approaches zero to such degree that it is indistinguishable from zero — therefore I justify saying god does not exist, even if I can know for 100% certain — some hypothesis are so terrible and so unproven, time and time again, that there is no further need to consider them further until ANY evidence is made available.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            “Since god is a myth as there is no evidence or sound reasons to think otherwise”

            BUT YOU CLAIMED SCIENCE
            so you bear the burden of proof under that paradigm ….. SO AGAIN …. absence of evidence is NOT evidence of absence ……….. now by your OWN STANDARD ….. describe your experiment ……. where are your data runs and how did you perform this experiment to determine your results ….. what were the controls you had in place …… what data did you throw out and on what basis ….. where is your PEER REVIEWED STUDY ….. and who read that study and approved its publication and where can it be found …………… because you are claiming science …. this is the current scientific methodology science recognizes ….. show me what you have ………..

          • DoorknobHead

            GOD IN AN EVER SHRINKING BOX
            Good point. Give me an instrument that can test each piece of known and unknown existence, at the same time, for all time, and I’ll show you ‘proof’ (read as astronomically high confidence) of the negative claim that a god, that is a master at hiding (as if he does not exist at all) does not exist. This is what religion asks for, and it ain’t gonna happen. If we test all of existence at the same time, except the last cubic nano meter, the religion will still claim their god belief. If the god claim is that god lives only in a box, we can check that tiny box with proper instruments and more easily prove that negative.

            GIMMIE MAGICAL PROOF TO DISPROVE MY MAGICAL GOD
            On the other hand, all science needs is one piece of sound evidence to astronomically adjust itself with more confidence in the validity of a god claim — but religion just can’t do it, not one piece. Never has, and I have a high degree of confidence based upon historical data, that it never will. Just like the religious give their god magical powers, they give words, such as “proof” magical powers. “Scientific proof” can be considered as much a myth (well, not AS much) as mythical god. Scientific proof at it’s best, only means a high degree of confidence combined with consistent predictive utility. Jump off that building (don’t try this at home, kiddies) to prove that god exists by predicting he will save you, and I’ll predict a splat every time.

            WHAT RELIGIOUS BELIEF DOES PREDICT VERY WELL
            The religion consistently produces a lack of evidence, lack of sound reasoning and arguments, constant submission to human biases, outright deceitfulness, duplicitousness, incorrectness, fawning over authoritarian power, praying on and inculcating children, being regressive instead of progressive, encouraging fear within adherents, branching off into divergent sects instead of converging to one belief system, not producing any further new value to the world, all while being perniciously harmful to humanity, and on and anon, and on.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            so … YOU ADMIT that you have no science to support your UNSUPPORTABLE CLAIM of non-existence ….. ok … i already knew that ….. so no surprises …… and a BIG FAIL on your part ….. FYI ….. ALL OF CREATION testifies that God exists …. and that is why you cannot prove He does not exist ….. no instrument needed ….. except your EYES ……..

          • DoorknobHead

            LITTLE HOPE FOR SOME STUCK IN THEIR OWN TRAPS
            The failure is the inability to properly understand words and concepts. Even after concepts are explained there is still an inability or lack of willingness to understand. Instead personal interpretations and meanings are inserted where they don’t belong without the proper submission to proper evidence — to reality; all to aid in the continuance of delusion. It is like taking drugs to avoid thinking about reality. It is not only the religious that do this, any strong ideology or dogma tends to ignore reality, and this is what interests me. How is it that people can delude themselves so deeply. Religion isn’t even worth consideration, the consideration to be paid is how the mind is so weak and fallible, and how in the future might minds think more reasonably and without slaving itself to emotions, human biases and fallacy. Maybe scientist will help cure people from being so easily deluded in the future, but for now we can only sit back and watch as people sit in their prisons of circular reasoning, spinning webs, so that they might not escape the net and the traps they set for themselves.

          • TruthvLIes

            That describes the homosexual agenda perfectly.

          • DoorknobHead

            Without religion, how would the religious know who they are supposed misunderstand, demonize and hate?

          • TruthvLIes

            I don’t know as I am not religious so you will have to ask them.

          • DoorknobHead

            IKR. It’s more of a rhetorical question. I don’t think many realize how much religion is responsible for normalizing unnecessary harm done against designated out-groups or others with different beliefs.

          • TruthvLIes

            As I said I am not religious so it is not an area of my expertise so you will have to ask them.

          • DoorknobHead

            Yes, I get that. I think often they know not what they do, and often do not answer in a manner concordant with reality or by introspection. Religious infusion into a secular culture can also affect those outside the religion, in ways those outside of religion might not be aware of.

          • TruthvLIes

            Yes, that may be a good thing depending on which religion is involved. If it was the atheists religion of me, myself and I then I would say no.

          • ThroatwobblerMangrove

            What do you mean, you are not religious?

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            nope …. the failure is YOUR premise …. that God does not exist ……..

          • DoorknobHead

            Exactly. My failure to believe your failure, due to a lack of your critical thinking, is because my default position does not include something that is so hidden it is exactly as if it does not exist in the first place.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            nope ….. your failure to accept the truth and the evidence …..

          • DoorknobHead

            I know, right. Saying things opposite to reality and denying reality altogether is the forte of the religious-minded. Scared, I suppose.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            scared of what ….. God owns everything ….. including the worldview that you are trying to STEAL …. science, logic, reason, creation … all belongs to Him …. pssst …. even YOU belong to Him …….

          • DoorknobHead

            SCARED OF WHAT? INDEED…
            People that are recovering from religious indoctrination often site that the fear of hell is one of the last things that held them in the chains of religious ideology. Fear is a great way to control people’s thought, and to keep then from asking questions which can lead away from untrue things and towards true things. In some cases people who have been atheists for decades find they still occasionally feel the fear of a hell, that they know as mythical, still haunts them, depending upon how much religious metal-abuse they were exposed to as children. Also, since god can be described as a monster, there is fear like a father figure abusing a child until they submit. Because fear is a good survival tactic, I hypothesis that some people are, due to natural selection and variation, more fearful than others, and this may also be a factor why some are less likely to escape being victims of religion, and the religious culture, than others who seek escape toward truth. Both the strength of the childhood abuse, and the susceptibility to not being able to overcome their fear because of a natural proclivity.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            fear is not involved ………. predestination is ………..

          • DoorknobHead

            AMOS: PRE SET OVEN FOR YOUR DESTINATION
            Wow, that seems potentially very deluded, to say fear is not involved. But maybe not, it is not like there is only one flavor of believer, and we are all individuals, but to say fear is not involved, for all Christians would be super silly. Even saying so for one’s self might just be a form of denial or a lack of an ability to be introspective, for some reason. Maybe even just normal inculcation. I can only guess. Well, you claim fear is not involved, and I can’t tap your mind and say otherwise, but I can tell you there can be some warranted level some of fear by atheists, in that there are so many strongly deluded people.

          • Maxwell Edison

            Yeah. Godless societies are better societies. Like Sodom. Pompeii. The Former Soviet Union.

            You have no idea what you are talking about.

          • DoorknobHead

            DUNNING-KRUGER
            It is what studies report. Sure, you and I may not know what we are talking about, suffering from the Dunning-Kruger effect, but go tell it to those that create the studies since you apparently know better.

            COMPARING A MYTHICAL APPLE WITH A REAL ORANGE
            Sodom? A mythical city found only in the bible and in the minds of those which have been taught a metaphor to be a fact? Now the former Soviet Union I can bite into a bit, because it is not a metaphor. The problem with the former Soviet Union is that is shares several characteristics with theocracies and religion in general, such as authoritarianism as an example. Religion is a dangerous power, just as a state can be a dangerous power, and they sometimes compete — sometimes the state uses force against religion to gain and maintain power, jealously, or sometimes religion does the same, but in reverse, which is known as a theocracy. Currently a dangerous power in the USA which is consuming all is Big-Money, which is using both the state and religion for it’s own gains. The reports I referred to talked about “secular democracies” to shed the conflation that religion often dishonestly uses to compare apples with oranges. Secularism isn’t an end-all-be-all, but is an important factor for societal progress.

          • Maxwell Edison

            I find your insult to my intelligence rather funny. It’s like people who drive sports cars with huge mag wheels. You just know they’re overcompensating. So what are you trying to make up for?

            To borrow from David Niven, taking off your clothes and showing off your shortcomings doesn’t impress me.

            As for Sodom, you really don’t know if Sodom existed or not. You just assume because it’s mentioned in the Bible it didn’t exist. Which shows a bias all your own. Fact is, while Sodom may not have been located, other geographic locations mentioned have. And facts don’t care about your feelings.

            It’s also patently absurd to say the Soviet Union prospered in a secular society. During the time it was under communist rule, 50 million people were killed while others were imprisoned and tortured, including people of faith.

            If you are going to assert the USSR had a better society, understand people are going to think you mentally and emotionally ill and best left avoided.

          • DoorknobHead

            What? I don’t know that angels came down to earth, and all they men of Sodom wanted to have dirty monkey sex with them, so the founder of the Abrahamic religions offered his daughters up to be raped by a mob, but instead they escaped, and the daughters got him drunk so they could have dirty monkey sex with their father so they could have babies? Okay, believe in Sodom. Paris is in lots of fictional stories too, but that does not make fictional angels real. It is in your own best interest to think Sodom, and Abraham, are fictional metaphors.

            Actually, many theists are very intelligent, they just stop using critical thinking and their intelligence when it comes to the con called religion. It’s not necessarily their fault they believe such fake news, humans are very fallible, and the con starts with very young defenseless children.

          • Maxwell Edison

            And flagged. Take your atheist attitudes elsewhere.

          • DoorknobHead

            So, your answer is to ‘behead’ those which disagree with you? and to pretend things written in your source material isn’t there when it does not work to promote your narrative? This sounds both familiar and historical at the same time.

          • Maxwell Edison

            Blatant troll. Flagged.

          • DoorknobHead

            WHEN BELIEFS ARE TOO WEAK TO BE CHALLENGED
            Emotional responses due to having deeply held beliefs challenged, might encourage people to pull out a “troll” card prematurely which is understandable (but not necessarily desirable in a free society), especially if that person’s worldview is partially made up of strong “sacredness” and “blasphemy” thinking. One way ideology shields itself is to not allow others to participate in the “free market place of ideas” by shutting them down and keeping their ideas from competing and possibly winning even if other’s ideas might be superior. This shutting down of others can take many forms which metaphorically, and in some cases literally, removes the heads of those with views different than the desired dogma — often by small groups.
            ATHEISTS ARE TROLLS JUST BECAUSE THEY EXIST?
            One definition of troll is someone who combines sowing discord and being off topic in order to disrupt the conversation for their own amusement. The first word of the article is “atheist” and is about atheists having a voice, so it does not seem I am off topic. Atheists are such because they have reasons to be, but to express those reasons, even if it is necessarily at the expense of ideology, is sometimes too much for the highly inculcated to handle. I seem to be the one willing to converse while my interlocutor is either not able or not willing. This is a great example that coincides with the article at hand — the desire to shut down the “free market place of ideas” by squashing the voices of others with different beliefs, i.e. Tyranny.

          • Maxwell Edison

            Here’s the thing, pal: I know God exists. He has made His presence known to me on such a personal level absolutely nothing you say is of substance.

            No, what galls me is that you come into a Christian website to spew your junk either to annoy, anger or somehow bring the unsure down to your subterranean level. The level of the selfish, self-centered and eternally damned. You and I both know if I started witnessing at an atheist website about the reality of Jesus Christ, I’d be banned on sight.

            You can keep on believing what you want. And you’ll be begging for mercy when you stand before the God you have so much contempt for. Guaranteed.

          • DoorknobHead

            I BELEIVE YOU
            I believe you! I believe you have had real and powerful personal experiences and you are convinced by them, and your not the only one. Hundreds of current religious leaders (‘pastors’ who can’t get out without being harmed) and ex religious leaders [Ref: The Clergy Project website] have heard from many others these types of personal-experience stories and have even had for themselves such convincing experiences. The problem lies in the epistemology question, and your claim of knowledge. What I think is happening, and what many others think, is the religious are misinterpreting real experiences that are being colored by human biases such as confirmation bias, for example. Religion teaches people to misinterpret reality to confirm what they already believe to be true instead of allowing for other cogent possibilities.
            GAL DARN IT
            Of course one feels galled, and angered and annoyed when other beliefs are presented against a strong worldview. It feels like an attack against beliefs is an attack against a person. Religion knows this, and teaches it’s adherents to TAKE offense, and feel attacked even in cases when no offense is meant. You say my beliefs are junk, and I believe your beliefs are not concordant with reality. We don’t share the same beliefs — but most people in the world don’t share our beliefs — so we are in the same boat here.
            LEARNING FROM OTHERS WITH DIFFERENT BELIEFS
            My arrival at a Christian website is incidental. I have news feeds, and sometimes the links are to Christian websites. I do NOT know a theist will be instantly banned when witnessing at an atheist website — my experiences have actually been quite the opposite. The thing atheist sites will do, though, is to also share their beliefs for why the witnessing experience is not actually a reliable way to determine the truth. For example, call-in internet shows such as The Atheist Experience or Talk Heathens often prefer to engage with believers and to hear what and why they believe. Atheist, and skeptics in general, often know one of the best ways to learn is to engage with others of different beliefs in a fair and respectful manner while only conversing with like minded people in an echo-chamber can be counterproductive. Many atheist websites are filled with ex believers that thought their way out of religion, sometimes taking decades to slowly lose their belief, or who at one point just actually read their holy books. These atheists have compassion towards those who still are trapped and victimized by religion.
            WE ONLY NEED TO FEAR, FEAR, ITSELF, AND REALITY
            The threats from religion have no affect upon me, because I have no reason or evidence to believe in their veracity, and I am free to follow the truth wherever it may lead me without fear of a mythical hell constraining me — even when the truth is not as pleasant as would be hoped. I am not ex-religious myself, but many ex-religious people say the feel much better, and more free once they have left the fear-induced shackles their religion teaches. They also realize that belief is not a choice, once they have learned why the methods they used to claim knowledge about the supernatural are unreliable.

          • Boris Oldman

            May I ask you a question? Are you mentally retarded?

          • Maxwell Edison

            Troll. Flagged.

          • TruthvLIes

            Typical. Explain away the genocide that happened in the U.S.S.R because it wasn’t religion that caused it.

          • DoorknobHead

            DON’T LET YOUR DOGMA OFF IT’S LEASH
            It was dogma and ideology with submission given to unquestionable authority (like god) — many of the characteristics of an authoritarian regime are similar to the characteristics of fundamentalist religion.

            The link is easy to find, if a person’s ideology or dogma has not made them too afraid to honestly do the search for themselves…

            For example, “What Links Religion and Authoritarianism”, JSTOR DAILY, July 25 2017.

            ‘The relationship between religiousness and authoritarianism has been a topic of study in the political, psychological, and social sciences at
            least as far back as the 1950s. Scholars Paul Wink, Michele Dillon and
            Adrienne Prettyman write that “a large body of research indicates that church involvement is predictive of an authoritarian attitude constellation, characterized by deference to ‘law and order,’ social
            conventionality, and intolerance of out-groups.” Gary K. Leak and Brandy A. Randall note that decades of study has shown “when religion is conceptualized in unitary terms, such as church attendance or affiliation, religion often goes hand in hand” with “intolerance, prejudice, authoritarians and dogmatism.’

          • TruthvLIes

            Never heard of any of them so i will take it with a pinch of salt.

          • DoorknobHead

            I think that’s the right attitude. Doing your own research and checking original sources for yourself is probably a best practice, especially in an era where so many sources are pretenders at being reliable.

          • Silas Jennings

            Stop telling perfectly reasonable and polite people they don’t know what they are talking about.

          • Maxwell Edison

            Are you going to continue to bother me after what happened a couple days ago?

            Leave. Me. Alone.

          • Silas Jennings

            Oh, are you going to tell me you didn’t have your stuff removed as well?

            TREAT PEOPLE RESPECTFULLY on this forum. No one’s picking on you. I would say the same thing to ANYONE else who was being as rude as you are.

          • Maxwell Edison

            Flagged for harassment. I told you to leave me alone.

          • Silas Jennings

            And I told you to speak respectfully. Stop breaking the site’s rules.

          • Maxwell Edison

            Flagged for flagrant and repeated harassment.

          • Barry Wom

            You are getting on everyone’s nerves with your whiny name calling and you should shut your mouth.

          • Maxwell Edison

            New account, possibly created by Silas for the purpose of further harassment and trolling.

          • Barry Wom

            Oh what on earth are you talking about, I’ve had an account for ages.

          • Maxwell Edison

            With only 8 comments, most of them posted here in this thread?

            Nice try, Silas.

          • Silas Jennings

            No, I’m right here, Maxwell. Try to restrain yourself from flagging, now.

          • Maxwell Edison

            You refuse to leave me alone, even as I specifically told you to do so, and your comments toward me are being deleted? Are you deliberately trying the mod’s patience?

            And FLAGGED again for harassment.

          • Silas Jennings

            Look, you’re starting to accuse other people of being me. You’re insufferable. All I did was tell you to behave yourself and talk to people respectfully. That’s all. That’s NOT harassment.

          • Maxwell Edison

            Bull.

            You have been actively trying to get me banned from here because you think you should be able to attack God, Jesus, Christians, Christianity and the Bible without fear of consequence on a Christian website.

            No. I know if you had your way your anti-Christian buddies and sock puppets take over the site and drive the Christians away, you hate us so much.

            But you have to get by me first. And it galls you having to do that.

            This isn’t JoeMyGod. But you should go back there if you wish to continue your behavior, as it will not be tolerated here at all.

            Last time: Leave me alone. Any comment you post to or about me is an intentional act of targeted harassment and will be treated as such.

          • Silas Jennings

            All right, I’ve had enough of this. I wasn’t going to do this but you’ve pushed me past my limit.

            This is a direct quote of yours about the moderator of this site:

            “The mod is once again not doing their job and banning these lefty libtards when they openly attack people of faith and lie about it!”

            The quote can be found here:

            https://disqus(dot)com/home/discussion/channel-communitycouncil/ladycheckmate_qa/

            Ban me if you have to, this is proof positive that there’s a movement out here to silence not the CHRISTIANS here but anyone who speaks up against them. And no one manages to be obnoxious with more concerted effort than you, Maxwell. You are absolutely the rudest person I’ve ever encountered and the forum would do so much better with you you here.

          • Silas Jennings

            Don’t bother with him, he will flag you and tag you and whine and scream. Let him get banned on his own.

          • TruthvLIes

            Right again Maxwell and to add to your list there is Pol Pot/Cambodia, Mao Ze Dong/China, Kim Un Jon/North Korea, North Vietnam, Fidel Castro/Cuba, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Germany (East), Hungary, Poland, Romania, Slovakia. Angola, Benin, Dem Rep. of Congo, Ethiopia, Somalia, Eritrea, and Mozambique. All have seen their demise under communism.

          • Frank Atkin

            @Amos Moses, To define ‘atheism’, it simply means “without belief in a god or gods”. ( Oxford English Dictionary ). And the definition has no attachment to any political persuasion or version of morality. If someone does not believe in ‘Bigfoot’, it is simply non-belief in that particular entity.
            And nothing to do with politics or morality.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            “no attachment to any political persuasion or version of morality.”

            right … NO MORALITY at all ………… so it is all JUST THEIR OPINION ….. and so they have absolutely NO COMPLAINT about anything … about how anyone is treated ….. about how they live or how they die ….. about anything ……….

    • meamsane

      What exactly would you like the government to do? Come pat you on the head recognizing your existence? Maybe an official Congressional resolution to the same affect? Are you not free to exercise your freedom of non-belief as we are to exercise our freedom of belief? Why do you need the government to validate your non-belief?
      If you would give up your obsession worrying about what religious people are doing, you might find more contentment in your life.

      • Worf

        This flag clearly indicates that the government does recognize us. The christians were allowed their monument, and atheists were allowed their flag. It is only the rabidly un-American christians that are objecting to constitutionally equal representation in this case.

        • meamsane

          What are you complaining about then?? Feel better?

          The article says nothing about “rabidly un-American christians”. But that does show your hostility towards them. Plain bigotry! Thanks for the reveal.

          If complaining alone makes someone “un-American”, then include the FFRF in that category to be consistent.

          • Worf

            “Atheists and minority faiths should not be persecuted, but a community doesn’t have to display or express every minority faith that exists among them,” one wrote. “That’s not how democracy works.”

            That right there is what I was meant by “un-American” christian. In this case, I am not the one complaining. The ones complaining are the ones that don’t think the atheist flag should be allowed.

        • YoikesAndAway

          Look if you want to raise your flag then do so, but why must you do it in opposition to the 10 commandments. This is not about equal recognition it is the atheist group wanting to target a religious monument. If Atheists really cared about recognition then put up your own memorial in a place all your own. Your actions are just like the TST whose only bit is being anti-Christian. At least have the courage and integrity of what you believe/don’t believe to do your own thing rather than being babies and targeting religious memorials. Your all so transparent in your idiocy.

          • Maxwell Edison

            It’s funny how the respondents wouldn’t answer you directly.

            I recently heard about a controversy surrounding a billboard put up by atheists calling Christianity “fake news.” But it was all by itself.

            Don’t know why the FFRF feels it should mock the Christian faith, which is what this is all about.

            Wait…yes I do.

          • MCrow

            Because that space has been chosen to display belief systems, apparently. That’s where the Ten Commandments go, so it should be where all other displays of religious belief or non-belief go.

          • james blue

            If Atheists really cared about recognition then put up your own memorial in a place all your own.

            They are, in the same PUBLIC place Christians are putting theirs.

            Instead of trying to put them in front of courthouses or state capitols I would like to see ten commandment monuments put on church grounds. There are far more churches than government building, yet I cannot recall seeing a ten commandment monument on church grounds facing the road.
            The “ten” monument I would like to see on government ground (courts and legislature) is the bill of rights.

          • Maxwell Edison

            Yes, next to places like the Ten Commandments and nativity scenes, for the sole purpose of mocking them.

          • james blue

            You sure it’s not the other way round?

      • Silas Jennings

        Maybe just learn where it’s allowable to put your religion on display, and places where it is not. Not too hard.

      • Mark P

        No. What we would like from the government is for it to NOT tell us that our unbelief makes us second-class citizens.

        • meamsane

          If you feel that you are second class citizens that must be due to your own internal insecurities, because I have never heard the government say that unbelief of atheists makes you second class citizens.

          • Frank Atkin

            When a particular religion or sect has a majority, the adherents tend to feel privileged and outsiders are ostracized. Yes, the outsiders are then considered ‘second class citizens’.

          • Lark.62

            Well you can put your monuments on govt property. But when an atheist wants to do the same thing, Christians block them. Those displays that get through are often vandalized by Christians.

          • TruthvLIes

            According to atheists, Christians cannot put thier monuments on so called government property. That is why they are sueing every Tom, Dick and Harry to get Christian monuments off.

          • Lark.62

            Equal treatment. Either no one places religious monuments on government property or everyone can. Either option is constitutional. Many find the first option cleaner and easier to administer, but the second option is legal.

            What is not legal is allowing christian displays while rejecting other religious views.

          • TruthvLIes

            Your atheist friends do not believe in equal treatment that is why they are suing every Tom, Dick and Harry who wants equal treatment.

          • Lark.62

            Except perhaps for a few random small towns, there is no government body named Tom, Dick or Harry. Your statement is false.

          • TruthvLIes

            Don’t be so asinine.

      • Why do you need the Government to promote your religion all over government buildings,schools,etc? These monuments should be on Private Property,not Tax Payer Funded Public Property. Sooooo,seeing that they are,And seeing that I Am a Taxpayer,A Gulf War Veteran & An Atheist,I will have my Atheist Flag flying Right Next to your Religious Monument.

        • meamsane

          I don’t. Fortunately, the SCOTUS doesn’t take such a strict view of Separation as you do.

  • Blood Rainicorn

    If religious monuments are erected on public property, don’t get upset when another group gets similar recognition. Christians don’t deserve any preferential treatment

  • Worf

    “Atheists and minority faiths should not be persecuted, but a community doesn’t have to display or express every minority faith that exists among them,” one wrote. “That’s not how democracy works.”

    Actually, yes it does. If one religion is expressed, it opens the door for all of them, as well as non-religion. That is how our >democratic republic< works. The minority do not have fewer rights than the majority.

    • Eldrida Urika

      You said: The minority do not have fewer rights than the majority.
      that’s the best way I have Ever heard that explained!
      Usually people talk about the negative of Christianity, which as a Christian I automatically bristle at; The way you just put it, makes it a whole different view to me. Thank you.
      Blessings!

      • TheKingOfRhye

        Look at this way: The Constitution gives individuals rights, and what’s a smaller minority than an individual?

    • Bill

      This discussion always comes up during the ‘Christmas’ and ‘Easter seasons. These holidays celebrate the birth and resurrection of Christ, pure and simple. As a so called ‘nonsectarian’ nation, not recognizing any particular religious belief, as set forth by the founding fathers,those folks who have a problem seeing ‘Christmas’ trees, by the way, were originally a ‘pagan’ symbol of the coming of spring in the dark winter, or a cross or menorah for that matter just don’t have to look . If they don’t like it, they need ro go to china, russia or north korea, where such symbols are forbidden, they’d change their tune really quick?

    • Concerned

      As we know per our Constitution, all people have equal rights and “Congress shall make NO LAW respecting an establishment of a religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”
      Therefore, the display of the 10 commandments is totally legal and the decision to display can be determined by the residents of the city in which they are displayed. These 10 commandments were used by our founders during the creation of our Bill of Rights and our Constitution.
      These same 10 commandments are good for all religions, not just one religion, and good even for atheists, but are not accepted by felons and crooks and those who cannot respect their neighbors.

  • JPT

    What is gained by public displays of piety in an otherwise secular setting, and why can it not be attained if the display is deferred?

  • TruthvLIes

    Democracy doesn’t work when a particular group (FFRF) wants to impose its agenda on everyone who does not agree with them. I think they have posted more lawsuits than anyone else in America to stop people enjoying themselves and and doing what they are not offended about.

    It is all about sour grapes because christianity gets more coverage than they do and so far they haven’t been able to take over government to impose thier atheist agenda.

    And by the way, the Council is not Congress.

    • TheKingOfRhye

      “Democracy doesn’t work when a particular group (FFRF) wants to impose its agenda on everyone who does not agree with them”

      Since when does democracy mean that everyone gets their way? Until Obergefell, the agenda that made same-sex marriage bans in the United States legal was imposed on everyone who didn’t agree with it, so was that a violation of democracy? I don’t agree with much of Trump’s agenda, so is that a violation of democracy to have that be imposed on me?

      Hmm….okay, the last one might not be a great example since he IS the President after all. But, if you really wanna talk about democracy, just keep in mind that he LOST the popular vote, so how democratic is that?

      • Maxwell Edison

        Red herring.

        • TruthvLIes

          Thankyou maxwell.; Could not have put it better myself.

          • Boris Oldman

            In other words, you couldn’t have possibly said something as stupid as what he did.

          • TruthvLIes

            In other words, you could not understand reality if you tried.

          • Boris Oldman

            You should not encourage the mentally retarded that way. Unless you are ALSO mentally retarded, which I assume you are.

          • TruthvLIes

            I live with people who are not christians as I am the only one in my family who is.

        • Bob Johnson

          And how is TheKingOfRhye’s comment a red herring? He directly responded to the relationship between democracy as practiced in the USA and minorities.

      • TruthvLIes

        “Hmm….okay, the last one might not be a great example since he IS the President after all. But, if you really wanna talk about democracy, just keep in mind that he LOST the popular vote, so how democratic is that?”

        Oh dear, I hear this all the time and it suggests the commentators that use this do not know how elections work in the USA or don’t want to know.

        Presidents are NOT elected on the popular vote. They are elected on the Electoral College votes. If you don’t like that, all you have to do is change the system. Until it is changed please stop using silly comments.

        • TheKingOfRhye

          I know very well that Presidents are elected via the Electoral College; I just think it’s an unfair, undemocratic system. I didn’t say anything like “Trump’s not the real President”. I have heard people say things like that, but they’re wrong to do so. Look at it this way: Someone could win the Presidency with 23% of the popular vote. What sense does that make?

          • TruthvLIes

            Reading between the lines your comment said that Trump should not be President because he did not win the popular vote.

            That is the problem when you don’t have a good grasp of the english language and please don’t say that you have because if you have you would not have said what you did the way you did.

            Someone with a good grasp of the english language would not write things that are open to conjecture.

          • TheKingOfRhye

            “Reading between the lines your comment said that Trump should not be President because he did not win the popular vote”

            Well, that IS what I think. He IS President, but is so only because of a system that, while he did legitimately win according to how it operates, is a undemocratic one.

            Do you have an opinion on that, or do you just intend to insult me?

          • TruthvLIes

            Oh dear, you are a sad little snowflake like all the Democrats who are spitting chips because their beloved Hilary didn’t win.

            But thanks to admitting to the truth…finally.

            You will find that all over the world, people are elected to office because of fallible voting systems. As I have a degree in Politics, I have had a good look at how it all works.

            Some say it should be first past the post, some say it should be the preferential system, some say it should be proportional voting, some say I don’t care who you vote for I am going to take control of government and some make sure there are enough people on the ground to interfere with the voting process to ensure they win.

            As Winston Churchill said “Democracy is the worst form of government but it is better than all others.”

            The bottom line is that if Hilary had won with the same results as Trump, they would have welcomed it with open arms. She would not have said I can’t take it because I didn’t win the popular vote.

          • TheKingOfRhye

            I’ll just say that I have felt that way about the Electoral College since…well, since back when I thought of Donald Trump as the guy who just had a few Wrestlemanias at his place. I’m not exactly sure what “truth” you think I’m admitting. Maybe you’re reading more things between the lines…that aren’t there.

            “She would not have said I can’t take it because I didn’t win the popular vote”

            And I never said Trump should or would said “I can’t take it”. That’s what I’m talking about….don’t read things that aren’t there.

          • TruthvLIes

            Sour grapes king of rye, sour grapes.

          • TheKingOfRhye

            You’re using that expression incorrectly, but you’re far from the only one.

          • TruthvLIes

            As a trained teacher of English I can assure you that I have used the expression correctly.

          • TheKingOfRhye

            “disparagement of something that has proven unattainable”……no, that doesn’t quite describe what I’ve been saying. Especially since, as I’ve said, I’ve thought that same thing for a long time, even when the guy I actually wanted to win at the time benefited from it.

          • carolyn

            Social Science Degree, Theology Degrees, worked with homosexuals. Trained Teacher. My my you have been busy.

          • TruthvLIes

            Yes I have. Stops you from sitting around all the time getting angry at everyone because they don’t agree with you liike someone I know here.

          • carolyn

            Well I have a degree. A masters degree. A professional diploma and 34 years professional practice. You dont KNOW me. I am not angry. I am merely pointing out when you talk nonsense. I dont have to agree with you and I am entitled to say that. Why do you have such rage at gay men? and why do you spend your life on here arguing nonsense arguments with anyone who happens to tell you that they disagree with you. You have 4300 + comments. You also have a foul mouth at times, saying nasty stuff about gay men etc. and name calling. Using Ad Hominem insults.

            “Oh dear, you are a sad little snowflake like all the Democrats who are spitting chips because their beloved Hilary didn’t win. ”

            I would look a bit closer to home lies vs truth. when you are talking about people sitting round “getting angry” at everyone because they don’t agree with you”

            Your ability to project is remarkable.

          • carolyn

            OMG – I have just seen that you now also claim to have a degree in Politics as well. “As I have a degree in Politics”
            So thats a Social Science Degree, Theology Degrees, Politics Degree, worked with Homosexuals, AND a Trained Teacher. You really have been busy. Either that or you are just an out and out liar who says what you want to try and win an argument. Remarkable that someone SO educated can still talk a load of codswallop.

    • Lark.62

      The first amendment that the FFRF fights to protect also protects you.

      • TruthvLIes

        The atheists do not fight to protect the First Amendment. They fight to destroy anything and anyone who does not interpret it the way atheists want it interpreted.

  • BobInBpt

    Now what in hell is the Atheist Flag? A white flag with nothing on it? or a black flag with nothing on it?

    • ZappaSaid88

      If you actually read the article you’d know what it looks like as they provide a description.

  • Kathleen

    I totally understand how some people are upset by the words “Thou Shalt Not Kill, Thou Shalt Not Steal, Thou Shalt Not Bear False Witness, Thou Shalt Not Commit Adultery … etc.” They probably hit close to home.

    BTW … The 10 Commandments are Judeo-Christian …. from the Hebrew scriptures.

    • Lark.62

      I do not appreciate the government telling me which deity to worship or how to worship it. And I do not appreciate a “commandment” that places a wife among a man’s property between his house and his slaves, cattle and donkeys.

      • TruthvLIes

        From what you write I get a very distinct impression that you do not appreciate anything that isn’t your way. Give my regards to Frank,

        • Lark.62

          Wrong again. I cherish the First Amendment and the right of people to speak and disagree. But I also cherish the restrictions placed on government action by the First Amendment and the entire Bill of Rights.

          The government must not give preference to any religious view.

  • Al Parker

    Well I guess a flag with a Jackass would look good in New Hampshire.

  • Recognizing_Truth

    Atheists have the right to free speech, and as an obvious religious organization, they also have the right to worship (themselves) as they see fit.
    The 1st Amendment is for all US citizens.
    Nice to see the 10 commandments monument back in place.

  • David Ruff

    It would not surprise me if most atheists were libtards. Does anyone remember why the puritans first came over to settle here in the “new world”? RELIGIOUS FREEDOM!!! There were no such thing as atheists (as a group) then. That is a fact of history. The people who moved here felt they were being oppressed by a British government that had zero respect for the pure teachings of the Bible; thus the name “puritans.”

    Yes, that’s right, they were all god-fearing Christians who founded America and created The Constitution so that all men would have equal rights under the law…including atheists who came later. For atheists not to show at least some respect for Biblical/Christian values is a slap in the face to every freedom loving American. Atheists may believe what they wish. But they can’t change history and they shouldn’t try to flaunt or push their beliefs on others either.

    • Silas Jennings

      A great many rethuglitards are atheists. Look no further than your current POTUS, a man whose behavior could not be less Christian.

      • David Ruff

        How is Trump an atheist?

    • Lark.62

      Puritans – Massachusetts Bay, 1620. Outlawed all religions but their own, including other forms of christianity.

      The Constitution – drafted by a variety of people with various religious views.
      It was ratified in 1789 and guaranteed freedom of religion and placed restrictions on the government to prevent the government from giving preference to any one religious view. The Constitution is not directly related to one small group of people who settled in one small part of New England a century and a half earlier.

      Equal rights means that rights are equal.

      If one citizen or group of citizens can place a religious display of their choice on government land, then any other citizen or group of citizens has an EQUAL right to place a religious display of their choice on government land.

      If Christians have a right to flaunt their beliefs, every other citizen has the same right.

      • TruthvLIes

        Wrong as usual. The First Amendment does not say “The government shall not establish a religion….”It says “CONGRESS shall not establish a religion…

        But atheists do not believe that christians have the right to flaunt thier religion that is why they are suing people left right and centre because according to them christianity is being flaunted.

        • Lark.62

          Considering the number of times the 14th Amendment and the Constitutional role of the Supreme Court have been explained to you, at some point repeating incorrect information becomes lying.

          • TruthvLIes

            I have never mentioned the 14th Amendment so I can’t lie about what I didn’t talk about.

          • Lark.62

            The First Amendment with its reference to Congress is impacted by the 14th Amendment. All levels of government in the United States are subject to the restrictions placed on government by the Bill of Rights. The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment has not been limited to “Congress” for going on 150 years.

      • David Ruff

        You are not arguing religious and/or ideological freedom. You are arguing the privilege to argue. A people that values it’s privileges above principles soon looses both.”-Dwight D. Eisenhower

        The irony is that Jesus Christ fulfilled the ten commandments therefore rendering obedience to them as a law code obsolete for Christians. Instead, he told his followers that they (the Ten Commandments) were based on the principle (now known as the Golden Rule), “Everything you want men to do to you you must do to them.” Therefore, rights and privileges are not principles to live by; love of fellow man and tolerance is.

        Thus, whether or not the statue of the ten commandments stands anywhere is not the point. Whether an atheist flag or even the flag of the U S is allowed to fly is not the point. The point is: continual arguing over these things divides people rather than bringing them closer together. Sowing intolerance reaps intolerance. That’s what you are doing.

        We all have been given the right to believe what we want. But we should not make that an excuse for wrongdoing, for what goes around comes around; and most of the time the reciprocation of wrongdoing is not “pretty.” But living by principles is. Yet, there are very few people any more who live by principles, especially those vested in both the Bible and the Constitution resulting in the chaotic “political correctness” we see playing out in the world.

        • Lark.62

          The conviction that “all people should be treated equally by their government regardless of religion or beliefs about religion” is not intolerance.

  • Marina

    The Constitution is based on the 10 commandments, but its anti constitutional !!!!

  • Kathleen

    Gee, that flag flying over 10 Commandments monument could be interpreted as an endorsement! 😉

  • Lolita

    Atheist flag???? LOL what does it look like??? No picture here!!! No such thing.

  • More fallout from the polytheism-enabling First Amendment’s establishment of religion. Yes, you read that correctly. This would have never occurred in 17th-century Christian Colonial America whose governments of, by, and for God were established upon His unchanging moral law, beginning with the First Commandment.

    Like a moth to a flame, Christians are intent on employing the genesis of their problems as the solution. In this instance, the First Commandment violating First Amendment.

    Religious Freedom and Christian Liberty are not the same thing. They are, in fact, hostile to each other. The former is born of the First Amendment. The latter is born of the First Commandment. In 1789, the First Commandment and Christian Liberty were formally sacrificed on the altar of the First Amendment and Religious Freedom. Christian liberty is being attacked as a consequence of the First Amendment’s provision for an alleged religious freedom for all.

    It’s one thing to allow for individual freedom of conscience and private choice of gods, something impossible to legislate for or against. It’s another matter altogether for government to enable any and all religions to proliferate through the land and evangelize our posterity to false gods. This is what the First Amendment legitimizes. It is an unequivocal violation of the First Commandment and the polar opposite of the following First Commandment statute:

    ‘[Y]e shall destroy their altars, break their images, and cut down their groves. For thou shall worship no other god: for Yahweh, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God: Lest thou … go a whoring after their gods….’ (Exodus 34:13-15)….”

    It’s the First Amendment that the sodomites, lesbians, and atheists hang their hats on and that they’ve been able to utilize for their cause. It’s likewise the First Amendment that so many Christians hang their hat on as if there’s something intrinsically Christian about it when, in fact, it is entirely antithetical to the Bible. It’s thus suicide for Christians to appeal to the First Amendment in any fashion whatsoever.

    For more, see online Chapter 11 “Amendment 1: Government-Sanctioned Polytheism” of “Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective.” Click on my name, then our website. Go to our Online Books page, click on the top entry, and scroll down to Chapter 11.

    Then find out how much you really know about the Constitution as compared to the Bible. Take our 10-question Constitution Survey in the right-hand sidebar and receive a complimentary copy of a book that examines the Constitution by the Bible.

  • Chet

    Aw, tel FFRF to go pack sand. Why do Christians and Jews tremble at the sight of these people only to drop and roll over in defeat? Why not try taking a stand and watch God Almighty work. “Stand Up, Stand Up For Jesus Ye Soldiers Of The Cross”… Stop being wimps and jelly bellies…

  • “Atheists and minority faiths should not be persecuted, but a community doesn’t have to display or express every minority faith that exists among them,” one wrote. “That’s not how democracy works.”

    Sorry, but that is a very wrong headed view of democracy in the U.S.A.

    First and foremost, The U.S. is NOT a pure democracy, but a constitutionally limited, representative democracy. Were it a pure democracy, then Hillary Clinton would be president since she garnered three million more votes than Trump.

    One of the major functions of our Constitution is to keep the government out of religious affairs as the only way to ensure that no religion prevails over all others. The only way to ensure this is to forbid itself to make laws favoring–or otherwise show favoritism to–any one religious or philosophical order.

    A person’s believe in matters of religion are his right to have and express, but he is given no right to have his beliefs sanctioned by government over other beliefs.

    Therefore, if a religious organization is allowed by their local government to erect a PERMANENT monument to their religion on public property, then that property becomes a public forum. The monument may not stand alone, but every other organization of theological beliefs or philosophical ethics must be allowed to erect theirs as well. And to that end, the atheist flag (or even an atheist code of ethics) should be allowed permanently at the “Citizen’s Place.”

    As well, any Muslim organizations could erect a similar monument and the town would be sued were it to disallow it.

    Why can’t the religious right understand this simple concept of equality under the law and understand that any government allowing one religion to erect a monument on property owned by ALL citizens, all citizens who pay taxes for the support of the property have a equal right to express their religion or philosophy?

    • Chet

      When a country, any country, is thus founded on religious tenets of the majority of its populace, well, then, so be it, i.e., Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia et al. America was founded upon Judeo Christian ethics and beliefs. And she was defined as a Christian nation founded upon the Holy Bible till advent of the recent Pharaoh. In government and society in general, Christians and Jews of America will never submit to alienation or subordination of the Jewish Messiah and our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ of Calvary with recognition of Him to be at or equal to all other so-called gods, which are no gods.

  • peanut butter

    I didn’t think Christians and atheists had a common bond. If you are trying to follow in the footsteps of Christ, you have to remember that when he met ‘Legion’, he didn’t embrace the demons that were in him, He cast them out into pigs who then ran off a cliff. You are mocking Him with this idea, and your town, at least the ones going against Him, will probably feel repercussions.

  • James Higginbotham

    to be an ATHEIST is not a RELIGION, when they DON’T BELIEVE IN GOD.
    they are of SATAN AND SHOULD BE DRIVEN OUT OF THIS NATION.