>Peter,
>
>>>Peter,
>>>
>>>You are correct sir! <s>
>>>
>>>Making an assertion is not the same as talking at (berating?) someone.
>>>
>>>I am making an assertion I believe to be true. If it isn't please show me. I don't mind being wrong at all.
>>
>>Doug, it's okay then. For one moment I thought that you had certain persons here in mind... <s>
>>
>>I think your assertionS indeed ask for some reactions.
>>
>>First, I get suspicious when you write 'forced secularism'. It sounds asif you think secularism is an evil thing.
>
>Well, on a philosophical and spiritual level I actually do think it is evil. From what I have seen in cultures that embrace this thinking I see an emptiness unlike I have seen elsewhere. That however does not give me the right to mistreat anyone though.

I found two definitions of secularism. I was referring to the second one. You too?
1) Religious skepticism or indifference.
2) The view that religious considerations should be excluded from civil affairs or public education.

>>
>>Second, some atheists spend so much effort over something they don't believe in, because they have this view of (fundamental) religion as dangerous and harmful to the world. They are worried!
>
>What in the world are they afraid of and what are they worried about? Anyone who would want to force someone to believe as they do (and as has been done in the name of Christ - sadly) is NOT representing Christianity faithfully. Not at all.

Are you saying here that atheists need not be afraid and worried? I agree that, in the West, most christian movements have been peaceful and have respected secularism (2nd definition) this last century. But the situation seems to have changed lately. Militant movements gain power and I think that an atheist reaction is the logical consequence.
In the 20th century de-churching (I hope you understand what I try to communicate here; it is a literal translation of the Dutch word 'ontkerkelijking') has been huge. The opinion of atheists was that factors like science, education and television would be enough and that religion would become a minor factor in society, largely limited to the personal life space. But we are now in the 21th century and it looks like there is a revival of religion, esp. of fanatic, militant religion. Personally, I think it is a final, desperate attempt of those in power in the religious institutions to regain momentum. They have a lot to loose if de-churching continues.
Nevertheless, it IS important (from an atheists point of view) to react NOW, while it is not yet too late. And although the reaction is in essence targeted toward militant movements, it is done by trying to convince as many people as possible that there is not such an entity as a God. Perhaps this is a flaw in the atheists' strategy. Perhaps they should focus on a strategy that deals solely with the militants. And perhaps the peaceful movements too should target their focus onto the militant movements, and start criticizing them. And perhaps we should cooperate in this 'battle'.



>>
>>Third, some atheists (antitheists, so to speak) are like the Christian missionary, but on the other pole. If Christians want the right to try to convert people, then atheists also claim that right.
>
>*chuckle* Go for it. <g> I LIKE a good, honest healthy debate! As long as everyone follows the rules.
>
>>
>>Fourth reaction, I agree if you state that there should be no force (to convert or to silence) applied by atheists. But I think you have made wrong observations if you think that certain atheists try exactly that.
>
>Well, I would beg to differ.. China, USSR, Cuba, France to a lessor degree and elsewhere around this globe HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of people were slaughtered because they would not give up their faith in God. No offense but the facts are that in th elast 100 years more Christians have been martyred for their faith than all other centuries combined.

THOSE certain atheists have indeed tried to force atheism and made many many victims. It were the militants amongst the atheists and they have also suppressed peaceful religious movements. Think of the way the people of Tibet were treated by the Chinese communists. The only militant type of atheism that I approve of, is the type that targets at the militant theists.


>Now, has 'the church' done much better over the centuries? NO, not at all. Neither has Islam. Or some others.
>
>Look at the title of this thread. <g> When we were going to high school it wa sok to have a Bible club or Bible studies on the lawn at lunch. Now, no way. You should study up a little on Sanger & Dewey.

I live in Holland. No such high school activities were/are happening here in public school. I haven't missed them.

[snip]