Updated 11:59 pm.EST, Fri November 20, 2009

Education|Mon, Aug. 24 2009 07:22 PM EDT

'Friendly Atheist' and Pro-Family Group Wage Public Conflict

By Nathan Black|Christian Post Reporter

An Illinois conservative family group and a self-claimed "friendly atheist" have found themselves in a battle of words that began with a warning about a nationwide kiss-in.

"It seems I have a conservative 'family' group angry with me because of this website. And they’re trying to attack my character (and my teaching position) as a result," wrote Hemant Mehta, author of I Sold My Soul on eBay, on his blog last week.

That "angry" group is the Illinois Family Institute, a nonprofit organization that serves to educate the public about issues that affect the family and traditional values.

IFI had recently sent an e-mail to administrators and school board members at Neuqua Valley High School in Naperville to inform them about the ideas Mehta promotes on his "Friendly Atheist" blog – ideas that parents could find troubling. Mehta is a math teacher at the school.

The e-mail was sent after Mehta criticized and seemingly mocked IFI's alert to subscribers about the "Great Nationwide Homosexual Kiss-In" on Aug. 15. Laurie Higgins, director of the Division of School Advocacy for IFI, was warning families who are opposed to homosexual behavior to avoid Chicago's Millennium Park where the event was to take place.

In a sarcastic blog post, Mehta wrote, "Of course, the abstinence-only crowd sees this (gay kiss-in) as pure evil."

The atheist author noted in his blog that Higgins equated homosexual behavior to pedophilia and incest, which he said was a ridiculous claim.

"The only thing that could make this kiss-in even better is if it took place just outside Higgins’ house," he stated sarcastically.

"...Higgins can do whatever she’d like to with her children. She might feel more comfortable if each kid came equipped with a blindfold. She could then tie it around them in case they dare go out in public where (*gasp*) gay people might be engaging in some harmless PDA."

Waging the conflict in public, Higgins denounced the atheist's comments in an open letter to Mehta on the IFI website.

She first stressed that she never suggested to school administrators that he be fired or that he should resign.

Then defending her previous statements, Higgins said she has made it clear that she was simply trying to inform leaders in District 204 about Mehta's "vindictive, irresponsible, and unprofessional public statement" that the kiss-in should take place outside her house.

Her goal, she explained, was to provide information to parents in the school district "about the nature of the ideas you express and endorse on your public blog so that they can make informed decisions as to whether they want their children to spend a school year under your tutelage."

"You (Mehta) fail to acknowledge a central point that I addressed in my two articles, which is that many teens are unduly influenced by emotion and the cult of personality, and therefore are predisposed to look favorably on the ideas of teachers whom they find cool or charismatic or funny or kind or anti-tradition," Higgins added. "Adolescence is also a time of rebellion which is why many teens are attracted to rebellious, anti-establishment people and ideas.

"If students search your name and come upon your blog, they will be exposed to your endorsement and promotion of ideas that some parents may find deeply troubling."

Drawing from a recent case in Orangevale, Calif., Higgins reminded Mehta about cheerleading coach Carlie Christine whose previous work as a Playboy model raised concerns among parents. The coach was fired.

Teachers have a First Amendment right to blog or speak publicly about anything they want, the family group director acknowledged. But she added that having the right to speak does not guarantee public approval.

School board member Mark Metzger replied to Higgins' e-mail, rebuking her action.

"Have you considered the possibility that if your actions caused Mr. Mehta to suffer consequences in his employment, you'd be subjecting yourself and/or your organization to liability? That's potentially unwise to your organization's self-sufficiency, surviival (sic) and mission," Metzger stated, according to IFI.

Mehta has not lost his job, the atheist said on his blog.

"My superiors respect my right to free speech and their concern is with my professional work, not my private life."

Mehta emphasized in his blog that he respects the separation of church and state and keeps his religious and social views out of the classroom.

Sort by: Newest | Oldest | Agree | Disagree
All comments on this page are subject to our Terms of Use and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Christian Post or its staff.
1 | 2
  • Fri Sep 04, 2009 6:35 pm Agree: 3   Disagree: 0

    Cheesehead wrote: "The U.S. Constitution established a republic under God, rather than a democracy." Actually an outright lie, since the Constitution says no such thing.

  • Fri Sep 04, 2009 1:41 pm Agree: 5   Disagree: 0

    No Believer, that was you - accusing me of having multiple ideas. Can you make a post where you DON'T lie? Is that even possible?

    And the people who run this site have to eliminate this ridiculous "flag" censorship. It renders the site virtually useless.

  • Wed Sep 02, 2009 2:56 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 2

    Flagged as inappropriate. show seat, I was looking at your response to mathetes on another site and I found it interesting you shared that you never start the name-calling and yet you are the very one who accused me of blatantly lying in other words a blatant liar in your Aug. 31st 1:35 post to me and I had not called you any type of name at all. So that would make you a _____? hide

  • Wed Sep 02, 2009 2:03 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 2

    Flagged as inappropriate. show seat, considering I did not lie nor have I been caught in a lie there is no need for me to aplogize and in fact it appears since my points to you are correct and your only option is to simply accuse those who disagree with you with lying and if you remember your false claim that I was a lying is what got this discussion started in the first place, your 1:35 post on Monday August 31st. Plus, I was not flagged for not apologizing but rather someone has gone on a flagging frenzy and I just happen to be their target along with several other posters. And the truth remains the same that God has never changed His morals and values. hide

  • Wed Sep 02, 2009 1:17 pm Agree: 4   Disagree: 1

    Flagged as inappropriate. show To whoever "flagged" two posts by "Believer" where he (a) accused me of lying, and then (b) refused to apologise or admit he had falsely accused me of having multiple user id's: I appreciate your support for my position, but please don't show that support by censoring him. Instead, please just give me a "thumbs up", or him a thumbs down, particularly the post where he lied, which has 17 "up" thumbs, and has been "flagged". By flagging "Believers" posts, you make it appear that I flagged him, when I did not. I don't censor, because people who value the truth should support the free exchange of ideas, and oppose censorship. In a free marketplace of ideas, better ideas will prevail, and bad ideas will look bad just by being what they are. Believer: I don't dignify liars with a response. If you can't even apologise when caught lying you are incapable of reasonable debate (not that you haven't already shown that with your other posts). Your statements and claims are all tainted by your dishonesty and your sinful pride. hide

  • Wed Sep 02, 2009 1:14 am Agree: 3   Disagree: 0

    Flagged as inappropriate. show Cheesehead wrote: "The U.S. Constitution established a republic under God, rather than a democracy." Actually an outright lie, since the Constitution says no such thing. hide

  • Wed Sep 02, 2009 1:14 am Agree: 3   Disagree: 0

    Flagged as inappropriate. show Cheesehead wrote: "The U.S. Constitution established a republic under God, rather than a democracy." Actually an outright lie, since the Constitution says no such thing. hide

  • Wed Sep 02, 2009 1:14 am Agree: 3   Disagree: 0

    Flagged as inappropriate. show Cheesehead wrote: "The U.S. Constitution established a republic under God, rather than a democracy." Actually an outright lie, since the Constitution says no such thing. hide

  • Tue Sep 01, 2009 8:15 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 5

    Flagged as inappropriate. show seat, your posts are too redundant for many of us to not recognize them from past sites using different IDs. And yet you have yet to show my blatant lies with regards to God never changing His morals or values as taught in the Word of God. hide

  • Tue Sep 01, 2009 3:50 pm Agree: 7   Disagree: 2

    Believer wrote:

    "I don't have to change my ID and sneak back on to CP like you in order to take cheap shots at other posters."

    NEITHER DO I. IT IS YOU WHO ARE LYING. I ONLY USE 1 ID ON THIS SITE.

    But then, you're religious, so lying comes naturally to you. How pathetic that only post where you get positive thumbs up from other readers is one you HAD TO LIE ON TO GET THEM.

    NOT ONLY ARE YOUR POSTS POOR, YOU ARE DISHONEST.

  • Mon Aug 31, 2009 8:05 pm Agree: 3   Disagree: 4

    Flagged as inappropriate. show seat, by the way what's changed is not God's morals and values but we've moved from the Old Covenant of the Law to the New Covenant of Grace as a result of God's Son, Jesus Christ fulfilling the sacrificial laws and that is why the sacrificial laws are no longer applicable and/or necessary as well as many of the levitical laws and in fact the dietary laws were removed when God spoke to Peter in a dream in the Book of Acts to tell him they were no longer applicable. hide

  • Mon Aug 31, 2009 8:01 pm Agree: 17   Disagree: 6

    Flagged as inappropriate. show seat, and those blatant lies would be? Plus, at least I don't have to change my ID and sneak back on to CP like you in order to take cheap shots at other posters. hide

  • Mon Aug 31, 2009 1:35 pm Agree: 9   Disagree: 3

    u4eeeahh: those who fear the truth resort to lies and censorship. So a truth-fearing censor has flagged the posts he disagrees with. That just proves how weak his beliefs are. Considering who has done the recent posts, it's probably "believer" who did that.

    believer: you stated "the primary exception of the sacrificial laws and other levitical laws, but once again the rescinding of these laws in no way shows that God's morals and values have changed."

    Um, sorry, it proves that those "morals and values" have changed. The fact that you are willing to lie so blatantly about something demonstrates that your belief system is a lie, and that you value it more than you value truth. This is one of the many reasons that more and more people capable of objective thought are either leaving literal religion, or leaving religion altogether. And considering the effect it has upon people - to convince them that blatant lying is acceptable - that can't happen fast enough.

  • Sun Aug 30, 2009 11:38 pm Agree: 5   Disagree: 1

    Flagged as inappropriate. show We have a coward unable to allow any discourse at all. Every post of several posters has been flagged in the last 2 hours. Hundreds of flagged comments which seems pointless. Does the administration accept this a proper behavior? hide

  • Sun Aug 30, 2009 8:29 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 6

    Flagged as inappropriate. show hman, plus Christ never said that any of the laws God gave His people were wrong but only that Jewish leaders were either misinterpreting them or misusing them. Plus, Paul does not condemn the Law but simply teaches that following the Law cannot save us and in fact our inability to keep the Law points us to our need to be saved. hide

  • Sun Aug 30, 2009 8:27 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 6

    Flagged as inappropriate. show hman, just because some of the laws found in the Old Testament are no longer applicable to us today by no means says that God's morals and values have changed. In fact many of the laws found in the Old Testament are still applicable to us today with the primary exception of the sacrificial laws and other levitical laws, but once again the rescinding of these laws in no way shows that God's morals and values have changed. hide

  • Sun Aug 30, 2009 8:59 am Agree: 9   Disagree: 0

    Flagged as inappropriate. show To my ear, Paul generally says "God has changed the rules," while Jesus says the rules were obviously wrong all along. So by Paul's instruction, your statement is incorrect in that God did change the rules. By Jesus's instruction, your statement is incorrect in that the Bible inaccurately reflected God's rules in the first place. hide

  • Sun Aug 30, 2009 8:55 am Agree: 8   Disagree: 0

    Flagged as inappropriate. show That doesn't ring true for me Believer. Jesus and Paul most certainly taught that many direct commands written in the Old Testament were to be blatantly and publicly disgregarded, and that God said so! hide

  • Sun Aug 30, 2009 8:04 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 6

    Flagged as inappropriate. show seat, but one thing that never changes are God's morals and values as taught in His Word, the Bible! hide

  • Sat Aug 29, 2009 11:34 pm Agree: 9   Disagree: 1

    What "traditional values" does the Illinois Family Institute promote? Gay-bashing? Slavery? Racially-pure marriages? Arranged marriages? Marriages when the woman can't own property? Dowries? Repealing divorce?

    There is no such thing as "traditional values". They change from place to place through time. They are created through dialogue. That's why there is no consensus on what they are or should be.

  • Sat Aug 29, 2009 2:42 pm Agree: 6   Disagree: 1

    Flagged as inappropriate. show Sat Aug 29, 2009 2:53 am : 1 : 0 Flag Delete Thu Aug 27, 2009 11:33 pm : 0 : 0 Flag Delete Chesed: Patrick Henry boldly declared: "It cannot be emphasized too strongly that this great nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religions, but on the Gospel of Jesus Christ. For this very reason peoples of other faiths have been afforded assylum, prosperity and freedom of worship here". http://www.wallbuilders.com/LIBissuesArticles.asp?id=126 Quote: "we call the following quotes "unconfirmed": that is, while the quotes below have been documented in a completely acceptable fashion for academic works, they are currently "unconfirmed" if relying solely on original sources or sources contemporaneous to the life of the actual individual Founder". "Patrick Henry might have boldly declared" is probably more accurate than "Patrick Henry boldly declared". hide

  • Sat Aug 29, 2009 1:30 pm Agree: 10   Disagree: 1

    Flagged as inappropriate. show Cheesehead wrote: "The U.S. Constitution established a republic under God, rather than a democracy." Actually an outright lie, since the Constitution says no such thing. hide

  • Sat Aug 29, 2009 2:53 am Agree: 7   Disagree: 0

    Flagged as inappropriate. show Thu Aug 27, 2009 11:33 pm : 0 : 0 Flag Delete Chesed: Patrick Henry boldly declared: "It cannot be emphasized too strongly that this great nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religions, but on the Gospel of Jesus Christ. For this very reason peoples of other faiths have been afforded assylum, prosperity and freedom of worship here". http://www.wallbuilders.com/LIBissuesArticles.asp?id=126 Quote: "we call the following quotes "unconfirmed": that is, while the quotes below have been documented in a completely acceptable fashion for academic works, they are currently "unconfirmed" if relying solely on original sources or sources contemporaneous to the life of the actual individual Founder". "Patrick Henry might have boldly declared" is probably more accurate than "Patrick Henry boldly declared". hide

  • Fri Aug 28, 2009 12:08 pm Agree: 9   Disagree: 0

    Flagged as inappropriate. show "which sections of the Bible are written into US law" Deuteronomy 22:28-29 wasn't written into US law. If it were the penalty for getting caught raping a virgin girl would be 50 shekels of silver and forced marriage, apparently regardless of the number of wives the rapist already has. http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy%2022:28-29&version=NIV hide

  • Fri Aug 28, 2009 11:32 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    @RevShnorrRocks
    Thanks for the link

  • Fri Aug 28, 2009 9:57 am Agree: 5   Disagree: 0

    Flagged as inappropriate. show Cafeeine: I will review your voluminous posts and book suggestions and get back to you, thanks very much for the effort. One more reading suggestion: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Tripoli#Article_11 hide

  • Fri Aug 28, 2009 8:53 am Agree: 2   Disagree: 0

    @ Daniel Paul

    That's fine, except that those values are hardly exclusive to the Bible. The inclusion of these, and not the specifically religious commandments hardly speaks of a christian flavor.

    @ Chesed

    I will review your voluminous posts and book suggestions and get back to you, thanks very much for the effort.

  • Fri Aug 28, 2009 2:34 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 5

    Flagged as inappropriate. show To be honest, there is nothing redeeming in our Christianity. It is the death of Jesus on the Cross that brings redemption. Not our attempts. People without Jesus need religion. People with Jesus have no need of religion. hide

  • Fri Aug 28, 2009 2:33 am Agree: 2   Disagree: 5

    "our particular superstition of Christianity one redeeming feature."

    Please note that he said "our" and not "your". He included himself...interesting....

  • Fri Aug 28, 2009 2:30 am Agree: 2   Disagree: 4

    Flagged as inappropriate. show "You have to remember that Christianity has not been able to survive all these years without ample injections of hatred and falsehoods." Jesus was against religion too you know. Christianity (the relationship with Christ) has survived without fear for 2000 years. Religion has survived by fear for much longer.... hide

  • Fri Aug 28, 2009 2:06 am Agree: 9   Disagree: 0

    Flagged as inappropriate. show That we had superstitious leaders in a more primitive time isn't a valid excuse for continuing to operate on myths and delusions today. But if we have to go for 18th century quotes: "I have examined all the known superstitions of the world, and I do not find in our particular superstition of Christianity one redeeming feature. They are all alike founded on fables and mythology" Thomas Jefferson, Notes on Religion, to the Assembly of Virginia, 1786 hide

  • Fri Aug 28, 2009 12:22 am Agree: 6   Disagree: 0

    I find many of the comments posted on this site contain factual errors, outright lies and cleverly contrived objections usually not germane to the subject. You have to remember that Christianity has not been able to survive all these years without ample injections of hatred and falsehoods. THAT is a historical FACT...laughter

  • Thu Aug 27, 2009 11:33 pm Agree: 5   Disagree: 0

    Flagged as inappropriate. show Chesed: Patrick Henry boldly declared: "It cannot be emphasized too strongly that this great nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religions, but on the Gospel of Jesus Christ. For this very reason peoples of other faiths have been afforded assylum, prosperity and freedom of worship here". http://www.wallbuilders.com/LIBissuesArticles.asp?id=126 Quote: "we call the following quotes "unconfirmed": that is, while the quotes below have been documented in a completely acceptable fashion for academic works, they are currently "unconfirmed" if relying solely on original sources or sources contemporaneous to the life of the actual individual Founder". "Patrick Henry might have boldly declared" is probably more accurate than "Patrick Henry boldly declared". hide

  • Thu Aug 27, 2009 8:43 pm Agree: 3   Disagree: 5

    Flagged as inappropriate. show James McHenry was a member of the Continental Congress, a state legislator, a soldier, and a signer of the Constitution...as well as the president of the first Bible Society in Baltimore. McHenry stated: Neither...let it be overlooked, that public utility pleads most forcibly for the general distribution of the Holy Scriptures. The doctrine they preach, the obligations they impose, the punishment they threaten, the rewards they promise, the stamp and image of divinity they bear, which produces a conviction of their truths, can alone secure to society, order and peace, and to our courts of justice and constitutions of government, purity, stability, and usefulness. Patrick Henry boldly declared: It cannot be emphasized too strongly that this great nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religions, but on the Gospel of Jesus Christ. For this very reason peoples of other faiths have been afforded assylum, prosperity and freedom of worship here. "Blasphemy against the Almighty is denying his being or providence, or uttering contumelious reproaches on our Saviour Christ. It is punished, at common law by fine and imprisonment, for Christianity is part of the laws of the land." Charles C. Pinckney We the members of the U.S. Taxpayers Party gratefully acknowledge the blessing of the Lord God as Creator, Preserver and Ruler of the Universe and of this Nation... The U.S. Constitution established a republic under God, rather than a democracy. In a republic governed by Constitutional law rooted in Biblical law,all life, liberty and property are safe because Law rules. - Preamble, USTP Platform Enough for you, Cafeeine? hide

  • Thu Aug 27, 2009 8:42 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 4

    Flagged as inappropriate. show "Our laws and our institutions must necessarily be based upon and embody the teachings of the Redeemer of mankind. It is impossible that it should be otherwise; and in this sense and to this extent our civilization and our institutions are emphatically Christian." - United States Supreme Court, 1892. While making certain not to endorse any denomination of religion over another, the founders of this nation made it emphatically clear that the principles upon which this Nation was built are based squarely upon the Bible. Virtually every one of the 55 writers and signers of the United States Constitution were members of various Christian denominations: 29 were Anglicans, 16 to 18 were Calvinists, 2 were Methodists, 2 were Lutherans, 2 were Roman Catholic, 1 lapsed Quaker and sometimes Anglican, and 1 open deist--Dr. Franklin who attended every kind of Christian worship, called for public prayer, and contributed to all denominations. George Mason is called the father of the Bill of Rights, for he insisted that the first ten amendments be added to the Constitution. The purpose for such an addition? "The laws of nature are the laws of God, whose authority can be superseded by no power on earth," Mason said. hide

  • Thu Aug 27, 2009 8:36 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 6

    Flagged as inappropriate. show On the U.S Supreme Court you can see near the top of the building a row of the world's law givers and each one is facing one in the middle who is facing forward with a full frontal view .. it is Moses holding the Ten Commandments. Entering the Supreme Court courtroom, the two huge oak doors have the Ten Commandments engraved on each lower portion of each door. Inside the courtroom, right above where the Supreme Court judges sit, the Ten Commandments! There are Bible verses etched in stone all over the Federal Buildings and Monuments in Washington, D.C . James Madison, the fourth president, known as "The Father of Our Constitution" stated: "We have staked the whole of all our political institutions upon the capacity of mankind for self-government, upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves, to control ourselves, to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God." Patrick Henry said: "It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded not by religionists but by Christians, not on religions but on the Gospel of Jesus Christ". Every session of Congress begins with a prayer by a paid preacher, whose salary has been paid by the taxpayer since 1777. Fifty-two of the 55 founders of the Constitution were members of the established orthodox churches in the colonies. Thomas Jefferson worried that the Courts would overstep their authority and instead of interpreting the law would begin making law an oligarchy . The rule of few over many. (exactly what has happened, BTW & to the downfall of this nation) The very first Supreme Court Justice, John Jay, said: "Americans should select and prefer Christians as their rulers." hide

  • Thu Aug 27, 2009 8:04 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 6

    "I smell a Salem witch hunt here"

    We've known that. What other purpose do pro-gays have on a Christian website???

  • Thu Aug 27, 2009 8:03 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 5

    " which sections of the Bible are written into US law"

    Thou shalt not kill.
    Thou shalt not steal.
    Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.
    Thou shalt not commit adultery (yep it really is)

  • Thu Aug 27, 2009 7:46 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 7

    To Cafeeine,

    Your question is mis-placed. Our Constitution is just an operator's manuel. It tells the how-to's of operating our gov't. What you should be looking at is the Declaration Of Independence That tells 'why' we formed our nation. There is much of God in it.
    The quotes are too voluminous to list here. Get the book, "America's God & Country: an Encyclopedia of Quotations" by William Federer. You also might want to check out David Barton's book, "Original Intent".

  • Thu Aug 27, 2009 6:08 pm Agree: 6   Disagree: 0

    Chesed, can you refer me to which specifically of the 10 commandments are represented in the US Constitution? In effect, which sections of the Bible are written into US law. I would appreciate it.

  • Thu Aug 27, 2009 4:22 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 15

    Flagged as inappropriate. show I, for one, don't want my kids taught by an athiest, homosexuality approving teacher. Even if they don't promote their beliefs in an outspoken manner, there are undercurrents that kids latch onto. This nation was founded on religious freedom, not freedom from religion. It was founded on the Bible, specifically the 10 Commandments. (which, BTW, are carved in stone in many places in Washington, including the supreme Court where they are busy 24/7 attempting to destroy.) hide

  • Thu Aug 27, 2009 3:28 pm Agree: 5   Disagree: 3

    Flagged as inappropriate. show "This woman should have kept her mouth shut about someone's personal blog. If he was pushing athiesm in the classroom, that is one thing, but on a personal blog?" Thank you! Amen! I agree. hide

  • Thu Aug 27, 2009 3:28 pm Agree: 6   Disagree: 2

    Flagged as inappropriate. show I smell a Salem witch hunt here. Too bad the poor hunters have no idea what they're doing. TGF, your judgmental arrogance in putrid. But you'll never see it. It's really sad. hide

  • Thu Aug 27, 2009 5:34 am Agree: 1   Disagree: 24

    Flagged as inappropriate. show Because of Mehta's melancholia, we get a whiff of why God felt so sickened He had to destroy all the sodomites in Sodom and Gomorrah. TGF The most loving thing you can do for your family is to pull them out of the public school system and keep them far away from apostate churches. hide

  • Wed Aug 26, 2009 7:19 pm Agree: 14   Disagree: 1

    There are radicals everywhere left anf right. In the spirit of capitalism and selling papers, the media has sold its soul to the profit margin. They focus on wild and outlandish stories that give each side of an argument an incorrect view of the opposing side.

    This woman should have kept her mouth shut about someone's personal blog. If he was pushing athiesm in the classroom, that is one thing, but on a personal blog?

    Christians have no desire to silence all opposition like religous fanatics. Those of us who know and appreciate our American history hold firm to the seperation of Church and State. An athiest can teach my kid all day long if he is a good teacher and keeps his religous opinions out of the classroom.

  • Wed Aug 26, 2009 3:51 pm Agree: 18   Disagree: 3

    Flagged as inappropriate. show They're comparing Hemant Mehta's "Friendly Atheist" blog to being a playbunny? These people are even more off their rockers than it looks. If parents want their children to be instructed only by those who both publicly and privately agree with their narrow ideological convictions, they can home school. You don't get to go into a public school and tell them who they can and can't employ. I wonder what the "Expelled" crowd would say about this level of harassment being directed against an atheist just because of his personal beliefs that he does not ever express in his classroom. I've met Hemant. And you know what? He's a nice guy. hide

  • Wed Aug 26, 2009 3:33 pm Agree: 9   Disagree: 4

    "the war against retaining God in one's knowledge, leads to the acceptance and practice of homosexuality. " -Professor X

    Professor X,

    So all those gay children are the result of their own personal war against retaining God in their knowledge? Children must be pretty sophisticated these days.

  • Wed Aug 26, 2009 12:17 pm Agree: 24   Disagree: 5

    Flagged as inappropriate. show Christianity: The belief that a walking dead Jewish deity who was his own father although he always existed, commits suicide, although he didn't really die, in order to give himself permission not to send you to an eternal place of torture that he created for you, but instead to make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh, drink his blood, and telepathically promise him you accept him as your master, so he can cleanse you of an evil force that is present in mankind because a woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree. Faffy hide

  • Wed Aug 26, 2009 10:56 am Agree: 24   Disagree: 4

    Flagged as inappropriate. show We need to get back to traditional, biblical marriages - like the marriages of Abraham, King David, or Gideon. hide

  • Tue Aug 25, 2009 6:59 pm Agree: 54   Disagree: 9

    Flagged as inappropriate. show Christianity: The belief that a walking dead Jewish deity who was his own father although he always existed, commits suicide, although he didn't really die, in order to give himself permission not to send you to an eternal place of torture that he created for you, but instead to make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh, drink his blood, and telepathically promise him you accept him as your master, so he can cleanse you of an evil force that is present in mankind because a woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree. Faffy hide

Please help us to monitor our message boards by flagging comments that are unlawful, harmful, threatening, abusive, harassing, defamatory, vulgar, obscene, libelous, hateful, or racially, ethnically or otherwise objectionable.
Contact Us if you have any questions, comments, or concerns.
Comment on this story
ID Password

Don't have a Christian Post ID? Signing up is easy. Click Here

  • icon1
  • icon2
  • icon3
  • icon4
  • icon5
The Christian Post reserves the right to terminate the account of any User who violates our Terms of Use.
Also on CP
Advertisement
Advertisement
CP Shopping
  • Jewelry
  • Health
  • Gifts
  • DVD
  • Coins

Bracelets | Chains | Crosses | Earrings | Gemstone |

Featured contents & Giveaways
Joolwe :
Cross-pendant necklace
Zondervan

Struggling to succeed in the Nashville music scene, talented singer/songwriter Parker James finds the competition fierce even deadly. A young woman's murder, industry corruption, a

Featured Advertiser Links