John, I'm not saying that all fundamentalists are like my old buddy Ivan.

I was merely describing, realistically, an actual experience. I don't claim that my knowledge of the Bible is superior to, say, the pastors of most churches or to a whole lot of other people. The point I was trying to make was that many fundamentalists, particularly the more aggressive and argumentative sort, set themselves up as authorities on the Will of God, basing it all on their piecemeal, pick-and-chose reading of the Bible, and then, when challenged by someone who is reasonably knowledgeable about the Bible themselves, fold up like a cheap lawn chair and stand there either smoldering or feeling a self-righteous pity for the poor sinner and consigning them to the depths of Hell. As if they truly think they know the Mind of God. Now, that's what I call hubris.

I have known and still know a large number of deeply religious people, some of them fundamentalists, who accept me as I am:   an armchair philosopher, a seeker, a sojourner—a questioner who isn't satisfied with the too-easy answer. Either fully consciously or deep down, they realize that they really don't know any more than I do, and often question the nature of their own faith. The essence of religion is mystery. And to claim that you know for certain eliminates (at least in your own mind) that mystery, and hence, any real possibility of religious experience. I maintain that the opposite of faith is not doubt; the opposite of faith is certainty. If you're certain, you don't need faith. Certainty, provided it is objectively verifiable, is not religion. It's science. (And science itself is not all that certain.)

The ones who get up my nose are people like Ivan, and several others I have run into from time to time, who, not knowing me from Adam's off ox, automatically assume that my soul needs saving, and they're going to get me to "accept Christ as my Savior" if they have to hog-tie me to a chair and beat me with a rubber hose. The incident I described is not the only encounter, by any means, that I've had with aggressively evangelizing fundamentalists.

Now, on a one-to-one level, it's no problem. I can deal with it. But—I especially resent it, on several levels—personally, philosophically, morally, religiously, politically, and patriotically—when people of this ilk arrogate to themselves the right to try to legislate, locally, or especially nationally, their particular idea of religious morality and force everyone to believe as they think they should believe. Or turn them into unwilling hypocrites by forcing them to behave as if they believed. Giving religious dogma the force of secular power leads to things like the Inquisition, the Salem witch trials, and the Taliban. I will fight this sort of attempt to breach the wall between religion and government with every fiber of my being and every resource at my command.

That's my stand. And that, after all, is the basic subject of this thread.

As a liberal (progressive), and as one who attends a Christian church with some regularity, I have no brief against Christians—or anyone—home schooling their children. My only concern would be that the basic "three Rs" and a fairly objective approach to history and civics be taught competently. But testing, such as the GED and SAT, can determine that.

Don Firth