Respect towards atheists

[Morkulv]

Okay, I might go a bit on a rant here so excuse me if it gets a little long but this is something that I want to get off my chest.

As some people might know (or not) I am an atheist. I do not believe in a 'higher power', and I do not believe that there is some form of eternal life in heaven (or hell, or whatever it may be) after we die. If there is life after death, I'm gonna let myself be pleasently surprised.

Anyway, more and more recently some people have been bothering me on the internet, mostly religious people who can't take the fact that I critisize their religion (critisize, NOT insult!). In these modern times, I think critisism is perfectly allowed with free speech, but somehow people seem to think that atheists can be insulted in whatever way possible, so I'm gonna say this: just because we do NOT have a religion does not mean we cannot be insulted! Christians always seem fond of telling me that I have no 'moral judge', and that 'atheists love their sin'. In every context this is plain insulting, but whenever I think out loud about their religion I get scolded for being respectless and I'm fed up with that!

Just because I don't believe in god or allah doesn't mean I don't have feelings, and I can be insulted too! The only thing I want is for people to act like grown adults and have a civil conversation without making fun of people and turning them into a laughing matter. Atheists do NOT think religious people are 'stupid', every culture has their own believes and in fact, most atheists were former christians. I grew up in a catholic family, but when I got older I started thinking for myself about life and I talked about it with other people and that is what made me into who I am today.

My concern is not with this forum, but my experience on the internet in general. I hope you people can understand that, and I also hope that this matter can be discussed in a respectfull and civil manner.

Thank you for your time.

[Set]

I see it all the time, unfortunately. People crying "Respect my blahblahblah!" and turning around and insulting someone else over theirs. It's annoying.

[Baphnedia]

As a practicing and practical hedonist, I can state that insult can be achieved with anyone. Y'know, regardless of my religion, I believe in separation of Religion and Science, and little things like teaching Creative Design bother the hell out of me.

Not meaning to add to your rant, but in this case, you're preaching to the choir (at least in my case), and I'm going to fill this post with as many religious cliches as possible... for those who prefer that I irk others regularly would prefer for me to do so. :p

[Morkulv]

As a practicing and practical hedonist, I can state that insult can be achieved with anyone. Y'know, regardless of my religion, I believe in separation of Religion and Science, and little things like teaching Creative Design bother the hell out of me.

Not meaning to add to your rant, but in this case, you're preaching to the choir (at least in my case), and I'm going to fill this post with as many religious cliches as possible... for those who prefer that I irk others regularly would prefer for me to do so. :p

Thats okay, this is just a subject that I needed to get off my chest, and I'm also wondering how other people feel about it. Plus this wasn't necessarily about believes themselves, but rather about respect (or the lack thereof) between them.

I see it all the time, unfortunately. People crying "Respect my blahblahblah!" and turning around and insulting someone else over theirs. It's annoying.

I agree, its really irritating and offensive. Also because those people generally talk about atheists as if we are below them. I get the feeling sometimes that different types of religion have more respect towards eachother then towards atheists.

I am talking ofcourse about the extremists, so respectfull religious people reading this, this is not aimed at you.

[Uniform Two Six]

I just try to avoid the subject of religion entirely. In my experience, if someone wants to talk about religion in the first place, that's a pretty good indication that they have some strong feelings about it. I consider that a wave-off right there. My experiences tend to run along exactly one line.

"What religion are you?" (What denomination, church, faith, etc.)

"Er, um, well... I'm agnostic."

"You don't believe in God?"

"Well, no."

"Why do you hate God?"

Now that's frustrating and rather insulting to me, but the more frustrating thing is that religious people often aren't trying to be insulting, they're trying to comprehend something that goes against their moral beliefs. In some ways their reaction strikes me as a certain amount of stunned surprise, sort of like if in casual conversation you would say:

"What do you do for fun when you're not at work?"

"Oh, I'm a child rapist."

I had one instance (before I realized that flat-out refusing to talk about religion was the way to go) in which I tried to explain what agnosticism meant. The response I got was "Well, I'll be praying for you since you're going straight to Hell." And if he was trying to insult me, or just intentionally being a jerk, that wouldn't have been so bad. The dude was being genuinely nice about it. He had no comprehension that he was being disrespectful.
And you're right, it's not that religious people are stupid (far from it, in fact), but (in my experience) they do tend to have a sort of insular kind of mentality where they're real comfortable with others of their faith, but are sort of at a loss when confronted with somebody with a different belief system. They tend to think of "different religions" as being Methodist rather than Catholic. I brought up the subject of the Hindu faith with this same individual (pointedly noting that there are way more practicing Hindus in the world than there are members of most of the Christian denominations), and the response I got was "Well, yeah. But that's not a real religion."

[Sevena]

when there is a lack of respect it generally comes from someone pushing a point and who is unwilling to even give the time it may take to understand why some one would feel such a way.this lack of understanding has fueled many religious wars through out mans many years.generally when i run into some of a different faith they are quite respectful about it, though you do find those who give you that sad look, like oh you poor thing your following the wrong path.i believe in god in all its forms.so ive never judged anyone on their belief or disbelief of god or a higher power.unfortunately this is not the status quo and i dont think it will ever be.if you have a belief that does not flow with what most believe,you have to expect that some or many will not respect it.at least i do.it doesnt make the fact that they dont respect my beliefs any easier to take but it prepares me for it.

[Terastas]

I brought up the subject of the Hindu faith with this same individual (pointedly noting that there are way more practicing Hindus in the world than there are members of most of the Christian denominations), and the response I got was "Well, yeah. But that's not a real religion."

I beg to differ about the "religious people aren't stupid" comment. One of my English professors in college once told us about how he used to have a textbook with an image of the Buddha in it that got him pulled before the board to discuss accusations that he had presented his students with "Satanic imagery" in it.

They might not be malicious in their degradation of all religions save their own (and in my book, atheism counts as a religion), but if it isn't done out of maliciousness, it's done out of incompetence because they let someone brainwash them into thinking that "Christianity = Religion" and "anything else = Satanism" or something to that extent. That attitude you just described is the result of a mental handicap: a virtual incapacity to interpret the meaning of the word "faith" except in relation to their own. If you can't do that, you forfeit any possible claim to being intelligent in my book.

The other side of the coin, of course, is that people who don't want their faith knocked shouldn't discuss it with other people, and that goes double for atheism. If you honestly believe that it's irrational to believe in anything, why would you open a discussion with someone that is, by your own definition, an irrational person?

Though I think atheists should be entitled to the same level of respect and/or protection under the law as any other religious practitioner, I can't help but roll my eyes and shake my head whenever an atheists chooses to vent about it. I'll identify myself as an agnostic whenever asked "the religion question," and I've actually developed a sort of masochistic appreciation for the kinds of retarded ridicule that sometimes comes my way as a result of it. I would've thought most (if not all) atheists would feel the same.

[Sevena]

Terastas i must ask ,from your post i got the impression that you feel religious people are stupid.so ill ask, do you really feel religious people are stupid?and i also must say that if we dont discuss or different religious beliefs,how are we every going to come to an understanding of each other?yes sometimes you must choose carefully whom you share your beliefs with if you dont want to get an outright slapping comment from them but i do also feel that you dont know what kind of response your gonna get if you dont share.

[alphanubilus]

The problem that I've seen with my dealings with mosth Atheists I've known, and most Christians for that matter, is ignorance. As a Christian, I'm often floored at the amount of ignorance that floods the Christian world. I would wager that a good 99.9% of Christians have NEVER read the Bible to its entirety. This is most evident with all the separate secs you find, as if all of these "secs" were reading the same book, you wouldn't have that many differences, but the truth is, most are ignorant of their faith. They literally believe what is being told to them, as opposed to reading it themselves. When you consider that many have never studied Biblical archeology or the histories behind them, it is no wonder there is so much misuse of context, but THEN again, more often than not, I've found that when things are taken out of context, the individual, has usually done so to justify something that wouldn't be justifiable other wise. Anytime I've talked to somebody about the Bible, and heard them state... "Well based upon your interpretation"... WRONG... The Bible in actuality is very clear as to its presentation, and usually those who scream interpretation, are those who only want to believe what they want.

Atheists, at least the ones, I've had dealings with, often plead tolarance, but in reality, they're the most intolerant of all. I've been cursed, screamed at, and nearly banned from message boards, because I used simple logic to prove whatever conspiracy theory they had against Christianity wrong or inaccurate. During one course, I even had a moderator formly apologize to me, and close her account because she was so embarassed at the idoicy and close mindedness. This isn't just on message boards though. I was in a Biology class where the professor would spend half of the class telling us how believing in God was lunacy and that are mentally impaired people would even consider this. In short, a Christian who believes in Jesus Christ, isn't mentally sound. The school board did nothing to stop him, but they jumped quick when they thought a professor was introducing Christian material to her students. She wasn't... Collegues of mine, who work in the science field were thrashed to death and almost expelled from the work force because they suggested a higher power... You can see some of their stories in Ben Stein's "Intellegence Not Included".
Every day I read stories where a town that has held certain religious traditions for 60 to 70 years, has to cancel it, because ONE person, an Atheist, is offended. I don't see Atheists getting offended over other religions... In fact, a friend of mine was mortified that his son, of whom attends school in sunny LA Cali, is being forced to study Islam for the next four weeks. I don't see Atheists griping about that. Atheists don't gripe that my state flag, Oklahoma, has Native American sacrements, such as the Peace Pipe, attached to itt, or that Salem Mass. has witch paraphenallia adorning their city seals. I guess... the Cross is just too powerful for them to handle. :p har har... (sarcasm for those who are humorously challenged).

My plight with the atheist is the same with most Christians, ignorance... I can't tell you how many times I've seen Atheists argue the same plot points, that have already been proven wrong. I've heard things as rediculous as "Jesus Christ was invented by the Roman Catholic Church" in the 3rd century". When you keep fighting circular arguments like this, it gets absurd. What is worth is no matter how much evidence I find to prove them wrong, they still adhere. Ignorance happens, but willingly ignorance is just sad.

The thing is folks, ALL people have religious ideals. Most practicianers are wonderful people who want to live happy lives, and there are those who want their way shoved down everybodies throat. As a follower of Christ, I don't shove my religion down other people's throats, but that also doesn't mean I agree. I believe in civil arguments and furthered education. When people stop wanting to learn, that is when things get dangerous. You're always going to have turdmonkies you live solely to be horrible people, but the reality is, they are horrible people to begin with, and religion is their excuse to vent and abuse.

As for Science and Religion being separate...

Read Science of God by Gerald S. Schroeder. He isn't a Christian... he's just freaking brilliant. Not for the simple minded, though... it is quite deep.

[Terastas]

Terastas i must ask ,from your post i got the impression that you feel religious people are stupid.so ill ask, do you really feel religious people are stupid?

I never said that. What I said instead was that, if an atheist truly believes that belief in God or the afterlife is irrational, then religious people are by an atheistic definition irrational.

And if those are the sentiments that an atheist has towards practitioners of organized religions, attempting to debate said practitioner would be equally irrational as well.

I didn't say that I personally think religious people are stupid, only that debating someone who is religious is only a worthwhile venture if you feel otherwise about them. People who believe religious people are irrational should not expect to have (what they would consider to be) a rational conversation with them.

Religion by itself is not stupid. Debating someone that you believe is stupid, however, is as stupid as stupid can get.

[Sevena]

i did not state that you said religious people are stupid, i only asked because that was the impression i got from you saying that, you beg to differ on the statement that religious people arent stupid.it was a question, i did not accuse you of saying it.you are defending a position on something that was not brought into question,the only question that was asked was if you really thought religious people were stupid.a simple yes or no ,and i did not mean to give that impression is all that was really needed.again my question was not an accusation,and im sorry it seems you thought it was.

[Baphnedia]

And lo, we enjoy the medium of text-only, where interpretations of our words, without supporting inflection or body language are much more subjective.

[Morkulv]

And lo, we enjoy the medium of text-only, where interpretations of our words, without supporting inflection or body language are much more subjective.

Its too bad I live on the other side of the ocean, otherwise I would love to have this discussion in real life. That way its alot easier to avoid miscommunications I think.

[Morkulv]

[Terastas]

i did not state that you said religious people are stupid, i only asked because that was the impression i got from you saying that, you beg to differ on the statement that religious people arent stupid.it was a question, i did not accuse you of saying it.you are defending a position on something that was not brought into question,the only question that was asked was if you really thought religious people were stupid.a simple yes or no ,and i did not mean to give that impression is all that was really needed.again my question was not an accusation,and im sorry it seems you thought it was.

Okay, then the answer is no, not really. I'm an agnostic, and by that, I mean I'm open to any possible interpretation; I believe in the basics like karma and spiritual wellness, but don't claim to know what generates karma or what it can lead to. I also believe in an afterlife, but only in the sense that I figure my spirit had to come from somewhere and therefore also has to go somewhere. I don't necessarily believe in Heaven or Hell, only that death is not the absolute end. I don't consider it stupid to speculate into those unknowns and try to fill in the gaps with faith, and my only advice to people practicing in organized religions would be to keep an open mind and be wary of anyone that instructs them to do otherwise.

The only religious people that I genuinely consider to be stupid are the ones that obsess over their religion to such an extent that they either A) try to push their religion into law (which I take to be a sign of weakness, a sign that they are incapable of living by a moral, unwritten code), or B) act in the name of their religion in ways that are completely contradictory to the doctrines they claim to be following (such as by using religion to justify torturing prisoners or murdering an abortion doctor).

Lewis Black described it well enough as a closure to one of his concerts when he said that religion is an absolute necessity to human life, but that it needs to be balanced out with respect for others and a sense of humor, otherwise things will go awry. He also said that if you didn't believe him, all you have to do is look at the people we're fighting (which was the Taliban at the time); a group of people who let religion completely take over every single aspect of their day to day life, the finished product of which was nothing short of absolute insanity.

Faith is what keeps us going. But if we listen to nothing but faith and never question it, it won't take us anywhere we want to go. Religious people by default are not stupid; only those that are incapable of thinking in terms of anything else.

[Sevena]

i am happy to see we have understood each other.

[Howlitzer]

For similar reasons as Terastas, I consider myself agnostic... and honestly this viewpoint can receive as much ridicule from atheists as people of a religious nature.

I've been told to my face by atheists that agnosticism doesn't even deserve any dignified consideration. I've also had similarly strained conversations with religious people. These rather intolerant responses clarified my view on the matter somewhat.

There is scientific evidence and known scientific facts concerning the workings of the universe. This should not be ignored. However once you get into the explanations as to creation itself....it gets messy.

Going further with that, arguing over which opinion is correct concerning religion isn't just irrational, it's kind of an invalid argument. There is evidence for all the legitimate scientific explanations for the workings of the universe. That explains how the universe works now, and what theoretically happened at the instants of creation and thereafter. We have some scientific theories as to what happened before this...but we can't really measure that directly. We can really only work out a model and see if it *maybe* could have been the case through experimentation, conjecture, and seeing if the numbers work.

If there is a higher power, intelligent or not, that is somehow behind the creation or workings of the universe, there's no reason to say that it operates or operated within the current set of rules we do.

For example, if you program an incredibly complex physics simulation, you are not then forced to operate by the same set of rules that you put in place for the simulation...you wrote them. In this virtual "universe" you just created, you are basically God. If you, say, created artificial life in this universe, can it prove or even observe your existence?

If it's completely set out from our context, we cannot really prove or disprove anything about it. So, arguing about what's right or wrong on this count is stupid....we don't and *can't* really know. Religious people and Atheists are going on belief alike on this count.

[WerewolfKeeper3]

I'm a christian, but i don't have problems with other religions or beliefs. I've seen on TV the way a "real" christian family treats people who don't believe in god, and honestly... it made me ashamed to be christian. Why? Cause they were completely disrespectful to the others, and were openly hostile. I know people who practice wicca, or who are athiest or agnostic, and i have no problem with them. I find Wicca and Pagan practices fascinating honestly... and i believe there are other spirits besides angels, demons, god and the devil.

Apparently, my views also make me not a christian: I don't believe in the whole of the bible. Why? because it's been edited before... books were taken out of it at one point. Is it that hard believe there were other things about it that might have been tampered with?
In any case, i told this to another christian who was more devote than i am; she said i wasn't a christian because i didn't believe in the bible. That upset me, because i do believe in god and his son; who was she to tell me what i did and did not believe?

I don't understand why people have to gripe at each other just because of our beliefs. I thought we're supposed to put the person before anything else about them, not the other way around?

Am I wrong?

[Terastas]

Why? because it's been edited before... books were taken out of it at one point. Is it that hard believe there were other things about it that might have been tampered with?

It's that very fact that can divide the faithful from the fanatics like no other. "You believe the Bible is the perfect, undisputed word of God? Okay, but which one?"

I actually went to a Catholic school for a few years and had to take courses on religion, and it was precisely for that reason (so said some members of the faculty) that they used the "New American" version, which was a (supposed) attempt at producing as direct a translation as possible from the oldest known records and had just as many cliff notes from the translators as actual scripture in it.

Though to be honest, I never really thought of the Bible as something that was ever meant to be taken literally anyway. I look at the story of God creating the universe in seven days the same way I look at the story of Little Red Riding Hood: fictional in its account, but truthful in its intent. I don't see it as a story of creation so much as a parable about the importance of having a day off.

I have a really hard time understanding why people -- even those who believe the Bible was written by God -- have a hard time accepting the possibility that the Bible may be written in parables. That's how his son described half of everything, right?

[alphanubilus]

Why? because it's been edited before... books were taken out of it at one point. Is it that hard believe there were other things about it that might have been tampered with?

It's that very fact that can divide the faithful from the fanatics like no other. "You believe the Bible is the perfect, undisputed word of God? Okay, but which one?"

I actually went to a Catholic school for a few years and had to take courses on religion, and it was precisely for that reason (so said some members of the faculty) that they used the "New American" version, which was a (supposed) attempt at producing as direct a translation as possible from the oldest known records and had just as many cliff notes from the translators as actual scripture in it.

Though to be honest, I never really thought of the Bible as something that was ever meant to be taken literally anyway. I look at the story of God creating the universe in seven days the same way I look at the story of Little Red Riding Hood: fictional in its account, but truthful in its intent. I don't see it as a story of creation so much as a parable about the importance of having a day off.

I have a really hard time understanding why people -- even those who believe the Bible was written by God -- have a hard time accepting the possibility that the Bible may be written in parables. That's how his son described half of everything, right?

I will answer your question...

Most fundamentals, such as myself, typically use the KJV or the NKJV, and unless you purchase a super cheapo version, most come with a pretty extensive dialogue on the translation issues. You see the wonderful thing about the Bible, is that there is a wealth of ancient manuscripts still in existence today. You also still have Jewish secs that duplicate those manuscripts down to the count of the Hebrew letter. They actually use computers, so you can find extremely faithful versions. In reality, you're going to find variants in most translations (older ones for that matter), but the content is the same, the message is the same.

It isn't until the 60's and 70's with the advent of the "modernist" movement that you start seeing huge departures, most of which were not based on the core material for the 1st to the 3rd centuries, but were based on men who wanted to make the Bible more... "acceptable" in today's society. Such is, if anything, is what is being taught most Mega Churches. They don't want to "offend" anybody, but the reality is, if it isn't the Gospel, it ain't Christianity.

While there are parables in the Bible, the Bible in itself is NOT a parable. There are several reasons for this, historical accurancy. Much of the events and the peoples of the Bible were historical figures. They existed. They were real. You can wager God's intervention, but you can't the lives of real people. Jesus did use parables, but He also gave their interpretation. IF the Bible was a giant parable, then what is the interpretation. The reality is, the Bible is VERY clear in its meaning and intent. People that cry "based on your interpretation" have never read the Bible or are openly blind and don't want to know what it is saying. I've read the Bible cover to cover, along with historian accounts, background info, and almost anything you can find on the subject matter, so yes I know what I am talking about. I've probably read the Bible alone, 8 to 9 times.

As for the Genesis account. Genesis, again isn't a parable. The ancient Hebrews used a term called, "Story Compression"... Meaning the left out all the useless extra info and just stuck with what was most important. Their wording was well planned and quite deliberate.

For example... the Hebrew word for "day" as used in Genesis, doesn't necessarily mean "day"... The actual word used through the first 6 days literally means "a span of time" of which is typically used for a 24 hour day. Gerald Schroeder proved that if you were standing where God was at the singularity, what would have been 14 Billion years for us, would account for only 6 24 hour light year days. So in accuality, the Bible is correct.

One of the common errors in the Genesis account of the English translations is the use of the world "Giants" in regards to the Sons of God, came unto the sons of men. The Hebrew word is Nephelim. At the time the Bible was originally translated to English, there wasn't a word for it, such they used "Giants". Latter, newer translators would correctly translate the word as "hybrids". Now some scholars, even today, believe that it was fallen angels interbreeding with humanity. I one time spoke with a scholar who even believed that the fallen angels created human/animal hybrids and there were REAL anthropromorphic werewolves and weretigers and... (Needless to say... he lost all credibility with me). If you follow Schroeder's account though, A. Evolution took place, and B. there were other "humans" other than Adam and Eve. In fact the Bible, in regards to Adam and Eve, unlike other creations, doesn't say create... In fact God says, "Let us MAKE man in our own image". The implication is that man was already created. God gave Adam and Eve a spiritual awakening... He made them a conscious soul. In short, the tribe of Adam and Eve, were the first "humans" to have a spiritual understanding. Their tribe lived in a paradise called Eden. Of course bad things happen, they rebel and are driven from Eden... Amazingly enough, the ancient Sumarians record a great exodus of people leaving a place called, "Eden".

Adam and Eve's tribe then is the "Sons of God"...

and all other tribes of men are the "Sons of Man"...

[Howlitzer]

For example... the Hebrew word for "day" as used in Genesis, doesn't necessarily mean "day"... The actual word used through the first 6 days literally means "a span of time" of which is typically used for a 24 hour day. Gerald Schroeder proved that if you were standing where God was at the singularity, what would have been 14 Billion years for us, would account for only 6 24 hour light year days. So in accuality, the Bible is correct.

That is certainly interesting if Genesis was, in fact, describing a more realistically long period of time.

However....forgive me for being a stickler for details...but could you clarify on what you mean by "6 24 hour light year days"?

Unless I'm missing something, a Light Year Day isn't a unit of measurement that makes any sense.

[Sharfan]

As a member of the Wiccan religion, I get insultated just as much as I did in the short period between transitioning between christianity and wicca, during the time when I called myself an atheist. I believe the problem lies in their inability to think differently. In wicca, there is no heaven or hell, just Summerland, which is where our soul goes before it is reincarnated. This may be hard for some christians to comprehend because of how different it is. I am slightly biased, though I do not disrespect the religion at all, because of how hard the catholic church had tried to crush the pagan religions back around the time period of the Salem Witch Trials. They did everything from turning our holiest symbol into their symbol of the devil, the pentagram, to making witches look like dark, evil beings, when the Wiccan Rede, one of the only actual rules in this religion, clearly speaks against any type of violence, using the simple sentence, "And harm ye none, then do as ye will."

Though, I digress. Back to the point, I really have no problem with any other religion. I find each one to be incredibly insightful, and that they're the right thing for its members. I just don't agree with its views. I also have no problem with atheists either. If that's what you believe in, then its not my, or anyone else's, place to tell you that you're wrong, or inferior to me. Personally, and I'm stereotyping, I find that the church has gotten to feeling rather superior as of late. Especially disconcerting when you realize that paganism has been around for hundreds of years before christianity.

Well, there's my two cents. . . well more like 5 bucks, but I tend to rant, so I'm not surprised at all. An inconsistency in the bible that I just wanted to point out: So, Kane kills Able, and then Able gets married. Now, where did the woman come from? I'm still waiting for a good answer.

[alphanubilus]

For example... the Hebrew word for "day" as used in Genesis, doesn't necessarily mean "day"... The actual word used through the first 6 days literally means "a span of time" of which is typically used for a 24 hour day. Gerald Schroeder proved that if you were standing where God was at the singularity, what would have been 14 Billion years for us, would account for only 6 24 hour light year days. So in accuality, the Bible is correct.

That is certainly interesting if Genesis was, in fact, describing a more realistically long period of time.

However....forgive me for being a stickler for details...but could you clarify on what you mean by "6 24 hour light year days"?

Unless I'm missing something, a Light Year Day isn't a unit of measurement that makes any sense.

I don't think there is a simple way of explaining light year days...

One light year = one point of origin hour.

24 Light years = One point of origin day...

Creation of Earth was 6 consecutive 24 hour light year days = 14 Billion years of time in earth terms.

As you already know when you look at a star, you don't see how it is, but how it was. Distance and time in space is measured by light years. A light year is the time it takes from the light of a distant star to reach our world.

If you were able to look at the heart of the singularity you would be seeing things as they were 14 billion years ago... However, if you were looking at the earth from the Point of Origin, at the epicenter of the singularity, what to us was 14 billion years, would be only 6 days.

There is actually a HUGE mathematical equation involved with all of this, but I can not begin to caculate it or explain it.

A good book that covers this is, Gerald Schroeder's, "Science of God".

[Set]

A light year is the time it takes from the light of a distant star to reach our world.

Huhwhat? No. A light year is the distance light travels in a year. Hence, "light year".

You failed grade school science class, didn't you?

So, Kane kills Able, and then Able gets married. Now, where did the woman come from?

Japan!

[Berserker]

around the time period of the Salem Witch Trials. They did everything from turning our holiest symbol into their symbol of the devil, the pentagram, to making witches look like dark, evil beings, when the Wiccan Rede, one of the only actual rules in this religion, clearly speaks against any type of violence, using the simple sentence, "And harm ye none, then do as ye will."

A quick nitpick... Wicca has only been around since the first half of the 20th century. It certainly wasn't around during the Salem Witch trials, a historical event which had nothing to do with any modern day New Age religion (such as Wicca.)

Also, the phrase "And harm ye none, then do as ye will" was published in 1964, itself a watered down Hippy version of a philosophy espoused by Aleister Crowley at the turn of the century (who would have balked at the thought of adding "and harm ye none" to his quote, I might add.) It, also, did not exist during any historical period of Puritan persecution.

These errors are excusable I guess, since most Wiccans I know have a kind of "school yard" understanding of the religion, and have not researched it's actual history.