|
FREEDOM FROM RELIGION FOUNDATION: EXPOSED AND CONFRONTED! HISTORY "Formed in 1976 by Annie Gaylor Jr. and Sr., the foundation was incorporated nationally in 1978. It has grown ever since and is now supported by over 11,000 members. It is run out of an 1855 building at the corner of West Washington Avenue and North Henry Street in Madison, Wisconsin that once was a church rectory. With a minimum annual membership fee of $40, the foundation has saved over $3.3 million (US) and receives over $1 million in dues per year. The foundation primarily uses this money to pay legal fees in cases contesting the separation of church and state of various United States governmental organizations, but it also pays salaries to its staff of four, distributes advertisements and sends out news publications to its members." <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_From_Religion_Foundation#_note-aboutCalling> (09 Dec. 2007).
STATED AGENDA "The Freedom From Religion Foundation, Inc., is an educational group working for the separation of state and church. Its purposes, as stated in its bylaws, are to promote the constitutional principle of separation of state and church, and to educate the public on matters relating to nontheism." <http://www.ffrf.org/purposes> (18 Feb. 2007).
SUCCESSES This foundation has become the most formidable foe of religion in America. It invests large amounts of money into battling religion and has already been successful in the following areas:
<http://www.ffrf.org/legal> (18 Feb. 2007).
APPROACH USED TO ACCOMPLISH AGENDA
<http://www.ffrf.org/purposes> (18 Feb. 2007).
WHAT THEY BELIEVE Morality "Morality is human-made, not ordained. Freethinkers judge conduct by its intent and consequences to the welfare of individuals, humankind and the planet as a whole. Freethinkers are responsible for their own actions, and do not blame or credit the supernatural, or respond to bribes of an "afterlife" or threats of hellfire. The only "higher power" we can truly invoke lies in our own minds and our own intelligence." "Freethinkers accept the natural world, and reject the unproved and primitive supernatural myths about gods, devils, angels, magic, life-after-death and the suspension of natural laws ("miracles") through wishful thinking ("prayer"). We hope that someday humanity will outgrow god-ideas much as children outgrow literal belief in Santa Claus." (Author's comment: They, of course, don't just hope; they will do their utmost to make sure it will happen.) <http://www.ffrf.org/nontracts/freethinkers_info.php> (18 Feb. 2007). (See Analysis Below)
The Ten Commandments "Do study the ten commandments! They epitomize the childishness, the vindictiveness, the sexism, the inflexibility and the inadequacies of the bible as a book of morals." "In essence, the first four commandments all scream that "the lord thy god" has an uneasy vanity, and like most dictators, must resort to threats, rather than intellectual persuasion, to promote a point of view.... How can anyone not perceive the pettiness, bluster, bombast and psychotic insecurity behind the first four commandments? We are supposed to respect this!" <http://www.ffrf.org/nontracts/10comm.php> (18 Feb. 2007). The arrogance found within these words has seldom been equaled. Childishness? Telling people not to steal and kill is childish? Insisting that each human being has a supreme duty to honor and respect the one that makes every atom in the human body and all of existence spin, childish? A God that "demands" that we do not harm our neighbor is childish? Would the millions of women and men who daily find out that their mate has been betraying them or has abandoned them for another person feel that the commandment on adultery is childish? Would the people who lost their life savings because of the Enron affair think that a commandment against lying and stealing is childish? How about the countless parents that get abused by their own flesh and blood? Do they find the commandment on honoring one's parents childish? What would the brilliant, "all-wise" leaders of FFRF propose instead, if they had been "creators" and "sustainers" of life? Which approach would they have used? They of course would have been "gentle persuaders," because they are "soft-hearted humanists" who don't believe in asserting divine power. Now consider this: if God's "assertive" approach has had limited results with rebellious human beings, would the "lame" approach of convincing with logical arguments have worked any better? Have humans not seen and experienced the most "logical" argument of all, that the result of disobedience to the Ten Commandments over the centuries has resulted in nothing but turmoil and torment for most of humanity? Is that not logical enough? Should that not be persuasive enough...? Has it changed anything? If there is a God who makes and sustains all things, He and only He has the right to determine right and wrong. He and only He has the right to insist any way He wants that humans do "what is right for them and others." He has all the rights in the universe to demand and expect honor and total submission, given the fact that life is His gift and death His prerogative. Asserting that a Creator is petty, psychotic and insecure, because He "demands" what is good for humanity, is the ultimate foolishness, and I quiver at the consequences that such an attitude will lead to. Let's hope that these valiant, quixotic, aggressive and offensive atheists will come to the point of sobriety some time in the future--for their own sake. Please read, Ten Great Proofs of God's Existence, -- a logical and sensible rebuttal to atheists' inane views about the Ten Commandments, from someone who did study the Ten Commandments--as they recommend--and found therein undeniable evidence of a Divine and loving Creator.
Jesus Christ "On the whole, Jesus said little that was worthwhile. He introduced nothing new to ethics (except hell). He instituted no social programs. Being "omniscient," he could have shared some useful science or medicine, but he appeared ignorant of such things (as if his character were merely the invention of writers stuck in the first century)." "Why is Jesus so special? It would be more reasonable and productive to emulate real, flesh-and-blood human beings who have contributed to humanity--mothers who have given birth, scientists who have alleviated suffering, social reformers who have fought injustice--than to worship a character of such dubious qualities as Jesus." <http://www.ffrf.org/nontracts/jesus.php> (18 Feb. 2007). Jesus Christ said nothing worthwhile? Would two billion people revere such a person, if he said nothing worthwhile? Would countless universities teach his views around the world, if they were useless and empty? Would Einstein believe that within His teachings where found the solutions to "all human ills" if Christ said nothing worthwhile? (See quote below). The arrogance that frames the minds of FFRF leaders in declaring of little significance the teachings of Jesus Christ is nothing short of shocking and laughable. Jesus Christ did not come to create social programs. Jesus Christ went much further: He taught the supreme principles that have led to thousands of social programs worldwide for thousands of years. He did not create World Vision, The Salvation Army, hundreds of Christian hospitals and clinics, countless programs for the needy around the world--HE INSPIRED THEM. He was not a man that would simply create a program that would help "the few," given His limited time on earth, He offered humanity irresistible, motivating, transforming concepts that have, are and will continue to move millions to help their fellow men worldwide. Contrariwise, what have the 1 billion atheists done for humanity, in the meantime? What is FFRF doing for humanity, except trying to undermine Religion, and Christianity in particular, anywhere it can. How "puny" is Atheism before the Great Master. How inane and absurd its assertions; how "laughable" its fruits.
"Being "omniscient," he could have shared some useful science or medicine, but he appeared ignorant of such things." Jesus Christ gave His fullest support to a Book that offered health principles that where way ahead of their time--over 3000 years ahead of their time. It's called the Torah. It gives principles that would abolish most infectious diseases and that would decrease cancer and heart problems dramatically. He also taught principles that would eradicate most mental illnesses. Furthermore, He proposed principles of morality that would eradicate drug use, smoking, STD's, murder, suicide, adultery, fornication neighbor abuse through lying and cheating, worker abuse, government abuse, and a host of other social ills that afflict humanity. But this is not enough for atheists that instead encourage life styles that have been proven to harm and to cause physical and mental problems. What they want is "freedom" -- freedom from God, that is. Freedom to experiment with behaviors that have been experiments with for millennia and need no further experimentation, because they have failed terribly.
"It would be more reasonable and productive to emulate real, flesh-and-blood human beings who have contributed to humanity--mothers who have given birth, scientists who have alleviated suffering, social reformers who have fought injustice--than to worship a character of such dubious qualities as Jesus." Once again, this assertion is based on the ignorant notion that one must be directly involved in dealing with social injustices so as to bring about an end to the same. Jesus Christ offered the "underpinnings" that inspired the ones that brought about dramatic changes in social injustices. Unlike what FFRF propagates, the ones that led the revolutionary changes that transformed our world for the better where "Christ-inspired" men and women, not atheists. Please read "ATHEIST LIES" on this site, for an enlightening review of who really brought about positive social changes in our Western World, and what their religious views were. WHAT "SUPERIOR" MINDS THOUGHT ABOUT JESUS CHRIST Albert Einstein “If one purges the Judaism of the Prophets and Christianity as Jesus Christ taught it of all subsequent additions, especially those of the priests, one is left with a teaching which is capable of curing all the social ills of humanity.” (Einstein, Albert, “Christianity and Judaism.” In Seelig, Cal (Ed.) Albert Einstein: Ideas and Opinions. New York: Three Rivers Press, 1982, 184-185.) Dostoevski “There is in the world only one figure of absolute beauty: Christ. That infinitely lovely figure is, as a matter of course, an infinite marvel.” (Sandoz, E. Political Apocalypse. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1971, 42.) "In the name of God, I William Shakespeare...God be praised, do make and ordain this, my last will and testament in manner and form following. That is to say, first I commend my soul into the hands of God my Creator, hoping and assuredly believing, through the merits of Jesus Christ, my savior, to be made partaker of eternal life, and my body to the earth whereof it is made. " (Rowe, A.L. Shakespeare's Self Portrait. University Press of America, 1985, 182.) Tolstoy “The solution before us is…by nothing else than a forward movement along that road which the law of Christ points out to the hearts of men.”
(Tolstoy, L., "Patriotism,
Slavery of Our Times," in, The Complete Work of L. Tolstoy. New
York: T.Y. Crowell Co., 1927,
303. WHAT "SUPERIOR" MINDS SAID ABOUT THE TEN COMMANDMENTS
"The righteous man fears God without being afraid of Him, because he regards
the case of his wishing to resist God and His commandments as one which need
cause him no anxiety. But in every such case, regarded him as not
intrinsically possible he cognizes Him as one to be feared."
|