Old letter of mine about the media and atheists

Steven Keller in his letter makes the case that the media is liberal by comparing its citing of think tanks and policy groups to those citations by members of Congress. But why is Congress, which is controlled by the GOP, used as an objective baseline?
A Republican Congress will of course on average cite think tanks/policy groups that are right-wing so it is by no means a surprise by that subjective standard the media is shown to be liberal. Why isn’t there a more objective baseline for this study if it is truly to measure ideological bias in the media in reports? This whole study is obviously flawed.
In a study by Media Matters which conducted a content analysis of ABC’s This Week, CBS’ Face the Nation, and NBC’s Meet the Press, which classified each one of the nearly 7,000 guest appearances during President Bill Clinton’s second term through Bush’s term as of 2005 as either Democrat, Republican, conservative, progressive or neutral. The conclusion: Republicans and conservatives have been offered more opportunities to appear on the Sunday shows — in some cases, dramatically so. Fifty-two percent of the ideological identified guests during Clinton’s second term were from the right, 48 percent from the left. In 2005, 58 percent from the right, 42 percent left are identifiable guests. Every year from 1997-2005 tilted right with its guests.
Indeed for a liberal media there are a number of stories which it misses or basically ignores. It has ignored the fact that the Bush administration narrowed the scope and application of the Freedom of Information Act, the Presidential Records Act and other key public-information legislation, while expanding laws blocking access to certain records. George Bush signed the Intelligence Authorization Act which allows the government to obtain an individual’s financial records without a court order. The law also makes it illegal for institutions to inform anyone that the government has requested those records, or that information has been shared with the authorities. Then there are other issues from strip mining mountaintops, bleaching of coral reefs, usage of federal lands without royalties paid to the government by mining/grazing interests, etc. and you can see our liberal media hasn’t lived up to its name.

Misconceptions about Atheists

I wish to clear up a few misconceptions about atheists. I, as an atheist, don’t get offended if someone refers to a Christmas tree or says, Merry Christmas. I commonly do this myself. I have never met a fellow atheist who ever got offended at these words. Indeed, I know of no atheist who has ever threatened to boycott a store for saying or not saying Merry Christmas, Happy Holidays or any seasonal greeting.
In terms of our lack of political power, atheists and other nonbelievers can’t even get an atheist on talk radio in America let alone be a threat to the views of millions of Christians. Heck, atheists have so little influence and voice that we don’t even get to define the term atheism. The non-atheist definition of atheism (as absolute belief there is no God) is the one that is used in society instead of the atheist definition of atheism which can simply be only non-belief.
Agnosticism is non-knowledge, different then non-belief by the way. No one wants to take bibles from pews; no one is taking down crosses in homes. Now, religion has been taken out of schools in terms of teaching that Christianity is true. As it should be. No person should be taxed to pay for religious beliefs they do not agree with. No child (as it once existed in some parts of the country) should be forced to engage in bible readings or a prayer.
Why anyone would want a governmental committee deciding their children’s religious education? I have no idea. I imagine that is one of the reasons we have churches. Some Christians complain about nonbelievers trying to take his religion away from the public sphere though many Christians want organized bible readings and prayers in public schools in order to further Christian values and ideas among the children of non-Christians. If this isn’t in fact what is wanted, then aren’t there still churches that have Sunday school classes to educate the children of parents who want their children to have a Christian education? Why the need for these bible readings/prayers in public schools?
There is no harm in Christians believing in their God nor that of any religious person believing in their God. That is their business, but the state should remain secular and neutral towards religion and the rights of atheists (including their children in school) should be respected. That means opposing the use of the Ten Commandments, bible readings, etc. in public buildings/schools to further the Christian religion as true. Let the government be neutral on this issue and not take the position that God exists or doesn’t exist with the right of the children of atheists respected. That is all that I and other atheists and assorted nonbelievers, ask.