The Second-Largest Religion in Each State

Reid Wilson, Washington Post, June 4, 2014

Christianity is by far the largest religion in the United States; more than three-quarters of Americans identify as Christians. A little more than half of us identify as Protestants, about 23 percent as Catholic and about 2 percent as Mormon.

But what about the rest of us? In the Western U.S., Buddhists represent the largest non-Christian religious bloc in most states. In 20 states, mostly in the Midwest and South, Islam is the largest non-Christian faith tradition. And in 15 states, mostly in the Northeast, Judaism has the most followers after Christianity. Hindus come in second place in Arizona and Delaware, and there are more practitioners of the Baha’i faith in South Carolina than anyone else.

All these data come from the Association of Statisticians of American Religious Bodies, which conducts a U.S. Religion Census every 10 years. Here’s what their map of the second-most-practiced religions looks like:

Map1

{snip}

Topics: ,

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • Lewis33

    Does Delaware crack down harder on white collar criminals or what?

    • I might be the only other person who got that.

      Joe Biden did make a crack about all the Indian 7-11 store owners in Wilmington, Delaware, (aka Engelmanville), so maybe it just happens to have a lot of subcontinentals.

      • IstvanIN

        I got it.

    • AutomaticSlim

      Lot’s of financial companies moved IT departments and data centers to Delaware over the last 20 years or so. And where cheapskate companies go, cheap H1-B Indian labor is sure to follow.

  • Cannot Tell

    I want to keep America predominantly white as much as every other AR reader, but there’s no doubt in my mind that Buddhists are generally better people than Christians. I hope that the Buddhist minority continues to grow.

    • IstvanIN

      Move to a Buddhist country if you love them so much. I have nothing against Buddhists but I want to live in a Christian countries. And don’t try the old “the founders weren’t Christian” garbage.

      • Cannot Tell

        I don’t think the founders were Christians, but that’s a debate for another day.

        Would you mind explaining to me why you prefer to live in a white Christian country as opposed to a white Buddhist country? (I know that the reason the population of Buddhists is rising is because of the change in racial demographics, but I’m curious as to which country you’d pick if race was held constant.)

        • IstvanIN

          I am of European descent and believe in Christ. Pretty simple. Those are my people. I am, if nothing else, loyal.

          • Lion’s Mane

            I commend your loyalty. But how do you feel about the very many modern American Christians who are adopting young children from places like China for the purpose of giving them a Christian home and the opportunity to become Christian? This is the new face of evangelism. Instead of go to the nations, the new policy is bring the nations to your shores.

            Very many White Christians in America today have little to no racial loyalty. They believe in Christ but they do not believe in their race and heritage. In fact, many of them see race realists as “un-Christian” at best. Many White Christians today see “racism” as a huge sin and view Racial Loyalty as a “sinful” philosophy competing with their loyalty to Christ.

          • propagandaoftruth

            This is a big problem of mine regarding Christianity, though some of this is a hallmark of modern eloi interpretations of the faith, IMO. This penchant for self sacrifice is deadly to a civilization when overdone, and strains of Christianity that preach this are abominations to the soul.

            As the non-theistic Satanists would say, psychic vampire factories.

          • [Guest]

            What can we conclude about Christianity, though, based upon what “modern evangelicals” or “many modern Americans” who identify themselves as Christians say or think? If we base our judgments concerning Christianity on what people who identify themselves as Christians profess to believe, we can look at atheist Lutheran pastor Thorkild Grosboell or self-described “secular Christian” professor Robert Jensen and conclude that Christianity and atheism are compatible.

            Episcopal priest Ann Holmes Redding (a black woman) says, “I am both Muslim and Christian.” Based on that statement by a “Christian,” are we to decide that Muhammadism and Christianity are compatible?

            If the United Methodist Church sponsors the resettlement of Lewiston, Maine, by Somali Muslims, that doesn’t indicate that Christianity demands it.

          • Lion’s Mane

            If the United Methodist Church is sponsoring this — no doubt you’re right: I just haven’t heard of it until now — what can we conclude of it? I do not know what the Methodists’ professed reason for these actions might be, nor what they have said in public statements concerning this. What I do know is that there are likely these two psychological factors at work here: (1) White Guilt [a.k.a. the Social Justice Gospel] and (2) a religious feeling of behaving as they believe Christ taught in the parable of the Good Samaritan.

          • [Guest]

            I think the Methodists were involved, although I was using them more as an example of “Christian” activities that are not necessarily Christian.

            I think your two points concerning motivation are right. And from what I’ve seen, the churches of the U.S. are full of that sort of thinking—except, of course, for the black-supremacy churches.

          • Lion’s Mane

            One cannot be a Muslim and a Christian at the same time. The two creeds contradict each other and are irreconcilable. Once again, we have in this Episcopal priest a lack of clarity of thought that indicates a strong irrationality at work. Muslims say that Christians are idolaters. I don’t know what her personal theology is, but it has to be so watered-down as to be just about meaningless.

          • [Guest]

            She’s a nut. But she’s a faithful servant of the gods of relativism and multiculturalism.

            If you can stand to read about her, here’s an interesting article to look up:

            “I am both Muslim and Christian”
            By Janet I. Tu | Seattle Times

        • Also our European heritage is Christian. I am a bit of a heretic Christian, but I still consider myself Christian. It is a key factor that makes European man what he is.

        • LHathaway

          “I don’t think the founders were Christians”

          I hope visiting AmRen will occasionally introduce you to small doses of reality. You could use a little.

          • WR_the_realist

            Most of the founders were Christians, some would be better defined as Deists. None ever thought that the first amendment was intended to forbid any public expression of Christianity, the position taken by the ACLU.

          • Hallie Eva

            Most of my ancestors were Free Thinkers escaping oppressive religions.
            One branch consisted of hard core Catholics. Unfortunately, Recusants were considered treasonous heretics.
            Seems no matter what religion the state required, my family was something else. :]

    • [Guest]

      That’s like saying that you love the white race but detest blond hair and blue eyes. To be pro-white is to favor Western culture, history, tradition, and religion.

      • adplatt126

        The supposed religious tradition of Christianity is not uniform or constant. Some of it is absurd and horrible, some if it charitable and good, some of it led directly to the values that dominated the nation for its first 200 years, some of it led to the Salem Witch Trials. At times it was tolerant, at other times brutal, at times somewhat rational, at other times superstitious. Christianity is a very broad religion with multifarious contradictory philosophical positions. I see a connection for example between Anabaptist traditions and the principles outlined in the Constitution and the Declaration Of Independence. I see far fewer of them between most Christian religious sects and those two documents. I like to discuss Western society in the context of race and intellectual traditions because those are the factors I think are dominant in our society, and led to the West’s ascent. I don’t believe the West’s ascent had much to do with the the majority of Christian sects or Christianity’s impact generally speaking however. At many times throughout white, Western history, Christianity, like its daughter Marxism, has in my view held back Western progress, like say in the middle ages when the Church declared a monopoly on knowledge and even biblical interpretation, which commoners were not privy to. Even the industrial revolution is intimately connected not to Christianity but to a schism in it between Protestants and Catholics and the resultant political and economic freedom of Northern Europe. So, really, which Christian history? I’m happy to discuss White history and white interests outside of Christianity, because I do not believe the future belongs to Christianity, nor do I believe the important events in the past do.

        • [Guest]

          You do understand the point, though, just as you would if I told you that my best friend, like me, is a race-realist white man although he loves Snoop Dogg and P Diddy but hates Johannes Brahms and Ralph Vaughan Williams and much prefers Nigerian tribal art to Thomas Gainsborough. He believes Maya Angelou was a genius and William Shakespeare a hack. All forms of art produced by blacks speak to him in a deep and abiding way unlike anything ever produced by the white man.

          But he’s a white race realist.

          • adplatt126

            Of course I understand your point. On the other hand, Maya Angelou was a good poet, and I’m rather fond of Miles Davis. With that said, Buddhism was also a religion founded essentially by darker skinned Central Asian but nevertheless Caucasian peoples.

          • propagandaoftruth

            The Buddha himself may have been Aryan or an Aryan/EastAsian mixture, genetically.

            The Tocharians were the branch of the Aryan family who wandered farthest east, the source of the red headed mummies found in western China. Check out these two Buddhist monks…

          • [Guest]

            I hope that you’re fond of the sound of the trumpet without truly being fond of Miles Davis.

            “If somebody told me I only had an hour to live, I’d spend it choking a white man. I’d do it nice and slow.”

            —Miles Davis

            Source: Jared Taylor (Paved With Good Intentions: The Failure of Race Relations in America, 1992, pg. 233)

          • Lion’s Mane

            Google Search: The Religions of Man (1958) by Huston Smith. (I think there’s a free online copy of this book.) If you can find it, read the chapter on Buddhism — chapter 2, I believe. It states very clearly that Buddha was Aryan and could only have been so — no other possibility will do. Also, the founders of Hinduism were Aryans as well — which is one reason why the Buddha had to be from that caste.

    • Hallie Eva

      As a life long Californian raised Christian, now, for many years, a student of the Buddhadharma, I can tell you there are many nonAsians who have chosen this path.
      The reflective, introspective approach to spirituality is better suited for my world view, both internal and external.

    • propagandaoftruth

      It’s not a proselytizing faith, which makes it’s growth interesting. Many take the thing as some sort of hippy dippy poser faith to be sure, but I’ve found much useful and precious wisdom therein, personally combine Buddhist, Christian and other faiths.

      It appears the Cathars of Provence, who were wiped out in a crusade in the late middle ages, combined Buddhist and Christian beliefs. “Kill them all. The Lord shall recognize His own.” This was the fate of the last Cathars along with the unfortunate Christians who harbored them.

      Regardless, Christianity, unlike Islam, eventually evolved beyond the above concept.

  • I think Buddhism is more of a philosophy than a religious faith.

    • trouble maker

      Thank you for saying that as Buddhism is considered a philosophy and not a religion , I once studied this philosophy and that is probably the main reason I have not killed my enemies. The law of karma is the backbone of that belief.

      • LHathaway

        lol, the belief in karma is what is going prevent violence?

        • Hallie Eva

          Violence, war, struggle, is the nature of humankind. When in our lifetimes has there not been lethal conflict somewhere on this planet? Not in my lifetime.
          The best one can do on a personal level is live a life of ahimsa, nonharm.
          Unethical acts generate karma, [karma defined as action, an action that requires another action for completion]. The fruits of karma revisit us, sometimes quickly, other times not in a single lifetime.
          Unlike Christianity, Buddhism is not a system of reward/punishment wrought by an external deity or force. We are responsible for our salvation, no external entity is involved.
          Interestingly, the Tathagata was not opposed to defending one’s life, family, crops, food, the essential resources to sustain life.

        • propagandaoftruth

          My interpretation of the concept of Karma has no problem with violence when needed. Action – reaction indeed.

          An eloi, Buddhist, Christian, atheist, whatever, will always find an excuse to avoid a necessary fight. That’s called cowardice.

          There is a story of the Buddha in an incarnation of his previous to his Buddhahood.

          He was a merchant travelling on a ship with many others when he discovered a plot by one of the merchants to sink the ship at a strategic point and escape in a small boat, thereby killing his competition.

          The pre-Buddha killed the evil merchant immediately and still became the Buddha in a subsequent lifetime.

          The Buddha was no eloi.

          Old Norse saying – a coward dies a thousand deaths, a brave man only once. Buddhism takes a different tack but is not adverse to this idea.

    • [Guest]

      I believe it’s a nontheistic religion such as Secular Humanism and others.

      • propagandaoftruth

        I suppose the point is that in the West we need a personal God, it seems. I’ll not pretend to have the answers, but there is a certain genius in the West’s symbolic personalization of concepts.
        One can make the point that all religions are in fact ideologies, philosophies, syncretic to the individual and not necessarily mutually exclusive to each other.
        To me, Buddhism has led me to a concept of God (both personal and impersonal – the distinction is ultimately meaningless and a matter of personal predilection IMO) as analogous to Truth. “God”, “Truth” “Karma” – my holy trinity.

    • Hallie Eva

      QD, neither a religion nor a philosophy, I refer to it as The Middle Way or Path, one that teaches an ethical way to live out this life.

  • IstvanIN

    Those are some depressing statistics. Buddhism, Hinduism and Islam? How low have we sunk.

  • The Jews aren’t going to be #2 in the northeast for long, not with the muzzie invasion. The clashes between the two groups ought to provide a bit of comic relief since Northeast Jewish politicians are the biggest supporters of diversity.

    • IstvanIN

      What goes around comes around.

      • propagandaoftruth

        It certainly does, lol…

    • AngloCelt

      The important point about the Jews isn’t their numbers – that’s an irrelevance – but rather the power they wield as a collective, which is always grossly disproportionate to their population. They could fall down the list to the tenth-largest group in each of those states, and yet still be the most significant.

      • Alexandra1973

        What power? They’re hirelings.

        Think the priesthood ran things back when Christ walked the earth as a man? Nope, they sucked up to the caesars.

  • Einsatzgrenadier

    The white man is better off learning how to think for himself, rather than allowing himself to be told what to believe by the so-called guardians of ecclesiastical orthodoxy. If more whites learned how to think critically, instead of retarding their capacity for independent thought by imprisoning their minds within the shackles of a nebulous group-think, maybe the white race wouldn’t be marching off to its own destruction like a herd of lemmings, which is exactly what they’re doing as we speak.

    By learning how to think for himself, the white man places himself in a much better position to challenge, not only the totalitarian hierarchies legitimated by religious teachings, but also the totalitarian ideologies of the left. Only by resisting religion and religious authority does the white man learn how disgusting submission is to an irrational and truly oppressive system.

    • Lion’s Mane

      I could not agree more. And in this sense, “religion” could (in the broadest sense) include quite a few tyrannical systems of thought — so long as they are traditions or teachings believed in without sufficient evidence.

      • [Guest]

        I wonder whether any of the hard sciences could also qualify as religions.

        Some physicists engage in speculation (belief without sufficient evidence), thereby showing quite a lot of faith in their tyrannical system of thought.

        • Lion’s Mane

          1. Science deals ONLY with the Natural World. The Supernatural is not ever part of science. 2. I don’t think that speculation should be defined as belief. Imagine you are Sherlock Holmes and you’re investigating a crime. You first speculate, based on the data you have, on the possible solutions. But your speculation only becomes certainty when actual evidence is found to confirm it. A true scientist, when speculating, always insists: “I don’t yet have the answer to this question. My hypothesis could well be wrong. I must wait for the evidence before drawing any final conclusion.”

          A “conclusion” that cannot be tested for confirmation by other scientists can never be added to the body of proven scientific knowledge. An unconfirmed theory is only a hypothesis; a confirmed theory is knowledge.

          • [Guest]

            Good points and well put. Thanks.

  • Mason Gull

    If I were a gambler, I’d wager that half the Buddhists are white people who practice meditation but aren’t really into the theistic part of the religion.

    • Pro_Whitey

      Most of the remnants of the mainline protestant denominations strike me as non-Christian and effectively Buddhist, especially the Unitarian Universalists (we could power our country with the old Puritans turning in their graves).

    • LHathaway

      That was my first thought. I think you’d win that bet. I think Buddhism is very popular among gays, also.

      • Hallie Eva

        I have not noticed a preponderance of homosexuals in the Buddhist community, L.Hathaway.
        Privately, the Dalai Lama is opposed to homosexuality, [and I agree], but does not speak of it publicly except from a tolerance of all things as is and not always the way we want them to be point of view.

    • Hallie Eva

      That would be me, Mason. Meditation, introspection, examining the nature of things, “as is.” Religiosity is not my cuppa.
      I do regard our Roshi very much. But he, too, does not not favor “-isms.”

  • WR_the_realist

    I think Buddhists can generally get along with other people. Arthur Jensen was one. It’s all those states where Islam is the second largest religion that worry me.

  • disqus_Xz3UA6obwj

    So where’s the greatest concentration of us honest rational folks – those who reject blind dishonest faith?

  • JohnEngelman

    I am fascinated by comparative religion. When I lived in the San Francisco Bay area I enjoyed visiting Taoist and Buddhist temples.

    • Alexandra1973

      Why am I not surprised?

      I understand that gurus abounded over there back in the day. Wonder if that’s changed.

      • Hallie Eva

        Alexandra, for the record, “Guru,” a Sanskrit word and title of respect, is defined as “master.” Hindu based religions call their teachers Gurus.
        Western Buddhists do not refer to Dharma teachers as Gurus.
        My sect is Soto-Rinzai, the teachers referred to as Roshi.

        • propagandaoftruth

          Soto-Rinzai, eh? Combining peasant and samurai Buddhism. I have attended a Soto center.

          Staring at a wall. Good stuff. I respect greatly but prefer more visualization style meditation, like the Tibetans do.

          • Hallie Eva

            More Soto than Rinzai.
            I do not go for mind freak koans, but Roshi occasionally slips me one when we sit one on one in Sanzen. Inadvertently, I solve it, but only because he catches me off guard before analytical mind kicks in with a few “second thought” moments.
            Staring at the wall has a salubrious effect on mind-body understanding. Nothing like sitting through an itchy nose or “monkey-mind” attack.
            The Tibetan schools still cling to ancient superstition and deities, which is not to my liking. I prefer the gradual system, zazen and Roshi’s teachings, [even from Dogen]. 😉

          • propagandaoftruth

            To each his/her own. I like and greatly respect various Zen paths, including Chinese versions, but was introduced to practice by a Tibetan tradition teacher. Find Tibetan visualization meditation fits me a little better.

            I LOVE those koans, by the way. Verbal Rorshach (sic) test in my estimation. Henry James, father of American psychology, once quipped in a class in which a Buddhist monk was visiting something to the effect that “that fellow has nothing to learn from me” and indeed many shrinks have compared Buddhist thought and methodology to the oldest form of cognitive psychology and therapy – never improved upon.

            Some years ago the Harvard shrinko department invited a Korean Zen master to debate a Tibetan master. Flew them up, all the shrinks gathered in anticipation of a great Buddhist debate. The Zen fellow opened by producing an orange and asking,

            “What is this?”

            The Tibetan consulted with his translator and after a moment the translater rejoined to the Zen master,

            “Are there no oranges where this man comes from?”

            The Zen fellow bowed and conceded the “debate”, and the shrinks were disappointed and bemused, some delighted.

          • Hallie Eva

            Lovely post, propaganda.
            Roshi has told us the Zen Master and orange story before. Always a few giggles, as it never fails to hit home.
            In Sanzen the other day during a long retreat, my reportage to Roshi was miserable.
            “Sitting with monkey mind, hopeless chatter, why do I bother?” Yadayadayada. On and on whining.
            Long silence from him. Just intense eye contact.
            Finally Roshi says, “zazen has handed you the problem.” “Now, what will hand you the answer?”

    • propagandaoftruth

      I also have a lot of respect for Zoroastrianism. Much has been lost and the classic Zoroastrians are still very insular (the legacy of living in dhimmitude under Islam for centuries) but some new, proselytizing, or at least convert accepting strains have sprung up that I alike a lot.

      The influence of Aryan Zoroastrianism on all three Semitic religions as well as Greek philosophy has been sadly underappreciated. I hate that “300” crappola, for example. The portrayal of ancient, ARYAN Persians and Medes as Africanized Arabs is an abomination to me. The Persians’ biggest flaw was the fact that they lost. First to the Greeks, then, tragically, to the lizard eating Muslim Arabs.

      • JohnEngelman

        The Zoroastrian belief that there is a good god and an evil god of equal power relieves the Zoroastrian religion of the need for theodicy – an explanation of why an all powerful and all good God allows evil to exist.

        In Zoroastrianism Spenta Mainyu, the good god, and Angra Mainyu, the evil god, struggle for mastery, but neither wins total victory.

        Zoroastrianism influenced Judaism and Christianity with the concept of Satan. The early Israelites lacked a concept of Satan. They interpreted misfortunes as God’s punishment for disobedience.

        • propagandaoftruth

          Yes, though there is some debate regarding the duality thing. Again, the West’s genius for symbolically personalizing concepts, thereby teaching wisdom succinctly in ways easily understandable by the masses.

          I also like the Zoroastrian concept of “Druj”. One of those words that’s hard to directly translate, but some kind of combination of “bad, evil, wrong, lie, error, angst” that characterizes the bad face of “God”, Ahriman.

        • Alexandra1973

          Nope, not quite.

          The concept of duality is more of a Gnostic thing.

          Early Israelites lacked a concept of Satan? I don’t think so. It was Moses who wrote the book of Genesis, after all.

          • propagandaoftruth

            Satan was the “left hand” man of Yahweh in my interpretation. God’s “guy who gets things done”, so to speak.

            I prefer that to the irresponsible belief that one’s iniquity has an external source, but blaming the Devil still beats blaming Whitey, eh?

          • JohnEngelman

            These are the earliest mentions of Satan in the Bible.

            Chronicles I 21:1 And Satan stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel.

            Job 1:6 Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them.

            First and Second Chronicles, and Job are believed to have been written after the beginning of the Babylonian Captivity, which began 587 B.C.

          • [Guest]

            First uses of that word in the book, yes. But not first references.

          • propagandaoftruth

            I believe Milton got his notions from Apocrypha. May be wrong there… Wiki time I guess.

            Like I said up there somewhere, though, I see the Old Testament Satan as something of God’s left hand. One of his guys, but the one you don’t want to run into. Not nice, but not God’s adversary.

          • Hallie Eva

            For the Hebraic meaning of the Christian Bible term, Satan, one must consult the Tanakh for original writings about G-d’s purpose for creating the concept.
            In the KJV and Newer versions of the Bible, the word, satan, is a mistranslation, interpolation, if you will, of the Hebrew word, שָׂטָן, which means, roughly, adversary.
            According to Torah scholars, the metaphorical שָׂטָן is not a fallen angel. The Almighty created the hinderer to allow man to face temptation and resist it, thus elevating himself before G-d. [As in Job.]
            שָׂטָן was created by and is entirely under the direction and control of Yahweh, and not a separate entity.
            For the record, as an nondeist, I have no dog in this race. Merely interested in comparative religions.

  • LHathaway

    Foreigners to ‘assimilate’ in the US. They travel thousands of miles across the entire globe and somehow end up in a neighborhood living with the same group of people they left at home. And then their exclusive neighborhoods (which they celebrate) grow and become larger. Only whites must integrates and they are still blamed as the ones who wont integrate enough.

  • Alexandra1973

    I place a lot of the blame on the 60s hippies that were getting into Eastern religions and bringing that garbage over here. Including the Beatles.

    Fundamentalist Christian here.

  • [Guest]

    If religion is “a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith” (as Webster’s puts it), then the U.S.’s top religions the self, money, sex, entertainment, and race.

    Any race realist can see that race is a religion and that blacks and browns are gods.

    • propagandaoftruth

      Messianic Deomcratic Totalitarianism. Our State religion.

  • Diana Moon Glampers

    SC……
    Hmmm.

    • propagandaoftruth

      That surprised me, the Bahai thing. I knew we had a major temple here but had no idea it was so prevalent.

      They must be good hard working law abiding types. Don’t hear much about ’em, you know?

      • Diana Moon Glampers

        I looked it up. Racial diversity (and what sounds basically like social justice agenda) seems to be a main component. A literal temple of white guilt right in what remains of the old south. But at least there was a primary today.

      • Hallie Eva

        Muslims in M.E. countries are homicidally intolerant of the Bahai sect.

  • ElComadreja

    Looks like the south is pretty well screwed.

  • Lion’s Mane

    Personally, I believe that Christianity is a middle Eastern religion and has only become a major part of European culture, rather than being the source of European culture.

    The danger with any religion comes when it rejects proven science and bases its “morality” on ancient scriptures which are largely irrelevant to the modern world.

    As to Buddhism: the Buddha was an Aryan and the “god” of Buddhism is impersonal. It is debatable whether Buddhism is, in the strictest technical sense, a religion. It’s really a “non-theistic religion.” It is a philosophy.

    • propagandaoftruth

      Is belief in a personal “God” necessary for “religion” or is this something of a Western concept?

      It has been in the West, but I’m not sure such a qualification id integral to the definition of “religion”.

      • Lion’s Mane

        I once read a good short article on the difference between primitive and modern religion in regard to the meaning of the word “God.” (I hope I can find this again some day.) For me, the definition of “religion” necessarily includes a vision and philosophy of life in which ALL human dreams of perfect happiness are believed to be ultimately fulfilled.

        • propagandaoftruth

          Thence the Godless, devil-less, heaven on earth the Messianic Democratic Totalitarian and his antecedent cousin the Marxist dream of. “Imagine” how good things could be if just those bad old obstructionist witches could all be burned at the stake, lol…

  • IstvanIN

    I am so sorry you can not read. I never said anything about denying anyone their freedom of religion, but Christianity is a fundamental part of our European heritage. You are certainly entitled to be an atheist or an agnostic, I would never deny anyone their beliefs, but importing a completely alien religion and culture to displace the historic American religion and culture is nothing less than ethnic cleansing, and not an individual choice.

  • IstvanIN

    Once again I am sorry you can not read. I never said this nation is a theocracy, nor would I want it to be one. But the founding population of this nation was by and large Christian and Christianity is part of our culture. I have absolutely nothing against Buddhism, in fact I applaud the Buddhist who took on the Muslims in a small Himalayan country some time back, I simply do not wish to be subsumed by an alien religion and culture, is that really so horrible? Furthermore if some foreign country wishes to ban Christian missionaries, good for them for defending their traditions.

    Please do not put words in my mouth.