Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF)


Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF)

The Freedom From Religion Foundation, based in Madison, Wis., is a national association of freethinkers (atheists, agnostics) that has been working since 1978 to keep church and state separate.

Location: Madison
Members: 703
Latest Activity: Dec 26, 2017

Discussion Forum

Annie Laurie Gaylor Addresses NOFS "Freethought Fiesta"

Started by Loren Miller. Last reply by Loren Miller Nov 22, 2016. 6 Replies

This past April, the Northern Ohio Freethought Society sponsored a "Freethought Fiesta," which among other things featured some terrific Mexican cooking for attendees and a talk by Freedom From…Continue

Tags: Annie Laurie Gaylor, Northern Ohio Freethought Society, Freedom From Religion Foundation

Human soul

Started by Lemual Poot. Last reply by tom sarbeck Nov 3, 2016. 55 Replies

I've heard many so called atheists refer to the "soul" as if it actually existed.  My question is:  If you believe humans have a soul are you really an atheist? Continue

Be it enacted by citizens of United States of America, three citizens be designated as true patriots

Started by Joan Denoo. Last reply by Lemual Poot Jun 6, 2015. 6 Replies

Whereas, Olivia McConnell, Eight-year-old, wrote her South Carolina state representatives; and Whereas, Olivia provided a legitimate reason to suggest this legislation:1. One of the first discoveries…Continue

Comment Wall


You need to be a member of Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) to add comments!

Comment by Carl Pastor on February 12, 2012 at 12:51am

well i tell u james. i wish i lived in a world in which politicians did want they were elected to do and i never heard "What he reallt wanted was".  canadas system seems to be pretty good, im for a 100% copy.

Comment by James M. Martin on February 11, 2012 at 3:01pm

@ Carl, If he opted out of public option it was only to win over Blue Dogs and a few conservatives who didn't want more millions added to eligibility and foreclosure of the option to not sign up those with pre-existing conditions.  What he really wanted was a single pay system similar to Britain and Canada, France and Germany, the Scandinavian countries, &c. ad infinitum, i.e. "European socialism."

Comment by James M. Martin on February 11, 2012 at 2:55pm

@Tim: Not so fast!  Although it was assumed that the insurance companies would be gladdened at the prospect of much less expensive contraception than carrying to term and giving birth, they already are quibbling about the added expense.

Comment by James M. Martin on February 11, 2012 at 9:13am

Ted, I keep reminding the religious right that they should recall what happened to the Papists after the fall of the Bastille: at the initiation of Madame La Guillotine (her coming out, you might say), religionists were the first to meet "The National Razor."  If we have a religious revolution in America, the pedophile priests will be put to the slicer, their cocksucker heads separated from their bodies, their hooded executioner conferring his benediction, "This is the final separation of church and state."

Comment by James M. Martin on February 11, 2012 at 9:04am

Troy, may I make a suggestion: the degree of narrow-mindedness and anti-humanness a religions sect, the greater the persecution complex.  I do not see all that many mainstream (Methodist, Presbyterian, Episcopal, &c.) sects joining in the "put upon" claims of the religious right, and it may be explained by the fact that these groups tend to accept the wall of separation.  Southern Baptists and evangelicals of all stripes are the main culprits.  Sadly, the recent online debate between Sam Harris and Andrew Sullivan on the proposition that "sane" or mainstream religionists enable the loonies like evangelicals did not get nationwide attention.  I would pay good money to see the two of them on stage for a couple of hours.  Why not?

Comment by James M. Martin on February 11, 2012 at 8:54am

David W, what "they" (I must imagine you mean the believers and their vocal element) do not understand is that the First Amendment not only prohibits the establishment of a state religion, it prohibits discrimination against those who do not believe at all.  The most absurd thing I read during the entire contraception flap was an editorial in the Washington Post (of all places) by some woman who claimed that the Obama Administration showed favoritism toward secularism, which she actually characterized as "a religion."  The last time I looked, secularists are non-religions.  I would suggest that the primary tenet of a religion is belief, that something cannot be called a "religion" unless it requires belief in a deity or deities.  The phrase, "Church of No God" is oxymoronic in the extreme.

Comment by Carl Pastor on February 10, 2012 at 11:21pm

i thot the pres opted out of public option, removing any chance of us keeping the insurance coimpanys honest.

Comment by James M. Martin on February 10, 2012 at 4:38pm

@Jennifer Marie: right now, unfortunately, the believers are the majority.  It may take a few more generations, but youth is moving in the right direction in many instances.  They no longer believe in marriage and certainly have nothing against anyone, including same sex couples, marrying, if that is their will.  Ditto abortion on demand.  But fossils like Santorum and Tony Perkins will never get it, you are certainly right.  But actually, they might get it, but they heed the advice of Seneca and are using religion to ascend to power.

Comment by Troy Gorsline on February 10, 2012 at 2:27pm

Next stop - PUBLIC OPTION!!!!!

Comment by Troy Gorsline on February 10, 2012 at 2:26pm

Yes. Insurance reform really is reform. Too bad the crazy wing nuts are going all....

Crazy Wing Nuts


Members (703)



Update Your Membership :




Nexus on Social Media:


© 2018   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service