|
Post by devilschaplain2 on May 12, 2009 12:15:34 GMT -5
It's either a joke or an attempt at insulting people. Either way, not something to be proud of. How the fuck is it insulting to say "You can be good without God" insulting? Now, if you ask me, I'd say that anything that pisses off fundies is good. But, this is simply saying that atheists exist and we're not necessarily bad people. Like I've said before, fundies are pissed off at our very existence. That's why they were foaming at the mouth when President Obama mentioned non-believers.
|
|
|
Post by atheiess on May 12, 2009 12:42:46 GMT -5
It's either a joke or an attempt at insulting people. Either way, not something to be proud of. How the fuck is it insulting to say "You can be good without God" insulting? Now, if you ask me, I'd say that anything that pisses off fundies is good. But, this is simply saying that atheists exist and we're not necessarily bad people. But is it appropriate to put these signs up right before Christmas and right in front of churches where the backlash is going to be even worse? The "good without God" ones aren't so bad, but there are many others (see above post). I don't understand why all the effort put into these signs can't be put into a more productive venture. Words on signs aren't as effective as actions, and telling people we are good isn't likely to change anyone's mind. Showing people we can be good will do a lot more in our favor. And why do you strive to piss people off? I resent people who deliberately try to create conflict like this because it's counterproductive. Most people (at least around the midwest) see atheists as contrary, instigators of conflict, and overall negative people without morals. How is deliberately trying to piss someone off going to change that? It's only going to give them more reason to believe what they already believe about us.
|
|
|
Post by Vene on May 12, 2009 13:03:28 GMT -5
The point is to show we exist, and that needs to be done at the most religious times of the year. When even the nominally religious are going all Christian is when non-believers need to see they're not alone. I never thought the point of the ads was to convert anybody, but to let it be known that there are atheists and agnostics out there.
And sometimes you do have to be aggressive. To compare it to the civil rights movements of the 1960s, we need a Martin Luther King Jr. and a Malcolm X. I am not content to give religion a free pass. It's an idea that should be able to be as harshly criticized as anything else.
|
|
|
Post by Bluefinger on May 12, 2009 13:24:00 GMT -5
It's either a joke or an attempt at insulting people. Either way, not something to be proud of. Found out that the billboards put up in my town were put there by the Freedom from Religion Foundation, not a local group. This is the group responsible for placing the billboards right in front of churches, and they claim to be the largest atheist/agnostic group there is. They have pictures of all their billboards on their website: www.ffrf.org/busbillboard/Some of these billboards are taunting, using almost religious phrases ("Reasons Greetings" and "Sleep in on Sundays") and stained glass windows in them , and some are not. But they all reek of propaganda and provocation. I much prefer the "you can be good without God" message if they have to put up these signs because it speaks for us instead of against someone else. I had a look at the billboards, and AGAIN, I just can't see how they are being more provocative then a lot of religious signs in existence. Also, considering the topic, the ads are being you know, purposely ironic. It is called a sense of humour, deary. Quoting famous people saying things critical of religion or stating belief. Is that provocative? Maybe for some, but what it does is show that there are people who folks can relate to that share similar viewpoints. The point is to show that they aren't alone. If this pisses a fundie off, well, sorry for merely existing and having a different viewpoint that I'm willing to make known. All those ads do is bring the ideas a fair few atheists/agnostics/etc have with regards to religion to public. These ideas will be made known one way or another, so getting people used to the fact that we may well disagree with them on certain matters is not a bad thing. Didn't mean to make you so angry. I thought we were just debating something. Wait, angry? Please don't start playing this game, dear, it isn't worth it. Voicing an opinion strongly =/= being angry. But is it appropriate to put these signs up right before Christmas and right in front of churches where the backlash is going to be even worse? The "good without God" ones aren't so bad, but there are many others (see above post). Maybe not in front of churches, but I don't see a problem with the timeframe. Plus, considering Christmas has pretty much become a commercialised secular affair, I don't think it is much of a problem. (Besides, Christmas is just a bastardised pagan festival, so it is hardly 'christian' to begin with). I don't understand why all the effort put into these signs can't be put into a more productive venture. Words on signs aren't as effective as actions, and telling people we are good isn't likely to change anyone's mind. Showing people we can be good will do a lot more in our favor. But considering how ideas are spread are through words as well as actions, it pays to employ BOTH as means to get the idea into people's heads. I can't communicate my disagreement solely through actions, it has to be voiced in words as well. I will not be relegated to silence and mere 'actions', just so not to 'offend' (which is impossible considering how fundies react to ANYTHING done by the non-religious). And why do you strive to piss people off? I resent people who deliberately try to create conflict like this because it's counterproductive. Most people (at least around the midwest) see atheists as contrary, instigators of conflict, and overall negative people without morals. How is deliberately trying to piss someone off going to change that? It's only going to give them more reason to believe what they already believe about us. If they are getting pissed off over something like a fairly tame Bus Ad, then pissing them off is good, because it only shows their insecurity and unwillingness to accept differing views. When I see an Ad saying that I have to have a belief in God in order to be moral, I laugh. For these people, when they see an ad saying that one can be good without God, they get pissy and whiny. As far as the fundies are concerned, they are the most vocal in opposition, and no matter what the non-religious do, the fundies will be up in arms about it, because we are not doing what we do in the name of some dogma. If someone gets angry about an Ad, ask them why. The moment they are forced to think about it, that's progress in my eyes. Change comes through conflict of some sort, whether this is physical or ideological. And only when ideas are being exchanged, does that change come along. But to exchange ideas, you need words, not just actions. And I for one will not be silenced or be told to 'act instead of speak'. My actions already speak for themselves, and if a fundie says that I'm immoral for not believing in their dogma, then it is up to them to show just HOW I'm being immoral in the first place. There is enough already to show that the non-religious are ordinary people like the rest, but if being ordinary is not good enough and still pisses people off, well, they can fuck off for all I care. Like Vene said, religion is not 'sacred' and above criticism or mockery. So making that viewpoint known WILL offend other people, but that comes with the territory when you enter discussions and debate. I will not soften my stance just to be 'nice'.
|
|
|
Post by atheiess on May 12, 2009 13:48:48 GMT -5
I guess we are coming from two completely different viewpoints. I would like for atheists to be able to coexist with religious groups, because those other groups are not going away any time soon (but probably will eventually). In order to coexist you have to be respectful of others, whether or not they choose to be respectful to you. Before acting you need to ask yourself if your act will be offensive to anyone else, and if there is an alternative to it. Christians and their opinions have just as much validity as we do because they share the same freedom of speech that we do, and we need to accept that despite the fact that they don't.
Just image that earth becomes a unified atheist planet (like on Star Trek), but then we encounter aliens that have a religion. How are we going to learn from and coexist with them unless we can be respectful of their beliefs, even if they aren't respectful of ours?
I grew up without a religion and never really gave it much thought until I was older. I've never felt the need for a support group of other atheists around to feel secure because I've never felt threatened by the religious, just sort of sorry for them. I'm wondering if maybe the people who used to belong to a religion feel like they still need that support net around them like they received from their church and that is what these billboards and other actions are trying to do - form a safety net. ?
|
|
|
Post by Bluefinger on May 12, 2009 14:05:32 GMT -5
I guess we are coming from two completely different viewpoints. I would like for atheists to be able to coexist with religious groups, because those other groups are not going away any time soon (but probably will eventually). In order to coexist you have to be respectful of others, whether or not they choose to be respectful to you. Before acting you need to ask yourself if your act will be offensive to anyone else, and if there is an alternative to it. Christians and their opinions have just as much validity as we do because they share the same freedom of speech that we do, and we need to accept that despite the fact that they don't. I have to say that this is somewhat naive. Ideas are not all created equal, and being 'respectful' shouldn't mean I can't criticise or poke fun. If someone voices what I think is a stupid idea, damn right I'm going to criticise them for that idea and I don't care if they get offended about it. Why? Because I expect people to do the same if I were to voice a stupid idea myself. I take a very scientific approach to how I view things, and that means I can be quite brutal with my criticism, because I don't necessarily value opinions, I value good, reliable knowledge. Not everyone's opinion is as valid as another's. They have the right to voice said opinion, but bad ideas/opinions are still bad and need to be criticised should they be made known. Otherwise, how does anyone know what is right or wrong to begin with? Just image that earth becomes a unified atheist planet (like on Star Trek), but then we encounter aliens that have a religion. How are we going to learn from and coexist with them unless we can be respectful of their beliefs, even if they aren't respectful of ours? No, stupid ideas will still be stupid, regardless of whether it comes from us or some aliens. Again, being critical of some stupidity does not mean I'm not being 'respectful', especially when I put my criticism in a very concise and eloquent manner. Plus, whether I respect someone has nothing to do with whether I agree or disagree with something they might say. I grew up without a religion and never really gave it much thought until I was older. I've never felt the need for a support group of other atheists around to feel secure because I've never felt threatened by the religious, just sort of sorry for them. I'm wondering if maybe the people who used to belong to a religion feel like they still need that support net around them like they received from their church and that is what these billboards and other actions are trying to do - form a safety net. ? No, it is because humans are social creatures. We yearn for communities because that is how we evolved. Our societies are still quite tribal in nature, and such mentalities are still strongly reflected today in many areas, so it makes sense that people want to find like-minded people to enjoy the company. People want to socialise with others they think will share similar ideas/hobbies/interests/etc. By advertising the existence of people in organisation A who share belief X, it helps bring others who may have not known about organisation A to come along and join in. I grew up in a non-religious household as well, but I still seek out like-minded individuals. Why? Because I want to be able to talk to people about certain topics, and generally enjoy the company of people who share similar viewpoints. Is that a bad thing? I sure hope not.
|
|
|
Post by devilschaplain2 on May 12, 2009 14:34:30 GMT -5
I think the sense of being ostracized in a community might worsen around the Christian holidays which everyone else is celebrating. So, yes, I personally find it appropriate.
|
|
|
Post by antichrist on May 12, 2009 22:33:56 GMT -5
So how are we not supposed to piss them off.
Get back in our closets? Go to church and pay lip service even though it feels absolutely stupid?
How about the gays, should they get back in their closets? Marry people they don't want to just to fit the norm and not insult people?
And that uppity Negro in the white house, how many people has he pissed off? Should he get himself back to a cotton field?
Personally I like the ads for the simple fact that they let people who are being raised religious and don't believe in it that they're not alone. Especially at Christmas.
|
|
|
Post by Dragon Zachski on May 12, 2009 23:13:32 GMT -5
When atheists start going door to door trying to convert people, I'll have a problem with it.
The ads aren't even that obnoxious compared to some of the Christian ones.
|
|
|
Post by devilschaplain2 on May 13, 2009 0:40:30 GMT -5
When atheists start going door to door trying to convert people, I'll have a problem with it. You mean like this? (Hmm, I swear I saw this cartoon somewhere here on FSTDT at some point but I'm not sure....)
|
|
|
Post by Thejebusfire on May 13, 2009 0:50:22 GMT -5
When atheists start going door to door trying to convert people, I'll have a problem with it. You mean like this? (Hmm, I swear I saw this cartoon somewhere here on FSTDT at some point but I'm not sure....) That's funny.
|
|
|
Post by Dragon Zachski on May 13, 2009 0:51:45 GMT -5
That's pretty awesome right there.
|
|
|
Post by rookie on May 14, 2009 12:05:12 GMT -5
How are we, as atheists and agnostics, supposed to get the thought "We are no worse and no better than those who believe in a supreme being or beings" out there without there being a perceived insult? There are groups who will see that as confrontational and insulting to their beliefs. There are groups, mostly religious, who believe the concepts of good and bad are handed down by god almighty for us. That very message, that we are just as good as them, is inherently saying their beliefs are wrong.
It's absolutely no different than me walking past a vegan as I enter a steakhouse. The very fact that I choose to do something so opposed to their beliefs may smack of insult to him personally. Same argument. Same mindsets.
The bus idea is not a bad one. Just saying there are those who don't believe. Yes, some will react to that message as though they were smacked in the face with a dead fish. But those folk aren't the intended target audience. The kid who has questions about faith, the person who wonders if there is a god. That is the target.
Yes, I would like to see some charity work done by blatantly atheist groups. I'd love to see a soup kitchen or toy drive or something similar where everyone staffing has on a t shirt or button that says very simply but very clearly "Atheist" or "I don't believe in god". Want to know a secret? Those who are insulted or offended by the bus ad will be doubly insulted and offended by that. And good for them.
I guess my point is at some point one must stop worry about toes getting stepped on if the idea (or group) is to move forward. These religious groups maintain the moral high ground because we keep surrendering it to them. We, as atheists, have to find a way to tell them tough shit. We're here and we're not going anywhere.
|
|
|
Post by MaybeNever on May 20, 2009 16:41:20 GMT -5
Ordinarily I'd say that people need to get over themselves - atheists are a substantial and growing minority in countries which at one time were themselves a hair's breadth from theocracy, and refusing to acknowledge or adapt to that fact is just going to get some faces smacked by reality sooner or later; on the other side I don't see any reason to trumpet the equality of atheists because if somebody wants to think less of me because I'm an atheist then they can kindly go fuck themselves.
But that's ordinarily. While the situation isn't endemic, there are many notable cases of discrimination against atheists on "religious" grounds, especially when it comes to awarding child custody. An atheist father has almost zero chance in gaining custody of his kids if they have a Christian mother, even if she's downright certifiable. I don't see it as a major cause because the discrimination is relatively low-scale, but any such thing isn't acceptable. In the end, only visibility normalizes something in the cultural eye. Atheism is inherently invisible - we have no common ideology, no common symbology, no meeting places, no real leadership - so making it visible is the key. Gay pride parades operate on the same idea. It isn't a perfect or even a complete solution, but it's a necessary step despite the teething pains it will cause.
|
|
|
Post by CtraK on May 20, 2009 16:58:25 GMT -5
Words on signs aren't as effective as actions, and telling people we are good isn't likely to change anyone's mind. Think you'll find it does. Many, if not most, multinational corporations are essentially the meanest, most vicious bastards on the planet, but hey - several hundred million pounds/dollars of advertising later, they're wonderful, lovely conveniences that enrich the lives of everybody. And anyone who disagrees is one of them evil pinkos.
|
|