Mr. Narisetti not only wants to protect children but to stop what he calls ‘psychological abuse’ on society’s future.

In the June/July “Free Inquiry” magazine published by the Council for Secular Humanism, an article “Religion and Child Abuse” appeared, written by Innaiah Narisetti.

Mr. Narisetti’s premise is clear when he states, “In one form or the other all religions violate the rights of children.” He questions at what age society ought to allow children “access to religion.” He wants the United Nations to restrict the “automatic” rights of parent’s to expose their children to religion. Mr. Narisetti also says, “Religious beliefs thrive by imposing themselves upon impressionable [children] minds...” and adults use these religious beliefs as a pretext to fight wars and promote other inhumane acts. Mr. Narisetti not only wants to protect children but to stop what he calls ‘psychological abuse’ on society’s future.

Atheists throughout history have deemed religion as the quintessential villain for most of society’s woes. Karl Marx taught religion was used by the rich to keep the working class in poverty. The author, Arthur C. Clarke considers religious beliefs a form of “superstition and barbarism.” Friedrich Nietzsche thought Christian virtues inspired weakness, not strength in man.

They plead their case against religion noting the brutality of theistic wars while ignoring the brutality of an atheistic Stalin. Certainly atrocities have been committed in the name of religion as well as non-religion. When arrogance is applied to any belief system, whether atheistic or theistic, the end result is oppression.

Christianity teaches man has separated himself from a perfect loving Creator but in evolution all men have risen up from an impersonal organic slime. Atheists, just like theist, are looking to explain the paradox of mans simultaneous greatness and cruelty. Atheists condemn religion as abusive but teach, by default, all thinking patterns come from the same micro organic pool. How can evolutionist claim authority to condemn one belief system over another? If the micro organic pool we all came from is the “designer” this friction between theism and atheism could be “its” purpose. If all humans came from the same impersonal organic source, our evolutionistic origins make us cohorts in all cruelty throughout history. Atheists have no authority to claim “any” belief system as abusive, unless they can prove that belief system came from defected micro organic pool “billions” of years ago.

On the inside cover of the magazine carrying the article “Religion and Child Abuse” there appeared a list of 21 principles called “The Affirmation of Humanism.” The following is number 4 (emphasis mine):

“We believe in an open and pluralistic society and that democracy is the best guarantee of protecting human rights from authoritarian elites and repressive majorities.”

Mr. Narisetti and the Council for Secular Humanism have proclaimed their evolutionistic belief system superior. In seeking to protect children from so called, abusive religious beliefs, atheists are on their way to becoming the authoritarian elites and the repressive majority. In their attempt to inflate the greatness of man, they violate the freedoms of man. Atheists believe all men evolved from the same micro organic pool, however the atheistic view came from a superior non-defected pool.