In response to "Religion aside, faith perseveres" by Gerald Cox:

All that high-handed rhetorical set up, just to beg the question in favor of God’s existence? Faith, in its dialectical opposition to reason, is utterly worthless as a methodology for determining truth. The object of faith is simply selected, whether it exists or not — indeed, whether it is logically possible or not! Until you demonstrate the existence of the object of your faith, it means absolutely nothing to any reasonable person.

Great article. But as there is hypocrisy in religion, there is hypocrisy in everything. The hypocritical aspect that goes with organized religion has been my main hardship when the question of “what to define myself as” arises. I’ve chosen to just go with believer. A believer that knows that the human race is not the almighty ruler and that there is something, much, much bigger than the “logical and rational” side can comprehend.

In response to "American policy not very 'Christ-like'" by Adam Lichtenheld:

I would not say the values of being kind to others are uniquely Christian.

This is not a Christian nation, Adam — this is a secular nation that has been unfortunately overrun with religious rhetoric, and whether it is used for good or bad, it alienates those who are not Christian.

Acting for the good of humanity and a sense of support for the oppressed, whether they are gay, black, female, or even atheist (fun fact: more people would elect a gay president than an atheist president) are also central, I think, to the tenets of secular humanism, which I as an atheist strongly support.

Think about your own biases and consider whether you could have written this article from a more secular standpoint.

In response to "Discovery highlights moral, scientific boundaries" by Andy Granias:

Andy, you raise some good points. Every society has an ever-changing scale of what’s moral and what’s not. Fifty years ago, it was immoral for blacks and whites to use the same drinking fountain, it was immoral for women to wear pants and it was ok to beat your children.

What might be immoral today could be commonplace in the future. Who knows, 20 years from now, every Super Bowl half-time show could have a breast pasty on full display.

In response to "America, stop kneeling at altar of religious insanity" by Kyle Szarzynski:

Well, I can see why Pat Robertson and his like annoy you. However, I am a Christian and I can honestly say that: a) the earth is millions of years old and the entire bible supports the fact b) communists hate feminism so that is a ridiculous statement c) there is no rapture, it is a lie that began with an insane Scottish woman in the 1800’s and d) not embracing or agreeing with something does not make you “phobic” of said thing If it did, those who lean left would be aptly named Christophobics or Foxnewsaphobics.

In response to "Catholic group deserves funding, at least for now" by Jason Smathers:

From everything I’ve heard and read about the RCF case, it has not been about religious discrimination, but about interpretations of significant additional components. Let’s focus on the relevant facts.

In response to "Religious education offers values, not indoctrination" by Kate Maternowski:

Here’s a question to ponder: can any value be desirable when that value stems from palpably false claims about the nature of the universe?

In response to "Religion: Does it benefit society?" by Bassey Etim:

What theists and atheists alike must realize is that religion is a tool — it can be used for good or for bad; just like science, just like any other system of understanding. Atheism has been used to justify terror and horror and so has religion. But, good can come from both of them. In the end, we need to allow individuals to understand things through the lens they choose while ensuring that everyone has that opportunity. This isn’t about “truth,” its about using the tools we have in a way that allows all to pursue what they desire.

Division. That is any religions fallacy. When you so strongly believe in something that is radically different from what someone else so strongly believes in, you cannot understand or sympathize with them. When your faith and purpose for being are so different than someone else’s, all that can be seen are the differences. It is this division, created by religion that catalyzes hate and violence. Perhaps it is time we stop counting our differences and instead notice our similarities; open our eyes to the collective divinity of the human spirit. If you want to believe in something greater than yourself, look around you. It is the collective, sympathetic understanding of mankind that fuels goodness in the world. Do good with what you’re given now, because the truth is, no matter how different you think you might be from someone, you’re not.

In response to "Islamophobia can end by education" by The Muslim Student Association:

Whether you are willing to believe it or not the Quran is a book filled with violence. It can almost be read as a war guide written by Mohammed, a famous warrior. While this may be true of the Bible as well, Christians have evolved past taking every word as literal instead of allegorical.

I suggest you read the Quran, if you haven’t, and you will be shocked at some of the things it says one must do in order to leave Islam as the only true religion.