That, ultimately, is all we have been arguing for. Not state established atheism, not an atheist state at all but a secular one.

And America is losing its grip on the concept of a secular state, as it becomes increasingly impossible to elect the non-religious, where the worst Christian minority, aided and abetted by the best Christian majority, threatens the liberty of all.

Creationism, here you have Christians arguing that it is best to lie to America's children, that the purpose of schools is not ultimately to educate, but to indoctrinate the next generation.

ID, creationism, "teach the controversy" and all of that, it isn't about educating the youth, it is about lying to them so they can hold untenable beliefs and be controlled by telegenic preachers who want their "$1000 seed."

And this isn't a small part of America's Christian culture.

Tiller's murder, where a doctor is murdered for performing a legal procedure, which was performed for very good reasons, and the murder is celebrated by America's theocrats.

And yet, for all of that, atheists who have gone for the last 20 to 30 years without much of a voice, here we are arguing against this, and the Christian left will whinge and whine at us for being too "combatative", it will slam us for not being "tolerant" enough.

You have Netroots Nation calling for an end to the seperation of Church and State, where the proposal is that people get to propose legislation based on their religion with zero criticism.

Who have the NCSE and America's other major scientific institutions specifically actually favouring one interpretation of religion over others, by claiming that religion does not contradict science.

Sure, some intepretations of the Bible may not contradict science as it stands, but those aren't the only ways of reading the Bible, and it relies on dismissing half of it as being metaphors and allegory besides.

I am not saying the major science institutions need to endorse atheism, I am saying they need to stick to science - provide the facts and let people interpret them as they see fit, with no concern as to whether it contradicts religion or not.

Because so far the kowtow to Abrahamic religion approach has not netted any major victories, it has won in court, but lost in popular opinion resulting in nothing more than a stalemate that is threatening the US' ability to maintain its economy.

Over the last 30 years, America's technological supremacy has been supplanted, your manufacturing sector has lagged and the service sector has grown, wonder why you have a finance crisis? Who the heck was supporting the service industry? At the same time, you have had the rise of the religious right and the most lukewarm and limp wristed response possible from the major scientific organisations.

And you cannot pretend, that the problem is just the religious right. It is in the religious left that seeks not so much to oppress, as to silence those who stand up against oppression, who respond to calls for a change in the way science is approached by telling the reformers that they are "strident", "shrill" or "mean" and "intollerant."

Many a religious lefty will use the exact same reasoning and arguments against the so-called "new atheists" that are rejected when they come from the neocons arguing politics.

Right down to the "serious" atheists who seem to do nothing more than slam atheists, much as the "serious" liberals who did nothing more than slam liberals.

And here is the thing, we aren't actually saying you don't have the right to your religion. We are saying we have the right to disagree with your religion and argue against your religion without being accused of being inately immoral.

Without being told that there are "No atheists in foxholes" even as atheist soldiers are threatened by their fundementalist brothers in arms with fragging.

Without being told that we are being "intolerant" simply because we don't agree with your ideas.

I don't hold Christians to be stupid, I hold certain ideas held by Christians to be stupid. I do not claim all Christians are the vile oppressor, heck it is a minority, but when the majority tells us, like mothers to a child with an abusive father, to shut up about the abuse? Yes, we hold you responsible for the minority.

Church and state must be seperate, not because it runs the risk simply of having the religious right coming to power and banning music, like as happened in Afghanistan, or because some theocratic dictator will take over as is happening in Iran, but because as these things happen you will have the religious left going right along with it right up until it is too late.

All for their God defined into meaninglessnes. All for their "highbrow" theology. All for metaphors, allegories, and a thousand different ways of saying nothing in really long sentences.

All for BS.

Post birth any major risks to the mother's health have passed, the child can survive without the mother's body maintaining it, and it can be given up for adoption with immediate effect.

Pre-birth, the mother may still suffer health complications, the child generally cannot survive without the mother's body maintaining it, and the child cannot be given up for adoption with immediate effect, for the very practical reason that it is inside the mother.