That's fun, but the answers are kind of predictable since you know it's created by the Freedom From Religion Foundation.

That is an interesting quiz and website, Ezra...thanks for sharing it with us.

The whole philosophic framework of that organization seems to be pretty biased against anyone practicing any sort of religion as a valid belief system, however.

Instead it harps on this whole concept of being a "free-thinker." Reason alone!

That premise is inadequate, however, because it fails to take into account that human reason is finite and largely flawed. Not everything is humanly quantifiable or scientifically measurable- does that mean that anything you cannot empirically prove is not true? Life would be extremely shallow and one-dimensional if that were the case.

Also, about 75% of the quotes in the one article are from the so-called founding fathers, many of whom were Deists who subscribed to the Divine clockmaker theory- that somehow whatever created life made the universe and everything in it, and the rest of existence is governed purely by reason, and the laws of nature.

Anyway, it is interesting to dialogue with people of diverse views on belief and unbelief.

I would assert that in recent decades a secular bias has taken hold in our nation. That to even publicly profess religious belief of any kind is fiercely attacked by legal activists who seem to think that only atheists and unbelievers should be able to publicly express their thoughts.

I am perhaps overstating my point here, obviously, but the pendulum has, to me, seemed to shift strongly toward a secular bias.

That is okay with me, though. I tend to think that oftentimes all too many "religious" people get too hung up on demanding their rights that they forget about their responsibility to be good neighbors.

__________________
Peace,

John

My eBay World

My Librarything

MySpace

. . . .

Agreed. It's heavy handed and biased. But noteworthy if it gets people to think about how much the original wall of seperation of church and state has crumbled. We're now led by a man who makes policy based on the voices in his head. What's worse, that he hears voices or that he calls the voice God?