I think the first billboard is advertising an alternative worldview. Is it a slight jab at Christianity? Sure. But, this billboard is quite benign compared to some that atheists have put up.

As far as Ham's billboard is concerned, He is simply advertising the museum. He has a right to do that. It has nothing to do with atheism. After all atheism and evolution are not the same. While many believers in evolution are atheists...not all are.

Some atheists, myself included, have argued that the state does have a vested interest in the education of children. I don't go as far as Lawrence Krauss and say, that teaching child certain religious beliefs is child abuse, but it does matter WHAT children are taught, and we as a society are affected when children are taught myth instead of science.

I am a secular humanist. Atheist describes my belief about gods. Secular humanism describes my social and moral values.

Sadly, in a lot of church environments the only qualification for youth work is being young and outgoing. Youth groups are concentrated cells of raging hormones and I am of the opinion that they are dangerous places to turn your teenagers loose. Well intentioned, naive relationships can end in inappropriate behavior. Worse, youth groups are prime targets for sexual predators. The best place for teenagers is right next to their parents.

Cynical? Yes, but I know of too many instances where things turned out just like the story you mention in this post. Children have parents for a reason and, for some reason, many parents are far too trusting and too willing to turn the responsibility for their children over to people they really don't know.

I would beg to differ with the good doctor. Osteen's view on homosexuality has been the accepted view in Most f the Christian church for centuries. Now answer move towards a more inclusive society some Christians are bothered by what the Bible says abut homosexuality. Instead of standing up and declaring that the Bible is offensive and repressive, they reinterpret it or revise it to fit their viewpoint. Osteen's view is supported by the text and that is the problem...

I much prefer the Christian who says, The Bible says, than the Christian who reinterprets it or revises it to fit popular public opinion. When a fundamentalist speaks there is no doubt about what try believe. The liberal? Like nailing Jello to the wall.

You say the truth is the truth. So which truth is the truth? Both views run to the Bible to "prove" their viewpoint. That is what is so neat about the Bible....it can be made to say anything.

I despise Osteens AND Hoffman's view. The Bible is the problem regardless of how it is interpreted.