 |
|
|
|
 A billboard criticizing Christianity is going up in Charlotte, North Carolina, host city of the upcoming Democratic National Convention.
August 13th, 2012
10:03 AM ET
First on CNN: Atheist group targets presidential candidates' faith with billboardsBy Dan Merica, CNN Washington (CNN) - A prominent atheist group is using next month's Democratic National Convention to take aim at the presidential candidates' religion, putting up billboards targeting Mormonism and Christianity in Charlotte, North Carolina. “Our political system is rife with religion and it depends too much on religion and not enough on substance," said David Silverman, president of American Atheists, sponsor of the ads. "Religion is silly and religion has components that are inherently divisive. … There is no place for any of that in the political system,” he said. The billboards go up Monday in Charlotte and will stay up for a month at a cost of roughly $15,000. The Democratic convention runs September 3-6. CNN’s Belief Blog: The faith angles behind the biggest stories The billboard targeting Christianity features an image of Jesus Christ on toast and this description of the faith: "Sadistic God; Useless Savior, 30,000+ Versions of ‘Truth,’ Promotes Hates, Calls it ‘Love.’ ”
The billboard targeting Mormonism lambastes - and, Mormons would say, distorts - specific Mormon doctrines: "God is a Space Alien, Baptizes Dead People, Big Money, Big Bigotry.” The Mormon billboard features a man in white underwear, a reference to special Mormon garments. Follow the CNN Belief Blog on Twitter Both billboards feature the line "Atheism: Simply Reasonable." American Atheists had wanted to put the anti-Mormon billboard in Tampa, Florida, to coincide with the Republican National Convention there later this month. Presumptive GOP nominee Mitt Romney is a Mormon. When no billboard company in the city would lease the group space for such a sign, Silverman said the organization decided to focus solely on the Democrats in Charlotte. “Presidential conventions are for ideas, not ideology - platforms, not platitudes," Silverman said. "If a person believes stupid things, we have every right to question his or her judgment, and that directly impacts how the nonreligious voter votes.” CNN Belief Blog: Atheist leader hopes to mobilize closeted nonbelievers Some religious leaders said the billboards showed a misunderstanding of how faith works. "That billboard makes the most common high-school error when it comes to atheism," wrote the Rev. James Martin, a Jesuit priest and author, in an e-mail to CNN. "It's not arguing against the existence of God, but against religion. The American Atheists need to go back to school on this one." Martin also questioned the language used on the billboard: "And as for 'promoting hate' they're doing a bang-up job themselves with that billboard." Terryl Givens, a Mormon professor at the University of Richmond, called American Atheists "petty and vindictive." “If this example of adolescent silliness is what atheists mean by being reasonable, then neither Mormons nor other Christians have much to worry about," he said of the billboards. "When atheists organize to serve the poor and needy of the world, they will be taken more seriously." CNN Belief Blog: Unbelieving preachers 'come out' as atheists It's not the first time the American Atheists group has released in-your-face billboards. Earlier this year, the group put up two billboards in heavily Muslim and Jewish enclaves in New Jersey and New York bearing messages in Arabic and Hebrew. “You know it’s a myth … and you have a choice,” the billboards said. At the time, Silverman said the signs were intended to reach atheists in Muslim and Jewish areas who may feel isolated because they are surrounded by believers. In addition to the billboards, Silverman said his group plans to stage protests at both conventions. |
  About this blog
The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.  |
|
|
|
I know this is off-topic but I think is post worthy:
Some telling news in the world of restaurants, namely the bigot chicken chain has reaped what it is sown sort to speak. In a recent social media index rating that gages the effectiveness of a company's social media marketing efforts, Chicken Jesus is getting a pretty good punch in the nuts. Here's the report from an article in a restaurant periodical:
"Barron added that early indicators for Chick-fil-A’s third-quarter sentiment “dropped to an unbelievable low” amid the controversy that the brand faced in the wake of mid-July comments by Dan Cathy, the brand’s president and chief operating officer, about same-se*x marriage.
“If this continues to hold it will drop them from a Q2 Top 10 to out of the top 50,” Barron said. “More importantly, they have had a significant drop in our VenueTrak platform, which tracks location-based mentions. In the last 10 days of July they dropped 48.1 percent from the same period the month before. This is a direct impact in visits and impact from others not talking about eating or visiting a Chick-fil-A."
So, yes, a simple lesson learned and you don't need a God to tell you so: You get what you give.
Silverman, the Westboro of Atheists?
Clever, but wrong.
I don't see him picketing funerals or trying to convince people that God hates them or that they will burn in hell forever.
As long as theists tell others their fairy tales and myths are true their will be those that call them on it. It is not hate, it is opposition.
When christians quit having to tell everyone about their precious beliefs, we will quit telling them they are wrong.
If Atheism is not a religion then why do they act like one?
Why do you care? Who's 'they'? How many do you know?
When do they hold worship services?
What are their doctrines? (mind you, atheism, not humanism, communism, etc.)
How exactly are they "acting" like a religion, and not any other secular organization?
Why do christians feel better by thinking atheists are a religion? Is it because deep down you know your dogma is unfounded and therefore you want to drag those who use reason down to your level?
@Mennoknight
we have no sacred text, no hagiography. How is that anything like a religion?
Presumably you meant to say something along the lines of "why are atheists just as zealous as believers?"
If you were a member of a minority (particularly a minority of thought), you would understand.
Atheists have NO personal gods, doctrines, dogmas or creeds. Atheism is a religion like NOT playing baseball is a sport and NOT collecting stamps is a hobby. Atheists like myself are just tired of hearing that people are inherently bad and need a savior. I do not believe that. Religion provides NO answers that can be believed by evidence. In fact religions are very proud of faith. The definition of faith in the Bible is as follows: "Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen" (Hebrews 11:1). That statement says faith is the evidence for faith. That is a circular argument. According to the Bible, god operates in this universe. He alters things according to his will. If you believe that then you have to admit that the presence of god in the Universe should be something that we could measure. Why? Because the universe is measurable. If god was detected in the universe, I would be the first to believe. Unfortunately for religion the universe so far complies to natural laws without fluctuation. A universe with god or a designer would/should be perfect. Ours is not.
Why are there almost no famous Atheist artists?
In painting you have to dig really, reallly hard to come up with anyone outside of Picasso...and I would not want to claim Picasso: communist, womanizer, liar, cheat, coward, perfectly happy to live and work with the Nazi's, bad man...
In music the only really major figure you could argue was Ravel...but he was a spiritualist and would almost certainly be more correctly described as a Deist.
There are just not many major Atheists in word art history...maybe Einstein was right...maybe Atheists are people who 'cannot hear the music of the spheres."
It seems to me that most Atheists have a very narrow range of knowledge...often times profound in their area of expertise, but very limited outside of it.
I am not sure this is entirely healthy.
A small sample of Atheist visual Artists – Just to show how ignorant your comment was of reality(I could add many more):
Pablo Picasso (1881–1973): Spanish painter, sculptor, printmaker, ceramicist, and stage designer. One of the greatest and most influential artists of the 20th century, he is widely known for co-founding the Cubist movement, the invention of constructed sculpture, the co-invention of collage, and for the wide variety of styles that he helped develop and explore.[180][181]
Raphael (1483–1520): Italian painter and architect of the High Renaissance. His work is admired for its clarity of form and ease of composition and for its visual achievement of the Neoplatonic ideal of human grandeur. Together with Michelangelo and Leonardo da Vinci, he forms the traditional trinity of great masters of that period.[182][183]
Gwen Raverat (1885–1957): English wood engraving artist who co-founded the Society of Wood Engravers in England.[184]
Gerhard Richter (1932–): German artist, considered one of the most important German artists of the post-World War II period.[185]
Bryan Robertson OBE (1925–2002): English curator and arts manager, "the greatest Director the Tate Gallery never had".[186]
Mark Rothko (1903–1970): Latvian-born American painter and printmaker, classified as an abstract
expressionist, although he rejected the label.[187]
Martin Rowson (1959–): British political cartoonist, novelist and satirist.[188]
Maurice Sinet, known as Siné (1928–): French radical left-wing cartoonist.[189]
Brendan Powell Smith (19??–): American artist, author, and creator of The Brick Testament, which illustrates stories from the Bible by dioramas of LEGO bricks.[190]
"Normal" Bob Smith (1969–): American graphic artist, who prompted controversy with his creation of Jesus Dress Up.[191]
Kurt Westergaard (1935–): Danish cartoonist, creator of a controversial cartoon of the Muslim prophet Muhammad wearing a bomb as a turban which was part of the Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy.[192]
Frank Lloyd Wright (1867–1959): American architect, interior designer, writer and educator, who designed more than 1,000 structures and completed 500 works. Wright believed in designing structures which were in harmony with humanity and its environment, a philosophy he called organic architecture.[193]
Hey "Lack", I posted a list the first time you posted this, not as comprehensive as the one Scott provided, but with many of the same names.
I don't think lying is very healthy for you. You should do a little research before you make your untrue claims. It might make you reconsider posting something that makes you look like an idiot spammer.
I suspect that there may even be a kernel of truth in Lack of "Athesit" artists' post. Artists, including musicians, do seem to me to more often be "spiritual." I also find that they tend to believe in ghosts, alien visitations, quack medicine, etc. to a greater extent. I submit that they are more often emotional thinkers and have less often developed their critical thinking skills. More cynically, successful and innovative artists throughout history (from Mozart to Hendrix) have also suffered mental illness (particularly schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and depression) at a higher rate than the larger population.
So in short, perhaps atheist are underrepresented among artists, but that may cut both ways with regard to arguing for religion. Artists are not necessarily the standard bearers for rational thought or level headedness.
For most of history, most people were 'believers' in name if not in spirit, because it could be dangerous to profess that one had no faith in a god, Lack. Why is this such a mystery to you?
In Western civilization, the church was the main source of money for musicians. It acted as a patron, employing composers to write music for services and festivals. Would you expect the church to employ musicians who admitted to being atheists? The other main source of money for composers were private patrons who were usually wealthy royalty or nobility. They were also unlikely to be atheists or employ them.
The percentage of people even now who claim to be nonbelievers is quite low. The number of composers who ever become well known is also quite low. Why would you expect to have heard of 'many' composers who are atheists?
Here are some famous atheist or agnostic composers: Vaughn Williams, Debussy, Delius, Brahms, Verdi, Britten, Wagner, Richard Strauss.
"It seems to me that most Atheists have a very narrow range of knowledge...often times profound in their area of expertise, but very limited outside of it. "
"I suspect that there may even be a kernel of truth in Lack of "Athesit" artists' post. Artists, including musicians, do seem to me to more often be "spiritual." I also find that they tend to believe in ghosts, alien visitations, quack medicine, etc. to a greater extent. I submit that they are more often emotional thinkers and have less often developed their critical thinking skills."
Can you be anymore fu*cking stupid than this? Both of you do not have a clue about what you say, it's apparent that you know nothing, not one iota, about the nature of music. Music is intrinsically mathematical in nature and in order to understand that you must have critical thinking skills which both of you display the lack of in all it's glorious arrogance. Two very fu*cking dumb, very fu*cking, ridiculously stupid mother fu*ckers.
@Lack
The layers of ignorance in this comment almost made my coffee blow out my nose.
"Why are there almost no famous Atheist artists?
Instead of taking you to task with a litany of famous atheist artists as others have done, let me turn the question around:
Q. How do artists (who provide nothing essential to basic existence – food, shelter, defence, medical care etc) survive?
A. Someone pays them to do it.
Q. Over the course of history, who usually pays them to do it?
Restated:
Q Who is in the business of something that transcends basic needs of existence and has the money to buy art?
Worked it out yet?
A. The church. For millenia the church has been the largest sponsor of art. Artists need paychecks. They work for their patrons and the church is the biggest historical patron of the arts in every society humans have invented.
Can you say with certainty that simply because Leonardo da Vinci painted the Last Supper, he was a true believer in the Catholic faith? We can't know what he truly believed. He did religious works for money and was probably a h0mos3xual, that doesn't necessarily make him religious.
So it is with many of the artists through history. To presume their faith (or lack of faith) is preposterous.
@lack: you obviously haven't researched michaelanglo bornarati nor leonardo di vinci lives as artists. they were both screwed by the church and had to hide what their passions truly were for fear of the pope. the sisteen chapel painted by michael is a prime example he was forced to paint the ceiling by the pope as punishment even though michael was a sculpture not a painter.
di vinci had to hide all his knowledge of the real world from biology to mechanical engineering from the church by writing everything backward because only the rich could afford mirrors during his time period.
the church paid major money to have everything from music to art created to further their cause and display their power.
Shall I wax poetic to defend my fellow Anti-theists? Wait. Poetry is art so never mind, as I am not capable of art. But let me tell you who could wax poetic and even write a song or two... John Lennon. Atheist. IMAGINE that.
To TheVocalAtheist,
Easy there, tiger, I meant no disrespect and I'm well aware that music has an aspect of math to it (however, it isn't necessary to be explicitly aware of it), I'm only saying that we are drawn into certain fields by our own personalities, and in our different fields we are trained to think about things differently. Artists are generally encouraged to think creatively and abstractly, and not always literally. On the other hand, I am a pretty scientifically minded and trained person, and that may relate to why my guitar playing is technically okay but rather pedestrian, and my drawing and photography is a bit literal. I'm really only talking about statistical tendencies here, not black or white. Or perhaps I'm wrong altogether. Either way, your response at least proves that not all non-believers are level-headed!
Atheism is growing in numbers faster than any religion in history has. Faith based religion cannot hope to keep people in ignorance in the information age.
Faith based religions days are numbered, and they have not been short enough. Religion is a parasitic meme infesting humanity.
Just as it is insanity to believe in the 6ft tall green monster in my closet without evidence to support its existance, so is it insanity to believe in god without evidence.
The null hypothesis is that god does not exist, since there is no evidence for the existance of god, the null hypothesis remains the logical position to hold. to depart from this position is to delve into insanity.
My understanding is that atheists belief there is no god (gods).... I'm not an atheist and do not hold that same belief.
However, I am curious about something. When an atheist has a terrible event occur in their life, such as a life-threatening illness of a close family member – do they not pray that they become better? If they do – who do they pray to?
@beans: i don't know about other atheists, however when my grandmother was dying of cancer i didn't pray to anyone/anything. i would check with the doctors to ensure she was comfortible, i would visit and spend time with her and i would see if there was anything more to be done........................needless to say regardless if you pray or not "god" has yet to save anyone.......only medicine and the strength of our bodies have done that.
No prayer here either.
beans: athiesm is more in no belief in god(s) than a belief in no god(s).
when my mom was dying from emphysema, i did not pray. nor can i pray when someone posts on facebook that a friend or relative is ill and requests people to pray for them
@ScottCA,
This is a claim worthy of believers:
Atheism is growing in numbers faster than any religion in history has. Faith based religion cannot hope to keep people in ignorance in the information age.
It is unsubstantiated and to my mind completely wrong. You have no data to back this up other than your gut instinct. It is worthy of Stephen Colbert's "truthiness" concept.
The relative increase in Muslims from the death of the prophet in 632 to domination that spanned central Asia to north Africa and Spain in less than a century is staggering. I'm not going to spend a lot of time researching figures to refute an assertion made without any data at all but I think you'll find that the Muslim conversion was one of the most impactful and rapid conversions on the planet.
You are correct insofar as atheism is growing fastest in millenials. This is a positive sign for our future.
@JecBeans,
thank you for your interest, but your understanding of atheists is not quite correct.
You said: "My understanding is that atheists belief there is no god (gods).... "
Atheists simply don't believe in God. This is a slightly (but important) difference from believing in the non-existence of God. Many atheists do in fact believe in the non-existence of God but it is not true for everyone.
If atheists really want to make a difference, vote for Rocky Anderson. He's an ex-Democrat and an ex-Mormon.
Atheists might as well vote for Rocky Balboa.LOL. If he was crazy enough to get sucked into the Joseph Smith cult, he must not be a real winner.
Billboards? Seriouslly? This is the great plan? What a bunch of weak minded dullards. If this is the best we can do to over throw The Religious bigots who have chained us then we deserve to be enslaved. What a joke!! And not to mention a waste of money. And we call ourselves enlightened and educated. THANKS WE ARE NOW SEEN AS WHINEY LITTLE 4TH GRADERS. I bet whomever came up with billboards got beat up alot in school . God what a fvcking joke!!!!
Atheism is growing faster than any religion in history has. Get used to seeing this message and hearing these opinions. More and more people will consider you rightly insane for believing in something without any evidence to support it.
Just as it is insanity to believe in the 6ft tall green monster in my closet without evidence, so is it insane to believe in god without evidence.
Because of the economy many employers are now hiring work from home employees. This helps the employer save money on the overhead costs associated with employees. It has never been a better time to work from home than now.
Learning how to work from home has never been easier. The holiday season is approaching and work from home employers are now hiring agents. The truth about working from home is that it is not a get rich quick scheme. The people that work from home have real jobs and hold contracts with companies. I know this because I’ve been working from home for over ten years and have been showing people how to obtain work from home jobs. If this book isn’t for you, I am sure a friend or family member can benefit from it.
I have put everything you need to know about working from home, the companies that hire work from home employees and why working from home is currently in demand in the new book “Job’s For Today’s Economy”, the work from home manual.
Visit http://www.georgepublishing.com for more information and visit our FAQ section.
http://WWW.GEORGEPUBLISHING.COM
flag this advertizement.
I worked a few years for the Union Pacific railroad in the 1950s at Chyenne Wyoming. My foreman Louis Self was a morman.
My brother and I wanted to attend his church and mabe join his faith. He told us that no person from another sect was allowed.
Does anybody know what the secrecy is all about?
I dunno, I have to tell the boys on bikes to get lost frequently. They come to my house all the time trying to convert me to Mormonism. I don't know who is worse, them or the Witnesses
Tony,
They call their magic clubhouse rules "sacred", not secret. They have a policy of feeding "milk to kittens", whom they deem unready for the "meat".
Yes, we do consider things “sacred, not secret”. We like to hold our beliefs close to us. We’re hurt and offended if, say, someone mocks us on a billboard (not that THAT would ever happen), or make up a Broadway Musical mocking us.
As for your boss, I’m sorry that he treated you that way. Everyone is welcome at our Sunday services. Our buildings even say “Visitors Welcome”. We meet for 3 hours on Sundays. We start of with Sacrament Meeting (worship service), which lasts for around 1 hour and 10 minutes. Each week, we take the sacrament of bread and water (sorry, no wine for us), sing traditional hymns and listen to speakers usually from the congregation. The first Sunday of each month is open to anyone who wants to bear their testimony of Jesus Christ. Our services are very traditional (no drums or bands). Following this, we have Sunday School. We alternate yearly between Old Testament, New Testament, Book or Mormon, and Doctrine and Covenants, which is a history of the Church. For the third “block” we separate into gender groups and study a set Gospel topic.
One thing that is different about our Church, is it’s the same everywhere. If I’m on vacation and visit another congregation (or what we call a “ward”), they will be teaching the same lessons, from the same manuals that my “ward” uses.
Our Temples are for members only. Before a Temple is ‘dedicated’, we will host an Open House for anyone who would like to walk through. It isn’t one big open space like a cathedral, but divided into small rooms for set purposes. One of the most import purposes of a temple, is we believe that families can be joined forever by being “sealed”. We only allow members in, because we would like to worship without the distractions of the outside world. Temples are very quiet inside. It would be very distracting to the Spirit of the Lord if in the middle of a prayer, a tour group comes through taking pictures. We welcome everyone to come to see the temple during an Open House. You can go to mormon.org or lds.org to find one near you. Right now, the Brigham City Utah temple is having one. Thank you and God bless!
According to a recent study published in The American Journal of Psychiatry religious affiliation is associated with significantly lower levels of suicide compared to religiously unaffiliated people, atheists and agnostics. Source: Kanita Dervic, Maria A. Oquendo, Michael F. Grunebaum, Steve Ellis, Ainsley K. Burke, and J. John Mann. "Religious Affiliation and Suicide Attempt" (161:2303-2308, December 2004).
Full article online: http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/abstract/161/12/2303
Could it possibly be the result of spiritual bankruptcy?
So what? Atheists dont have the dogma and fear to deal with so when they have had enough they don't have an irrational belief stopping them.
As long as we're jumping headfirst into conflating correlation and causation, one might also point out that people with Downs Syndrome are far less likely to attempt suicide than the population as a whole.
Maybe it's cause everybody else is missing Downs Syndrome in their lives!
(disclaimer: I mean no disrespect to the DS population)
Why are there almost no famous Atheist artists?
In painting you have to dig really, reallly hard to come up with anyone outside of Picasso...and I would not want to claim Picasso: communist, womanizer, liar, cheat, coward, perfectly happy to live and work with the Nazi's, bad man...
In music the only really major figure you could argue was Ravel...but he was a spiritualist and would almost certainly be more correctly described as a Deist.
There are just not many major Atheists in word art history...maybe Einstein was right...maybe Atheists are people who 'cannot hear the music of the spheres."
It seems to me that most Atheists have a very narrow range of knowledge...often times profound in their area of expertise, but very limited outside of it.
Here's a few: Vincent Van Gogh proudly declared himself an atheist. Renaissance great Raphael was very likely and atheist. Mark Rothko and Frank Lloyd Wright were openly atheist, as was Henri Matisse. That's just in the fine art. There are also several musicians who are atheists, but you'll have to do your own homework.
We will likely never know how many others there were, since for most of history, churches and temples have been the primary source of income for artists, and it's very bad policy to alienate your boss. I think that you simply are trying to belittle people by making an unsubstantiated claim.
And for the record, while I am nothing more than a mediocre dabbler, I love to paint. I always have. Hmm. I guess you don't need god to be creative, after all.
I think you are right. This nauseating thread is making me want to end it all 🙂
Judaism: only Jews are people; all goy are equal with animals.
Judaism: has caused almost all human suffering in history.
Atheists need to attack the real culprits here: Judaism, whose followers happen to be in control of the world right now. Please visit http://www.incogman.net to learn the REAL truth, not some marxist liberal spin on reality........
lol.
I am surprised it took this long to find a religious anti-Semitic idiot on here. Were you in the car with Mel Gibson when he crashed or just close friends? 🙂
Atheism is no more vaild an intelluctual position on the problem of first cause than any other.
Atheists: get back to me when you can "prove" what was on the other side of the Big Bang. Let me know when you have proof that matter is something more than quantum fluctuations. In short, get back to me when science is actually able to solve ANY of the big questions about the nature of the universe. Since it has not solved any to this point, keep up the FAITH that it will. But until it does, god is alive and well. I suspect he/she/it will be for a very, very long time.
Summing up your post.
Argument from ignorance. Congrats.
I'm confused, are you saying that since science can't answer your questions immediately, it must be wrong, whereas your unfounded conclusion that religion , specifically christianity, must be right because you read it in a book....... oh dear, it's got to suck to stupid like you.
@Planet Claire,
and this keeps you up at night, wondering why science has no answers for what happened before the big bang.
Really there are lots of other things to worry about.
– Whether there will be enough jobs come 2013,
– whether we can find the right balance between government tyranny and not having a 'dirty' fission weapon explode at the SuperBowl,
– whether the corroding bridge down the road will be repaired before it collapses under a school field trip,
– whether we can figure out how to stop arming the bigoted and mentally incompetent before they shoot at congresswomen or worshippers
I find these questions much more relevant than what happened before the big bang.
How about you?
Once again atheist's falling back on the "you must be uneducated and not believe in science" mantra. Try a different approach because this one makes it look like your smoking c 0ke.
And not knowing that apostrophes aren't used to make nouns plural makes you look like a genius, Einstein.
I'm a r3tard and deserve to be c @str@ted.
i m0l3st little b0ys
You are the one claiming to know. Get back to us when you have evidence of your claim. Saying "you can't prove me wrong" does not make your claim true.
@Planet Claire,
I think you misunderstand, atheism is not belief in science and science does not equate to atheism. Most atheists, I suspect, trust scientific findings, but it is not a belief and certainly is not required to be an atheist.
Atheism, for the most part, is simply a lack of belief in God or gods.
@claire: i guess turn about is fair play; get back to me when you can prove "GOD" is real and not some made up power play by the church.........until then i will trust that you aren't taking any of our science based medicines or using any of our science based technology; because if you are using these things, YOU ARE A BIGOTE!.
And still no one gives a #$%^. Just another dull witted special interest group. Yay for you.
"Atheism: Simply Reasonable" - as the billboard states. Ha!! What a joke. The hate-filled comments I see on here, and the continuous attacks on Christians, show what atheism is all about. The billboard itself speaks volumes. If this is what kind of people you are at your core, so filled with hate for others just because of what they believe, then I truly feel sorry for you. What sad lives you lead..
Are you Christian?
Thanks for playing JT. You're a peach.
Right back atcha, "not a GOPer." Just basing my comments off of what I've seen here and on other boards containing posts by atheists.
Yes, @hawaiiguest, I am a Christian. And I don't go around insulting or belittling atheists because of their views.
Not addressed to you two, but to atheists & others in general: believe what you want to believe, that's your right and I have no problem with whatEVER your beliefs are. But don't try and tear me down as a person because of my beliefs. If you do, you have just shown how small-minded and bigoted you really are...
@JT
Oh but I am atheist, and you just made a claim about "what atheism is all about", so your comment was directed, in part, to me.
I find it hilarious that you claim hate and contempt for those who don't disbelieve in a god when your doctrine includes the eternal torture of those who do not believe as you do. Not to mention the statement within your bible that no un-believer in the christian god can do anything good, and are evil monstrous people.
@JT,
thanks for coming back.
I respect people who live a faith-based life. So long as they don't proselytize or try to convert me, there's no issue. Live and let live are words to live by. When self-professed believers are sanctimonious or hypocritical here, I am more than ready to make a point of it.
Regarding these billboards, frankly I think they are non-productive, irritating and will only serve to annoy people. They won't achieve anything useful. They are just as offensive as the anti-atheist billboards put up by evangelical organizations but that's no excuse.
"Regarding these billboards, frankly I think they are non-productive, irritating and will only serve to annoy people. They won't achieve anything useful. They are just as offensive as the anti-atheist billboards put up by evangelical organizations but that's no excuse." This.
@Not a GOPer: thank you for that post. I respect your position, and I agree 100% with what you said about the billboard.
@hawaiiguest: I think you misunderstood what I said. I also think you are mis-interpreting what the bible says. I'm pretty sure it does not call anyone 'evil and monstrous' for not believing in God.
Wouldn't this world be a better place if we had a little more love for each other as human beings and a lot more tolerance for views that are different than our own??
Think of your fellow man
Lend him a helping hand
Put a little love in your heart
You see it's getting late
Oh please don't hesitate
Put a little love in your heart
And the world will be a better place
And the world will be a better place
For you and me
You just wait and see
Another day goes by
And still the children cry
Put a little love in you heart
If you want the world to know
We won't let hatred grow
Put a little love in your heart
And the world will be a better place
And the world will be a better place
For you and me
You just wait and see
Wait and see
Take a good look around
And if you're lookin' down
Put a little love in your heart
I hope when you decide
Kindness will be your guide
Put a little love in your heart
And the world will be a better place
And the world will be a better place
For you and me
You just wait and see
Put a little love in your heart
Put a little love in your heart
Put a little love in your heart
Put a little love in your heart
Put a little love in –
Put a little love in your heart...
@JT,
Wouldn't this world be a better place if we had a little more love for each other as human beings and a lot more tolerance for views that are different than our own??
Can't and won't argue with that.
JT: As opposed to the christian billboards that threaten unbelievers with hell?
There is no such thing as Atheism. An Atheist simply does not believe in God. I am also an a-easterbunnyist and an a-unicornist. I also don't believe in talking snakes, perfect gardens, and that rainbows have a supernatural explanation. If Atheism must be defined since it used mostly by religious people, it would be "To live life as if the real world we live in is actually the real world". No wizards or magic needed.
Prayer changes things ,
The biggest killer of all-time was NOT an atheist.
At one point, God torturously murdered EVERY pregnant woman, child, baby and fetus on the face of the earth.
Judgement, sentencing and execution are not murder. More people have been murdered by atheists in the last 100 years than were killed in all previous centuries.
@truth be told
No, they were judged, sentenced, and executed. According to you, that's not murder. Try again?
@TBT
Bullshit!
While the totalitarian communist regimes were truly horrible did murder millions of people in the 20th century – probably around 30M* between Stalin and Mao alone, I can happily show you sources that demonstrate more than 60M people killed by violence in the wars and slave trades of the 18th and 19th centuries alone let alone ALL previous centuries.
* Not counting deaths through famines – since we are talking about "murders" here.
truth be told,
LOL.
Tell us what the babies and fetuses did to deserve to be murdered?
Sin
Romans 9
10 And not only this; but when Rebecca also had conceived by one, even by our father Isaac;
11 (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth;)
12 It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger.
13 As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.
...
15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.
"At one point, God torturously murdered EVERY pregnant woman, child, baby and fetus on the face of the earth"
Good, women suck.
tbt: your god is an impotent little punk. now, b1tch, get back on your knees and open your mouth, jesus is coming again
@gop'er
What planet do you live on Stalin alone murdered no fewer than 24 million by himself and estimates for chairman Mao range as high as 800 million. This does not include their war dead or the untold millions who died of starvation and disease under atheist compassion.
@truth be told,
what planet are you on?
800 million? This is off by a factor of ten. Please recheck your sources. NO plausible data correlates with this number. I can't even find implausible sources that indicate a number this high.
Including the deaths by famines, the range of deaths in China is truly staggering but all the consensus estimates are in the range of 49M – 78M. The estimates vary all over the place, but 800M is just wrong.
The majority of deaths in China were due to famines, and not torture and murder. The biggest of these was during the Great Leap Forward (famine of 1958 – 1961) where an excess of somewhere between 20M – 45M people died, depending on sources.
Estimates for Stalin's purges and Gulag (not counting the Ukraine Famine of 1932 – 1933, 2.4M – 7.5M) vary anywhere from 6M – 20M.
Staggering numbers of people died in the communist regimes in the PRC and USSR in the 20th century. The numbers are appalling. But your repeated assertion of "murder" exceeding all previous centuries is WRONG.
So if you want to call the total "murders" 50M = 20M (Stalin) + 30M (Mao), I won't argue, but your assertion is still completely wrong that they "murdered" more people than in all prior centuries.
Another credible analysis I looked at gives the following 'excess' fatalities for the 20th century:
Deaths* by communism: 87M
Deaths** by non-communism: 116M
* including famine and democide
** including war, famine and democide
You can find that analysis here: http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat8.htm
If you want a very interesting source for 18th – 20th century information look here:
http://necrometrics.com/index.htm
If you want to have a reasoned discussion about this I would welcome it. The atrocities commited in the communist regimes in the 20th century were awful, but you appear to be repeating bad data that someone gave you.
@truth be told,
by the way, the GLOBAL population in 1950 was ~2.5 Billion. 800M would represent 32% of the world's population! Killing 800M Chinese would be one in every three people alive!
There are more than 1B people living in China today. Can you not see how implausible your math is?
Regardless of your views on religion, this billboard is hate speach and nothing less.
I would expect nothing less from the liberal atheist sector.
Should I a'ssume you're a christian because you simply stated your opinion without any argument or reasoning as to WHY. The art of persuasion–look it up.
Should I a'ssume you're a christian because you s
Christians just love to tell people what they believe and why. But when others tell them the are full of bs and why, it is "hate speech".
Quit telling people about your precious beliefs and we will quit telling you you're wrong.
@anybody
Just how does "morality" comment on the possibility of god's existence? I don't get it. Wouldn't that be like claiming we can prove the existence of the devil by observing that chimps throw their poo at one another?
@Moby,
Love the monkey analogy!
I'm sooo tired of the morality argument. I listed it as number 4 in my top 10 list of "irritatingly stupid ‘arguments’ that religionists make".
Over and over again, these people insist that morality has to be "God-given" and usually in the form of the Ten Commandments. Like people can't come up with the idea that killing, stealing and lying are 'wrong' all on their own.
It is preposterous.
Far too often Christians delude themselves about what they wish the Bible says versus what it actually does say. Assuming that all morals in it are original thoughts is no more accurate than pretending the Bible actually mentions abortion or not molesting children.
There is NO God. Just the fear of impending death, guilt, and a desire for a justice at the end that drives these irrational beliefs. Get over it! The only way our species will ever confront the real problems out there is to come to the conclusion that this short lifespan is all we have. Justice occurs here, not in the clouds or on the mysterious planet Kolob.
Jesus: "There is NO God."
The above-statement is an example of the 'argument from ignorance' fallacy.
God love the atheists! If ever one needed an example of illogical reasoning, look no further than your friendly atheist. Chances are his picture will be posted next to the definition of "illogical."
He will argue that there is no supreme being, that the world is entirely physical...material. Yet if you ask him whether he perceives certain things or acts to be "good" or "bad" he will almost certainly acknowledge that this charity or these actions are "good", or that this situation is "bad." But this is illogical and hypocritical because in a purely material, physical world there can't be qualities of "good" or "bad." Therefore the atheist's position is illogical. It'd be fun to be around when the light finally goes on.
@Tom,
every society of humans defines their own morality.
It's not hard to come up with the idea that killing, stealing and lying are harmful to a community without a burning bush or graven tablets. When it is empirically obvious that all societies create a moral code without any common religious frame of reference, how can this be illogical?
@I'm: Really??? Stealing, lying for personal gain-great idea! Getting rid of the newborn or the unborn or the elderly or the infirm because they're a drain on society? Makes wonderful sense-it leaves more resources to go around. Right? If it feels good, do it. Why not? It's the individual freedom thing to do. All of these are just common sense, realistic, logical behaviors, right?
Yet most societies don't. For some crazy reason they've adopted totally contrary concepts of "goodness." So you gotta ask yourself, where did these crazy notions of "goodness" come from, because they're certainly not logical in a purely physical world. Hmmmm.....maybe they came from a spiritual realm?
The god of the bible complicates morality in that he kills, tortures, and commands the killing and torture of others. Morality comes from empathy and sympathy–products of a rational, mammal mind. Social animals that have no concept of god have morals, and we are social animals with a concept of god, but are morals come from the same reasoning–not god.
Sorry, "our morals.."
@Tom,
humans hand down their observations (call it wisdom if you like) through generations. They observe that happiness and contentment are not derivative of selfish behavior and the definition of 'right' versus 'wrong' becomes evident and ultimately integrated into religious teachings to codify them as societies develop more sophistication and invent religion.
The empirical evidence for this is pretty clear. Ask any anthropologist.
There's no chicken and egg question. The moral fabric exists prior to the evolutions of theology and the societal definition of morality changes over time as the culture develops.
Tom,
Why do you have such a low impression of the intelligence of Christians? Why do you think they would be too ignorant to do "good" without needing a centuries old book to tell them to do that?
Moby Schtick
Tell me what carnivorous social animals are you speaking about that have social grace?
GOPer
"Ask any anthropologist."
=> a bit out there, how about asking some non Christian anthropoligist
@fred,
the Code of Hammurabi existed as a legal framework in ancient Mesopotamia. It's where the biblical "eye for an eye" reference originally comes from.
This legal framework clearly came from a well established moral structure centuries before any form of Judaical culture. This is in no way related to subsequent, pre-Mosaic adherents to Yahweh but was none the less co-opted by Jewish tradition.
"196. If a man put out the eye of another man, his eye shall be put out." Ca 1772 BC
@fred
Why do you qualify your statement with the word "carnivore?"
But many animals with bigger brains have social codes: elephants, whales/dolphins, apes, and various marsupials. As far as "social grace," that would depend upon how you define that term; it's not a term I used. But, however YOU might define it, I would say that cetaceous order has more 'social grace' than we humans with all our weird justifications of killing and poor behavior towards other humans.
GOPer
Your underlying suggestion is that Moses took his laws from the Babylonians and thus was man given not divine. There is no basis whatsoever for this other than the suggestion that the Bible was not codified until much later. No one can say when the oral traditions and codes were originated (that goes for Mayan, Mesopotamian civilizations as well as the Hebrews). According to the Bible it was God that shed first blood for man when sin brought about physical and spiritual death.
Ignoring the question of Gods existence you have a bigger problem in that your social evolution model results in a variable “good”. Stalin thought it good to kill Christians which conflicts with a Christians “good”. Only absolute truth not relative or variable truth could resolve this dilemma.
Moby
When a male lion takes over the pride the other babies are killed. There is no recourse or remorse.
When Apes kill they pass out the soft organs to others in the group there is no remorse.
When Stalin killed Christians there was no remorse in him.
Killing is not a bad or good thing for animals based on empirical observation.
@fred,
the 'eye for an eye' context comes through the Abrahamic tradition. Abraham comes from ancient Mesopotamia (Ur as I recall). The Code of Hammurabi is first written down in more or less the same period (give or take a century) that most scholars like to place Abraham. Presumably the moral construct pre-exists the stele and stone tablets it is engraved on.
An individual (Stalin in your example) cannot dictate "morals". Morality is a societal consensus of conscience – by definition it is not individualized. There can be gray areas where consensus is difficult for a given society. I doubt very much that the average peasant in the Soviet Union thought that having their fellow comrades being rounded up and dragged off to the Gulag was the epitome of "goodness".
Morality can't come from the god of the bible because he's the most evil character ever imagined. He killed off 99.99999% of living people and animals in a world-wide flood (supposedly) and he is going to torture FOREVER 99.999999% of human beings. What a stupid idea to think that morality comes from such a being.
Yes, fred, and humans do much worse than that to each other. What does that have to do with anything we are discussing? Do you understand how to argue a topic or not?
GOPer
If as you say “Morality is a societal consensus of conscience” then there is no right or wrong, good or bad simply variable consensus that takes on the attribute ascribed by a given society at a given time. Is that logical to you? Is the Borg morality good or bad? Morality based on societal consensus is nothing more than a reflection of that society. Killing puppies for pleasure is good if the societal consensus believes it is. No standard bearer necessary, no absolute truth required.
@fred
And you're uncomfortable with that thought, therefore you feel the need to have something more telling you to be good based on an ancient societies ideas of it under pain of eternal torture.
@fred,
please provide an example of a society where your reductio ad absurdum examples – like "killing puppies for pleasure" is considered morally good.
Oh, and let me know when you find a hive mind floating in space.
Human behavior is generally pretty normative when it comes to defining a set of morals. Technology, particularly in the medical fields has an enormous impact.
There are some interesting obsevations in pre-Columbian cultures with human sacrifice, but Christianity is all about human sacrifice commemorated with a canabalistic communal meal anyway, isn't it?
GOPer
Hawaiiguest
I am very uncomfortable with the notion there are no absolute truths. My Grandmother told me how all the kindest people in her village turned against the Jews and did horrible things that were approved by consensus of the village and State. Although consensus changed the absolute truth remained.
These thoughts or truths go back to the time Adam and Eve and the core values have not changed regardless of culture. If there was no Adam and Eve we have evidence that Neanderthal worshiped and provided for the afterlife. We are different than animals in several ways why reduce our morality to a common social animal.
Regardless of dreams and wishes othewise the fact remains we are unique in our universe.
@fred,
where was your Grandmother's village?
We talked yesterday about how even the morality of Christians is subjective. The notion that the moral 'guardrails' not only can, but DO move can be scary.
The responses of people who live in a totalitarian state can be truly frightening. Why did the good Catholic and Lutheran people of Germany abandon their moral compasses in a wave of anti-Semitism? They knew it was wrong. Greed and selfishness motivated the willing participants and fear made the unwilling participants look the other way, but I don't think that as a community there was consensus that what happened was 'good' or right'.
Great posts, Tom! Well said!
Also, If every human society defines their own morals, according to their culture, it makes one wonder how then do the women (and some co/ns/cientious men) in those Islamic counties know that great evils are done against them, while they're being treated worse then livestock? If you watch some of the do/cu/mentaries where they go into deep, backward places where civilization didn't shine yet through, yet those people know what is right and what is wrong! They know what is good and what is evil!
But according to the kind of reasoning some of ppl here have, they should think the ways of their "cultures" are just great, since in their societies such ways are promoted adn and established in them. .
But we do know that there is an universal knowledge of right and wrong, good and evil imprinted on every human conscience. It's just what people do with it, that's a different story!
@PRISM 1234,
yes, by our definition the treatment of women under Sharia is indeed reprehensible. Clearly there are no moral absolutes here. Nor is the treatment of women by our culture so different until at least the 20th century.
– Former male slaves were allowed to vote before women (19th amendment in 1920 if you're keeping up).
– Susan B. Anthony is celebrated in part because she encouraged women to keep their own purse. She was arrested for voting in the 1872 election.
You have just come from posting in the 'anti-abortion' thread. Clearly we in our culture still have some way to go to get our own house in order before judging others.
But you still can not answer how do we humans know what is right and what is wrong! If there is no Standard that's imprinted on us by outside Source, we could never define the absolute of right and/or wrong, becaue like some of you say, it's according to someone's upbringing. That's simply not true! And Tom is right, you people do constantly contradict yourself! But you need to be honest enough to face up to it!
@PRISM 1234,
there's no self contradiction here. Morality is the societal consensus of conscience. It is not absolute. It is fluid and it changes with time and culture.
As fred and I discussed yesterday, it is not even absolute for Christians. Contemporary Christians all agree that slavery is "wrong" yet the bible condones slavery and it was practised in this country until the 1860s. What changed? The bible didn't change. The bible *still* condones slavery. The Christian definition of slavery changed. Morals that change over time cannot be defined in any way as "absolute".
But THE TRUTH NEVER changes!
🙂
Actually there's an error in my post. It should say:
The Christian definition of morality (not slavery) changed.
@PRISM 1234,
What you see as "Truth" is filtered by your perception, knowledge, environment, etc.
No,it is NOT! my understanding of truth comes from the knowledge of God who is the author of truth! Those who deny Him hav no way of knowing what the truth is. I suppose that's the reason they,including yourself, always tell us WE are delusional. A blind man can not know what sky, trees, sunshine and colors of nature look like. And if he never encountered those who see, he will tell them they're lying when told the truth. This description perfectly fits the dangers of God! They are blind and lame in this world, worse then those who are physically impaired and blind! And That's not meant to offend you, people, but truth is not pleasant, especially to those who are proud in their ways. That human ego has ways of causing many of our problems! It is just the way it is!
* typo – m-t-s : "deniers of God"
"....my understanding of truth comes from the knowledge of God....that human ego has ways of causing many of our problems! It is just the way it is!"
Couldn't agree more, Prisspot
@PRISM 1234,
A belief that changes – empirically evident in the changing 'morals' of Christians – is clearly not an "absolute" by any definition.
Thoughts cannot be anything but influenced by our sum of knowledge.
Lets do a couple of thought experiments:
Astronomers discover a massive meteor headed for earth. Forget all the silly sci-fi movies about blowing it up with nuclear weapons – these are not real science – and the end of the earth as we know it will happen in a month's time.
Do you think that certain *knowledge" of the end of the world will have a material effect on the concept of faith for a lot of people? Knowledge is an important filter in understanding "truth".
No-GOPer, it doesn't matter how "Christan beliefs" changed, God is still the same. You may want to see what Christ had to say about the subject of Truth and people's beliefs.
And about your hypothetical scenario... sure the knowledge of meteor heading for earth would have a material effect on the concept of faith for a lot of people.... But what people would do knowing what's coming, depends on who they are and what they're made out of. You see, there IS a judgment day coming, when God will judge the earth and inhabitants thereof. And every human being KNOWS deep down inside themselves that it is coming. Because we, unlike the animals, have souls. We are made in the image of God and we are meant to KNOW Him and fellowship with Him. But many people have silenced their souls by denying that part of their being, yet their souls KNOW that they are meant to be immortal, and that they will stand before their Maker to whom they will be accountable too...There is deep restlesness in human soul without God, and those who refuse Him are filling that void within with many things, which they hope will make them complete. But nothing does, and nothing brings Peace that knowing God as your Father does! Yet, so many choose to live for Self, and in pride of their hearts will go o on their own ways.
N one could EVER convince me that man is only a physical being, nor that everything that exists is a product of some freak 'cosmic accident'. It is total, utter absurdity! I have seen proof of God in my own life, not one BUT MANY... I have encountered things that those of the world of science could never explain, but would run speechless and dumbfounded from it....
Man can not figure out God, nor can He be proven by man's science!!! And man can not comprehend Him on his own. It has to be God who reveals Himself to man... But that requires certain condition of his heart, something God sees in man's heart that causes Him to reveal Himself. The rest, those who look to their own intellect and understanding, will simply just go on in their own ways, because the love of Truth is not found in their hearts!
I don't think things said here are tohard and complicated to understand, but I honestly don't think you will.... yet how I wish and pray that you would!
GOPer
Ya lost me there or your example does not fit. Knowledge is not the filter in your case anymore than knowledge is the filter when someone is given a number of days certain to live due to say cancer. People are what they focus on and knowing there are only 30 days left brings into focus that which is really important. One point of focus is the meaning of life and afterlife. Do I bring asbestos underwear or a Bible?
This is the difference between animals and man. There is a “instinctive” pattern and empirical observation that man understands the need for provisions beyond this life. There is zero scientific knowledge about what is outside of this known existence. Knowledge is not a filter it is simply useless when the end is certain.
Your knowledge base is empty in that which is most important when the end is certain. To suggest that our demise is that of animals when all empirical observation points otherwise should be a red flag. As Jefferson said these truths are self evident.
Chad,
What difference do other religions make anyway when the Bible (besides morals) is full of errors, contradictions, hypocrisy and nonsense?
In my experience, the ones who are quickest to make claims about the content of the Bible are frequently the ones who know the least about it.
pot meet kettle, kettle meet pot.
Tom,
A poll/test last year showed that the average atheist and average agnostic know more about the Bible than the average Christian. Your experiences aren't in line with statistics.
Observer: The problem with most of the comments from the religious folks like Tom, is that we keep hearing anecdotal evidence claims like "My Experience with X tells me Y" or the famous "The Bible says XYZ..." or silly circular arguments like "All truth comes from God because God is truth". Can we all just agree (religious folks too) that these arguments are all based on fallacies and nonsense and move on? I would love to hear some solid God proof instead of these attacks and characterizations. Oh and for the religious that question my Bible chops, I studied to be a minister.
What's worse than an ignorant atheist? The one who knows the word of God, but has denied the power of God and refused His gift of grace.