Your posting seems to indicate the fact that you did not actually read what I had to say. I merely used the link to Wikipedia because it is easier to find and read, and does a good job summing up the findings of the survey. If you want a link to the survey itself, here you go:
<a href="http://b27.cc.trincoll.edu/mt/mt-search.cgi?search=+2008&IncludeBlogs=14&limit=20
http://b27.cc.trincoll.edu/mt/mt-search.cgi?searc... /> (go to Part IA – Belonging for the relevant info).

I didn’t realize I was writing a school paper here, or else I would have cited the source directly.

Oh, and by the way, I am not picking facts out of context to support my own claims. I have no “personal moral agenda” as you call it. This really isn’t that complicated, because the point you are arguing against is the result of a statistical survey. Am I misunderstanding the results?

Finally, Christians do not distort or mold; they interpret in whatever manner they deem best, just like every other human being does. If this were not true, then there would be no different sects or beliefs within Christianity, yet there are. It has nothing to do with bending words to do “whatever we want to do” but to applying our own internal moral and logical filters to what we learn. It’s a basic trait of humanity, and not a good one at that.

You are welcome to your own beliefs. In fact, I am happy for you that you feel such. However, I respectfully remind you that these are your beliefs, and cannot be pushed on everyone by statements such as “whether non-believers like it or not.” How would you feel if I were to assert to you that “when people die they just rot in the ground, there is no soul or afterlife, whether Christians like it or not” It would be rather rude and offensive to you, I am sure, and even more importantly, it does not foster discussion or allow for an open-minded debate. Please keep that in mind in future postings.

Respectfully,
Proud Agnostic

I’d like to make a few points:
1) I am not in any way anti-Christian. I am not anti-Judaism, anti-Islam, anti-Buddhism, anti-any religion. I think just about all of them bring a unique and valuable philosophy to the table. However, I respectfully disagree with your beliefs. In fact, the majority of the world is not Christian, ergo the majority of the world also disagrees with your beliefs to one degree or another.
2) I am not an atheist, but an agnostic atheist. There is a distinction, just as it would be false of me to call you a Jew.
3) Although you are entitled to your own beliefs and opinions, that does not make them right or respectful. You could also happen to be anti-gay, or anti-black, or anti-women. Although you have the right to your own opinion, it is generally regarded as uncouth and wrong to be hateful or spiteful towards a group of people just because they are different than you. This is no less true with non-believers.
4) I am not my own god, for I do not believe in a god. I believe that I am answerable both to my own set of morals and to those of the society I live in. This has nothing to do with a god.
5) I do not claim to know it all. All I claim is to constantly seek out the unknown, to learn more about myself, others, and the nature of the world around me. As an agnostic, I am open to all possibilities about the universe, but accept none blindly. I believe you are backwards in your statement, for you DO claim to know all through your religion, and accept no alternative ideas that disagree with it. Such close-mindedness does not allow for growth and learning
6) I am unsure of what “education” you have had that is superior to my own, but I would suggest that you try and expand that education, not because it is inferior, but because it represents only one viewpoint in a multitude of them. Even if you don’t agree with others, it is generally a good idea to understand their beliefs and values, and where they are coming from.

Finally, I would just like to remind you that I came to this website seeking to openly and respectfully discuss differences of belief and opinion. Such discussion cannot occur when a person is so utterly convinced of their own rightness that they will not defend their own point of view, nor bother to refute claims against it. So I ask you, if you wish in earnest to discuss your beliefs, please respond to the points I have made in this post, and in the previous ones which you have ignored. Otherwise, do not bother to respond, as it will not serve anyone any  good.
Thank you,

PS I appreciate the offer of praying for me, and can only hope it comes in good faith. And no, I will not be praying for you, that would be silly, as I currently do not believe in God. After all, would you pray to Zeus for me, or Odin, or Ra, or Vishnu, or any other of the multitude of gods you also do not believe in? I doubt it, as it is counter to your beliefs. Likewise, I will not do something that is counter to my own. However, I will hope for you, which I at least feel is just as kind.

In addendum, I forgot to mention the arguments against the From Design Argument, which I believe you are referencing. One of the simplest against that is the argument from poor design, which counters with the statement that a supreme being would create organisms with optimal design, whereas many parts of organisms exhibit suboptimal design, thus suggesting creationism is false. Examples of this include;
-The human male’s testes descend from the abdomen into the scrotum during development in the womb. This migration, instead of initial development in the womb, leads to the weak points that cause hernias, which prior to modern medicine, often resulted in death.
-Humans have an appendix, which is completely useless in organisms that cook their food, and since we assume that creationism created civilized man, there would be no need at all for an appendix. Furthermore, it allows for potentially deadly appendicitis.
-The eye is more complex than it needs to be, as compared to invertebrates. The retina is actually inside out, in a matter of speaking. Further, it uses 6 muscles to move instead of the required three.
-Almost every organism except humans can synthesize vitamin C itself, but we cannot due to a faulty enzymes. For this reason, it is necessary for us to obtain this vitamin from our foods.

All of these faults are not only allowable by evolution, but are explained by it.

Sorry, I intended to include this in my initial post.

Faith_Filled,

First and foremost, let me thank you for being respectful and earnest in your postings. I understand you had a lot to ask, and that is fine. I also thank you for not forcing your beliefs down my throat, as others have tried to. To do so is not conducive for a polite conversation about belief. I will do my best, in response, not to push my own beliefs on you, but present them in a way that can be objectively considered.

For some strange reason, the site won’t let me reply to many postings, only to certain ones. I think this is a programming error, and have emailed the admins in an attempt to fix it. However, in the meantime I will only be able to respond via email, which may make my replies a bit confusing, so let me apologize in advance for that. I will try to reply to each of your questions directly.

Thank you again.

I actually had to read several essays from the Federalist Papers for a class at school. I ask you, where in these essays does it say that the Founding Fathers only accepted Christianity? Furthermore, the Federalist Papers were not written by all of our founding fathers, but almost completely by Hamilton and Madison. Other ideas enumerated in these essays include the opposition to the Bill of Rights. Does that make the Bill of Rights unconstitutional, too? Similarly, you are correct, Washington had some rather concrete views of religion. However, that does not make him correct. Although an excellent leader and critical part of the formation of America, he is no god, nor king, nor tyrant, and his views are not automatically correct.
This is indeed a Christian Nation, in the sense that the majority of this nation is some form of Christian. However, this nation is not a theocratic one, there is no national religion, there was never intended to be. This nation, as I have already stated, needs to accept all belief systems, regardless of whether or not they match your own.

Thanks for the offer, but I really don’t need your prayers. True, I do not subscribe to any faith. Are you saying that this someone makes me inferior to you? For your information, despite this crippling disability that I suffer, I am still able to make it through life, feel a sense of direction and accomplishment, and formulate my own appropriate set of morality.

1) I am not “constantly offended” by anything. But your statement is ridiculous, obviously if someone says something offensive, others have the right to be offended. I am not offended by Christians or by Christianity, but by the suggestion that belief in God is required for someone to be a good American.
2) I do not group all Christians together, just as I do not group all Muslims together, and just as you should not group all nonbelievers together. For the most part, I don’t have a problem with mainstream Christianity, but I speak out against the radicals of any and all religions, whether they be Christians or Muslims or Hindus or whatever. I do not “attack” Christians as you say, most of my friends are some form of Christian.
3) Western Civilization is INFLUENCED by Judeo-Christian values, not founded on them. Many of the values you are speaking of were espoused well before the formation of Christianity, and are held by Christians and non-Christians alike. In fact, the original works by Montesquieu were censored by the Catholic Church, as were the works of Locke, another major philosopher our founding fathers drew heavily from.
4) There are tons of facts most Americans probably aren’t aware of. For example, did YOU know that the Ten Commandments are actually NOT on the walls of the US Supreme Court. The only thing that looks like it is a tablet which merely has written on it the Roman numerals I-X, which as stated by the architect of it, was meant to symbolize the Bill of Rights (the first 10 Amendments). Furthermore, our founding fathers had a diverse set of religious beliefs, many of which do not fit neatly into our modern definitions. Yes, several of them were Christian. However, many others were either deists, or influence by deist ideas (the former includes Madison, Adams, Hamilton, Paine, while the latter includes Jefferson, Franklin, and others). These men did not refer to God in the same manner that you do, and were as a result far less divisive about the idea.

Wow, your first statement is just incredible. Obviously everyone has a right to be ignorant, but to call me ignorant just because I don’t hold the same faith that you do is stupid. I HAVE actually attended several church sermons, on top of going to a synagogue a few times. I have also read most of the Bible, along with the Quran, and works of several other major religions. I in fact would guess I have a wider and more diverse religious education that you do, and yes, I have read plenty about Christianity. However, I challenge you to name me one FACT about God, because obviously belief in God is not based on fact, but on faith. You clearly need some elementary education if you don’t get the difference. But then again, its your right to ignore facts about…well, facts. That is the choice you get as an American. Good luck in your own life, and consider that there may be plenty of people out there who hold different beliefs than yourself, and are no wiser or dumber because of it.

Your examples are obviously meant to be mocking in nature, and fail to address the real issue. If there was no wiggle room (which was not my quote by the way, but merely a response to someone else who used that term), then how do you explain the numerous different denominations of Christianity who interpret the Bible and other works differently? There are plenty of REAL examples of people interpreting the bible differently, such as the right to divorce, the right of women to be ordained, predestination versus free will, etc.