"There's probably no God" snappy comeback

[wtmusic]

You've probably heard about the British Humanists campaign to put the following advert on 800 buses across Britain:



I was in Bath, England a couple weeks ago and saw this in the window of a Christian bookstore:



Which all in all is a bit more muted than the stern warning on the website which inspired the original atheists ad:

"... the following warning for anyone who doesn't "accept the word of Jesus on the cross": "You will be condemned to everlasting separation from God and then you spend all eternity in torment in hell. Jesus spoke about this as a lake of fire which was prepared for the devil and all his angels (demonic spirits)" (Matthew 25:41)."

No doubt millions have been converted/unconverted by these clever ads, but I wonder how many childrens' lives would have been saved had the funds (about $300,000) been directed to hunger relief?

Just sayin'.

[crim son]

1. People champion different causes.

No doubt both of the advertisers believe that if everybody just knew what they knew, there'd be no hunger, disease or war. :sarcasm:

[sinkingfeeling]

2. And how many children's lives could be greatly improved if we didn't waste $millions fighting

over choice?

[sui generis]

3. Well I'm on the side of the humanists.

Remember to eat all of your vegetables to save the poor starving youth in Asia.

Just sayin'

Why do you have to have god to be good and enjoy life? Just sayin' that too.

:shrug:

If your faith is so weak that a bus sign can convert / uncovert you, then it never was faith to begin with. Those people, in my opinion, have been "saved". From religion.

just sayin'

[Christa]

4. And your point is?

Are you against the Atheist Campaign?

[wtmusic]

10. Not against it but wouldn't donate

because IMO it's a waste.

I'd rather give money to organizations which are taking concrete steps to keep religion out of government (ACLU).

[Oregone]

5. "but I wonder how many childrens' lives would have been saved"

Who knows in the long run. Is a world full of secular humanists better at distributing resources to those in need, or are militant religious fundementalist better at doing so? Last time I checked, the former was not in charge of Somalia at least

[Cronus Protagonist]

6. If God was everywhere we wouldn't need to look for Her

Even a child can tell that.

[wtmusic]

13. Logic was never religion's strong suit

The faithful should stick to fear and intimidation.

[SidDithers]

7. Apparently, the religious have a different definition of "snappy"...nt

Sid

[Lex]

8. LOL

:thumbsup:

[redqueen]

9. Heheheh

[shadowknows69]

11. I love the irony of the second sticker

Start looking for him. He is everywhere; but our DVDs and books are the first place you should look :rofl:

[Sal Minella]

17. After buying the DVDs and books first, of course.

A good old money-grubbing Capitalist God would certainly be my first choice if I felt the need to believe in one at all.

[redqueen]

12. How much money is used to build churches?

A lot more than $300,000 I promise you that. Pff.

[RaleighNCDUer]

22. I was really squishy, still, when I was 13. My dad got transferred to

Spain, and shortly after getting there we went sightseeing to the cathedral in Cadiz, where there was a 3' tall solid gold, gem encrusted cathedral on display.

And beggars outside on the steps.

Changed my attitudes about religion forever.

[el_bryanto]

14. Yep there's nothing more productive then knocking down religion

Bryant

[mr blur]

23. You're absolutely right. And we have to keep knocking,

until the whole stupid, ugly fantasy disappears.

[el_bryanto]

24. Yep. Nothing is more endearing then pissing on people's beliefs.

[Touchdown]

56. We gotta put that hellfire out somehow.

:shrug:

[LanternWaste]

39. And all other fantasies too...

"And we have to keep knocking, until the whole stupid, ugly fantasy disappears..."

Like all the other man-made constructs which appear nowhere but our own imaginations-- politics, borders, philosophy, the arts, economies, literature... and a thousand other imaginary things.




Unless of course you think your imaginary, fantasy constructs are worth saving at the expense of all the others... but unilateral and dogmatic righteousness of one's own belief-systems at the expense of all others seem to be 99% of the problem anyways. :shrug:

[kristopher]

25. You're right.

Knocking down religion would probably do more to decrease social problems in the US than almost anything else we could do.

Journal of Religion and Society
Volume 7 2005
ISSN: 1522-5658

Cross-National Correlations of Quantifiable Societal Health with Popular Religiosity and Secularism in the Prosperous Democracies: A First Look

Gregory S. Paul


Conclusion

<20> The United States’ deep social problems are all the more disturbing because the nation enjoys exceptional per capita wealth among the major western nations (Barro and McCleary; Kasman; PEW; UN Development Programme, 2000, 2004). Spending on health care is much higher as a portion of the GDP and per capita, by a factor of a third to two or more, than in any other developed democracy (UN Development Programme, 2000, 2004). The U.S. is therefore the least efficient western nation in terms of converting wealth into cultural and physical health. Understanding the reasons for this failure is urgent, and doing so requires considering the degree to which cause versus effect is responsible for the observed correlations between social conditions and religiosity versus secularism. It is therefore hoped that this initial look at a subject of pressing importance will inspire more extensive research on the subject. Pressing questions include the reasons, whether theistic or non-theistic, that the exceptionally wealthy U.S. is so inefficient that it is experiencing a much higher degree of societal distress than are less religious, less wealthy prosperous democracies. Conversely, how do the latter achieve superior societal health while having little in the way of the religious values or institutions? There is evidence that within the U.S. strong disparities in religious belief versus acceptance of evolution are correlated with similarly varying rates of societal dysfunction, the strongly theistic, anti-evolution south and mid-west having markedly worse homicide, mortality, STD, youth pregnancy, marital and related problems than the northeast where societal conditions, secularization, and acceptance of evolution approach European norms (Aral and Holmes; Beeghley, Doyle, 2002). It is the responsibility of the research community to address controversial issues and provide the information that the citizens of democracies need to chart their future courses.


Full article at: http://moses.creighton.edu/JRS/2005/2005-11.html

[SteelPenguin]

40. At one point in my life I would have agreed with you

Once you see people living in abject poverty, no running water, no medicine, scraping their living out by farming where the people who transport their crops to market get nearly all the profit, children dying from common diseases that a basic antibiotic would cure, etc. etc....

Anyway then getting even just basic help to those people in the form of basic medicines, education, clean water that they don't have to walk 2 km to retrieve seems a bit more productive in the betterment of people's lives than knocking down religion.

Kinda hard to say "300k well spent!" on a bus advertisement aimed at people who have a roof over their head, a heated home, running water, and readily available medical care, when you know people with kids who might die because of something that wouldn't even keep your kids out of school for a day.

At least for me.

[Touchdown]

57. Also, those buses didn't have to accept Christ to get the posters...

Like those children in abject poverty had to.

[SteelPenguin]

59. not all work helping those in extreme poverty has a relgious bent

However far too much does...

You can choose where your money or time goes. As much as I'd prefer all relief work to be 100% free of religion, if I had to choose between my own children having no religion, and then dying from Scarlet Fever, or listening to a sermon and then getting a dose of anti-biotics and living I know which one I'd choose.

I'm just glad for all the people who actually go out of their way to help people who need it, particularly those who don't have religion and are doing it not to 'save' anyone but to simply help those who need help because it's the right thing to do.

[wtmusic]

58. .

:thumbsup:

[Goblinmonger]

15. How much could be done for children's lives

if the Roman Catholic Church would sell off all the precious metals and gems and art work they have stored in Vatican City and stopped outfitting the Pope in Prada.

Just sayin'.

[Deep13]

16. That's a one-sided question.

One also has to ask how many children's lives would be saved if the money donated to churches and the money they save in tax free property and income had been used to save children's lives. How about a Vatican auction? What if all the money donated by well-meaning people to Mother Theresa had been used for charity and not for the support of her monastic order? And what about all the children who are oppressed by theocracies or terrorized by stories of hell--how would their lives improve without that horseshit?

In this world, ideas matter.

And the snappy comeback is pathetic. I HAVE looked for god all around and have always been disappointed in that respect. Fortunately, what I found was far more awesome and beautiful than any bronze-age sky god.

[slampoet]

18. In no possible way is that even a comeback it is just simplistic opposition.

Absolutely humorless.

[Greyhound]

30. No it isn't.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=teMlv3ripSM">Argument Clinic
:rofl:

[grantcart]

36. DUzy all star grand slam response

[RaleighNCDUer]

19. The religionists don't see any dichotomy in saying

'there probably is a god' and 'he is everywhere'.

If they can support the 'he is everywhere', then where does the 'probably' come into play?

[BolivarianHero]

20. A United Church of Canada minister's retort when this ad was an issue in Ottawa...

"There probably is a God. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life."

It's the equivalent to your United Church of Christ, only there are some congregations that dissent from the denomination's relatively radical politics because its the largest and most mainstream sect of Protestant Christianity in Canada, and therefore has a broader tent of believers.

[PVnRT]

21. That's about as snappy as a Dane Cook joke

See what I did there?

[TexasObserver]

27. If by "snappy" they mean "uninspired, unimaginative, and predictable" then Yeah.

[slampoet]

28. +1

[Occam Bandage]

37. I think you mean,

That's about as snappy as a Dane Cook joke, which tend to be very long, unfocused, disjointed, and repetitive, which when combined paints a portrait of a joke few indeed would call "snappy."

Brah.

[yellowcanine]

26. If all of the God promoters would look for God in PEOPLE the world would be a much better place.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

29. In both cases, the God/no God, referred to doesn't give a rip.

I would think that any sensible deity, or non-deity, would have better things to do than look at signs on buses or concern itself/non-self with what a temporary species of animals inhabiting a negligible planet circling a very common star on the outskirts of an unremarkable galaxy in a universe made up of trillions of stars and planets think of it/non-it.

Human beings are remarkable only in their hubris to regard themselves as special and think themselves important only because we tell ourselves we are.

[Rex]

31. There probably is a God.

Now stop enjoying your life and start worrying. :evilgrin:

[anigbrowl]

42. DUzy nomination!

[chaska]

32. THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!! Children grow up, become Republicans, and go on years long breeding binges.

Therein lies the doom of the planet.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

33. By "snappy" do you mean "doesn't make sense?

I looked around.

Didn't see Him.

[Obamanaut]

34. Why do folks put "just saying" after saying or typing something?

The audience knows it was said, they were there and heard or read it.

[wtmusic]

43. It is emphasis

for a point that the author feeks has been overlooked. FYI.

[Obamanaut]

47. Or, it is just rambling by the author and he, or she, wants to make

it seem that there is substance.

Or, in the case of an insulting or rude statement, it may be an effort to make the statement seem less rude or insulting.

In either case, it is quite similar, imo, to placing "you know" or "you know what I'm saying" every third or fourth sentence.

My post was actually meant to be rhetorical. Sorry.

[wtmusic]

53. I get it...kind of like saying "Sorry" in a post

when in reality you're not sorry at all (could have been edited beforehand)

Am I close?

[Obamanaut]

55. Exactly right! It's a non-apology, as in "I'm sorry you took offense

to what I said." The speaker is not apologizing for saying it, just that the listener took offense. Just sayin' You know what I mean?

[Occam Bandage]

35. That's not really "snappy." Far, far too long.

"I've had a wonderful evening. However, when I say this, I do not mean to say that the wonderful evening I have had was had by me tonight. Rather, I was referring to an entirely different evening altogether, as a means of insulting your skills as a host by implying that I did not particularly enjoy myself while being entertained by you."

[Stevenmarc]

38. Why would I need to look for him if he's everywhere, can't I just turn to the left and say hi.

[RedCloud]

41. Do you really want God in your bathroom?

Just asking, :shrug:

[wtmusic]

44. Actually

you're "just assumin'", aren't you? :eyes:

[Touchdown]

45. Ah' yes. The creator of gravity, DNA helix, nuclear fusion, hydrogen...

... cellular mitosis and billions of galaxies, is so petty and small minded as to give a shit about a few sings on busses, much less whether or not two dudes get hitched. :eyes:

[JNelson6563]

46. Just think if the churches paid taxes!

Or if the massive wealth acquired by churches of the centuries was sold and used to help the hungry children or any other swath of the greater good! Imagine!

But I reckon bible-god, who apparently has a real needy personality type wouldn't be too happy with that.

Julie

[dysfunctional press]

48. so hunger relief is the only valid place for people to spend money?

btw- do you have to use a ladder when you climb on/off your high horse?

[wtmusic]

51. hmm, let's see...

compare two choices for where money is best spent + make a decision = all other choices are invalid

What's wrong with that logic? Think hard.

[dysfunctional press]

54. the problem with that 'logic' (or lack thereof) is that it's ignorant.

so- everybody in the world should all decide on ONE cause for all the charity money to go to?

ALL the money goes to world hunger relief, because that's the most important, and "all other choices are invalid".

aids relief? nope- it all goes to world hunger.
genocide in darfur? sorry- hunger relief and all.
amnesty international? don't call us, we'll call you.

and on and on and on...

starting to get a clue as to what's wrong with your....what did you call it again..? logic? :shrug:

[sutz12]

49. If he's "everywhere" why do we have to look for him?

:evilgrin:

[RainDog]

50. bullshit. god, if a god existed, would not be male

that whole concept, that god is male, is a sick, sick, sick representation of ego. male. human. ego.

It's the religious equivalent of the pasty white male republican.

[wtmusic]

52. I'm down with that.

Even portraying Satan as male is all ego.