Fear Mongering
Ex- Atheists
R. Dawkins
B. Russell
D. Hume 
Atheists and Divorce
The Greatest Minds and God
Nobelists and God
Is God Cruel?
Is Christianity Evil?
Bible Contradictions?
About God and Jesus Christ
Great Theistic Works
God's Existence Sites
C. Hitchens
S. Harris
P. Pullman
Open Letter to Atheist/Agnostic-Jews
Open Letter to Christians Who Embraced Atheism
Free Literature
The Author


God Seen Through the Eyes of the Gretest Minds Kindle Editions  Hard Cover Edition



Thought-provoking reflections about God

The Dawkins Delusion?

There Is a God

Mere Christianity  C.S. Lewis

Darwin on Trial

The Edge of Evolution

Intelligent Design

The Fingerprint of God

The Creator and the Cosmos

Creation As Science

The Cell's Design

Understanding Intelligent Design

Icons of Evolution

The Language of God

What's So Great About Christianity





"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."

<> (09 Dec. 2007).



"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."

<> (18 Feb. 2007).



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:

  • Won the first federal lawsuit challenging direct funding by the government of a faith-based agency
  • Overturned a state Good Friday holiday
  • Won a lawsuit barring direct taxpayer subsidy of religious schools
  • Removed Ten Commandments monuments from public lands
  • Ended bible instruction in public schools after 51 year practice
  • Halted prayer at public institutions
  • Stopped direct subsidy to religious schools
  • Ended commencement prayers at a Top Ten University after 122 years of practice
  • Ended distribution of Gideon bibles in public schools.
  • Brought nearly 30 First Amendment lawsuits since 1977, and keeps several Establishment law challenges in the courts at all times.

<> (18 Feb. 2007).



  • Files lawsuits!
  • Publishes Freethought Today
  • Sponsors annual high school and college atheist based essay competitions with cash awards
  • Conducts, annual national conventions, honoring the "Freethinker of the Year" for state/church activism, a "Freethought Heroine" and student activists
  • Bestows "The Emperor Has No Clothes" Award to public figures for their criticism of religion
  • Promotes freedom from religion with educational products, bumperstickers, music CDs, winter solstice greeting cards and literature
  • Publishes useful atheist books
  • Provides speakers for events and debates
  • Established a freethought book collection at the University of Wisconsin Memorial Library as well as a 2,000-volume office collection

<> (18 Feb. 2007).




"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.)

<> (18 Feb. 2007).

(See Analysis Below)


"Morality is human-made, not ordained."  

This assumption alone carries tremendous ramifications. This implies that morality is relative and that it has been, and still is, the result of human beings' subjective judgments. Since it has been so, all humans continue to have the right to conceive their own subjective morality. If atheists would have their way, what a nightmarish world this would be.


"Freethinkers judge conduct by its intent and consequences to the welfare of individuals, humankind and the planet as a whole."

Noble-sounding indeed, but also "assumes" that the human mind can and "wants to" create a morality that is totally selfless and is not tainted by selfish motives. Sigmund Freud, an arch-atheist, informed us that there is a part of the human mind (The ID) that makes that a difficult challenge indeed, as history is clearly proven.


"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."  

This is a fascinating statement. They say that they are "responsible for their own actions," (which is what most religions believe, by the way. Nothing new and original here), and they do not blame or credit the Supernatural, referring, it appears, to evil influences such as demons or Satan. Do not Religions such as Christianity and Judaism place the responsibility for one's actions on individual choices? They certainly do believe in "tempting forces," but they also believe that each human being has the capacity to resist those forces and grow stronger by doing so. Most of all, they hold that humans have "freedom of choice," and that they, therefore, are responsible for their own actions. Not too much difference here.

The point I would like to briefly focus on, though, is the concept of "responsibility." Taking responsibility for one's actions is a noble concept, but if one chooses to steal, lie, commit adultery and gets away with it, who will they be responsible to? Nietzsche, another arch-atheist,  felt he was "responsible" for his own actions, and that he had the right to decide what was right or wrong; thus his conclusion that "good is evil and evil is good." He also believed that he had the right to visit as many prostitutes as he wished, and that he was only responsible to himself. The end result was venereal disease and the mental illness caused by it. He feared not Hell; he was not affected by bribes of the afterlife; he felt he was brilliant enough to choose his own right path and ended up insane. Atheists are welcome to determine right from wrong as well, and to allow their own minds to assess consequences, or lack thereof, on their own , but they should be warned that the atheist leaders of the past have already done it and have not done such a great a job, and that they risk making some sad mistakes themselves, like their predecessors have before them. Nonetheless, they have been given freedom of choice, and they are welcome to try. (Read Not-So-Moral Atheists on this site).


"The only "higher power" we can truly invoke lies in our own minds and our own intelligence."

Clearly if one does not believe in a Higher Power, one only has himself or herself to rely upon. But what a weak foundation that is. Human beings have proven and daily prove to be very frail and weak beings, who have a chronic tendency to "self-destruct." The evidence is the tens of millions in the US alone who now have incurable STD's, the tens of millions who are dying of AIDS, the tens of millions who are dying of smoke-related diseases, the hordes who are committing suicide by using drugs and by abusing alcohol; the millions who will choose to drive while drunk, and on and on. Many such foolish people are well educated and some are actually very intelligent. I know some that are both brilliant and foolish, as their self-destructive actions have clearly spotlighted.

Human beings have for centuries paid lip service to Religion and ethics. The fact that people believe in a god or give superficial reference to religious ethics  means only that they are superficial believers or, worst still, hypocritical beings. The reality is that at the societal and global level humans are committing suicide and hesitate to turn back, even when the evidence is irrefutable. So, which intelligence is FFRF referring to? Maybe they believe that scientists are the intelligent ones that will lead to human salvation. But who is responsible for creating the atomic bomb, the hydrogen bomb, chemical weapons, horrific weapons, the technology that is poisoning our land, our air, our water? Lots of knowledge there, and a definite understanding of the scientific method, but where is the wisdom? Maybe they should all listen to the supreme Scientist of the past century, Einstein, who warned that,  "...without a religion-based “’ethical culture’ “...there is no salvation for humanity.” (Einstein, Albert, “Christianity and Judaism.”  In Seelig, Cal (Ed.) Albert Einstein: Ideas and Opinions. New York: Three Rivers Press, 1982, 184-185)

Unlike atheists, Christianity, instead, holds that humans are very weak and in need God's help. It also teaches that humans will continue to give Religion "lip service," but will not implement healthy, powerful principles given as gifts from the Creator that can bring about healing to humanity. Christianity also teaches that human beings will finally bring themselves to the brink of extinction, thanks to the false savior, Science, in the hands of an irresponsible humanity and that the return of Jesus Christ is the only thing that finally save humanity from self-destruction. (Read Matthew 24 for an advance description of our days).

Atheism is just another expression of a weak and frail humanity offering solutions that will not work, as many famous atheists have already proven. Only Jesus Christ the Messiah will solve the insoluble, not FFRF, or any other self-deluded foundation.


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!"

<> (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."

<> (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.


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.)


“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.)

William Shakespeare

"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.)


“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.)


(German philosopher)

"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."
Kant, I. Philosophical Writings, In The German Library: Vol. 13. New York: Continuum Publishing Co., 1986, 217)

"God created the world for His honors sake because it is only through the obedience to His holy laws that God can be honored. For what does it mean to honor God? What, if not to serve Him? But how can He be served? Certainly not by trying to entice His favor by rendering Him all sorts of praise. For such praise is best only a means for preparing our hearts to a good disposition. Instead, the service of God consists simply and solely in following His will and observing His holy laws and commands."
(Kant, 143)

"God is the only ruler of the world. He governs as a monarch, but not as a despot; for He wills to have His commands observed out of love, and not out of servile fear. Like a father, He orders what is good for us, and does not command out of mere arbitrariness, like a tyrant. God even demands of us that we reflect on the reason for His commandments, and He insists on our observing them because He wants first to make us worthy of happiness and then participate in it. God' s will is benevolence, and His purpose is what is best. If God commands something for which we cannot see the reason, then this is because of the limitation of our knowledge, and not because of the nature of the commandment itself. God carries out his rulership of the world alone. For He surveys everything with one glance. And certainly e may often use wholly incomprehensible means to carry out His benevolent aims."

(Foremost Italian poet of the Romantic period)

"The ten commandments contain general principles . . .
conceived for the good of humanity . . . They are infinite and diverse."
(Leopardi, G. Opere, Tomo II. Milano: Riccardo Ricciardi Editore, 1977, 356)

(American writer)

"God always makes most prosperous those who are most obedient to His laws in the Bible."
Wagenknecht, E., Harriet Beecher Stowe. New York: Oxford University Press, 1965, 177.)