Public Atheist Monument Across from 10 Commandments

reply to post by windword


Atheists often get offended if you suggest their disbelief requires as much faith in the unknown as those who buy into gods. But when you crank up the telescope and gaze out into the vast universe, it is pretty damned clear that what we 'think' we know... we really don't know at all.

God? No God? Guesses... based on a faith in our personal belief.

Personally, I far prefer that the Atheist monument sit alongside those Ten Commandments than to see neither at all. From here, people can look down into the depths of humanity and dredge out meaning. From there, they can make their own choices... which is better than not having these articles and items to begin with.

My faith is personal. I would never seek to burden the next person with it... even if asked to. hearts and minds are rarely (if ever) changed in this way. It is through our own lives and what we live that leads us to belief in anything... or nothing at all.'

I salute and respect the Atheist monument and hold firm that there is a right being exercised here that is not to be offended. I can only hope that my opposites look back with the same.

reply to post by Rocker2013


What's the difference between these two billboards?




Both offer an opinion. Both advertise their respective organizations. Both are placed on the side of a road. Both are concerned with religion. Both deify an idea to sell. Both are implying that their ideal lifestyle is the best lifestyle. Both are shoved right down everyone's throats.

In the end, like all billboards, their selling something—an ideal—one that they feel is in your best interest to follow. How secular of them.

What you're merely doing is defending your ideal, whatever your label you think signifies you the most—atheism—your deity. Christians, Muslims, Jehovas Witnesses all do the same. Pretty soon you'll be putting up billboards promoting it, writing literature about it, putting up monuments in support of it...oh wait...too late.

reply to post by LesMisanthrope


Do you mean to tell me that logic is just as much an opinion as the phrase "Jesus Saves"?

Te bench is very pretty.

I am all for a counter to religious thought being erected or "advertized".

If atheism is a religion, then so is football. Do some people adhere to their atheistic ideas with religious fervor? Yes. But atheists do not belong to a religion. There are no tenets, no dogma, no deity.

Is it possible that the dominance of Judaic faiths has actually warped the meaning of what it is to be religious? You drop a bowling ball into a sheet, that sheet will bend to match the contour of that object because the material is designed to do so. Likewise, our language bends to match how we understand it in order to grease the wheels of communication. So when one interpretation of a particular word or phrase becomes exceedingly abundant, in addition to all other interpretations becoming something along the lines of taboo, our recognition of the broader spectrum that comes with that word is limited by what we're allowed to acknowledge.

I would call it "Blinders Syndrome" - all you know is what you're allowed to see. So what if the term "religion" used to mean something different? Something that doesn't necessarily revolve around the recognition of a deity, or around the veneration of a particular power? What if it was more like an adjective to describe a particular intensity of regard for an idea or whatever?

Just thinking out loud here.

reply to post by AfterInfinity

Do you mean to tell me that logic is just as much an opinion as the phrase "Jesus Saves"?

I'm saying both are billboards. Both disturbe the beauty of the road.

reply to post by LesMisanthrope

I'm saying both are billboards. Both disturbe the beauty of the road.

That's an opinion, which is no more valid than the messages on either of those billboards. Unless you would like to further clarify your stance on the value of opinions? I'm guessing this might be your version of a clever point in demonstrating the objective credence of opinions.

reply to post by AfterInfinity

It was a metaphor.

If our wisdom amounts to no more than choosing one billboard over another, submitting to and adopting someone else's opinion, then it's no wonder we can be sold anything. There's no free thought whatsoever when one lets himself be dictated what to believe. It's the epitome of close-mindedness to assume we must all live under the same billboards and labels.

Religion cannot be about deities if deities don't exist. Religion is about something else. What is this something else? What is it people actually believe in? The language? The dogma? The culture? As godless ones, it is the religiosity and psychology that should be examined, which I find does not differ in the slightest between what I would call religious groups—idealistic, theistic and atheistic. It's irrelevant to discuss deities—there are none there. This is my particular issue with atheism.

I like this approach. Christian Groups can have their momument, and Atheist groups can have theirs. My complaint about the monument is the quote from Madalyn Murray O'Hair. As many in this thread have said, it's a blanket generalization of not only atheists, but religious people as well. That being said, it's still huge step up over the 10 commandments.

I feel like this would be a better way to deal with religious monuments on public lands than filing lawsuits. Maybe they could get muslims as well as other religious groups to post their own monuments as well.

reply to post by LesMisanthrope

If our wisdom amounts to no more than choosing one billboard over another, submitting to and adopting someone else's opinion, then it's no wonder we can be sold anything. There's no free thought whatsoever when one lets himself be dictated what to believe. It's the epitome of close-mindedness to assume we must all live under the same billboards and labels.

So let's do away with labels and not know how the hell to identify our common ground or explain our differences or isolate similarities or communicate at all. Let's say screw language entirely and start grunting instead. Would that make you happy? Because apparently, you have something against labels even though they clearly serve a purpose.

Religion cannot be about deities if deities don't exist. Religion is about something else. What is this something else? What is it people actually believe in? The language? The dogma? The culture? As godless ones, it is the religiosity and psychology that should be examined, which I find does not differ in the slightest between what I would call religious groups—idealistic, theistic and atheistic. It's irrelevant to discuss deities—there are none there. This is my particular issue with atheism.

I'm struggling to grasp the complexities of your contention. As a spiritual atheist, I personally have an issue not with the religion, but the followers of said religion. If they were less aggressive with their beliefs, I would be happy. If they were less hostile toward those who disagree with their beliefs, I would be happier. If they were open to alternate schools of thought and willing to share head space with the rest of the philosophical world, I would be even happier.

This is what I want. You don't have to convert, you don't have to shut up, I just want you to recognize that you share space with free thinking people who would prefer to stay that way and are more than willing to extend the same courtesy toward you. And I'll admit that pisses me off about a lot of atheists - they ridicule other religions because they have different opinions. I don't agree with that. If they leave you alone, leave them alone. Talk about the weather or something. But if they get offensive or aggressive or hostile about it, that's when they need to back up and recognize their insecurities.

Speaking as a Christian, I have absolutely no issue with this atheist monument.

Freedom of speech should not lead to the silencing of views or opinions, but to the sharing of them, and in a country that claims said freedom, events such as this should be far more common than the current practice of attempting to silence people with views or beliefs that are not perceived to be popular or in the mainstream.

reply to post by LesMisanthrope


Are you assuming all atheists agree with that sign being there?

Should I assume all Christians agree with there sign being there in that case?

You say that is what you take issue with in atheism which doesn't make sense to me. It seems to me you and many other people are taking it upon themselves to assign a lot of attributes to atheists and atheism.

The only rational issue that anyone can reasonably have against atheists or atheism is that we do not believe in deitys although I do not know how rational or reasonable it is that you or anyone should care that I don't believe what you do.

If on the other hand you take issue with the organization that erected the sign I can understand that just like I take issue with organizations like westbound baptist church but I don't assume all Christians think as they do....or maybe I should if I use your line of reasoning.

However I think it would be better if we make an effort to make distinctions between what a organization does and not assign values to entire genres of people are accredited for. I think that would go a long way to keep the peace in forums like these.

reply to post by Grimpachi

The only rational issue that anyone can reasonably have against atheists or atheism is that we do not believe in deitys although I do not know how rational or reasonable it is that you or anyone should care that I don't believe what you do.

I actually find that very interesting. It reminds me of something I saw the other day, a quote:

I went to subway today to get my favorite sandwich. The man in front of me ordered a different sub. I got really upset because he didn't get the same thing as me, even though it didn't affect me in any way.

...

...

This is what it sounds like when people complain about gay marriage [or religion], even though it doesn't affect them.

I edited the quote a little because it got somewhat offensive toward the end. But you get the idea.

Originally posted by LesMisanthrope
reply to post by Rocker2013

 

What's the difference between these two billboards?

Both offer an opinion. Both advertise their respective organizations. Both are placed on the side of a road. Both are concerned with religion. Both deify an idea to sell. Both are implying that their ideal lifestyle is the best lifestyle. Both are shoved right down everyone's throats.

But NEITHER is positioned directly outside a government office where the elected representatives of all citizens of any faith and none are charged with carrying out their duties of office.

That is the part of this that you are choosing to ignore.

I get that you think it's hypocritical for atheists to do the same thing they are criticizing theists of doing, but that is not the core of this story. This story is about the entanglement of governance of a secular society and a specific religion, and the argument against that.

This is about the separation of church and state, not whether one group behaves in the same way as the other.

Can't atheists change their name to rationalists or something instead of leeching off those who keep the faith? Everybody needs faith, if they choose to believe in ratio that's their business. Those who believe in a place called heaven is what society needs especially in dire times. They are the keepers of the immaterial, their vision of it might not yet be perfect but it's better than without. I'm not Christian myself but I do believe if Christianity would be gone tomorrow something would be missing, something which is always there in society in plain sight yet hidden because nobody knows how it would be like without. People don't know what they got until it's gone.

reply to post by Dragonfly79


But the term atheism is used specifically to denote a lack of religious direction or intention. Rationalists defer to reason as their primary source and method of thought. You could say one is a way of thinking, the other is a way of feeling. Hard to draw a line, but let me try and make an example: One can be crazy and still be atheist. A conspiracy nut who dug too deep can be a raving lunatic and still qualify as an atheist. They are not a rationalist, but they are atheist.

I get what you're trying to say, though, and it's just not that simple.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by NOTurTypical

 

Oh, you mean like this?

14 There is something else meaningless that occurs on earth: the righteous who get what the wicked deserve, and the wicked who get what the righteous deserve. This too, I say, is meaningless. 15 So I commend the enjoyment of life, because there is nothing better for a person under the sun than to eat and drink and be glad. Then joy will accompany them in their toil all the days of the life God has given them under the sun.

Doesn't really change the meaning, in my understanding. No blood, no foul. Maybe you see something that I don't? Oh, well, of course you do. You're a Christian, after all.

edit on 3-6-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)

OMG! I love this. When all else fails, attack the authenticity of the OP's signature! Scrutinize for hypocrisy.

For the record, I'm not an atheist. I don't, however believe in the Biblical God nor the Christian, New Testament version of God. From what I see most often, in my opinion, religious people put their god in a superstitious box labeled "Stuff We Don't Understand."

I think the problem is, we can't agree on a definition of who or what god is. But I think we can all agree that there does exist a question and an enigma.

The atheist billboards and other media messages are similar to the gay rights movement and support feeling safe to come out of the closet.

As with gays, atheists are not a group think. They are individuals with one thing in common. Unlike religion which is for the purpose of recruiting those to a group of same thought.

Atheist Activism - - - Activism and education are, first and foremost, about raising the profile of atheism and normalizing atheism in the public discourse. With our community projects, billboard campaigns, and educational resources, we encourage the millions of atheists who are "in the closet" to come out as atheists and be proud of embracing reality. atheists.org...

reply to post by AfterInfinity

So let's do away with labels and not know how the hell to identify our common ground or explain our differences or isolate similarities or communicate at all. Let's say screw language entirely and start grunting instead. Would that make you happy? Because apparently, you have something against labels even though they clearly serve a purpose.

No need to be ridiculous about it. It's the idea that one label can be better than another that I'm talking about.

So you're a spiritual atheist. Out of curiosity, when would you ever use this label?

reply to post by Rocker2013

This is about the separation of church and state, not whether one group behaves in the same way as the other.

What's the difference between American Atheists and the Christian church?