North Carolina school baptizes over 100 students without parental permission

[ProudModerate2]

Okay, how many of these kids belonged to some religion other than Christianity?

The point is it was against parental consent, something conservatives claim to like.

This is a private school not a public school so bad comparison here

It is not a "bad comparison."
"Parental consent" should be required.

Here is a major difference:
Parents have a choice whether to send their kid to a private school or not unlike public schools.

I makes no difference.
Should a school, just because it's "private," be OK for my young child to be forced or coerced to drink wine?
Or "well, it's a Christian school, so you should have known your young child will be convinced to drink wine at this facility."
What else are they going to do, or convince a young mind to consume, because the "power of the Lord" was "present," and this makes it OK?
What if a child has a allergic reaction to alcohol (even a little bit) or that wine/alcohol does not interact well (or deadly) with certain medication my child is taking?

[OSR stands with Israel]

Okay, how many of these kids belonged to some religion other than Christianity?

The point is it was against parental consent, something conservatives claim to like.

This is a private school not a public school so bad comparison here

It is not a "bad comparison."
"Parental consent" should be required.

Here is a major difference:

Parents have a choice whether to send their kid to a private school or not unlike public schools.

Absolutely unbelievable at the mouth breathers in this thread who somehow think because the school was running by Pentecostals that something is utterly jaw-dropping as their kids being Mass baptized without parental knowledge or consent was somehow remotely on the table.

Grotesque levels of hypocrisy as well for the same twits who jump up and down screaming over the necessity of parental consent for things like teaching evolution, teaching that gays aren't icky, Etc etc, suddenly say that that all flies out the door because private school blah blah blah blah duuuuuuuuuuuuuh!

I don’t think parental permission should be needed for any of those things . What there should be parental permission of is trans related stuff , sexual education etc 

[Badger]

Okay, how many of these kids belonged to some religion other than Christianity?

The point is it was against parental consent, something conservatives claim to like.

This is a private school not a public school so bad comparison here

It is not a "bad comparison."
"Parental consent" should be required.

Here is a major difference:

Parents have a choice whether to send their kid to a private school or not unlike public schools.

Absolutely unbelievable at the mouth breathers in this thread who somehow think because the school was running by Pentecostals that something is utterly jaw-dropping as their kids being Mass baptized without parental knowledge or consent was somehow remotely on the table.

Grotesque levels of hypocrisy as well for the same twits who jump up and down screaming over the necessity of parental consent for things like teaching evolution, teaching that gays aren't icky, Etc etc, suddenly say that that all flies out the door because private school blah blah blah blah duuuuuuuuuuuuuh!

I don’t think parental permission should be needed for any of those things . What there should be parental permission of is trans related stuff , sexual education etc 

And perhaps, just spitballing here, baptizing ones child even in a private school??!?

[OSR stands with Israel]

Okay, how many of these kids belonged to some religion other than Christianity?

The point is it was against parental consent, something conservatives claim to like.

This is a private school not a public school so bad comparison here

It is not a "bad comparison."
"Parental consent" should be required.

Here is a major difference:
Parents have a choice whether to send their kid to a private school or not unlike public schools.

I makes no difference.
Should a school, just because it's "private," be OK for my young child to be forced or coerced to drink wine?
Or "well, it's a Christian school, so you should have known your young child will be convinced to drink wine at this facility?
What else are they going to do, or convince a young mind to consume, because the "power of the Lord" was "present," and this makes it OK?

Private Enterprises can’t violate the law so being made to drink wine is absolutely violating the law . Other stuff would come down to whether or not they violated the terms and conditions of the contract they made with the parents and we would have to see if this violated it or not .

[jojoju1998]

The Catholic Church takes 3 years at most for one to become a Catholic, study of the Bible, Philosophy, Theology, Church History, prayer, retreats.

Meanwhile; Pentecostals...

Instant Christian !

We Pentecostals have a very different view of how one is saved than Catholics do, as well as what the role of Baptism is in the faith.  The theological differences that brought about by the Reformation have not been resolved in the over 500 years since Martin Luther nailed his 95 theses to the door of the Cathedral at Wittenberg.  There's been no compromise on the fundamental issue of what one must need to be Saved.  Catholics and Protestants have a very different idea of what this requires.  I'll spare the Atlas reader the details, but it's safe to say that the disagreement is ongoing.

Yes, one can be saved that fast, by Faith and by Faith in Christ alone.  It is another matter to be a mature Christian, to grow in the Lord, to study to show yourself approved for Church Leadership.  But to be saved is by Faith, and by Faith, ALONE.  Indeed, Justification by Faith Alone is the watershed doctrine of the Reformation; the Doctrine under which the Church stands or falls.

Faith requires Obedience; and doing the work of the lord, because Faith works THROUGH Love. Through the Church Community. Galatians 5:6. How do we express that Love ? The Catholic Church teaches that it is through the spiritual and corporal works of Mercy that faith drives people to grow more Holy. Santification.


Now going back to the topic, I doubt these students will ever attend Sunday services; or try to be more Holy in the sense of spiritual growth and peace.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Okay, how many of these kids belonged to some religion other than Christianity?

The point is it was against parental consent, something conservatives claim to like.

This is a private school not a public school so bad comparison here

It is not a "bad comparison."
"Parental consent" should be required.

Here is a major difference:

Parents have a choice whether to send their kid to a private school or not unlike public schools.

Absolutely unbelievable at the mouth breathers in this thread who somehow think because the school was running by Pentecostals that something is utterly jaw-dropping as their kids being Mass baptized without parental knowledge or consent was somehow remotely on the table.

Grotesque levels of hypocrisy as well for the same twits who jump up and down screaming over the necessity of parental consent for things like teaching evolution, teaching that gays aren't icky, Etc etc, suddenly say that that all flies out the door because private school blah blah blah blah duuuuuuuuuuuuuh!

I don’t think parental permission should be needed for any of those things . What there should be parental permission of is trans related stuff , sexual education etc  

And perhaps, just spitballing here, baptizing ones child even in a private school??!?

Depends on what the terms and conditions of the school’s contract is and none of us know in this case . If doing this violates their contract then yes this should not be permissible at all and the parents have a right to sue here otherwise they don’t .

[TheReckoning]

As long as the students themselves consented, and it wasn’t a public school, I see no problem at all with this.

Aren't you one of the twits who go on about how gender affirming care is wrong because kids around the age of 11 can't begin to consent to such things? But they can do so regarding a religious conversion without parental consent?

Joke poster confirmed

People can change their religion whenever they want. People can’t change their physiology whenever they want- reversal of “gender affirming care” requires years and years of communicating back and forth with many different healthcare professionals and a lot of money - if it’s even possible at all.

These two things are not the same. People have a right to choose and practice their religion as they want- that includes minors.

[ProudModerate2]

Okay, how many of these kids belonged to some religion other than Christianity?

The point is it was against parental consent, something conservatives claim to like.

This is a private school not a public school so bad comparison here

It is not a "bad comparison."
"Parental consent" should be required.

Here is a major difference:
Parents have a choice whether to send their kid to a private school or not unlike public schools.

I makes no difference.
Should a school, just because it's "private," be OK for my young child to be forced or coerced to drink wine?
Or "well, it's a Christian school, so you should have known your young child will be convinced to drink wine at this facility?
What else are they going to do, or convince a young mind to consume, because the "power of the Lord" was "present," and this makes it OK?

Private Enterprises can’t violate the law so being made to drink wine is absolutely violating the law . Other stuff would come down to whether or not they violated the terms and conditions of the contract they made with the parents and we would have to see if this violated it or not .

They didn't "make them" do anything.
They allowed it to happen, probably making the non-parent-consenting kids to watch the Baptism of the parent-consenting kids, and then probably asking the other kids if they want the same?
They unethicality coerced the kids to do this. The kids are way to young to make this kind of decision, and you (the principal) can't stand there like a jacka$$ and blame that it happened because of the "power of the Lord."

[OSR stands with Israel]

Okay, how many of these kids belonged to some religion other than Christianity?

The point is it was against parental consent, something conservatives claim to like.

This is a private school not a public school so bad comparison here

It is not a "bad comparison."
"Parental consent" should be required.

Here is a major difference:
Parents have a choice whether to send their kid to a private school or not unlike public schools.

I makes no difference.
Should a school, just because it's "private," be OK for my young child to be forced or coerced to drink wine?
Or "well, it's a Christian school, so you should have known your young child will be convinced to drink wine at this facility?
What else are they going to do, or convince a young mind to consume, because the "power of the Lord" was "present," and this makes it OK?

Private Enterprises can’t violate the law so being made to drink wine is absolutely violating the law . Other stuff would come down to whether or not they violated the terms and conditions of the contract they made with the parents and we would have to see if this violated it or not .

They didn't "make them" do anything.
They allowed it to happen, probably making the non-parent-consenting kids to watch the Baptism of the parent-consenting kids, and then probably asking the other kids if they want the same?
They unethicality coerced the kids to do this. The kids are way to young to make this kind of decision, and you (the principal) can't stand there like a jacka$$ and blame that it happened because of the "power of the Lord."

None of us know the terms and conditions of the contract the school made with the parents and that’s what it comes down too . This is how the free market works and private schools govern by the same rules as the free market in general

[Fuzzy Bear Loves Christian Missionaries]

Okay, how many of these kids belonged to some religion other than Christianity?

The point is it was against parental consent, something conservatives claim to like.

This is a private school not a public school so bad comparison here

It is not a "bad comparison."
"Parental consent" should be required.

Here is a major difference:

Parents have a choice whether to send their kid to a private school or not unlike public schools.

Absolutely unbelievable at the mouth breathers in this thread who somehow think because the school was running by Pentecostals that something is utterly jaw-dropping as their kids being Mass baptized without parental knowledge or consent was somehow remotely on the table.

Grotesque levels of hypocrisy as well for the same twits who jump up and down screaming over the necessity of parental consent for things like teaching evolution, teaching that gays aren't icky, Etc etc, suddenly say that that all flies out the door because private school blah blah blah blah duuuuuuuuuuuuuh!

If you send your child to a school like this, you consent to the teaching of their doctrines.  Documents are given to parents before the child is enrolled stating what they do.  The school is sponsored by a Pentecostal denomination, but the School, itself, may not necessarily teach all aspects of Pentecostal doctrine, but Water Baptism is ordered by Jesus Christ and most Fundamentalist denominations view Water Baptism as something ordained by the Lord.  

The school has had second thoughts about not notifying parents.  I, for one, would be overjoyed if one of my grandchildren opted for this in a school such as this.  I understand that some parents may not, but they did place their children in a school that is overtly Christian.

As to whether or not kids are of other religious beliefs:  The school has no responsibility to ratify those other beliefs.  The parents can take their child out of that school if that's a problem.  This is a defined religious environment, and parents are not forced to send their kids to this school.

If anyone thinks this is terrible, but is fine with teachers (without parental knowledge or consent) discusses Gender Identity, Gender Fluiidity, sexual orientation, or any other topic of a highly sexualized nature, they they are the ones who are being ridiculous.  Badger's anti-Christian bigotry (and the bigotry of the Daily Beast and a few others here) is to be expected.  So I'll ask this crowd:  If you're THIS bent out of shape about a Water Baptism, given the context this occurred in, how bent out of shape should I be if my son is presented with the idea of Gender Identity, Gender Fluidity, the moral correctness of SSM in public schools all on the public dime?  

[dead0man]

now, I don't fashion myself as an expert an Christianity (though I do seem to know far more about it than most Christians), but I'm pretty sure Jesus doesn't want (and won't accept into Heaven), people who were tricked into being baptized when they were 11.  Baptism isn't a magic trick one can do to get someone else into Heaven and any Christian that thinks that way is, well, wrong.

[jojoju1998]

now, I don't fashion myself as an expert an Christianity (though I do seem to know far more about it than most Christians), but I'm pretty sure Jesus doesn't want (and won't accept into Heaven), people who were tricked into being baptized when they were 11.  Baptism isn't a magic trick one can do to get someone else into Heaven and any Christian that thinks that way is, well, wrong.

Well that's the Protestant belief. Salvation by Faith Alone. Boom. Done. You're saved. I doubt that these kids will continue to be practicing Christians after wards though in their adult years.

[ProudModerate2]

Okay, how many of these kids belonged to some religion other than Christianity?

The point is it was against parental consent, something conservatives claim to like.

This is a private school not a public school so bad comparison here

It is not a "bad comparison."
"Parental consent" should be required.

Here is a major difference:
Parents have a choice whether to send their kid to a private school or not unlike public schools.

I makes no difference.
Should a school, just because it's "private," be OK for my young child to be forced or coerced to drink wine?
Or "well, it's a Christian school, so you should have known your young child will be convinced to drink wine at this facility?
What else are they going to do, or convince a young mind to consume, because the "power of the Lord" was "present," and this makes it OK?

Private Enterprises can’t violate the law so being made to drink wine is absolutely violating the law . Other stuff would come down to whether or not they violated the terms and conditions of the contract they made with the parents and we would have to see if this violated it or not .

They didn't "make them" do anything.
They allowed it to happen, probably making the non-parent-consenting kids to watch the Baptism of the parent-consenting kids, and then probably asking the other kids if they want the same?
They unethicality coerced the kids to do this. The kids are way to young to make this kind of decision, and you (the principal) can't stand there like a jacka$$ and blame that it happened because of the "power of the Lord."

None of us know the terms and conditions of the contract the school made with the parents and that’s what it comes down too . This is how the free market works and private schools govern by the same rules as the free market in general

You are absolutely f****** incredible.
Just because your an economics junkie, does not mean you should insert such hogwash as "the free market" into this discussion.

[Fuzzy Bear Loves Christian Missionaries]

Okay, how many of these kids belonged to some religion other than Christianity?

The point is it was against parental consent, something conservatives claim to like.

This is a private school not a public school so bad comparison here

It is not a "bad comparison."
"Parental consent" should be required.

Here is a major difference:
Parents have a choice whether to send their kid to a private school or not unlike public schools.

I makes no difference.
Should a school, just because it's "private," be OK for my young child to be forced or coerced to drink wine?
Or "well, it's a Christian school, so you should have known your young child will be convinced to drink wine at this facility?
What else are they going to do, or convince a young mind to consume, because the "power of the Lord" was "present," and this makes it OK?

Private Enterprises can’t violate the law so being made to drink wine is absolutely violating the law . Other stuff would come down to whether or not they violated the terms and conditions of the contract they made with the parents and we would have to see if this violated it or not .

They didn't "make them" do anything.
They allowed it to happen, probably making the non-parent-consenting kids to watch the Baptism of the parent-consenting kids, and then probably asking the other kids if they want the same?
They unethicality coerced the kids to do this. The kids are way to young to make this kind of decision, and you (the principal) can't stand there like a jacka$$ and blame that it happened because of the "power of the Lord."

I haven't seen you object once to teachers asking young students about their Gender Identity, presenting Gender Fluidity as a concept to schoolchildren, and discussing highly sexualized topics.  Since you're bent out of shape on this topic, what exactly do you think about the above topics being presented in public schools on the public dime, with, or without, the consent of children?

[jojoju1998]

Okay, how many of these kids belonged to some religion other than Christianity?

The point is it was against parental consent, something conservatives claim to like.

This is a private school not a public school so bad comparison here

It is not a "bad comparison."
"Parental consent" should be required.

Here is a major difference:
Parents have a choice whether to send their kid to a private school or not unlike public schools.

I makes no difference.
Should a school, just because it's "private," be OK for my young child to be forced or coerced to drink wine?
Or "well, it's a Christian school, so you should have known your young child will be convinced to drink wine at this facility?
What else are they going to do, or convince a young mind to consume, because the "power of the Lord" was "present," and this makes it OK?

Private Enterprises can’t violate the law so being made to drink wine is absolutely violating the law . Other stuff would come down to whether or not they violated the terms and conditions of the contract they made with the parents and we would have to see if this violated it or not .

They didn't "make them" do anything.
They allowed it to happen, probably making the non-parent-consenting kids to watch the Baptism of the parent-consenting kids, and then probably asking the other kids if they want the same?
They unethicality coerced the kids to do this. The kids are way to young to make this kind of decision, and you (the principal) can't stand there like a jacka$$ and blame that it happened because of the "power of the Lord."

I haven't seen you object once to teachers asking young students about their Gender Identity, presenting Gender Fluidity as a concept to schoolchildren, and discussing highly sexualized topics.  Since you're bent out of shape on this topic, what exactly do you think about the above topics being presented in public schools on the public dime, with, or without, the consent of children?

I have cousins in Public school and none of them are learning about this. Like None. What are you talking about

Like there's nothing. Nada. My Sister who is still in high school, there's nothing in her textbooks. Nothing.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Okay, how many of these kids belonged to some religion other than Christianity?

The point is it was against parental consent, something conservatives claim to like.

This is a private school not a public school so bad comparison here

It is not a "bad comparison."
"Parental consent" should be required.

Here is a major difference:
Parents have a choice whether to send their kid to a private school or not unlike public schools.

I makes no difference.
Should a school, just because it's "private," be OK for my young child to be forced or coerced to drink wine?
Or "well, it's a Christian school, so you should have known your young child will be convinced to drink wine at this facility?
What else are they going to do, or convince a young mind to consume, because the "power of the Lord" was "present," and this makes it OK?

Private Enterprises can’t violate the law so being made to drink wine is absolutely violating the law . Other stuff would come down to whether or not they violated the terms and conditions of the contract they made with the parents and we would have to see if this violated it or not .

They didn't "make them" do anything.
They allowed it to happen, probably making the non-parent-consenting kids to watch the Baptism of the parent-consenting kids, and then probably asking the other kids if they want the same?
They unethicality coerced the kids to do this. The kids are way to young to make this kind of decision, and you (the principal) can't stand there like a jacka$$ and blame that it happened because of the "power of the Lord."

None of us know the terms and conditions of the contract the school made with the parents and that’s what it comes down too . This is how the free market works and private schools govern by the same rules as the free market in general

You are absolutely f****** incredible.
Just because your an economics junkie, does not mean you should insert such hogwash as "the free market" into this discussion.

Um yes private schools are part of private enterprise so they are governed in a similar way. Nobody is forced to send their kids to private school so I would not even object to much of the stuff I object to if private schools did it .

[ProudModerate2]

...  Badger's anti-Christian bigotry (and the bigotry of the Daily Beast and a few others here) is to be expected.  

You calling out others about "bigotry" is rich.
Through the many years here, I have seen example after example of you expressing (different levels of) bigotry/hate towards immigrants (brown people) and people of the LBGT+ community.

[Kahane's Grave Is A Gender-Neutral Bathroom]

Naturally OSR brought up the market economy here.

[jojoju1998]

Okay, how many of these kids belonged to some religion other than Christianity?

The point is it was against parental consent, something conservatives claim to like.

This is a private school not a public school so bad comparison here

It is not a "bad comparison."
"Parental consent" should be required.

Here is a major difference:
Parents have a choice whether to send their kid to a private school or not unlike public schools.

I makes no difference.
Should a school, just because it's "private," be OK for my young child to be forced or coerced to drink wine?
Or "well, it's a Christian school, so you should have known your young child will be convinced to drink wine at this facility?
What else are they going to do, or convince a young mind to consume, because the "power of the Lord" was "present," and this makes it OK?

Private Enterprises can’t violate the law so being made to drink wine is absolutely violating the law . Other stuff would come down to whether or not they violated the terms and conditions of the contract they made with the parents and we would have to see if this violated it or not .

They didn't "make them" do anything.
They allowed it to happen, probably making the non-parent-consenting kids to watch the Baptism of the parent-consenting kids, and then probably asking the other kids if they want the same?
They unethicality coerced the kids to do this. The kids are way to young to make this kind of decision, and you (the principal) can't stand there like a jacka$$ and blame that it happened because of the "power of the Lord."

None of us know the terms and conditions of the contract the school made with the parents and that’s what it comes down too . This is how the free market works and private schools govern by the same rules as the free market in general

You are absolutely f****** incredible.
Just because your an economics junkie, does not mean you should insert such hogwash as "the free market" into this discussion.

Um yes private schools are part of private enterprise so they are governed in a similar way. Nobody is forced to send their kids to private school so I would not even object to much of the stuff I object to if private schools did it .

If these kids are being taught that evolution is wrong; and that The Book of Genesis is literal... somehow that is not as bad as what is supposdely taught in public schools.

[ProudModerate2]

Okay, how many of these kids belonged to some religion other than Christianity?

The point is it was against parental consent, something conservatives claim to like.

This is a private school not a public school so bad comparison here

It is not a "bad comparison."
"Parental consent" should be required.

Here is a major difference:
Parents have a choice whether to send their kid to a private school or not unlike public schools.

I makes no difference.
Should a school, just because it's "private," be OK for my young child to be forced or coerced to drink wine?
Or "well, it's a Christian school, so you should have known your young child will be convinced to drink wine at this facility?
What else are they going to do, or convince a young mind to consume, because the "power of the Lord" was "present," and this makes it OK?

Private Enterprises can’t violate the law so being made to drink wine is absolutely violating the law . Other stuff would come down to whether or not they violated the terms and conditions of the contract they made with the parents and we would have to see if this violated it or not .

They didn't "make them" do anything.
They allowed it to happen, probably making the non-parent-consenting kids to watch the Baptism of the parent-consenting kids, and then probably asking the other kids if they want the same?
They unethicality coerced the kids to do this. The kids are way to young to make this kind of decision, and you (the principal) can't stand there like a jacka$$ and blame that it happened because of the "power of the Lord."

None of us know the terms and conditions of the contract the school made with the parents and that’s what it comes down too . This is how the free market works and private schools govern by the same rules as the free market in general

You are absolutely f****** incredible.
Just because your an economics junkie, does not mean you should insert such hogwash as "the free market" into this discussion.

Um yes private schools are part of private enterprise so they are governed in a similar way. Nobody is forced to send their kids to private school so I would not even object to much of the stuff I object to if private schools did it .

I have no problem with your second sentence above.
Just don't try to have us swallow s*** about "the free market" regarding this topic. Like seriously, it's almost a derailing comment you are making.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Naturally OSR brought up the market economy here.

What's wrong about that

[dead0man]

now, I don't fashion myself as an expert an Christianity (though I do seem to know far more about it than most Christians), but I'm pretty sure Jesus doesn't want (and won't accept into Heaven), people who were tricked into being baptized when they were 11.  Baptism isn't a magic trick one can do to get someone else into Heaven and any Christian that thinks that way is, well, wrong.

Well that's the Protestant belief. Salvation by Faith Alone. Boom. Done. You're saved. I doubt that these kids will continue to be practicing Christians after wards though in their adult years.

but the faith part of "salvation by faith" is the faith of the potential Christian.  If these kids were tricked, they don't have that faith/they ain't getting into heaven/the people doing it don't understand Christianity very well.

[ProudModerate2]

Naturally OSR brought up the market economy here.

What's wrong about that

You can not possibly be that naive.

[Kahane's Grave Is A Gender-Neutral Bathroom]

Naturally OSR brought up the market economy here.

What's wrong about that

It's just kind of funny that on page two of a thread about private religious schools in North Carolina the free market somehow fits into the picture.

[Fuzzy Bear Loves Christian Missionaries]

Okay, how many of these kids belonged to some religion other than Christianity?

The point is it was against parental consent, something conservatives claim to like.

This is a private school not a public school so bad comparison here

It is not a "bad comparison."
"Parental consent" should be required.

Here is a major difference:
Parents have a choice whether to send their kid to a private school or not unlike public schools.

I makes no difference.
Should a school, just because it's "private," be OK for my young child to be forced or coerced to drink wine?
Or "well, it's a Christian school, so you should have known your young child will be convinced to drink wine at this facility?
What else are they going to do, or convince a young mind to consume, because the "power of the Lord" was "present," and this makes it OK?

Private Enterprises can’t violate the law so being made to drink wine is absolutely violating the law . Other stuff would come down to whether or not they violated the terms and conditions of the contract they made with the parents and we would have to see if this violated it or not .

They didn't "make them" do anything.
They allowed it to happen, probably making the non-parent-consenting kids to watch the Baptism of the parent-consenting kids, and then probably asking the other kids if they want the same?
They unethicality coerced the kids to do this. The kids are way to young to make this kind of decision, and you (the principal) can't stand there like a jacka$$ and blame that it happened because of the "power of the Lord."

None of us know the terms and conditions of the contract the school made with the parents and that’s what it comes down too . This is how the free market works and private schools govern by the same rules as the free market in general

You are absolutely f****** incredible.
Just because your an economics junkie, does not mean you should insert such hogwash as "the free market" into this discussion.

This is very much a Free Market issue.  These parents want their kids to have a certain kind of education that is not provided in the Public Schools.  Indeed, the parents paying good money to send their kids to this school would probably be unhappy if their school DIDN'T assertively proclaim the Faith in the classroom, and in all of your activites.

Your anti-Christian bigotry is out in the open.  If you weren't expending so much hot air here about how hateful everyone you don't agree with is, I'd let it blow over.  But you won't stop, and the reason you won't stop is because you hate Evangelical Christians.  That's fine too.  Perhaps you have a specific personal reason for that.  That's OK if it's the case, but you have never said that, so I'll simply chalk up your attitudes towards Christian as the sort of "disgusting" "hate" you constantly rant about.

In many ways, CentristRepublican has a better screen name than you.  CR isn't much of a Republican, but he's at least a Centrist.  I'll let the reader decide if the body of your work is something to be proud of, but you're not "Moderate" at all.  There is no moderation in your hatred toward Evangelical Christians.  That's your business to a point, but when you virtue signal how others are Hateful and Disgusting, it's time to turn away from the computer screen to the mirror.