Intolerant Atheists Retaliate Against Christian Billboards

reply to post by zaiger


Where is the support for most atheist leaders? can we see a lsit of all atheist leaders so we can look at actual numbers to see what percent went on mass murdering campaigns?

I think the issue with the list of atheist leaders here, and also with religious leaders that went on mass murdering campaigns, and all instances of holy wars, the main issue is morality. Belief, or lack of belief, in a higher power did not influence any of them to kill people, rather it was the beleif that it was morally acceptable for them to committ these atrocities.

Both sides can drop the "your bad because (atheist/religious) people started wars" because both sides are quilty, and religious beliefs are usually a corelation rather than causation.

as one member commented, there were many economic reasons for religious wars that have occured, i juust think that religious leaders can easily create a religious justification while atheist leaders must look elsewhere to try to justify the unjustifiable

reply to post by Ozzy Mandias


No, the classic "Religion is bad and causes bad things." is an inbuilt justification that those leaders exploited to justify the unjustifiable as you put it. All in the name of fighting a "evil".

reply to post by Daniem

What does this even mean?

That the bible,god and jesus are always said to be fictional characters and so on and so forth. But it often comes up that the god in the old testament was evil and killed people. So i was pointing out that the bible can be factual and litteral when it suits an atheist argument.

(You didnt write it, but you agreed to this)... Who are "THEY"?
What kind of asurd statement is this?

You are right i did not write that, but i assume he was speaking about the evangelical preacher types.

Are you proposing that atheism says anything about killing people?

No im not saying that atheism is about killing people but it happens to be a verry common side effect when one atheist gains power over a country.

You know Stalin didnt believe in the invicible pink unicorn either, does that make everyone who doesnt believe in it somehow part of a disbelief that should be avoided?

I was not saying that the disbelief should be avoided but rather that people kill out of their own hatred and Intolerance and that religion is not to blame for teaching people this.

Stalin did not kill people in the name of, or for the purpose of, atheism. Stalin's oppression of religions was due to the fact that they were an opposing organization that people would feel loyalty to, instead of being loyal to Stalin and/or the state..

But when religious wars are waged they are normally fought by two different parties both members of different religions, they kill those who are opposed to their beliefs. Atheist leaders kill their own citizens that are opposed to their beliefs one is not better than the other. So the inquisition and the witch hunts are no better than the gulag or the cambodia killing fields.

[edit on 17-2-2010 by zaiger]

This all started when a Christian interest group decided to post billboards condemning the 'Separation of Church and State', you know.. a little "legislation" that has been the groundwork for America since it's inception.

That little First Amendment that recognizes the separation of church from state as one of the most important principles of America.

So..

Who's intolerant now? The "Christian" knuckleheads who challenge the Constitution of the United States of America, or the guys putting billboards up that basically say, "there are Atheists you know"?

Yeah, that's what I thought.

An open letter to the year 3010, in which I have no doubt there will be a profession called "digital archaeologist".
In your perusal of this archived material, I would ask you to notice that the arguments put forward by the religious are quite poorly expressed in comparison to counter arguments; also the grammer is poorer, as is the spelling; although these by themselves are no true indication of stupidity, merely inexperience in being held to higher academic standards.
I would ask you to note that when comprehensively refuted, the religious ignore such argument & continue to repeat their position as if the refutation had not already invalidated their position. Such is also a result of a poorer standard of education, not necessarily stupidity. It may seem like only a fool could fail to offer rebuttal when the opportunity exists & then go on to reiterate a disputed argument, but I promise you, these people are not fools exactly, it's just that their education trained them for a particular role & their culture prevented them from attempting to reach beyond that.
You should note that when refuted, the religious quickly turn to deflection, obfuscation & unsupported claims, for reasons which I'm sure you now understand. However, do not be so quick to judge this inability to debate formally. Religion has never had to justify itself through reason until recently, its practitioners therefore are used to being able to use bluster or slyness to wriggle their way out of a debate & then count on mass support without a reasoned argument to carry their cause. Its really no surprise that such thinking still continues, since that was indeed the very method used to convert them to religion in the 1st place. Regarding this last you should also note that the publication "Mirriam-Websters Dictionary" is an example of what we currently call "propaganda" &, in this instance, also "cultural imperialism".
Finally, for the damage we did, I'm truly sorry. Please understand that some of us really did try our best.

reply to post by hotbakedtater


Lol, everyone is turning this into a stereo type thing, how about we look at everyone as people, something we all are, and start from there.

reply to post by Bunken Drum


If you have something to say then say it. This is not livejournal.

reply to post by Bunken Drum


Right. Anything else to add beyond ad hom and "This is this cause I say so." fluff put in the format of a silly self-righteous letter to our descendents?

Dammit, I think us Agnostics should get a sign also!

erm...how about just a big black questionmark on a white board...

Alternatively, just a person shrugging saying "who knows"

reply to post by SaturnFX


LoL! Nice one. I think it's a good thing they don't, moderatism seems to trend towards individuality instead of collectivism anyway *which seems to feel such signifiers of group identification are needed* at least IMHO.

[edit on 17-2-2010 by Watcher-In-The-Shadows]

reply to post by SaturnFX


I think a White question mark on black would be more stylish..... wouldn't want to offend the "post modern" types, you know.

I've already said my piece earlier in the thread. How sad is it that the only time anyone responds to an argument is when it is deliberately framed to be antagonistic?
Good evidence for our descendants I feel.
"You're either with us or agin us! Or... er... f# it! I dunno... he'll go away if I ignore him."

Originally posted by FortAnthem
reply to post by TLomon

 

I guess the thing I see as intolerant is how the atheist group felt the need to "retaliate" by putting up their own signs to counter the Christian billboards message.

If they had just put up the signs to get the word out to other atheists that they are not alone and that they would be setting up a network for atheists, I wouldn't have a problem with it.

It seems to me the atheist group which paid for these signs posted them out of spite and in retaliation for the Christian signs. That may be just my opinion but, that is the impression I got from the story.



[edit on 17-2-2010 by FortAnthem]

That line of reasoning leads me to believe the Christians who put up their billboards are intolerant of a sweet little document that makes this great nation work so well. Who the hell do Christians think they are? Let's whine about how ONE religion (theirs) isn't the adopted religion of the state? Boo Hoo you intolerant bunch of whiners. This country wasn't founded to cater to your beloved religion and the only reason God exists in the few places it does is due to bribery and deceit. You people are immoral, shameful and intolerant. Not us atheists. Religion is a horrid barbaric intolerant superstitious practice that SHOULD be banned, unfortunately not many people are educated enough to realize this, hence why it still exists.

I can see it all now.

Can you imagine a revival at The Holy Church of Deny Your Maker?
Do.... do do do.. Do ,,,, do do do
Now people, tonight, we are going to get excited. I mean we are going to
blow the roof off this place now people. Now I want to hear it loud people.
Do....do do do.. Do.... do do..do.. Do....do do do
PEOPLE!! ....WHAT ARE WE, wHAT ARE WE EXCITED ABOUT?

NOTHING!!!

Do....do do do.. Do....do do do

[edit on 17-2-2010 by randyvs]

conspiracies in religion doesnt mean you need to be a religious people to post in this board, so if I were you, I would create a board just for you to discuss all the fiction you want there ... so, nobody will go there

reply to post by SaturnFX

Dammit, I think us Agnostics should get a sign also!

erm...how about just a big black questionmark on a white board...

Alternatively, just a person shrugging saying "who knows"

What does it mean if even the universe doesn't know?

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/5a8190066a4a.jpg[/atsimg]







ed: I just realized that picture was copyright so here is the link

[edit on 18-2-2010 by LadySkadi]

Originally posted by LadySkadi
reply to post by SaturnFX

 

Dammit, I think us Agnostics should get a sign also!

erm...how about just a big black questionmark on a white board...

Alternatively, just a person shrugging saying "who knows"

What does it mean if even the universe doesn't know?

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/5a8190066a4a.jpg[/atsimg]

Every body knows The Riddler dosn't exist right?

Skadi make Funny!

[edit on 17-2-2010 by randyvs]

reply to post by zaiger

the god in the old testament was evil and killed people. So i was pointing out that the bible can be factual and litteral when it suits an atheist argument.

The god was evil in the OT alright, but an atheist that said it was a fact? It is a fact that it says so in the book, but the atheist wouldnt say it acctually happened for real. That what you mean? Not sure i understand..

You do know that sometimes atheists accept surtain claims etc from the theist, for the sake of discussion or for the sake of ridiculing or something else approprate.

No im not saying that atheism is about killing people

Good, cause insinuating this falsehood is rude and offensive.

people kill out of their own hatred and Intolerance and that religion is not to blame for teaching people this

well, i dont know about that.. ive seen some weird suggestions in religious writings.

personally, it would make my day if i happened upon an atheistic-themed billboard in the midst of all these threatening and insulting christian billboards that i see as often as mile markers along the highways around here. i don't think this is out of some childish retaliation as has been insinuated. i think it's just damned nice to see proof that you're actually not the only rational person around.

anyway, i can't sneeze in public without someone saying, "god bless you!" and every time i bite my tongue and smile because i know they mean no harm. but if i went around telling people, "may allah smile upon you!" "praise buddha!" or "ave satanas!" i would, undoubtedly, have individuals cursing and threatening me on a regular basis. (by the way, someone asked why atheists tend to single christianity out...personally, it's because where i live, the majority ARE christian. 76% in the u.s., 86% in the bible belt [i live in arkansas])

even if it is a bit childish, i can still commend these signs.
truly, i feel that black pride, gay pride, and feminism have all come to childish proportions. but there was a definite time when these proportions were necessary--when the pendulum is stuck to one side, you've got to give it a heavy push.

radical atheism, i believe, is among the same lines. it is necessary at the moment. but, like anything else, could easily slip into absurdity if it doesn't check itself once momentum gets the pendulum swinging again.

of course, this is all "imho" (and no one has ever used that phrase with an ounce of humility)

Once again atheists prove that they really don't care that you believe in an invisible sky wizard.