Athiest sign

[Xx{Midnight}xX]

Re: Athiest sign

There's a saying I like to repeat, because it definitely held true for me. "Nothing will make you an atheist faster than reading the damn Bible."

The point these atheists in Washington are trying to make is not to take everything at face value. Start thinking for yourself. Apply reason to your judgment. If you still want to be Christian after you do this, then go right ahead. But above all else, think. That's all most atheists want out of religious folks. Just think for yourselves. Take a different perspective on the whole thing.

I needed a good statement. That quote'll work well.

I agree with the second statement as well.

[Chaosvermin]

Re: Athiest sign

Just bring back the goddamn Sun!
Or send it away for us Southern Hemisphere-ers

[Zybanthia]

Re: Athiest sign

I don't understand how anyone could state that Atheism is a religion. Break down atheism. It is a lack of a theism. A religion is a belief system about an ultimate power...atheists acknowledge no ultimate power, therefore lack a religion. We can all worship a pineapple, and it can be a religion because we are worshipping it as an ultimate power. Without a belief in that ultimate power, there is no religion.

You can't call baldness a hair color. There is no hair.

*sigh* I sort of hate to get into this, but atheism is a religious belief. Maybe not necessarily a religion, but it IS a religious BELIEF. Atheists believe that there is no god (or at least, the most standard definition of atheism is "the DISBELIEF / denial of god(s)"). They actually BELIEVE it. Atheists also bother to congregate and express their BELIEFS.

Now, somebody who is agnostic doesn't actually have any belief at all - they are (most commonly) pitted in between theists and atheists because they believe nothing. They (as far as I know) don't congregate because... well, they have nothing to congregate about. THEY are the ones with, as you put it, no hair.

To add to this, you can split this very finely, saying there is "weak atheism", etc, but in the dictionary definitions, this is what you will see.

[PlaceboFX]

Re: Athiest sign

The only reason it is considered a religious belief is because of the existance of religion, which is exactly what athiests are denying in the first place. I think that it really depends on how you are looking at it.

[Grandiagod]

Re: Athiest sign

*sigh* I sort of hate to get into this, but atheism is a religious belief. Maybe not necessarily a religion, but it IS a religious BELIEF. Atheists believe that there is no god (or at least, the most standard definition of atheism is "the DISBELIEF / denial of god(s)"). They actually BELIEVE it. Atheists also bother to congregate and express their BELIEFS.

Atheism is a belief "about" religion, it's not a religious belief.

Now, somebody who is agnostic doesn't actually have any belief at all - they are (most commonly) pitted in between theists and atheists because they believe nothing. They (as far as I know) don't congregate because... well, they have nothing to congregate about. THEY are the ones with, as you put it, no hair.

No, agnostics believe in the possibility of God.

Also that was totally off topic and i think the sign is ballin' awesome **** christians yo

[Relambrien]

Re: Athiest sign

I think this is where I'm supposed to tell everyone that atheism is divided into many many subcategories.

"Strong atheists" are the ones who say "I know for a fact there is no God."
"Weak atheists" say "I don't think God exists because I haven't seen evidence to suggest it."

There are also other categories, such as apatheists, theological noncognitivists, and agnostics, which all fall under the blanket term of "atheist"

Apatheists simply don't care whether or not there is a God.
Theological noncognitivists say the question of God is meaningless because it only harms humanity.
Strong agnostics say "It's impossible to know whether God exists."
Weak agnostics say "I don't know if God exists, but it may be possible to show one way or the other."

Anyway, regarding the sign, it seems to me like a blatant trolling attempt. I highly doubt the Freedom from Religion Foundation thought that putting an atheistic sign in the middle of a bunch of Christmas displays would actually help further the "spirit" of the holiday season (which, due to its secularization, transcends religion). They wanted to make a statement: "Yeah, we can put our stuff here too because we're just as qualified as you." Which they're perfectly entitled to do of course, free speech and all.

It just seems like the wrong place for a statement about the recognition of atheism. They knew it would cause ripples and be controversial, and why would you pull that during a time of year where people are supposed to be coming together, regardless of religion, unless you were intentionally trying to start controversy?

[All_That_Chaz]

Re: Athiest sign

Squeek, I'm not Christian. I'm not religious. I'm not defending any beliefs that I myself have. I don't know why you think the shock approach is a good one. I'm well aware that parents raise their children to have certain beliefs which is something I don't agree with personally, but how parents raise their children is their business.

I'm not saying Christians are wrong for putting the nativity scene somewhere. I'm not saying Atheists are wrong for wanting people to think critically about their own beliefs. What I'm saying is that putting a sign saying those things in a nativity scene is a dick move. If they want to influence people, hand out fliers on the street, or design your own religious scene. Don't crash another religion's party. I don't go to parties and scream at everyone who drinks liquor because I personally don't like to drink because that's a dick move.

EDIT: What bothers me the most is that really if the roles were reversed the posters here would be taking the exact opposite viewpoint. The evil Christians put a Jesus Fish on the back of the massive 50-pound framed document. How dare they impose their beliefs on another group!

[Afrobean]

Re: Athiest sign

I say it isn't because it's silly and a slippery slope. I mean to me saying this piece of paper (fine, "massive 50-pound framed document") being a religious symbol makes as much sense as some Atheist dude saying the spot the nativity scene is on is Atheist holy ground and it can't be there, and following the Christian congregation around and repeatedly disallowing the scene to be anywhere. It's just dumb.

And fine, great, Winter Solstice. Let them make their own holiday scene then, don't trash another religion's.

Stop saying things.

Religious symbol or not is irrelevant. This is about freedom of speech and equal representations of faith.

It's the denial of the existence of gods, but it is much different than any organized religion. If I was to say I was an atheist, you don't know *anything* about what I believe other than that I don't believe in God(s).

And there are plenty of people who believe in God, but do not affiliate with any religion. Would you say that they can't claim their religion as "Christian" if they don't affiliate with any denomination? After all, if a person isn't affiliated with a church and responds merely "Christian", all you know about them is that they believe in God and that Jesus Christ is the son of God.

I just think that it's in extremely poor taste and is only there in order to make people unhappy.

Who gives a ****. Freedom of speech. Tact is irrelevant.

It seems to me that your bias is causing you to dig a bit too deeply.

rofl

Accusing the person in favor of equal free expression for all parties that he's being biased. Good one!

ps

A religion is a belief system about an ultimate power

hey ur right

However, you fail to note that an atheist DOES have "a belief system about an ultimate power". Their belief about it is simply a different belief than most other religious affiliations. For example, someone might believe God is an old man with a grey beard living in the clouds. Another might believe that God is a Jewish carpenter's son who lived 2000+ years ago. Atheists have a specific belief about God too; that he does not exist.

[sumzup]

Re: Athiest sign

except for fake washington those god damn god worshipping nazi eastern washingtonians they are no better than idahoians

HOLD IT. There are some sane people in eastern Washington, you just have to look harder to find them (i.e. Pullman). Eastern WA rocks.

[Afrobean]

Re: Athiest sign

I don't understand how anyone could state that Atheism is a religion. Break down atheism. It is a lack of a theism. A religion is a belief system about an ultimate power...atheists acknowledge no ultimate power, therefore lack a religion. We can all worship a pineapple, and it can be a religion because we are worshipping it as an ultimate power. Without a belief in that ultimate power, there is no religion.

You can't call baldness a hair color. There is no hair.

Bald = lack of hair.

Atheism = lack of religion.

The sign was not a religious symbol. It was an attack on another religion. It was not in celebration of a holiday. I repeat. It was an attack on religion. It had no place in a public place for religious symbols celebrating a holiday because it was an anti-religious message attacking a religion.


I consider myself an athiest, and I still believe that the sign was outrageous and completely inappropriate. I would no sooner put up a swastica next to a Menorah. It isn't right.

Bad example.

A better one would be the question of whether bald is a HAIRSTYLE. Color of hair would be more akin to specific denominations like Catholic or Protestant.

[Syhto]

Re: Athiest sign

Religious symbol or not is irrelevant. This is about freedom of speech and equal representations of faith.

Afrobean, some people aren't just talking about freedom of speech and equal representations of faith. No one is even trying to fight their right to say/do what they did here, so why does this keep coming up. The main post asked for opinions, not whether or not it was legal.

[All_That_Chaz]

Re: Athiest sign

Stop saying things.

Religious symbol or not is irrelevant. This is about freedom of speech and equal representations of faith.

First of all, your tone could be a bit nicer.

And I don't think equal representation of faith should be mandated in A NATIVITY SCENE. It's a religious symbol for ONE RELIGION. No, they're not doing anything illegal, but it's plain silly politically correct garbage.

[Afrobean]

Re: Athiest sign

First of all, your tone could be a bit nicer.

yeah well ur gay

And I don't think equal representation of faith should be mandated in A NATIVITY SCENE. It's a religious symbol for ONE RELIGION. No, they're not doing anything illegal, but it's plain silly politically correct garbage.

Would you rather atheists get panty-bunched and demand "SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE GET THAT NATIVITY **** OUTTA MY GOVERNMENT PROPERTY!"?

[Squeek]

Re: Athiest sign

First of all, your tone could be a bit nicer.

And I don't think equal representation of faith should be mandated in A NATIVITY SCENE. It's a religious symbol for ONE RELIGION. No, they're not doing anything illegal, but it's plain silly politically correct garbage.

So, why does the Nativity scene get the ins, then? What makes it better than atheism symbols?

Please remind me why popular = right.

And hey, if the local Jewish community wanted to put a Menorah up, they'd have every right to do so. If the local Muslim community wanted to put their symbolism up, they'd have every right to do so. It just so happens that so far, the only two groups to put up symbols are Christians and Atheists.

I read an interesting comment on one of the news sites with this article on it. Someone actually stole the sign, and Christians had a good laugh about it, despite it breaking one of their own commandments. What if someone stole the Nativity scene? I guarantee you, we'd have more of a public outcry about that than this stupid sign.

[All_That_Chaz]

Re: Athiest sign

So, why does the Nativity scene get the ins, then? What makes it better than atheism symbols?

Please remind me why popular = right.

And hey, if the local Jewish community wanted to put a Menorah up, they'd have every right to do so. If the local Muslim community wanted to put their symbolism up, they'd have every right to do so. It just so happens that so far, the only two groups to put up symbols are Christians and Atheists.

I read an interesting comment on one of the news sites with this article on it. Someone actually stole the sign, and Christians had a good laugh about it, despite it breaking one of their own commandments. What if someone stole the Nativity scene? I guarantee you, we'd have more of a public outcry about that than this stupid sign.

I don't know what's so hard to get about this. There's a Christmas scene put up by the people who celebrate Christmas. People who have something against that holiday or what it stands for don't have to rain on their parade. I have absolutely nothing against any religious groups expressing their beliefs, I only ask for civility. Let the Atheists put up their own display. They don't have to be together. It's like going to an art museum and drawing a stick figure on a painting. Just because it's your expression doesn't mean it's ok for you to ruin that painting.

I haven't said anything supporting a claim that Christianity is a better belief than Atheism and I certainly don't make presumptions about how is right. And popularity would never be part of my judgment on that. There's no reason for you to get so defensive.