Intolerant Atheists Retaliate Against Christian Billboards

reply to post by FortAnthem


Evangelical atheist is an oxymoron. We had better come up with another way to describe these stubborn, almost "militant" atheists who refuse to let other people's belief system and religion get shoved in their faces and down their throats everywhere. If we want to shove a belief system down your throat you had better sit darn still and enjoy it for Crissakes we are the Catholics!

Just making light - I am Catholic and I know if they had as much ambitio as they have actual cash they WOULD take over the world...They don't want all that baggage, they don't even want your pitiful, soul. Just send cash.
The more you send the more protection you will get.
Who can blame the atheists?

Anyway...

I am writing Ft Anthem, because of your reference to the sci-fi story "8 oclock in the morning." Weird because I kept running into that story on quite a few web sites I visited yesterday.
Have always got a kick out of your signature..."all out of bubblegum" cracks me up and I just learned it is a line from that short story.
It was a creepy story too - I really liked it. - peace out

In Tampa there was a billboard that said something like 'Don't believe in God? You are not alone."

Guess who was so outraged by that billboard? Intollerant christians. Freedom of speach goes both ways.

Originally posted by Watcher-In-The-Shadows reply to post by Bunken Drum

 

And you resort to the childish and breathtakingly annoying tactic of creative context switching...... Too bad other people's statements doesn't mean whatever you decide it does. Goor day sir.

One really does have to wonder how its possible for a person to have a modus operandi explained & then fall into the self same trap. I have refuted your charge of childishness with an explanation of debate tactics (the MO above). The fact that I do have greater facility with english than you is not my fault. That you cannot frame your arguments in such a way as to avoid points being made against them with added humour ought to to tell you something about yourself, in relation to that post of mine to which you originally replied.
That you failed to rebut & repeated yourself demonstrates not only that you are witless, but that I was correct in the 1st place. You may take that as a little of the aforementioned "crow[ing] from the intellectual heights".
That you also failed to rise to the implicit challenge of my last post not only validates my position vis a vis "Open letter" post, but also points since.
Here is the rest of the crowing:
Throughout our exchange, you have attempted to use perjorative language & increasingly mistakenly applied adverbs & adjectives (this is the slyness I pointed out). That you end this last with an attempt at, "Good day sir", missing a comma & misspelled, tends to suggest that you believe a choice of words alone can make you seem intellectually adequate, but, having begun your statement with "And", even had you been close, it would have already been demonstrated for the pretence it was (this is the bluster I mentioned). Finally, if it were the case that I had "spewed" any of my replies to you (here I'll throw you a bone, in as much as I'll stoop to a level at which you'll be more comfortable), then you're just sh!t.

Originally posted by woodwardjnr
i'm glad my post gave you something to think about. IN the UK most schools will teach Religion up until the age of 16, most primary schools are Church of England or another religious domination. To get into a Church of England Primary school it is recommended you go to your local church. Just as was recommended to my mother before she sent me and my brother to primary school.
At this young age you are told about Christianity and the Bible as though it really happened.
It wasn't till I was 18 and better at questioning things that I began to question Christianity. So in a way it is forced upon us in society like it or not.

How can I spit in the face of a god in whom i do not believe.

Well if i was in your place i would be pissed to. That is why i believe in the separation of church and state. Religion has no role in our government because it could spell disaster for religious and non-religious rights. That is my personal opinion and i know of other people who share the same view.
One question though; Do they teach Evolution and secular science in the same way they teach the bible? The catholic school i attended taught evolutionary biology as scientific fact.

As far as spitting in the face of god. For secular purposes lets call it spitting in the face of decency and good-nature instead of god. I respect your right to disbelieve. All i and other like-minded theists ask is that you will return the favor. We both have much to learn from eachother, and i would prefer if we could stand united regardless of beliefs.

[edit on 18-2-2010 by DeathShield]

reply to post by Bunken Drum


You do realize that by attacking his grammar, syntax, etc, you are essentially saying " hey i lost the argument so now i am going to pick on you for something completely unrelated to the subject at hand because i have no clue how to properly construct a counter-point without resorting to petty semantics."

reply to post by DeathShield


Exactly, all this childish bickering is doing is holding us back. Both "sides" have their good points and bad points. Which gets lost in the disgraceful general narrow minded mele of "us versus them" BS. But neither side can really prove their underlying preconceptions anyway. Which is why I think the "us versus them" stuff is prefered.

reply to post by Bunken Drum


Sure, keep telling yourself that skippy. Whatever helps you sleep at night. If superficialy "perfect" is what you prefer, that's fine. I prefer content *the underlying thoughts attempting to be conveyed* over winow dressing *perfect syntax and grammer*. And, incidentally, "It just isn't because I think I'm genius with impeccable grammer and syntax skills and I say say so." is not an acceptable refutation of a claim... Don't realisticly expect you to agree though. Again, good day sir.




[edit on 18-2-2010 by Watcher-In-The-Shadows]

Originally posted by DeathShield reply to post by Bunken Drum

 

You do realize that by attacking his grammar, syntax, etc, you are essentially saying " hey i lost the argument so now i am going to pick on you for something completely unrelated to the subject at hand because i have no clue how to properly construct a counter-point without resorting to petty semantics."

Actually, there isn't any argument at all. I stated my only real position ages ago & then began to mock those who couldn't respond to it. Watcher took exception to this &, without making any counter-point, preceded to call my abilities into question. I have since responded, been ignored & so decided to utilise the same tactic of calling his/her abilities into question.
There is no "argument" to which I could construct a "counter-point", other than "you suck". I have twice, & lets call this a 3rd time, referred Watcher to the argument I originally proposed: its not my fault if s/he will not present anything of substance, but instead prefers to attack me.
It is my fault that I choose not to rise above such nonsense, admittedly. However, since I am actually sincere in my beliefs, I have no problem destroying my enemy on whatever front they choose.
As I said earlier, "Is it fair? No."
Do I care? It rhymes...
Of course, if you had actually read the thread, you would already know this. So the question becomes, what is your agenda? Clearly, by jumping in on another's behalf, without even a single reference to what has gone before, you do have one... go on spit it out.

I want to address this issue of people "brainwashing" their kids.

I was formally trained, educated, and ordained as a Wiccan Priest. After all of my studies, I decided that I no longer agreed with ANY religion, or even the existence of "GOD". It was a personal choice that was not arrived at quickly or lightly. My children, at the moment, are godless heathens. And personally, I believe they rightfully should be. It is not my place to impose upon, or shield them from, any presumed belief or disbelief in any religious tradition whatsoever. Personally, I have tried to avoid answering any question as of yet. They are in my opinion too young. They are at an age where teaching them these things would become easily deep rooted in their young and impressionable minds. When they are older and able make decisions for themselves I will be happy to answer their questions and even assist in their research of said questions. I will also take pride in their INFORMED decision of faith in a "GOD" or the lack thereof.

When I was a practicing Wiccan, I held the same belief. Religion is a personal experience and must therefore be comfortable for each follower within their own hearts and minds. In the same way so must a belief in Atheism/Agnosticism.

By teaching a young child ANY religious or anti-religious belief system only serves to infringe upon their right to choose.

reply to post by Watcher-In-The-Shadows

If superficialy "perfect" is what you prefer, that's fine. I prefer content *the underlying thoughts attempting to be conveyed* over winow dressing *perfect syntax and grammer*. And, incidentally, "It just isn't because I think I'm genius with impeccable grammer and syntax skills and I say say so." is not an acceptable refutation of a claim.

This would be more of that slyness I predicted. Lets just recap shall we?
I presented an argument.
Nobody could respond to it, but instead repeated the disputed position.
I mocked this failure & made predictions about how such people operate.
You took offence, calling me childish & silly, without any attempt to refute any points I'd made previously.
I refuted your charges with an explanation of my debate tactics & referred you to my argument.
You failed to offer either refutation or rebuttal, but repeated the charge of childishness, exactly as I had previously predicted.
I mocked you.
Someone else tried to lend you a hand. Unfortunately for you, that person hadn't taken in the entire thread.
You're still failing to address a single thing that I've said.
Consider this as me mocking you again.
The moment I see anything like "*the underlying thoughts attempting to be conveyed*" other than "you suck", I will be more than happy to address them in a less confrontational manner.
In the mean time, what do you mean "Again, good day sir."? That's the 1st time you've managed to type that... Do you know any football chants? Think of the tune to "Go West" by The Petshop Boys & now think of the end of my last post to you. The bit that's missing is "and you know you are."

reply to post by pyrael


Agreed 1,000,000,000,000%. Best to approach the subject when they are ready. To do otherwise is simple programming.

reply to post by pyrael That's very similar to my own situation, except that my kids are both at uni now. We rarely talk about spiritual matters, but I often notice that when they're home, my "spiritual" bookcase gets dipped into.
I take the view that, whatever age somebody is, their path will be unique. It would be wrong of me therefore to instruct them in any doctrine. When they ask, I simply do my best to offer my experience on what prompted me to grow.
Occasionally this frustrates my daughter. In some ways, I'm sure she thinks I've got some great & powerful secret that I'm holding back. Well, my bookcase is well stocked, so if that mistaken idea prompts her to read more of it, that wont do her any harm. By contrast, I believe that telling her what I believe may impede her own search for what's personally right.
My son's just a typical teen boy. If knowing stuff gets him kudos, he wants to know. He'll get more out of me when he realises there's more to life than sex. I just hope I'm still alive by the time he does!

a retired businessman paid $50,000 to rent 10 billboards that condemned the separation of church and state.

One opinion

In retaliation, the United Coalition of Reason has spent $100,000 to erect signs that read, “Are you good without God? Millions are.

Another opinion


And people are going ape schlit over what again?

It is their a$$ets to waste.

I see no war going on nor intolerance, only a poop flinging contest.

My opinion is that everyone has their right to their opinion on the subject and I have the right to choose to be offended or to choose not to care.

Originally posted by SaturnFX
Question for the church+state=goodness......do you *really* want the federal government running religion?

Personally?

Not really.

Then again, it is on our currency and in classrooms when the pledge of allegiance is being recited every morning.

Also

When running for governor and using "I am pro life" as a campaign platform, separation of church and state becomes moot.

Have your pick.

reply to post by Bunken Drum

I'm going to get back to you on this, don't think i am ignoring you.

reply to post by Bunken Drum


You know I actually share almost the same exact view with my child. I'm just going to answer his questions when he asks me about god, religion, faith etc. I'm just going to make it clear that what i believe and what reality is are two completely different things. I think any rational Atheist, agnostic or theist should share the same view if they want their kid to actually think for themselves.


See? You actually have something in common with a religious person. Pretty crazy huh?

reply to post by Bunken Drum


And again with the assumption I or anyone paid any attention to your initial post at all or am even aware you had posted prior to your fit of pique. And considering the sheer arrogance displayed thus far, one is not inclined to address it as it will be most likely be mired in a simular immaterial arrogant pseudo-intellectual morass I am having pumped in my general direction now.
And for the sake of futile argument, it is arrogance that decides that since no one answered you that no one could answer you. Logically fallacious to boot.

One cannot realistically expect a favorable exchange of information from someone who views himself to greatly be their intellectual superior at the onset. And you illustrate nicely just how true that is and why. Breaking past someone else's hard held illusions is quite probily impossible if held hard enough.




[edit on 18-2-2010 by Watcher-In-The-Shadows]

reply to post by miss_silver


Mmm i agree. However personally i would have expected Atheists (this particular group at least) to have at least done something other than resorting to the same tactics that Theists use. but fight fire with fire i suppose. I can't rightfully say that they should not do this either. If that is how they want to spend their money then fine, But like the theists their money would have been better spent on giving aid to the needy. Personally i don't like mega-churches and ornate bibles or anti-abortion protests. And i am a (mostly) pro-life christian. Hell to come to think of it i don't care much for the bible regardless of its decorations. as far as pro-life politicians go you can be pro-life without being religious. I've met a few pro-life atheists who used secular philosophy to justify their stance.

Alright let us go over this again:
1 "separation between church and state" appears nowhere in the constitution, it was written by Thomas Jefferson in a letter to the Danbury Baptists.
2. What the constitution does say is.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion- What does that mean?? Well ill tell you. This means that the US cannot make a state religion like in soviet russia. In 1994 the supreme court said "government should not prefer one religion to another, or religion to irreligion." So the government is not suposed to uphold some christian or atheist way of doing something.

or prohibiting the free exercise thereof- pretty simple, they can't stop you from being whatever religion or non-religion you want.

Now when it comes to school they cannot teach "religion" besides a basic understanding of what the religion is some beliefs and practices. It would be hard to teach kids history while leaving out religion. what would that look like? The pilgrims left england because they had nothing to do...
There is a difference between teaching kids abot and just teaching kids. You can say christians believe the rules laid out in their bible. You could not say YOU MUST FOLLOW THESE RULES AND JESUS IS YOUR SAVIOR OR YOU WILL BURN IN HELL. The school system is suposed to be neutral they are not allowed to teach kids about god but they certianly cannot teach kids there is no god.

Originally posted by DeathShield


Hell to come to think of it i don't care much for the bible regardless of its decorations.

I feel the same way about the good book. To many people are taking what they want in it, scripture wise, disregarding the rest to suit their own agenda. It is one of the main reason as to why I lost my faith.

Originally posted by DeathShield
as far as pro-life politicians go you can be pro-life without being religious.

True but they usually go hands in hands. This is why I used it as an example but there are exceptions to the rule