Lenoir City High School won't publish...

Lenoir City High School won't publish atheist student's editorial on religion in schools

There are 2050 comments on the Knoxville News Sentinel story from Feb 23, 2012, titled Lenoir City High School won't publish atheist student's editorial on religion in schools. In it, Knoxville News Sentinel reports that:

Krystal Myers, editor of the school paper at Lenoir City High School, has run afoul of school administrators because of her editorial entitled "No Rights: The Life of an Atheist." Schools Director Wayne Miller said it was the decision of the school authorities not to allow publication of Myers' editorial because of the potential for disruption in ... (more)

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Knoxville News Sentinel.

Since: Apr 08

Corby, UK

#1640 Apr 11, 2012
LornaDune wrote:
If I may ask a question...
If as an Atheist you do not believe in anything except evolution and that once we die we just dont exist anymore past that time. Can you be sure that whatever it is that make you "you " and me "me"will not exist again?
Like when your body dies might there be one little cell left that would start "you" up again?
I guess what I wonder is if we just are because we are and we were never really born but we die, how do we know we wont ever exist again if we existed this time...the part that makes me "me" would wonder about that.
Why do so many Christian assume that only atheists believe in evolution?

The reality is that the majority of the world's Christians believe in evolution.
Fat Albert

Shelbyville, TN

#1641 Apr 11, 2012
Let me answer the question. Atheist don't have a clue to what they believe. Can't you see that by their post?
Amused

Lowell, MA

#1642 Apr 11, 2012
Khatru wrote:
<quoted text>
Why do so many Christian assume that only atheists believe in evolution?
The reality is that the majority of the world's Christians believe in evolution.
Even the pope has conceded on evolution. One would have to be pretty retrograde in their thinking if even the catholic church is more progressive than them.

Since: Apr 08

Corby, UK

#1643 Apr 11, 2012
Amused wrote:
<quoted text>
Even the pope has conceded on evolution. One would have to be pretty retrograde in their thinking if even the catholic church is more progressive than them.
Absolutely!

Given that Catholics represent the majority of Christians then it's safe to say that most Christians believe in evolution.

It's quite possible that the world's Catholics outnumber the world's Atheists. This would mean that more Christians believe in evolution than Atheists - a fact that the fundies will find hard to accept so they'll just ignore it.
Roxy

Knoxville, TN

#1644 Apr 11, 2012
Amused wrote:
<quoted text>
It's an open forum, and the answer should be the same no matter who asks the question. Very simply, the question is: do you have any proof of the existence of Moses, apart from the bible?
The point of my longer post was simply that if Moses existed and the biblical account of his exploits was anywhere near accurate, he would have been a major figure in Egyptian history. Yet, he is not mentioned by Egyptian sources from that time, or in histories of Egypt. The omission of that which would be expected to figure prominently in such histories if it were true, is strong circumstantial evidence that the biblical account of Moses is a myth. Using the bible to prove the truth of its content is merely circular reasoning. Do you have anything outside that closed loop to prove your point?
I'm not nearly as well versed in ancient history as you seem to be, but weren't there several prominent rulers, pharoahs, etc. whose actual existance was not discovered until modern times because the people of the day tried to erase every evidence the lived because they hated them for one reason or another.
Don't you think that could be the case with someone like Moses? Although there archaeological findings that give evidence of history recorded in the Pentateuch.
Roxy

Knoxville, TN

#1645 Apr 11, 2012
Even us Morons know that caterpillers evolve into butterflies, tadpoles evolve into frogs.. How come there are still caterpillers evolving into butterflies and tadpoles evolving to frogs. Shouldn't they have moved on by now. And why do Bluebirds only mate with Bluebirds and Robins only with Robins. And what did happen to the Unicorn anyway. Did he evolve into a horse and disappear?
dumbfounded

Lebanon, TN

#1646 Apr 11, 2012
huh. this thread is making me more dumb. i can't tell if the whole "robins mate with robins" thing is a racist comment, an insidious misunderstanding of evolution, or what. let x = e^{i\pi}+1 and be done with it, where x also equals "religious sponsorship by the govt"
Roxy

Knoxville, TN

#1647 Apr 11, 2012
I think all you eggheads...those that believe in gods and those that don't should admit that none of you know much compared to what there is to know. Probably you are all related to me somewhere along the evolutionary scale or the biblical family tree...nobody has the answers about everything for sure except that we are here and we will die somehow someday.
Live and let die, I say!

“Citizen_Patriot_ Voter_Atheist!”

Since: May 09

Earth,TX

#1648 Apr 11, 2012
LornaDune wrote:
If I may ask a question...
If as an Atheist you do not believe in anything except evolution and that once we die we just dont exist anymore past that time. Can you be sure that whatever it is that make you "you " and me "me"will not exist again?
Like when your body dies might there be one little cell left that would start "you" up again?
I guess what I wonder is if we just are because we are and we were never really born but we die, how do we know we wont ever exist again if we existed this time...the part that makes me "me" would wonder about that.
A neverending you, LOL! You must be terrified of living.

You are not going to be able to grasp this, but (now I am going to be real careful in saying this) the word 'atheist' simply means 'not theist'. That is what the "a" on the word "theist" does. It just makes it understood, that the atheist is not a theist.

Evolution has nothing to do with the "a" being on the word "theist". If you want to connect the word 'evolution' to an actual person, I suggest you pull it as far as possible away from the people called evolutionists. And find someone who is in no way part of the words meaning, then tie the word to them and ask them to validate the beliefs you just created for them. Sort of like you have just done.
LornaDune

Knoxville, TN

#1649 Apr 11, 2012
Reason Personified wrote:
<quoted text>A neverending you, LOL! You must be terrified of living.
You are not going to be able to grasp this, but (now I am going to be real careful in saying this) the word 'atheist' simply means 'not theist'. That is what the "a" on the word "theist" does. It just makes it understood, that the atheist is not a theist.
Evolution has nothing to do with the "a" being on the word "theist". If you want to connect the word 'evolution' to an actual person, I suggest you pull it as far as possible away from the people called evolutionists. And find someone who is in no way part of the words meaning, then tie the word to them and ask them to validate the beliefs you just created for them. Sort of like you have just done.
If atheists don't believe in god and don't believe in evolution what else is there?

“Fortes Fortuna Juvat, ”

Since: Dec 09

Wichita. Ks.

#1650 Apr 11, 2012
LornaDune wrote:
<quoted text>
If atheists don't believe in god and don't believe in evolution what else is there?
Life.
LornaDune

Knoxville, TN

#1651 Apr 11, 2012
Yeah!

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#1652 Apr 11, 2012
Behind closed doors wrote:
As for wanting to "stamp out" any other point of view...I never knew anyone saw Christian Evangelism as a threat to anyones choice to believe whatever they choose.
I have no idea to what you are referring. Please try using the REPLY button. It recopies the post you are critiquing. This is all I saw: http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/atheism/T... Posting like that is wasting your time. Please repost it again properly - with the comment you referenced included as a quote in small, gray italics - or just shit can the question.
Behind closed doors wrote:
Your heart is hardened even to the thinking of anyone whose intentions are good intentions if those intentions include faith.
My heard is hardened? Only Christians talk like that. I don't care about your intentions. I'm glad they're good, but glad for you, not me. It doesn't matter to me.

And you continue to make it personal. Like millions of others, I have no respect for your religion, or for faith. You seem to think that I should. I happen to consider your religion a noxious political force and a societal burden, and faith to be a terrible idea, which you apparently consider indicative of an unjustly belligerent attitude - reason to begin commenting you think is wrong with me rather than addressing my grievance. In my opinion, that is a poor strategy for you. Besides allowing me to pound your religion without rebuttal, by engaging me judgmentally rather than my ideas with your own, you guarantee that you cannot profit from the encounter.
Behind closed doors wrote:
Trying to find common ground with you is a waste of my time and yours.
Yes, your time probably was wasted.

It's easy to find common ground. We both want the best possible world. We want people to be happy. We believe that that depends in part on the ethics of the society. We both believe that people should have various freedoms including religious freedom. There's where we part. Why was this difficult or necessary?

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#1653 Apr 11, 2012
Amused wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually, I think that despite what they say about wanting to spread the 'good word' to everyone, most religious people need the us vs. them exceptionalism to feel good about themselves, and a whole world of just 'us' with no 'them' would be horrible for them because the would have no one to feel superior to.
Agreed. They will always scapegoat somebody - unbelievers, "abortionists," gays, feminists, Muslims - whatever.

But that doesn't change the fact of the hypocrisy of the Christian calling an unbeliever a bigot for preferring that Christianity disappear from the world, when he would presumably like to see atheism be nonexistent. Nor that either is a bigot for feeling that way about an ideology, as one cannot show bigotry to a nonliving thing.

Richardfs

“Formerly "Richard"”

Since: Mar 12

In the beginning e=mc^2

#1654 Apr 11, 2012
Behind closed doors wrote:
<quoted text>
No, because I think an unborn baby is a human life. If it is wrong to kill a baby outside the womb, why is it not wrong to kill a baby inside the womb.
But, until I would be willing to devote my life to making sure that unwanted child will be born into a situation where he will be loved and cared for, I'm not sure I would have the right to stand outside a clinic with a protest sign either.
I don't. Know for sure that God would not rather that baby go on to Heaven. Either way I believe there are limits built into his plan that will see ultimate justice for all who are born into this world.
Still no response to my question.

“Citizen_Patriot_ Voter_Atheist!”

Since: May 09

Earth,TX

#1655 Apr 11, 2012
LornaDune wrote:
<quoted text>
If atheists don't believe in god and don't believe in evolution what else is there?
Some atheist, and some theist believe in evolution, but evolution has nothing to do with being atheist or not being atheist.
And what else is there?
Duh, life, love, family, friends, education, work, play. An everyday celebration of humanity. No fears, no dogmas, no creeds, no limitations. Life is what we make of it, and we choose to live among our peers as rational human beings. We work, we pay taxes, we obey the laws, we offer no hurt to our fellow man, we are responsible for our earth and it's resources. We teach our children to love, to respect, to earn and to dance. What else is there?
Should we bow to an ancient god who would make us eat our children, a god who was beaten by his own claimed, creation? A god who had Adam try to find his mate from among the animals?

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#1656 Apr 12, 2012
Behind closed doors wrote:
Greater is He that is in me than he that is duping you. Your choice!
Nonsense. There is no evidence for either your god or your devil, just a book of fables. And even that makes your claims suspect. Perhaps you really had better have another look at that relationship a little better :

[1] For starters, the red one seems to be in charge, as he gets the best of everything. He get's two realms, earth and hell, compared to Jehovah's one. And he gets over ninety percent of the souls.

[2] Plus, Satan seems more powerful, as he, but not Jehovah, is capable of being in the presence of sin. Man, incidentally, also possesses that super-power apparently lacking only in Jehovah.

A few more things about Jehovah:

[3] He has lied at least twice (will return soon, and whatever you pray for you shall have).

[4] And a third of the angels, who knew him personally, were unimpressed, rebelled and left.

[5] He has apparently maliciously seeded the earth with deceptions like fossil and DNA evidence for evolution.

[6] He had given man reason and then expects him to ignore it. He gave man free will which will cause 90%+ to fall into hell. He gave us lust, then asked us not to express it.

[7] He seems to prefer people who make guesses based on bad evidence over rational people, and he wants them to worship him forever.

[8] His bible is jam-packed with assorted errors.

[9] Jehovah raged and murders unto near sterilization.

The bottom line is that it seems that Jehovah is the underlieutenant of the red one, and that he has some terrible flaws - reason to distrust him, and to be wary of him.
Behind closed doors wrote:
Nor did I have any idea anyone saw Christians as feeling superior. Quite the contrary.
You don't claim superiority? Good one. How about, "Greater is He that is in me than he that is duping you." Where do you get the nerve? There is nothing better in you than me.

As I alluded earlier, you could learn a LOT if you had the skin to face it, but I don't think you do. You take the criticisms of your religion personally, and the garbage it teaches you and shrink from them - like you being filled with a better nature than I am, or like that vile Revelations 21:8 scripture that equates people like me with murderers and cowards. You do feel superior to murderers and cowards, don't you?

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#1657 Apr 12, 2012
Behind closed doors wrote:
Work with me here. Give me the benefit of the doubt that I, like you, am a decent and well meaning human being.
There you go again - making it personal. It's not about YOU feeling superior. It's your religion - it's what it teaches billions of people, who then go out and live as if they are superior to those who don't believe, just as you have done.

But you think that YOU rather than your religion are the target of that criticism in this thread, and that YOU have to defend your sense of egalitarianism against charges of feeling superior, which were directed at your dogma, not YOU.

You imply that if people would just recognize that you have no explicit or conscious sense of your superiority as a saved and heaven-bound creature that is filled with a better spirit, that the negativity my abate. But I'll say it yet again - it's not about you, and there is nothing that you can do to mitigate the hostility that is justly due your church.

I doubt that anybody in your world apart from the unbelievers posting here would be comfortable telling you these things about how your church and religion are perceived if they knew you personally and had to continue interacting with you in the future - not unbelieving family, friends, neighbors, or coworkers. I wouldn't. I just spent several hours in a car with a conservative Christian friend that I haven't known long, somebody my wife and I got to know through a gourmet cooking club.

We discussed economics. He's still a supply sider who told me what a genius Laffer was and what a putz Keynes was - standard conservative boilerplate. And right on schedule, he began touting consumption taxes over income taxes. He's as indoctrinated as anybody. But I couldn't really tell him what I thought, other than that I am liberal and disagreed. There was so much that coud be said, but my wife would kill me if I alienated him over something so irrelevant to both of us. When he asked me what I lie to do with my time (we're both retirees and American expatriates living abroad), I mentioned these message boards, and how much I enjoyed thinking and writing about religion and secularism. He's a Christian. I told him that I am a skeptic and unbeliever, and I dared go no farther. There is no way to share these ideas with people that you have to get along with unless you water them down to the point of them being inadequate to describe the actual antipathy that people like me feel for his church.

But you and I have a different relationship. You have the opportunity to hear the truth - if you can stomach it. Or not.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#1658 Apr 12, 2012
cujo wrote:
So just to be clear, you are willing to stand up with the secularists and fight against the anti-abortion legislation that so many states are implimenting?
Behind closed doors wrote:
No, because I think an unborn baby is a human life. If it is wrong to kill a baby outside the womb, why is it not wrong to kill a baby inside the womb.
And that is your right.

But I know why you think that way. I know where you heard that idea. How? Because if I assembled the next five hundred people that agreed with you that a fetus is a baby, and who used that language about human life being sacred, I have zero doubt that at most one wouldn't be a church going, born-again Christian, most of whom would vote to make abortion a crime - premeditated murder - of they could. That is also their legal right.

But we wish that they would confine their religious sensibilities to their own lives. They won't. Even those of you who don't actively work against unbelievers who choose to live outside of Christianity and its teachings, and who want the choice about an abortion to be made by the mother, and not some coven of priests - even you refuse to help her have and keep that right. And that is your right.

But fighting you tooth and nail is our right. Resenting you for choosing to impose your beliefs on our women - such as my wife or daughters - is our right. Telling you how we feel about you thinking that your beliefs are so superior that they should be imposed even on others who don't share them and determine their options even is also our right - no!- our duty. I owe that to the women I love.
Behind closed doors wrote:
I believe there are limits built into his plan that will see ultimate justice for all who are born into this world.
That's nice. Then there is no reason for you to be concerned about the injustices in the world. As a Christian, you can assume that it will all be made fair after death, and that justice is your god's concern, not yours. So, I guess that we can't expect you to be too concerned about things like East Timor, Rwanda and Darfur - because your god has a plan, right?

=========

There you go - two more takes on the "belligerent" unbeliever's perspective on Christianity, and why many of us consider it so toxic.

Do you remember asking, "Strange. You are so concerned about how Christians live our lives. Have you asked yourself why that is? I wouldn't waste a minute worrying about what you do or do not believe in"? Well, this is why. For starters, too many of you worry more about the unborn than the living, and you appear to have zero idea how much of that is due to your church's teaching.

These are good reasons for fighting your church and its ability to determine anything.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#1659 Apr 12, 2012
Regarding my comment, "Because if I assembled the next five hundred people that agreed with you that a fetus is a baby, and who used that language about human life being sacred, I have ..." - I should have elaborated that I am referring to people who say things like that, but turn out to only consider fetuses sacred human life - the ones who hate funding child health programs.

Are Iraqi families also sacred human life? How about death row inmates? How about the Rwandans? Most Christians don't give a crap about any of that, which is what I meant when referring to people who use the language that human life is sacred - people who merely give it lip service. They;re usually Christians.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Sports Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News UCLA FOOTBALL NOTEBOOK: Neuheisel says Prince w... (Sep '10) 1 hr SomePhaarts 32,913
News Banner moment: Chicago Cubs finally raise champ... 2 hr Banner Phart 4
News Ranking the 10 Most Trusted Defensemen in the NHL 3 hr Are Phartse 9
News White Sox field an outfield full of Garcias 11 hr AgentPhartss 2
News Raiderettes Visit Japan - Group 2 (Feb '06) 12 hr More phartz 214
wHERE IS rYAN fULTON 21 hr One phartsx 2
News Trotz: Caps victim of 'strange goals' as series... Fri Name phart 4
More from around the web