Indiana Teacher Tells First-Graders to Keep ‘God, Jesus, Devil’ Out of Classroom Conversations

McCordsville, Ind. — An elementary school teacher in Indiana recently sent home a classroom update to parents that included a request to tell their children not to talk about “God, Jesus and [the] devil” at school.

The McCordsville Elementary School teacher, whose name has not been made public, sent the request on Aug. 23 after hearing an estimated five first-graders debating among themselves about the existence of God and the devil. She said that she addressed the children about it, but the subject matter later came up again.

“With McCordsville Elementary being a public school, we have many different religions and beliefs, and I do not want to upset a child/parent because of these words being used,” the teacher wrote to parents. “If you go to church or discuss these things at home, please have a talk with your child about there being an appropriate time and place of talking about it.”

However, several of those parents soon contacted the school, concerned that their child’s free speech was being curtailed.

“There were a handful of parents that contacted us,” Mt. Vernon Schools Superintendent Shane Robbins told the Indianapolis Star. “They were offended that we were trying to quiet their children.”

He said that the teacher is fairly new—in her second year—and wasn’t completely educated on district policies surrounding the religious expression of students, nor did she speak to the principal before including the request in the classroom update for parents. The matter is now being discussed with the teacher.

Robbins said in a statement that the district allows students the liberty to discuss what they wish as long as it does not disrupt the learning environment.

  • Connect with Christian News

“Trying to limit a student’s view on religion is a violation of a student’s First Amendment rights,” he outlined. “However, if the discussion becomes an academic disruption, then as a district, we can intervene to maintain the integrity of the educational process while at the same time being sure to not violate a student’s constitutional rights.”

“It is the position of the Mt. Vernon Community School Corporation to respect the diversity of our students. In doing so, we will address sensitive topics with compassion while maintaining the integrity of our academic environment,” Robbins stated. “I believe this was a learning experience and an opportunity for us to improve as a school district.”

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

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

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

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


Become a Christian News Network Supporter...

Dear Reader, has been of benefit and a blessing to you? For many years now, the Lord has seen fit to use this small news outlet as a strong influential resource in keeping Christians informed on current events from a Biblical worldview. Despite Facebook's recent algorithm changes, which has limited our readership, and, as a result, has affected operational revenue, we continue to strive to bring you the news without compromise and to keep Christ in focus. If you have benefited from our news coverage, would you please prayerfully consider becoming a Christian News supporter by clicking here to make a one-time or monthly donation to help keep the truth widely and freely published and distributed? May Christ continue to be exalted through this work!

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
  • Michael C

    So a new teacher in a tiny town made a mistake that was promptly corrected. Sounds good. What’s next?

    • Mr Cleats

      McCordsville is part of the Indianapolis metro area, which has 1.4 million people. So “tiny town” just shows your ignorance.

      And btw, for people who constantly squawk about “equality,” you lefties sure don’t practice it. You express your contempt for a “tiny town,” as if the kids there don’t matter. You’re a bunch of elitist snobs who look down on people in rural areas or small towns. So all your talk about equality is bogus.

      • Michael C

        McCordsville is a tiny town. Whatever you’re inferring from that statement is all on you. I don’t understand why that made you so insecure. I have no more “contempt” for tiny towns than I do for new teachers (a parallel characterization with which you seem to have no problem).

        For the record, I do believe that equality (without the scare-quotes) is a good thing, I’m not a “lefty”, the outcome of this situation was appropriate and it should be the same in urban, suburban, and rural schools, I’m definitely not an “elitist”, and I don’t look down at small towns.

        I think you should take some time to examine why you’re so sensitive.

  • bowie1

    If she was not “completely educated” on the policies then she should be before she even steps into a classroom.

  • mr goody two shoes

    Lutherans wonder Will she allow the southern baptist’s “Nashville creed ” to be hung up in her class room ???

  • meamsane

    You would think that a teacher in her second year would already be well-aware of school “policies”.

  • Wesley Willis

    good for the 5th graders. questioning gods existence at at early age BEFORE they get too indoctrinated by their parents and church.

    • Chet

      No reference in this piece regarding any child’s “questioning of God’s existence”… Perhaps that’s the take of the teacher or another …

      • Wesley Willis

        It’s in the second paragraph dude. I didn’t write it, but good for the kids. Soon they will realize that there is no good reason to believe in something just because your parents and church told you to.

        • Chet

          I better go back and reread that para. Just as surely, however, there’s surely no reason whatsoever for any child to believe some man’s unbelief and take his word as truth while not accepting the truth of God’s Word, the Holy Bible…

          • Wesley Willis

            But that’s not how it works. Just like santa and the tooth fairy, these kids wouldn’t believe in any of them until adults tell them to. Just like god.

          • Chet

            As I said, Sir, children can believe doubters, skeptics or they can believe God’s Word which has stood the test of time for two thousand years plus. The Holy Bible will still be standing long after our bodies have returned to dust and we’ve been long forgotten. And you can bet the farm on it.

          • Wesley Willis

            “children can believe doubters, skeptics ”

            It’s not necessarily that children “can” believe whoever they want, it’s that they would never come to the conclusion that santa, tooth fairy,.god exists on their own without adults telling them otherwise. Being told to think something is more dishonest that coming to the conclusion on your own.

            “God’s Word which has stood the test of time for two thousand years plus”

            I’m really not sure what this means. Sure, it’s existed for a long time, but that doesn’t mean it’s gods word or that it’s true. There are books older than that so that means nothing. What about the holy books that are older than the Bible? Are those true too? How did you determine the books from other religions are not true and your book IS the word of the real god?

            “The Holy Bible will still be standing long after our bodies have returned to dust and we’ve been long forgotten. And you can bet the farm on it.”

            Yes, paper last longer than humans. I don’t question that at all.

          • Chet

            Simple, childlike faith is all Christ requires. Some of us have it (as God imparts it to us) and some of us willingly ‘choose’ to not to have it. For me, I’ll gladly stake my life in the present and my soon eternity on it without doubt or reservation… I once was lost and on my way to Hell, and bound by various sin, including booze. Now, I praise the Lord for His great love and mercy and grace in delivering me from it’s influence and vice-like grasp under the domain of the Devil and his own… Jesus saves from the guttermost (me) to the uttermost, perhaps yourself. I don’t question this at all…

          • Wesley Willis

            You think you deserved hell? I don’t even know you and don’t think you deserve hell. Why worship a guy that would send you to hell? Am I going to hell? Do I deserve it? I’m glad there is zero evidence hell (or heaven) exists. Threatening people with hell for not agreeing with them is an immoral teaching.

          • Chet

            I’m certain I deserved to go to Hell, not merely because I, like all others, was born with a sin nature, but, rather, because of the wickedness of my own dark heart. That is, before the light of the glorious gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ shone through and I was shown via God’s Word, that though I had done much wrong in my life and I was without excuse. Then, the Holy Spirit enlightened my heart to understand and believe that unworthy as I was, nevertheless, God loved even me and He sent His only begotten Son into this sin cursed world to provide the single means by which I and all other sinners could attain His great mercy and grace. So, I said yes to the Lord Jesus Christ, best I could, and with limited understanding upon reading a gospel tract someone had earlier provided. I meant business with God and wanted His forgiveness, and via the precious shed blood of Christ, I was washed whiter than snow and all my innumerable sins were forgiven me. My name was then written down in the Lamb’s Book Of Life and Heaven was assured me at the end of life’s road. All thanks to Christ and nothing on my part whatsoever. Then, I learned another great lesson from the Holy Bible; when ones repents of his sin and comes to Christ, not only does God forgive such one for Christ’s sake, He then even forgets one innumerable sins. Now, how about that. No man could ever do such. If you and I were friends and I wronged you, you might be able to find it in your heart to forgive me, but you would never forget what I had done.

            “As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one”Romans 3:10. “For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God” Romans 3:23, Holy Bible.

            Thanks, Wesley, for giving me opportunity to share God Almighty’s love for you. And if you’ve never heard God’s plan of salvation, you’ve heard it now, Sir. Please know, Jesus saves, from the guttermost (me) to the uttermost, perhaps you. At the end of life’s road, as one snaps-out into eternity there is a Heaven to gain (for the saved) and A Hell to shun (for those who reject Christ and needlessly die in their sins). Choose wisely, my friend…

          • Wesley Willis

            I’m sorry that I believe that you have more self worth than you do.

            I just don’t think it’s moral to send people to hell simply for not believing in something for which I find there is insufficient evidence. If I meet god and I tell him that I honestly sought him out and never found it, and then if he sends me to hell still, then that’s not a god worth worshipping – that’s very petty, dishonest, and immoral in my mind.

            I suggest you look up Pascal’s wager and why it’s a failed argument.

          • Chet

            I suggest you trust not in the arm of flesh and reject the whispering of the Devil. If you’ve never heard of God’s love for you, Sir, and His simple plan of salvation via Christ and Him crucified, well, you have now. You, and you alone are now fully responsible for your own soul’s eternal well being. Be wise, mister, choose Christ and enjoy the benefits of a transformed life in the here and now and an assured eternity in the bliss of Heaven one day soon coming. Hell, the madhouse of eternity, is not a place any reasonable thinking man would care to even see, much less be consigned therein forever. Thanks for the exchange of views. God bless…

          • Wesley Willis

            I haven’t seen any reason to believe the devil is real, so your claim about me listening to him doesn’t make sense. I don’t believe your crucification story – why did god sacrifice himself to himself to bypass rules that he himself created? Also, he wasn’t sacrificed – don’t you claim he came back to life?

            After reading the Bible how did you determine god was the good one and Satan was the bad one? God killed millions and millions more people and Satan killed only a handful.

          • Chet

            Sir, you do not appear to be authentically interested in the things of God. The Devil takes on many forms and works in and through people just as he did via the serpent in the Garden of Eden in deceiving Eve.

            The Lord Jesus Christ willingly laid down His life on Calvary’s Cross to provide the one and only means by which we sinners can be forgiven of all sin. And on the third day, Christ arose to live forever even as He makes intercession for His own.

            “The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance” II Peter 3:9, Holy Bible. God loves you and I, Wesley, even though we have sinned and He proved His love via Christ and Him crucified. The Devil wants only to damn one’s soul forever via any means possible. And deception is his greatest tool… Don’t be deceived… Jesus saves from the guttermost (me) to the uttermost, perhaps you…

          • Fee

            Mr. Wesley, please keep seeking the Lord. Just as Chet came to Christ and repented of his sins, I am praying you’ll do the same, for Jesus Christ died for all, including you. I humbly ask of you, just give Christ a try, without requiring of Him any kind of “evidence” of His existence. Surrender your mind, body, and spirit to Him, dismissing your logic and intellect. Trust and believe, Jesus loves you more than anyone. One day soon, you will experience His amazing love and know the reality of His existence; quiet thyself in the meantime and rest easy.

          • Wesley Willis

            I’m sorry, but I can’t just believe things because somebody told me I should. That goes for all things, not just god. Like everything else in life, I believe things after the have been shown to be true or likely true. God should know EXACTLY what it takes to convince me and he hasn’t done it yet. The ball is in his court. If he wants me to know he’s there he will give me the evidence I require (he knows what I require since he gave me the brain that he gave me, right?).

          • Fee

            Thanks for your pleasant reply, Mr. Wesley. What you shared and the manner in which you shared it is a good start. Indeed/agreed, God did give you and create your amazing brain. One glorious day, God’s love and plan for your life shall be revealed to you. I anticipate your powerful testimony being shared here at that time, just as Chet and others have shared their life-changing stories in this thread; please don’t harden your heart. I love you in Christ and you’re in my earnest prayers. I sincerely wish you well. Be at peace and rest easy. One sweet day, Mr. Wesley, one sweet day…

          • Chet

            If one finds himself in Hell, the only thing he’ll be looking for is forever elusive relief from the abode of the damned, the flames, demon spirits, blood curdling screams never letting up, loneliness, misery, unquenchable pain, horror, never satisfying thirst, and along with all that, one’s own condemning and convicting conscience – why did I not listen… No man is beyond God’s great plan of mercy, grace, forgiveness and mercy via Christ and the Cross and His resurrection, but each man must come unto Him on His terms. It’s really simple, so much so, a child can understand it… Consider the cost if your soul should be lost… “For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?” Mark 8:36, Holy Bible…

          • Zoroastrianism (much of which was copied by early Christians) is far older than Christianity (to use a tautological phrase). That religion has stood the test of time as well.

            Yes, there are far more Christians now, but consider the fact that if all the world believed in a single proposition, the sheer weight of all that belief, without objective evidence, would lend not a molecule of truth to the proposition.

            If more people buy ford trucks than any other make of truck, does that mean that they are better trucks, or does Ford Motor Company simply have better advertising? One should never believe something just because so many others do–or because it was what they were taught to believe, especially with objective evidence to the contrary.

          • daniel wright

            There is disagreement among scholars about when Zarathustra lived. Some say he lived around 500-600 BC which is after David, Jeremiah and Isaiah all prophesied of the coming messiah. That being said,Jesus is an historical figure who fit the criteria in those prophecies. That cannot be said of any other religion.

          • Thank you, Daniel, for the thoughtful argument. Such a reply impels me to go back and refresh my memory of dates. I always like doing that. Sorry, but your statement requires a rather lengthy answer. Copy it out, sit back, sip a nice cabernet, and enjoy the read. 😀

            Zoroastrianism was recorded as early as the mid to late 5th century BCE–before the times of Jeremiah and Isaiah. And the only reference to David, or the “House of David,” outside the Bible, is on a stone that was engraved around 1000 BCE. There is also much disagreement on the validity and interpretation of the time prophecies, especially that of Isaiah.

            In fact, the story of Jesus’ virgin birth, itself, has logical flaws, not the least of which is the virgin birth. As well, at the time, the Jews were fervently looking for a messiah based on Isaiah’s “time prophecy.”

            My thought is that Jesus was a very charismatic preacher, heavily influenced by Zoroastrianism, who’s preaching fell victim to embellishment after his death (for which there is no independent, extant documentation of those events written in the Bible–and the Gospels, themselves, disagree on just what happened at and after the “resurrection”).

            Concerning Isaiah’s prophecy, you may already know that when the old Hebrew word “almah” (young woman) was translated to Greek, the word “parthenos” was used, which means “virgin.” There is no evidence whether this was an honest mistake in interpretation or a deliberate deception to make Jesus’ birth a miracle.

            In either case, the translation was wrong. I think it was another embellishment, copying that of Zarathustra’s virgin birth, of which they already knew. After all, it would never do to have a miracle for Zara but not for Jesus.

            Besides, ancient Hebrew scholars, such as Isaiah, were meticulous in specificity. If Isaiah had intended to prophesize the miracle of a virgin birth (which would have been HUGE), then he would have used the word, “Bethulah,” which meant, “virgin”). And, by the way, the Muslim belief in the 72 virgins for martyrs is the result of a mistranslation as well.

            Other clues that Christianity is a hybrid religion via a mix of Hebrew and Zoroastrianism is the fact that the word “paradise” was a Zoroastrian (Persian) word. As well, the ancient Jews did not believe in a heaven and hell for folks on Earth. They believed that rewards and punishments are for the living. After death, the souls, good, bad, or ugly, go to Sheol (house of shadows) to dwell.

            Also, Jewish angels did not have wings. They came as humans, walking like everyone else. Too, we have the war in heaven derived from Zoroastrianism.

            It is interesting to me that the early Christians did not borrow the more empathic part of the Hell scenario. Where Christian will have a soul burn in torturous agony for eternity, the Zoroastrians believed that after a time in Hell, Ahura Mazda would send a cooling river through Hell, the souls would walk through the river, which washes away their sins, and they emerge on the other side and are welcomed into paradise.

            And, by the way, Zarathustra was said to have been born of a virgin some 600+ years before Jesus. But the claim of virgin births proves nothing relevant to the truth of Christianity or Zoroastrianism.

          • daniel wright

            So you are saying that Jesus told the man on the Cross that he would meet him in hell?

          • Is that all you have for an answer to my argument of Christianity being a hybrid religion?

            But to your nonsensical question (i’m being very kind): You are aware, are you not, that the four Gospels disagree on what “Jesus” said from the cross. So, which of these “accounts” is true? How do you know?

          • daniel wright

            If you ever followed a criminal investigation closely you will notice that every witness’ version of the event will vary to some degree. Each of the accounts are from the perspective of the observer. There was much crying and wailing happening and some things one man heard another didn’t. All accounts are true from the perspective of the witness. You are full of excuses. That will end at the judgement.

          • You will also notice that forensics can discover the truth, just as it does in evolution. Where witness’ may vary, solid evidence does not.

            In any case, there is no reasoning with a fundamentalist. I’ve said my piece and you have interpreted it according to your prejudices.

            So, have it your way. I’ll have it mine. Again, fortunately there are far more empathetic people in the U.S. than fundamentalists.

          • daniel wright

            True. The evidence has shown that evolution is a fable cooked up by atheists to justify their disbelief. There is no evidence of any species becoming another. They adapt to their environment to survive,but in the end Darwin’s finches were still finches.

          • Wow, are you completely off your rocker! It proves my belief that fundamentalists are abysmally ignorant of the mechanics of evolution.

            Anyone who argues against something they know virtually nothing about broadcasts the fact that he is ignorant and an fool.

          • daniel wright

            So you are a biologist? You think I know nothing about the “THEORY” of evolution. If you are so all knowing about the subject then convince me. Show absolute undeniable proof that one species actually became a more advanced one. Show how the second law of thermodynamics doesn’t apply. Your statement along with the attack on my sanity proves ZERO!!! Put your money where your big mouth is.

          • daniel wright

            I see at least twice that you lean on your own understanding. That is a mistake many have made. Leaning on your own understanding has brought many well meaning folks astray. You are not perfect, Stop pretending you are.

          • My understanding comes from education. Your understanding comes from having been taught completely differently. It is you who are easily led astray, especially by Bible thumping politicians and wealthy preachers (if you are into theology).

          • daniel wright

            One man’s education is another man’s indoctrination. I see the latter in you.

          • And I see the reverse. Fundamentalists are always attacking higher learning (objective education). That speaks for itself.

          • daniel wright

            I see no truth in that. There are Christians with multiple doctorates. Some former atheists have become Christians as a result of their scientific research. It all comes down to whether professors allowed their students to have freedom of thought or held grades over their heads to force them to conform to their preconceived beliefs. How is forcing an atheistic belief on your students with a failing grade used as whip anything near objective education?

          • Yes, multiple doctorates, but not in biological evolution. They are still ignorant. A preacher can have doctorates, but can still be completely ignorant of biological evolution.

            Read up on Behe’s defeat in the Dover, Pa trial. Educate yourself.

            How is forcing an atheistic belief on your students with a failing grade used as whip anything near objective education?

            Higher education does not FORCE anyone to believe anything. It is sectarian religious teaching that forces by means of the threat of going to hell if you don’t believe.

            Of course I don’t expect you to understand that. You are beyond reason.

          • daniel wright

            You are the one in need of education. There are dozens of examples I have heard where college students said their professors failed them for writing a thesis or paper that didn’t conform to the professors politics. Who said that “higher education” was objective in this time of political correctness gone roid rage mad? It happens all the time. You cite a court case? Judges and juries are subjet to their own beliefs and prejudices. Anyone can find a friendly judge or pack a jury. Just ask OJ about that one.

    • Boommach

      The fool says there is no God.

      • Wesley Willis

        The fool says there is a god when there is no evidence.

        • Boommach

          His evidence abounds, sir. There are none so blind as those who will not see.

          • james blue

            What evidence? I have faith that God exists, not proof.

          • Wesley Willis

            Faith is not a pathway to truth. Faith is the excuse one gives when there is no evidence. If you had evidence, you wouldn’t need faith.

          • james blue

            Do you wear a deerstalker Sherlock?

          • daniel wright

            Are you referring to the faith leftists and atheists lean on in their blind adherence to the theories of evolution and global warming.

          • Wesley Willis

            I don’t think you know what “faith” “leftists” “atheists” “blind” “adherence” “theories” “evolution” or “global warming” means. I only say that because your question suggests you don’t know what those words mean.

          • daniel wright

            You don’t know me very well do you? Look into my history on Disqus. My history is open to you. I am not afraid to have others know my comment history like you are. You will see I am well versed in those subjects.

          • Wesley Willis

            Of course I don’t know you. I can’t care about what your history says – I’m going by what you are saying to me right now.

            Your previous comment demonstrated that you don’t understand what “faith” “leftists” “atheists” “blind” “adherence” “theories” “evolution” or “global warming” means. I think you think they know what they mean, but your usages are incorrect and or incoherent in your last comment.

          • Boommach

            From the complexity of the mitochondria of the simplest to the balance of the entire universe. University colleges have been dedicated to and people have spent their lives studying creation. Assuming it all came about without design is asinine. His evidence abounds.

          • james blue

            We have evidence that stuff exists, not evidence of God. We only have faith in his existence.

          • Wesley Willis

            I disagree. How did you determine that what you see is evidence for YOUR god and not somebody else’s god?

          • Boommach

            There is but One God.

      • Wesley Willis

        Ok, so why should I care what an old book says? What about the Hindus and other religions that believe in multiple gods? What about Muslims and other religions that believe in a different god that you and think you are wrong? I know some Muslims that are more confident than you
        that their god exists and yours doesn’t. So how do you resolve that? 1) how did you determine those other gods do not exist? 2) how did you determine you God does exist?

        • Boommach

          The fools says there is no god….and then he’ll turn around and propose there may be many gods. There is but one God. There are many paths to hell. You and everyone else is free to choose whichever avenue you find most comfortable travelling. Christ came for all; even moslems, budhists, hindus…. should they repent and recognize Christ’s deity. I fully understand your fear just as you are confounded by my confidence. You’re free to believe or not believe. Your fears are well founded, Wesley.

          • Wesley Willis

            You don’t seem to understand. Everything you just said is what YOU think. Others think differently. How do you determine who is correct?

            Do you actually care what is real? Or do you only want to believe your story because you want it to be true?

            My only fear is that we live in a world where we can’t even have a real and honest conversation because you just assert what you want to be true and aren’t able to prove that it’s true (or even likely).

            You haven’t answered any of my questions yet. I’d like you to think for yourself and use your words. Using translations of translations of copies of translations of some words some guys that lived thousands of years ago doesn’t help the conversation at all.

          • Boommach

            We are having that conversation. I am being anything but dishonest, Welsey. You don’t have to worry about what some guy on the internet calling himself Boommach says. You need to worry about the Truth. Christ said “I am the Way and the Truth and the Life. If you don’t want to seek the Truth, that is your prerogative. The Bible says many will not. I have told you clearly that you are free to believe or not believe anything you wish. Freedom is of the Lord. Why is it you are so closed minded and intolerant?

          • Wesley Willis

            I think it’s dishonest to assert something while ignoring other basic facts. Again, you claim your god is real. Other people claim a different god is real, and many of them are more confident in their belief than you are about yours. How did you determine they are wrong? Before you quote Bible versus as authority, you first need to show how you know it’s gods word. Other religions quote their holy books – how do you refute them?

            I do want to seek the truth, but in an honest way. I think our definitions of truth and honest are different, and that’s a problem. How do we resolve it?

            Yes, I’m free to believe whatever I want, just as you are. However, I don’t believe things until they are demonstrated to be true or likely true. I start with the evidence and reach a conclusion. You seem to start with a conclusion and then look for the facts that support it while ignoring the facts that oppose your view. That, to me, is dishonest.

            I don’t believe I’m closed minded or intolerant. I’m the very definition of open minded – willing to change my mind (are you?). However, the only thing that will change my mind is evidence and reason. Your threats of hell seem very intolerant to me. “believe like me or suffer for eternity.” I think that’s wrong and immoral.

          • Boommach

            No, I will not forsake the Truth. Seek ye first the Kingdom. You seek every avenue possible to explain Him away. There are many different religions in this world and as I said, many paths to hell. You are free to believe anything you wish. Neither your beliefs nor my beliefs will alter the Truth one iota. You seek separation from God and you will most assuredly get what you want. Hell is the absence of God and God is the source of all things good. It is where you will recall your darkest days on earth as a fond memory and your finest hours with nothing but regret. I fully understand your fear and consternation. Without the Lord, you are doomed. Every head will bow and knee will bend. That will include yours. All will be in awe. Some will be in stark terror. That’s just the way it is.

          • Wesley Willis

            No. Why do you get to explain away other gods without question? According to some other religions, you are going to hell for rejecting them. How did you determine those hells aren’t worth worrying about? They are MORE confident in their beliefs are you are with yours.

            I’m not seeking separation from god. I’m asking god to give me some evidence he exists. Has not happened so far. If you god is so powerful and all knowing, why don’t you ask him to reveal himself to me? He should know exactly what it would take to convince me and he hasn’t shown me yet. Do I deserve to go to hell because your god hasn’t given me the evidence it would take for me to believe? Sounds unfair and petty.

            I don’t fear things that haven’t been shown to be true. Please stop telling me I’m afraid and that I deserve to go to hell. I think that’s immoral to threaten me with hell and that you worship a guy that would send me to hell for little to no reason whatsoever.

            You make a LOT of assertions and don’t back them up with any evidence. I’m afraid this conversation won’t be able to proceed if you continue to tell me what I think, threaten me with hell, and make unfounded assertions.

    • daniel wright

      But being indoctrinated in the ways of the world and the atheists who run it is ok with you?

      • Wesley Willis

        That’s a nonsensical question. Please clarify.

        • daniel wright

          Do you need a remedial reading course? You oppose Christian teaching but are OK with the filth kids are exposed to every day in the secular world? What kind of example is that.

  • Lydia Church

    This sort of thing happens all the time now, they want to suppress the Bible and persecute Christians. Students of any age have the right to discuss the Bible and all of its topics on school property. No one has the right to curtail that. That is called ‘freedom of speech’.

    • KennyCraig

      “Students of any age have the right to discuss the Bible and all of its topics on school property.”
      I agree. And by the same token, teachers (and other students) have the right to question and even ridicule any dogma.

  • michael louwe

    Because the liberal Blue State governments are prohibited by the US
    Constitution to censor/shutdown Free Speech and the peaceful assembly of
    protesters, the liberals have resorted to using non-government org(= NGOs) as proxies to do the dirty work for them, eg …
    using teachers/professors to censor their students’ Freedom of Speech,
    using the FFRF atheist group to censor Senator Marco Rubio’s tweets,
    using liberal Antifa attackers/terrorists as proxies to shutdown peaceful non-liberal protest rallies and
    using their liberal tech companies in Blue States as
    proxies to censor/shutdown/silence non-liberal websites and apps, eg Cloudfare, Go
    Daddy and Google shutting down Dailystormer and Gab.

    What the liberals of the Blue State governments have been doing is not very different
    from the Iran government sending Iranian terrorists as civilian proxies
    to attack Jewish organizations and synagogues in other countries or
    the Pakistan government sponsoring Laskar e-Taiba Muslim terrorists as proxies to attack India and Indian civilians or
    China using NKorea’s Kim Jong Un as a proxy to test Western political resolve and military reactions or
    ISIS/Muslim mosques radicalising their civilian members to become Muslim
    terrorists or proxies who proceed to carry out attacks in the West.

  • Robinske2

    Maybe the left can bring in their Antifa thugs to “beat some sense” into the parents who complained. After all, kids that talk about God in public likely come from homes that believe what the Bible says about homosexuality and Transgenders. The Democrats, leftists, & Media in our nation refer to people still thinking this way as Nazis and White Supremacists.

    • brucewang

      The Bible says nothing about homosexuality and transgenders.

      • Nor does it say anything about intersexuals and I suspect most Christians have never heard of it and those that have tend to avoid the questions it brings to the mind. I know because I’ve brought up those questions only to have them ignored. Cognitive dissonance, I suppose.

        • And what questions would that be?

          • The most obvious is; If the Genesis creation stories are true and, as fundamentalist are fond of saying, “God made Adam and Eve,” not Adam and Steve,” then this suggests that only males and females are born, separate and distinct.

            1. Given this, how is it that intersexuals are born? Why would your god allow that, and since it happen, should the person be without the right to marry whom he or she loves?

            2. If an intersexual was altered via an operation at birth such that the child would grow up physically a man but genetically predispositioned as a woman, should she be allowed to seek happiness through marriage to a man even though she looks like a man?

          • 1) Intersex is a birth defect not caused by God but by man because of the fall of mankind in the Garden of Eden.

            2) With the availability of today’s technology there is no reason for your scenario to happen.

          • So, you do understand genetic variation? You understand that every child isn’t born either male or female, but can be a combination genotypically–that genes determine sex before birth and can vary widely in sexual predispositions regardless of physical appearance?

            And you claim that modern technology can solve what you call “defects?” What about before modern technology?

            As well, you are ignoring the basic question. What is Christian society to do with people whose gender was surgically decided at birth but turned out to be genetically the opposite gender. What does you god say about their right to marry the same physical gender? Nothing? What would you say about that? Do you have enough empathy to care?

      • Chet

        Wrong and right. The Word of God says enough about the sin of homosexuality just as fornication and adultery. It is void, however, of this new man devised insanity know as trans nothings…

        • So, do you believe a intersexual should never be allowed to marry?

          • Chet

            I have no opine on this matter and my opine is just that, mine, mattering not to anyone else. I generally attempt to stick to God’s Word on understanding various matters, educating myself as possible and trusting the indwelling Holy Spirit to illumine me. Eunuchs are mentioned in the Holy Bible, some born that way, others becoming such for reasons beyond my comprehension. Much is indeed said regarding sin, i.e., the sin of adultery, fornication and the abomination of homosexuality. God designed man and woman to marry. Man devised men marrying men and God will never recognize such as His Word is forever settled in Heaven.

          • Fascinating. You didn’t even bother to look up “intersexual” and it is clear that you have no idea.

            An intersexual is a person born with both male and female sex organs. An Eunuch is someone who has been castrated or otherwise born with non functioning genitals. Vast difference.

            So, you haven’t enough intellectual curiosity to even have an opinion? You don’t wonder why your god would have children born intersexuals? Some parents, upon discovering this when their child is born, decided which sex they want their child to be and order the surgery to make it happen.

            In some cases, this has been a disaster as the child grows up with the genotype (genetic predisposition) of a woman, but the phenotype (physical appearance) of a man. Should this person never marry? Anti-SS marriage laws would say that she has no right to seek happiness in marriage. What do you think?

          • Chet

            I indeed did look up intersex and remain as stated, no opine worth sharing. I recalled hearing such anomaly but never have heard it regarding marriage. There might be a reason, perhaps, you’re intelligently fluent and seemingly concerned over a matter that constitutes what percentage of live births? God’s Word has not spoken on this matter, my friend. Since you asked my opine, I’ll flatly declare there is no relative connection to one born with such condition, such as his skin and eye color and a man desirous of having sex and marriage with another man. Eunuch, vast difference for sure and no linkage on the matter to sin.

            I don’t question God and His authority as Supreme being, else I’d be wondering why at times it seems good people (not sinless) die young while the purposeful wicked live long prosperous unconcerned lives. And the only answer I have is that Hell is such an awful place, indescribable, really, God is most kind to allow one many, many years to consider his personal need of repentance and saving faith in the Lord Jesus Christ of Calvary. And then, why are some precious little kids born crippled? This kind of questioning could last endlessly and would amount to naught, bottom line. However, in Heaven, there’ll be all eternity to question and understand all we did not know as sinners on planet Earth. That is, after having praised the Lord 10k years for His great mercy and grace and forgiveness via His shed blood on Calvary’s cross on our behalf. No other object of man’s supposed faith has ever done such for undeserving mankind, ever.

          • concerned over a matter that constitutes what percentage of live births?

            Interesting. The “answer” you gave was gibberish. You just ignor the moral imperative to treat such people as you would have them treat you were you in the same situation. Tell me how Christian society should treat these people.

            I constantly hear the mantra from your crowd that your god made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve. Yet, here are some babies born phenotypically both Adam and Eve. And yet you dismiss it as a low percentage? Is that what your god does? Has It, or you, no empathy at all? Do these people not deserve to seek happiness through marriage. Can you not imagine yourself having been born intersexual? Answer the question.

            Yes, this questioning could be endless because of your lack of intellectual curiosity, which is necessary to in order to remain buried in ancient, pre-science literature–and believing it.

          • getstryker

            Why would he or anyone desire to waste their time attempting to educate an ‘educated idiot’ with no discernment or desire to understand ‘THE truth’?!

          • “Truth”: the most abused word in the English language.

            For a long time when I was a lad, I suffered under the idea that there is only one “truth.” A proposition is either true or it is not.

            After some education in philosophy and epistemology, I came to understand that there are two kinds of truths:

            1. Objective truth: a proposition that can be independently verified. This truth is reality as clear as we can know it. The scientific method is a good example of this. It is the best method of determining the nature of natural phenomena.

            For example, math is objective science. This includes physics, which enables us to understand truths about the universe, about technology, about the world, about medicine, and about medical care. Medical science can be credited for casting out the religious belief in demonic possession as the cause of illness, especially mental illness. Science has greatly advanced civilization since it extricated itself from the Church.

            2. Subjective truth: a proposition that cannot be independently verified. This truth is purely individual belief. It requires no verification and, indeed, there can be none.

            For an extreme example, a recovering alcoholic is in a room with several people. The person is suddenly taken by an attack of delirium tremens (DTs). He begins screaming out that there are snakes all over the floor and on the furniture.

            All in the room look about and see no snakes.

            Objectively, there are no snakes in the room. But it is still true that the man saw snakes and there is no way anyone cannot tell him differently–because he “saw” them.

            Science and strong religious belief that rejects science will never reconcile because they speak to two entirely different realms of truths.

            As well, the numbers of believers, no matter how many, lend not a nanogram of weight to objectivity.

            So, yes. I do indeed reject subjective “truth.”

          • getstryker

            Yes, of course you do . . . be that as it may, Truth is still Truth!.

            Chet was absolutely correct – and that is . . . he told you THE Truth!

            I would hope, that with all your great intellect, that you figure that out some day soon.

          • Completely missed the point of my post did you? I’m not surprised. Fundamentalists aren’t prone to critical thinking or analysis, and run from it when they hear it.

          • getstryker

            Yeaaaah, that’s what we do – whew!

          • Very good, we agree. Thanks.

          • getstryker

            As I have always suspected . . . folks like you really do live in a ‘fantasy world’ . . . now it’s your turn . . . you tell me the same or similar thing – and on and on and on it goes – here we go. ;-(

          • It’s your delusion. Have it as you will.

          • getstryker

            Delusion? If there is NO God, I lose nothing! – you AND I end up with a ‘dirt nap’ and that’s it. DEAD – HOWEVER, if I’m correct and there IS an Almighty God, Jesus Christ His Son and Holy Ghost . . . Then those that believe as I do have an eternal reward in Heaven . . . AND, what you get is NOT a delusion!
            HELL – The choice is yours, you’ll have to live with it.

          • Ah, the old, fallacious Pascal’s Wager argument. Easily shot down because you refuse to understand why you worship the Christian god. If you understood why you reject the beliefs of others, only then will you understand why they reject yours.

            There is no more reason to believe in your religion than there is to believe any other.

          • getstryker

            Time will tell, sir . . . time WILL tell.

          • Yes it will. Be well my friend.

          • getstryker

            Excellent comments – stay in touch . . .
            May God Bless you and yours!

          • Chet

            To God be the glory and may the good Lord bless you as well…

          • getstryker

            He already has, He introduced me to you . . . I’m working on a ministry you may be interested in participating in – Your ‘private’ so I can’t follow but I do ask that you stay in touch. This is self-funded and nationwide. Working on plans now – would like your ‘input’ down the road.

          • Chet

            Thank you, and I’ll keep watching, brother… There’s so much to be done to rescue the perishing. These various websites and message boards afford numerous themes and subsequent ideas but one consistent thread I note seems to be one of mounting hate. Seems outright unwarranted hate for God and His Christ, His followers, and Israel is growing. And as well, hate for this nation’s president is unlike anything I’ve ever seen anywhere. The world is essentially in chaos, i.e., NOKO, Venezuela, Iran, Iraq etc., while America is in crisis and the poor people of Texas and Louisiana are in dire straits. Nevertheless, the good news gospel must be paramount. God bless, getstryker…

          • getstryker

            please contact me at my ‘handle’ @ g mail (dot) com

          • Fee

            Boom! Praise God! God bless you!

          • Chet

            To God be the glory!

          • Fee


          • Wesley Willis

            Chet 1) can you define your god? 2) how did you determine what gods word is? 3) And how did you determine that you should follow your god and not somebody else’s god?

          • Chet

            (1) God Almighty is creator of Heaven and Earth and all things contained therein, including his highest creation, man. (2) Reading His Word, the Holy Bible and listening to those with much more spiritual understanding than myself. Just as one does in school and in the presence of his elders. (3) The Lord Jesus Christ is God in flesh, 100% God and 100% man and He came to Earth to give His perfectly sinless life on the Cross of Calvary on behalf of all us depraved sinners. He, alone, makes it possible for sinful man to be reconciled to Holy God and when one repents of his sin and believes on Christ, his innumerable sins are then washed away in the precious blood of Jesus , never to be held against such one, ever. In fact, God Almighty, for Christ Jesus’ sake, even then forgets our sins.

            No other object of man’s faith can claim such, none. Jesus saves from the guttermost to the uttermost. No turn-aways, no exclusions, regardless of what man has done. That is, if man will come to Him on His terms – repentance and faith in Christ and Him crucified, buried, risen and coming again for His own. And the sooner the better… Thanks for this opportunity to share God’s love…

          • You didn’t even try to answer his question. So much for integrity.

          • daniel wright

            You ask him to define the undefinable. He answered in his own way but to you he has no integrity.

          • One who refuses to explore the deeper questions is not intellectually honest, one is rather robotically frozen in a single program containing no algorithm for analysis. A thinking person should have more curiosity.

          • daniel wright

            You just described yourself. You know everything so everyone else has to write Tomes in response to your demands. You limit yourself to what you can imagine in your limited human capacity. There are spiritual realms you can’t imagine with your mind. But then again,you don’t believe in the spirit world so maybe I am talking to a wall.

          • I’ve demanded nothing and I certainly don’t know everything and no one else does either. That is why we have science. But neither does science claim that they will ever discover it all.

            And your imagination is limited as well–even more so because you refuse to seek knowledge outside of your religious fortress. That you believe in spiritual realms even though you cannot possibly know of them is no argument against what I write. But if you wish to believe that, it’s fine with me.

            Show me clear, unambiguous, objective evidence and I will believe it.

            However, perhaps you can use physics in your claim. I argue that a “spirit” would necessarily have to be a construct of something, if not quantum particles. It’s way beyond what I’ve studied, but from what I’ve read, it is clear that science has no idea of the extent of the quantum universe.

            As I wrote elsewhere in an argument concerning the existence of a god:

            “In my . . . opinion, it is more reasonable to accept the possibility of the eternal existence of energy, manifesting in one form or another, or even to believe in energy as self-causing, than to suggest that a thinking mind, consisting of nothing, coming from nothing, popped out of nowhere, into nowhere, thought about it, then made it somewhere.

            “For there to be a thought, or even a popping into existence, logic would say there must first be motion, and that which is in motion would have to become organized. There must be a causal link from movement to organization before a thought can organize.

            “And, for there to be motion, of course, there must be something that moves, which would necessarily be something energetic. There is an energetic precondition, Reverend, for every thought and memory in your head.

            “So, to boil all this down to its base element, even though I believe both propositions—existence caused by a god, and existence caused by no god—are irrational, I think the existence of an eternal energy field is less so because we know the energy field exists. We are a part of it. We have the observable evidence of its existence.”

          • daniel wright

            You just made my point. If you can’t see, touch,hear, taste, smell or imagine it then it doesn’t exist. Secular scientists take the opposite position to explain away God. They talk about dark matter,dark energy Quarks, bozons etc. without ever observing them. There is no evidence that any of those things exist but that is all you hear about from mainstream scientists. The positions they take are due to their not ever considering the possibility of a creators hand being responsible. That is where Quantum theory and the big bang come from. There is ample evidence backing a creator. All you have to do is look without preconceived notions.

          • Your first argument, the assumption of what I believe exists, is completely false. There are many things that science has yet to discover that neither your or I could imagine.

            Your assertion that scientists try to explain away your god is false on its face. They do nothing of the sort. Just because they make discoveries that happen to step on your theological toes does not mean that was their intent. Really. You prove one of my main arguments that fundamentalists have no formal education in biological evolution, know nothing about it, and don’t want to know.

            What would you call a person who argues vehemently against a proposition when that person knows virtually nothing about that which he argues against? That is exactly what I did many years ago. But then, after the argument with an educated atheist, I had the strength to admit my ignorance.

            That is when I decided to enroll in college and gain the knowledge that I needed to effectively argue for Christianity and against atheists. So I did. I studied philosophy, world religions, and paleoanthropology. Voila! I found out that the atheist was correct in his objective facts.

            They talk about dark matter,dark energy Quarks, bozons etc. without ever observing them. There is no evidence that any of those things exist . . .

            This is what I mean. You have no idea of what you argue. Your ignorance of science is astonishing. Have you no idea what knowledge theoretical physics and subsequent research has brought us? Have you read nothing about the Large Hadron Collider? Have you no intellectual curiosity? There is your evidence of the Higgs Boson and quarks.

            And your argument that because certain things exist proves your god, no it doesn’t. Where is the evidential link? How do you think the big bang was discovered? Do you have any idea what the scientific method is?

            Okay. I think you’d best stick with your beliefs and forget science. Enjoy your life and all the things science has brought you. Continue believing that any disease you contract is the work of demons people of other religions are doomed to everlasting Hell by your “loving” god.

          • daniel wright

            You seem to think that all educated people are atheists. NOT TRUE. There are entire societies in the scientific community who are ostracized for not conforming to accepted models. There are many new discoveries that you may be unaware of. Many cosmologists and physicists have made discoveries that show the big bang to be false. The big bang theory continues to be the model for a very good reason. It supports the absurd notion that the universe created itself. That being true it would negate the need for a creator; Plain and simple. The large Hadron collider has cost over $13 billion and the Higgs bozon (the god particle) is yet to be discovered.Yes, I have read about it and CERN too. Halton Arp has shown in his red shift research that current theories about the expansion of the universe are wrong. There is a growing group of scientists who’s discoveries show that the current model of how stars function is wrong and they are actually electric in nature rather than thermonuclear. The belief that space is a vacuum is also false as it is full of plasma. Gravity is also not the force behind star and planetary formation but rather electromagnetism is the the binding force. Research has also shown that the speed of light can indeed be exceeded at least by gravity. Gravity is hugely weaker than electromagnetism but it’s influence is instantaneous. As light takes eight minutes to reach us from the sun it’s gravitational effect is instant. The thing I see is that most people who are taught by atheist professors become atheists themselves. You need to update your scientific knowledge. Current models are falling as we speak. Investigate the electric universe model. Youtube is full of lectures on the subject.

          • You seem to think that all educated people are atheists.

            Daniel, you have a serious problem with either logic or reading comprehension–or both. I never implied that. It is a straw man argument.

            And, yes, there are millions of believers who have been highly educated, but poorly educated in evolutionary biology. Even scientists, such as Michael J. Behe, who is very schooled in biology, but was proved to be very deficient in his knowledge of bacterial flagellum. This was borne out in Tammy Kitzmiller, et al. v. Dover Area School District, et al.

            Of course you’ve read much about science, but apparently from organizations like AiG and others that have a self-serving agenda.

            Halton Arp has shown in his red shift research that current theories about the expansion of the universe are wrong.

            No he has not! He came up with his hypothesis in the 1960. Telescopes and astronomical instrumentation have advanced significantly since then. We can study Quasars in greater detail now and the general scientific community now knows that some objects once thought to be quasars, are in fact, highly energetic galaxies.

            But, I do not have sufficient knowledge to get deeply into astrophysics. I suspect that neither do you. When there is a lack of knowledge, one can easily fall prey to sophistry.

            Therefore, until Arp gets up, up-to-date, strong evidence for his HYPOTHESIS that has been INDEPENDENTLY verified (by scientists completely devoid of personal and organizational agendas), I’ll stick with the consensus of the vast majority of astronomers and astrophysicists.

            I will, however, dig further into this.

            And, btw, the LHC is, indeed, advancing particle physics and has discovered a new particle that is consistent with predictions for the Higgs boson. You see, the Higgs boson has been predicted by several models. How do you think the elements of the universe that we know of were discovered? First there were hypotheses that predicted them. Experiments were devised to look for evidence of their existence. That evidence was found, independently verifying the hypothesis. This is how real science works. I trust it.

            In the meantime, perhaps you could do some reading on OBJECTIVE science sites, not just the agenda centric AiG.

            If Arp has something interesting, science will eventually corroborate it. But a young universe? Hogwash!

          • daniel wright

            I never said that All educated people are atheists. I do know that those who see themselves as superior to others are mostly atheists. By the way,most scientists in the accepted community do indeed have an agenda. It’s called left wing politics. Either that or their research grants are being used to force them to comply to the current models. You see yourself as superior to me. Oh well,your arrogance is noted. The Higgs bozon has indeed been predicted. However it hasn’t been verified. You are very good at muddying the waters and attempting to intimidate those you see as inferior to you with double talk. I see I am trying to explain particle physics to a chimp. Good bye Bonzo. Don’t reply. I won’t respond.

          • Jon from Richardson 75080

            “I decided to enroll in college and gain the knowledge that I needed to effectively argue for Christianity and against atheists … I studied philosophy, world religions, and paleoanthropology. Voila! I found out that the atheist was correct in his objective facts.”

            Hmm; if your goal was to gain knowledge to effectively argue FOR Christianity, you were studying the wrong things.

            Why would philosophy be important to argue for Christianity? What would possess you to study WORLD RELIGIONS to argue for Christianity? If you studied paleoanthropology, did you determine the world view that the professor(s) / department had beforehand? That is critical to the outcome, because professors in these disciplines tend to either create clones or discouraged dropouts. Trust me; there is no such thing as 100% agreement in any of these sciences where speculation is involved. Which brings me to my first question: How do you know what you were taught is true?

          • Hmm; if your goal was to gain knowledge to effectively argue FOR Christianity, you were studying the wrong things.

            This statement demonstrates why so many folks have such a deficient in their understanding of biological evolution, ethics and philosophy.

            Philosophy includes critical thinking. It teaches one how to recognize illogical and/or fallacious arguments. It teaches, as well, the thinking of renowned theologians such as Aquinas, Descartes, Pascal, Luther, Kierkegaard and many others. It teaches the arguments of Bertrand Russell, Comte, Spinoza, Hume, and more.

            Philosophy majors learn the history of thoughts on many important arguments, unlike those schooled mainly in their parents and/or society’s religion.

            All this boils down to only one, single tenet to live by: Do unto others as I would have them

            The more objective information a person has, the more he is likely to make correct decisions within the realm of his studies. My interest was simply to learn the arguments of religious thinkers, of thinkers of other religions and of agnostics and atheists.

            How could I possibly argue against propositions of which I knew virtually nothing. I would be a fool to do so.

            Therefore, I went back to school promising myself that I would put my own beliefs in abeyance, objectively listen to the arguments of all sides (as much as possible), and that I would follow those arguments to their logical conclusion–and that I would accept the most logical conclusion no matter how uncomfortable it made me feel.

            At first, I wasn’t comfortable with atheism even though that is where the arguments were leading. Me education in the living world religions and their origins was a true eye opener. It convinced me that there are good and decent people around the world no matter what religion they believe, and there are the not so good. As well, it convinced me that no one has The Truth.

            My evolution from de facto Christian fundamentalist to atheism came in steps. I went from Christianity (due in no small part to Gottfried Leibniz) to Spinoza’s Pantheism, to agnosticism, and finally to de facto atheism.

            My turning to biological evolution was mainly due not only to the mountainous amount of evidence for it, but how that evidence was verified–via the scientific method.

            My social philosophy now is compete equal rights and opportunity to education, to beliefs, to healthcare, to all the institutions of our society. I believe firmly in the notion that all workers should have income parity (equity) with the wealthy. No one should have to live in poverty, and that no private/corporate entity should be allowed to influence government officials.

            All this boils down to one tenet: Do unto others as I would have them do unto me. I found happiness in marriage. I wish that for everyone, no matter their beliefs or whom they love.

            What loving god would not approve of this.

          • Addendum to my last response:

            I realized that I didn’t directly answer a couple of your questions.

            What would possess you to study WORLD RELIGIONS to argue for Christianity?

            Two words; intellectual honesty! How can I know my belief is better or right when I know so little about other beliefs? Shouldn’t I know they are wrong because I know about their beliefs, or just dismiss them as wrong. That’s Intellectual dishonesty.

            If you studied paleoanthropology, did you determine the world view that the professor(s) / department had beforehand?

            Sorry but that is an illogical question. You seem to be suggesting that whatever worldview one adopts, it was the view of one’s professor having that view.

            Well, I studied Philosophy of Religion taught by a theologian. Did I walk away having his opinions? I studied world religions under a professor who would not divulge his worldview. What opinions could I have gotten from him?

            Who taught you your world view? Did you get other opinions? Have you ever considered that you might be wrong about what your parents and/or the church taught you to believe? How do you know? Logically, you can’t know for certain.

            How can I know that I am right in MY beliefs if I know virtually nothing about the beliefs of others? To want to know the beliefs of others is to be intellectually honest.

            If my belief in Christianity was right, then my higher education would have borne that out.

            Socrates said that “the unexamined life is not worth living.” I say that the unexamined belief is not worth believing.

          • daniel wright

            I see how you define your god. You see him every tine you look in the mirror. 95% of the prophesies of the Judeo/Christian Bible have already came to pass. Explain that.

          • Wesley Willis

            So god is my face? Or are you calling me god? That’s a nonsensical statement. You need to explain what you mean by prophesy first, then give an example.

            While I don’t believe any of that, let’s say, for the sake of argument, that you were correct (I don’t think you are). That says absolutely NOTHING about the existence of god.

          • daniel wright

            I am not calling you god. I am saying you see yourself as god. There is no creator, therefore you are the ultimate authority. The Bible is full of prophecies. You would know that if you opened it. You say that you don’t think I am right. I didn’t read that you “KNEW” that I was wrong. I see doubt in you. Is there hope that your eyes will open or is this wishful thinking on my part?

          • Wesley Willis

            My only doubt is that your claims about God don’t make any sense. I believe things are true AFTER there has been sufficient evidence. Btw, you probably do that too in EVERY aspect of your life except you make an exception for god. Why? Yes, I and my society are the ultimate authorities. No creator necessary (especially since his apparent creation is so flawed, it makes me question the ability of your creator).

            I’ve opened the Bible many many many times and I see no signs of prophesy. Please give an example? I can find lots of immoral teaching, slavery, torture, rape, genocide, anti scientific claims, etc. but no prophesy that predicted a specific detail in the future.

          • Intersex is a birth defect and has nothing to do with LGBT.

          • You’re dodging the question. You are not thinking beneath the surface.

            Suppose a person is born intersexual, grows up genetically a woman, but was altered at birth to be physically a man. But this person who looks like a man falls in love with a man. Should this individual be forbidden to seek happiness through marriage?

            As well, a person with a phenotypic predisposition to be a woman, but is physically a man (non intersexual), should that person be prevented from seeking happiness through marrying a man?

            (I’m assuming here that you understand that the human genome varies widely, and that is normal and necessary for species survival.)

            So, exactly how does the LGBT community, through marriage, damage your marriage? What imposition have they imposed on you? Should they not have that right to seek happiness in marriage?

            No one has ever been able to successfully answer these questions. Give it a shot.

          • Birth defect easily remedied by medical science.

            I never said my marriage was damaged. They have the same rights I do and no one ever said any different.

          • You still are not answering the social/religious question.

            And, no you didn’t say it damages your marriage. It was a rhetorical question. I know it dosen’t. And, yes, a homosexul does have the same right to marry the one he or she loves love. Fundamentalists, however, have and are even now fighting against allowing them that right.

            I’m glad that at last we are in agreement on that issue.

            Now, to the subject of the article, do you think that a teacher may teach his or her religious beliefs in public school? Or do the parents have the right to raise their children in the religion of their choosing without interference from government agents (teachers)?

          • We are not in agreement on anything yet.

          • Not in agreement?

            They have the same rights I do and no one ever said any different.

            Assuming that “they” means the LGBT community, then that statement is in accord with my thinking. They have just as much right to marry whom they love and you do as well. So, where is the disagreement on that?

          • They have the same right to choose Heaven or Hell and the consequences of that choice are eternal.

          • That isn’t even a subtle dodge. We are talking about our society, not a religious myth. Why, ON THIS EARTH do you wish to deny someone the same right; i.e., seeking happiness through marrying the person he loves? It does you no harm. It doesn’t break your legs or cost you money.

            You don’t want the government micromanaging your life, then don’t try to use the government as a blunt instrument with which to bludgeon the rest of society into abiding by YOUR beliefs. Leave people alone to live as they wish. If you believe that they are going to Hell, then fine. Believe it. But leave them the hell alone.

          • It is not a dodge it is the absolute truth and I am opposed to homosexual marriage because it furthers the weakening of the moral fabric that holds our families and society together.

          • As I say, believe as you will. But don’t attempt to use the government to micromanage the lives of others. It weakens nothing. Love is Love and is not weakened by how someone else runs their lives.

            I firmly believe it strengthens our moral fabric. The illusion of weakening is in the heads of fundamentalists who want to control others according to their RELIGIOUS beliefs. The Establishment clause applies here. Why are you insisting on removing a right from others that you claim for yourself.

            Step out of Sunday school for a moment and consider it objectively. If it does not hurt your marriage or anyone else’s. how is it weakening anything. It is indeed all in our head.

            But if you insist on fighting against the happiness of others, then don’t scream when the government stops you from doing something you THINK you have the religious freedom to do.

          • The bottom line is you do not believe in God and I do believe in God and yes the moral fabric of society has been slowly unraveling for several decades now. The fact that you can’t see this is very troubling and telling on your part.

            Being a Christian does not negate my Constitutional rights of which lobbying for new laws or changing/repealing existing laws is part and parcel of being a citizen of the United States of America.

            In closing…..I don’t THINK I have religious freedom, I KNOW I have religious freedom.

          • LOL. I fully agree with your point that the moral fabric of our society has been deteriorating for several decades–ever since the rise of the neoconservatives and the subsequent adoption of their worldview by virtually all conservatives as well as the introduction of their economic policy of supply side economics.

            Their political philosophy is a combination of Machiavellian ‘ends justifies the means,’ a Nietzschean ‘will to power must be one’s primary motivating force,’ and a Randian Objectivism that says one’s actions are rational only when the actions benefit one’s self-interest over the interest of others. Supply-side economics is designed to redistribute the collective wealth of the working class upward to the already wealthy.

            I don’t expect you to believe any of this. But then, that’s how propaganda works, especially with the religious right. You want to know why most Republican candidates use constant personal attacks against their opponents? Check out Newt Gingrich’s formula for effective propaganda, titled, Language: A Key Mechanism of Control. You can find it at Information Clearing House.

            And, no, I don’t expect you to follow my suggestion because you don’t want to know about how the conservative base has been nurtured to hate liberals and progressives.

            And yes, you have religious freedom, but so do all other religions. Under the constitution, they have every religious right you have. And that applies to the non religious as well.

            You’ve confirmed to me that you are as ignorant of the Constitution as you are of evolution and world religions.

          • You eschew propaganda yet you swallow it hook, line and sinker. LOL

          • daniel wright

            Who would they marry? Is there no limit. What next,inter species marriage?

          • So, exactly what is your objection to same-gender marriage? Why the absurd, snide remark?

          • daniel wright

            If you want answers from me then you must answer my questions. Answering a question with a question is a favorite tactic of leftists and atheists. It doesn’t work on me.

          • Answering a question with a question can certainly be an answer because it is logically implied by the questioning response.

            For example:

            Person A: Why would you ever allow homosexuals to marry? Marriage is supposed to be only between a man and a woman. It’s biblical law–God’s word and you cannot change it!

            Person B: So, you would have these people denied the right to seek happiness in marrying someone they love? How would their marrying hurt you and your family?

            Can’t you see the logic here? It is clear that person B is in favor of same-gender marriage. Is that not an answer?

          • daniel wright

            Not really as you asked a question followed with a statement.

          • It is unbelievable how you dodge questions. Remove the statement! It still implies you are against homosexuals marrying. I’m having a difficult time with your lack of thinking logically.

          • daniel wright

            Answering a question with a question is YOUR way of dodging the question. As for whether I oppose homosexual marriage,yes I do. It is a disgusting perversion of something sanctioned by GOD. I know,you’re an atheist so my point is meaningless to you. It is also illogical. The only thing that binds homosexuals is sexual attraction; hedonistic pleasure being at the center. Sex exists for one reason. That reason is procreation. The fact that two of the same sex cannot reproduce makes homosexuality illogical. Marriage is a union designed to provide a stable home life for the children of the union. So yes,I oppose homosexual marriage for two reasons. What logical argument do you have in support of it.

          • Well, it is clear that your mind is both devoid of logic outside the religious lockbox it is in. So, have it your way. I’ll have it mine.

            Fortunately, there are far more thinking and empathetic people in the U.S. than fundamentalists and we are gaining more all the time.

            Your religion is just that–your religion. Don’t squeal when the government denies you a right that you THINK you have. Keep in mind that your are trying to use the government to micromanage the lives of others who don’t believe as you. It is the height of hypocrisy.

          • daniel wright

            When did I assert that the government should step in? I didn’t. It’s leftists like you that use government as a weapon against others. You have the right to believe in God or disbelieve. I have never argued against that. It is your ilk who see yourselves as compassionate and empathetic. Your cries ring hollow. You see yourself as morally superior when in reality you are morally bankrupt. That is the irony of it all. PS,Where is the logical argument in favor of your position?

          • The only way you can prevent same-sex marriage is by using the government to suppress that right.

            Progressives like me insist on EQUAL RIGHTS. It is fundamentalists who insist on UNEQUAL RIGHTS. You want to have the right to seek happiness through marriage, but you want to deny others that same right. If you folks would simply mind your own business, worship as you will and leave others to live according to the dictates of their conscience, then there would be now problems. Why YOU think to be immoral, others do not. You are the immortal one as you are trying to deprive others of happiness.

            Tell me. Do you want a theocracy in the U.S.? If you do, then you are no better than the Muslims. If you don’t, then leave others alone to manage their lives as privately as you manage yours.

          • daniel wright

            You either can’t read or are just arguing for the sake of argument. I have never pushed for same sex marriage being made illegal. If you can quote me saying that please do. The problem I have is gays using lawsuits to force straights to bow to their wishes. If you deny the wedding cake lawsuits that other lefties have in the past then it just shows your unwillingness to believe factual events. I have only ever talked about the immorality of gay marriage and the fact that it is totally illogical. As for denying others happiness,please show where talking common sense without the threat of force does that. You leftists want to be left alone but force your beliefs on conservatives on a daily basis pushing to disarm law abiding citizens,denying the right to defend themselves against armed criminals. Why don’t you stop that? BLM ans ANTIFA (both ultra leftist) and snowflake college students demanding to speak but demanding the other side be silenced. Stop that too. What I see is the “do as I say,not as I do” scenario. I see hypocrisy on a massive scale.

          • The problem I have is gays using lawsuits to force straights to bow to their wishes.

            Oh my goodness! You mean that gays are filing lawsuits to make Christians abide by our secular laws, like non discrimination in the market place? How horrible. And you believe that your religious freedom means you can discriminate, of course. You should be allowed to discriminate against anyone you hate, gay, black, brown, Muslim, atheists, anyone, right?

          • daniel wright

            Here we go with the accusations and name calling. Bars and nightclubs have signs saying “we reserve the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason”. That’s because they are in the United states where we still have such a thing as a PRIVATE BUSINESS!!! That is no different than deciding who can and cannot come into your PRIVATE HOME!!! Tell me mister wise guy. What laws do you mean? Show me a law that forces me to do business with ANYONE. That’s just another way to force your beliefs on others. This isn’t the USSR Komrade!!! Not yet. Get a life Commie.

        • brucewang

          It doesn’t. The word homosexuality wasn’t even invented until the 1800s.

          • daniel wright

            The Bible warns about the sin of men having sex with men. You are nit picking about terminology. The term not being invented until the 19th century is irrelevant. It is what it is and your opinion changes nothing.

          • brucewang

            Are you an expert on the translation that was used? Male prostitution was common at the time and makes far more sense in context.

          • daniel wright

            Are YOU an expert. Do you read ancient Hebrew or Greek? A man having sex with a man is sin whether paid for or not. Your diversion isn’t working on me.

          • brucewang

            As a matter of fact, I know some Greek. Including the word arsenokoitai. In Timothy 1:9-10, translators sometimes use homosexual for the original Greek words, pornoi, arsenokoitai, and andrapodistai, meaning male prostitutes, males who hire male prostitutes or the slave dealers who procure them. And if you see the word homosexual or homosexuality in the Bible, it is because translators chose those words to reflect their own homophobic feelings and ideas.

          • daniel wright

            So those translations nullify the sin of Homosexuality? In what universe?

          • brucewang

            Did you read what I wrote? They don’t even REFER to homosexuality.

          • daniel wright

            So a man having sex with another man ISN’T homosexuality?

          • brucewang

            Non-homosexual men engage in sex in prison. Also, male prostitution is often given as a more correct translation.

          • daniel wright

            So men having sex with each other in prison isn’t homosexuality? Are you saying there are co-ed prisons? Are you also claiming that a man selling his body to another man isn’t homosexuality? What universe are you from?

          • brucewang

            Homosexuality, first of all, isn’t what you do, it’s what you are. You can be a homosexual and never lay a finger on another human being. It’s about attraction. You keep reducing everything about homosexuality to one or two sexual actions that may have nothing whatsoever to do with attraction.

          • daniel wright

            That is your opinion. What difference does it make if you are not attracted to someone of the same sex? If you have sex for the pleasure alone that doesn’t negate your actions. Prisoners who have sex with each other are engaging in homosexual activity;plain and simple.

          • brucewang

            So why do you focus entirely on the sex aspect and ignore the fact that you have two people legitimately in love? You wouldn’t do that with straight people.

          • cindybear

            There are several words in the Greek New Testament, which refer to love – brotherly love (philos), family love (storge) and the love of God (agapeo). Missing entirely from the Bible is the Greek word for sexual love (eros). So when Paul, for example, wrote about two spouses’ love for one another, he was speaking of the pure spiritual love of God. Believe it or not, sexual gratification is not God’s top priority for marital relations, but the mutual reverence for one another’s souls and the procreation of children is. One simply cannot love another human being while enticing and leading them into sin. The sin of fornication includes homosexual relations, whether imagined in the mind or carried out in the flesh.

          • brucewang

            There’s nothing inherently sinful in a homosexual relationship. They are pretty much identical to straight relationships in pretty much every way except for the mechanics. They don’t result in procreation, but neither does a couple who cannot conceive, or an elderly couple. If two people love each other and have the commitment to one another that results in happiness, that is all that matters. I’m not talking about promiscuity, which is never a good idea…in straight OR homosexual couples.

          • cindybear

            Believe what you will and I will believe God’s word and in the end we shall see who was correct. Good day sir.

          • brucewang

            Correction – you believe what you THINK is God’s word. As you like.

          • daniel wright

            (Some) Greek? Ancient or modern?

          • brucewang

            Since we are talking about the use of the word in the Bible, ancient.

          • daniel wright

            Nothing you say shows that homosexuality in any form,paid or unpaid is condoned in the Bible.

          • brucewang

            Nothing you say shows that the verses in the Bible refer to homosexuality at all.

          • Chet

            The Holy Bible, of endless ages past refers to them sodomites. And as adultery and fornication are indeed sin, so too is homosexuality. It’s declared as an abomination in God’s sight. This isn’t my opinion as my opinion means nothing beyond myself. It’s the Word of God that matters, not men’s ideas and values or lack of such…

          • Michael C

            The word “sodomite” to refer to homosexuality isn’t biblical.

            Nowhere in the original texts does the word “sodomite” (root word “Sodom”) exist. That word was made up centuries after the books of both the old and new testament were written

          • Chet

            Wrong, dude. Get out your own Holy Bible and review its concordance. Of a number of biblical references, an easy story to understand is God’s destruction of the land of Sodom and how He drove such from among Israel. Within the Ten Commandments, there is admonition “Thou shalt not commit adultery”. There is no such reference within these Ten Commandments as to the sin of sodomy which was well understood as abomination and wholly unacceptable abnormal behaviour. Besides, the number of such people practicing this abomination was infinitely minimal, whereas fornication and adultery, albeit SIN, nevertheless, was more prevalent and customary in that normal men do commit such SINS. The same goes for today as sex outside God ordained marriage is lauded and celebrated everywhere without regard to its penalties, now and hereafter… Try as one might, one will never find support within God’s Word for the abominable practice of men having sex with men, nowhere, dude…

          • Michael C

            You’re arguing against things I haven’t said.

            The terms “sodomy” and “sodomite” in reference to homosexuality are not biblical. They don’t exist in the bible. They’re not biblical terms.

            If you don’t understand what I’m saying, look up the verses that you think have the words “sodomy” or “sodomite” in them and then look up the original language. I find BlueLetterBible to be helpful for this. You can just look up a verse or chapter and click on the “tool” button next to the text and it will show you the original language.

            When the bible is translated into different languages, people add their own words that may have different connotations than the original.

          • Chet

            Dude, you can check divers versions of God’s Word and you’ll not find support for men having sex with men. Nor will you find somehow erased the story of Lot and his venture in the land of Sodom, so destroyed for it’s immorality and abomination of sodomy, men working that which is unseemly with other men. Homosexual relations are abomination in God’s sight, period, just as adultery and fornication remain SIN in normal men who submit to their base nature and love to chase the ladies… Instead of remaining faithful to the one whom they wed in the sight of God Almighty… That is in marriage, as God designed, period…

          • Chet

            Try as you might, Dude, via playing word games and endlessly striving to declare men having sex with men meets with God’s approval. Nevertheless, sadly, you are in serious error, just as one who claims he is a Christian while making a living of robbing banks. Men having sex with men is abomination, period. And that’s another Holy Bible word…

          • Michael C

            Why are you replying multiple times to the same comment?

            Is it because I never responded to your last comment? Are you that desperate for attention?

          • Chet

            No, not hardly, dude. Seems you are a hardcase to reach with truth. The last response was the truth from God’s Word, the Holy Bible (not myself) and as one never knows the length of his days it was important that the truth was adequately shared. That said, if you never heard the truth regarding the abomination of homosexuality, well, you’ve heard it now and are thus without excuse. May the good Lord open your understanding to receive all His recorded truth and not what some man thinks…Out.

      • Actually yes it does. Same sex sex aka homosexuality and pretending to be the opposite sex aka transgenderism is forbidden and condemned by God.

        • brucewang

          Actually, it doesn’t. What people like you are fond of doing is taking some very general words of the Bible and applying them to some specific grievance you have. This is called the Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy.

          What we know about the “men lying with men” thing is that put in the context of the time, it refers to male prostitution.

          • Sorry Bruce but you’re wrong. There is nothing in scripture to support any of what you said.

          • brucewang

            That’s because you are using your own interpretation of scripture to support your own argument, Doug.

          • I am using the plainly spoken Holy Word of God that is a burden to understand for those lost and in love with their sins.

          • brucewang

            You’re using your own interpretation of what you believe is the word of God. I know many, many Christians who could not be further from what you believe.

          • They are Christians in name only.

          • brucewang

            And who gets to decide that? You? Or are you speaking on behalf of God?

          • God decided that.

          • brucewang

            Too bad you aren’t God.

          • Never said I was and I am glad I am not God.

          • brucewang

            Well, how do you explain it when you claim to speak on God’s behalf and other Christians who also claim to speak on God’s behalf say things that completely contradict what you say?

          • Those who speak and contradict God’s Word are not speaking for Him. They are speaking for themselves and satan. They are the wolves in sheep’s clothing and the bad fruit that Christ Jesus warned us about.

          • brucewang

            But they aren’t contradicting God’s word. They’re doing exactly what you are doing – quoting the Bible and following the word of God to the letter. And that’s the problem. You all think that’s what you’re doing and never acknowledge for a moment that YOU might be the ones in error, and so all you do is fight with each other and call each other false. You might work on a bit of unity if you want people to take you seriously.

          • If they believe as you do, they are contradicting God’s Holy Word.

          • brucewang

            We aren’t talking about me. We’re talking about other Christians whom you deem to be un-Christian.

          • Do they believe like you do that homosexuality is not a sin?

          • brucewang

            If they have functioning brains and believe what we know from science, yes. Just because you understand human sexuality doesn’t exclude you from being a Christian. It only excludes you from being a bigot.

          • I am not a bigot and neither is God. You and the others you speak of are calling God a liar.

          • brucewang

            If you’re fighting against accepted science because of your religion, I think you know you’re doing something that makes no sense.

          • It goes against the Word of God and that makes it junk science. No true Christian would accept it over God’s Word.

          • brucewang

            If it is proven true, it’s not “junk science”. Homeopathy is junk science because it isn’t science at all. And if it disproves something you have been conditioned to call God’s Word, then clearly you have been wrong in your belief about what constitutes God’s Word and should consider adopting a faith more in line with facts.

          • I will not join you in turning my back on God and thereby joining you in eternal damnation.

          • brucewang

            I reject your ridiculous judgement, which is a product of your own revenge fantasy and nothing whatsoever to do with God.

          • I have no desire for revenge on anyone nor do I wish pain and suffering on anyone.

            God gives us free will to choose as we want. Choose Christ Jesus and receive life eternal with Him or choose to reject God and receive eternal torment in the lake of fire. Those are your only choices.

          • brucewang

            Is that the “free gift” you are always talking about? Not much of a gift, is it, when if you choose not to accept it you burn in fire for an eternity? I would really seriously wonder about worshiping anyone who gave such “gifts”.

      • cindybear

        Romans 1:21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles.

        24 Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25 They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.

        26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.

        28 Furthermore, just as they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, so God gave them over to a depraved mind, so that they do what ought not to be done.

        Holy Bible, New International Version®

        • brucewang

          Yep. Not a single mention of transgenders or homosexuals. Thanks.

          • cindybear

            The truth will stand when the world’s on fire regardless of who rejects or twists it to suit their purposes. Satan tried that with Jesus, but he failed.

  • Reason2012

    When exposed on their anti-Christian bigotry and indoctrination, they always try to pretend it was some sort of mistake.

  • What the teacher should do is to allow that discussion and use it as a vehicle on which to introduce the children to other religions, beliefs and cultures. Let them know that children in other regions of the world believe much differently because, like them, they were taught to believe in a different religion and their belief is as true as the student’s own.

    Teach them respect and empathy for everyone. Teach them to understand the reason they believe Christianity–because that is what they were taught to believe.

    This is the only path to peace and brotherhood. I’m sure most if not all Christians on this site will disagree, but then, those the parents of the other children in those other religions would disagree as well. That is why we have religious tensions and mistrust in the world, as well as radicalism. Reason should prevail. Knowledge is far better than ignorance.

    • Chet

      Reason should and does prevail: Jesus Christ is King of Kings and Lord of Lords. He alone is God Almighty in flesh and beside Him there is no other… Simple truth.

      • That is, of course, what you were nurtured to believe by parents or society or both. Folks of other religions would say exactly the same thing, but without division.

        There are many reasons to believe, but reason applies only to the philosophical arguments for the existence of a god or gods. Beyond that, it is 100% subjective belief and you may not impose that belief on others in society who don’t believe it. Yes, many politicians will pander to you and make such laws, but they are unconstitutional.

        • Chet

          No one “imposes” Christ on anybody. Christians are called to spread the good news gospel IAW the Great Commission to the lost among us, and that, unfortunately, is the masses. One must willingly hear the good news beyond his ears and include his heart and mind in the salvation process. Faith is key and saving faith itself is also the gift of God. And we who attempt to follow Christ’s instruction are not deterred by anyone, supported or not. Beside the Lord Jesus Christ, there is none other. No other object of man’s faith can claim deity and perform the wondrous miracles He did and continues doing in the lives of His followers…

          • No one “imposes” Christ on anybody.

            Chet, please try to read my responses more carefully. I never said anything like that. My point is that fundamentalists want the government to make laws that force others in society to ABIDE by biblical laws (i.e., laws against same-gender marriage, allowing Christians to exclude some people from the secular marketplace, forcing Intelligent Design into public school science classes, having public schools give sectarian prayers over the sound system, etc.).

            Sigh, just believe as you wish, but all I’m suggesting is that you do not join in political pressure based on those beliefs.

            I keep up with these things and I see that the Christian right is never slacking in their attack on the Wall of Separation. Already we have politicians who pander to fundamentalists blocking efforts to do something to mitigate Global Warming, and Trump is the Panderer in Chief. I hope you are happy with him.

          • Wesley Willis

            “No one “imposes” Christ on anybody.”

            Yes, Christian parents the church impose it on their kids. Happens all the time. Unfortunately.

          • YES! I’m surprised that I did not think of that. They teach the kids well before they are able to think for themselves–while parents are virtual gods to them, so what they say must be true (e.g., Santa and gods)

          • Wesley Willis

            eventually, kids will realize there is the same amount of evidence for Santa existing as there is for god existing. I wish more adults would follow their lead.

          • Yes, more and more it is happening, slowly but fairly steadily.

          • Chet

            You’ve said so much, my friend, time and space will not permit me an all inclusive answer. Everyone knows climate changes, just not at the will, behest or response of man. For perhaps the most elementary example of just who controls all weather, good, bad and disastrous, and all in between, checkout your own Holy Bible at Matthew 8:23-27. Just as God Almighty either perfectly willed or otherwise allowed President Trump’s predecessor to serve, so too is he allowing Trump to serve for such a time as this.

            Not only does the Lord determine what constitutes marriage, so too does civilization worldwide. That is, till recently, in America, when she underwent her “fundamental transformation” under duress. Now, man equates himself with God even as he essentially thumbs his nose at the Almighty. And, yes, I am very happy with President Trump and his own…

          • Well, you’ve been very well indoctrinated.

            I’m sure you’re happy with Trump. It is as I suspected. The most vulnerable people to political manipulation are the fundamentalists. They are the most xenophobic and will fall for scapegoating every time because they haven’t had the will to vet claims and will forgive all his well known cardinal sins so long as he is on the attack against people they don’t know, but hate anyway.

            All a politician has to do is thump the Bible and blame all non-Christians (especially Muslims, brown skin, black skin people and liberals) as the reason the economy for the working man continues it’s relative flatlining as he and the rest of the wealthy grow evermore wealthy from their labor.

            I had to laugh when I saw that Trump Tower’s address was 666. Geez, with all his obvious deceptions and angry finger pointing, fundamentalists should believe that he is the Antichrist. But then, deception is his forte, and that seems to be why they love him, ignoring the fact that they, themselves, are most likely being misled.

          • Chet

            Now, at last, you’ve gone off the rails and revealed your true self. For awhile, I thought you were a one time Christian who had been somehow wronged by another so called man of God and thus you allowed him/her to come between you and your Lord. Now, it appears I was dead wrong.

            Para 1: For sure Trump is a sinner. So too are you and I and everyone else. And what does an unbeliever know about forgiveness when the One whom he has sinned against and woefully wronged extends His arms as He stands ready to forgive the sinner, yet, the proud unbeliever says no! Thinking perhaps he must check with what other gods have to say on the matter first. And other smart men as well, even though God declares “the fool hath said in his heart there is no God”…

            Para 2: Who is this man you’re speaking of in such demeaning hateful fashion? I’ve not known him nor ever heard him. The man I heard and trust is one who blames stupidity and carelessness for the floundering economy and the weakening of America internally and among the world. Nothing noted about one’s skin color in the equation.

            Para 4: It is you, my friend, who is deceived as you seek to compare men with men in trying to figure out others and their positions on whatever. Meanwhile, the clock keeps ticking as life grows shorter by the day. Eternity stretches out before you even as the God of all flesh, the One with whom we all have to do, beckons you to come unto Him via Christ and His cross. Yet, you prefer to discount the One and only means of forgiveness available to all us sinners and forego Heaven upon snapping out into eternity. Surely, you doubt the existence of the Devil as well… Yet, he is alive and well and still in the soul damning business. Don’t be deceived any longer. Come to Christ…

          • For sure Trump is a sinner. So too are you and I and everyone else.

            1. LOL! That is one of the favorite fallacious arguments of the “Christian” right. It is the fallacy of false equivalence. Many (most?) fundamentalists believe they were given brains by a god but refuse to honor that god by exercising a even a molecule of quantification in moral evaluation.

            But then, you do hold up the sufferings of a fictitious (or just hyped) person as an example of “perfection,” but ignore the fact that a conservative vice president (initials: Dick Cheney) set up a world wide gulag archipelago of black site torture camps that rendered far more torture (on many innocent people) over a long period of time than the example you give.

            And that with the approval of his sockpuppet, GW Bush. But Bush often thumped the Bible as does Trump at rallies, so they must be good people.

            2. Yes, he doesn’t mention skin color. Hah! “Here Rover, hear this dog whistle.” By the raciest organizations running to him, it isn’t hard to know what signal they hear and easy to know the nature of most of his supporters–especially the fundamentalist right.

            3. Oh yes, preaching works on the reasoning person as prayer does on your god.

          • Chet

            There’s a huge difference between those poor souls who suffered torture as you exclaimed in para two and the Christians and others today who suffer persecution and unimaginable torture, i.e., ISIS. All such poor souls had or have no choice in the matter as they had or have not the strength nor means to resist or deliver themselves. My Lord Jesus Christ allowed himself to suffer at the hands of wicked men such as you and I due to His love for us.
            A love unmatched by any other supposed god, anywhere. He, Christ could have called 10,000 angels to set him free and destroy the world, but, praise God, He endured till the end for sinners such as you and I. Unworthy beings we indeed are… Para three- Ridiculous on its face…

          • Wow. You have not clue at all. Chet, your comfortable living and lack of the will to really investigate the torture rendered by the U.S. leaves you seriously ignorant. For example, (and I am NOT defending ISIS) but ISIS does torture, but many victims are beheaded–death comes quickly, unlike the torture applied by the U.S. and the very sadistic regimes to which we rendered many. And that torture did not bring death, but lasted for years.

            Did you approve of that torture of suspected terrorists and insurgents? I’d guess that you did. I could be wrong, of course.

  • Chet

    Teacher, here’s a respectful response to your edict: My child is not accountable to you nor subject to your denunciation of his/her faith in Jesus Christ, Son of the true and living God, nor the great deceiver, the Devil and his own.

    • As I recall, she did not denounce Christianity. She simply didn’t want it discussed in the classroom. Really, Chet. That is a huge equivocation. The subject of religion can be very divisive. There are likely to be Jews in the class and perhaps even a Muslim.

      But as I’ve stated before, she should allow such a discussion in order to swing the conversation to world religions, especially the Abrahamic religions.

      I used to have a signature on all my posts: The unexamined belief is not worth believing. It is a different take on a quote attributed to Socrates’: “The unexamined life is not worth living.” I wouldn’t go as far as did Socrates, but I definitely think that those who do not seriously and objectively examine their learned religious beliefs are betraying their own intellect. And an objective examination of biblical claims cannot be obtained purely from the bible.

      • Chet

        Respectfully, Sir, so says you. For me, I believe God over all men, including myself. Let God be true and every man a liar. Not to suggest you’re lying, just confounded for some reason known and understood but by you, yourself.

        • Well, there has never been a citadel with walls stronger than the citadel of religious fundamentalism. Personally, I’m very happy that, many years ago, I freed my mind of the chains of religious dogma. It wasn’t easy, but reason prevailed.

          • Chet

            So then, you freed your mind, a temporary existence, in favor of losing your soul, an eternal presence in the Lake of Fire? And did so willingly? Sounds like an awful bad deal to me.

          • Just as you will lose you soul for not believing in Islam? Nothing you can say to this infidel that the you would not say to a Muslim or that the Muslim wouldn’t say to you. Which is right? Were you to be intellectually honest, you would not know. Of course, were you intellectually honest, you would not be a fundamentalist.

          • Chet

            I’m intellectually honest enough to know and proclaim there is one God and One mediator between God and Man, the man Christ Jesus. Please share Islam’s plan of salvation and how one might attain forgiveness of all one’s sins and gain eternal life upon snapping-out into eternity… I’ve never heard the plan, and that’s intellectually honest. I’ll be checking, Hobbs…

          • Google ReligionFacts + “salvation in Islam.”

          • Chet

            Greetings Hobbs: As with all man made religion, Islam is one that declares man’s works render him justified and fit for eternal life, i.e., some very good, some evil, i.e., bombings etc and killing of innocents. You’ll find no faith in any entity other than the Lord Jesus Christ who grants forgiveness and mercy wholly upon the singular merits of the object of one’s faith. “For by grace are ye saved, through faith: and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast” Ephesians 2:8-9, Holy Bible. Now, Hobbs, you seem to be rather intelligent gentleman regarding a number of things, save the good news gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ of Calvary, so, match that…

          • daniel wright

            It’s your choice. God asks, he never forces you.

          • Yes, that is your subjective view. Doesn’t make it right.

          • daniel wright

            If the God of the Bible forced everyone to worship him then you would be a Christian. The fact that you are not a Christian proves my point.

          • Where did you ever get that idea??? It makes no sense at all because I’ve never argued that. It is a perfect and clear case of the straw man argument.

          • daniel wright

            I said that God forces no one. You said that was my opinion. I will state my point once more in slightly different form. If the God of the Christian Bible existed (he does) and forced everyone to worship him then you would have no choice. True or false?

          • First and foremost, you are offering a premise based on a subjective belief–that your god exists and “forced” us to believe it exists, which forces a positive conclusion. What can you possibly prove by that argument?

            You say your god exists and I say that it doesn’t. Without objective evidence, my view would have more weight because we have physical evidence of a universal energy field and it’s function, but we have no objective evidence for the existence of god(s), especially a personal god. You are forcing a conclusion based on an irrational and objectively baseless premise.

            In any case, even if your belief in the existence of a god were true, your conclusion is a false dichotomy

            There are other choices in life on which to exercise free will. Even if all the world believed in that god, we would still have choices among good things (e.g., choices of which science to study and into which field of research one wants to go; where to live; when to marry the person you love; what to eat for dinner; which wine to drink; how to celebrate events, etc, etc.).

            But then, you are now getting into what I call the Dilemma of Free Will. Setting aside the argument from causal determinism, believers in the Abrahamic religions come to a dilemma by believing two contradicting propositions at once: 1. Evil exists in order that humans can exercise their freewill to choose evil or good. 2. Evil exists because Eve disobeyed God.

            Now, think about that. It is something of an extension of your argument. If your god existed and it wanted humans to have free will, then why the Garden of Eden scenario? Why blame the woman for introducing the evil that it wanted humans to know?

            In any case, your Bible says that your god creates evil. Why was that necessary?

            And the most overriding question: Why would your god doom billions of souls to everlasting, burning torture for having been born in a society that believes in a different god or gods (think history, not just present day)? Most children in our society are taught to believe Christianity but taught about no other religions. So, of course that is what most believe and refuse to believe any other.

            In other regions, children were taught to believe in their religion, but taught about no other religions. So, of course that is what most of them believe and refuse to believe any other.

            Yet your god would doom them for that? Nice god you have there.

          • daniel wright

            You sound educated and wise. 1 Corinthians 1:27 “For God chose the foolish things of the world to confound the wise;God chose the weak things of the world to confound the strong.” Yes,God gives us free will,that’s the point you don’t get. A forced love is a false one. Even a wise man like you understands that.

          • You keep talking about “forced” love. If you read my post with care, you will notice that I did not say “forced” love or belief.

            But since you mentioned it again, what do you call the biblical threat of eternal damnation for not loving and believing in the Christian god? That’s not a threat? That’s not an attempt to force belief by fear?

          • daniel wright

            When did I say that you mentioned it? I didn’t. Something that is forced on you gives you no choice. You have one. Everyone does.

          • Mark

            Daniel, I think the threat makes it a forced love.

          • daniel wright

            Are you saying that you love Jesus?

          • Daniel, why don’t you just be honest. You are the one who began arguing that your god does not force people to live it.

            That was rather nonsensical because I never mentioned such a thing. I didn’t even know what made you think of that line of argument.

            Here are your posts:

            It’s your choice. God asks, he never forces you.

            If the God of the Bible forced everyone to worship him then you would be a Christian.

            I said that God forces no one.

            A forced love is a false one.

            So, since the most powerful cannonballs of reason cannot scratch what you have been indoctrinated to believe. Have it your way and I’ll have it mine.

          • daniel wright

            When have I ever argued against free will? Please show me when I did.

          • Geez, what a profound reading disorder you have.

            If the God of the Bible forced everyone to worship him then you would be a Christian.

            This statement loudly implies that if a god forced belief, then no one would have the free will to believe otherwise. It implies the taking away of one’s free will to believe or not.

            How is forcing an atheistic belief on your students with a failing grade used as whip anything near objective education?

            Okay. It is clear that your ignorance and hate of atheists and anyone else who teaches evolution is an atheist, and that their students are “failing,” is so abysmally ignorant there is no point in going on.

            As I’ve said, enjoy your life of hate and ignorance.

          • daniel wright

            I have no hate for you,only pity. I have had my say. Die in ignorance. Put a fork in me,I’m done.

      • daniel wright

        School is supposed to be a place of learning. The teacher doesn’t own the classroom.She is employed by the taxpayers to teach children. Maybe the Jews and Muslims should have thicker skin.

        • I’m sorry, but your comment is as fallacious and non sensical as it can get.

          First, you are suggesting that the students should be inculcated with one particular religion, no matter if there are kids of other religions in class.

          Secondly, you are suggesting that parents have not right to bring up their children in their own religious belief unless they are Christians.

          Thirdly, you are dismissing the Establishment Clause of the 1st Amendment.

          Fourthly, you are showing an indifference to the American values that are codified in our secular Constitution–mainly, the value of equal rights. Rights that you claim for yourself, apply to all others.

          And you are correct about one thing, the teacher does not own the classroom. But she/he is as much an owner, though her taxes, as all taxpayers, even those taxpayers who are NOT Christian.

  • Garden of Love

    Let’s be honest: Lots of people go into teaching because they want to strike a blow at parental authority. So parents pay taxes so they can have their own authority undermined. What’s wrong with this picture?

  • This has nothing to do with the feelings of other kids and parents. This is all about the feelings and ideas of this godless teacher and the agenda that he/she is pushing out of hatred for God and Christianity.

  • MCrow

    Eh. Let the kids talk. As a teacher, I don’t stop kids discussing, I just don’t indoctrinate. Students should be free to discuss, so long as they don’t disrespect the beliefs of other students.

    • james blue

      so long as they don’t disrespect the beliefs of other students.

      Define “disrespect”… Spend any time reading articles and comments on sites like this and one might think “disrespect” is any counter argument.

      I do agree with you about letting kids talk, but I think the parents who like their child to discuss their faith with other children wouldn’t be so sure if their own child was convinced by the opposing views of the other children and decided to convert to a different faith or stop believing altogether. If their child came home praying to Allah instead of Christ I’m betting they would be against other children discussing faith at school.

      • MCrow

        I suppose for me it’s mostly making sure the student isn’t insulted. If someone says “I don’t like Islam/Christianity/Buddhism because…” that’s one thing. If someone says “I don’t like Muslims/Christians/Buddhists because…” that’s another. I suppose for me it’s more about respecting the student than the actual belief

        • james blue

          But as I pointed out, people take offense when you criticize their faith, even if you do not criticize them personally.

          • MCrow

            *shrug* They are allowed to be offended. I don’t teach religion, and generally, I leave it out of discussion unless its relavant. If kids want to talk about it among themselves, I actually don’t think I’m legally allowed to stop them. I might ask them to stay on task, but that’s about it. If someone is being bullied or told off for their beliefs, that’s when I’ll step in.

  • james blue

    The full details of the incidents is not reported and given past records on site like this I’m pretty sure there is more to the story than written here. Not that it matters as minds are made up. Of course students can talk about their faith, but if it is during class time and not , say, lunch then the teacher would be correct.

    setting aside the letter.

    If you child came home after a discussion with a student of a different faith, or even an Atheist student and that other student had convinced them to convert, Would you be happy about it or would you wish to have words with the school or the parents of the other student? Sure you could tell your kid to stay away from that student, but what if your kids doesn’t listen to you? Should the school enforce your command, should the school force the other student to stop talking to your child?

  • bwgirl

    I’ve read another Primer, it was really cool! It taught the difference between good and evil. It also taught about consequences.

  • Tassieo

    Looks like Satan is already there! 🙁

  • I’d continue talking anyway! That’s a violation of the 1st Amendment and as an American, I will not tolerate it!

    • OldSilk

      The teacher has had to apologize, and the school did as well. That does not mean that such persecution will abate with the close of world history on the way.