moment of silence is just sneeking prayer threw the back door.
It's like the I.D. thing.
What kids need is a moment of science.

Despite a long battle fighting to prevent mandatory prayer–err, I mean a mandatory “moment of silence” in Texas public schools, a court ruling decided students not wishing to waste their valuable time so that Christians have time to pray to their imaginary friends should either shut up or shut up.

A three-judge panel from the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans upheld a district court ruling, saying the law is constitutional because it expressly allows for any silent use of the period, either religious or nonreligious.

The 2003 law allows children to “reflect, pray, meditate or engage in any other silent activities” for one minute at the beginning of each school day.



Of course no informed individual can honestly claim that it is an important part of a child’s education and a beneficial use of our tax dollars to give the students quiet time. In fact, I would very much like to hear why so many people were SOOOOOOOOO passionate in fighting for mandatory “shut your mouth” time (more so than for better textbooks or for better resources), because they can’t give a reason as this is just a thinly veiled excuse to give the children of Christian parents preferential treatment. In fact, it’s so thinly veiled that prayer is even mentioned in the law.

Here’s an article that supports the new law:

In the one minute wedged between the pledge to Texas and American flags and the school day, Christine Michael prays to God for safety and guidance.

“To be watched over throughout the day and the week to be protected, not just for me, but for everyone,” said Michael, an 18-year-old senior at West Brook High School and outspoken Christian (which, incidentally, is also the pronunciation of his name).

With or without the state-mandated minute of silence, Michael said he would still pray each morning, but the dedicated quiet time gives him a moment to focus.

“It’s not that I’ve been told to do that or someone has asked me to do it,” he said. “It’s just what I feel I should do.”

So if this student would be praying with or without the law why was the law forcing everyone else to let her focus necessary??

Oh, and here’s the kicker:

Circuit Judge Edith Brown Clement noted the lawmaker who sponsored the moment of silence bill expressed a desire to add prayer to Texas’ existing statute after the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals found a similar law in Virginia was constitutional.


I hope Texas students decide to practice their mime or juggling lessons in front of the students of Christian parents, especially if they’re terrible jugglers and stand beside those other students.

So penn and teller are gods.

They do miracles all the time.

I knew it.

So god talks to this guy then aparently gives him the ok to let people know he talked to him, but tells him not to put his name on it?
So god wanted people to know he was talking to people, but didnt want people to know he was talking to that guy.

constitutional rights and freedom?!

When did we all have that?
And it will get much worse before it ever gets better. (if it does)

Thats just stupid.
She's not in the ghetto, and she has 2 parents that make money.
So it not even close to the same thing.
I'll give you that Sarah is dumb white trash with money, but she still does not live in the ghetto.

Right, it's the god of the gaps.
As soon as we say I Don't Know to something then there are some that say that's where god takes over, that is until science shows otherwise.
But then something else happens that science says I Don't Know and the religious are right there screamming god until once again science prooves them wrong.
This has gone on sense our beginnings, and will continue until we shake that evolutionaly trait of believeing there is a god that spins the earth and shoots lightening when he's angry.

Exactly

is the post to long?
It's a realy cool read I promise.lol

one reason why I believe Christ did not Rise from the DEAD.



Zero credible evidence.

If I can not help, I try and comfort in what ever way I can.

yep, no matter how many people die of aids in Africa they still will not let them where condoms.
Yeah, tradition is wonderfull.

Tradition uber allas!!

How can you be 100% sure you are right and then say there is a possibillity that you are wrong?
That realy does not make much sense.
I admit that I may be wrong.
I don't think I am but I could be.
I know the evidence leans toward me being right.

A belief in God is deeply embedded in the human brain, which is programmed for religious experiences, according to a United States study.

Scientists searching for the neural "God spot", which is supposed to control religious belief, believe several areas of the brain form the biological foundations of religious belief.

The researchers said their findings supported the idea that the brain had evolved to be sensitive to any form of belief that improved the chances of survival, which could explain why a belief in God and the supernatural became so widespread in human evolutionary history.

"Religious belief and behaviour are a hallmark of human life, with no accepted animal equivalent, and found in all cultures," said Professor Jordan Grafman, from the US National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke in Bethesda, near Washington.

"Our results are unique in demonstrating that specific components of religious belief are mediated by well-known brain networks and they support contemporary psychological theories that ground religious belief within evolutionary-adaptive cognitive functions."

research finds faith hard wired brain belief god deeply embedded human which programmed religious experiences according united states study scientists searching neural god spot which supposed control religious belief believe several"

Scientists are divided on whether religious belief has a biological basis.

Some evolutionary theorists have suggested that Darwinian natural selection may have put a premium on individuals if they were able to use religious belief to survive hardships that may have overwhelmed those with no religious convictions.

Others have suggested that religious belief is a side effect of a wider trait in the human brain to search for coherent beliefs about the outside world. Religion and belief in God, they argue, are just a manifestation of this intrinsic, biological phenomenon that makes the human brain so intelligent and adaptable.

The latest study, published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, involved analysing the brains of volunteers, who had been asked to think about religious and moral problems and questions. For the analysis, researchers used a functional MRI machine, which can identify the most active regions of the brain.

They found that people of different religious persuasions and beliefs, including atheists, tended to use the same electrical circuits in the brain when solving a moral conundrum as well as when dealing with issues related to God.

The study found that several areas of the brain were involved in religious belief, one within the frontal lobes of the cortex - which are unique to humans - and another in the more evolutionary-ancient regions deeper inside the brain, which humans share with apes and other primates, Professor Grafman said.

"There is nothing unique about religious belief in these brain structures. Religion doesn't have a 'God spot' as such, instead it's embedded in a whole range of other belief systems in the brain that we use every day," Professor Grafman said.

The search for the God spot has in the past led scientists to many different regions of the brain.

An early contender was the brain's temporal lobe, a large section that sits over each ear, because temporal-lobe epileptics suffering seizures in those regions frequently reported intense religious experiences.

One of the principal exponents of this idea was Vilayanur Ramachandran, from the University of California, San Diego, who asked several of his patients with temporal-lobe epilepsy to listen to a mixture of religious, sexual and neutral words while measuring their levels of arousal and emotional reactions. Religious words elicited an unusually high response in these patients.

This work was followed by a study where scientists tried to stimulate the temporal lobes with a rotating magnetic field produced by a "God helmet". Michael Persinger, from Laurentian University in Ontario, found he could artificially create the experience of religious feelings - the helmet-wearer reported being in the presence of a spirit or having a profound feeling of cosmic bliss.


Dr Persinger said about eight in every 10 volunteers reported quasi-religious feelings when wearing his helmet. However, when Professor Richard Dawkins, an evolutionist and renowned atheist, wore it during the making of a BBC documentary, he famously failed to find God, saying the helmet only affected his breathing and his limbs.

Other studies of people taking part in Buddhist meditation suggested the parietal lobes at the upper back region of the brain were involved in controlling religious belief, in particular the mystical elements that gave people a feeling of being on a higher plane during prayer.

Andrew Newberg, from the University of Pennsylvania, injected radioactive isotope into Buddhists at the point at which they achieved meditative nirvana. Using a special camera, he captured the distribution of the tracer in the brain, which led the researchers to identify the parietal lobes as playing a key role during this transcendental state.

Professor Grafman was more interested in how people coped with everyday moral and religious questions.

He said that the latest study suggested the brain was inherently sensitive to believing in almost anything if there were grounds for doing so, but when there was a mystery about something, the same neural machinery was co-opted in the formulation of religious belief.

"When we have incomplete knowledge of the world around us, it offers us the opportunities to believe in God. When we don't have a scientific explanation for something, we tend to rely on supernatural explanations," said Professor Grafman, who believes in God.

"Maybe obeying supernatural forces that we had no knowledge of made it easier for religious forms of belief to emerge.

Actually thats not realy true,
Only one was original the others were just a Plagiarism of Mathew.
And that was done many years after jesus' death.

I like you.

Why you angry?

This is a fourm for people to express their feelings and ideas about religion or lack there of.

Well said.

Saying I hate the sin but not the sinner is the exact same thing.

I am not wrong.

Since the “Four Horsemen” of atheism have had their books on the top of the charts, Christians and even some atheists claim that any atheist who criticizes Christianity or calls Christianity out for the evil that it preaches are themselves intolerant bigots. To this, I always say the same thing. I hate Christianity, not Christians. We don’t choose what we believe. We have reasons to believe what we believe (even if those reasons are not reasonable).

There are many reasons why Christians believe what they believe. Some are indoctrinated at a young age, some were manipulated out of fear, guilt, despair, etc., and some are brought to Christianity through some other sort of emotional experience. It isn’t their fault that they don’t question their beliefs or that they believe in a ridiculous bronze aged mythology. So I have nothing against Christians as people. In fact, I think most Christians are very good people, who believe very ridiculous things which sometimes cause them to do very evil things all in the name of their deity of choice.

Christianity, on the other hand is not a person, it is the religious system of belief (relationship with God) and the beliefs based on the Bible which has continued to refine themselves for over 2000 years for the express purpose of converting people and spreading itself like a virus. This system has discovered which buttons to push on whom and exactly how and when to push those buttons. The sad part is that even the people pushing those buttons don’t see it as doing anything dishonest or immoral.

So I can’t even blame Pat Robertson or James Dobson. They have been tricked by the system of Christianity (i.e. other Christians who have also been tricked by the system). They really have no malice in their heart. Even Fred Phelps doesn’t hate “fags” because he is a hateful person, he hates “fags” because he believes that his God punishes him because he allows “fags” to sin. If you truly believed that the fate of your eternal life rests in the hands of pleasing your deity, you would do whatever hateful thing you thought your deity would want you to do. That doesn’t make you a bad person, just and dangerous person.

But the point here is that I don’t blame Christians, I blame Christianity. My view on this is similar (ironically enough) to the Christian view of loving the sinner and hating the sin. In this case, the sin is Christianity as a belief system. So you won’t hear me (or read me in this case) say that Christians in general are stupid or dumb (some particular Christians maybe, but more often than not they are just lazy and ignorant) or that they have no rights to believe in stupid or dumb belief systems.

They have every right to believe whatever ridiculous thing they wish to believe. But I think it is important to point out to them just how ridiculous those beliefs are and to point out that their beliefs are dangerous to others. If they have the right to force their beliefs on everyone else than I have the right to fight back though education. If they have the right to preach their system of belief, than I have the right to criticize their system of belief. That doesn’t make me hateful of them as people nor does it make me intolerant of their beliefs. I fully support their right to preach, but they don’t seem to respect my right to criticize their ridiculous bronze aged fiction.