During a recent airing, talk show host Dennis Prager spoke to a man who apologized to his son for “giving a worse America to you than my father gave to me.”

A worse America? This wasn’t a new concept to me. Having grown up all around conservatives, I’ve heard this complaint many, many times. People lament what they perceive to be a decline in American values over the last forty years.

Although there may be a small amount truth in the statement, I have to wonder if it is really so, overall.

I mean, I’m sure the African Americans who, at one time, had to drink from different water fountains and go to different schools would disagree. And I’m sure the women who weren’t able to vote or leave abusive marriages would disagree. I’m sure the hispanics in my hometown, who were not allowed in the public swimming pools, would disagree.

I bet the girls who were blamed for their own rapes would disagree. I bet the parents of depressed suicidal teens, who were told their children had lost their seat in heaven, would disagree. I bet the children with ADHD, who were smacked with a whip in school for not controlling themselves, would disagree.

I wonder if the “love children”, the “bastards” who were labeled dirty for coming too soon, would agree? Or what about those permanently paralyzed by polio, before there was a vaccine? How about the single mothers who couldn’t get a decent enough job to feed their family?

We could go back a few more generations, to the lawlessness of the old west,
the ruling gangs of New York, the slaves of the south. Child labor? Public education by way of the Bible? Or what about no public education?

Oh, I know we could come up with an entire second list of injustices we have overcome. Improvements in American values.

Yes, there may be spots where America has done a nose-dive. But does it really balance out to a net loss? I don’t think so. I’d say that for many, America is a much better, safer place. It is a wonderful time to be raising children.

Then this morning Israel said, “You know, someone was just telling me that in Portland the government put a bunch of yellow bikes around the city so that anyone can just grab one and ride it to where ever they’re going, then leave it there for someone else to use.

And I thought, Wow, yet another reason to go visit Portland.

I’ve been dreaming of a vacation to Portland for a long time now.

When his comment drew my positive response he smiled and added, “I remember a time, a number of years back, when you told me about that bike program and you talked about how wasteful the government was to be buying bikes and handing them out for free.”

Suddenly the idea became familiar. That’s right, I did say that!

That was back in my Rush Limbaugh days! Back when Rush’s Word was the other Word of God. Back when I thought that if global warming really was real, it would just be a part of God’s second coming and the destruction of the earth.

Nothing to worry about.

Tackling pollution was not a priority to me. I guess the ability to see the mountains from my home was not a priority, either. And I didn’t realize my son would have asthma, so there’s another effect of pollution that would have meant little to me.

Thank goodness for the freedom to change our minds.

Note: After doing some minimal research, I have found that it was a non-profit organization that started the bike program. It later received government endorsement and the contribution of a warehouse. All bikes, repairs, and other services were a donation. This should provide solace to any conservative readers who may now be raging at the idea of a government-run bike program.

I envy Europeans in cities where walking is a life-style. I would love for my town to adopt biking as a major mode of transportation, the way Amsterdam has done.

Let me name a few benefits off the top of my head. . . better health, cleaner air, and lower stress levels. Those are just the obvious ones.

In the United States, we did not make ourselves a walking/bicycling society. But given the current climate of social, political, and health trends, maybe now is the time to train a generation of bicycle-commuters.

Last Mother’s Day my husband gave me the gift of my dreams. We went to the bike shop and equipped the entire family with bikes (as much as my three-year-old wanted a bike, and as much as he surprised us by riding circles around the store, we attached a trailer to my bike for him to sit in).

Every weekend we go out together. I take the lead, the kids follow me, and Dad monitors from behind. We leave our neighborhood and cross the major road which leads to an elementary school parking lot, where Dad teaches the kids bicycle tricks, or we go to a greenbelt with sidewalks that wind around. On the way we teach the kids the rules of the road:

1. The side of the road to ride on.
2. Hand signals.
3. Right-of-Way.
4. General traffic rules.

During the week when my husband leaves early to work, I take the kids around the neighborhood. Since Dad is not here to watch from behind, I take up the rear and my eight-year-old son gets to play the leader. Because of this we have always stayed within our own neighborhood and avoided the major road.

I was so proud recently when, after only a few weeks of this practice, I felt Blake was ready to lead us across the main road to the other side. It was a risky venture, but we tried it and succeeded! He did great! We are now one step further in my plan to raise a generation of bicycle-commuters.

We will keep practicing through the summer and then I will take the next step forward when the kids are back to school. I’ll leave the comfort of these two neighborhoods and begin biking my youngest to preschool. I have already made a practice trip to verify the route is bicycle friendly.

Next I will begin making my way down the major roads to learn which have bike paths. I will start training myself to commute to the coffee shop, the scrapbook store, the grocery, and wherever else I think I can ride to. In the meantime I am making note of which roads have bike-paths and which shopping centers have places to hook up the bikes.

Once I’m comfortable biking around my town, my husband and I will start leading the kids around. We’ll teach them how to commute. And we’ll start commuting as a family to our favorite places.

My major goal is for the family to bike the two-and-a-half miles from our house to Tropical Smoothie. We’ll rest for a nice, cold drink, and then ride back home again.

So what do you think? Will you join me in my mission to raise a new generation of bicycle-commuters? Do you think we can transform the American way of getting from Point A to Point B? It doesn’t require a move to Amsterdam. It is a choice.

And if my dream to see bicycling become mainstream is unrealistic it will not take away from the benefits and my own pleasure at being a bicycle commuter. Even if it means being a lone one.

What finally motivated me to get it done? The great founder of COTG, Brent Rasmussen of Unscrewing the Inscrutible (Brent, what do you call yourself in relation to COTG? Probably not the founder?) commented on one of my recent posts and wrote up a little blog entry on AgnosticMom.

That was all the motivation I needed.

Amazing how all this time I’ve considered submitting an article but it just seemed like work I didn’t have time to do. It took, oh, about three minutes to pick the post and send the email.

So maybe I’ll get on the ball and submit all the time.

Anyway, if you don’t know what a blogging carnival is or you’d like to see one that is godless, click here and go have some fun. Get to know some of the other godless bloggers out there.

I thought I’d start off with a bit of drama. Just to get your attention.

We can find a legitimate answer by taking the emotion out of it and giving it a good analysis. Do they hate us, or do they FEAR us? And do they fear us, as individuals, or US as a whole?

AgnosticMom reader, Hifi, twice emphasized an important distinction we have to remember as we discuss how to improve our atheist/agnostic image:

Speaking of the UofM study about the negative view and distrust Americans have for atheists one commentator had this to say, “Agnostics like myself…would very much like to be considered full citizens and participate in American public life. The study found that “negative views about atheists are strong,” but that “survey respondents were not, on the whole, referring to actual atheists they had encountered.”

I reiterate my earlier statement, “In that light, personal revelations will do little to change the dominant view of atheists as the least trusted demographic in America – including the way our friends vote on religious issues. The last thing they will do is consider how promotion of religion by government is going to affect us.”

While you and I may be (or become) successful at winning our neighbors’ hearts, friendship, and even trust, it’s an entirely different story if we are ever to consider a fellow secularist gaining the presidency, or even lower-level government position. A successful “coming-out-of-the-closet” will hardly help us make gains when it comes to public policy that affects us.

It is time to dissect the problem. What do they fear about a secular society and secular influence? I think it is three things.

1) They fear the “removal of God” from the public domain as an abandonment of God, which will result in either his wrath, or in a loss of his protection.
2) They think anger motivates us more than charity, and fear a loss of goodness and good actions.
3) They fear a decrease in morality in our country.

It is the bottom two fears that we have the most control over. If we focus our efforts to improve our image in these two areas first, if we can convince the religious public that the non-religious can maintain a charitable and moral society, the first fear may prove less difficult to overcome.

I want to address morality in a separate post. In fact, I may initiate the topic as my next article in the Humanist News Network. It is a massive topic and I hope to address it over a few different blog entries. Let me just touch on the subject with a skeleton overview and the statement that we need to have a system for identifying moral choices. I cannot think of many other things that anger and scare the religious more than the idea of “Moral Relativism.” Therefore, Moral Relativism is just as much our enemy as it is theirs.

Moral living makes sense for two basic reasons:
1) Humans feel pain and suffering (as well as joy)
2) Humans have a capacity for empathy

We can choose to be moral, not because we hope for eternal blessings and fear eternal punishment, but because we can relate to and empathize with another person’s pain.

We should base our moral choices, not on arbitrary rules from an old book (a few that come to mind: don’t eat pork, don’t drink coffee, don’t flip the lights on the Sabbath, don’t expose your shoulders except when swimming); we should base our choices on whether they will cause others pain. To take it further, we should ask ourselves whether the action we want to take, if everyone were to take the same action in similar circumstances, would increase the overall happiness or the overall suffering in the world.

We will discuss this in detail later, but ultimately we have to show the world that we have a reliable system for making moral choices, a system that will agree with and make logical sense to all people, no matter the religion. We won’t all necessarily agree with the exact choice in every situation. The important thing is that we can show that there are reasons to be moral which extend beyond arbitrary religious rules.

The other image problem has to do with the inaccurate portrayal that some of us project on a regular basis: Anger. I see it in some atheist blogs: Cries for the termination of religion altogether (is that really going to convince religious people that they are safe with us leading?). I see blame against the religious for all of the world’s problems. I see hyperbolic claims about religious people that are simply not true.

Some atheists also project a lopsided amount of anger in the way they choose to demonstrate. The recent “War On Easter” was an example. One blogger I read said she was treating Christians to a taste of their own medicine by putting anti-Jesus literature in the church pews for Easter Sunday. I have never known a Christian to defame another religion’s god in the other religion’s holy chapel. The War On Easter was not a tit-for-tat pay-back game. It was an outrageous assault unlike any actions I have ever seen a Christian take.

It reminds me of a recent “Smut for Smut” campaign where college students set up a booth where they offered to trade smut for smut: They handed porn to anyone who would give them a Bible. The idea was to bring awareness to smutty passages in the Old Testament regarding women, sex, and war. While a genuine discussion with the religious regarding these problems with the Bible could be enlightening and educational to many people, offering pornography in exchange for Bibles only make us look crude and hateful.

On the other hand, we have people like the Ebay atheist, who is actually reaching his hand across the aisle of differences and having a real and positive affect. He is showing concern and striving to understand the religious. In return they are trying to understand him. He is taking a non-offensive, but very bold approach to bridging the gap between us.

Just look at what this article had to say about Hemant Mehta, the Ebay Atheist:

The stunt has racked up several ad campaigns’ worth of exposure for the product he was actually marketing: atheism as a wholesome American way of life.

A dedicated nonbeliever, Mehta auctioned his soul on the following terms: For every $10 bid to win, he would attend an hour of services at a local house of worship of the winner’s choosing. He promised to keep an open journal of his experience and an open mind to the possibility of conversion. The bait was the chance to win him over for God, but only the purest of souls could fail to see the hook in Mehta’s own bid to sell atheism as just another strand in our glorious tapestry of beliefs.

I also liked the friendly “demonstration” that gay and lesbian families held for the Easter Egg Hunt at the White House. It was hardly a demonstration at all. No shouting, no accusations. All they did was announce that gay and lesbian families would have a large showing at the White House for the Easter Egg Hunt. And they did! They showed up early to get in. They wore the rainbow-colored flower leis to identify themselves. They were happy and friendly and participated like any other family. They put a good face on gay families. We need to do something like that.

I have an idea of something we can do right away. Something to identify us with our real values. Something that will show that we mean business when it comes to working to solve the world’s problems. And it will be positive! Just give me a few days to present it to you.

In the meantime, clear your calendar for May 4th. Pencil in a two or three hour block for an activity which I will later disclose. Begin thinking about a cause you feel passionate about. I’m not talking about a cause for atheists/agnostics/freethinkers etc. I’m talking about a real problem in the world: hunger, abuse, the child-sex industry, disease. Which one moves you the most? Hold onto that thought and that date. I promise I’ll get back to you later.

I have been struggling to find a reasonable answer to this question. How do atheists/agnostics get people to not despise us? In Texas I merely tell someone I am an atheist and the stereotypes just start coming. Not always, but it takes the liberal/open-minded person to hear me out and then realize that I am atheist for good reasons. Texas is conservative though so that is not typical. My question(maybe a topic) is how do we get xians to just shrug their shoulders when they hear that someone is an atheist/agnostic? As if that proclamation is immaterial and irrelevant.

I’m going to answer this question in two posts. This first one will deal with the personal situation of “coming out” to our friends, since this topic has come up a number of times recently. In second post I will talk more about a long-term plan for improving our public image as a whole.

There are definite things that we, as atheists/agnostics/freethinkers, like to do as activists (some more than others) that will continue to make things worse for us. Trust me . . . having been a religious, political conservative (among mostly other religious, political conservatives) my entire life, I know that some of the things we do only confirms the religious people’s belief that atheists are evil and could bring down the entire stability of the United States. I am confident that there are certain ways for us to communicate, demonstrate, and work for our rights that are more likely to have positive results. That topic will be for next time.

On a personal level, as far as I know, most everyone who knows me is acquainted with my secular stance. To one degree or another, they know some or all of the following about me:

I am raising my children without religion
We are agnostic
I do not believe in the existence of God at all
We do not go to to church on principle
I do not agree with religion
I play a public role in the non-religious community as a writer and a blogger.

Though I live in a conservative, Christian city (with a high Mormon population), I have never had a friend or associate shun me, react negatively (with the exception of a few Mormon friends in the very beginning who expressed sadness, and a couple who offered to take my children to church FOR me . . .grrr). But as a whole, my friends have continued to pursue friendships with me despite our religious differences.

Many AgnosticMom readers have expressed difficulties in this area. They have shared experiences of people losing interest in the friendship as a result of the atheist/agnsotic revelation.

I have no idea if what I do is any different from others who have had problems. Maybe we just interpret our friends’ actions in different ways, effecting the way we treat them? Maybe I am fortunate to live around tolerant people?

I will tell you how I “come out,” and you can decide for yourself if the difference is between the way we say it, the way we interpret our friends, or the friends themselves.

First I need to acknowledge what I DON’T do, which might make a difference. Although my personal beliefs are atheistic, I call myself “agnostic” because it seems to me more philosophically sound. Therefore, I never tell people, “I’m atheist.” Perhaps if I used this label I might get a different reaction because of the stigma associated with it. My previous experiences make me doubt it, though. Still, I am going to use my next few opportunities to tell people I am atheist, just to see if I get a different reaction. After I’ve had a chance to try it a few times, I will report my results!

Let me tell you what I DO do. It varies, depending on whether I am with good friends, or acquaintances whose conversations with me never reach beyond topics of the weather. The situation doesn’t allow for in-depth discussion, making a chance for follow-up questions and understanding difficult. With these acquaintances, I short-cut with, “We are not religious.”

For example, I have a gun-toting, militant-type of Christian neighbor. He has the products of his animals hunts mounted on his living room wall. He skins his prey right on his front driveway. He patrols our suburban neighborhood with a gun on his belt. He is a young Christian father and, except for the animal skinning on the driveway, a good neighbor.

Recently, while making mundane neighborly-talk with Mr. Gun-Rights Conservative, he asked me, “What’s the deal with all the religious names in your family? Israel, Noell, Trinity? Is that coincidence or does it have something to do with your religion?”

I answered with a smile (always with a smile!), “NO, it’s just a coincidence. We’re not religious.”

Surprised, he needed a confirmation, “You’re not?”

Again, with that all-important confident smile, I gave him the confirmation he sought, “No, not at all.”

On the other hand, when my friends are socializing (I am part of a MOMS Club with an evolving membership), I go into more detail when the topic comes up. Again, with that smile, I say, “I am agnostic. I don’t believe in God or religion.” If I get the chance I make sure to tell them my issue with religion is only a matter of beliefs and not a personal grudge for past offenses.

I also make sure to show the same amount of interest in, and respect for, the religious beliefs of my friends as I expect them to show me.

Responses to me are often surprise and curiosity, which I interpret to be positive responses. When there are so few of us, and even fewer of us who are open about our non-beliefs, we have to understand that people have very little exposure to atheists and agnostics. What else can they be but surprised?

I cannot think of a time when someone seemed uncomfortable at learning my stance. Is it because they have enough exposure to me to know I am not a threat to them, their children, nor to society? Is it because of the confidence and smile with which I communicate? (It took me coming out a couple of times before I lost my fear). Is it because I am with a circle of exceptional friends who are comfortable with religious differences? Maybe I interpret certain reactions as positive where others might interpret them negatively?

What do you think?

I am sure that one of the most important things we can all do to improve our image is to start telling our friends, in an positive way, that we are atheists and agnostics. How else will people ever be able to form a positive view of us if they don’t personally know any moral, happy freethinkers? If they know one, they will have their first experience of cognitive dissonance. They will see that, in the case of that one person, the reality does not match up with their view of what an atheist is like. If they know two or three of us, they will have to learn to change their view altogether.

I have started working on Gregg100′s last question from the list he submitted. It was a question about Easter, and how I will explain our celebrating it to our children. Since Easter is just over a month away, I hope you don’t mind, Gregg, if I hold onto it until we get closer to the holiday. In fact, I am considering it for my April HNN article, rather than a regular blog post. I have not yet decided, but it will appear, either here or there, not long before Easter.

And last but not least, I just want to say that I did get over my miniature panic regarding our teenage children visiting churches. Like I said before, I got carried away in the emotions of certain memories. Thankfully I’ve got my crew here at AgnosticMom and you all grounded me with your comments. That’s what our community is here for, right?

So, as I sit on my bed, preparing to shut down my new MacBook Pro laptop which Israel gave me for Valentine’s Day, I just wanted to give a heartfelt thanks to all my readers who leave comments. Your disagreements with me give me a chance to re-evaluate my opinions. Your words of support are as supportive as you mean them to be. Your experiences are sometimes funny, sometimes sad, but always interesting. Your ideas are priceless. Your thoughts are ingenious. We have a good group here.

I feel a desire to respond to almost every comment, but I don’t always have the time when I am reading them. It would also be an over-abundance of ME in the comments area. But whether I respond to your comments or not, please know that I thoroughly enjoy them.

If you have been a silent reader, I hope you will make yourself known and share your thoughts.

I’m going to bed now. I’ll have a my next post ready by midday tomorrow.

Do you point out “In God We Trust” on coins and make an issue of it with children? How do you tell your children to react when they go to school and are asked to pledge allegiance to “one nation, under God”?

I prefer to pick my god-battles, and a statement of supernatural diety on our coins is not one of them. I won’t be pointing it out, and if my children ever ask me about it, I would just explain that our country has a religious majority and a history of both religion and Deism.

I already have two children in school, and they do say the Pledge of Allegiance. Remember, my kids still figure there is an existing god, although whatever that god is like in their minds, they can’t possibly feel it is a great significance in their life. I guess I am approaching the Existence-of-God topic the same way we approach the sex-subject: Give honest answers as their questions come up or as our experiences point in that direction, and in the amounts that they seem ready to digest.

At some point I will teach them the history of The Pledge and how the “Under God” phrase was added in in 1954 I will ask them, “How do you think it made many Americans,who believe in more than one god, feel?” And, “What message did that send to all the families who don’t even believe in a god at all?”

Rather than push an issue onto my kids, I prefer to follow their lead on this. If they want to say The Pledge, they’ll continue to say it. If at some point they want to opt out, I’ll be happy to inform their teachers. If they want to write letters to the local newspaper, the school, or the school board, I’ll help them find the addresses and proof-read their letters. But these actions would stem their own desires, not mine.

I personally would not turn what might be MY issue into my children’s issue, placing a burden on them for a stand they might not be passionate about. The Pledge is an issue I would prefer to let my children decide on their own when they are older.

How should they react when asked to pray for a friend or relative?

Usually a person asks others to pray for them because they are in great distress. I do not feel this is a time to voluntarily vocalize a disbelief in the very thing the distressed person is relying on for help. At the same time we must maintain personal intregity. An appropriate response is, “I am sorry for your difficulties. You will definitely be in my thoughts.”

Rarely would it extend beyond that, but if the person wanted to press the issue, get an actual prayer commitment, then an explanation with an offer for actual help (if applicable) should be enough. “I’m sorry, but I don’t practice prayer or religion. But I would love to help out by (fill in the blank).” I would teach my children to respond the same way.

“I was envisioning a situation wherein you might be at someone’s home for dinner and before the meal, someone says, “Shall we thank God for this food?” and one of your children “blurts out, “We don’t believe in God”" Of course it could be any situation in which someone wishes to invoke some type of reference to God.”

We experience prayer situations a couple of times a month when we have dinner with my in-laws. Two thirds of the family bow their heads and close their eyes, while a third of us (my husband and I are not the only ones who don’t participate for various reasons) stand there quietly watching the group. And sometimes Israel and I wink at each other.

Once in a while the kids fool around and we have to remind them to be quiet while others are praying. That is precisely how I would have my kids behave in all situations in others’ homes or churches while they pray; to give others respect by allowing them to pray without making a scene.

I think respect is the key. Not respect for religion, but respect for other people and their choice to believe in it. Some very intelligent and well-educated people are religious. Also, people we love, like our extended family members, are religious.

As another example, in the Mormon religion, the phrase, “Oh my God,” is almost as offensive as the F-bomb. It can be jolting to the senses for many Mormons. We teach our children not to say it for their grandparents’ sakes. I told them that even though it doesn’t mean anything to us, and so many of their friends say it, we would prefer they don’t because it would really hurt their grandparents if they accidentally said it around them out of habit. It is just our request, not an order. They don’t get in trouble when it comes out by accident.

On the other hand, if my children ever blurt out, “We don’t believe in God,” I can’t imagine being worried about it unless they did it in a manner to make fun of someone else who does. I think I would just smile.

Here is a variation on the subject of prayer and references to God: Blake has a best friend named Zach. Zach spent the night at our house once. When it was time for them to go to bed, I heard Zach telling Blake that they had to say their prayers. Blake told him, “I don’t pray,” but Zach became insistent that Blake wouldn’t go to heaven if he didn’t pray. And Blake was insistent that he doesn’t pray, but he couldn’t get Zach to leave him alone.

I poked my head into the room and said, “Zach, it’s really nice that you want to say your prayers. Our family doesn’t believe you have to pray to go to heaven,” (I said this to reassure my son), “but I understand your family does, so you should go ahead and say your prayers. Don’t worry about Blake.”

So far these types of situations have not caused my children any anxiety. Blake is very confident with how we choose to live our lives. And while we have giggled at a few religious beliefs (he thought it funny that the Bible says God made Eve from one of Adam’s ribs), I have never seen him show disrespect for other people’s choices to worship.

I have one more question to address, regarding Easter, which I will do in a Part 2 post.

I received my first correction! After reading, America In Decline, Skysinger clarified for me that we do not have a cure for polio, just a vaccination. Well, that makes sense, doesn’t it? I’m sure I’ve got many more corrections coming in my blogging future, so I am glad the first one came in such a nice manner; a warm-up. Thanks for your input, Skysinger!

Mary said:

I enjoy reading your blog because, regardless of my religious leanings (I’m still trying to figure that out), I most definitely believe in science as the basis of humanity.

Because my children are not yet in school, I understand that I am now free to remain “blissfully ignorant” of the extent to which religion is impeding true learning in our public schools. But at least I know where in the world (here! and your new column!) to go for an opinion I can respect.

Mary, I’ve wondered if you were even agnostic and what motivates you continue to read my blog! Now I know. I am glad that I don’t offend (at least too much?) my thoughtful and reasonable religious readers. I harp on religion, mainly when it infringes on my life as a secularist. And sometimes I tease and make playful jabs, but I am not trying to convince anyone to leave their religion. I just hope they will understand the plight of the secularists.

As for religion impeding learning in public schools: maybe I’m wrong, but I doubt you will find your California schools as affected as in places like Kansas and Dover. Regardless, the lack of a basic understanding of science is a national dilemna with national consequences to come if we don’t turn it around. I’m glad you and I have a common respect for science.

Speaking of science and American culture, Ron made an interesting observation at his local Barnes&Noble:

I was at Barnes and Noble today – and they moved the Science section, they also reduced it in size. They moved it over near blank journals – where no other literature exists – somewhere west of the bargain books!
There is ONE shelving unit of science books (not including the specific section on physics)! That is 33% the amount of space they give to ‘religious fiction’ (possible oxymoron) – and roughly 20% of the space ‘devoted’ (literally?) to religious books. At Barnes and Noble! The religion shelves are all centrally located in the store, as well – with a good 6 or so signs leading you to them.

It’s unnerving to enter a huge ‘secular’ bookstore and see that the history, and science sections barely add up to the amount of space allotted for religious books.

I am so glad you brought this to our attention. Tami and I were there last night, and realized that ours has an extremely small science section as well. I doubt it reflects Barnes&Noble’s values, rather the demands of the customers. Nobody’s buying science-related books! We have a long way to go. Do you all feel our country is taking giant leaps backwards? (Oooh, wait until you see what I have to blog about next! Look for a future post regarding women. We’re going backwards, people).

Well, I have a few more comments to respond to tomorrow. Thanks for being patient with this unusual weekend format. We’ll be back on track next week lots of hot topics.

At some point, my parents began listening to Rush Limbaugh. He was on two different stations at different times of the day, so we had Rush for 6 hours every day. My parents played him on every radio in the house. No matter where you were, you could hear.

I really can’t live my life without these voices, at least at some point in my day. But I’m not into hearing Rush tell me that my rejection of a belief in God is because I want the ability to be immoral without guilt.

So I have found a more tolerant host. Although I disagree with him seventy percent of the time, I love Dennis Prager. He “prefers clarity over agreement.” And that is what I get from him. Clarity. Not as much agreement.

So this is my third time referring to his show. He provides me much brain food, therefore, you can expect to hear of him more in the future at AgnosticMom.

Dennis Prager spoke of a man who apologized to his son for “giving a worse America to you than my father gave to me.”

Although there may be some truth in the statement, I have to wonder if it is really so, overall. I mean, I’m sure the African Americans who, at one time, had to drink from different water fountains and go to different schools would disagree. And I’m sure the women who weren’t allowed to vote would disagree. I’m sure the hispanics in my hometown, who were not allowed in the public pools, would disagree.

I bet the girls who were blamed for their own rapes would disagree. I bet the parents of depressed suicidal teens, who were told their children had lost their seat in heaven, would disagree. I bet the children with ADHD, who were smacked with a whip in school for not controlling themselves, would disagree.

I wonder if the “love children”, the bastards, who were labled dirty for coming too soon, would agree? Or what about those permanently paralyzed by polio, before there was a cure? How about the single mothers who couldn’t get a decent enough job to feed their family?

We could go back a few more generations, to the lawlessness of the old west,
the ruling gangs of New York, the slaves of the south. Child labor? Public education by way of the Bible? Or what about NO public education?

Yes, there may be spots where America has done a nose-dive down a slippery slope. But does it really balance out to a net loss? I don’t think so. I’d say, for many, America is a much better, safer place.

Pat Robertson is not representative of all Christians. I don’t want you to mistake me for lumping millions of good religous people into the same box as fanatics like Pat. But he does have a huge following who supports his judgemental rantings. If it weren’t for them, he wouldn’t be able to continue this nonsense.

Yesterday I heard one of these nuts call into a radio station, with this comment about Sharon’s stroke, “He’s killed a lot of people. It’s a long time coming.”

It seems Pat has become their modern prophet, speaking for their god, except that his prophecies often come after the fact. This group of fanatical religionists is growing larger and more powerful. They have become bold in their political interference, effectively changing the definition of science for some school boards, convincing pharmacists that they don’t have to fill doctors’ prescriptions if they are religiously opposed to them, and intruding on a married man’s right to make decisions concering his wife who, for years, has been in a vegetative state.

I really don’t care if people want to have outrageous beliefs. But when they are powerful enough to effect the social policy of our country in way that is damaging, we need to reverse the trend. I’m at a loss for how.