Thank you for writing this. I've been addressing similar issues on my blog for the last couple of weeks, having been told NOT to mention my opinions about religious people who "really believe", lest I offend them. But never mind that I get offended much of the time. The double-standard and the religious privilege is increasingly annoying in America these days.

As I understand it, the American Catholic Church will also ordain woman as well as married men. ACC does not submit itself to Vatican rule and doesn't follow the Pope. Apparently there are several up-and-coming Catholic denominations apart from the Roman Catholic Church. Bravo to them.

wait.... what?? the abused victim is supposed to "make amends"??? For what?

I'm all for letting people believe what they want. The problem is that actions derive from beliefs. In particular, people vote to control the lives of others based on those unproven beliefs. At that point, it is necessary to speak up and challenge them to prove their position or keep it to themselves.

yup. my neighborhood has people coming through regularly on trash day, scrounging through all the trash cans at the street, collecting cans. They're just part of the local scenery, and that's how they make part of their income. I hardly ever drink canned drinks any more, but when I do I keep the empties separate and make them available beside my regular trash.

You're joking, right? Why would a fifth grade student, or the student's parent, need to be interviewed? They did nothing wrong here; they merely reported inappropriate behavior from the teacher, who had no right to be anointing anyone or anything in the classroom. And, just so you know, I used to be a Pentecostal minister; reading the Bible is what made me an atheist! I think everyone, especially Christians, should learn to actually read the book they claim to love and follow so much.

Are you serious? This was being done in a FIFTH GRADE class.... roughly 10-year old kids. Totally appropriate for a young pre-teen child to go home and tell the parent that the teacher was doing something strange, and absolutely appropriate for the parent to stick up for the child and find out what was going on. As for "perfectly good teacher" ... a perfectly good teacher doesn't impose her personal religion on public school students; a perfectly good teacher does not cross the legal and moral boundaries of the teacher-student relationship. And what if that "holy oil" was peanut oil blessed by a priest or whatever, and the child was allergic to peanut products? Most anointing oil is plain olive oil, but even so, it is not appropriate to have a religious ritual in a public school.

Cool... Just clicked to add you on facebook! :-)

as a fellow knitter and outspoken atheist, I am proud to know our Yarn Harlot influenced the world beyond our fiberous venues. (knitivity.com)

It's nice to like things! I'm sure LOTS of people like to have the government printing up their religious slogans and symbols.

You write: "The General Assembly must 'OK' all plates so don't hold your breath for a 'We Don't Believe' tag anytime soon."

And that is precisely WHY there shouldn't be such tags at all. If it's all personal, anyway, why wouldn't the General Assembly approve of "In Reason We Trust" on individual vanity plates? I'd love to put it to the test, and have Tennessee humanists, atheists, agnostics, free-thinkers ask for "In Reason We Trust" on the license plates and see what happens.

Seems like the General Assembly would yield to religion while not yielding to those who aren't religious. Makes no sense and is grossly unfair -- why should belief continue to be privileged while non-belief is denied? If you want to put symbols of your belief on your car, that is your right and privilege, just do it somewhere other than on governmental tags.

I'm not arguing against religion, or religious people. I'm arguing against inappropriate privilege being extended to religion.