It seems that the most popular Christian fiction books today (and they are fiction, something that readers don't always seem to keep firmly in mind) are about an apocalypse in the future. This isn't a fad or a fluke: apocalyptic books have been massively popular with Christians for years, if not decades.
It is curious that the Christian Right is so antagonistic towards homosexuals and homosexuality. On the whole, gays are a relatively small minority in society and as such pose little threat to Christianity or Christians' lives. Most Christians could probably live their entire lives having little contact with gays and without noticing homosexuality.
In arguing against church/state separation, Christian Nationalists promote myths, misconceptions, and even lies about the relationship between religion and government. Confusing people about how religion and government should interact helps convince people that it's appropriate for the state to promote, endorse, or even fund one religion in particular. Seeing the right relationship between religion and government, however, reveals why the state should be secular and separated from religion.
Does a 'naked public square' end up demeaning religion and discriminate against religious believers? No, because strict separation of church and state does not demean or discriminate against religion. Strict separation does not exclude religion from the public square. Instead, it prevents religious speech from being privileged in the public square and it prevents the government from encouraging religious speech in the public square. A public square can only be 'naked' in an official sense.
Agnosticism is the label applied to not knowing for sure if any gods exist; theism is the label for belief in at least one god of some sort. Some people argue that the two aren't compatible because every religion demands believers to know for sure that their god exists. If any believer says that they don't know for sure, even though they continue believing anyway, then they cannot remain good adherents of their religion anymore. This is not a valid objection to the concept of agnostic theism.
One of the preeminent battlegrounds for the Christian Right's war on modernity is America's secular public school system. The Christian Right cannot stand the fact that instead of infusing the entire curriculum with their brand of conservative Christian principles, the government maintains a neutral stance on religion with a secular system. The godlessness of America's public schools is an advantage, not a defect. Public schools should be secular, not extensions of religious institutions.
It's common to hear religious theists complain about "militant atheists," but just what is a militant atheist? What separates militant atheists from regular (pacifist?) atheists? It's not always easy to tell and the people most likely to call atheists "militant" seem to be the least likely to try to explain the label. So here is a guide to militant atheism derived from the sorts of situations where religious theists insist that atheists are being too militant.
It seems strange that atheism would be so difficult to understand, but it must be - otherwise, there wouldn't be so many arguments over what it means, what it entails, and what significance it has for society. Because the same questions and same arguments keep coming up over and over again, it's important to have a central resource where people can inform themselves or to which they can refer others.
The idea that Christians should 'hate the sin but love the sinner' is a popular defense of Christian attacks on homosexuality, abortion, and other behavior which they consider abhorrent. Critics rightly point out that hating the sin can quickly become hating the sinner as well, something which many Christians appear to indulge in when it comes to gays, for example. Is this a problem with atheist critics of religion can succumb to as well?
Skepticism of the paranormal and skepticism of religious and theistic claims are often treated separately - but they shouldn't be because both criticisms generally stem from a common commitment to a naturalistic and materialistic view of the universe. Both atheists and skeptics reject the paranormal, supernatural, and magical thinking which underlies both theistic religion and popular paranormal superstitions. Skepticism and atheism have far more in common than many realize.