In keeping with the long and ignoble tradition of plastering the Lord’s Prayer on every flat surface in creation, Christians in the Indiana legislature have introduced a bill to require reciting the Lord’s Prayer at the beginning of every school day.

I’ve no issue with the Lord’s Prayer itself. I suppose it’s as useful as anything in helping accomplish the bill’s goal of, “establishing character and becoming a good citizen.” But prayers seem a little weak for such an important job and there is no proof it works anyway.

I also have no issue with teaching about religion in public school provided it is taught from a sociological or historical perspective and includes all religions and non-theistic points of view. After all, it is an important part of the nation’s history and understanding it can help pull us all together.

I don’t even care if religious groups want to use the school building to hold services as long as they pay the freight for that use and school isn’t in session.

But, I draw the line at requiring the Lord’s Prayer or any other religious custom or action in schools.

It’s true the bill only requires prayers at charter schools which may be partially funded by non-governmental groups. However, charter schools are, more often than not, at least partially funded with government money. And therein lies the rub.

By virtue of that government money, charter schools are open to everyone, not just Christians. Requiring kids to repeat their prayers is heavy handed and a back door to killing the concept of separation of church and state – a separation that inhibits the idea of a thriving and expanding theocracy. And BTW, wouldn’t this bill fall into the category of tyrannical Big Government that steals our liberties in a much more fundamental way than light bulb or low-flow toilet regulations?

If you insist on required prayer take your educational business to a religious school. There you can freely pray or require prayer as you wish. I don’t even care if you want to sacrifice goats (they go swimmingly with a little mint sauce BTW) on an altar. Your school, your money, your rules.

But the worst of these sorts of laws is that they are 100% unnecessary. Nothing prevents in-school prayer now. You’re free to pray all you want, any time you want. Kid got a dicey test coming up? They can put in a few quiet words to the Big Guy before they pick up their pencil. Scared they’ll be picked last for the volleyball team? “Oh dear Lord, don’t let them pick me last. Amen.”  Prayer doesn’t need to be required or recited aloud to be effective.

“Dear Lord, I beseech thee. Show those who would rob one person’s religious freedom in order to make it only for their own understand there is a way of compassion and understanding. A simple solution to a simple problem. Let them trust in your wisdom and show them the bright light of respecting all others as they ask to be respected.”

“In the Lord’s name we pray. Amen.”

Related articles

• The Omnipotent Poobah Speaks about religion and politics (omnipotentpoobah.com)
• The Indiana Senate has fortunately already solved all the other problems in the world… (blaspheromones.com)
• Memo to Indiana Republicans: Reciting the Lord’s Prayer in School Won’t Make Students Better Citizens (patheos.com)
• This is what theocracy looks like (kaystreet.wordpress.com)
• Banner Banished: Court Strikes Down R.I. School Prayer Display (secularnewsdaily.com)
• Alberta school board will get final say on Lord’s Prayer (vancouversun.com)
• FFRF protests New Haven clerk’s call for school prayer (secularnewsdaily.com)
• The Tyranny of the Whiny Minority: The Whinority (zwingliusredivivus.wordpress.com)
• Lord’s Prayer Out in Australia (frstephensmuts.wordpress.com)
• School Board Gets Educated (steelcityskeptics.net)
• School prayer debate returns to the Capitol (tampabay.com)
• Judge orders removal of school prayer mural (thegreatone22.wordpress.com)
• School prayer lawsuit trial postponed (mysanantonio.com)

Disclaimer: I’m a former Christian who is now an atheist. I have nothing against most theists and respect their beliefs – up to the point where they step on mine. However, even in my Christian days I would’ve been appalled by the hubris of this plan.

I’m overjoyed so many religious people are so protective of my soul that they insist upon preaching to me at every chance, attempting to nail the 10 Commandments to every flat surface in America, and being generally pesky with their anti-sharia laws and Defense of Marriage hogswallop.

Pastor Michael Stahl – or “Pastor Mike” – of the Living Water eChurch especially wants to help by entering me in a database called, The Christian National Registry of Atheists, a database to identify heathen atheists, skinheads, cross-burners, etc. No word yet on if he plans a similar Christian National Registry of Muslims.

Of course, I’m sure in his pious and peaceful heart he doesn’t mean to equate me with a sex offender. He just wants to hate the sin, but love the sinner.

Oops! I spoke too soon.

“I mean, think about it,” Pastor Mike says, “There are already National Registrys [sic] for convicted sex offenders, ex-convicts, terrorist cells, hate groups like the KKK, skinheads, radical Islamists, etc..” (But) this type of ‘National Registry’ would merely be for information purposes.”

P-Mikey is All About the Information
Information purposes? Yo P-Mikey, one man’s “information” is another’s unwelcome intrusion into something that is none of your business (I was going to say “Goddamn” business, but I didn’t want to blaspheme your delicate sensibilities).

Let’s let the ePastor explain. “Why do this, what’s the purpose? Duhhh, Mr. Atheist for the same purpose many States put the names and photos of convicted sex offenders and other ex-felons on the I-Net – to INFORM the public!”

Well, duhhh you preposterous ass-miter, most atheists are NOT ex-felons or ex-sex offenders. Would you advocate putting Christians, particularly the felons and sex offenders, in my database, The Atheist National Registry of Christians. After all “we only want to, INFORM the public!”

I wouldn’t put names or photos on the list. I agree with Mike that addresses are a bad idea too. We might have a little oopsie and kill an abortion provider or something. You know, purely for informational purposes.

Feeding Satan Ignorant Asshats
I’d also not use the “information” to,  “begin to witness to them and warn them of the dangers of atheism Christianity.” Nor would I, encourage all our Christian atheist friends, as well as the various churches and their congregations NOT to patronize them as we would only be ‘feeding’ Satan ignorant asshats.”

“Frankly, I don’t see why anyone would oppose this idea – including the atheists themselves (unless of course, they’re actually ashamed of their atheist religion, and would prefer to stay in the ‘closet.’),” Pastor Mike said.

Pastor Mike, may I enlighten you? I’m a proud atheist. I’m not in the closet. Neither are most atheists.

I am atheist just as you are a Christian, albeit a twisted caricature of one. I don’t want you to tell me about the dangers of atheism, because to be honest, part of the reason I’m not a Christian is because of crapweasels like you. My soul is none of my concern.

Perhaps the way to best sum up what I think of odious pea brains like Stahl is this, “God may be my copilot, but since I’m doing the driving, I’m the pilot.”

And I really loathe back seat drivers.

Related articles

• More Poobah on Religion (omnipotentpoobah.com)
• National Registry of Atheists (thewordofme.wordpress.com)
• Florida Pastor Calls For An Atheist Registry, Media Points And Laughs (mediaite.com)
• Mad Pastor’s Facebook presence vanishes after he proposes a register for atheists (freethinker.co.uk)
• Pastor Mike Unwittingly Offers Help to the Atheist Community (atheistexperience.blogspot.com)
• What do Atheists do in Crisis? (nogodz.wordpress.com)
• Studies question effectiveness of sex offender laws (scienceblog.com)
• God Delusions round-up #12 (humanistlife.org.uk)

GUNS AND BIBLES - Ameican Christians like to howl about their persecution, but it's hard to feel their pain. Having control over almost all political posts, have unlimited money and influence, and can demonize and run rough-shod over others, it's not persecution...it's the Tyranny of the Majority,

American Christians are quite vocal in the belief they’re oppressed, but it’s hard to feel their pain. They’re the overwhelming majority in this country. Virtually every member of every legislative body and every elected representative is Christian. Their lobbies are as potent as any on K St. The government funds them by not taxing them. They routinely work to defeat bills clear majorities want and that deprive citizens – sometimes other Christians – of their civil rights.

If that’s oppression, sign me up. It sounds like a sweet deal.

However, there are persecuted and oppressed Christians. For example, many countries have real zero tolerance for anything other than their God and prophet. They sometimes force Christians from their homes, turn them into refugees, or kill them.

NO MEA CULPA - If the Pope thinks Christians are the most oppressed instead of the oppressors, he should take his next vacation in Baghdad. BTW Your Holiness, don't forget the up-armored Popemoblie. The Natives are restless.

Meanwhile, American Christians busy themselves with important issues like the proper etymology of Christmas v. Holiday. Living in their secure homes and working in their secure jobs they feel it’s their God-given right to rewrite history books, let pedophiles escape unpunished, or denigrate science because it doesn’t completely jibe with their Bible.

There’s no doubt the intolerance against Christians in countries like Iraq is awful. It’s the tyranny of the majority directed against the few. But except for the degree of modern persecution (the Christians don’t exactly have a bloodless history either), how is that any different from the tyranny of the American majority against the minority here?

I’m not a Christian and I’m sure there are many Christians who’d argue I have no right to an opinion about their religion. However, I’d point out that by the same logic, Christians have no right to an opinion about Islam or me or Druids. But, they never seem shy about exercising the same freedoms they seem unwilling to share with anyone other than themselves.

It is the Christian Sabbath, the last one before the holiest of Christian holy days. Whether you call it Christmas, the holidays, or Festivus, it seems like a good time for Christians, indeed everyone, regardless of religion or the lack thereof, to borrow the concepts of peace and harmony espoused in the Bible, the Quran, and most other religious texts in the world.

Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

Related articles

• Which Day is The Christian Sabbath (wiki.answers.com)
• -Thousands of Christians Continue to Flee Iraq (answersforthefaith.com)
• Grim Xmas for Iraqi Christians as many flee north (sfgate.com)
• Pope: Christians are most persecuted group (msnbc.msn.com)
• Actual persecution vs imagined persecution (washingtonmonthly.com)
• Are Christians Really Oppressed? (friendlyatheist.com)

When will politicians learn that running on personal values is a non-starter, particularly since most voters don’t care? But more importantly, how is it that the most sanctimonious pricks are usually the ones who turn up in compromising positions with those they hate on?

I don’t care what a person does behind doors. Really, I don’t. Plushies, fisting, or sex with park benches, it’s all good with me. By the same token, if you don’t like something, I’m OK with that too as long as you don’t try to force others to embrace your kookie, holier than the holiest of holies blather. But when a lout like Carl Palidino screams about the evils of the “homosexual life style” and is then caught emailing “awesome lesbian porn” (BTW Carl, lesbians are homosexuals) it’s rank, “large H” hypocrisy.

However, I expect a some “little H” hypocrisy, even though it too is wrong. There are a variety of reasons for candidates to change positions – from legitimate conversions of opinion to taking a slightly different spin on an issue to placate a particularly important constituency. But, there is something different about ignoring what you preach, particularly when you scream it at the top of your sinning-assed lungs.

And, here’s the difference.

When a candidate changes position on, for example, whether the Department of Education should be abolished, most voters – if they notice at all – forget about it within days. Most wouldn’t vote based on that single issue anyway.

But when a sanctimonious ass cake preaches the evils of homosexuality and is then found in bed with hookers or shipping porn spam around like a Nigerian Viagra dealer, values voters never seem angry about the breach of faith. In fact, they often scapegoat others, from the media to some innocent party, to protect the “sinner”. Values voters are much more likely to care less that a soldier who was never asked and never told was discharged than the sin of the anti-gay, red-handed jackwad pulling his pud over lesbian porn.

And values voters do often vote purely on values issues. They seem to have an attitude of hating the sin but loving the sinner only when the sinner is one of their own – even if the sinner has compounded their original sin with the sin of lying about it – repeatedly.

It’s also different in another important way.

If someone is elected and succeeds in abolishing, say, the Department of Education, the Republic may suffer from a stupid decision, but it’s unlikely to perish. However, if values voters continue to ignore and defend the transparent imbeciles like Palidino and nibble away at constitutional protections because someone is gay or Muslim or black or just different in some way, the Republic will perish.

If you think the worst thing that can happen is the repeal of DADT or gay marriage, you ain’t seen nothing like a country turned into group-belief theocracy.

Especially if you’re not a member of the theocratic elite.

Related articles

• Are Anti-Gay Christians Responsible for the Suicide Trend? (friendlyatheist.com)
• Are Lesbians Only For Porn? Google Instant Thinks So (gayrights.change.org)
• Misleading Poll Released By Military Group Opposed To DADT Repeal (lezgetreal.com)
• Carl Paladino Releases An Apology (perezhilton.com)
• Do Atheists ‘Love the Sinner but Hate the Sin’? (friendlyatheist.com)
• Denouncing Homosexuality, In New York? (plastic.com)
• Andrew “I’m Sorry” Marin Lurvs Peter “Porno Pete” LaBarbera (slog.thestranger.com)
• Michele Somerville: Homophobia in the Church: What Catholics Are Doing About It, and What Still Needs to Be Done (huffingtonpost.com)
• A God of Love (slog.thestranger.com)
• Mark Olmsted: O’Donnell and Gays: What Kind of Hypocrite Is She? (huffingtonpost.com)
• Love and Let Love or Bully and Let Bully (zackfordblogs.com)

DUH-O! - Athesists and agnostics are found to be the most knowledgeable about religion, but that's no reason for atheists and agnostics to break out the confetti and dance on the table in celebration.

I’ve debated hundreds of religious people over their preferred Tome of Enlightenment™ and found it interesting that a new poll by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life validates my own anecdotal evidence – that some of the most pious are also some of the most ignorant of their own religion.

In fact, the study finds that not only do religious people often exhibit a shocking ignorance of their Bible, Quran, Torah, et al, but agnostics and atheists like me actually know more about them than those who depend on them for their moral guidance.

I’m what you might call a friendly atheist. I don’t get too worked up over many things believers think they’re divinely empowered to do, because in many cases, it doesn’t really matter. For example, is a dollar with “In God we Trust” worth less than a dollar without?

Believers as Aggressive SOBs?
On the other side of the fence, agnostics and atheists sometimes look at the religioned as aggressively ignorant SOBs who won’t stop discriminating against their fellow humans until they get to dance around the infidels nailed to the biggest cross around. But, that doesn’t mean everyone on both sides is an argumentative crapweasel intent on converting their opposites to a life of enlightenment and wisdom with extreme prejudice.

However, I can get worked up when it comes to believers imposing their beliefs on not only atheists and agnostics, but believers of religions not their own. It’s as harebrained for Muslims to assume Christians are, to a person, supporters of the most insane beliefs about Islam as Christians feeling divinely justified in depriving Muslims if all manner of Constitutional rights.

As a former Christian, I’ve come to believe the Bible is a wonderful work of literature, and on the whole, not a bad checklist for leading a morally good life. I know, and support, that others may differ. The biggest differences I have with most Christians are that I see the Bible as the work of man and where we’ll each end up when we die. I try to stay tolerant of views that oppose my own because that’s the compact I’ve made with myself – to allow believers the freedom to believe anything they want, so long as they respect my freedom to not believe.

I don’t believe I have the corner on biblical wisdom by virtue of answering more questions on a survey form, but I do think there is meaning – even non-biblical meaning – in how believers sometimes conduct their own religions.

Because My Bible Tells Me So
In all my personal religious debates I’ve ended up in the same place. I offer logical and scientific reasoning to explain things and, faced with the disagreement, almost every Christian explains away events or beliefs by saying, the Bible tells me so.

I have a feeling that part of this rhetorical impasse comes as a result of selective readings of religious texts – in other words, believers simply pretending Biblical quotes to the contrary aren’t there…when it’s convenient. The result is a disincentive to learn more about their religions. After all, if you only believe that parts of a religious text apply or that they apply differently to those you don’t like, what’s the point in digging further to find the inconvenient and inconsistent things hiding in the dense text?

There are many believers who dig hard and try to reach a level of religious understanding that clearly many of the people in this survey have no use for. And there are plenty of hypocritical muttonheads among the non-believers. I’d caution the non-believers to not do any fist-pumps over the survey though.

The poor showing of the believers isn’t doing believers OR non-believers any good. Without finding some middle ground where we can all learn to coexist, our philosophical culture wars and quite real hot, shooting wars, will continue unabated.

And, that is a situation that science can’t tolerate and isn’t what God wants.

Related articles by Zemanta

• More form the Poobah on Religion (omnipotentpoobah.com)
• Atheists, agnostics most knowledgeable about religion, survey says (irreligion.org)
• Atheists Know More About Religion (godlessgirl.com)
• No Religion, Know Religion (marginalrevolution.com)
• Atheists and agnostics outscore faithful in religious knowledge (holykaw.alltop.com)
• Americans’ religious IQ lacking (religion.blogs.cnn.com)