Apparently, most of you love to respond to your own buttons, biases, and assumptions, and not to what is written.

"Just what religious tyranny are you subject to, Guest? Good grief: 400 years ago people could have been (many were!) burned at the stake for their belief, and you talk of religious tyranny in America in 2004? Get a sense of proportion, do."

Where did I say I was personally a victim of religious persecution or tyranny? Nowhere. To talk of religious tyranny in America in 2004, with the take over of the public square in the US by fundamentalist Christians, is valid and legitimate.

What I actually said was we live in an era of religious tyranny. I put no geographical boundaries on it. I did not say "in the US" although I include the US, as I do many parts of the world where many people suffer profound religious persecution, particularly women.

Then there was this question:

"What you're proposing is merely replacing existing religions in the public debate with secular ones, isn't it?"

No, that isn't what I'm proposing.

"Post-modernists believe that either reason or faith alone is doomed to fail. There are questions that reason alone can't answer, things you can't prove as every pure mathematician or physicist knows. Faith is essential..."

I think this is more suited for posting to the faith thread. I[m interested in dialog about living life without religion, and moving beyond a society bound by authoritarian religious diktats, and coerced conformity to religious values.

"As to your suggestion that religious matters be removed completely form the public sphere, well that's a violation of the 1st Amendment, isn't it?"

Here is the First Amendment:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

I believe, just as a current example, that the proposed constitutional amendment to outlaw gay marriage, would be an instance of Congress making a law respecting estalishment of religion.

Another example. The display of the 10 commandments, or any other symbols and vestiges of the Christian religion in government buildings. Again, a violation of the 1st Amendment.

3rd example. The Bush administration Faith Based Initiatives. Private school vouchers for religious schools.

When I say I want religion out of the public square, I don't mean I don't want religious believers to participate in the debate, because that would be a violation of their 1st Amendment rights. What I mean is, Christians shouldn't be allowed to impose and implement their personal religious beliefs in the public sphere, such as in the halls of government, through government funded and supported initiatives, etc.

"Oh, that's right, you could skip that process."

I said no such thing.