On Atheism...

The sign reads:

"There are no gods, no devils, no angels, no heaven or hell. Religion is but myth and superstition that hardens our hearts and enslaves our minds."

This is the message that the Washington Supreme Court decided MUST be allowed the same space in the Capitol Rotunda as a nativity scene and a Christmas tree. The decision was made because ALL "religions" have the same freedom in the US.

I am MORE than willing to admit that atheists have ALL the same rights is I do, as a practicing Catholic Christian. I realize that my Roman Catholic faith has no more rights or privileges in the eyes of the US Government than does any of the 17,478 OTHER Christian denominations currently recognized in the world, or the 1,450 NON-Christian religions. ANY atheist in this country has the very same RIGHT to free speech as I do.

However, NO ONE is going to convince me that it is RIGHT, CORRECT or morally ACCEPTABLE to call "atheism" a religion, or to offer it's views as PROTECTED as "religious" in any way, shape or form.

There are a lot of crack-pot faiths out there... faiths were believers are bitten by poisonous snakes, or where sex is a liturgical practice, or where the hatred of another human being is a required tenant of belief simply based on race or ethnicity... and maybe these are all "religions" in the eyes of the Federal government.

But NOT atheists. You can't belong to an "atheist religion"... and anyone that claims to is simply trying to get a tax-exempt status. SO, no atheist has any protection under the "Freedom of Religion", and no claim can be made based on that Right (meaning their claim to a Right of Freedom "FROM" Religion).

There is NO "separation of church and state" and the 1st Amendment is clearly (literally, in fact) intended to keep the STATE out of RELIGION... not the other way around.

If, according to the Constitution of the United States of America, no impediment can be made on the free practice of religion in this country by the government, then no restriction can be made on the free practice of religion by those who hold no religion as sacred, either. If a Muslim is offended by the representation of Joseph or Mary because it violates Qu'ronic laws against idolatry, and he can't avoid seeing them because they are displayed at his place of work or where his children go to school... then we have a case for the courts to review. If an atheist is offended because someone chooses to show the figures of the Nativity at Christmas, it is no more an infringement of his Rights than a display of the busts of the Founding Fathers would be. Nothing more than carved and painted images of human shapes and ideas... thus constituting no offensive act, intentional or otherwise.

What could be more pathetic than this kind of infantile effort? This is a STUNNING example of the repressed, bitter liberal wasting his energy and efforts on a cause they can't possibly win... because it is untenable from the start.