Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Disrespect for those who deserve respect


danielost

Recommended Posts

That was the whole point. Santa Monica had these 14 spots that were up for lottery for whoever wanted to bid on them. For what length of time, I do not know. Doesn't matter. The atheist nebshlt finally had enough with the church getting the spots. I assume no one else felt like spending money on empty plots that you could only hang onto temporarily. So, the church basically just rented the spots every year. Well this guy decides to go on a donation hunt to buy up all the spots except for a few and replace holiday scenery with stupid signs that either spout common sense or mock religion and the people weren't happy. Since that apparently wasn't enough this guy sued the city for constitutional violations, won and dismantled a 60 year tradition that bothered no one and was enjoyed by most.

The state set up a lottery, the atheists won the most plots (most of which weren't used and should have been redistributed) and then the Christians had a fit because they weren't allowed prima place anymore and vandalised the other displays.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No ones interfering with my rights of speech or religion as longbas I keep it in my home or church. But you can say what ever you want where ever you want. So now tell me who's rights are being supressed here.

Your freedom of speech is not being infringed on. Nor is your freedom to practice your religion.

You just can't put up monuments to your faith on government property. Demonstrate where this is otherwise the case.

So far you lot still get to have prayer before government meetings, the US motto has been "In God we trust" since the 50's, you still get to preach to people from street corners, and you still wear all of your religious jewelry (providing you're not in an occupation where a necklace might get snagged or something.) and on.

Atheists meanwhile are unable to be elected in 7 states. So you tell me, who's being victimized here?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not a religionist, but I have to agree with the OP that the American atheists in particular seen ridicuously activist. Christanity has been woven into Western civlization for the last 2000 years, and to me it seems both petty and misguided to try to re-write history by removing all traces of that.

Even more so, when while they are clamouring to have all Christian symbols removed, they remain studiously silent in regard to the growing islamization. I mean, really.... what courage does it take to bash Christians? Zero, zilch, none. It is like taking candy from babies.

The first thing the atheists should do is putting a Mohammed cartoon on all their publications. But of course that would come with a personal risk. So they do the easy think and attack Santa Claus. Bah!

Edited by Zaphod222
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Establishing Christian monuments on state lands are a tacit approval of Christianity.

I just can't take this line of thinking seriously, I'm sorry. I can't help but imagine you with a general sword raised int he air as you shout this. While this is a hyperbolic image, you see what I am getting at.

Atheists have motioned for equal space in the past to put non-denominational monuments up as well and been denied

That is the complete opposite of not caring, and alludes to the type of person I was describing. If at first you don't succeed at removing something you don't like.. put up something of yours that they won't like to get even! It's really bad; and is a textbook case of a hypocrite. But most people realize this and can only shake their head. There is a very infantile aspect to it all. No real danger is at work. People will always believe what they want to. And then there are those who will believe what they want, and make it so the opposing belief has less ammo to win the war. These people need to put on their big boy pants and chill out. But I know, not possible, when the other side is clearly wrong.

Further, this is used to support the idea that the US is a Christian nation in an effort by others to push the Christian religion

Dear.

God.

:w00t:

And yeah, I take issue with that.

I see. I just see the slight absurdity in your views. I don't think most of what you fear even exists, except in ways that will happen whether any single thing is changed or not. But maybe that's just me.

If you want to live in fear that the bad guys will convert more to their army, then continue your fight. But just don't expect everyone watching to take you seriously. I am forced to just see you as a talking head vs. another talking head, arguing inanely forevermore.

Some day, man. Some day.

Edited by _Only
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The state set up a lottery, the atheists won the most plots (most of which weren't used and should have been redistributed) and then the Christians had a fit because they weren't allowed prima place anymore and vandalised the other displays.

So when teenagers are out destroying Christmas decorations every year are we to assume they are all Atheists? Hell, I would be sorely tempted to vandalize the flame baiting Atheist's displays after causing such a ruckus over something the majority of the people enjoyed.

I rank people like him right up there with the Westboro Baptist Church.

Edited by Michelle
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The first thing the atheists should do is putting a Mohammed cartoon on all their publications. But of course that would come with a personal risk. So they do the easy think and attack Santa Claus. Bah!

You seem to be under two misapprehensions.

One, that international Draw Mohammed Day isn't a thing, it is. And all of the leading figures in the atheist movement have spoken out against Islam. Hell, New Atheists as a group got blasted for being "Islamaphobic." Damned if you do, damned if you don't, eh?

The second, that atheists attack Santa Claus. We don't.

And American atheists aren't trying to rewrite history, they are trying to make government more secular. Ideally that means atheists get just as much preferential treatment as theists. Which means none.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So when teenagers are out destroying Christmas decorations every year are we to assume they are all Atheists? Hell, I would be sorely tempted to vandalize the flame baiting Atheist's displays after causing such a ruckus over something the majority of the people enjoyed.

I rank people like him right up there with the Westboro Baptist Church.

So you see putting up a sign saying "Reason's Greetings" as flame baiting?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just can't take this line of thinking seriously, I'm sorry. I can't help but imagine you with a general sword raised int he air as you shout this. While this is a hyperbolic image, you see what I am getting at.

That is the complete opposite of not caring, and alludes to the type of person I was describing. If at first you don't succeed at removing something you don't like.. put up something of yours that they won't like to get even! It's really bad; and is a textbook case of a hypocrite. But most people realize this and can only shake their head. There is a very infantile aspect to it all. No real danger is at work. People will always believe what they want to. And then there are those who will believe what they want, and make it so the opposing belief has less ammo to win the war. These people need to put on their big boy pants and chill out. But I know, not possible, when the other side is clearly wrong.

You forget, the initial attempt was to ge ttheir own displays set up, since they were putting up only Christian displays. Yet instead they oly allowed Christian displays. This wasn't initially a fight to take anything down, but to be able to offer up their own displays as well.

It was only when they were blocked from being able to put up their displays that they sued for discrimination.

I see. I just see the slight absurdity in your views. I don't think most of what you fear even exists, except in ways that will happen whether any single thing is changed or not. But maybe that's just me.

If you want to live in fear that the bad guys will convert more to their army, then continue your fight. But just don't expect everyone watching to take you seriously. I am forced to just see you as a talking head vs. another talking head, arguing inanely forevermore.

Some day, man. Some day.

You realize theists aren't allowed to run for office in 7 states?

That there is an ongoing movement to force Creationism in schools?

That fundamentalists have tried to put prayer in schools and more recently a school was going to force students to recite prayer in a public school before being given their diploma?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So what matters the ten commandments at all? Christians claim they are the basis for US law, but that isn't the case. They don't provide any real good sense of laws, since they offer no extenuating circumstances (some parents are terrible, sometimes you need to steal to survive, and killing, well, it didn't even seem to get taken seriously in the book itself.

Killing and stealing are good ones. Others are good advice and the rest is about fearing god but I doubt that has much influence on people. Let them claim that. It isn't true. There is probably some influence but you act as if there is some kind of problem with Puritans these days. Sometimes those things are necessary to some people. It's like you just want to assure people that they won't be *smited* as if it's necessary to make such an announcement. Few people today express their religion with a fire and brimstone outlook.

Edit: *spelling*

So instead you want it put up at a courthouse?

Ehh, not personally but I'm not all up in arms about it.

Pew is one of the more respected polling companies.

And if you had actually read the article, it was opened to a lottery instead of only Christians being able to use the land it was open to those who applied.

If you followed up on the story, the Christians vandalized the atheist's signs and the menorahs put up by the Jews. The atheist's lawsuit opened it up for other religions to be represented as well.

Do I like that spaces were left open or underutilized? No, I'd have preferred that unused spots were put back and redistributed.

That doesn't excuse the vandalism done by the Christians who had up to then had gotten to preach there unopposed.

Well they ticked off an entire city. It's bound to create a reaction. At least it wasn't violent.

Unneutralized? Apparently, since it did eventually happen, any other time beforehand somebody, anybody, could've issued a challenge towards the city and had this over and done with a long time ago. The fact that they didn't is proof that it was fully supported by a majority of city residents for 60 years. So what's the problem if the entire city supports it? Was Santa Monica posing a holy crusade style threat? 60 years is a long time to prepare. And that is proof that the presence of these displays posed no imminent threat or were brain washingly influential. And to further cement my pov, Santa Monica is a dominantly democrat ran, white minority city with a small percentage of republicans and probably a smaller percentage of conservatives. If its existence didn't bother anyone in that city it isn't going to bother anyone anywhere else.

If you knew anything, you'd know the moement to push Happy Holidays started with Christians and is done without the support of the secular community but as a way of being more welcoming to people who have other religious beliefs, including Jews, Christians, Wiccans, ect.

And my point is, David Silverman is the President of American Atheists, Richard Dawkins is a one of the figure heads of the "New Athesits," neither have anything against wishing others a Merry christmas or hearing it from others. You are making it seem like there's some organize effort there when there isn't, it's not even a majority of atheists who have a problem with it.

And knowing something about the topic would probably help when you're trying to be outraged about it.

Oh well good for them. How tolerant. I'm pretty sure the article said a rabbi interviewed claimed that he was upset too because all the stars of David had to come down and that in fact it was the most displayed religious symbol in the city with over 60 of them scattered around. It wasn't just about this spot in the end. The Christians may have had the most dominant display but so what. People love to do it up for Christmas,

Yes I am making it seem like an organized effort. Why would an unorganized non effort need to appoint a President?

Perhaps not but this small group of people sure likes to stir it up seemingly for their own satisfaction.

You just said we should shut up and be happy with what we've got. Seven states still block atheists from office despite there supposed to not be a religious test for office.

The military has put in barriers for atheists on their fitness tests.

I'm not talking about these guys, I'm talking about what's going on in the US regarding atheism yet claiming to have an informed opinion.

I'm not sure i said that so forcefully but ok, whatever.

The states thing is archaic. Do they just not accept atheists or do you have to be religious?

Take that up with obama.

My opinion stands and is valid. This isn't the first time I've had this conversation here. I don't need to know the president of people who don't believe the most which btw doesn't make sense on so many levels. Atheists don't have enough in common with eachother to be considered a group. Agreeing on one thing, that gods don't exist, isn't enough to get together and have meetings and think tanks over unless of course they are on some type of mission to spread the way on how not to believe. Leaders, groups, organizations, followings, missions, announcing group existence to the public... Sounds so familiar.

Edited by F3SS
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What was a scenario where a religious symbol on government land shook the foundation of secular government?

Or is this all tacit, too?

Or just it could happen, so it needs to prevented?

It just sounds like paranoid dramatics to me.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you see putting up a sign saying "Reason's Greetings" as flame baiting?

It has nothing to do with the trite little cardboard signs he put up and you know it.

The problem is the "all or nothing" people who can't learn to play nicely together. Being pushy to the point of being obnoxious gives us all a bad name and makes the religious much more resistant and distrusting.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fact that they didn't is proof that it was fully supported by a majority of city residents for 60 years.

And as we all know, as long as they've always been doing it, even if it runs against the constitution that's A-ok.

Yes I am making it seem like an organized effort. Why would an unorganized non effort need to appoint a President?

Great, so you can point to an orgnized effort against Christmas right, since it's really the atheists not hyperbole strung up by right wing pundits?

The states thing is archaic. Do they just not accept atheists or do you have to be religious?

It has been contested recently and is still on the books, though found to be un-Constitutional. You have to declare a religious affiliation.

Leaders, groups, organizations, followings, missions, announcing group existence to the public... Sounds so familiar.

Yeah, I'm a member of a sword fighting club, we do the same thing. Jeeze. Like I asked earlier, do you count football fans as religious?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It has nothing to do with the trite little cardboard signs he put up and you know it.

The problem is the "all or nothing" people who can't learn to play nicely together. Being pushy to the point of being obnoxious gives us all a bad name and makes the religious much more resistant and distrusting.

yet in the article, the site was made open to anyone due to the amount of requests. The Christians still got put their displays up, and then still attacked the atheist groups displays. So tell me, what would you see as a non-antagonistic display?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yet in the article, the site was made open to anyone due to the amount of requests. The Christians still got put their displays up, and then still attacked the atheist groups displays. So tell me, what would you see as a non-antagonistic display?

You still haven't proven it was Christians that attacked the displays, it's merely your opinion unless someone was charged for it.

Frankly, Atheist displays of any kind make me roll my eyes, but especially at Christmas. If you want to organize Atheism, to the point it is almost identical to a religion, invent your own holiday and put all of the signs up you want. If not, let other people enjoy their traditions in peace.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And as we all know, as long as they've always been doing it, even if it runs against the constitution that's A-ok.

Great, so you can point to an orgnized effort against Christmas right, since it's really the atheists not hyperbole strung up by right wing pundits?

It has been contested recently and is still on the books, though found to be un-Constitutional. You have to declare a religious affiliation.

Yeah, I'm a member of a sword fighting club, we do the same thing. Jeeze. Like I asked earlier, do you count football fans as religious?

I still think you're hiding your disdain for religion behind that.

This is about more than just Christmas but the effort clearly exists.

That's dumb.

I wouldn't be surprised. You act as if you are standing up against the imposing will of a fourteenth century king. And yes, some football fans are borderline religious. You are apparently unaware of the fanaticism that the Pittsburgh Steelers generate in this city and abroad.

yet in the article, the site was made open to anyone due to the amount of requests. The Christians still got put their displays up, and then still attacked the atheist groups displays. So tell me, what would you see as a non-antagonistic display?

Antagonistic? It's certainly mocking at times. https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&hl=en&biw=768&bih=928&tbm=isch&sa=1&ei=23IAUpfDDOjE4APHzYCoBQ&q=atheist+anti+christmas+billboard&oq=atheist+anti+christmas+billboard&gs_l=img.3...74418.77835.0.78573.15.15.0.0.0.0.332.1458.13j1j0j1.15.0....0...1c.1.24.img..15.0.0.PtttkAVK8is

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You forget, the initial attempt was to ge ttheir own displays set up, since they were putting up only Christian displays. Yet instead they oly allowed Christian displays. This wasn't initially a fight to take anything down, but to be able to offer up their own displays as well.

It was only when they were blocked from being able to put up their displays that they sued for discrimination.

The mindset that it was undesirable to be forced to see something of which you don't appreciate and that you couldn't provide something of yours to combat it (which is an odd concept of presenting something to oppose Christmas decorations on Christmas) that fueled the drama. Do not attempt to deny this. You're not going to score the type of people who did that any points with me. I still can't see past the haze of absurdity in attempting to battle Christmas decorations during Christmas. It's people giving power to something they fear the power of, through dramatics. While the Christians celebrate their holiday, we all walk by and smile at snowmen, while the militant atheists plot their next move. Oh, just give me a break.

You realize theists aren't allowed to run for office in 7 states?

That there is an ongoing movement to force Creationism in schools?

That fundamentalists have tried to put prayer in schools and more recently a school was going to force students to recite prayer in a public school before being given their diploma?

None of that has to do with the existent or not power of symbols that can have religious connotations. This is what I was referring to; your fear that monuments that could hold religious connotations will be used to sway change in the campaign you are involving yourself in. Removing a statue of a cherub outside of my courthouse won't stop an old lady from petitioning her school to let her class label black clothing as sin, any more than placing a statue of Moses outside the city hall will stop an atheist in an 8th state to be denied entry into office.

They just aren't related. Wanting to remove a symbol is, again, just giving power to that symbol, and then hoping to use the removal of that symbol as a symbol of your own. But symbolic wins don't mean jack in politics.

They're petty.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You seem to be under two misapprehensions.

One, that international Draw Mohammed Day isn't a thing, it is.

....and nobody acts on it. Show me an atheist mag that actually puts a Mohammed cartoon in its front cover.

And the cartoonist who founded the Draw Mohammed Day had to change her name, abandon her career, and will be living in hiding for the rest of her life from death threats. Just like the 4 Danish cartoonists from Jyllandsposten. Now show me any atheists site or mag or organization that picks up on this outrage and makes it a first priority.

....no I can't see one either. They are too busy bashing Santa Claus

Talk about barking up the wrong tree!!!!!

Edited by Zaphod222
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I'm a member of a sword fighting club, we do the same thing. Jeeze. Like I asked earlier, do you count football fans as religious?

Maybe if it at all had anything to do with religion. Strong opposition to a religion puts you on the football field of religion, no matter what side, however undesirable that may feel.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The mindset that it was undesirable to be forced to see something of which you don't appreciate and that you couldn't provide something of yours to combat it (which is an odd concept of presenting something to oppose Christmas decorations on Christmas) that fueled the drama. Do not attempt to deny this. You're not going to score the type of people who did that any points with me. I still can't see past the haze of absurdity in attempting to battle Christmas decorations during Christmas. It's people giving power to something they fear the power of, through dramatics. While the Christians celebrate their holiday, we all walk by and smile at snowmen, while the militant atheists plot their next move. Oh, just give me a break.

Look, aside from atheist groups you also have secular Christian groups like American's United for Separation of Church and State who are a Christian group also trying to stop the encroachment of Christian monuments on public land.

Do oyu at all recognize that other religions are also involved in celebrations that time of year, including Jews, Muslims, and Wiccans?

None of that has to do with the existent or not power of symbols that can have religious connotations. This is what I was referring to; your fear that monuments that could hold religious connotations will be used to sway change in the campaign you are involving yourself in. Removing a statue of a cherub outside of my courthouse won't stop an old lady from petitioning her school to let her class label black clothing as sin, any more than placing a statue of Moses outside the city hall will stop an atheist in an 8th state to be denied entry into office.

They just aren't related. Wanting to remove a symbol is, again, just giving power to that symbol, and then hoping to use the removal of that symbol as a symbol of your own. But symbolic wins don't mean jack in politics.

They're petty.

Except you are flatly wrong. Monuments on public land both have been used to justify the idea that the US is a Christian nation, and have a Christian monument is against the Separation of Church and state. The idea is not to replace the symbol, but move it private property belonging to the people who actually worhsip it. That failing, opening it up so everyone can put up their symbols is the next best option.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

....and nobody acts on it. Show me an atheist mag that actually puts a Mohammed cartoon in its front cover.

I don't know of any off hand, but American atheists put up billboards specifically targetting Jews and muslims in New York.

And the cartoonist who founded the Draw Mohammed Day had to change her name, abandon her career, and will be living in hiding for the rest of her life from death threats. Just like the 4 Danish cartoonists from Jyllandsposten. Now show me any atheists site or mag or organization that picks up on this outrage and makes it a first priority.

....no I can't see one either. They are too busy bashing Santa Claus

Talk about barking up the wrong tree!!!!!

Alright Zaph, who's bashing Santa Claus.

As for these people, American Atheists and other Secular organizations has helped these people. They have blasted the jihadists at every given opportunity.

As it stands, if atheists groups actively oppose Islam, they get blasts as being Islamaphobic, if they don't, they get told they're to soft on it.

Regardless, Islam is not a big problem in the US, it's bigger in Britain, but here in the States the bigger problem is the Right Wing spread of Christianity.

Maybe if it at all had anything to do with religion. Strong opposition to a religion puts you on the football field of religion, no matter what side, however undesirable that may feel.

O.o Sure, whatever dude.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Monuments on public land both have been used to justify the idea that the US is a Christian nation

By who?

This was a rhetorical question.

You have failed to make me see your lgiht by repeating the same points repeatedly unfortunately.

I take my leave before I become another talking head.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By who?

This was a rhetorical question.

You have failed to make me see your lgiht by repeating the same points repeatedly unfortunately.

I take my leave before I become another talking head.

For a start.

The information written there has been the justification in the Religious right and republican party to prove the US really is a Christian country.

This line of reasoning lead to the US Motto being changed from "Out of Many, One." to the current "In God We Trust," and also lead to "Under God" being put in the pledge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For a start.

The information written there has been the justification in the Religious right and republican party to prove the US really is a Christian country.

That was my rhetorical point. The only justification of ideas was done by those who had already justified the ideas long before. In their eyes, the US is and always will really be a Christian country. And the others will disagree.

But nothing was actually changed or new, despite how many 'in God we trusts' appeared.

See ya.

Edited by _Only
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That was my rhetorical point. The only justification of ideas was done by those who had already justified the ideas long before. In their eyes, the US is and always will really be a Christian country. And you will disagree.

But nothing was actually changed or new.

See ya.

Right, so... just sit by and let these people continue on with their ways instead of trying to do something about it. Such as pointing out the violations of the constitution or pointing out where religious charities get much less over site that secular ones, or any of multitude of places where religions get preferential treatment.

Now, there are changed being made and loopholes the religious have abused in the past are being filled. Moving these monuments to their proper place is part of it.

Personally, I'm more on the side of community building for secular/non-religious/agnostic/deist/non-traditional theists/homosexuals here in the South.

Edited by ShadowSot
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Christian bubble is breaking, there will be much more whining from Christians in the next 30 years as they fade out.

Christians have been getting away with so much they cannot believe that putting up a Christian symbol promotes Christianity. They are offended that you suggest such a thing.

The removal of Christian symbols from government property is because they already broke the law and have been for some time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.