It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Man refuses to drive 'No God' bus

page: 14
14
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 02:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Salvatore_Rubberface
 





Originally posted by Salvatore_Rubberface

I also strongly believe that Atheist wouldn't also travel in a bus that had biblical writings on the wall and said dinosaurs and humans liver together? He wouldn't also drive or travel in a bus that had orthodox Jews traveling in it. How is it all of the sudden that atheists have the right to paste baseless propaganda about religion with meager scientific facts that can easily be answered...



Surely this is a joke? Athiests use public transport all the time (myself included) and there is plenty of "baseless propaganda" thats pro-religion with no facts whatsoever! There's some threats of eternal torment in hell - where's your proof for that?

You say "How is it all of the sudden that atheists have the right?" Well I'm sure we've had the right for a long time, it's just we've always been prepared to quietly tolerate the relatively bland religious propaganda that has been on our transport networks. However, when Christians notched it up to "you will burn in Hell" it became more offensive, and someone decided they'd had enough. As the bus company is a business which needs to make money, they were obviously just as happy to accept an athiest cheque as they would be a religious one. And rightly so, as the advert's statement of "There may not be a God..." isn't offensive. There's no threatening language there, unlike the aforementioned Christian advert that sparked this whole fiasco...






[edit on 17/1/09 by sotp]




posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 03:07 PM
link   
Speaking as an atheist.

The man has every right to defend his beliefs and he should not be forced to operate something that offends him.

peace



posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 03:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by GamerGal
reply to post by Exuberant1
 


No he wouldn't. If a store sells some thing that is what they sell. What's next a Mormon working at a liquor store suing because they sell alcohol?


He wouldn't be able to sue, but he could certainly not work there.

You people are rediculous. The man is not suing, he refused to drive a bus that had an add he found offensive to his beliefs.

If the company fires him, so be it. Thats thier call.

Personally I think it would just be easier to find the dude a bus without the add on it. Not that hard. They don't have to go through the process of firing him, and then finding a replacement.



posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 03:38 PM
link   
reply to post by nerbot

Ever driven in London, ever been near a London bus?

OK, I will grant that it is London and not the US. I will also 'thankfully grant' those concessions.

You go drive what you want, and believe what you want. I will still salute the actions of a man who had enough courage and integrity to stand up and refuse to be forced into accepting something he did not agree with. My condolences that you do not have that kind of integrity.


"I have never cut a truck off in traffic".

Must be something in the water over there...


--------------------


I was merely trying to show how those statements (which you originally made) could be flipped to a Christian perspective, and that they were kind of pointless in the first place...

In doing so, you seem to have lost context. How many posters have berated this man for simply deciding he did not wish to perform a job function that violated his belief system? Nowhere was any action against the bus company even insinuated, but rather he said he would be happy to continue driving for them if there was another bus available.

Now explain to me how that is showing hatred, or how it is being intolerant? I can easily show you how hateful and intolerant others on this thread have been... right down to using the words "he should just shut up and drive the bus".


I don't want to steer the thread that way at all.

I congratulate you on your subconscious steering ability.


Where did you get that rubbish from? For a company to expect an employee to do the job they pay him for is hardly comparable to slavery. As I've already said, I respected his choice and to claim I would ever advocate slavery is frankly a shocking insult.

It should be a shocking insult. Because that is exactly what anyone who believes that this driver was out of line for his actions is advocating.

A man disagreed so vehemently with an advertisement (which last time I checked was the right of every citizen, even in the UK) that he refused to take part in it (which last time I checked was every person's right to do, even in the UK) without violating any laws in that process. As a result, we have 13 (or is it 14 by now?) pages of people responding how the man is somehow a slacker, or an idiot, or should just "shut up and drive the bus".

Notice I never mentioned one word about religion in that explanation. It's not needed; this is not a thread about religion (at least not in my mind). Only the atheists and Christian-haters seem to want to turn this into some kind of virual war zone.

This is about a person's right to decide what they will do with their life, and the right to protest peacefully. Yes, the company has every right to fire him if they so choose. But he is still driving, at least until the fiery posters on here decide to hunt him down and hang him for not liking their advertisement...

Yeah, that's maybe a little overboard a statement. But IMO it is nowhere near as overboard as someone saying that the man shouldn't have the right to disagree with something they personally agree with. That is indeed slavery, when one is forced into servitude regardless of whether or not they wish to serve.

Or do you have a more sotp-friendly definition?


I suppose it's not at all surprising that someone calling themselves 'TheRedneck' (as if that's something to be proud of) would side with the guy advocating violence against those who have a different view...

It is also not surprising that you would resort to such stereotypes in trying to prove an unprovable point.

I do not advocate violence. I simply observe that those who would use the phrase "shut up and drive the bus" are hiding safely behind their keyboards.

I advocate freedom of people to choose what to do with their life, within a peaceful and legal framework. You are arguing for censorship of those who would dare disagree with you.

Yes, I am a redneck. You appear to have less love for freedom than a redneck.

The(proud to be a)Redneck



posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 03:53 PM
link   
The truth of the issue is this:

All of the God haters and mockers are razzing this guy for taking a stand for Jesus. There is no name in the world hated more than the name of Jesus. Darkness hates the light.

I applaud him for his stand. Some things in life are more important than one's job.

When the one-world/antichrist government finally does come to pass (and it will be very soon now), actions like that will be illegal and will cause the protestor to be executed. Don't believe a global government is coming? Check out www.infowars.com...

Christians need to speak up while there is still time. This guy has called attention to the falsity of the teachings of the prideful atheists, who, by saying there is no God, have made themselves into gods. This is idol worship (worship of self) in its most basic form.

Remember, Psalm 53:1 in Holy Bible (KJV...not the apostate versions) says that, "The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. Corrupt are they, and have done abominable iniquity: there is none that doeth good."

Remember - there is NO SUCH THING as a good person. THERE IS NONE THAT DOETH GOOD. All have sinned and fall short of God's glory. Don't believe me? Try to pass the Good Person Test at www.goodpersontest.com...

The funny thing is - when those of you who do not repent are consigned to hell (and yes Virginia, there is a hell), you will remember every snide remark you made, and every time you mocked God. You will be heartbroken and separated from God and pondering your mockery for all eternity.

And it is heartbreaking to me that many of you will mock what I have just written. Please listen to me...PLEASE...while you still have breath in your body. Life is short. I write these words not because I believe I am better or superior to anyone. I am a only a wretched sinner, saved by God's loving grace. I tell you these things as a watchman, to warn you of the wrath to come...



posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 04:16 PM
link   

reply to post by sotp
 

I suppose it's not at all surprising that someone calling themselves 'TheRedneck' (as if that's something to be proud of) would side with the guy advocating violence against those who have a different view...


I'm not advocating violence, just pointing out a fact. Problem is one thing the terrorists said is true. MOST AMERICANS are creatures of comfort. This pampered little dillusion that Americans live in, which gives the physically inferior the option to utter their useless, negative, non society contributing nonsense is because of violence.

Since the beginning of time it is people who had the nuts to FIGHT and die for what they believe in, while the rest of society voiced their opinions very secretly and scurried about like rats, waiting for those to protect them (same as today)

I suppose that any man/woman whether they be of any religion or non, who fought and died in violence, so you can run the skin flaps under your nose, is below you?.

As far as your racist view of my brother from the south, it's ill willed and innaccurate.I'm a yankee but deep in my heart a straight up REDNECK, born in the wrong geographical location.Rednecks are among some of the most faithful and bright people who have contributed much in the building of this country.



posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 04:18 PM
link   
reply to post by machinegun_go_go
 


You're making way to big a deal about it. Whether you know it/like it or not, people do have a responsibility to society. I think a lot of people would have a problem aiding in the desemination of that sort of material. It's the same situation with pharmacists that don't want to give the day after pill, I personally wouldn't want that on my mind that I helped someone kill a person.



posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 04:20 PM
link   
reply to post by TheRedneck
 


MENBERS PLEASE NOTE:

Only the two first quotes stated by our friend above are mine.

The remainder are from other posters who "redneck" has not credited.

Thanks....nerb



posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 04:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by mr-lizard
Speaking as an atheist.

The man has every right to defend his beliefs and he should not be forced to operate something that offends him.

peace


Exactly... and the bus business should not be forced to cater to a workers personal beliefs. Its a win win. Freedom for all.



posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 05:09 PM
link   
The bus shouldn't even be displaying that on there, because it offends him and other christians and my self! I know for damn sure there would be some uproar if it said "gays are going to hell" or "atheists are confused"



posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 05:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by b3r6a8d8
The bus shouldn't even be displaying that on there, because it offends him and other christians and my self! I know for damn sure there would be some uproar if it said "gays are going to hell" or "atheists are confused"


REALLY?!? No, seriously... REALLY?!?

Why SHOULDN'T the bus be displaying advertisements like that? Someone pays to put the advertisement there, the bus company takes the money, and then has a duty to fulfill by displaying that particular ad. If anyone working FOR the bus company has a problem with a particular ad, they have the freedom and choice to protest, not drive, etc... just as the company should have the freedom to fire someone who is subordinate and refuses to do their job, regardless of circumstances. If he doesn't like the message, he can go work for and support some other bus company who does share his beliefs.

It's really that simple. Just as you have the right to not visit these forums and put up with all the confused athiests (who, in all actuality, are by far less confused than anyone following an unseen deity).

On that last note, my personal opinion is that there would be no uproar if the things you mentioned were advertised. In Cheyenne, there is an old "God Hates Fags" guy that would drive around in his toyota camper that was plastered on every square inch about "Fags are going to Hell" and "God Hates Fags" and "Satan Loves the Clintons"... there were a couple articles in the paper about it, but nobody really cared... we just ignore him and made fun of him. No uproar, no worldwide media coverage.

This guy should just suck it up, realize that some people are just gonna go to hell, and to look on the bright side: less real estate to have to share in heaven! (Yes, that is a joke... if it offends you, maybe you NEED to be offended!)

Look... the Athiests and Agnostics have to put up with christian filth at every turn... why can't you just put up with a (in contrast) microscopic bit of our crap? God will take care of everything, afterall... right? Why should you worry, unless you maybe feel that god isn't doing his job, so you have to step in? Grr... guess that is an entire thread by itself.

EDIT TO ADD: Nothing wrong with us Rednecks, either! Alot of us are in military, scientists, lawyers, innovators... hell, some even became presidents! I beet you half the mechanics that keep your vehicles running are rednecks... how about who built your house? Probably a Redneck (with a strong force of immigrants)! Don't look down on people because of some crap job or country living or sub-par habits... them's the people you depend on for a cushy lifestyle!


[edit on 17-1-2009 by Earthscum]



posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 05:55 PM
link   
reply to post by 44soulslayer
 


You can't always generalize people, stereotyping everyone
not everyone would say that the muslim bus driver you used that everyone else would call him an "extremist".



posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 06:18 PM
link   
reply to post by TheRedneck
 





In doing so, you seem to have lost context. How many posters have berated this man for simply deciding he did not wish to perform a job function that violated his belief system? Nowhere was any action against the bus company even insinuated, but rather he said he would be happy to continue driving for them if there was another bus available.



I used them in the same way you appeared to - as random statements. All I did was show how they could work both ways. I fail to see what context they were supposed to be in in the first place.

I know some posters have berated the guy for his actions, but at what point am I supposed to have done so? I claim no responsibilty for anyone else's opinions. Why do you direct that comment at me in particular?
Anyway, if that job function so badly violated his belief system he would not have later agreed to drive that bus if no other was available. It couldn't have been that much of a violation after all. My only gripe with the guy was the way he ran straight to the media to complain about something that deep down he obviously truly didn't feel as strongly as he claimed...




Now explain to me how that is showing hatred, or how it is being intolerant? I can easily show you how hateful and intolerant others on this thread have been... right down to using the words "he should just shut up and drive the bus".



For one thing I never at any point claimed the driver was in any way showing hatred, but the fact he made such a song and dance over this does show he was being intolerant of athiests...I have already illustrated how intolerant some posters on this thread can be (using yourself and Revealation as examples)...right down to veiled threats of violence...




It should be a shocking insult. Because that is exactly what anyone who believes that this driver was out of line for his actions is advocating...

A man disagreed so vehemently with an advertisement (which last time I checked was the right of every citizen, even in the UK) that he refused to take part in it...



Maybe it's a bit much for some to say that he was 'out of line', and he was certainly within his rights but he didn't have to walk out. He could have filed a complaint with his employer & the Advertising Standards Agency then got on with his job until the situation had been investigated. If eventually there wasn't a satisfactory (to him) resolution then he could have made a decision. That would have been a reasonable response. But he chose to walk out then run straight to the media full of outrage. Just as it was his choice to go back to work after all his histrionic protestations and be a hypocrite. He obviously realised that having faith but no job won't put food on the table, especially in an economic downturn...




This is about a person's right to decide what they will do with their life, and the right to protest peacefully



I think most posters here have said basically it's his choice but he shouldn't expect his employer to bend over backwards to accomodate him. However I'd hardly call running to the media screaming for attention like a spoiled child peacefully protesting. He tried to make it into a big deal, which it isn't, as he's now shown by agreeing to go back and possibly drive the bus after all...




...when one is forced into servitude regardless of whether or not they wish to serve.



Okay, maybe I missed something here, but who said he should be forced to do the job? It's maybe been said that he should either do the job he is paid for (no wages in slavery) or quit (can't just quit being a slave). Stop overreacting...

(continued)



posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 06:18 PM
link   



It is also not surprising that you would resort to such stereotypes...

...I simply observe that those who would use the phrase "shut up and drive the bus" are hiding safely behind their keyboards.



I'd hardly say I'm resorting to anything. If you give yourself a classic stereotype for a screen name surely you must be prepared for such comments! What did you expect? Also, if you do not advocate violence, why are you agreeing with and giving a star to a statement that basically implies 'some people are going to get what's coming to them' (and in a prison that's hardly going to be a strongly worded letter, is it?). And there are those who say the driver could have just said "God bless you" to his passengers. Those people are also hiding safely behind their keyboards. The driver would be putting himself in danger if he said that. London is not America, overt religiousness is not common and there are plenty of hooligans who would use it as an excuse to assault him. Not because they are athiests, just because he dared to be different...





I advocate freedom of people to choose what to do with their life, within a peaceful and legal framework. You are arguing for censorship of those who would dare disagree with you.

Yes, I am a redneck. You appear to have less love for freedom than a redneck.




I have less love for freedom than a redneck? I very much doubt that.

Where have I ever said I wanted censorship for those who disagree with me? Frankly, I think the world would be better off if neither the religious or the athiests were allowed to publicly broadcast their beliefs. Religion (or the lack thereof) should be a personal matter and there would be no need for this debate at all if that were the case. I know that the religious believe they have a duty to spread the word of their God\Gods but everyone knows what a church/temple/mosque/etc. is. As I said earlier, let those who wish to know God come to Him themselves. I think they'd be more inclined to believe if they weren't having dogma spouted at themon the street or from their front door by uninvited zealots. It's pointless to display posters of scripture quotes outside a church. Those who want to hear scripture will already feel inclined to go to church, those who do not, will not. But by all means ring those bells. Anyone taking offence to that is going a bit far, even if it disturbs your Sunday morning it only lasts for a little while...



posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 06:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Revealation

I'm not advocating violence, just pointing out a fact.



You actually are advocating violence, and in a bad way. You basically implied that when no-one is around to stop you those people you don't agree with are in for a going over. You kinda sound like you were the school bully...




Problem is one thing the terrorists said is true. MOST AMERICANS are creatures of comfort. This pampered little dillusion...which gives the physically inferior the option to utter their useless, negative, non society contributing nonsense.



Wow. You have some serious issues there. You seem to believe that a person can't contribute to society if they aren't built like tank. How many scientists throughout history have been big burly types? Albert Einstein? Hardly in the Dolph Lundgren league was he? Gave us the theory of relativity but couldn't drive a tank worth a damn! Marie Curie? Sure she won Nobel Prizes in two different disciplines but how many martial arts disciplines had she mastered? Useless. Stephen Hawking? What does it matter if he can help solve the mysteries of the universe? He can't jump out of a helicopter all guns blazing! The guy's got nothing on Bruce Willis!
Seriously, your comments on the 'weak and inferior' make you sound like a Nazi. Lay off the testosterone.

Anyway, it's not only in America but in most of the Western world that people are creatures of comfort, be they big and strong or not. Yet most understand the concept that sometimes violence is necessary. You seem to be equating atheism with pacifism - it's not the same thing.




I suppose that any man/woman whether they be of any religion or non, who fought and died in violence, so you can run the skin flaps under your nose, is below you?



I have nothing but respect for those who have fought in wars for my freedom. Wherever did you get the idea I had a problem with them?





As far as your racist view of my brother from the south, it's ill willed and innaccurate. I'm a yankee but deep in my heart a straight up REDNECK.



It's not racist.

Rednecks are not a race, they are a glorified clique.



posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 06:18 PM
link   
reply to post by b3r6a8d8
 



Originally posted by b3r6a8d8
The bus shouldn't even be displaying that on there, because it offends him and other christians and my self! I know for damn sure there would be some uproar if it said "gays are going to hell" or "atheists are confused"


Did you even read the thread? The reason for the athiest advert in the first place was a Christian advert telling non-Christians (gay/straight/whatever) they would spend "all eternity in torment in hell, burning in a lake of fire"!





posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 06:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Revealation

And a hearty 'thank ye' to my brother from the North!


I have made mention of this before on ATS, but that nickname, while it is accurate, was not something I came up with myself. It was given to me as a derogatory moniker many many years ago. I have made it my own, however, and yes, I do take pride in it now. There is a proud history behind that name, one that supported the ability of so many to decry everything that allowed them that freedom. It also has one very unique ability, and that is to separate those who stereotype and judge prematurely from those who truly have an open mind.

Much like a rat trying to get away from the snap that usually precedes a trap springing shut, our friend sotp is trying to run away now from his statements before. And like many rats in that situation, he has instead walked right into the heart of the trap. His prejudice and intolerance are now clear for all to see, who can see.

I'd like to take this opportunity to re-state my feelings on this subject: The religious implications of the advertisement are irrelevant. The driver has every right (and some, including me, would say a duty to self) to refuse to drive the bus. The bus company has every right to fire the driver for that refusal. It's called 'business'. It happens every day.

My concern is when armchair socialist advisors, most of whom have a long record on here of crying for civil rights and trying to point out how intolerant and prejudicial others are, now show their own colors when confronted with someone who uses their free will and civil liberties in opposition to their 'cause'.

Keep posting your wisdom, my friend. I'll keep starring.


TheRedneck



posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 06:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Earthscum

Nothing wrong with us Rednecks, either! Alot of us are in military, scientists, lawyers, innovators... hell, some even became presidents! I beet you half the mechanics that keep your vehicles running are rednecks... how about who built your house? Probably a Redneck (with a strong force of immigrants)! Don't look down on people because of some crap job or country living or sub-par habits... them's the people you depend on for a cushy lifestyle!




No they aren't because I'm not American, but I know not all rednecks are slack-jawed yokels! You are a prime example, given your reasoned post. It's just that I think that TheRedneck is helping to perpetuate the negative stereotype he seeks to dismiss...



posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 06:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by LiquidMirage

Originally posted by machinegun_go_go

This is outrageous. The man should should be fired or suspended. It is his job to drive the bus - not pass judgement on the advertisements it carries.

I can imagine what would happen if I turned up to work one day and refused to do my job based on what someone thought or said or wore!

Christians - literally - get away with murder just because of their religion.

Sickens me that nothing appears to has happened to this man.

Why can some people not even acknowledge alternate viewpoints?

Why on earth should his employers even consider going out of their way to pander to his notions of offending his imaginary friend?



Originally posted by machinegun_go_go
Why can some people not even acknowledge alternate viewpoints?


You mean like you can't acknowledge and accept his viewpoint. I really have to chuckle at nimrods that spew the sort of rhetoric that you just did about somebody else's beliefs and then turn around and make an idiotic comment about other people lack of tolerance. I don't really expect people with the IQ of an artichoke to understand though!



[edit on 16-1-2009 by LiquidMirage]


That's assuming artichokes have an IQ.......
2 lines



posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 06:35 PM
link   
reply to post by sotp

Why do you direct that comment at me in particular?

Why? Perhaps it is because I did make an assumption. You see, you were the first to reply to my post, wherein I tried to show the hypocrisy of some others who were stating that he shouldn't have even been allowed to quit.

Now, if what you claim is true regarding your position, I see no real difference between it and my own. So why did you take such offense at something that was not directed at you?

If you argue on the side of someone who advocates the things I accused you of, you should be prepared to either refute them quickly, or take the chance you will be seen as an accomplice in that train of thought.

My daddy used to say it this way: "If you lay down with the dogs, you get up with fleas".

TheRedneck



new topics

top topics



 
14
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join