Atheist Billboards To Debut During Holidays

[Liberal_in_LA]

Atheist Billboards To Debut During Holidays
Message Questions Existence Of God
Russell Haythorn, 7NEWS Reporter

POSTED: 9:22 pm MST November 13, 2008
UPDATED: 10:38 pm MST November 13, 2008


DENVER -- A controversial billboard will likely be popping up in a neighborhood near you, just in time for the holidays.

The billboard is paid for by a Colorado atheist group. The message sits against a blue sky backdrop and says, "Don't believe in God? You're not alone."

Ten billboards will pepper metro Denver, while one will be put up in Colorado Springs.

"And we're putting them up in November and December because of the holidays, when church and state issues tend to come up a lot," said Joel Guttormson, with Metro State Atheists. "To let non-believers, free-thinkers and atheists know that they are not alone, especially in a country like ours that is predominantly Christian."

Pastor Willard Johnson of Denver's Macedonia Baptist Church called the billboards a desperate effort to discredit Christianity.

http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/17977308/detail.html

[LynnTheDem]

1. In places like Iran, such a billboard would be considered "controversial".

What I do not get is why in a supposedly first-world progressive (snort) nation like America, this would be thought "controversial".

When it isn't considered such, then America will be a truly progressive nation.

[baldguy]

3. Because someone will torch the thing.

Almost guaranteed.

[WindRiverMan]

4. I don't mind the billboards, but the timing is horrid

Putting these up as we approach the Christmas and Hannukah Seasons is a real dig at Christians and Jews in this nation. It tries to diminish their beliefs during what they consider a Holy season. Any other time of year would be fine. I personally think this is fairly mean-spirited and only gives the religious zealots in the nation more reason to hate.

[LisaLynne]

8. I don't see how this is a "dig" at Christians and Jews ...

not to mention the other religions you failed to mention who also have holidays and holy days during this time. Look at it from the perspective of those who do not believe -- at this time of year, many people do have religious holidays to celebrate and that can make those who do not, for whatever reason, feel very much alone. I think the message of the sign is quite lovely.

[ihavenobias]

133. Right. And the line that stood out to me was the last one...

"Pastor Willard Johnson of Denver's Macedonia Baptist Church called the billboards a desperate effort to discredit Christianity".

If we accept his logic then how desparate are all of the efforts behind the Christian billboards across America? You know, the "Got Jesus?" and about a zillion others.

[felinetta]

212. Christianity is based on paganism. Pastor Willard Johnson

should read THE DARK SIDE OF CHRISTIANITY by Helen Ellerbe. America should be a place that tolerates all believers and non-believers as long as no violence is involved. Of course,
religion is steeped in violence.

[dorkulon]

9. Great, so any time beside the months of november and December, and I suppose Easter and Passover are

out. And let's not forget the Muslim holidays, or the Hindus for that matter.

Hey, isn't it kind of a dig at Christians for Jews to be celebrating Hannukah right around Christmas?

I think they'll survive.

[GodlessBiker]

10. I think xmas is a dig at pagans for moving the birth of their leader to the time of Saturnalia.

[Fumesucker]

12. Umm... Easter is the holiest day of the Christian calendar...

You know, resurrected from the dead and so forth..

I don't know a lot about Judaism, but I'm fairly sure that Hanukkah is not a really major Jewish holiday, ISTR that Passover is the biggie..

[WindRiverMan]

53. I never said it was the Holiest, I said a HOLY time period.

don't put words into my mouth. I hate that crap.

[Goblinmonger]

84. I think the point is

that if you are going to put a "holy" time period as off bounds, then it can never be put up.

[BB1]

88. How about Sundays then?

Or Fridays. Or Saturdays.

Or pasta days...

[mondo joe]

183. It's a holy time for believers. It has no bearing on others, who have an equal claim to

the public forum and free speech.

[MurrayDelph]

80. If you want to look at attacks during the holiest times

why is it that Christians (to the best of my knowledge) are never offended by all of the "Jews for Jesus" signs that show up just before the Jewish New Year (or, as Jews call them "The High Holy Days")?

[surrealAmerican]

92. Hanukkah is actually quite a minor holiday.

It's only hyped in this country because of its proximity (on the calender) to Christmas. Passover is a "biggie", as you say. The most important are Rosh Hashonnah and Yom Kippur, which are usually in September.

[pink-o]

260. Passover matters, but the most important holidays in Judaism are Rosh Hashanna and Yom Kippur

in September and October. Remember, Sandy Koufax wouldn't pitch in the World Series on Yom Kippur. And just last month, Rahm Emanuel had to get special permission from the Rabbi to attend congress for the bailout hearings.

But speaking as an ethnic Jew and a religious agnostic, I can't think of any Jews who would take offense at that billboard. I have very religious members of my large extended family, and they don't try to convert me, they don't guilt me into going to Temple. (and they could, you know--we're the masters of guilt, remember?)

I think, once again, this is just gonna stick in the craw of those crazy fundies, who won't be happy until their god is the only god and their belief system is displayed everywhere 24/7--because any QQQ re their god just sends them into a frenzy of apoplexy.

That kind of crazy reaction only tells me how insecure they really are in their beliefs. If their god was so omnipotent, a few questions wouldn't affect him or his followers.

[varkam]

13. Huh?

How is the message "tr(ying) to diminish their beliefs"? It's not saying "You're stupid for believing in a sky-daddy", or anything of the sort.

Also, try putting yourself in an atheist's shoes. We're dug at on a daily basis in this country. My newspaper as a "Faith & Values" section, as if they are somehow intertwined with one another with the obvious implication that you can't have one without the other.

[DangerousRhythm]

90. "Faith and values"

That REALLY annoys me for the same reason. When I saw CNN had a Faith and Values correspondent I had to do a double take to make sure I had read the screen correctly.

That said, this billboard really doesn't bother me. It doesn't put down anyone else for whatever they choose to believe. It's very simple and to the point.

:shrug:

[Quantess]

226. Faith & Values

Is that the section where the coupons are tucked in?

[msongs]

27. it is none of those things. the barrage of xmas brainwashing is already underway with

xmas ads using pagan themes already flooding the airwaves, encouraging people to violate the alleged core beliefs of the superstitions by focusing on the materialistic instead of doing things that actually help other people.

the persecution complex of some "religious" people is just mind boggling

Msongs

[Irishonly]

37. I don't think it is

I am a progressive Christian who believes strongly in separation of church and state. Evangelical neocons drive me just as crazy as any progressive democrat and I hate what the past eight years have done to people of all faiths and to atheists. President Carter was probably the best example of a Christian leading without forcing his beliefs on the world. Now all of us have to hear about this silly war on Christmas. It isn't real except for to those who have an inflated view of how important they are in the world. Billo milks it for ratings and to have something to talk about. Saying "Happy Holidays" isn't a slam to Christianity nor is someone not saying anything at all. The billboard is an expression of free speech and IMHO, it's high time for Christians to stop forcing their beliefs on everyone. It's also time to realize this silly war on Christmas is nothing more than a sales pitch. Most Christians know that a long ago Pope decided when Christmas was, put it close to a pagan festival to encourage the spread of Christianity. Stores want you to buy, buy, and buy to celebrate the secular part of Christmas. Mind you, I love the secular part and have Irish santas, singing snowmen and even my dogs have Christmas stockings. Not only do we believe in Santa we believe in the Santa Claus dog and the Easter dog.

Nothing will make the religious zealots stop hating those they cannot control. They are into feeling persecuted and do nothing except threaten if you don't happen to believe like them. Instead of trying to live more like Christ or Buddha,etc., they put pressure on everyone to believe as they do or face dire consequences. It isn't something that make a progressive Christian proud and I resent that I feel like I have to defend my beliefs because wing nuts has perverted them so badly. When I listen (and I never willingly do) to some of the so-called Christians talk, I don't even recognize my faith.

The billboard isn't a bad thing nor is it intended to persecute believers. Any time of the year is ok. Try walking in another's shoes sometimes.

[Cabcere]

277. Very well put.

:thumbsup: Thanks.

[Zhade]

283. Wow. I don't buy into your myths, but you're my type of christian!

NT!

[codjh9]

299. Excellent, thanks.

[gollygee]

38. Maybe they should wait until Easter and Passover time?

There is no time that people who think atheists should be invisible would find these appropriate.

[ensho]

46. so, you are afraid of the billboards? a person might stop and think?

thinking is good

[Madam Mossfern]

50. Sorry, Chanukkah

is not such a big dealy holiday for Jews. Well not until recently because some feel the need to compete with Christmas. As a Jew, I welcome that billboard.

[PurityOfEssence]

58. As a pretty hardcore anti-theist, I have to agree

Didn't their mommies tell them not to rain on other people's parades? The message itself is great, and so is the image, but it's a bit aggresssive to do it near Christmas. Yes, there's NEVER a really good time to take on the religiously intrusive, since they seek to make every waking moment theirs, but a little bit of respect and coexistance would be nice.

For the record: I'm an agnostic; there's no proof either way, even though my working theory is that any proffered major religion is poppycock and the idea of a supreme whatever is silly.

Still, people should be respectful of others, even if many aren't to oneself.

Bad timing.

[mondo joe]

69. It doesn't rain on anyones parade. When did people decide other people not believing

in the same thing rains on a parade?

That's like those idiot fucktards who think same sex marriage ruins hetero marriages.

[PurityOfEssence]

99. Would you jump up at a straight wedding protesting for gay marriage?

That'd really ruin their cherished day, now wouldn't it? It's also going to make a lot of friends, isn't it?

There's a time and a place for everything, and some MANNERS and RESPECT for others' feelings is an important element to a harmonious society. I've been fucked with all my life in subtle and not-so-subtle ways for my disbelief, but that doesn't justify fucking with people in their peak moments of joy and reflection. A little coexistence goes a long way...

There's a tiresome through-line among many of the downtrodden and assorted other "wronged" that makes many feel justified to flail about and make everyone else miserable because of the sub-standard hand they've been dealt. It doesn't help the cause.

A sign like this should go up on the second week of January or so. With the frontal invasiveness of religion in society, signs like this SHOULD exist, but one should have some respect for the feelings of others even if one isn't always respected in kind. It's called fundamental social decency.

The whole point of my riposte is THE TIMING of the act.

[gollygee]

101. That's not parallel

What would be parallel would be standing up Christmas Mass and talking about atheism.

[PurityOfEssence]

108. The comparison was raised by the person to whom I'm responding

Do you see the equivalence now?

[gollygee]

111. No, not the same-sex marriage issue

The thing about standing up and protesting at a marriage isn't parallel to putting up a sign. The atheist version of standing up and protesting at a wedding would be standing up during Mass and talking about atheism. Which would be wrong. But there's nothing wrong with putting up a sign, regardless of when. There are religious billboards and other signs and crosses all over the place where I live. And anti-abortion signs for that matter too, many of which are religious. Non-religious people can put up signs too, and whenever they want.

[PurityOfEssence]

124. "That's like those idiot fucktards who think same sex marriage ruins hetero marriages."

What is this, reading impaired day? The person brought this up, I commented in kind, and somehow you can't read. READ. It's fun and very rewarding.

Yes, people can put up signs like this whenever they please, but SHOULD they? Personally, I think people's beliefs should be given a bit of respite during peak times, and I think that a little politeness goes a long way. To do other is to be combative and abrasive.

Back to the crux of this issue: someone responded to my post drawing a parallel with straight versus gay marriages, and you're still oblivious to that obvious fact. This is tiresome. Admit your mistakes and join the rest of us fallible humans.

Do you not understand how threads work? It's very simple: look at the little line connecting a post to a previous post it's what logical people do when tracing a chain of events.

[Pithlet]

135. Except you haven't really explained

how the billboards are an affront to anyone's beliefs. You say people's beliefs should be given a respite during peak times. How are those billboards not giving them a respite? Wait, I know the answer to that. My very existence is an affront to people of faith. I'm supposed to keep quiet and pretend I don't exist. Just like I do the rest of the year. Apparently, reaching out and saying to others, "Hey, I exist! You're not alone, there are others like you!" is an affront to people. According to you. We should be giving those poor, poor people of faith a break, because we're so loud and and obnoxious about it the rest of the year? Is that what you're saying?

[PurityOfEssence]

146. Why are you asking me what I'm saying when you're TELLING me what I'm saying?

The billboards will be taken as an affront to extremists of faith, just as wanting to take overtly religious outpourings out of government is taken as an affront. To those extremists who embrace the concept that their duty is to convert the heathens, any impediment to that is taken as an attack. It's not fair, it's not right, but that's how it's taken. Resistance to their aggression is taken as an unprovoked attack.

This is one of their two tender times of the year. I'm not saying that billboards of this type shouldn't be allowed, I'm just saying that it's not the best political time to do it. Wait two months.

Yes, your very existence IS an affront to many of the faithful; they feel a literally god-given RIGHT and superiority, and your very presence irks them to no end. They won't be swayed, and that's that. They WILL, however, be given ammunition against the violent, barbaric heathen killjoys, and this will not help among those who have a sense of coexistence. Why pick a fight RIGHT NOW?

Why mess with their solemn moment? There's a sense of fair play and accommodation here, and even if I'm generally given no quarter from many of the fantasists, many HAVE AND DO respect my beliefs and don't tread on my feelings in tender moments. They don't bring up their afterlife crap when a loved one dies, they don't try to convert my children, they tread lightly and wish me Happy Holidays, and beam with camaraderie when I wish them Merry Christmas or Happy Hanukkah.

So, you're certain of what I'm saying, yet you end your missive with two VERY important questions, so you obviously DON'T know what I'm saying.

People should behave themselves, and that doesn't mean simply knuckling under to tyranny, it means being sensitive and empathetic. Having walked out on religion at 6, I've taken plenty of heat over the years, but I've also gotten a lot of acceptance. Thus, when attempting to sway people, I generally don't jump in their faces at vulnerable moments.

As for the question of how such a sign would be offensive, I didn't state a case there because it seemed so obvious: when dealing with a conquest mentality, any resistance is taken as an attack. The extremist believers will use this as a further "war against Christmas" and further paint non-religious types as ones who would abolish religion.

I try to remind people that there are THREE, not two views, and they're very obvious when arguing events like the Alabama State House Ten Commandments Sculpture: there's pro-religion (it must be everywhere, and it's their RIGHT to echo it constantly), there's anti-religion (a rather rare voice) and there's religion-neutral. I, like most non-religious types, advocate religion-neutral imagery. (The opposite of the Ten Commandments on display isn't a secular, non-religious display, it would be a crucifix with a red circle and a slash through it.)

To me, this is obvious. Since the iconography of the serene, cloudy sky, and the religious-like appeal of preying upon (or merely appealing to) the loneliness of the individual is the mode of this advertisement, it is either meant to tease/mock or is clumsy because it can so easily be interpreted as so.

Yes, I'm being a bit combative, here, but take the substance of this post with the understanding that it warranted effort in interest of conciliation and out of respect, even if it did stem from conflict. I actually DO want people to understand this, and I consider it our duty as sentient people to be ambassadors for a way of life. That means rising above it at times, and that's NOT to be confused with just lying back and taking it.

Make sense?

[Pithlet]

148. Well, yes. It makes sense. But it's wrong.

Of course it's an affront to extremism of faith. Because WE are. We can't EVER open our mouths or show ourselves. It isn't a matter of timing. It doesn't matter when we decide to show ourselves. Your argument doesn't work, because it isn't a matter of timing. Of course they'll say "But it's Christmas! It's our time of year! How dare they!" But do you honestly think they'll keep their mouths shut if these billboard shows itself at any other time of the year? Please.

[PurityOfEssence]

204. I simply disagree

To me, the holidays are a warm and homey kind of time. It's a time to spend with one's loved ones and share a bit of relaxation and togetherness, not a time to pick a fight. Sure, the signs will also bring hope and a feeling of belonging to those who feel shut out, but I just don't feel that it's all that neighborly a time to stir things up. If they piss and moan come January when signs like this go up, then fuck 'em, but a little bit of respite should be allowed people during the holidays.

It's a lifelong cause of mine to loosen the chokehold of fantasist theocracy, but we DEFINITELY disagree at least on timing, if not tactics.

People who focus on their beleagured put-upon status often become selfish assholes, demanding redress NOW with total disregard of others. It's a big, messy world, and we owe it to each other to cut people some slack.

Personally, this sub-thread smacks of sanctimoniousness of the non-religious, and there's some world-class irony there considering my beliefs.

There's a time to simmer down a bit and get the fuck along with one's fellow humans, and one of those times (for me) is the holiday season. It's a time to spend regroup and come back together and have a warm, nurturing few days together.

My argument doesn't work FOR YOU. For others, it probably does. Perhaps a bit of age has made me realize that gentle nudging and involvement work better than sticks in the eye and confrontation.

It's not the end of the world, nor is it a disaster that these things go up now, I just don't think it's the best approach. Purists and sanctimonious hotheads make me sick, and they don't generally make anyone else feel all warm and fuzzy either. If the theory is to shove non-religiousness down peoples' throats and make 'em cry uncle, count me out. It also won't work: it's a question of statistics, and we're radically outnumbered. The great movements of acceptance came with firm action, insistance, occasional flare-ups, but the steady march of time and engagement.

Manners count.

[mondo joe]

214. Sorry but your argument is totally fucked up.

Manners do count. That's why it would be rude to interrupt or intrude on someone's personal time - like a wedding.

The public square is not personal, and it's not owned by a religion.

Non theists have the SAME right to be out there in public that theists have.

The idea that non theists should try to be invisible in public because their existence might offend others during a special time is really sickening.

Miss Manners maintains etiquette is the practice of making people feel comfortable. And I agree. But I apply it to everyone - not just some.

[PurityOfEssence]

219. Yep, we've got every right to be as big a bunch of assholes as they are,

but count me out.

Just because other people are intrusive and domineering doesn't give one the cosmic right to do the same.

On the other hand, maybe it does, but if the option's taken, the high ground can hardly be claimed, now can it?

Personally, I want to win, not to have the joy some seem to get from pissing people off.

Different tactics aren't necessarily abject surrender; the tough guy who was always spoiling for a fight on the playground generally didn't fare too well in the long run.

[mondo joe]

220. I don't see the billboard as assholish.

It's just a billboard - its not even critical of any religion.

If someone is pissed off because a billboard reminds him that there are atheists in the world, it's his problem.

[PurityOfEssence]

228. Nor do I

I just don't think it's a particularly good idea.

I'm responding to the general tenor of tit-for-tat justification. Aggressive believers suck. Call them out for it, let them suck, whatever, but don't use that as a justification for counter-sucking.

[Zhade]

288. Dude, they don't want or care about your empathy. They want your "soul".

NT!

[mondo joe]

170. Only a fucktard would take the mere mention of the existence of atheists as an affront

to their faith.

[Pithlet]

174. What really burns me is WE are expected to capitulate to THEM

or WE'RE the ones being provocative. It's absolutely ludicrous. This thread is absolute proof that it isn't just religious people who get crap on DU. There are plenty of biases to go around.

[mondo joe]

175. I don't understand the idea that atheists should try to be invisible because their very

existence gives offense to some believers.

They ought to accept that not everyone does, or is supposed to, believe the same things.

[donco6]

190. Not at all, really.

Why should the sentiments of Christians take precedence over the needs of atheists who - particularly during this heightened religious time - feel alone and isolated? It's religion that's bringing about the isolation - but we have to ask permission to attempt to address the problems it causes?

That's ridiculous.

[Zhade]

287. With all due respect, FUCK the extremists. They don't get to dictate public discourse. PERIOD.

"People should behave themselves, and that doesn't mean simply knuckling under to tyranny, it means being sensitive and empathetic."

"This is one of their two tender times of the year. I'm not saying that billboards of this type shouldn't be allowed, I'm just saying that it's not the best political time to do it. Wait two months."

DOES. NOT. COMPUTE.

You're saying we should allow ourselves to be silenced because of fundamentalists who don't understand the secular nature of our government and country. Nope. Never going to happen.

[gollygee]

191. YOUR parallel doesn't work

I don't have a problem with his parallel.

YOU made a parallel - that putting up these signs during the Christmas season was similar to someone standing up during a wedding and protesting about same-sex marriage rights. And I said THOSE TWO THINGS aren't parallel. And they aren't. What would be parallel to standing up and protesting during a wedding would be standing up during Mass and talking about atheism. But putting up a sign for atheists during Christmas is not parallel to that.

Are you deliberately misunderstanding me?

[PurityOfEssence]

209. No, no; it doesn't work FOR YOU

You are not the center of the universe, nor is your interpretation fact by writ.

To me, and to many others, the holidays are AN EXTREMELY SPECIAL TIME, akin to a wedding or a funeral. I lead a seriously busy life, and always have throughout my adult life; the holidays are more than just a respite, it's a time to put differences aside and spend formless hours together, play board games, watch movies, go to parties, watch the joy in the short guys' eyes as they open presents.

So, for you, the parallel doesn't work. For me, it's the best, most precious time of the year.

There are many like me. We'd like to leave our differences at the door for awhile and share each other's time with our guards down, not stir up ill-will.

Again, it's such an emotional time (often bad, as well) for so many people, that I don't like to see it as yet another battleground.

Sure, the signs will provide a sense of belonging to non-religious people feeling lost and alone during the holidays, but I just don't agree that it's the most neighborly thing. I also don't think it'll help the cause.

I'm not playing games or deliberately misunderstanding anything; I simply have a (if you can take this with the secularism from where it comes) holier view of the holidays.

A wedding is a time of joy for a couple, their families and their extended friends; the holidays are a time of joy for society at large.

[gollygee]

210. It's a precious time of the year for me too

People who believe in God don't own this season.

[PurityOfEssence]

216. Then enjoy it and spread the joy

I happen to disagree on tactics, that's all.

My view of Christianity is not good at all, and it stems from many not-so-charitable places in my heart. Speaking in very broad terms here, I generally feel rather sorry for them, and at times like these, not only do I not want to make the community-at-large antsy, I just want to leave them alone. Sure, many of them are EXTREMELY aggressive and intrusive, but what the fuck, it's built into the belief system with its need to convert and gather up as many scalps as possible to please the Sky-Chief so he'll save a place for you in the happy hunting ground. It's an imperialist, selfish death-cult that plays to the childish need for approval and safety. There's a need to convert that also stems from a bit of a nagging feeling that it's all poppycock, so it's important to get EVERYONE to agree so one won't be plagued by the creeping fear of the silliness of it all.

Whatever.

I don't cede them this season, I take it for myself and share it with them, Jews and other non-religious types. It's family time and a moment of refuge. It's acceptance time, and as such, such messages have more than a whiff of strife about them. Life is hard; I don't want people to be.

Many happy memories well up at these times, and I love being with my kids and extended family; messing with the fantasy underpinning of it all just isn't what I want to do.

Some things we can't change, and some things we can, but if one is always an irritating claxon for his/her own personal beliefs, one will be ignored and disliked by all but those who completely agree. Such is not a life I want; that's why I'm a liberal: people are different, and they should be given some slack at times.

This, to me, is one of those times.

I must confess, though, that it's a bit disconcerting to not hear any even slight whimper of agreement here.

[Zhade]

291. "if one is always an irritating claxon for his/her own personal beliefs"

We're talking about atheists, who LACK personal beliefs that resemble the beliefs religionists share.

People are different, and THEY deserve slack, but there's no reason we have to pretend to respect their beliefs just to make them happy. That would be lying to them, and it's disrespectful to them and us both.

[mondo joe]

211. A wedding is a private affair. A season or a city or a town is not.

The time of year doesn't belong to you in the way a wedding is yours.

And if you don't think it's neighborly, do you think Christians turning everything in Christmas-land for a month or two is nighborly to those who aren't Christians?

[Zhade]

290. Those who find fault with atheists wanting to be happy too are not worth consideration.

Saying "hey, we know you feel alone during this religious frenzy, but you aren't" is literally a sign of warmth and welcome. It epitomizes the special togetherness you keep underlining!

That some would take issue is THEIR problem, not ours.

[Zhade]

286. There is no requirement to respect beliefs we do not share, or that are - bluntly - crazy.

There's no need to be insulting just because the poster disagrees with you.

[Zhade]

285. It's not equivalent - marriages aren't generally open to the public.

NT!

[mondo joe]

168. No one owns the season. A wedding, however, is a private ceremony.

Your analogy is deeply flawed.

[PurityOfEssence]

213. It's not my analogy, but it's still just another community

Anyone at a wedding who's allowed through the door is a member of that group. If one of them jumps up to spoil everyone's moment because of a gripe, they have as much right as a member of that community as someone in society has to sound a discordant note during the holidays.

Let's backtrack a bit: I was responding to someone who brought up the analogy of gay marriage. It's not a great analogy to start with, but the "specialness" of the moment DOES have some emotional similarities.

My point is that there's a time for getting along and a time for getting one's way, and I don't feel that the holidays are the most conducive time to confront on this subject. There's bit of a spoilsport feel to it: you're ruining my life with your domination, so I'm going to fuck up your fun. So there. Blah, you big meanies: I hurt, so it's my turn now.

I don't want to ban this. I don't even want to make a big stink about it, but I just wanted to voice my dismay at having to make an issue about this during the holidays. It's not the way I'd like my side to behave. It's like watching a crazed, filthy street person railing about political subjects I agree with: it's not helping the cause.

Life is hard; a bit of respite is to be cherished.

There's also a bit of acceptance gotten from age: some people have nothing in their life except the hope of their salvation and all that silliness; I don't want to take that away from them, and I don't want to rankle them in what little bit of relaxation and comfort they can glean out of their busy lives. Let them have a bit of good cheer. Let it rest for a bit.

There's a tinge of meanness to it, that although it may be unintentional, is simply not productive.

It's sort of like that old Doonesbury cartoon (VERY old, early 70s) where Mike's mother stills an argument about radical, activist politics with a tray of freshly baked treats: "even revolutionaries like chocolate chip cookies". Get it?

[mondo joe]

215. If Christians feel their special time is fucked up because everyone who disagrees doesn't

go into hiding so they can pretend to not exist, that's just absolutely fucked up.

Be into the holidays. Love Jesus and celebrate it. Party till the Hanukkah candles dim. Say Merry Christmas. Say Happy Holidays. Say Good Day. Put a manger up in your front lawn. Put up a billboard so other atheists remember they're not alone.

Only a self centered idiot would construe people having other beliefs as an offense to them.

The only tinge of meanness here is the idea that non-theists should make themselves invisible in public for the comfort of others.

[PurityOfEssence]

217. That's a bit of projection there, doncha think?

I'm hardly raging that it's an outrage and the horriblest disaster of an idea that's ever been wrought by imbeciles, I'm simply saying that I don't think it's a productive tactic and sort of wish it wasn't being done, and not in that way.

The sign itself echoes religiosity in a way that some will take as ridicule. Maybe it's unintentional, maybe not. It may very well be deeply sincere and reaching out to the lonely non-religious types beset with the horse shit of the season. Beats me. There's just something there that leaves a bad aftertaste.

I argue religion all the time with people and always have, but I make it a point to never argue religion with believers who are gravely ill or old; I don't want to take that away from them. That would be mean. Bringing it up during the holidays seems a bit intrusive, too. Just because many believers grant themselves the right to shove themselves in others' faces with their guess doesn't mean I have the right to; retaliation just takes the cheer out of my pecan pie, if you get the concept...

I let them have their joy at this time of year. If they get intrusive, I have many different ways to get them to back off, and some aren't pleasant or respectful.

The image and the wording aren't the most conducive, and I'm just chiming in with a bit of cautious disagreement.

[mondo joe]

218. Not at all. I adore Christmas. I love it to death. What difference does it make to my

enjoyment if atheists put up a billboard?

That's what I'd like to know. What difference can it make to anyone's enjoyment of the holidays to simply know someone in the world has a different belief?

[PurityOfEssence]

230. it's like this:

Many believers feel that non-religiousness is an aggressive threat. They feel that atheists and agnostics consider themselves superior and that they're being called idiots. Many believe that we're immoral and dangerous. Like it or not, it's a stigma that will have to be overcome before suffrage is to be had.

There's a time to pipe up, but I don't think the holidays are the best time. Personally, I wish that others would stop trying to convert me or EVEN PARTICULARLY ESPOUSE THEIR BELIEFS IN MY PRESENCE OR THE PRESENCE OF MY CHILDREN. For all my abundant faults, I AM a pretty coexistent type of person, so I'm honorably advocating treating them as I'd like to be treated myself. It's the golden rule, and one that's common to most religions and most codes of civilized living. Even if others don't particularly want to do unto me in a fair and accepting way, I'd like to do so to them for the simple reason THAT IT'S THE RIGHT THING TO DO. I don't want to mess with their tender time, and it will be taken by many as doing so. What's so hard to understand?

A liberal sensitivity should make one empathetic to others, especially to others' soft spots. That's why I don't see that this is particularly constructive. It's hardly the end of the world, and it can be reassuring for a fellow non-religious type to see an outreach like this, but targeting the holiday season is a bit intrusive.

Do you seriously think that it's just a coincidence that this is happening now? Isn't this somewhat DELIBERATE? I guess I'm just not angry and wronged enough as others who've suffered oh-so-much more than I ever have.

Dealing in the religious realm is dealing with near-sanity and full-on insanity. Clomping around in tender areas like that should be done with caution and care, not forthright certainty and cavalier abandon.

[Luminous Animal]

231. It's happening now

because some atheists feel alienated during one our more visible Jesus fests. Also, the billboard is not trying to convert anyone, it is a message to like-minded people.

What is so hard to understand is your off the charts reaction to a billboard that doesn't mention religion, doesn't dis religion, and doesn't speak out to the religious.

I'd have a similar reaction to an atheist who got het up over a Christian billboard that said, "Believe in God? You are not alone."

I find your blanket characterization of "the religious realm" as near or full-on insanity far more insulting than that billboard.

[PurityOfEssence]

251. Yes, those who disagree with you suck

It's nice and tidy, and a common method of dismissing all who differ.

My view of religion is one of EXTREME wariness. I don't see any agnostic suicide-bombers, and I HAVE seen quite a few people close to me with clinical mental problems that were either exacerbated or largely caused by religion. Some are now dead, some are institutionalized, some are not so well, but getting by. It's something to be very careful when addressing.

Are you SERIOUS that this billboard is innocent, non-confrontational and doesn't even mention religion? It uses the word "God", in case you don't notice. It uses the iconography of a beautiful blue sky with clouds, which is typical of many religious backgrounds. It's talking about belief in a supernatural being, and THAT'S RELIGION.

Perhaps it's just gentle, nurturing outreach to non-religious people who feel lost and alone at this time of year, but it's still, to me, a bit confrontational and I don't want the movement to be unduly shackled with accusations of trying to take away their joy. It just doesn't seem like the best method. I also don't like spoiling other peoples' good time, even if people have messed with me. Such retaliation is vulgar, childish and the standard spiral of social ugliness.

Let's monitor the responses over some time and see if others respond in kind.

As for your sanctimonious labeling of me as much more scurrilous because of my dim view of religion, fine; feel superior. Humanity's lovely; there's no dark side to the human creature, and anyone who says so should be shouted out of the public arena. To see NO level of confrontation, deliberate or not, in debuting these signs specifically during the holidays, one would have to be oblivious. Whether it's warranted or not is a question of tactical taste and personal ethics. I think it's a bit mean and snarky, whether intended or not, and the deliberate targeting of the holidays is, by definition, confrontational.

[Zhade]

294. A billboard put up by the nonreligious is religious?

Are you kidding me?

You think that reminding others that they're not alone as nonbelievers in a time when belief is heavily pushed into society on the daily is confrontational? That's ridiculous.

[mondo joe]

235. I know some believers feel non religiousness is a threat. I think that's their problem.

What I think is deliberate is that at this time of year many non theists are made to feel invisible, and isolated.

I think this campaign is a deliberate effort to let them know they're not.

Bravo!

[PurityOfEssence]

Perhaps so

Perhaps it's ONLY aimed at those who don't believe, as it suggests in the text, but something in me suspects that it's also a bit of a "nyah-nyah, we're here and we're not going away" message borne of a (justifiable) feeling of being embattled and marginalized.

Binary thinking is the bane of mankind, and it's one of the wellsprings of religion and idiotic politics like libertarianism: the world should be simple and easy. I wholly disagree: life is VERY complex and shaded, and it should be dealt with accordingly. Thus, although I'm happy to see more visible acknowledgment of non-religiousness in the public sphere, I'm EXTREMELY wary of the way it's done and its unintended consequences.

My gut response to this is a wince, and I feel that this should be expressed in the community. There is good to it, but I just wish it wasn't right in the heart of the season. I don't like the imperialism of belief, and there's a bit of an intrusiveness here that I don't think will reflect well on the movement. It's hardly the end of the world, and it's hardly ugly, but there's a bit of an aftertaste here, and if people can't see that, I have to question their perspicacity.

The downtrodden have the right to be heard, but they also have an obligation to themselves to be careful of the methods used.

The holidays are a very, very personal and sentimental time for me, and there are plenty of secular messages in the public sphere. "Happy Holidays" is literally the all-encompassing message, and it should make people feel they belong by its very presence. Seeing that should take the sting out of whatever aggresive prosetelyzing is encountered, and it's not like Christianity, for all its faults, is on a 24 hour a day bent to dominate everywhere. Many believers are embarrassed by such activity.

My simple argument is that I think the benefits will be somewhat outweighed by the drawbacks, and there's something of the killjoy aspect to the message itself when put out at this time of year. It's a bit provocative. How will you feel when some of them get vandalized? Do we want to piss off those who are in a mood to be pissed off? I derive no satisfaction or joy from that.

More than anything, though, I'm arguing a "soft" dismay over this, not an advocation that such things never be said, but merely a queasiness over the timing. I also question the pristine motivation: I don't think it's just to open the arms to the lonely, disenfranchised non-religious person at a time of innundation; I think there's an element of confrontation there.

[Zhade]

295. How could anyone possibly be LESS "confrontational" than saying "we don't believe either"?

Remain silent? If this is provocative, some are waaaaaaaaaaay too thin-skinned.

I think you should question you own assumed perspicacity on this.

[Zhade]

293. That's their problem, not ours. We're not going to silence ourselves...

...simply because others can't take that we lack belief in their myths.

"targeting the holiday season is a bit intrusive."

Uh, as intrusive as the entire country going gaga for religion in December, pushing their myths in our face every minute? You've lost a sense of perspective in this argument.

"Even if others don't particularly want to do unto me in a fair and accepting way, I'd like to do so to them for the simple reason THAT IT'S THE RIGHT THING TO DO."

It's only YOUR opinion that silencing ourselves is the "right thing to do".

[Zhade]

284. Um, it states a simple fact - many don't believe, and we don't have to feel alone.

Your approach relegates our free speech to times it won't offend the religious. No thanks!

[mondo joe]

63. The timing is perfect. Atheists are surrounded by theism but especially at this time.

Our nod to each other doesn't hurt anyone else.

[gollygee]

66. Someone told me that I shouldn't "have the right" to put up a Christmas tree

Because the word "Christ" is in "Christmas tree".

It's a PAGAN symbol. I don't care what it's called.

Anyway, yeah. Surrounded by theism and theists are loudest and most judgmental this time of year.

[mondo joe]

68. I don't worry about ohers' celebrations as long as they don't violate the rights of others.

I'm with you, and hope you enjoy your tree! :-)

[surrealAmerican]

94. I agree.

This is exactly the time of year atheists are made to feel the most alienated from society. The message is perfect.

[pepperbear]

73. so another point of view is a dig? n/t

[Seldona]

78. Concerning this subject and these people, absolutely.

In fact at various times throughout history it was enough to get you killed, including our own.

I believe the late, great, George Carlin put it best. "You believe in god? No? BLAM! You believe in god? Yes? Okay, you believe in OUR god? No? BLAM!" Pretty much sums it up since the dawn of religion.

[QueenOfCalifornia]

74. I think

Christmas and other religious holidays are a dig at reality.

[Donnachaidh]

89. baloney

Christians and others do NOT hold the patent on this season. And for them to think they do is arrogant. This *season* has been celebrated by pagans for many thousands of years BEFORE the Christians tried to usurp it and make it their *own*.

[Evoman]

119. Gee...so sorry that telling atheists they are not alone is mean-spirited.

[donco6]

187. I guess we have to ask permission first.

"What time of year would be best for you theists?"

And they can't even see the preposterousness of it all.

[ZombieHorde]

126. Christmas and Hannukah

Christmas and Hannukah are 'real digs' at each other. Each tells the other that they are wrong. Jesus Christ is the messiah vs. Jesus is not the messiah.

[fizzgig]

176. what?

do you know why hannukah is celebrated? it has absolutely nothing to do with the messiah

[Luminous Animal]

177. Doesn't matter.

How dare the Jews have a holiday around same time as the Glorious Celebration of the Birth of "Our Lord". They're stealing the baby Jesus's thunder for Christ's sake!

[fizzgig]

178. it was even pre-emptively stolen!

damn omnipotent jews ;)

[ZombieHorde]

180. My post was about the reasons Christians split from Judaism.

Generally, people of the Jewish faith do not consider Jesus to be their king, while Christians do. Christmas and Hanukkah are major holidays for their faiths, and those faiths are theologically opposed to each other.

[mondo joe]

181. And Hanukkah has nothing to do with the dispute. There's nothing about Hanukkah

that Christians couldn't celebrate if they cared to.

[ZombieHorde]

193. "Hanukkah has nothing to do with the dispute"

I must be explaining myself poorly.

Generally speaking, people of the Jewish faith deny the divinity of Christ. This is highly blasphemous to the Christian faith.

Hanukkah is a holiday, which has nothing to do with Christ, but is mainly celebrated by those who hold theological opinions in which many Christians consider to be extremely blasphemous.

Christmas is a holiday, which has something to do with Christ and celebrates a man who Christians feel was the king of the Jews.(Matthew 27:11) This is offensive to some Jews.

To summarize:

Christmas = major Christian holiday. Christians generally believe that Jesus is the king of the Jews. Some Jews are offended by this.

Hanukkah = major Jewish holiday. Jews generally deny the divinity of Christ. Some Christians believe that Jews will be punished in the afterlife for this belief.

Christianity and Judaism are theologically opposed.

[mondo joe]

195. There's nothing about Hanukkah that is counter to Christianity.

And it's not even a major Jewish holiday - it's a minor one.

But there's nothing about Hanukkah that is particularly Jewish and couldn't be celebrated by Christians.

I get what you're trying to say - your argument doesn't hold up based on the specifics.

[ZombieHorde]

200. LOL Are you posters fucking with me?

There's nothing about Hanukkah that is counter to Christianity.

I clearly stated this in my last post.

And it's not even a major Jewish holiday - it's a minor one.

OK, replace 'major' with 'well advertised'. Christmas and Hanukkah are well advertised holidays.

But there's nothing about Hanukkah that is particularly Jewish and couldn't be celebrated by Christians.

Generally speaking, Hanukkah is only celebrated by Jews and those who are hanging out with Jews (such as a non-Jewish spouse)

I get what you're trying to say

Your post tells a different story.

[mondo joe]

203. I understand the point you're TRYING to make. You're just not making it well.

Suggestion: when you've dug yourself into a ditch, stop digging.

[ZombieHorde]

205. "You're just not making it well."

This claim is most likely correct. I am having a hard time coming up with a new way to describe my point.

when you've dug yourself into a ditch, stop digging.

What else am I going to do with my shovel?

I will try again, but this time, I will bring the billboard back into the mix.

The billboard is theologically opposed to Christianity and Judaism.

Christianity is theologically opposed to the billboard and Judaism.

Judaism is theologically opposed to the billboard and Christianity.

[mondo joe]

206. That is what I understood you to be trying to say. Thanks for clarifying.

:-)

[fizzgig]

189. you are correct that jews do not believe jesus to be a messiah

you are incorrect, however, about hanukkah being a major holiday. it is actually a minor holiday but has drawn more attention because of it's proximity to christmas.

hanukkah is a celebration related to the recapturing and re-dedication of the temple in jerusalem and the miracle of one day's worth of oil burning for eight.

christmas is the celebration of the birth of christ, true, but the date was likely picked because it it is close to the winter solstice and the christians appropriated it as a way to put down pagan worship. the christians were notorious for appropriating pagan holidays for their own as a way of oppressing pagans.

if you believe the history, hanukkah was celebrated for more than 160 years before the birth of christ.

so, i ask you, how is hanukkah a jab at christmas? or how is christmas a jab at hanukkah? a jab is something done intentionally, not by a calendar.

[ZombieHorde]

194. how is hanukkah a jab at christmas? or how is christmas a jab at hanukkah?

Their religions are theologically opposed to each other.

a jab is something done intentionally, not by a calendar.

That is a good point. My focus was on messages.

[Warren DeMontague]

153. So, to you, saying "I don't belive in God" is a bigoted, mean-spirited statement?

But let me guess- saying "I believe in God" is not.

Right?

[Duende azul]

208. How weak must their faith be if they are so easily offended?

That´s what I never will get with the fundies.

shall their god/gods take care of the problem if there is one.

[Random_Australian]

223. Play ball! HOW does it try to diminish their beliefs?

How is "don't believe in God? You are not alone" mean-spirited?

When in the year do you think isolated atheists would most likely feel lonely, if not christmas?

Note: it makes no reference to anyone else's beliefs at all. If it is confronting, it will have to be simply because it mentions the existence of atheism, unless there is some hidden message I'm not seeing.

[RadicalTexan]

238. GOOD.

We have free speech, too.

[jrockford]

115. "In places like Iran" - when was the last time you were there? nt

[LynnTheDem]

197. 1998.

Beautiful land, beautiful people.

And oh yeah, that billboard would be considered "controversial".

[Zhade]

282. Fear. People don't like thinking that we atheists might have a good reason not to buy into religion.

NT!

[Turbineguy]

2. Great idea!

More people need to feel threatened and alienated.

Fundies are paranoid enough. Only now, it turns out they were right.

[Fumesucker]

15. Right about what?.. That some people don't belive in a god?

Most people with an above room temperature IQ are aware of this already..

And I'm talking Celcius, not that other scale.

[Skinner]

18. "They were right" to be paranoid?

How so? Because a billboard states a fairly mundane fact which should be obvious to everyone: That there are some people who don't agree?

[Arugula Latte]

143. Amen, Skinner, so to speak ...

[otohara]

48. ???

could you expand on this - what are you talking about?

[gollygee]

67. Is this threatening for some reason?

Why would someone find this threatening? Or for that matter, alienating?

[bertman]

83. gollygee, they find it threatening because they believe it is blasphemy to deny the existence

of their god. They used to slow-roast people over fires for saying there was no god. Many of these religious types tolerate us non-believers only because the laws of our country allow us to believe, speak and worship--or not worship--as we please. If we didn't have the Constitution on our side they would have wiped us out long ago.

[mondo joe]

75. What were they paanoid about? That not everyone would worship as instructed?

[Turbineguy]

76. To amplify:

I see this as the other side of the same coin as those who would put the 10 Commandments all over the place. It seems there are a lot of Fundies who subscribe to the fantasy that they are persecuted (I don't see any getting eaten by lions, but what do I know). This just gives that fantasy more credence.

I don't need either one in my face.

[mondo joe]

77. The 10 Commandments? Are you actually equating putting religious dictates

in taxpayer owned settings at taxpayer expense, in defiance of the First Amendment, with private citizens purchasing billboard advertising?

Are you really doing that?

[gollygee]

79. People who want to pay for private billboards for The Ten Commandments

should go for it. The issue with that is that people want to use public money and/or display them on public sites. That is unconstitutional. I'd think it would also be unconstitutional for this billboard to be paid for with public money and/or displayed on public property as well. However, it is being paid for by a private organization on a privately owned billboard.

Not the same issue.

[Marr]

132. No, this is the other side of the religious billboard coin.

And religious billboards are *everywhere*.

[AlCzervik]

109. How is that threatening to people who are religious, in what way and please be specific

anyone even remotely threatened by that billboard needs a serious head check. Oh yes and please let us when the next atheists comes by your home trying to convert you.

[Marr]

131. Yes, because if anyone else expresses their view of the universe, it's automatically an attack

on fundamentalists. The religious may speak, but everyone else must be silent little sheep. The only views that can be expressed are those embraced by religion.

... uh-huh.

[Turbineguy]

198. OK, sorry. I misunderstood.

My view of the sign was that it divisive and I thought we were trying to reconcile the country. That was the foundation of my comment.

But then this whole thread turns into an opportunity to attack eachother.

So I was well off the mark.

[Random_Australian]

222. "I thought we were trying to reconcile the country"

And you think you're well of the mark because people didn't agree with you.

Just running this whole thing by me one more time, it went like this:

The OP said there were billboards being put up saying "you are not alone".

You said that this kind of behaviour makes people feel "threatened and alienated" and that the fundies paranoid about atheists were right - ie. that "Don't believe in God? You are not alone" is something which forces atheism on people somehow. Apparently by magic or something.

People point out that this may not be the most logical of statements.

Your response? You wanted to reconcile people, but by allowing such statements as "don't believe in God? You are not alone" to be seen in public, it seems everyone else wants to cause division.

Soooooooooo, got any arguments to back up your claims that the billboards are offensive or divisive?

[Zhade]

297. "You are not alone in not believing" is THREATENING?

Are you fucking kidding me?

[Kazak]

5. Awesome!

:think:

[kevinbgoode]

6. Hmmm....

"Pastor Willard Johnson of Denver's Macedonia Baptist Church called the billboards a desperate effort to discredit Christianity."


Seems to me that some of the people who CLAIM to be the official spokesmodels for "Christianity" do a pretty good job of discrediting the religion all by themselves.

[CrispyQ]

40. Excellent point!

I think the billboard is great.

[Zhade]

298. religion doesn't need help in discrediting itself, it does fine on its own.

NT!

[GodlessBiker]

7. I like the billboard and the timing is perfect. We hear a lot of xmas propaganda and this ...

... is a small (so far) but needed counterpoint.

[Buzz Clik]

17. Why would an atheist need a counterpoint to Christianity?

[GodlessBiker]

21. It provides people who do not believe a little support not to be intimidated by those who do.

It tells people that there is a community of atheists and they need not be ashamed or embarrassed to come out and say they are atheists if they are asked about their religion.

I think the billboards are a nice community service.

[ensho]

47. agree - lightening will not strike you dead if you give up believing in gods

many a person has discovered.

[GodlessBiker]

62. Word.

[Kazak]

23. Right, why would an atheist need to raise awareness?

:shrug:

[Fumesucker]

25. There are churches on every other street corner where I live..

And yet we still have monster billboards advertising churches all over the landscape.

If theists can advertise, why not atheists?

It's not like there is an established atheist meeting place, at least not where I live.. I've been here for nearly twenty years and have never heard the slightest whisper about any kind of atheist organization.

[gollygee]

65. Why wouldn't they?

:shrug:

[Kazak]

158. Well, that was kind of my point.

Maybe I should've included a sarcasm smiley? :shrug:

[Pithlet]

123. DU is just about the only place I ever openly discuss my lack of belief.

I know that DU can sometimes seem like a place that is hostile to people of faith. I can understand why that is. But it is also refuge for many people. It's considered shameful to lack faith. I never reveal the fact that I'm an atheist, to anyone. Now, the area of the country I live in doesn't help. I live in the Bible belt. But, it's clear acceptance is needed in our culture. That is why it's needed.

[Buzz Clik]

236. Well stated.

[Zhade]

300. I don't care anymore. I tell people, and if they have a problem with it, it's theirs.

Of course, I live in Los Angeles...

[cobalt1999]

11. I'm a hardcore atheist, but I don't agree with putting these up.

Christmas season or not.

If someone believes or doesn't believe in something (god, Karma, Little Green Men, etc), they should keep it to themselves.

Atheists usually aren't the needy types anyway, so the billboards are provoking a fight under the guise of support.

Take 'em all down is my opinion.

[Buzz Clik]

16. Very good points, top to bottom.

[hans]

71. Best day for this sign is The Fourth of July. N/T

[hans]

72. Actually I do believe. I believe the Bible is book written by men. N/T

[KittyWampus]

82. And your Geometry text book in school was also written by men. Both books contain Universal Truths

and Principles

[Beetwasher]

87. Uhh, No, Both Books Do Not Contain Universal Truth's And Principles

Show me something, anything, from the bible that is as universally true as 2+2=4.

[KittyWampus]

107. read my signature line.

you can't build a stable structure without following basic rules of construction. Deadmen & studs must be placed within exact distance from one another or a wall will collapse.

THAT'S what my signature means.

[Marr]

136. Your signature has nothing to do with carpentry or architecture.

It's ludicrous to claim such pragmatic meaning in that obscure, vague passage.

[Beetwasher]

186. That's What You Think It Means

And unless you're redefining the term Universal Truth so that it's completely meaningless, your sig ain't no UT.

[Zhade]

302. Your assertion isn't evidence.

NT!

[RichardRay]

233. What is your basis for stating that 2+2=4?

2+2=4 is an effective belief in the Euclidean/Newtonian universe where we (or at least most of us) live. Can you prove it? Not as a an accounting 'proof', or as some sort of incomplete induction, but an actual 'proof' in the full sense of the word? I doubt it, although I could be wrong. I suspect that you, as most of us, take that on faith, supported by your experience to date and based on respect for the framework into which it fits.

How does that differ from truths that other people draw from other sources, and which they believe on the same kinds of basis?

[Beetwasher]

234. Wrong

Just simply, ridiculously wrong. If you don't get that 2+2=4 is more universally true than anything in the bible , that's your deficiency and I'm not going to waste time explaining it to you any more than that there ARE some things that are "Universally True", laws of physics and mathematics fit into that category. Period. They don't change anywhere in THIS universe, thus, they are "Universally True". Nothing in the bible falls into that category. Not even close.

[RichardRay]

237. And you know this how? You have made no more effective

an argument for your perspective than the a Pentecostal snake handler speaking in tongues. If you can't do better than that then you're pretty sad.

If you want to start talking about universal truths you're stepping into a pretty dense thicket; tread carefully. If your argument is to tell me that I'm deficient for not being able to perceive the obvious truth of your perspective, then I'd suggest you go find a Philosopher's Stone or produce some phlogiston from a sheet of paper, or perhaps propagate some some waves through the ether.

[Beetwasher]

249. Wrong Again, Words Mean Things

It's very simple really, but I know you'd rather get bogged down in semantic/symbolic deconstructive bullshit strawmen, but I ain't fallin' for that nonsense.

A claim was made that the bible and a geometry book both contain "Universal Truth". That's bullshit within the context of the English language and in the context of this universe, unless you want to redefine the term "Universal Truth" to the point of meaninglessness. There is a fundamental difference between "Truth" based upon a foundation of physical and mathematical law and "Truth" based upon moral/societal/cultural constructs.

2+2=4 is not of the same "truthiness" as "Except the Lord build the House, they labor in vain that build it. Psalm127:1"

If you don't understand that, then yes, that is your deficiency and I certainly don't need to "tread carefully". :eyes:

[RichardRay]

253. My point is (and I do have one)

that 99.9% of the people who claim to only believe in science and facts and things that can be proved accept all they things they accept on faith. The number of people who can actually do the science they say they hold in such high regard is vanishingly small. The rest of the so-called 'scientific' folks have never done science and most have no real idea of what they're saying they believe in. They are, at best, engineers, and engineering is no less parochial than other system with little more than anecdotal underpinnings.

Mathematics is another whole kettle of fish. It's not a science, it's math, and mathematics and mathematicians get at least as weird as any religious practice and practitioners I can think of. I mean, how can you claim Wiles wasn't wacko (in a good way!) and the reaction of the math world to his Fermat proof certainly smacked of religious uproar. Not to mention the continuing religious wars over the correctness of the computer assisted proof of the Four Color Theorem.

So, it seems to me that the claim to knowledge made by most of those who discount religion is sort of funny. This is not to say that there are no people out there who may make the claim reasonably, just that the ones who can are largely unable to explain their 'knowledge' any more than religionists can.

[Beetwasher]

257. Irrelevant, Strawman, Bullshit

A claim was made. It's bullshit. The bible and a geometry book do not both contain "Universal Truths". Now you can certainly argue that they do, but to do so you'd have redefine "Universal Truth" to the point of absurd meaninglessness in which anything and everything is a "Universal Truth" if you just BELIEVE it to be. In this universe, 2+2=4 regardless of whether I believe it or not. Period.

Now, if you would like to discuss the issues in your post and get bogged down in your semantic deconstructionalist bullshit, fine, start another thread about it. But it's completely irrelevant to the discussion at hand.

[RichardRay]

264. If anybody is postmodern in this little pissing contest it sure

isn't me!

My objection to your statement is has nothing to do with something true just because I believe it; I'm taking an entirely opposite tack, as a matter of fact. My point is that your objection to the original statement is (very probably) no less 'faith-based' than other poster's belief in the statement from the Bible. Note that I don't say that both are actually 'faith-based', only that the vast majority of the people of claim to believe only what's 'proven by science' can't do the science required to prove it, so their holding of that position is a belief based on the understanding of someone they respect.

If you can do the math to prove that 2+2=4 in all cases for this universe then I withdraw everything I've said and bow in your general direction.

[Beetwasher]

265. Give Me A Fucking Break, Your Point Is A Load Of Deconstructionist Semantic Crap

I don't have to "prove" anything and understanding that 2+2=4 is not a matter of faith in any way, shape of form.

"If you can do the math to prove that 2+2=4 in all cases for this universe then I withdraw everything I've said and bow in your general direction."

That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard. It doesn't become any more or less of a reality just because I can or can't "do the math". You're point is idiotic.

[RichardRay]

266. OK, I'll settle for an explanation of why you see my

position as deconstructionalist.

A couple of sentences? Maybe a link to a discussion of how philosophy of science or math is deconstructionism? I don't know a lot about postmodernism, but I'd have thought that scientific rigor wouldn't fit well with that worldview...

[Beetwasher]

267. Frankly, I Don't Care What You'll "Settle For"

As much as you'd like to go off on a tangent into a philosophical discussion about science and math, what you're actually doing is trying to defend a post that makes a specific and definitive claim that "truth" in the bible is akin to "truth" in a geometry book. That claim is bullshit and unsupportable. So again, I reject your strawman bullshit.

[RichardRay]

268. OK, then I reject your 'appeals to authority'

Now that we've rejected each other, I'll go back to work.

Bye-bye.

[Beetwasher]

269. LOL! Uh Huh

Seriously, you think I'm going to sit here for hours (or longer!) and expound on set theory so I can "prove" to you that 2+2=4? Some people may be stupid enough to allow themselves to fall for strawmen crap like that, but not me. It ain't relevant to the discussion and just because I could do it, doesn't make it any more or less real.

"The number of people who can actually do the science they say they hold in such high regard is vanishingly small. The rest of the so-called 'scientific' folks have never done science and most have no real idea of what they're saying they believe in."

So in your world, only people who can actually DO the science (and/or math) can make effective arguments about "truth" in religion being akin to "truth" in science? Talk about an appeal to authority. :eyes:

"If you can do the math to prove that 2+2=4 in all cases for this universe then I withdraw everything I've said and bow in your general direction."

Wow. That's all it would take? :rofl:

[RichardRay]

270. There are people who make claims about science they can't

prove, there are people who make claims about religion they can't prove. I see both groups as equally able to make effective arguments in support of their positions. No 'appeal to authority' there.

[Beetwasher]

271. LOL! The Difference Is, Claims In Science ARE "Provable" To The Extent That Anythingn Is "Provable"

(Or math for that matter). The same can't be said about religion. Nothing in religion is "provable" and frankly, that's sort of the whole point, thanks for making it. So, there is nothing "equal" about a scientific "truth" and a perceived, religious "truth".

You told me if I could prove 2+2=4 then you would "bow down" to me. Umm, I got news for you, if that ain't an appeal to authority, then nothing is. You would only accept my arguments if I "proved" to you I was some sort of mathematics authority. It's essentially the definition of an appeal to authority. :eyes:

I thought you were leaving? :shrug:

[RichardRay]

272. Not true.

In order to prove what you can in mathematics (e.g. - that 2+2=4) you need some axioms. Give the religionists their axioms and they'll step through their lemmas, too. The two sets of axioms can't be used to state each other's world's, but that's not to say that proofs can't be constructed in each of them.

You chooses your axioms, you gets your proofs...

[Beetwasher]

273. Good Grief

Yeah, give them their axioms. It's that simple, huh? Now why didn't I think of that. :eyes:

So, Einstein, let's see those religious axioms. Oh, that's right. They don't exist. At least not in this universe.

[RichardRay]

274. I think you just tossed mathematics overboard.

Would you like to start on physics?

Of course there are religious axioms, and, like all axioms, they are not subject to proof or decision. Isn't that the nature of axioms?

Whose would you like to start with? Hindu's?, Jew's, Muslim's, Christian's? Buddhist's? Zoroastrianism's? Take your pick - it's kind of like deciding what kind of geometric axioms you want to start with.

[Beetwasher]

275. Umm, You've Got To Be Fucking Kidding Me

Are you in all seriousness telling me that you think what are called religious "axioms" are the same as a mathematical/logical axiom? Really? Are you making that claim? Seriously? :rofl:

Wow. Just wow.

Frankly, if that's the case, then really, is there any point in moving forward in this discussion? I mean I will, but that admission means you've devolved into a level of absurdity that is beyond meaningful discussion because then definitions pretty much become whatever we want them to be.

[RichardRay]

279. And they differ how? What's your definition of an axiom and

how do wff's stating the underlying assumptions of religion not qualify as 'axioms'?

Dictionary.com:
axiom – noun

1. a self-evident truth that requires no proof. me - self-evident to whom?
2. a universally accepted principle or rule. me - are there any of these? if so, what are they?
3. Logic, Mathematics. a proposition that is assumed without proof for the sake of studying the consequences that follow from it. me - this is the sense I am using

Dictionary of Philosopy:
A proposition laid down as one from which we may begin; an assertion that is taken as fundamental, at least for the purposes of the branch of enquiry in hand. The axiomatic method is that of defining a set of such propositions, and the proof procedures or rules of inference that are permissible, and then deriving the theorems that result.

[Beetwasher]

280. And Next You'll Tell Me You're Not Really Delving Into Semantic Bullshit

:eyes:

Why didn't you show me the dictionary definition of "axiom" that has to do w/ religion? Why pull out the "dictionary of philosophy's" discussion on "axiomatic method" instead? And one that ALSO doesn't mention religion?

Oh, it's because you're full of shit.

"me - this is the sense I am using"

Oh, that's fine w/ me that you're using that definition. So, you're using a dictionary definition that specifically points out that it pertains to mathematics and logic and says nothing about religion? :rofl:

In other words, you've just totally proved my point and you're just making shit up and defining things in the way that you see fit.

Weak.

Hell, I'm starting a religion right now and the prime axiom is "my shit don't stink!". It must be true cuz it's an axiom! And it's an axiom cuz I said so! :rofl:

How childish.

Please, keep this going so I can ridicule you some more.

[Zhade]

304. The difference is, in science someone HAS proven it. The same cannot be said for religion.

Moreover, the evidence that supports the proven science can be examined and tested. Not so religion.

[Zhade]

303. Science is not taken on faith, because at any moment people can try to disprove its theories.

If it can be disproven, it is overturned. If not, it stands.

That's the basic difference between religion and science: falsifiability.

[surrealAmerican]

97. "Atheists usually aren't the needy types" ...

... except when they are. I know many people raised in a religion, who when they finally decide that they don't believe in a deity, feel incredibly isolated. It doesn't usually last more that a few years, but if you haven't found a like-minded community yet, this may be just what you need to hear.

[Miss Chybil]

118. I agree. nt

[ZombieHorde]

keep it to themselves

If someone believes or doesn't believe in something (god, Karma, Little Green Men, etc), they should keep it to themselves.

I'm a hardcore atheist

If someone believes or doesn't believe in something (god, Karma, Little Green Men, etc), they should keep it to themselves.

I'm a hardcore atheist

If someone believes or doesn't believe in something (god, Karma, Little Green Men, etc), they should keep it to themselves.

I'm a hardcore atheist

(There seems to be an inconsistency in your post.)

[OwnedByFerrets]

163. And why, in AMERICA, should someone NOT be allowed to

display an opinion as long as it doesn't break a law?

[Random_Australian]

224. Do people look for people like themselves? Yes, they do.

"atheists usually aren't needy types anyway" - stereotyping, generalisation, call it what you want, but you still have no basis for calling any group special.

But really, I want to know - what makes you think the billboards aren't genuine? When you see a religious billboard, do you think "ooohhhhhh, there is a hidden agenda there. They don't really want to advertise their church!"

Let people put anything legal they want on privately paid billboards is my opinion.

[demwing]

244. Groupthink is doubleplus ungood.

War is Peace
Freedom is Slavery
Indepednence is Reliance
Faith is Disbelief

[Zhade]

301. People should keep it to themselves?

Gosh, it's a good thing people didn't keep to themselves that they believed slavery was wrong, or that people other than white landowners should vote, or that science should be well-funded, or...

[Buzz Clik]

14. Sweet Mother Earth. Don't tell Bill O'Reilly.

[Fumesucker]

20. Au contraire mon ami..

I want video of O'Loofah's oversized head exploding into a billion tiny little pieces and flying all over the studio, coating the camera lens with translucent pinkish gray ooze..

I'd pay to see that..

[Buzz Clik]

24. You won't have to pay a dime beyond your basic cable bill. It will happen.

[Fumesucker]

26. No cable, no satellite..

I'll have to wait til it hits youtube. :(

But that shouldn't take more than five minutes or so. :)

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

19. I question who is Really funding this. This is going to be a clarion call to religious

fundies to band together, stoking up "the base", causing more divisiveness.

Most Atheists are Intelligent enough to know that they are not alone.

[Fumesucker]

22. Intellectual knowledge is not the same thing as the emotion..

I live in the deep south, intellectually I know there are other atheists around but I almost never meet one knowingly. To the best of my knowledge there is no "atheistdar"..

Emotionally it's pretty alienating.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

28. It's hard for me to put myself in your place as I'm in NY. I'm sorry that you are emotionally

affected.

If you feel a need to bond with other Atheists, maybe you can find a place to network in your area. Is Craigslist popular there? You never know. :)

:hug:

[Fumesucker]

35. Thanks for the kind words..

I've been here for over fifty years and I'm used to things as they are.

Almost all my intellectual stimulation comes from teh intertubez anyway, very few people around me are interested in most of the things I care about aside from my family.

[spooky3]

57. you may be interested in this website, if you haven't seen it already...

www.ffrf.org

[bunkerbuster1]

95. They had at least one billboard up in these hyper-religious Northern-Atlanta burbs

It was last year. I don't remember anyone taking a torch to them.

(I will admit to being surprised.)

Funny thing about the minister being interviewed, taking it as a shot against "Christians." Huh? Doesn't the Jewish or Muslim faith in the Deity count for anything?

[spooky3]

100. yes, and they ought to be equally concerned

whenever they see a billboard advertising something like "Worship at the church of your choice", since that's as much a "shot" against freethinkers, as a billboard like the one in the OP is a "shot" against others who disagree with its POV.

It's just amazing how so many people demand tolerance of their beliefs but suppression (or worse) of others' equally valid beliefs.

[msongs]

30. yes, if you are not a fundie STFU - how's that working out so far? :-) nt

[ensho]

49. fundies are already 'banded together'. 'stoking' them up is good

the world will see them 'stoked', being religiously insane.

[Deja Q]

64. Most smart atheists, like believers of religion, don't instigate this sort of thing.

Whoever paid for the signs is a grade-A, division-causing, caustic troll. And regardless of camp, they know they are not alone.

And I will not tolerate the intolerant. (Another oxymoron; life rox!)

[Zhade]

305. Uh, any evidence for your assertion?

NT!

[PassingFair]

227. Probably the American Humanist Society.

I have a sticker expressing the same sentiment
on the corkboard next to me.

Is it any more "divisive" than if it were a cross?

:eyes:

[NV Whino]

29. One thing that no one has mentioned in the pros and cons, here

Colorado is a riddled with fundy nutballs. I questioned why anyone would want to do this and then I read that it was Colorado and understood. A non-believer surrounded by those nutballs can begin to feel very alone. Just the fact that there were enough people to get together to fund a billboard campaign would make me more comfortable.

I do expect some sort of retaliation from the nutballs, however.

[Ian David]

34. Maybe they'll suicide-bomb the billboards. n/t

[Fumesucker]

36. I could do a job on a billboard with a paint ball gun...

:evilgrin:

[ensho]

247. lol

I shouldn't laugh. the religiously insane are dangerous.

[Starry Messenger]

98. I was just scrolling down to see if anyone else had noticed that.

I though Colorado Springs was the fundie mecca. Maybe these billboards will bring comfort and direction for someone who feels alienated and never knew why. And they are pretty tasteful looking compared to some of the fundie billboards I've seen on the tubez.

[Ian David]

31. They WANTED a "War on chrisTmas," now they finally have one. Go, godless! n/t

[Sal Minella]

32. Fear of a billboard "discrediting" Christianity? Doesn't that show terribly weak Christian faith?

Since Christians outnumber everybody else in the U.S. already, I really think they could forego pummeling all non-believers into total silence. We aren't pounding on their doors waving tracts and trying to convert them, after all -- it's just a billboard.

I think that billboard would be provocative only to those super-sensitive to provocation -- the way visible female ankles constitute sexual provocation to the Taliban.

[Madam Mossfern]

51. I guess that assumes

that only Christians believe in God.
Interesting.

[Sal Minella]

56. No, but some people are protesting the billboards' pre-Christmas timing, therefore the connection

The quote, "discrediting" Christianity, comes from the Baptist minister in the story.

[Madam Mossfern]

93. Sorry if I confused you

that was who I was referring to. As far as I can tell, this is mid-November, when is it not Christmas season?

[DU GrovelBot]

33. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

==================
GROVELBOT.EXE v4.1
==================



This week is our fourth quarter 2008 fund drive. Democratic Underground is
a completely independent website. We depend on donations from our members
to cover our costs. Please take a moment to donate! Thank you!

[madmom]

39. I wish they'd put them around here!

[Peace Patriot]

41. I wish the sign putter uppers had more of a sense of humor, or irony, or

intellectual bite, or cleverness, or educational value. In fact, as worded, the sign could be read to mean the opposite of what the atheist group intends ("You don't believe in God? You are not alone. You have...God as your companion.")

To my mind, humanity's need for belief in Gods, or God, is fascinating. The mix up of that need with power politics leads to truly awesome mischief and evil--the exact opposite of what most of the big modern religions preach. And that irony is always a fun topic. But I mean--as to this billboard--something gentler, more probing, more getting into the psyche and what the mind of humans is trying to do, by creating Gods or God. To just say that it's illogical, irrational, unscientific, is not enough. Not nearly enough. For instance, how about a big billboard that says: "Are you God? In what way?", or, "The generosity of Christmas is a Pagan idea. Get it?"

Personally, I think we aim at perfection of our highest thoughts and desires, and then personify it, because we can't get there. Or we can't get there alone. It's our brother and sister humans whom we should look to--a big or small community--to realize the perfection that we long for, that seems to be embedded as an idea in our brains. And when our brother and sister humans disappoint, we project that idea/desire elsewhere. And it may be the long range trajectory of our evolution not just to create an idea of God but to become God. (Ever read "Childhood's End"? A great and haunting science fiction novel by Arthur Clarke that explores this idea.)

Anyway, to just tell people "You're wrong!" about an idea that they so deeply feel is kind of pointless. To say it in a gentler way--as this billboard does--which seems aimed at making atheists feel less alienated in our culture--is okay. There are many issues that that could be used for. (Imagine if, back in 2003, billboards had sprung up, saying, "Don't support the Iraq War? You are not alone." THAT billboard might conceivably have saved us from slaughtering one million innocent people in Iraq, for, at the time, nearly 60% of the American people opposed the war--Feb 03, all polls--but hardly anybody knew it; the corpo/fascist 'news' monopolies created the opposite impression--that the majority was goose-stepping to the Bushwhacks.) If atheists need to comfort each other, fine. But I was just wishing that the billboard had a more thought-provoking message. What is going on in the human mind? Why does it posit perfection? Where does that lead us? Why do we create religions based on compassion, then use them to justify the horrors of war? What is vital to human emotional needs, in the cyclical, seasonal celebrations--following the roll of the planet on its axis and around the sun--that gets replicated in every religion, from time immemorial? (Is time immemorial?) Like that. We are just very vulnerable little critters shivering in the winter cold, hoping for spring. A baby being born = spring is coming again. But then that hopefulness is dashed by the inevitability of our individual suffering and death, over and over and over again. Round we go. It's in our DNA.

I think it's much more important to ask WHY people believe in God, or Gods, than trying to debunk their belief. The latter is too simple. (And we've learned that it is wrong--an insult, and even genocidal--to do that to indigenous tribes.) WHAT are people aiming at? And how do we begin to make our evolution conscious, and even to direct it? How can this projective capability of the human mind be put to good use? Jesus ain't such a bad dude, for people to believe in--IF they would really believe in him! Every religion has something like this--a core of profoundly ethical teaching--that attracts people of good will...and then politicians. And then corporate looters and war profiteers, riding the deep desire of humans for the sun to come out again and grow the crops.

Billboard: "Be kind to an atheist this Christmas! Jesus said so."

[Fumesucker]

45. Personally I think the default human condition is atheism..

In that if you raise a child with no reference to religion in any way, shape or form they are most likely not to come up with such an improbable idea entirely on their own.. Or at least they won't give the idea sufficient weight to become theists. My wife and I kind of put that theory to the test with our own daughter, she turned out to be pretty much an atheist (apatheist might be more correct) despite going to church with her friends whenever she expressed a desire to do so, which happened maybe ten times total in eighteen years.

If mankind had an inner need for theism then the atheistic percentage of the population would not vary as widely as it does, well over 90% in some nations, well under 20% in some others.

Mostly we are theists because we have been indoctrinated since birth in that particular catechism.

[Peace Patriot]

91. Well, I don't think that proves anything--an isolated child. For one thing, the child

isn't finished with her life and thought. She may end up a deist after all. (Often happens that kids end up rebelling against parental beliefs, sometimes in adolescence, sometimes the moment they get out from under parental control, sometimes even later.) Also, your child may have gotten no religion at home, but you simply can't isolate a child these days from the larger culture, which is drenched in religious references and assumptions. Or you wouldn't want to do that to a child. They need to understand and swim in their culture. If you really isolate a child, he/she won't develop language. What does that prove? Nothing.

As for your stats, I'd bet there are a lot of religion avowers--who attend church, etc.--but, if you could really get inside their heads, you'd find that they are agnostics or atheists. They avow religion for family/community/business reasons. And the converse--if you really got inside some atheists heads, I'd bet you'd find belief in something (a "higher power," as AA calls its). We are a complex species, for sure. On our knees after some tragedy, and a non-believer 99.9% of the time--or believing in love and forgiveness while totally screwing other people. Contradictory and complex. Influenced by all sorts of things. Extremely adaptable. I was basically an atheist throughout my childhood education in conservative Catholic schools and in a conservative Catholic home. I never believed any of it. I just went along on the surface of my brain, and the moment I got away from home (which wasn't particularly oppressive, just very Catholic), I stopped going to church. Since then I've read a lot of religious books, books about religion, and women's spirituality books, and connected with some women's spirituality groups. Maybe the church carved a place in my mind that needed to be filled with some god image, and the Goddess--so long repressed in western civilization--really spoke to me. Now I would say, as to deep core beliefs, I am a Buddhist. I don't subscribe to any doctrine or practice. Zen Buddhist, I guess. I think the Buddhists are onto something about the cyclical nature of human life, that we, as individuals, return. It could be a trick of mind, or wishful thinking, but it seems to me that we are here to learn something. That is the basis of all fiction and written history--learning, passing experience along, gathering wisdom. What is the lesson? And, can we keep it conscious as we experience the great transformation of death, and come back round--the way the earth circles the sun (time is not a straight line, it is a circle), and the sun circles the galaxy core, and the galaxy circles the center of the galaxy cluster, and our known universe circles some humongously big (or small) black hole thing "out there" somewhere.

A circle makes sense. A line (birth, life, death) does not. (And by circle I mean circle, oval, spiral--all the rounds.) Time as a straight line thing that ends is an illusion of our society. It is based on the physical facts of life on a very, very small scale--us--but fails to account for macro-time, and certainly fails to account, or even address, our emotional and psychological relationship to time. And you cannot ignore those, or you are risking seeing only one tiny puzzle piece of a hugely bigger picture.

Could be we just go blank, at death; the worms eat our flesh, and we only exist, in a tenuous way, as long as people remember us. That is certainly what the physical facts say. But then there is that other part of us that transcends the physical facts, that thinks up geometry or the Hubble telescope, or that performs heroic, self-sacrificing acts. Why? If the physical facts are all there is, why bother? Why not just eat, fuck, steal anything we want, and shoot ourselves when we're too old to enjoy physical comforts? Something drives us to learn, grow, progress, become better--smarter, more generous, better citizens, stewards of the planet. What is it? I wouldn't say "God" because so much crapola surrounds that word. Nor "higher power" either. Inner power, maybe. Inner psychic capacity in relation to others? The circle? Or, our inner perception that life is a circle? That we come back round?

[Fumesucker]

103. There was nothing for her to rebel against..

I never made any effort to inculcate my daughter with my beliefs (or technically, lack of such), if she asked I told her what I thought but that was as far as it went.

And if she's going to become a theist it's not in evidence at all.. I now have three grandkids who also only go to church when they want to with a friend or relative.

And this line is getting a bit old don't you think?

Why not just eat, fuck, steal anything we want, and shoot ourselves when we're too old to enjoy physical comforts?

That's just another way of saying atheists have no moral compass, I'm pretty sure you know that is not true.

Keep in mind it's the most vociferous *theists* who approve of torture the most..

[Peace Patriot]

122. Sorry, I did NOT mean to imply that atheists are immoral. I was making a different

point, re how people form religious/ethical systems--what they use religion for. So sorry about this mistaken impression. Indeed, I would say that a lot of people substitute religion FOR an ethical system. They rely on the Bible, or preachers, or the Pope, to tell them what is right. Atheists, on the other hand, have to think things through. I have nothing but admiration for people who do that. I would just say, think it ALL the way through. It's too easy to just dismiss religious belief as superstition. It is too prevalent, too elaborate, too persistent in human history. It is doing something for the human psyche--maybe primarily a unifying force (holding the tribe together facing hardship or someone dying, or some other communal purpose), but also it seems to be tied up intricately with the creative/questioning aspects of the human mind. The "why?" people have always asked, and are always asking. Some people go for easy answers. Some people struggle through various questions to a religious belief. Some people reject the whole thing as absurd. Others see an opportunity to make money. You can't reduce all of this to just balderdash. And I'm particularly interested in the overlay of often powermongering religious institutions upon the seasonal celebrations that date back into the far, far distant past. THAT is what we seem to need--this connection to the cycle of life. We also LOVE stories. One of the worst impacts of commercial TV has been its interruptions of stories to blare commercials in peoples' faces. I truly think it has damaged the human brain. It's not the content--it's the fracturing of concentration that is harmful. Thank God (ahem) that our technical expertise is beginning to overcome that intrusion on what I think is THE most basic human psychological need: a story; our story; someone else's story; stories to chase the boogeyman away; stories to thrill us, scare us, give us happy endings, provoke us to think. And that is another function of religion--or one could say, a basic human need that religious institutions have co-opted. I am still attached to the Christmas story. It is a charmer. And there are numerous stories in the New Testament that resonate in my mind--the "who shall cast the first stone?" story, the story of the Good Samaritan (anti-bigotry story), and others. I think the fact that they are good stories is how they managed to survive all the Bowdlerizations that took place around the 4th-5th centuries AD.

Anyway, this is a truly interesting subject to me. I had not meant to offend you, and I'm sorry if I did. And I think your daughter is lucky not to have been propagandized as a child. It takes a lot of years of self-deprogramming to reach a point where you can view the subject with good perspective. She does not have that formidable hurdle to an unfettered mind.

[Fumesucker]

127. No offense taken...

I've been online since the days of 300 baud acoustic modems and polished my chops on usenet political newsgroups, I'm remarkably hard to offend. :)

In my post where I mentioned raising a child in a total absence of religion I didn't mean that the child would be cut off from society, but rather a child being raised in society a bit more extreme atheist than say Denmark, where basically there would be no discussion of religion at all (and hence no need for the term "atheist" or the meme it delineates).

In such a scenario I think that the vast majority of children would grow up to be essentially atheists, that's pretty much what happens in similar societies today.

Take a child from say Pakistan or Saudi Arabia where the society is even more drenched with theism than our own and raise them in Denmark and I'd be willing to wager they would turn out atheist. Run the experiment in the other direction and I'd also be willing to wager that the little Danish kid raised in Saudi would become a follower of Islam. Most of us have no clue just how programmed we are by the society around us, fish do not notice the water in which they swim.

I find it interesting that the Bible stories you seem to be most attracted to are the ones the most vociferous, in your face theists in the US almost completely ignore, in my experience fundagelicals rarely quote the red words.

People have a desire to understand the things around them, in some it is far stronger than in others but just about everyone has it. IMO, religion is simply the explanations that pre-scientific cultures came up with to explain the inexplicable. Of course there is more to it, social control, group bonding and the other things you mention are a part of the mix but it was originally the desire to understand that drove the establishment of religion.

[Zhade]

306. Of course the default is atheism. All babies are born atheists.

They are unaware of any god's alleged existence, and so cannot choose to believe in any. Hence, we are all atheists at birth.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

42. PRAISE BE! AT LONG LAST!

finally. where can I send money for more billboard ads?

[MindPilot]

243. That would be the Freedom From Religion Foundation

www.ffrf.org

[ChairmanAgnostic]

248. Ah. I already send them money.

better increase it.

I love how they publish the names of newly indicted and convicted child abusing priests.

[earth mom]

43. I like it, but wish they had added something like, "Why not worship mother earth instead?"

That way they could have gotten an environmental message in too! O8)

[mondo joe]

52. Because atheists don't worship. NT

[earth mom]

55. You need to learn the definition of the word "worship".

wor·ship (wûrshp)
n.
1.
a. The reverent love and devotion accorded a deity, an idol, or a sacred object.

[mondo joe]

60. Atheists don't believe in deity, idols or the sacred. NT

[GliderGuider]

112. This one does.

My family contains 4 unbroken generations of atheists. For 58 years I have never believed in a "god", and I never will. However, I'm a Deep Ecologist -- I believe very strongly that the universe, and especially all the life it contains, is sacred. You don't need to believe in a separated god to feel a sense of the sacred.

[mondo joe]

128. I suggest in response that you are using an unusual or less common definition of

"sacred".

[GliderGuider]

140. Less common, but becoming more so.

From Mirriam-Webster:

2 b: entitled to reverence and respect
5 a: unassailable, inviolable b: highly valued and important <a sacred responsibility>

I'm finding this usage becoming more and more common as the converging crises of civilization thunder in on us and people realize we've fucked up Mother Nature's home. This usage is especially common in Buddhism, Deep Ecology and the personal transformation movement. If the only contact you've had with reverence is in the context of Abrahamic religions, then it would be natural to think that "sacred" is mainly a religious term.

[earth mom]

137. Who made you the decider? I'm agnostic and mother earth is sacred to me.

sa·cred (skrd)
adj.

5. Worthy of respect; venerable.

So why don't you take your fundie bullshit elsewhere and bother someone else? :puke:

[mondo joe]

142. If you're agnotic you're not an atheist. And I observe you had to dig down all the way

the the 5th least common definition of "sacred".

I love it when people dig down to find rare or antiquated definitions of a word to try to compensate for their errors.

[earth mom]

254. You are reaching dude. A definition is a definition. I zeroed in on the definition that I go by

when I use the word "sacred".

So again, who the hell made you the decider of the way I define a word or belief? Answer: NO ONE.

Also, I identify with atheists because most of the time I don't believe in the existence of "gawd". But to cover my bet, I "choose" to think that there maybe be something out there, because none of us know for sure one way or another.

However, I do know that the official "gawd" story was made up centuries ago and is nothing but a bunch of woo woo made up to satisfy, brainwash and control the masses.

Here, educate yourself: http://zeitgeistmovie.com/

[mondo joe]

255. All definitions are not equal. Hence they are numbered to reflect common usage.

If you want to try to CYA with an anomalous definition, no one can stop you.

But you're not fooling anyone but yourself.

[earth mom]

258. I don't give a damn how much a definition is used. You are splitting hairs here & you know it.

:eyes:

Also, don't think I didn't notice that you totally ignored the Zeitgeist link.

Obviously you can't handle the truth.

[mondo joe]

261. Squawk squawk squawk. NT

[earth mom]

262. B.S. B.S. B.S. B.S. B.S. ad nauseam from you. Look how you hijacked this thread.

:eyes:

[Zhade]

307. Actually, you can be an agnostic atheist. Most, like myself, are such creatures.

We don't know that there are/are not gods (because we don't have all the knowledge in the universe - if we did, *we'd* be gods) and lack belief in any of them due to the lack of evidence for them.

[Random_Australian]

225. .... because there are lots of atheists, and not a lot of them worship mother earth,

and the billboard is trying to be inclusive.

In other words, replace "mother earth" with "Jesus Christ" and you'll get my meaning pretty quick. :)

[RadicalTexan]

239. That would make the billboard pantheist

I'm an atheist and I don't worship anything, including "mother earth."

[starroute]

44. I'd rather they said "Don't believe? You're not alone"

The vast majority of human problems stem from our propensity to just make shit up and then believe in it as if it was real. Some of those beliefs -- like the belief in the free market, for example -- are currently doing a lot more damage than the belief in "God."

Singling out one particular thing to believe or not believe in, and then having major cultural wars over it, only serves as a distraction from the real problem, which is "belief" in general.

Until we address that larger problem, we're not going to make much progress out of our current state of species-wide semi-ignorance.

[MindPilot]

54. A nice retort to the "Jesus is the reason for the season" billboards

that dot the landscape everywhere this time of year.

[Deja Q]

59. "Tolerance" is the grossest oxymoron these days.

Not to mention it gives Bill O'Reilly more clout, so keep on doing the same.

Forgive me for thinking freely too.

[Goblinmonger]

86. So the mere acknowledgment of the fact

that there are other atheists in the world is enough to send O'Reilly off in a manner that causes you concern.

Well, then what fucking won't. Seems the only way to be safe is to just get rid of the atheists.

Look, as you said above, many atheists know they aren't alone and that their atheism is OK. But a lot don't. There are a lot of people who don't believe and feel badly for it and get no support from anyone around them. All this sign is saying is that it's OK, and there are others around them. It really does suck to be isolated as an atheist in a country dominated by Christ imagery at this time. If something as benign as this sets them off, then they need to reach around and pull the stick out of their ass.

[mondo joe]

173. What about the billboard do you consder intolerant?

[mondo joe]

61. The British version was more clever and charming.

But isn't that the usual?

[varelse]

70. Ugh, these people make my head hurt

"The Bible says that faith is the evidence of things not seen. Evidence. If we ignore the evidence for gravity or the Creator, that's really dangerous"

:eyes:

I'm openly atheist, and I have no problem with the billboards, although they're probably just a waste of money and time (see the quote above).

[Greyhound]

81. 10 recs and a kick. n/t

[cherokeeprogressive]

85. Who the fuck reads billboards? n/t

[Fumesucker]

106. People who cannot look at written words without them playing in their mind.

I literally cannot not read printed words, I have to blur my vision or avert it.

[bunkerbuster1]

96. I LOVE that it's in Colorado Springs.

That's about as in-your-face as their billboard here, last year, in the GA burbs.

[fascisthunter]

102. Christmas Has Become More about Consumerism than Anything Spiritual

I think this will bother those who feel they have a lock on free speech during their holiday.

Welcome to reality... we are free to not believe, just as you have been free to openly celebrate you religious views.

[MineralMan]

104. I guess I don't see how this is in anyone's

face. I put it in the same category as a billboard that said, "Like to fish?" "You are not alone." Then a web site for some fishing forum.

I'm an atheist, but have no particular interest in meeting up with other atheists. I don't really want to sit around over coffee and discuss atheism. I interact with people that have similar interests, but I consider my atheism just a simple non-belief in deities and other such supernatural entities. For me, there's nothing really to discuss.

In my daily life, the question of my beliefs or non-beliefs never seems to come up. If asked, I say I'm an atheist. That usually brings up some other question, which I answer, then say I don't normally discuss such things and that I think everyone has some sort of way of thinking about such things and that's a personal matter.

This billboard is doing nothing but advertising some organization of atheists. I can't see how it should bother anyone at all. I'm far more bothered by commercial billboards, frankly.

[LatteLibertine]

105. Personally, I love the timing

Some people pay lip service to religion out of fear of being outcast or actually attacked. I believe our predominantly Christian status is as largely mythical as our "free markets". I think many say they believe in god because it's an easy way out or to avoid negative attention.

I know atheists who have received threats and that have had their property vandalized. Their crime? Just being known as atheists.

Certainly people should express their faith and it shouldn't be assumed or expected for everyone to share said beliefs.

Of course religious leaders are going to wail about this because it's a threat to their power base.

Also people often make extremely flawed assumptions about non-Christians not having any values. I believe in the "golden rule" just without all the myth and ritual. I believe in being a decent and just person because it is the best and right thing to do, not because I've received a mandate from some outside person or thing.

BTW the golden rule concept has been with us much longer than Christianity-

"Do not to your neighbor what you would take ill from him." (Pittacus)
"Avoid doing what you would blame others for doing." (Thales)
"What you wish your neighbors to be to you, such be also to them." (Sextus the Pythagorean)
"Do not do to others what would anger you if done to you by others." (Isocrates)
"What thou avoidest suffering thyself seek not to impose on others." (Epictetus)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethic_of_reciprocity

IMO it's moral common sense.

[JimboBillyBubbaBob]

110. Billboards

Sensibilities require shocking from time to time.

[Festivito]

113. I thought it was to be: Lack belief in God?

I think there are several types of atheism. These atheisms lack an adequate nomenclature.

[Zhade]

308. "Lack belief in" is the same as "don't believe".

If the billboard said "believe there's no god?" you'd have a point.

[crimsonblue]

114. why do you hate America?

:P

[Ladyhawk]

116. Yea for us atheists!!!

I was thinking of trying to start a local "Lonely Hearts Club for Atheists" or something. It's pretty bleak here.

[Joe the Liberal]

117. I live in CO.....

Denver to be more exact and I'm delighted to see this, I'll keep an eye out for the billboards. :party: :party: :party: :party: :headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :headbang:

[Evoman]

120. When "You are not alone" becomes "mean-spirited" "an instigation" or "controversial"

is when something is really fucking wrong with the religious majority.

If you have a problem with this you are a fucking moron or a fucking bigot, you choose.

[sarcasmo]

121. Kick and Nom.

[SoCalDem]

125. This is not a great idea.. It's just as bad as the evangelizing

Live and let live is a better approach..

[Pithlet]

138. How? How is merely acknowledging the existence of atheists evangelizing?

I'd sure as hell like to know.

[SoCalDem]

139. Mocking religious people at the most "significant " religious time of year

just seems a bit much..

I prefer the "don't poke the bee-hive" approach..

I am not religious at all (raised Catholic), but I don't pester my religious friends:)

[Pithlet]

141. Okay, that's fine. That argument is reasonable.

That's not the same thing as evangelizing, though. I agree. I don't think deliberately provoking people is the right way of going about things. Without knowing what group is behind this, though, I reserve judgment. It could genuinely be a group interested in reaching out. They may have chosen the holidays because it is a hard time for some people who lack faith and feel left out, in which case people of faith who are offended can just suck it. If the timing is indeed deliberate and meant to provoke, then no, I don't agree with that. I prefer to give the benefit of the doubt. ETA that it is upsetting that some are jumping to the conclusion that this is an attempt to offend and attack people of faith rather than taking it at face value.

[Luminous Animal]

145. Mocking?

How is reaching out to other atheists via advertisement mocking religious people? How is a billboard pestering?

Does Christian advertising mock non-believers, Jews, Muslims, Pagans, etc.? Is a Christian billboard "pestering" folks of other denominations?

[mondo joe]

166. What on the billboard did you perceive to be mocking?

[OwnedByFerrets]

167. Please explain HOW this is mocking?? Nothing mocking about that sign.

[Fumesucker]

201. But Christmas isn't the most significant religious time of the year..

That would be Easter for Christians.

[Luminous Animal]

184. As bad as evangelizing?

I'm an atheist and I do not find evangelizing bad... not even those who try to stop me on the street and hand me literature. It can be annoying but no more annoying than dealing with those who hand out fliers for products I do not want. And the God Folks got nothin' on Coca-Cola, Taco, Bell, et. al.

[gollygee]

196. It's as bad as a billboard for a church or that gives some religious message

That's what it's like. It isn't any worse or better than that. And that kind of stuff is out there all over.

[Starry Messenger]

259. The juxtaposition in the second picture is priceless. n/t

[Zhade]

309. Mentioning the fact that other atheists who likewise don't have any religion is evangelizing?

What color is the sky in your world?

[Marr]

129. The best atheist ad I've ever seen was a picture of the World Trade Center with the caption,

"Imagine a world with no religion".

I think it was a BBC ad promoting an interview with Richard Dawkins. Cool ad.

[MindPilot]

241. Those billboards were funded and developed by the Freedom From Religion Foundation

www.ffrf.org

[nadinbrzezinski]

130. Maher made the point that it was time to speak up

but boy this will give the War on Christmas crowd some ammo

:-)

[hay rick]

134. Crusading atheists?

This will get ugly.

[Arugula Latte]

144. How is it crusading? It's just telling people they're not alone ...

Which is a message the religious don't want others to hear, because they like to isolate and marginalize nonbelievers as much as possible.

We have god/religion put in our faces day after day (it's on the money, fer chrissakes, pun intended) ... Why do people flip out when it is pointed out that not everybody buys into the mythology?

[hay rick]

147. And it leaves a contact number.

Read our literature... It's advertising and surely will be taken as proselytizing.

[mondo joe]

151. It is clearly aimed at people who are already atheists. NT

[Arugula Latte]

179. Oh noes!1!

So only the religious can put their point of view forward? As a matter of fact, I had a young religious Christian dude come to my house today (I was out raking leaves in the yard) and try to give me a tract. The nerve, you know? Atheists never do that.

This is a simple billboard. Unlike the religious, we're not knocking on doors telling people their belief system is crap. We need to have some voice ... . I'm sick of the religious trying to shush us.

[hay rick]

192. An agnostic's belief system.

I believe in the First Amendment. I have no problem with atheists putting up billboards all over the place. However, I question whether this will have the "intended" effect of letting other atheists know that "they are not alone." I think it is more likely to fuel backlash. Just my opinion.

Are you really offended by people coming to your door (or yard) and trying to sell their religion? I find they are almost invariably polite and readily take "no thank you" for an answer.

[Quantess]

256. When an elderly Jehovahs Witness showed up at my door, I was prepared to be polite.

I politely said no, but he was persistent, like a friendly salesman. I was calm up until he started talking about getting God into our government. This was about a month before the election. He said, "don't you want our government to reflect God's values" or some tripe like that, and I lost my cool. I said, "the government needs to stay out of religion, and religion needs to stay out of government", got my dog back inside, and I slammed the door in his face. I wish I had remembered to tell him that his church needs to get taxed, for mixing politics and religion.

[hay rick]

263. The exception that proves the rule?

Haven't encountered an aggressive Jehovah's Witness myself. I saw a recent news blurb in which Serena Williams was asked whether she supported Barack and she said yes but she wasn't going to vote for him because she was a Jehovah's Witness and they didn't believe in voting.

[gollygee]

199. Why wouldn't it have a contact number?

It's for a group atheists can hang out with if they want to. It isn't an attempt to "convert" someone to atheism. It says "if you're already an atheist and feel alone, call us and we can hang out." Not, "If you believe in God, call us and we'll tell you why you're wrong."

[hay rick]

207. To find out more call our 800 number.

That's kind of the way I take it. You see it as a social networking pitch. We disagree but we could also both be wrong. The OP says the billboards were paid for by a local Colorado group but I notice that the web site is for a Philadelphia humanist/atheist group. Somebody want to call the 800 number?

[Zhade]

310. What an ugly connotation. Atheists don't kill swathes of "infidels" in the name of religion.

Fucking ridiculous. Did you actually think your statement through at all?

[acmavm]

149. Doing it just to stir up shit and cause more division.

[Pithlet]

150. Why aren't we putting the blame for the division squarely where it belongs?

With the religious groups who discriminate and spread hate and division based on whether or not someone believes? Why is it the fault of the group trying to raise awareness?

[acmavm]

152. They're not trying to raise awareness. They're trying to stir up shit.

[Pithlet]

155. Never mind.

Not worth arguing with you. You haven't a clue.

[acmavm]

156. And you have the market cornered? I don't think so.

[Pithlet]

162. Obviously more than you do.

That much is clear. "They're just trying to stir shit up" Very intelligent discussion, there. Sorry. I can do a lot better than that. I'm going to find better discourse elsewhere. Have a pleasant evening.

[OwnedByFerrets]

169. You are SO correct.

[Warren DeMontague]

Do you think "I don't believe in God" is an inherently divisive or bigoted statement?

Do you think people who say "I believe in God" should shut up, too?

[mondo joe]

161. Some people have such a chip on their shoulder, they think everything is an

antagonistic expression directed at them.

[Warren DeMontague]

164. And some people long for the "good old days" when unbelievers stayed in the closet

along with gays, etc.

[mondo joe]

165. Indeed. If simply being visible is construed to be "divisive" then clearly the poster

would prefer we were invisible.

[acmavm]

171. Is it directed at ME? Poor little ME? My gosh, if I'd have known that they

were putting that sign up for me, well I would be honored.

Just fucking imagine, a billboard put up directed at just at ME.

Will wonders never cease.

[Arugula Latte]

185. So you would agree that the Christian dude who came to my door today

to try to convert me was also stirring up shit, then, right?

[gollygee]

202. Are you a mind reader?

How do you know their intent?

It just asks people if they believe in God, and says if they don't they aren't alone, and gives them a phone number they can call to join a group with other atheists. It says absolutely nothing about anyone else's beliefs. If there is a group of Christians who post a sign telling people that if they are Christians they are welcome to go to that church and also give a phone number, is that shit-stirring? Because that's the EXACT same thing this billboard is doing.

[Zhade]

311. That's your assumption, posited without any evidence whatsoever.

If pointing out to atheists that they don't have to feel alone is "stirring up shit", someone's way too thin-skinned.

[mondo joe]

154. It's not divisive for atheists to reach out to one another. NT

[Name removed]

160. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[donco6]

188. You again.

Talk about shit stirring.

[Warren DeMontague]

157. Okay, where do I send the check?

I find it hysterical that in a country where everyone is supposed to be entitled to free expression of their views, any time atheists or unbelievers have the temerity to say "we're here, we don't believe, and we won't apologize for it or shut up" some people invariably go all flappy-armed and bugfuck.

Sorry, but "I don't believe in God" is no more of an offensive, divisive, inappropriate statement than "I believe in God".

[AndrewP]

182. Agreed.

If someone believes in the magic man in the sky or whatever, that's their deal, not mine. I never attack anyone's beliefs in person but I don't join in either.

Not sure why I would have to apologize for stating that it is a load of crap to me, so I'll pass on the celebrations.

[RedCappedBandit]

159. Christian billboards are fine..

but nonchristian billboards are controversial?

This is absurd.

There is nothing wrong with reminding people that they're not the only ones with a particular world view.

[Pithlet]

172. But it's Christmas! OMG!

We're supposed to pretend we don't exist, or we're just being deliberately provoking or something, according to many in this thread. Hell, with Christmas creep because of the horrible economy, by next year we'll have to start hiding ourselves in July!

It's fscking ridiculous. It isn't just the fundies that are biased against us. Any attempt whatsoever to reach out to each other, and we're just stirring shit up. Or were bothering the poor, poor religious people! It isn't just religious people on DU who face bias.

[Random_Australian]

221. "You are not alone"? Now, there's a divisive message if I ever saw one. Deliberately inflaming

religious people by making offensive remarks about their religion, that's what it is!

If you're from planet Shit-For-Brains. That has to be the least controversial billboard I have ever seen. :shrug: In fact, I applaud it. Letting people know that there are others like them around is actually pretty cool.

What next? The guy wandering around with the "free hugs" sign is a terrorist, trying to take away people's free choice to not hug people?

[Feron]

229. I fail to see the big deal.

In my area, there is a Jesus billboard on the interstate that has been there for as long as I can remember. It's a total guilt trip into choosing Christianity complete with an agonized Jesus on the cross.

Not my cup of tea, but it's free speech. The country would be worse if they could not put a tacky billboard up simply because I don't like their opinion.

There is no freedom from offense. People choose to be offended at these things. And let's face it, fundie Christians complain about athiest billboards no matter the time of year.

If someone is secure in his or her belief system, then contrary opinions aren't going to bother them. And if your belief system can't handle any criticism or contrary ideas, then it's time to re-evaluate the belief system. Censoring speech that you don't like doesn't make your belief system any stronger.

BTW Bob Enyart is a complete and absolute hateful kook. His show used to come on in my area years ago.

[Zhade]

312. Great post!

NT!

[tavalon]

232. Excellent!

I do believe in God as I understand her but I want people to know that the fundy whackadoos do not own Diety nor do they own people. I think this is great.

[TWiley]

240. Please add "LETS TAX THE FUCKERS" to it

Then, and only then, religion will finally provide a genuine social service by helping to lower everyone elses taxes.

[demwing]

242. If you believe in God, as I do...

Then why would another person's (or group's) disbelief challenge or affect your belief system in the slightest?

Sounds like some people don't have much faith in their own faith :)

[MindPilot]

245. This thread is a perfect example of why I no longer donate to DU

As is the norm in America, I--as an Atheist--am clearly not truly welcome nor fully accepted here. I am tolerated; yes, I'll grant that the DU community is very tolerant, but there is an undeniable undercurrent that non-believers should just stay in the closet and stay quiet. We are supposed to stay in our own forum for chrissake! (Wherein of course I cannot post if I don't donate--isn't "separate but equal" just grand?)

If anyone doubts that is the tone of this thread, just read back through it substituting "Gay" or "Black" wherever you see "Atheist".

[and-justice-for-all]

246. Wonderful...and I support that message..nt

[JNelson6563]

250. I think it's a good idea

Of course, I am an atheist.

I've read much of this thread and while I respect all the opinions on this matter I still like the idea. I believe the holidays are a tough time for many, believers and non-believers alike. Those who have lost loved ones, suffered family break-ups and the like can suffer depression during the celebration period. Those who are atheists can often feel isolated even from loved ones due to different beliefs. I'd say there is no time where an atheist might feel so alone and, to make it worse, you've got the "Christmas warriors" out there shouting "Merry Christmas!" at everyone, practically daring them to say "Happy Holidays!" back so they can get all up in their face.

No, I say this is a very good time for these billboards. Perhaps it is time for someone other than atheists to give consideration to the beliefs of others. I can tell you that as of now we are still not very welcome to make ourselves known. Some time ago I sported the little Darwin fish thingy avatar. I was informed via PM right here at DU that my avatar mocked Christians and offended the poster and they fairly demanded I remove it. Enough!

Everyone has every right to sport their "colours" as they please and go about in peace. Wear a cross around your neck or sport a Darwin fish on your car or whatever. Anyone taking offense is the one with the issue, not the wearer.

Just my .0125 worth,
Julie

[Vidar]

252. I am a believer, but I don't find that billboard at all offensive.

It's simply stating the fact that there are many atheists, with the implication that they may benefit from some sort of association with fellow atheists. I applaud support groups of any type. Presently, I practice a private spirituality, but have previously been a Lutheran, Unitarian, Methodist & Episcopalian. In none of these "incarnations" would I have been offended by such a billboard, though I imagine the "Palinite" fundie nutjobs will go apeshit over it.

[TheFarseer]

276. How is this less obnoxious than Christian billboards?

that I'm sure many on here hate. Now I get to hear how liberals want to take away Christmas again this holiday season. That should be fun!

[mondo joe]

278. I can give you one big reason:

These billboards only reach out to other non believers to let them know they are not alone.

They don't disparage believers, or make authoritarian decrees.

I wouldn't mind similar boundaries in Christian billboards. The ones I find irksome are more a verbal assault on others.

[Zhade]

281. Before I even read the replies, let me just say: no, atheism IS NOT a religion.

It is NOT "the belief in no gods", it is "a LACK OF BELIEF in any due to the lack of corroborating evidence for their alleged existence". Some atheists take it further and assert that they know gods don't exist; they're not able to back that up, but that doesn't make the majority of atheists who simply don't believe incorrect.

Also, Josephus was a forgery.

(I'll bet I covered them all, even without seeing the replies!)

[elleng]

289. REALLY ANNOYS ME!

'Agnostic' since childhood.

IMO, non-believers, free-thinkers and atheists are smart enough to know they're not alone, and DON'T HAVE TO ADVERTISE.

Seems like someone want attention for attention's sake. This will end up further alienating a lot of people, NOT a desirable result, IMO.

[Jennicut]

292. I am a lutheran Christian and have no problem with this ad

In America, I thought we had religious freedom and that means the freedom to not believe in religion as well. Just like all the "muslim" bs (as if being muslim was a crime) this is equally ridiculous. Some people just don't believe. And that is okay. The real war on Christmas is how commercial and buy buy buy its become, putting us all in debt so Johnny and Suzy can have the latest video game or Barbie.

[flvegan]

296. I'd like to give thanks to the DU Gods for this thread's epicness.

I give it a 9.8. A 10 except for excessive splash on entry.