Comments on My views on the Washington Atheist Sign controversy

Go to Religion in the Modern World - Add a comment - Go to My views on the Washington Atheist Sign controversy

OTA. - that's a good point and I can't help but feel it is notion that

inspired the wording of the sign.

It seems the sign's authors were welcoming controversy as a means of attracting attention.

posted by gomedome on December 9, 2008 at 6:53 AM | link to this | reply

calia14 - Re: More reading for you gomedome...

That's the biggest problem I have with it, I actually agree with the words expressed but why choose that setting? In investigating the group that was responsible, it seems that they feel making this statement promotes their agenda of insuring the continued separation of church and state. I even agree with the agenda but choosing a battleground where a clear general theme of expressing goodwill is demonstrated by all other participants, seems a bit tacky to me.

posted by gomedome on December 8, 2008 at 10:56 PM | link to this | reply

ammon - that is about what I expected

Instead of offering but one example of a real person that fits your manufactured negative assessment, you instead offer works of existentialist fiction. Are you trying to be a comedian?

I'm not going to get into word plays with you, traditional beliefs as a term used in the context which you have used it, envelop far more than a belief in God. It simply cannot be said that the one commonality amongst all atheists in not believing in God is a rejection of all traditional beliefs. To further attempt to connect the dots from this one commonality to insist that a person who does not believe in God is also by default a nihilist, ranks right up there with some of the stupidest things you have ever said. (and that is a major accomplishment).

posted by gomedome on December 8, 2008 at 10:50 PM | link to this | reply

Oh, and in response to your comment that you know of no one

who believes that traditional values are unfounded and existence is senseless and useless, I would point you to a few of the existential novels …you might try reading The Stranger by Camus or some of the more modern stuff by Chuck Palahniuk.

posted by ammon on December 8, 2008 at 2:57 PM | link to this | reply

Gomedome…....at the risk of wearing your patience too thin, I must say that

the denial of the existence of God is congruent with the denial of traditional beliefs. The words on the signage similarly purport the denial of traditional beliefs and hence support a nihilistic position, which is a broad movement that you seem to want to ignore. Nihilism and atheism go hand in hand because both pivot upon the denial of traditional beliefs, i.e. God. These particular atheists are suggesting that religion is all myth while effectively promoting an alternative philosophy that can also not be proven to be anything more than myth. Surely you can see and admit that this is clearly contradictory and hypocritical.

posted by ammon on December 8, 2008 at 2:38 PM | link to this | reply

well.. like Christmas itself..the controversy sure sells..

~Peace, OTA

posted by Blue_feathers on December 8, 2008 at 1:07 PM | link to this | reply

ammon - oh please, more of your drivel

I have simply lost patience with your insistence that atheism is associated with nihilism as a broad sweeping generalization. I know of no one who believes ". . . . that traditional values are unfounded and that existence is senseless and useless" . . . nor do you know anyone that believes this, at least anyone who is above the age of 15. You have simply derived this conclusion from your prejudices and have attached it to anyone you cannot get to agree with you.

The saddest part of this is that you have been exchanging comments with non believers on this site for years now and you are still attempting to force your foregone conclusions.

Go bother someone else.

posted by gomedome on December 8, 2008 at 1:01 PM | link to this | reply

Gomedome………..I would recommend that you do a bit of reading about nihilism

before you go off the handle, as it is a very prolific philosophy that is rather widely circulated, being the viewpoint that traditional values are unfounded and that existence is senseless and useless. As usual, you digress into a tirade of name-calling every time someone calls you on an issue.

posted by ammon on December 8, 2008 at 12:23 PM | link to this | reply

FineYoungSinger - again it appears as if you are grasping at things to

create an argument from.

The question of whether or not the sign was libelous is an obscure point at best. I have yet to see an objection based on this premise. The vast majority of objections have been of the nature of offense to religious sensibilities based on what the sign says. Amongst all of these objections there is a clear pattern of ignoring the first amendment. The subtleties, other intangibles and simply what has been accomplished by displaying such a sign, have escaped most people.

posted by gomedome on December 8, 2008 at 11:40 AM | link to this | reply

Re: FineYoungSinger - I think everyone is aware of how and why they are able to

In retrospect, perhaps; if, however, the statement was ruled to be libelous, the atheist group responsible for the sign would be outside of it's rights to free expression. THAT is the reason why the handful of individuals that took offense to the statement got all bent out of shape. Anyone in this country has the right to petition the government to make this determination. There's nothing ironical or debatable about it. Libel is obscure, and because of this obscurity everyone is NOT aware of how and why they are able to voice their opinions.

I can't help but find it ironic that one of the "religious folks" in this discussion has no problem whatsoever with the sign. They are entitled to their opinion, and entitled to express it in any manner they see fit. I simply choose to disagree, and can therefore let the sign stand.

posted by FineYoungSinger on December 8, 2008 at 10:24 AM | link to this | reply

Re: Gomedome…….I read the recent news articles about this

ammon - there is no such thing as a belief in "nothingness", that is simply a moronic catch phrase you have latched onto as a means of denigrating the mindset of people that are clearly beyond your comprehension. There are no alternate myths being offered by the action of posting the sign, it simply states an opinion about religious beliefs while appealing to reason. A position I might add that I completely agree with, I just feel that the sign is posted in the wrong setting.

In the future, spare me your arguments attempting to validate your half baked conclusions pertaining to atheists. We've heard them all before and they add up to nothing more than an obtuse bias intent on proving that all non believers are lesser of character. Nihilism, belief in nothingness, alternate myths? . . . go talk that drivel with the bible lobotomized and stop wasting my time.

posted by gomedome on December 8, 2008 at 10:02 AM | link to this | reply

FineYoungSinger - I think everyone is aware of how and why they are able to

voice their opinions.

The debate to a great extent is centered around how easily religious folks see nothing wrong with denying these rights to others, especially when they are on the receiving end. There is also a long list of intangible aspects to this particular issue. All other displays at the capitol building are celebrating the holiday season, this sign stands alone as stating an opinion. I can't help but feel that there are better places or situations to do that.

posted by gomedome on December 8, 2008 at 9:50 AM | link to this | reply

Gomedome…….I read the recent news articles about this

but have not devoted study to the matter beyond that. Nevertheless, the fact that they are offering up their own display is, in and of itself, sufficient credibility for my comment. As you say, they are certainly over zealous and, although I typically refrain from calling people idiots, protesting religion as a myth while simultaneously interposing an alternative myth is quite ridiculous. They are quite clearly and openly promoting a belief in “nothingness” and their signs are a tangible manifestation of this.

posted by ammon on December 8, 2008 at 9:43 AM | link to this | reply

"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."

Because of this amendment, and because the state/local laws and ordinances are being followed, the group behind the Atheist sign has the freedom to state their beliefs. People get too emotional about their beliefs, and really need to chalk this one up to freedom of speech.

While the sign may be viewed as insulting (with a blanket statement that religion hardens hearts and enslaves minds, the reader can quite logically draw the conclusion that the sign means to accuse people practicing religions of being stupid and uncaring), the people making the statement have a right to their opinion, and the right to express their opinions and beliefs publically.

Part of the reason, by the way, that the statement has been "reduced in content to the offending lines" is because of the insulting nature of the statement. Had the offending lines read, "People practicing religion have hard hearts and enslaved minds", the sign would be libel. But because the statement does not attack a person, but an object, it is not. This is what the "fundie numbnut filters" were up in arms about---libel is illegal.

posted by FineYoungSinger on December 8, 2008 at 9:32 AM | link to this | reply

ammon - there is really only one hilarious aspect to this -

it is your comment.

You have harbored these same inane conclusions for years and attempt to insert them whenever you can, whether the situation warrants it or not. In this case the group known as the: Freedom From Religion Foundation has an agenda and they may well be over zealous in their approach but that in no way supports anything else in your comment. . . . and for the record, I think they are a bunch of idiots choosing the wrong battleground to make a point.

I would also lay odds that you did not take the time to learn anything about the FFRF before making your comment. Who they are, what they represent and their mandate are rather important aspects to know before drawing a conclusion about them dontcha think?

But not in your case, propaganda and your own agendas will suffice in place of facts.

posted by gomedome on December 8, 2008 at 9:28 AM | link to this | reply

And so we see atheists involved in the active promotion of their

“believe in nothing” agenda in the same manner as a traditional religious zealot. And so their “nothing” becomes a tangible philosophical focus in and of itself and the action a promotion of the “MYTH” of nihilism. It is quite hilarious!

posted by ammon on December 8, 2008 at 8:39 AM | link to this | reply

Re: Did the atheist group also apply for and receive permission as did the

FineYoungSinger - Yes, all groups had to apply and receive permission for their displays but I don't agree that permission is the only issue. The words on the sign are not in keeping with the general theme of celebrating the season as all other displays are, I wonder if there is a better forum to make such a statement.

posted by gomedome on December 8, 2008 at 6:35 AM | link to this | reply

Did the atheist group also apply for and receive permission as did the

other groups to erect their sign on public property? If not, then that's the only issue that needs to be addressed.

posted by FineYoungSinger on December 8, 2008 at 6:27 AM | link to this | reply

mordent - I don't know where to begin with your comment

You say a lot I agree with, a lot I sort of agree with and a lot I disagree with.

The catchphrase "this is a Christian Nation" is nothing more than a con, we've had groups try to use that one in our country as well. The USA is a self designed secular democracy which has had since its inception a Christian majority but those demographics are ever changing. The constitution is clear on separation of church and state but one group by virtue of their numbers is insistent on imposing their will on the rest of society.

The problem for them lies in the fact that the numbers against their unwilling inclusion of others in their religious traditions are growing and will continue to grow. There are simply more types of superstitions, other religious beliefs and non beliefs within mainstream society these days. The only practical answer is to enforce the constitution as it was intended, everyone take their religions home and out of the public sector.

posted by gomedome on December 7, 2008 at 7:46 PM | link to this | reply

Re: you are quite right -- none at all is best

Xeno-x - seriously, what a waste of time and energy.

posted by gomedome on December 7, 2008 at 7:31 PM | link to this | reply

ZenMom - the sheeple never fail to dissapoint

There is something about posting a sign in that context, which simply expresses a viewpoint that strikes me as a little out of place but I cannot quite articulate what it is. Maybe it is because it seems to detract from the spirit of the season. Even though I agree with every word on that sign, I question whether or not the battleground chosen was well advised.

posted by gomedome on December 7, 2008 at 7:30 PM | link to this | reply

To me it's all a bunch of laughable garbage. To me the only difference between atheists and Christians is belief/disbelief as they're both obsessed otherwise.

However majority or strength does rule in life. I'm in sport-fighting and occassionally a female will join the club. The men all adjust themselves and become more helpful/gentlemanly. I change nothing, I simply carry-on.

Despite the gentlemanly behavior/re-assurance the females sooner or later grow insecure or disinterested. They either quit or take private lessons. They come to realize they're either not combatants or they don't belong in that environment anymore than I belong at a breast-cancer group or girls volley-ball.

What I'm saying is that the US since formation is a Christian nation. Atheists/other religions should just realize this and quit belly-aching. They have every right to practice their beliefs as they see fit in their churches and homes. Just let the buildings/department stores have their little Christmas show. To be offended at the sight of all this Christianity is silly and in the end it is nothing more than a power-grab.

Fair enough, than if you want the power you must outbreed them. And believe me if/when they outnumber Christians in the US they too will insist on their way being law.

posted by mordent on December 7, 2008 at 4:55 PM | link to this | reply

you are quite right -- none at all is best

posted by Xeno-x on December 7, 2008 at 4:25 PM | link to this | reply

Check out the comments on this post. Corbin seems to feel that atheists are not entitled to display our sentiments........since it it not delivered in the form of a "symbol" (as opposed to "sign"). Someone needs to get a grip....

http://www.blogit.com/Blogs/Blog.aspx/Justsouno5994/583325

posted by ZenMom on December 7, 2008 at 2:13 PM | link to this | reply