The reason that I brought this up was because we, as Americans, should be open to other's beliefs. As American's we have our first amendments rights to worship freely and freedom of press, to me this woman is attempting to hinder the rights of other Americans. I know that most people are Christians first and Americans second, but we live in a nation where there is a separation of Church and state. For the most part this is religious persecution. If children read Harry Potter and believe (not imagining or playing pretend) that they can perform spells like the characters from the book; then they're disillusioned children. If they are inspired to become Wiccans from reading the books (which I doubt) then that's their choice as an American. Christians know the word of the lord to be true to them, where Wiccans know their ideas and practices are true to them. If we let the Church run the state then we would give up our freedoms that the fore fathers of our nation laid out for us. I also admire her for voicing her opinion, that's what makes our country so great. My main problem is that she's trying to enforce Christian beliefs in state funded schools. I love America because we have so many different religions, creeds, races, ideas and that we can voice them. Once our voices are silenced, we adhere to one belief, we reject information, that's when we become a fascist or communist state.

Don't really disagree with what you've said. What I do have a problem with is that there is a double, really multiple, standard in our society. For example, if the ACLU wants to imposed its system of beliefs (atheistic secular humanism) upon America, especially Christians, that's fine. THEY can ban books with alledged Christian content from school, and no one blinks an eye. If a Muslim objects to any material that might offend them, then by all means, such material is immediately jerked from the shelves. If any material suggests that homosexuality might be "negative" in any way, the outrage is so fierce that such intolerant material is condemned and outlawed -- with those who dared to suggest such a thing forced into "sensitivity and diversity training" classes. BUT, let a Christian even suggest that something that their children are FORCED to read in a public school goes against what they are teaching their children, then that parent is ridiculed and scorned in the media as being bigoted, intolerant, or just plain stupid. Something is dreadfully wrong here.

Does this nation practice freedom of speech and religion? Yes. At least for everyone except Christians. We can have occultish or Wiccan-sounding material in schools, and it's just called diversity. Kids can be forced to read about "Adam and Steve" being a normal family. Never heard of the ACLU ranting about anyone bringing a Koran to school or trying to ban classes that teach the principles of Islam. But let anything Christian be even SUGGESTED in a public setting, and there's such a firestorm of protest and hatred that it is immediately discarded as potentially offensive and intolerant.

There is certainly freedom of speech and freedom from religious persecution in this country -- as long as you are NOT a Christian. We should all respect the beliefs of others and let opinions be voiced. There is freedom to do so, and their certainly should be. It's just a shame that the right of "freedom of religion" is rapidly being replaced by newer mandate of "freedom from anything Christian".

I read something very interesting about the way most Muslims think. Muslims, especially Arab Muslims, do not think of obligations as running both ways. American's are used to the I'll scratch your back if you stratch mine way of thinking. Obligations within a family or clan outweigh all others, and obligations between believers and non-believers is a one way street. This is why Muslims make demands, throw a fit if not met, and if met do not reciprecate. Also no compromise can be reached. I do agree with you that we accomodate others as not to offend them while the majority suffers because of it.

So true. But how long must the majority continually be forced to give in and "make nice" because another group MIGHT be offended? Is the majority actually enabling said group to continue in their maladaptive behavior at the expense of society at large? This is sounding far too much like a sociology class now.....

How long do we give in and make nice? Until the minority becomes the majority and we are all assimilated into a new culture. That's what Christians have done since the beginning of the current era (since A.D. is no longer P.C.), and that's what the Muslims are trying to do now.

Here's an example I just read:

A Christian fraternity at UGA is suing the university for discrimination. UGA refuses to recognize this group as a legit organization because the only requirement for membership is that a person must be a Christian. Sounds pretty exclusive!!

Of course, there are other religious organizations on campus that are just as exclusive, but that's more than OK. The article mentions the Baha'i organization, which requires that their frat only include those who process the Baha'i faith. Of course, UGA has NEVER attempted to deny legitimizing this organization. That would be so politically incorrect to do!

But, let a Christian group try do the same, and they get nailed to the wall.

Double standards and persecution. That's just the fact of today's anti-Christian bias in society at large.

I never knew that. I know that there are Jewish frats all over the country. Most frats do consist of white Christians, aside from your historically black frats like the Omega's and Sigma's. Fraternities get to screen their pledges and decide who they want in or out, so why put a clause out there? If you (and your brothers) want your frat to be Christian then don't let non-Christians in. After all the black ball and reject kids based on their financial status, back ground, and just not getting along with one member, what's to stop them from not having non-Christians? I went to a small military college in SC, that will remain nameless, where double standard was the standard. Life's not fair, but at least we can complain about it! Haha

Yeah Yeah!!! Harry Potter!! The real question I have is where is Gimpel? He beat the drums regularly with new blogs 3 or 4 times a week for our wonderful president. Then a week or so before the mid-term elections, he has just disappeared. Just like I said, he was a paid hit man for the republican party.

And I see this paper which must be part of the liberal media (LOL) has pretty much effectively done away with any politically oriented blogs with their mommy blogs that are just such compelling reading. Could it be that they don't want people on here discussing how bad Mr Bush and the republican party in general are looking right now?

SOME of the truth is finally starting to come out about the way the American public has been lied to by Mr Bush and his cronies. Let's do like THAT GREAT AUSTRALIAN Rupert Murdoch and his wholly owned subsidiary of the White House, FOX NEWS and try to keep it hidden. I have no doubt that is what Gimpels disappearence and the MOMMY BLOGS are all about.

Get your own blog! Stop cluttering up mine with your I love Gimple and miss him dearly sob story!

One comment from me and RIGHT OFF THE FRONT PAGE the blog went. LOL That darn liberal media at it again.

I just don't understand it. All of a sudden nobody wants to talk politics anymore.

IT SEEMS THE BUSHIES HAVE BEEN QUIETED!!!!

Come on guys, you were more than happy to talk politics just a few weeks ago. Don't be that way. Tell me again how great Bush is and what a fine job he is doing. LOL

When have I ever said Bush was doing a great job? Politicians across the board are screwing up. And sure a lot of conservatives have been quieted, want to know why? I find that a lot of people that subscribe to the democrates run purely off emotion, with no regard to logic, interupt conservatives when they speak, rant and rave a lot, are idealist with little to no grasp of reality and want you to listen to what they have to say but don't want to hear any retort. Republicans and democrates are greedy, republicans just admit it, but people want what they can't have. Political parties are ruining our system and we should do away with the label. If Bush is doing such a bad job who's doing a good job? There's more than just the executive branch.

If you want to talk politics start your own blog, I want to talk religion.

I can agree with some of what you said weekapaug05. One thing that I don't agree with at all is democrats running off of emotion. The republicans pretty much have a lock on that with the fundies and the rednecks.

And although I will agree there are some greedy democrats out there as well as republicans, I think the percentage would be much, much lower and the democratic policies don't hurt the poor anywhere close to as much as the republican agenda. I just can't understand how people can be so gullible to vote for them when they don't even really try to keep it hidden that much that they are all about making the wealthy even wealthier and doing it at the expence of the poor and middle class.

They can take 2 or 3 hotbutton issues like abortion, flag burning, and gay marriage and it doesn't matter what else they do. Why people are so gullible to not see through that is beyond me.

Democrats want to keep the poor, poor. Otherwise they would want tax cuts and there would be no need for a lot of government funding. Two of those last three issues that you listed shouldn't even be on any political agenda that should be left up to the American's personal choice. Flag burning should not be done because if you hate a country enough to burn the flag ... maybe you should re-evaluate where you live. We're a capitalistic nation, where you should be able to keep what you earn and spend it as you see fit. If democrats want to help out so much then why don't the donate more to charities? Al Gore being such the humanitarian that he is only gave (according to his tax return) somewhere around $600 to charity in 2004 if I'm not mistaken. More do as I say not as I do. People should help there fellow man out of the goodness of their heart, but people don't. I don't think that the government knows how to allocate my money better than I do. A lot of dems are rich folks that don't have to worry about money but are idealist, and the poor that want to receive help from the govt. But on the same token where you have "rich greedy republicans" you have "poor looking for a hand out dems" that use money they receive on guns, tattoos, alcohol, a flashy pair of shoes instead of trying to get themselves out of the hole. It's not a perfect world. I don't think that we should hurt people who busted their butts to get where they are, making a lot of money by building a business that took off. It's the American dream to come from nothing and build an empire, is it not? There will always be the wealthy and the poor no matter what system of government you have. Why? Because everyone is different and utopia is unattainable.

I personally don't like either party, and I don't like anyone TAKING money from me. I like to give money because I've found the more you give the more you get, whether its monatary, spiritual, or emotional.

Damn you for dragging me into politics! Arg!

Don't like politics, but I like that post. Give it away is best.

THAT GREAT AUSTRALIAN is Australian no more. The FCC will not allow a foreigner to own US broadcast properties so he became an American in record time.

mgroothand, he is still a d*mn Aussie AND piece of crap to me. lol

mydtwc: Hmmm, guess that makes me a d*mn Dutchman since I was born and raised there. I thought I was an American, I came here (legally), paid a lot of taxes here. Hmmm, hadn't thought about that recently.

You know who else had book burnings? The Nazis.

I'd much rather have my book burned than have a group put out a death sentence upon me because my book said something they did not agree with (e.g., Salmon Rushdi). There are far worse things than book burnings! You can burn my book as long as you don't chop off my head!

I guess you'll never be a martyr, sitting around while things happen around you while you do nothing. Won't stand by your words and ideas. Jesus said some things that people disagreed with and he suffered a much slower more painful death than a nice quick clean cut decapitation.

Sorry just giving you a hard time.

Good one.

You know, I can always write another book. But, it's much more difficult to find another head. Walmart does not carry spare parts like this yet.

Well there was that one woman who got a face transplant. Maybe you can be the case study for the head transplant. Who knows maybe you can get a better looking one like Sean Conery's.

I have no problem with truth being shaken, just not stirred!

oneway, I was not specifically referring to you. I was referring to the masses.

Oh, I know. I was reponding for the masses as well. Sort of Weekapaug's "stream of consciousness", I guess.

I'll volunteer to set said moral guidelines. I'll also voluteer to lead the de-sensitivity training classes as well so that we can subject everyone to everything to the point that they are not shocked or offended by anything at all and the western world can stop walking on eggshells.

Or we could have Christian schools, Buddhists schools, muslim schools and maybe even atheist schools(oh yeah, we already have this- the public school system). Schools that are "gay friendly", wiccan schools, oh the list could go on.

Or we could all just homeschool our kids and be done with it.

Your not going to change God's view on things and that is the guidelines Christians will always go by. The bible tells us to not "yoke with unbelievers" and not to be "of the world". Granted we have to be in the world, but I am commanded not to conform to the world. weekapaug05, you have said before that you have a NIV Life Application Study Bible in your desk. If you have read it, you should know why Christians take the stand that they do. Even some atheists understand and respect that.

I thought the Bible taught us TO "yoke with unbelievers". How else do you build the Christian community? Isn't that the job of a Christian, to try to save souls? Jesus went to the slums healed the sick, the blind, saved the prostitute, gathered followers and taught them to believe. I think that you need to read your Bible because I think that you don't know your faith as well as you think you do. I'm not trying to be mean, consider this a spiritual challenge, I'm helping you grow. Once again this could be another inconsistancy within the good book or a misinterpretation, that's why I don't live my life by the book but rather by what I've learned from it and applied that to my own beliefs.

Nope. 4Him is correct. Jesus is very clear that we are not to "yoke" with unbelievers. Now, I take that to primarily refer to the dangers of a Christain marrying a non-Christian. Lots of big issues there. I think what you are referring to is a Christian getting out into the world and interacting, working, socializing, and witnessing to non-Christians. You are very correct that such is the mandate to all Christians. Christ calls his followers to get out into the world and be "salt" and "light" to help the world, but to be careful and not be absorbed by the world. In other words, Christians are to be in the world, but not of the world. That's my understanding, at least.

So just don't work, marry or live with them? This seems contradictory to me. I can understand the don't marry to a degree.

Sorry for my mistake 4HIM.

no problem, weekapaug05. I could have ellaborated more in that post.

Christians really don't have much choice but to work with unbelievers. Actually at work is where we can be the most influence at times.

While I do take 2 Corinthians 6:14 to mainly be talking about marriage, I believe it could be taken even further in meaning don't "fit in" with unbelievers. It says in the next couple of verses that we must live among them, but be separate from them- meaning be different, careful not to walk in the ways of the world.