Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

Atheist sign joins nativity scene, tree at Washington State Capitol building**Update

ljs

By ljs
in The Tailgate

Recommended Posts

BigMike619

BigMike619

Posted
Posted
First - I don't like the comparrison of atheists to the KKK.

Second - most here have said that this should NOT have been an attack of other's beliefs. The KKK should be able to put up signs. However, if they are deemed enciting a riot, they are against the law. Since the KKK can't help but be a bunch of dicks, I'm sure their sign would be hateful in nature.

you went in 2 directions here. insulting and saying it was ok.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rincewind

rincewind

Posted
Posted
for dramatic effect. just to show that even though it is the biggest most racist group out there, shouldnt they have the same rights?

i didnt see you answer the question. it must have been on the other page and my post didnt go there.

You quoted it with this post:

dont cherry pick.

you didnt even bother to say black people and christians.

its just a comparison. doesnt mean that athiests are racist.

Here it is again, note the 'second' part:

First - I don't like the comparrison of atheists to the KKK.

Second - most here have said that this should NOT have been an attack of other's beliefs. The KKK should be able to put up signs. However, if they are deemed enciting a riot, they are against the law. Since the KKK can't help but be a bunch of dicks, I'm sure their sign would be hateful in nature.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ljs

ljs

Posted
  • Author
Posted
The part about this that bothers me is that Christmas (and Hanukkah to a lesser extent) is a culturally accepted Holiday that the majority of the population celebrates. If there happened to be an atheist themed holiday that a noticeable portion of the population celebrated, then let them put up their signs on that day.

What you are essentially setting up is a scenario where the state can't celebrate the things in our society that make it unique. So are we going to let "anti-environmentalist's" put signs up on arbor day, or "anti-american" crowd put up signs on flag day or July 4th? Or what about the Neo-Nazi's putting up a display on Yom Kippur?

The rational end of this trend is kind of rediculous...

Putting up Christmas themed displays to recognize something that a huge chunk of the population celebrates is not sponsoring religion, rather, it is a recognition of the values and practices of the population. If a few plastic figures or a menorah offend you --- you should take a serious look in the mirror and re-evaluate the things that matter in your life.....

very well said:applause::cheers:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ljs

ljs

Posted
  • Author
Posted

here's is my questions...why are athiests trying to hard to stop people from celebrating holidays? I mean, that is how I feel about it. If you don't celebrate, then fine...but stop trying to take away my Christmas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DiscoBob

DiscoBob

Posted
Posted
Talking about the hypothetical 'atheist holiday'. If there really was such a thing, do ANY of you REALLY think that Christians wouldn't be out trying to convert those celebrating and talking about how hethanistic that 'holiday' was?

....I'm sure you are right, however, no one is advocating that atheists should not have the right to hate Christmas and try to convince others that they shouldn't celebrate it....

But why should they be given a platform to object on government land?

I'm not sure what everyone else's point has been, but the biggest issue that I have is that the government is not obligated to give equal "ad-space" to each group that objects to something. The logical end of this is that you force the government to have "no-opinion" on anything - which strips our culture of any of it's identifying factors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rincewind

rincewind

Posted
Posted
....I'm sure you are right, however, no one is advocating that atheists should not have the right to hate Christmas and try to convince others that they shouldn't celebrate it....

But why should they be given a platform to object on government land?

I'm not sure what everyone else's point has been, but the biggest issue that I have is that the government is not obligated to give equal "ad-space" to each group that objects to something. The logical end of this is that you force the government to have "no-opinion" on anything - which strips our culture of any of it's identifying factors.

Personally, I think the sign was in poor taste. And you're right, the government should have told the atheists they had to have a specific reason to put up the sign at that specific time. They shouldn't make their yard a hissy fit playground - refuting someone else is not a good enough reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Midnight Judges

Midnight Judges

Posted
Posted
....I'm sure you are right, however, no one is advocating that atheists should not have the right to hate Christmas and try to convince others that they shouldn't celebrate it....

But why should they be given a platform to object on government land?

I'm not sure what everyone else's point has been, but the biggest issue that I have is that the government is not obligated to give equal "ad-space" to each group that objects to something. The logical end of this is that you force the government to have "no-opinion" on anything - which strips our culture of any of it's identifying factors.

These displays were privately sponsored and the atheist display was celebrating an atheist themed holiday in the winter solstace. You are not suggesting merely that the Govermment not promote atheism, you are advocating that they should discriminate against atheists even when atheists have gone through the exact same steps as Christians.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jumbo

Jumbo

Posted
Posted
If the KKK wanted to put up a ddisplay next to MLK on his Holiday would Wash St Govt allow them?

Not likely--but you could put up a Jeff Foxworthy poster next to the one for the Dave Chapelle concert at the Capitol Playhouse. Does that help?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jumbo

Jumbo

Posted
Posted
Could someone please teach Jumbo how to multiquote? Thanks. :)

Hey, I mastered multi-quoting while you were scrambling around in cages with oiled-up West Virginian males. :D

Soemtimes, I just like to give that individual attention so posters feel "special." :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
techboy

techboy

Posted
Posted
Simple answer: they aren't.

Most atheists aren't, I'm sure. Dan Barker, however (one of the leaders of the group that put up the sign), most certainly is trying his absolute best to "deprogram" every religious person out there. I know that from watching him operate and reading his work, but it's also fairly obvious from the tone of the sign. It's not just "I don't believe your faiths are correct." It's "I believe your faiths are not only wrong, but dangerous to yourself and others."

Barker has the passion of the converted. Much as often the atheist that becomes a Christian is far more passionate and vocal, Barker is a former Pastor that became an atheist, and he has the exact same kind of zeal.

These displays were privately sponsored and the atheist display was celebrating an atheist themed holiday in the winter solstace.

1. The display was less a celebration of the solistice than it was an attack on religion. In some sense, that's what atheism is, of course.

2. The Winter solistice is not an "atheist themed holiday". It's a pagan themed holiday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zguy28

Zguy28

Posted
Posted
First - I don't like the comparrison of atheists to the KKK.

Second - most here have said that this should NOT have been an attack of other's beliefs. The KKK should be able to put up signs. However, if they are deemed enciting a riot, they are against the law. Since the KKK can't help but be a bunch of dicks, I'm sure their sign would be hateful in nature.

So, you are saying that if a bunch of theists go out and riot over this sign, the gov't should take it down?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Midnight Judges

Midnight Judges

Posted
Posted
Most atheists aren't, I'm sure. Dan Barker, however (one of the leaders of the group that put up the sign), most certainly is trying his absolute best to "deprogram" every religious person out there. I know that from watching him operate and reading his work, but it's also fairly obvious from the tone of the sign. It's not just "I don't believe your faiths are correct." It's "I believe your faiths are not only wrong, but dangerous to yourself and others."

Barker has the passion of the converted. Much as often the atheist that becomes a Christian is far more passionate and vocal, Barker is a former Pastor that became an atheist, and he has the exact same kind of zeal.

I don't disagree. Barker is certainly evangelizing atheism. Very annoying. I didn't know he was a pastor.

1. The display was less a celebration of the solistice than it was an attack on religion. In some sense, that's what atheism is, of course.

Right, kind of hard to separate the two.

2. The Winter solistice is not an "atheist themed holiday". It's a pagan themed holiday

I don't see why it can't be both. It's not like atheists would be the first to adapt a holiday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zguy28

Zguy28

Posted
Posted

I don't see why it can't be both. It's not like atheists would be the first to adapt a holiday.

Why would they celebrate the Solstice?

Would it be like "Yay! The shortest day of the year! Let's celebrate!" or "Let's break up the winter duldrums"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Midnight Judges

Midnight Judges

Posted
Posted
Why would they celebrate the Solstice?

Would it be like "Yay! The shortest day of the year! Let's celebrate!" or "Let's break up the winter duldrums"?

Sure why not. They mentioned the natural world in thier message. Maybe the solstice is part of that.

lol I hate the winter solstace. And daylight losings' time for that matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jumbo

Jumbo

Posted
Posted

I don't know why...but this thread had me remembering this t-shirt I ordered in '69 from the back-page ads in a National Lampoon magazine...it said "Nuke the Gay Whales for Christ" on the front and featured a matching cartoonish graphic depicting said action in each detail.

I wore it into a post office on the outskirts of Anchorage where a postal employee told me I would have to leave immediately due to the fact that it was not acceptable in a federal building. I poined out that this branch was actually in the basement of the Woolworth's building and they were apparently renting space. She replied by saying she was also the weekend manager of the watch & jewerly department upstairs and that the shirt wasn't accecptable for Woolworth's either.

So I understand what it feels like to be spurned for supporting a symbol of your beliefs just because it's a controversial minority view. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites
blchizzleke

blchizzleke

Posted
Posted

a key issue that is being ignored is that the nativity scene, which promotes Christianity, is in fact a religious symbol that promotes a religion that says non-Christians are morally inferior and going to hell. therefore, they are insulting and denigrating other religions and atheists alike implicitly by having their symbol in there, much in the same way that the atheist sign is insulting and offensive to Christians. the only difference is the atheist sign is using explicitly using words to insult religions whereas the nativity scene uses implicit symbols to insult atheists and other religions. in my opinion, there should be nothing condoning any religion or lack of religion in any government building.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...