Online Dating: Do these stories sound familiar?

Have you heard the world of online dating is tough? Brutal is more like it. After abstaining from online dating for a while, I signed up on a Christian site, Christian Mingle, and thought I’d record some of my experiences for posterity.

Oftentimes I get winks or emails from Billy-Bob types who drive a 30-year-old truck, sport a 16-inch graying beard, and live in West Virginia. Additionally, they have to borrow their friends computer because they don’t own one, much less know how to use one. And, like one date I once had, don’t know the difference between scallops and scalloped potatoes.

So, I’m being a little choosier this time. My date must have the following: be male, and have a pulse. I just think some of these West Virginians don’t have a pulse. But I should be kinder.

Anyway, after three months of nonsense, I’m about ready to give up. Here’s a look back at some of my potential mates:

First there was Sick Rick. We emailed back and forth a few times and he said he’d like to take me to a restaurant that was popular here in Steubenville. Rick didn’t have a job, but was decent looking, lived nearby, and he seemed nice enough so I figured I’d give him a chance.

On the day of our scheduled date, he texted me and said he was sorry he had to cancel but he thought he had the flu. The flu is a wonderful thing. It can be used to avoid all kinds of things: anything from work, to appointments, to, well, a date. I responded I was sorry he was sick.

Then, just a day later, when I asked how he was doing, amazingly, he was feeling better already! Gosh, I wish I could get that one-day flu! I didn’t say anything then, about doubting he had the flu, but was definitely not believing he did. Then, I didn't hear from him for two days.

Now, I am of the opinion that if a man has your phone number, and is a texter, and he is truly interested, he is not going to let two whole days go by without a text, or an email for that matter. So, after two days, I lost patience and decided to tell him how it was.

“I haven’t heard from you in two days, so I guess you’re not interested anymore or you’re too busy. Honestly, I don’t think you even had the flu.”

Well, did I get a nasty response back!

“I was interested but now you are calling me a liar. I was sick.” He proceeded to tell me I was not a nice person, he was no longer interested, blah, blah, blah. Classic over-reaction, in my book. Nobody likes to be caught in a lie. I think he probably had another date, maybe with someone more desirable, and put me off for a bit. This is nothing new in the world of online dating.

He blew it when he let two days go by with no contact after claiming to have the flu. Hello… I’ve been at this dating thing a long time Sick Rick, and I’m better at it then you!

Next up was… dang I can’t remember his name. Anyway, we’ll call him Slippery Sam. He sent me a very nice email saying he liked my profile, and thought I was cute. Great. So I emailed him back. Two days passed. Now, I know he got the email I sent him because you can check to see if the email you sent was read by the recipient.

Then, against my better judgment, when I saw Slippery was online, I tried to instant message him. He didn’t answer. Normally at this point I give up. I have very, very little patience for delays and non-responses. You’re online? Answer me. Otherwise, we’re done. Sound too harsh? Experience has taught me to be harsh.

A few more days went by and Slippery Sam emailed me again. He acted like it was completely normal to talk to someone after ignoring an IM, and for some reason, against my better judgment (maybe because I thought I was too hard on Tricky Rick) I gave him another chance. But my original thought to discard him was correct.

We began one evening chatting on the instant messenger service through the dating site, and I noticed his responses were taking a lot of time. Again, I don’t have a lot of patience for this. If you are interested and want to meet me, you need to be timely in your responses. If not, I’m signing off. I have better things to do, such as chat with other non-responders, than wait ten minutes in between messages.

Slippery Sam then told me he was cooking dinner, so I cut him a little slack, because one needs to go back and forth to the oven and onto the computer. And cooking upped his desirability, because I wouldn’t mind having a man cook for me. And clean up. And do housework….

Anyway, he was fairly quick in his responses at that point, so being the considerate person I am, I asked if he would want to chat later since he was cooking and would then be eating. He said that would be good.

So, an hour or so later I came back online and we began chatting again. Then, the dreaded non-response. I asked him a question, two minutes went by. Then three, then five, then eight. So, just what are you doing that you can’t answer me?

Again, in my book, if a guy is interested, he’s going to make sure he responds, and in a timely manner. So, I signed off. A little while later, I signed back on… just to see if he had ever answered my question, and/or apologized for taking so long to answer. He did not. And before it ever got started, it was over. Another one bites the dust.

Then there was Don Juan. He was so very complimentary to me, telling me how pretty I was and how much he liked my profile. He was very attentive to me, chatted politely online, with no delays, and was very excited about possibly meeting. I was feeling pretty good about the whole thing. He was going to school for nursing; he was bettering himself at this late stage, and I felt that was admirable.

But Don Juan had some secrets to reveal, one of which was at fifty-five years of age he worked a near minimum wage job in retail. Do I really want to date a guy who makes less money than I do? But, he was going to school, and eventually would have a much better job for more money, so I weighed that and decided it would be ok.

But then, we were discussing when we would go out to dinner; it was early in the month. He informed me he would not have the money to take me out until the end of the month. He can’t take me out to dinner until his next payday?

I’ve been living that life for a long time, and frankly, if I’m going to be with someone, my life better improve substantially, or, no thank you, I’ll stay single. I started to get that creeping, ugly feeling.

Then his other little secret came out:

“I live with my parents. I take care of them.” Oh, geez. Can it get any worse? Can it?? Somewhere during all this he sent me an email telling me he would understand if I wasn’t interested anymore. You’re darn right I’m not interested anymore. I do not want to take care of someone’s elderly parents any more than I want to become a step-mother to young children. Sorry, but that’s a deal breaker. But, bless your little heart for making it easier to dump you!

I got up the courage up to do the necessary thing and I emailed him, saying, “After thinking about everything you have told me, I feel I don’t want to pursue this.” Honesty is the best policy! I mean, I could have led him on and let him spend his entire paycheck on taking me out to eat, but I took the high road and passed on the free meal.

Then there was Tipless Tom. I have to say, I really liked his picture. He was in his mid fifties, and quite good-looking. He was employed and lived fairly close to me. I had a whole vision of his personality matching his looks.

Like me, he wasn’t a phone person, but liked to text and that worked for me. We texted back and forth and he seemed really interested. He was polite, and very timely in his responses, and I got the feeling he wasn’t talking to anyone else, which is always a good thing.

We were to meet at Applebee’s for our first date. I was greatly anticipating meeting him.

I primped and primed and looked good. I was excited. An attractive man, intelligent, seems great…why wouldn’t I be excited? Visions of a happy life together filled my imagination. Could he be the one?

I pulled into the parking lot of Applebee’s and saw a man in an older model beige Toyota, which he had previously described as his car. This had to be him. But wait – he doesn’t look like his picture. Nothing like it. I started to get that dreaded feeling once again. All right, all right, give it a chance, you haven’t seen him up close yet I thought.

I got out of the car, and smiled at him. All the while feeling that disappointment. He looked nothing like his picture, and it was one of those instant things: I didn’t like his teeth or his hair… the whole person looked nothing like what I expected. I am not attracted to this man, I was thinking. I wanted to leave right then and there. He wasn’t tall enough either. I’m 5’9 and tend to like men around 6 feet or taller. With my slight heels on, I was towering over him. Sigh.

OK, I thought, give him a chance. If he has a great personality, it will be fine. We can be friends first and maybe it will grow into something. Looks aren’t everything.

“Hi, Lisa,” he said to me. I looked around to see if he was talking to someone else, since my name is Mary. I got my hopes up…maybe I have the wrong guy. Maybe my good-looking guy is in another Toyota… a newer one, perhaps?

But no, he was talking to me.  We had dinner and had a decent conversation throughout, but there was absolutely no chemistry for me. He had this odd tinny laugh and I couldn’t wait for the server to come over and take the check so I could get out of there. I kept looking around to see if our server was anywhere but she was busy.

Then, as if this wasn’t bad enough, he says, “Do you have money for the tip?”

Seriously, dude? I was so astounded; in all the dates I have been on – and there have been many over the years – this question never came up.

“I don’t think I have any cash on me…let me look.”

I really didn’t think I had any money on me, as I normally don’t carry much cash; I use my bankcard for everything. But I found a five-dollar bill. Frankly, it was five dollars that I needed. I left it on the table. I found that whole thing awkward, but he seemed fine with it.

I sensed that Tipless was interested in seeing me again, as he texted that night saying he had a great time and enjoyed the conversation. I however, had an OK time and had no intention of seeing him again. Asking me to leave the tip really sealed that deal.

I wasn’t quite sure how to tell him I was not interested. He continued to text me, and I answered, politely, but short. Then, I had my opening.

Tipless Tom mentioned something about our “next date.” I decided it was time to come clean. Should I tell him I’m not attracted to him? No, that’s mean. Tell him there’s no chemistry? That seemed cruel, too. So, I simply texted this: “I just want to be friends.”

He texted back that that was fine and it is “comforting” to have Christian friends. Whew. That was easy. A couple times after that, he texted me to say hello, and I answered, but haven’t heard from him since, which was over a month ago. Maybe he’s busy working overtime so he can afford to pay the tip on his next date.

I have now switched from Christian Mingle to Christian Café, hoping for a better quality person. I have been communicating with one particular guy who waited days to respond to my email to him, after he first emailed me. Different dating site, same baloney.

Truly, it is no wonder women stay single.

Online Dating: Ladies - Recognize the Warning Signs

It was with much reservation that I jumped back into the dating pool a few months ago. After about seven years of on-again off-again online dating, I had given up on it for a while. But I kept seeing these commercials “Find God’s Match for You” with Christian Mingle. I was thinking about joining.

Then, a doctor I was seeing (whom I see because I’m psychologically damaged from online dating) suggested I try Christian Mingle. Was this a sign from God? It had to be. Or so I thought...

So, I created my profile, uploaded my pictures and waited. I decided this time I would do it a little differently. I would not seek out men; I would let them find me. Primarily, the reason for this was the rejection factor. You send out all kinds of winks and smiles and emails and most of the time never hear back from anyone.

I heard from a guy named Bill who seemed great. It has turned out to be yet another learning experience, which I would like to share, mostly to help other women.

Ladies – when it comes to men and online dating, there are warning signs in their communications with you, and you need to know them. Pay attention - it could be life altering. (The last name has been left out as well as other details, to protect myself.)

Bill was 59, good looking, and in great shape. At least, that’s what his picture showed. He was a little older than what I’d prefer, but, heck, I’m going to be 50 this year. His first email read:

“If I made the effort to be your friend first and more, would you know how to treat a man?”

Not your usual email, but ok, everyone is different. Maybe he’s had women treat him badly.

I sent him an email back, and five days went by before I heard from him again. During that time, I wondered why I didn’t hear back from him. Had I said something wrong that he didn’t like or turned him off?

I had told him about my interest in baseball in the 1990’s and how I wrote baseball poetry; this because his profile stated he was a big baseball fan.

Was he in contact with someone else, had he met someone else? These are just some of the thoughts that go through your mind when you don’t hear from someone for days. And most likely, you said nothing wrong. The problem is on their end.

Here is the actual unedited email I received from him finally, and some commentary by me in italics.

Dear Mary,

I'm sorry I didn't drop you a line sooner. I find that I lose track more because we're not in the same community. This is the first time where I've found I am writing you first and then looking forward to meeting you. I lost track of your email until just now and a couple of days have passed.

Warning sign #1: An apology followed by a renewed commitment to me. He begins with an apology because we both know it took him the better part of a week to respond to my email. Twice, he makes reference to “losing track.” Is he that overwhelmed with emails from women on the site that he “lost track” of mine? Highly unlikely.

“Losing track more” because we’re not in the same community? Seriously, what does where I live have to do with his response time? Because I live 80 miles away it took you five days to respond to my email? That just doesn’t make sense.

He makes up for the time that passed by going a little over the top with the compliment where he makes me feel special; he wrote to me first, not the other way around. He is looking forward to meeting me. He lays on the charm rather thickly.

My interest in baseball goes back to my Grandfather who always had a game playing either on TV or his transistor radio. I picked it up quickly.

I think your success with your poetry is wonderful. I would like to hear or read it.

I am ready and willing to do whatever I am able to help you know me. Let me know what you want to know about me.

Warning sign #2: He appears overly anxious to please. He is ready and willing for me to know him. He seems to want to go out of his way with me. This, so soon, is a sign something is not quite right here.

For now I will let you know that I've had extreme difficulty losing my parents last summer, and two friends from high school.

Warning sign #3: Seeking sympathy. The part about having a hard time losing parents is very personal to write about so early on. This is something normally discussed after meeting; not too many people would wear their hearts on their sleeves to a total stranger in their second email to you.

I am pleased to say that the emotional issues along with my relationship to God have helped me grow and become stronger. That Holy Spirit is my spiritual fitness trainer who is very demanding. Every time I've received a spiritual gift, the Holy Spirit gives me a new challenge. That is as it should be because I am also reminded that I will receive just enough grace to successfully complete the challenge and go on to the next challenge. Even if the challenge at hand seems daunting.

Warning sign #4: Holier than thou. This was perplexing to me. It sounded overtly spiritually intellectual and pompous. I’m a Christian and I don’t mind discussion about the Holy Spirit. But this in-depth speak about the Holy Spirit being a "spiritual fitness trainer" was a little much. It almost sounded “rehearsed”- some good lines.

These were statements that were designed to impress me, the recipient, how Holy he was and how God is such a big part of his life, as was his faith. But it sounded phony to me. I found I had to reread this paragraph several times to really get what he was saying.

Last year was as difficult as any. Like I said both my parents, women I went to school with, a woman Carol who was one of the best Den Mothers any cub master could ever ask for, and a neighbor who was really an exceptional friend.

Warning sign #5: Goody-two-shoes. He manages to slip in that he was a Cub Scout master. Translation: I’m a great guy and I need to prove it to you!

Also, this is the second mention in the email about his loss -- designed to garner sympathy and reinforce he has been going through a hard time. Of course, he is only human for feeling a loss, and that is understandable. But to discuss it this early on with a person you haven’t met?

It is nice we both have an interest in baseball. That is a fun way to start out and build. Music also is a part of baseball games. That is an area where I excel. I would love to share that with you.

I'm feeling very positive about my feelings as I write you. I've learned there are times to use my head and there are times to follow my heart. Both are telling me I'm on the right track.

Warning sign #6: Overkill. His head and his heart are telling him all these things, yet he’s never even talked to me on the phone much less met me. Wow – he’s feeling really positive for someone he’s gotten one email from! He’s following his head and his heart based on my picture and profile? I found this a little condescending and pushy. Why is he in such a rush to have a relationship with me when we haven’t even met?

I want to come to know you better as well. What are your thoughts?

Take care,

Bill

Although I hadn’t analyzed the email quite the way I did here, something was bothering me. A woman’s instinct. Many of us have very good instincts when it comes to men or people in general.

The last time I ignored my instinct, I got into a relationship with the World’s Biggest Loser and wasted two years of my life. That is why I’m so leery now, if a little jaded.

My gut instinct was telling me something wasn’t right with this guy – could he be a scammer? A serial killer?

His profile didn’t fit that of a typical scammer: widowed, working as some kind of electrical engineer, out of the country at the present time – usually in West Africa – one photo on the profile and always good looking, and ready to start a relationship with you, pronto – often before you’ve even written back to them.

Scammers look for targets that somehow, in some way, they will get money from you. I’ve reported many of them, and found their profiles gone from the dating site after reporting.

Something felt wrong -- and was my gut instinct ever right.

I went on the dating site one day and his account, under the name of Billy**** had been removed.

I sent him a text: “What happened to your profile on Mingle?”

This was his response:

“It was hacked! I’m so sorry. I have to author a new one. I’m very upset about that. I’m shook up about it. May I call you & tell you my email address? I don’t care to do anything through CM until I know more about what happened. Thx.”

He stresses how terrible it has been for him to have been hacked. Upset. Shook up. Again, looking for sympathy. Blaming everything on the dating site. How could they have allowed this to happen?

I have never known anyone – and I’ve been on all of the dating sites at one time or another – Match.com, Eharmony, Plenty of Fish, Christian Café – to have been hacked. It just doesn’t happen.

I wrote back:

“I have no way of knowing if you are real. Lot of fake profiles on there.”

I got no response to that after an hour and a half. So, I texted, “Guess I have my answer. Bye.”

And I meant it. Now I was 100% certain something was wrong here. I was thinking he was a scammer. But I was wrong.

Around midnight, when my phone was shut off, he sent me this text in response to my last one:

“My profile was hacked. I am sorry you had the hassle. I live in ***** Ohio. I am Bill B******. I use MLGuild because I own these guitars. I play guitar piano and trumpet. ST. ***** Oh, is my parish. I PLAY and sing in Contemporary Choir. Please contact me with your CM name. I will not continue my account if they will not protect us from hackers.”

So I wrote back, “MLGuild? That was not your user name. People get banned for many reasons. My gut instinct tells me to avoid you. Something is not right.”

His user name that he had contacted me with was Bill*****, not MLGuild. So why would he have more than one user name? And why couldn’t he keep them straight? I was about to find out.

I decided to do a little detective work, which I am very good at. And let’s face it, now that I had his last name, it would be a virtual piece of cake. I typed his name into an Internet search and hit pay dirt. It took only a matter of minutes to find out he was married.

His father had indeed passed away and there was an online guest book. Most of the guests had written to Bill and Susan (not her real name) in their condolences.

I also found him on Facebook, where it openly stated his relationship status was “married.” I found his wife on Facebook, too, and she didn’t appear to be too concerned about her looks, but that was no excuse to be a lying cheat.

I saw pictures of him with his grandchildren and other family members. I saw more than I wanted to. I felt sad for his kids and his wife that he could do this, and be so stupid about it!

Did he not realize once I had his last name, I’d find out the truth? Does he not know the power one has with a keyboard and a computer?

My final text to him read, “Didn’t take me long to find out you’re married to Susan. LOL”

I also sent a message to his wife telling her that her husband had an account with Christian Mingle and that he had been in contact with me, wanting to meet, and I told her I have the proof, if she wanted to see it.

But I have a feeling she has been putting up with this for a while.

I have not heard back from him.

Atheists Fired up over 9/11 Cross Ruling

It came on Good Friday, a gift from God and U.S District Judge Deborah Batts. The lawsuit by American Atheists seeking to ban the cross found at Ground Zero from being displayed in a museum has been tossed out, and the cross will be permitted to stay.

The fact that this ruling came on the holiest week of the year for Christians is a delicious irony, one that I can bask in for months, possibly even years to come.

I thank God for the sensibility of Judge Batts. Those fun-loving folks over at American Atheists – who despise any and all things Christian and would file a lawsuit against their ailing mother or best friend, if it involved Christianity – claimed the inclusion of the cross at the 9/11 Memorial Museum was causing them all manner of illnesses. Thank Heaven good sense ruled the day and the cross will be displayed in the National September 11th Memorial and Museum where it rightfully deserves its place.

While most Americans agree that it should be allowed to stay, most atheists are up in arms. Not only did the ruling come on Good Friday, but American Atheists were happily celebrating their 50th anniversary of godlessness at their annual convention that weekend, which took place in Austin, Texas, this year. I’m pretty sure this ruling must have put a damper on that celebration. Naturally, though, they aren’t going down without a fight.

“We will appeal. We’re fighting it. This is not dead,” American Atheists’ President Dave Silverman said of the ruling. “This is a place where religion destroyed American lives. This is something all Americans must fight. This is injustice. What could possibly be more religious than a cross? The only thing would be a cross with the name ‘Jesus’ carved in it.”

Edward F. Kagin, an attorney for American Atheists, called the ruling an effort by the government “to endorse Christianity as the national religion of the United States.” That statement is so absurd it doesn’t really even deserve comment, but here goes anyway:

How does a single cross, in one museum, constitute the government endorsing Christianity? One cross at one museum and suddenly Christianity is now the “preferred religion” of the United States? Is the government calling on people to bow before it at the museum? Is the government demanding everyone must immediately sign up for, and attend a Christian church?

Please, Mr. Kagin, for an educated man you speak utter nonsense, and you know it. Your ludicrous statement is absurd and insulting to anyone with half a brain, and frankly, these kind of statements coming from non-believers are really tiresome.

Atheists claim 500 non-believers died on 9/11 and feel those non-believers are not being honored. Please, show me an atheist symbol found in the wreckage and I will lead the charge to have it included in the museum. If not, shut up and go away.

In the ruling, Judge Batts wrote that the cross “helps demonstrate how those at ground zero coped with the devastation they witnessed during the rescue and recovery effort, and she called its purpose “historical and secular.”

The judge noted the cross will be displayed in the museum in the “Finding Meaning at Ground Zero” section with placards explaining its meaning and the reason for its inclusion. Additionally, non-religious and secular artifacts will accompany it.

So then, what exactly is the problem atheists have with this ruling? Comments around the Web range from blatant disrespect of Christianity to rage and name calling, with the occasional reasonable argument thrown in.

Hemant Mehta, the so-called “Friendly Atheist” had this to say at Patheos.com:

“When steel beams fell that day, a couple of them criss-crossed, as you might expect, and some Christians took that to mean a sign from God (why God didn’t intervene earlier that day has yet to be determined). If a church wanted to display that particular cross, they had every right to do so, but for a historical museum to have a display with the cross suggested to AA that Christian victims were being treated as difference from (and better than) other victims. AA offered to donate a symbol of their own for inclusion in the memorial, but the museum curators rejected their donation.”

So American Atheists offered to donate a symbol of their own, hmm? No doubt a sign stating religion is a myth that poisons minds, much like the atheist signs that have been put up around Christmastime to counter all the religious stuff they so despise. And the museum turned them down. No wonder there.

Mehta also writes: “The problem with the ruling is that it still gives preference to a symbol some Christians found meaning in after 9/11. Yes, it’s part of history. But other, non-Christian groups found meaning and symbolism in other places and relics of their memories are not being displayed in the museum.”

I have no idea what Mehta is talking about. What relics were found in the rubble that are not being displayed, as he claims? The American Atheists symbol is an atom – and to my knowledge, there was not a twisted steel piece in the shape of an atom found at the site. Nor was there a menorah or any other type of religious symbol found in the rubble. What was found was a cross. Plain and simple. To not include it would be to deny history.

Just look at some of the comments from atheists beneath Mehta’s article:

Yeager

It really is pathetic to consider this as some sort of sign from “god.” If it is a

sign then it is a sign that their god has abandoned them. Seriously, their god

allowed thousands to be killed by non-believers and all he/she left was a

pseudo-cross in the rubble? Reminds me of t-shirts that say “I ran a marathon

and all I got was this t-shirt.”

dandaman

Then why is it erected as a cross? All it is missing is the J man. Why not an X, or an upside down cross, or a horizontal cross? This is complete bullshit and the judge knows it. Pisses me off.

onamission5 Joseph Stalin

People found comfort in it because they saw it as a sign from their god, and that is precisely why it is being displayed. Because it's a comforting representation of religious belief. Hardly secular.

C Peterson

What are you going to do. It's an ugly piece of crap that devalues the people who died, and devalues any monument commemorating the event. But it's a good place to let your dog take a piss if you're passing by. But if you're a Christian, maybe it makes sense, since God destroyed the towers.

Carmelita Spats Joe Petersast

Joe Pederast...I find immense aesthetic comfort in Andres Serrano's crucifix lodged in a bucket of urine...It is regularly on display in museums...The last time, a group of Catholic fanatics almost destroyed the work of art while on display at a museum in France...The curator left the damaged piece to show the barbaric, obtuse, tactless, insensitive, cunt-hood of wide-eyed Eucharist munchers...Just sayin'.

From the Washington Post came these comments:

Incredibly Gay Jesus cammo99

The hate from religion is why the towers came down in the first place. To pretend that Christianity is the victim after examining Christianity's past, is foolish to say the least.

Steve Darnell Zureiter

I suppose I need to repeat this for you, as well. "Respecting an establishment of religion," does not mean establishing a religion. It means giving preference to a religion, which including a cross (or any other religious symbol) in a government memorial does. The freedom of religion clause of the 1st Amendment means that the government will neither endorse a religion nor prevent adherents to a religion from worshipping as they please. It exists to keep the state from telling the church what it can do (within the reasonable confines of the law) and to keep the church from telling the state what to do.

David Batista FreeManinAmerica

Ignorance: state of being uninformed. Faith: Belief without proof.

No proof = Uninformed on a topic as you are not able to back it up.

therefore, Faith = Ignorance and Your religion requires faith so you shouldn't be be calling other ignorant when your whole religious belief is based on IGNORANCE.

And from The Blaze:

Comforteagle

The museum should be allowed to show rubbish that was got from the collapse, espesially if it looks like well known death tool and religious symbol since a religion was a key motivator in causing he thousands of deaths there. (Spelling error is the poster’s, and I have to say I can’t tell you how many times I’ve read that Christians are uneducated sheep.)

But there are actually some atheists who think it’s okay for the cross to be included, such as this poster:

Atrum_Angelus

I’m an atheist, and I don’t see why this shouldn’t be a part of the museum. I remember the news showing people using thus cross formed from the beams of the building as a means of comfort, and that was a part of the history of the aftermath.

I have a back ground in history (archaeology degree), and I don’t see how this is any different from a museum showing other pieces of history that just happen to also be religious in nature. One cannot simply wipe religion from the history books. It has had and still has, a major impact on the events of the world. Religion was even a part of the history that lead up to the attack on Sept. 11.

Excellent point, Atrum Angelus. You have proven not all atheists are ignorant Christ haters.

The_Doors_of_Perception gets off track as the original argument often does with this response to another poster:

The things you say…they are so elegant…as if Jesus could have spoken them himself. I’m sure Jesus cant wait to hang out with you in heaven. You can tell dirty jokes and talk about homosexuality in detail to each other…

Oh and you do know that you don’t have to be an athiest to believe in the fact of evolution or the big bang correct? Most sane people do… (An atheist who does not know how to spell his own disbelief.)

And on and on it goes. This is just a sampling of comments, but without a doubt, after studying many sites and comments, what’s been posted above is the general tone and spirit if you will, of non-believers.

Encouraged by lawsuits where they have won, such as removing 10 Commandment Displays and other religious displays, across the Web, many atheists band together in their disbelief and utter hatred of Christianity. Their common goal is their desire to remove any Christian signs or symbols from the public square, and they are fueled by the many wins they've had over the years.

But as I’ve written before, these lawsuits are costly and time-consuming, and this lawsuit is by far the most insulting to Christians and very unpopular. At the same time, though, it serves the purpose of educating people about American Atheists, their follwers, and what they stand for - a secular, godless America.

Certainly there will be an appeal by American Atheists in this matter and they will most certainly lose again. I look forward to perhaps, say, a Christmastime ruling.

Godspeed.

March 8 Marks 65–Year Anniversary of Banning Religious Studies in Public School

There is perhaps no group besides American Atheists and the ACLU who consistently challenge Christian signs, symbols and Christian tradition more than the Freedom From Religion Foundation, FFRF. The group has been victorious in many lawsuits and is a thorn in the side to many Christians who find their tactics to be militant atheism, and indeed, they are right.

On March 8th, FFRF is proudly commemorating the 65-year Anniversary of the 1948 landmark Supreme Court decision in McCollum vs. Board of Education, which banned religious studies in public schools.

The case was brought by atheist Vashti McCollum whose son attended public school in the Champaign, Ill., school district. The classes were voluntary, but McCollum declared her son was ostracized for not participating. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 8-1 that religious classes on school property were a violation of the separation of church and state.

Justice Hugo Black in a portion of his opinion wrote: “Here not only are the state’s tax-supported public school buildings used for the dissemination of religious doctrines. The State also affords sectarian groups an invaluable aid in that it helps to provide pupils for their religious classes through use of the state’s compulsory public school machinery. This is not separation of Church and State.”

Annie Laurie Gaylor, Co-President of FFRF posted a column commemorating the anniversary both on the groups Web site as well as their Facebook page.

Gaylor’s essay, entitled, “Give thanks to the McCollum Family,” is clearly a take on Christian’s giving thanks to God. Gaylor also notes she is en route to a celebration in Champaign to celebrate the anniversary.

“In the face of bitter defeat in two lower courts, social shunning, hate mail, reprisal against herself, her family and her children, Vashti did not give up. She was rewarded with a historic decision, 8-1, in her favor,” Gaylor writes.

“FFRF daily invokes the McCollum precedent in our legal letters of complaint over state/church violations in public schools,” notes Gaylor.

The group lists 12 ongoing lawsuits on its Web site challenging everything from a painting of Jesus in a school, to a graduation prayer, to a Catholic Shrine on a mountain. (Details of the lawsuits can be seen here: http://ffrf.org/legal/challenges/ongoing-lawsuits/

Gaylor also writes of the 65-year old ruling, “While we take a moment to savor this strong ruling, it must be noted that the Supreme Court has egregiously deviated from the principles in McCollum in its 2001 Good News Club v. Milford Central School District decision. What the court stopped during the school day, it now blesses as soon as the bell rings at the end of the school day.”

Clearly, the Supreme Court has been inconsistent in rulings. In addition to Gaylor’s aforementioned lawsuit, there have been divergent rulings in lawsuits that were seeking to remove 10 Commandment Displays – some have ruled the monuments can stay, while others rulings forced the removal of the monument in question.

Clearly, Gaylor and her cohorts at FFRF are very proud of this decades old victory that banned religious study in schools. Vashti McCollum and those like her that have stood against religion and won are the group’s and followers heroes.

Many Christians would argue that since these court decisions, schools have gone downhill with bullying, shootings, and many children with a general disrespect and disdain for authority.

In the 1940’s, mothers didn’t send their children to school with the thought that their child could be a victim of a mass shooting. Indeed, the thought never entered anyone’s mind. I personally know of one mother who pulled her child out of public school after the Newtown, Conn., shootings. And really, who could blame her?

What lack of religion and lack of God in schools has done is evident. We haven’t gotten better as a society, we’ve steadily gone down that slippery slippery slope of Godlessness. And that is no cause for celebration.