There are many atheist and freethought groups here in the United States. I am a member of one called American Atheists. This organization was founded by Madalyn Murray O’Hair, who did not want her children to be forced to say prayers in public schools. In the early 1960’s, she took her school district to court in order to protect herself, her children and other atheists from Christian prosletyzing in the public school system. Since the case went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, organized school prayer is now banned throughout the United States in public schools. Religionists now wish that she had won the case on a more local level, perhaps they shouldn’t have fought so hard!(lol) She has been demonized by every Christian religion ever since. She and her family were murdered in the 1990’s in a tragic kidnapping plot. (It had nothing to do with their atheism) She was a great woman, a wonderful teacher and friend, a true hero who took action and stood up for her ideals. I would do the same, if necessary.

American Atheists is a not-for-profit, educational and nonpolitical organization dedicated to the complete and absolute separation of state and church, accepting the explanation of Thomas Jefferson that the First Amendment to the Constitution is meant to create a “wall of separation” between state and church. Amer. Atheists is one of the few freethought organizations that regularly takes the government to task for meddling with that amendment. And meddle they do, they have been trying to get around that school prayer ban for the past 44 years, but that’s not all…

Here are some aims and purposes of this organization and I must say that I wholeheartedly agree with them:

1. To stimulate and promote freedom of thought and inquiry concerning religious beliefs, creeds, dogmas, tenets, rituals and practices.

2. To collect and disseminate information, data and literature on all religions and promote a more thorough understanding of them, their origins and histories.

3. To advocate, labor for and promote in all lawful ways the complete and absolute separation of state and church.

4. To act as “watchdog” to challenge any attempted breach of the wall of separation between state and church.

5. To advocate, labor for and promote in all lawful ways the establishment and maintenance of a thoroughly secular system of education available to all.

6. To encourage the development and public acceptance of a humane ethical system stressing the mutual sympathy, understanding and interdependence of all people and the corresponding responsibility of each individual in relation to society.

7. To develop and propagate a social philosophy in which humankind is central and must itself be the source of strength, progress and ideals for the well-being and happiness of humanity.

8. To promote the study of the arts and sciences and of all problems affecting the maintenance, perpetuation and enrichment of human (and other) life.

9. To engage in such social, educational, legal and cultural activities as will be useful to the members of our organization and to society as a whole.

These folks are serious and somewhat militant when it comes to government involvement with religion.

What do you think about it?

My life’s goals in a nutshell. (Plus a bunch more…)

A right nice bunch of militants they sound to be… perhaps they would be down for some friendly war games??? Where HAS JT gone off too…

Point 3: Do they agree that state institutions should not ban religious expression, i.e. that religious expression should be allowed on a voluntary basis in public forums?

Point 5: How does “thoroughly secular” education correspond with the supposed goals described in Points 1,2, and 6, where education would seem to necessarily include religious education?

Point 7: Good luck. Life/civilization apart from God will ultimately lead down roads of misery and despair. They may love Thomas Jefferson for one quote taken out of context, but they certainly wouldn’t like much of what else he had to say, including those quotes enshrined in his memorial in Washington, DC (“God who gave us life gave us liberty. Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are the gift of God? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, that his justice cannot sleep forever.”)

Point 5: How does “thoroughly secular” education correspond with the supposed goals described in Points 1,2, and 6, where education would seem to necessarily include religious education?

Instead of teaching religion as “this is the way it is” as the church so enjoys doing, it would teach about the beliefs of religions (including Christianity) and the histories and origins of religions from a third-person POV. (“This is the way Christians believe it is.”)

Life/civilization apart from God will ultimately lead down roads of misery and despair.

I completely disagree. A godless life and a godless society appear all the more kindly and appealing to me.

As for teaching, I didn’t ask for anything different :) My current perception, though, is that American Atheists wouldn’t much like even what you’re suggesting.

As for godless societies, well, history is set quite against you, my friend. You may like the idea, but as Thomas Jefferson had observed, it hasn’t worked on societal levels.

As for godless societies, well, history is set quite against you, my friend. You may like the idea, but as Thomas Jefferson had observed, it hasn’t worked on societal levels.

How so? I’m not talking about societies wherein everyone is forced not to believe in a god, but one where no one, by choice, believes in god.

I believe history will show that any culture that has denied the existence of a god creature had suffered irrefutable decline and/or decimation… and the flip side any nation that sided with and followed God enjoyed unequaled power and prosperity…

In closing I believe that the more the United Stated veers off course from it’s initial direction(of following God) it will suffer equal or greater decline and ultimate defeat…

Agreed, AL. The Soviet Union was a failed experiment that included atheism; various other states have followed similar patterns and fallen. I attribute part of the decline of the West to its selfish disunity corresponding with a growing disregard for God.

Could you give me an example wherein it is clearly evident that the godlessness of a society attributed to its failure.

Um let’s see… The entire history of Isreal (Northern and Southern Kingdoms)...

Isreal’s still there, and they’re most definitely religious. What exactly do you mean?

I am talking EXACTLY about the fall of the NORTH AND SOUTH KINGDOMS OF ISRAEL in relation to their outright rejection of GOD… not to mention every single problem that came before that was directly related to their standing with God… The small country of Israel today bears hardly ANY resemblance to the kingdom that was the center of the known world at the time…

Could you recite the approximate events that you’re talking about, please? I gave up after searching wikipedia for about fifteen minutes. I’m tired, and I’m having bad allergies. I don’t want to spend too much time on the computer.

Try looking beyond weakpedia…

Aran, this crap about Jefferson really steams me. Calling the quotation a “remark” and saying that it is taken out of context demeans it. It is being demeaned on purpose by your choice of words. Religionists do this all the time. Hell, all people do this all the time. Thomas Jefferson co-authored the First Amendment to the Constitution contained within the Bill of Rights. He ought to know what he thinks it means and HE SAID what he thinks it means. Just as he said what he said in your quotation above. You notice that the amendment is the FIRST Amendment to the Constitution, so it seems that other people thought that it was important, too. The Constitution was not meant to be amended on a whim. They made it damned difficult to amend it on purpose. I think that the separation of church and state is a very good idea. I think that Jefferson and many other people must have thought the same way. What is wrong with a theist believing that there should be no entanglement between church and state? What is wrong with an atheist believing the same thing? You and I agree on a lot of things. Because one of us believes in God and one doesn’t, are we supposed to disagree on absolutely everything that exists? We don’t! (well, we may disagree slightly on this…lol)

Point 3 – Atheists “believe” that state institutions should not “sponsor” religious expression in public forums. Religious institutions and people are free to do what they like within the law, just like anyone else. A church may rent a picnic grove in a public park, a church may sponsor and apply for a license to hold a demonstration or perhaps a church service on public property. Suppose the city council passes a law saying that religious organizations do not have to pay a fee to rent a picnic grove. That is not very fair to other people who have to pay to rent a picnic grove, is it? The state would be sponsoring (subsidizing) religion and the law should be challenged by those of us who have to pay the fee. This is simplistic, but applies to much bigger issues. Why is the property owned by religious organizations exempt from property tax in most locales? I have to pay such tax. I also am not a member of an institution that seems to need a property tax exemption, so I certainly can’t see any merit.
Additionally, you may publicly and voluntarily express your individual or collective religion wherever you like. If you are banned from doing so, some lawmaking body has overreacted. You would have every right to challenge such a ban. The line is drawn at coercion. My city council may pray before meetings. If I know that beforehand, yet need to attend, I would plan to arrive after the prayer. If the council forces everyone present to stand, bow their heads and recite a prayer, that becomes coercion and should not be allowed. You see, Christians think that when they are praying, everyone, Christian or not, needs to stop what they are doing and go along with it. Or, at least be silent, out of respect. Bullshit! Inside your church, pray all you want, shout all you want, whatever. I promise not to come there and disrupt you. Pray or speak about religion all you like in public forums, too. Just remember that they are public places meant for everyone’s use, not just prayerful folks. Be prepared to be ignored completely and don’t expect passersby to pray with you or stop what they’re doing and keep a respectful silence. And, remember, you don’t have to speak in order to pray or express your religion.
You may be thinking of things such as crosses or other religious symbols on the courthouse lawn or maybe in a public park. You know darn well they don’t belong there. If you want to bring one there and walk around with it all day, more power to you. If you plunk one down there and expect it to be able to leave it there permanently, I don’t think so. There is plenty of private property in most locales that will be happy to accept your cross, plunk it down there.

Point 5 – FiNiX has it right. Religious education and education about religion are two different things. Atheist organizations are not collecting information on religion in order to promote religion, you know. They feel that everyone should have access to information about religions. Some atheists want to counter what they feel are the bad effects religions have had upon human societies. To do this, they need information about religions, and they disseminate that information in order to promote their point of view, just like religions do. We can’t help it if the public schools don’t want to INFORM their charges about religion. Public schools should and do feel that religion is a private matter, between families and their children. Just because school boards, administrators and teachers may feel that they have been FORCED to be this way is not my problem.

Point 7 – That is your opinion and you are welcome to it. Looks like I’m headed for misery and despair then. Along with the rest of us poor lost souls. As I said in the other thread, this is a philosophy, a way to define humanism. This is how atheists feel. Religious folks may feel differently. Again, they are welcome to think as they like. “Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are the gift of God?” The answer to the question is “yes”. Liberty is the right of every human being, to think that it was handed out by some supernatural being is a fallacy. We grant it to ourselves. Occasionally, it needs to be taken by force. I think this nation has proved that more than once, for sure. If we needed God’s help, then I say “thanks, God!” Then I go back under my rock. lol

Put Thomas Jefferson’s comments in the context of his time. England had gone through centuries of state-sponsored religious persecution. Anglicanism was the state-sponsored religion at his time, which persecuted his deism, plus Puritanism, Catholicism, Quakerism, and all those other beliefs at the time. Jefferson didn’t want our government to take any part in PERSECUTION of religion, and by extension promotion of any ONE religion. However, prayer was very much an institutionalized part of the government. Heck, Congress even printed Bibles and promoted the dissemination of Bibles, and Jefferson himself if I remember correctly advocated educating with the Bible-grammar and morals-in schools. Non-Christian religions weren’t an issue at the time, so promoting Christianity in this non-denominational sense was perfectly accepted. Now it would need to include other belief systems. My point is that Jefferson never intended to take religion out of government entirely, and he absolutely was against any government persecution or discouragement of religion—that’s why I get “steamed” every time I here people using Jefferson’s quotes as the gospel that the state should be wholly irreligious or anti-religious.

Yes, the Constitution was intended to be amended, but hard to amend—that’s why I hate activist courts, which have a tyranny of the few dictate de facto changes to the Constitution without the peoples’ approval.

You are actually pretty moderate on the extent of separation of church and state, but still farther than I am. Many I know don’t believe any mention or reference to any religion should be allowed in the public square, much less on government property or during government proceedings; and their idea of teaching about religions is to advocate against them all.

As for Point 3, I agree with you mostly. I believe voluntary religious use and even tax or fee exemptions should be allowed to religious institutions—just as they should be allowed to all non-profit institutions (though our non-profit system needs some serious reformation). Non-coercive but public prayer should be allowed in government proceedings or public schools. I also believe that religiously-flavored monuments should not be paid for with public funds, but if they have been well in the past, that is no reason to take them down. Religions are a part of our heritage, and as long as the state is non-coercive and shows no favoritism for one religion over another by persecuting a given religion, and as long as it is not in opposition to the will of the people, those sorts of things should be allowed. Similarly, I don’t believe we need to drop “In God we Trust” or “One Nation under God” or crosses on military gravesites or inscribings in courthouses and government buildings. These are non-coercive displays of heritage and culture more than anything else. The United States is a religious country; to ignore that in public expression is to deny who we are as a nation. If we were 80% Jewish, Hindu, Muslim, or Hobbesian, we’d have different monuments.

Point 5: As long as one religion or belief system is not promoted over another, and none are persecuted or advocated against, religious education is fine. Note that there is not time or money to teach about all religions and belief systems, so some realistic judgment calls are in order—like focusing on predominant worldwide, national, or local religions and belief systems to what extent possible. Proportional representation, if you will. I don’t expect Catholicism to receive as much attention in the heart of a Southern Baptist town as in St. Louis, for instance.

Point 7: I don’t think all individual people will end up in misery and despair. I think if whole cultures go down that road, though, the aggregate result will be more along those lines.

Now we’re talking…

On Point 3 …The Koran is required reading in our public schools…

if whole cultures go down that road, though, the aggregate result will be more along those lines.

But what if all members of that culture do so willingly? How would that cause misery and despair?

Because, Finix, mankind has an inbuilt need for God. Some manage to deny it, but others crave it. We all worship something, whether its God or an idea, money, fame, power, sex, drugs, entertainment/pleasure, ourselves, another person or organization, a philosophy, whatever. The only thing that will ultimately fulfill this need, I believe, is worship of God, because that’s whom worship was made for. While it’s true that societies that were religious have fallen, many have succeeded. None that have discarded religion have succeeded for long. The track record for cultural rise has been better with religion than without, when it more often declines.

I don’t need god and I don’t worship anything. There is no need to do so. We’re not in the dark ages anymore. You can appreciate things like drugs or money or entertainment but nothing says you have to or that everyone worships these things. You talk about societies with religion that have succeeded, but thats only with years and years of war and intolerance to other religions( just take a look at the entire middle east). Thats why they are around so long. The soviet union used atheism but most russians were not atheists so I don’t think thats a good example of an atheist society.

Well and good, people, some controversy! We have been getting complacent lately and we need to talk about stuff, all kinds of stuff, so I will continue to introduce fun subjects like this.

Aran, thanks for your replies, as always, they are so sweet to read! I so enjoy discussing things with you! However, you had to demean poor Jefferson again. he sure must not be an important person at all, I guess… Doesn’t know what he’s saying, you know, not quite right in the head unless his quotations mention his adoration of God, then we GOTTA listen to him, he makes complete sense THEN. He just has to say “God” and we fall down on our knees and speak in tongues… offhand and out of context tongues, of course, is there any other kind? (sarcasm again, sorry, hon, you know me!) You do remember that one of the major reasons that the United States printed Bibles was to teach people (children among them) to read, right? It was nearly the only complete large printed book that was available, especially because it was MADE available. Just one reason, though, yours are just as valid.

American Atheists would much prefer that religious education take place in post secondary education. they feel that most religions indoctrinate their children. They do the same to their children, though, too. As you said in the other thread, I’m a middle of the road kind of person, so I’m a middle of the road kind of atheist. I can usually see the other fella’s point of view on most anything (specially if it’s a fella! lol). Of course, I don’t have any children…(oh, lol again!) Amer. Atheists is among the most “militant” freethinking groups, as I said. Even though I am a member, that is somewhat because I knew the founder and somewhat agree with the aims and purposes, you know… Also, my past is somewhat militant in nature, so we meshed well.

AL, the Holy Roman Empire is an example of a former (theist) world power that has fallen somewhat. I would not call the Vatican a world power really, except that the entire world does kowtow a bit to that darn pope. And what’s with the Koran thing?

Hi ec! Where ya been? I agree with you, but good luck convincing Aran. If everyone worships something, I’ll just say I worship myself! I’m all there is to my life and I have to make it on my own. I’m selfish, I’m a mean old bitch, AND I know it. Self-love is the Empress of worship!

Thanks, Koo. Yes, your reason for the widespread use of Bibles in education is a major one. I don’t discount Jefferson’s words, I just place them in context to try to ascertain his meaning. I know you were being sarcastic, but considering his times, do you really think he intended the 1st Amendment to direct the goverment to purge religion thoroughly from all its activities, buildings, documents, and places?

EC, the way I’m using and defining worship, I bet you do worship something. What do you place first in your life, either ideally or practically through your actions? What guides your thoughts and actions? What do you sacrifice for? What do you consider your greatest want or highest good? What do you spend your time on to the exclusion of other things, or let your mind dwell on to the exclusion of other things (even if you think you value something else more highly)? What do you seek to make you happy? What gives you meaning?

There is probably no one thing that is the answer to all of these questions for you, but they are all questions aimed at finding out what you “worship,” in the extended Biblical sense of “idol worship.” Maybe you’re a nihilist and don’t see meaning or worth in much of anything…then you’re “worshipping” that ideal. The only people I can think of who aren’t worshipping much of anything are those caught in the throes of depression who can’t see anything to give meaning or happiness or value, etc, and that proves my point.