American Atheists at it again?

[InformedIgnorance]

We talked about this comparison, and you ended up with no real argument there.

To be exact your rebuttal was 'to compare it with racism makes every sort of completely crazy problems.' without any sort of explanation, forgive me if I find your argument less than compelling.

The word in itself doesnt at all. I love greek myths, I never said so in a pejorative way.

Me too; however, I also realise that by calling them myths we generally hold them to be absurd fantasies and would consider someone who holds them as literal truth to be foolish.

What is "offensive" to them is that anyone dare say that what they have chosen to believe to be true is not true. So it is not the word itself at fault, but the fact that they want that anyone who doesn´t share their beliefs shut it. That is unacceptable.

Oh I agree that there are many among them that are indeed like that, I also suggested right from my very first post that the easiest way to deal with this is to ensure that your message is as inoffensive as possible, because those whiners will continue to complain and in doing so make themselves seem unreasonable, undermining their credibility.

On the other hand, by using terms that carry less negative connotations you are more likely to be able to have congenial dialogue with moderates.

And yes, they have 1000% right to say anything is an absurdity in a billboard.
I am sorry, but they do. If they can´t stand to see it, the more they need to, because it is far more likely that their "faith" is based on denial.

Personally I agree that your first amendment gives you such a right; never said it didnt'! ONCE AGAIN, merely explaining why they are complaining.

U did understand what I said you just said it

Lol, figured as much - which is why I said that was what I was assuming that you meant

You cannot insult a person´s belief.

B.S. see that, I just insulted your belief that you cannot insult a person's belief.

The belief has no conscience nor should have any rights.

Which assumes that it does not exist, theists obviously do not believe that, they believe God DOES exist, it has conscience and has rights.

If the ad said "People who believe in this myths are stupid" then it would be different. That´s not what the ad says though.

I agree that such a message would be more offensive; once again, personally I do not find this message offensive (I AM NOT A THEIST) however the language used carries strong negative connotations about the beliefs, hence people who hold those beliefs may find the message offensive.

 

[waitasec]

Those who find it offensive are at fault. The billboard is not offending anyone and ideas don´t have feelings, so saying things like "It offends my religion" is senseless. It offends THE PERSON that has the religion because such person dosnt want to hear such religion questioned. Well, they may look the other way.

The same argument could be made of racial comments.

only if you're desperate...

 

[InformedIgnorance]

Or if you are capable of understanding that religion and race are both topics that people hold to be deeply personal, where disparaging remarks about them are often found to be deeply offensive. If 'religion' cannot be offended because it doesn't have feelings, I am sorry to be the one to tell you this then 'race' which also lacks feelings, cannot be offended; hence the same argument could be made of racial comments.

Unless you are oblivious.

 

[Me Myself]

To be exact your rebuttal was 'to compare it with racism makes every sort of completely crazy problems.' without any sort of explanation, forgive me if I find your argument less than compelling.

Actually, my argument was before and after that if I recall correctly. First thing I did was follow your logic to it´s logical conclusions. They weren´t pretty :areyoucra

Me too; however, I also realise that by calling them myths we generally hold them to be absurd fantasies and would consider someone who holds them as literal truth to be foolish.

So what? a lot of people think repoublicans are foolish or that democrats are foolish or that x or y are foolish. That doesn´t make x or y a pejorative. I never thought of them as "foolish".

But I must say that when I heard people even question evolution in North America I couldn´t even believe it. I´ll call Inteligent Design" (as an "alternative" to evolution) a myth any day of the week, and if anyone feels offended, well that´s their problem, they really do need to put their feet at the Earth, and if I am wrong about evolution (that I am not ) it is my problem, and not much of a big deal if I make a billboard about it saying how mythfull ID is.

You say words like "predatory" "sexual predator" "oportunist" as if they had no pejorative meaning when I posted how that is of the first things you see in asearch that is so superficial I didn´t even had to clck the links after putting the words on google. Now if you do the same with "Myth" you´ll struggle to find the "pejorative" in it.

That´s because it is not. "Myth" is just what you call a believe that was used in ancient times to explain things (though other concepts exist, but they revolve around this). If you want to say people who believe in them are stupid, well, you may. Not that the word "myth" will start meaning that though.

On the other hand, by using terms that carry less negative connotations you are more likely to be able to have congenial dialogue with moderates.

And that´s why I said it is not immoral or even rude, just ineffective. That doesn´t make it "predatory" though. (least not according to wiki, given that "predatory" must ignore MORALS)

B.S. see that, I just insulted your belief that you cannot insult a person's belief.

You did? I haven´t heard my belief complain yet Maybe she is just shy?

If you believe beliefs have feelings you are far more animist than me

Which assumes that it does not exist, theists obviously do not believe that, they believe God DOES exist, it has conscience and has rights.

I believe your chair has rights. Stop sitting on it! you are insulting ME! YOU ARE BEING RUDE!

I agree that such a message would be more offensive; once again, personally I do not find this message offensive (I AM NOT A THEIST) however the language used carries strong negative connotations about the beliefs, hence people who hold those beliefs may find the message offensive.

I may find you sitting in your chair offensive as well . That doesn´t mean you are being rude by sitting in your chair (still there aren´t ya! :cover: ) or for not offering me an apology about it.

Matter of fact, I know have problems with all the billboards with people sitting on chairs. They are infringing my religious rights! I will go complain now! how can they be this rude and blasphemous!

 

[waitasec]

Or if you are capable of understanding that religion and race are both topics that people hold to be deeply personal,

what you fail to understand is that the person is their race..they are not the religion...and to assume a religion is capable of being offended is childish at best...
this line of thinking perpetuates :ignore:
see how intelligent that looks...?

 

[Me Myself]

Or if you are capable of understanding that religion and race are both topics that people hold to be deeply personal, where disparaging remarks about them are often found to be deeply offensive. If 'religion' cannot be offended because it doesn't have feelings, I am sorry to be the one to tell you this then 'race' which also lacks feelings, cannot be offended; hence the same argument could be made of racial comments.

Unless you are oblivious.

Okay then, I´ll repat my argument:

Let´s tear down all churches, because they are offensive to churches who hold different beliefs.

I don´t believe that I will go to hell if I don´t worship Jesus. We must destroy every religious symbol of him now.

Churches are an infringement of human rights! they are promoting their "color"ism beliefs! Just by saying what they believe they are completely killing each other out!

I was born a catholic, I remember when I was born I started puking holy spirit and my first words where the RCC crede!

Dude, I was raised catholic. I´ve changed. It has never been about race.

 

[waitasec]

Okay then, I´ll repat my argument:

Let´s tear down all churches, because they are offensive to churches who hold different beliefs.

excellent point...

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

It targets those that currently call themselves theists in an attempt to find those amongst them that are having difficulty with their faith... some would call that predatory

If a domestic abuse victim was still with her abuser and having difficulty with the idea of leaving her marriage, would you say that it was predatory to encourage her to leave?

In some of these insular religious communities, I think that's a pretty good analogy for what's at stake. It may not be a matter of physical abuse, but it is often one of the person's psychological and emotional well-being.

 

[Rakhel]

If a domestic abuse victim was still with her abuser and having difficulty with the idea of leaving her marriage, would you say that it was predatory to encourage her to leave?

In some of these insular religious communities, I think that's a pretty good analogy for what's at stake. It may not be a matter of physical abuse, but it is often one of the person's psychological and emotional well-being.

The problem with that is that the abused never see themselves as being abused where they can and sometimes do see the intervention as abuse.
You cannot force a person to leave, nor can you force them to see what you think they should see.

 

[gnomon]

AmericanAtheists say it's one thing. Joseph Campbell says it it's another.

 

[InformedIgnorance]

Actually, my argument was before and after that if I recall correctly. First thing I did was follow your logic to it´s logical conclusions. They weren´t pretty

The only posts I could find (included waitasec's since it was part of the convo) since my comment that related to racism where (please provide me a link if there are others that I have somehow missed):

http://www.religiousforums.com/foru...40-american-atheists-again-3.html#post2833981
http://www.religiousforums.com/foru...40-american-atheists-again-3.html#post2834006

Please point out those logical conclusions if you would be so kind, the closest you come is your comment that repent today and be saved should be extremely offensive, which I agree - it is offensive, how is that a "completely crazy problem"

So what? a lot of people think repoublicans are foolish or that democrats are foolish or that x or y are foolish. That doesn´t make x or y a pejorative. I never thought of them as "foolish".

And if being a republican or democrat was as emotionally involved as being a theist or an atheist, well I think you would find that there would be significantly more offence taken by calling republican ideals foolish

But I must say that when I heard people even question evolution in North America I couldn´t even believe it. I´ll call Inteligent Design" (as an "alternative" to evolution) a myth any day of the week, and if anyone feels offended, well that´s their problem, they really do need to put their feet at the Earth, and if I am wrong about evolution (that I am not ) it is my problem, and not much of a big deal if I make a billboard about it saying how mythfull ID is.

ID a myth? I agree, however I would not be so crass as to call the entire religion a myth, nor would I be so disrespectful as to write it on a billboard. Sure, your 1st amendment might allow you to do so, however as I stated right from the very start.... all I am doing is explaining why some people may find it offensive.

You say words like "predatory" "sexual predator" "oportunist" as if they had no pejorative meaning when I posted how that is of the first things you see in asearch that is so superficial I didn´t even had to clck the links after putting the words on google. Now if you do the same with "Myth" you´ll struggle to find the "pejorative" in it.

I said them fully knowing that they carry extremely negative connotations, because I intended to convey those connotations.

That´s because it is not. "Myth" is just what you call a believe that was used in ancient times to explain things (though other concepts exist, but they revolve around this). If you want to say people who believe in them are stupid, well, you may. Not that the word "myth" will start meaning that though.

Really now, are you trying to tell me that you think Myth carries no negative connotations when applied to someone's ideology and belief system? Surely you could not really think that everyone around you is that stupid...

And that´s why I said it is not immoral or even rude, just ineffective. That doesn´t make it "predatory" though. (least not according to wiki, given that "predatory" must ignore MORALS)

The fact that you say it is not rude, heck even the fact that you do not find it rude, does not mean that others do not - to them it is rude. And yes it would be predatory from the perspective of many people of faith, because from most religious perspectives, swaying a believer of that particular religion is considered immoral (for example converting a christian to islam may be seen by many christians to be immoral, since it is a rejection of the word of god as they believe it has been revealed).

You did? I haven´t heard my belief complain yet Maybe she is just shy?

If you believe beliefs have feelings you are far more animist than me

I don't; however I do believe that people have feelings towards their beliefs, such that when they perceive those beliefs to have been derided they are likely to feel offended.

I believe your chair has rights. Stop sitting on it! you are insulting ME! YOU ARE BEING RUDE!

I may find you sitting in your chair offensive as well . That doesn´t mean you are being rude by sitting in your chair (still there aren´t ya! ) or for not offering me an apology about it.

Lol, Yes I am still sitting down; however were you actually here, and if you actually strongly felt that way about chairs, I may well stand up - because it is polite. I would certainly not go out of my way to call chairs derogatory terms such as 'butt holders' or imply that belief that chairs have consciousness is somehow foolish.

Matter of fact, I know have problems with all the billboards with people sitting on chairs. They are infringing my religious rights! I will go complain now! how can they be this rude and blasphemous!

Perhaps you should complain if you feel that strongly about it; it is certainly your right to do so.

what you fail to understand is that the person is their race..they are not the religion...and to assume a religion is capable of being offended is childish at best...
this line of thinking perpetuates
see how intelligent that looks...?

It is 'childish' to suggest that a person is their race (what is a race?) yet to claim that they are not their religion.

A religion itself cannot be offended, but religious beliefs can be derided, thus offending the people who are that religion - By the same token a race itself cannot be offended, but racial membership and characteristics can be derided, thus offending the people who are that 'race'. To claim otherwise is foolish.

Okay then, I´ll repat my argument:

Let´s tear down all churches, because they are offensive to churches who hold different beliefs.

I don´t believe that I will go to hell if I don´t worship Jesus. We must destroy every religious symbol of him now.

Churches are an infringement of human rights! they are promoting their "color"ism beliefs! Just by saying what they believe they are completely killing each other out!

Lol, if only we could get away with it.... *Cough* I mean burn heathen! By the same token I hope you intend to tear down all lecture halls (etc) that atheists intend to use for conferences.

But let me make something clear because I am not sure that I have managed to convey it despite saying it several times:

Personally I do not find the billboard offensive, I am not a theist, nor an atheist, I am not emotionally invested in the issue one way or another. My purpose in taking part in the discussion was to explain one of the reasons why some people may find such a billboard offensive - that is all; that you disagree that religious beliefs are a grounds by which some people may feel offended by the message portrayed is entirely up to you; however it IS a potential source of offence primarily because of the emotional involvement of the people who hold such beliefs. You might find such offence to be misguided, but to be unable to predict, identify and understand the reasons that they may feel offended is an entirely different issue.

If a domestic abuse victim was still with her abuser and having difficulty with the idea of leaving her marriage, would you say that it was predatory to encourage her to leave?

Are you suggesting a parallel between religious belief and domestic abuse?

In some of these insular religious communities, I think that's a pretty good analogy for what's at stake. It may not be a matter of physical abuse, but it is often one of the person's psychological and emotional well-being.

Hooooo, thats a pretty strong comment; I agree that on occasion this may well be the case though (suicide cults for example). Still, to parallel the two is rather intolerant; given it equates religion in general (remember that this was an open billboard and available in multiple languages) to an abusive partner, seems hardly reasonable to suggest that religion in general (as opposed to in specific cases) is some destructive force in people's lives.

 

[gnomon]

Personally, I'm appalled. The billboard message isn't complete without including the phrase "C'mon! I mean, come on!"

 

[HiddenDjinn]

I want to thank those ******** for ******* off the Satmar, who are centered one neighborhood west of me. I'll more personally thank them if the Satmar riot and disrupt my commute. Such an attack on their community won't go ignored.

 

[waitasec]

It is 'childish' to suggest that a person is their race (what is a race?) yet to claim that they are not their religion.

so then segregation was just a figment of our collective imagination
are you that desperate, really?
now that is offensive :slap:

A religion itself cannot be offended, but religious beliefs can be derided,

is religious belief that fragile that it has to be handled with kid gloves...?
then it's just a waste of time, just sayin

thus offending the people who are that religion -

nothing happens when ones religion is offended... unless of course there is something to be afraid of... what i wonder

By the same token a race itself cannot be offended,

well yeah...

but racial membership and characteristics can be derided, thus offending the people who are that 'race'. To claim otherwise is foolish.

which isn't the same as someone who chooses to believe in a religion...
i didn't choose to be cuban...now did i?

 

[InformedIgnorance]

so then segregation was just a figment of our collective imagination
are you that desperate, really?
now that is offensive

I am saying both are x.x

is religious belief that fragile that it has to be handled with kid gloves...?
then it's just a waste of time, just sayin

To you, but not to someone who holds that belief.

nothing happens when ones religion is offended... unless of course there is something to be afraid of... what i wonder

Nothing other than people being offended I agree

which isn't the same as someone who chooses to believe in a religion...
i didn't choose to be cuban...now did i?

Lol, see my comment about sexuality on that XD (how many religious personalities have claimed sexuality is a choice)

For the same reason that many homosexual people say that their sexuality is not a choice, it is who they are; many religious people also consider their faith a part of themselves, no different (perhaps even more integral) than their own skin.

 

[waitasec]

I am saying both are x.x

i disagree.

To you, but not to someone who holds that belief.

then that belief is not worth it...
personally i want my beliefs challenged that way i know
where i stand...

Nothing other than people being offended I agree

then no harm done...i suppose

Lol, see my comment about sexuality on that XD (how many religious personalities have claimed sexuality is a choice)

For the same reason that many homosexual people say that their sexuality is not a choice, it is who they are; many religious people also consider their faith a part of themselves, no different (perhaps even more integral) than their own skin.

nonetheless everyone is sexual in nature....
as not everyone is religious in nature.

 

[InformedIgnorance]

i disagree.

I know, though I disagree with the reasoning you have given for disagreeing, I do understand.

then that belief is not worth it...
personally i want my beliefs challenged that way i know
where i stand...

Once again that is true for you; not necessarily true for others - which is one reason why such comments may cause offence to some people, that is all I was saying.

then no harm done...i suppose

Harm is subjective, but I agree; all I am saying is that their objection to such a comment is understandable (in that you can understand the reasons why they may feel offence given that they have a high degree of emotional attachment to the subject which is being referred to with terms that have negative connotations - even if those connotations were not intended) even if you do not agree with it.

nonetheless everyone is sexual in nature....
as not everyone is religious in nature.

Right, but what would happen if people who believed sexuality was a choice put out billboards targeting homosexuals saying "You know it's a mistake, and you have a choice", the LBG community would likely be offended, and the cause is once again understandable even if you do not agree with it.

 

[Me Myself]

Let´s put it this way:

If they find it offending, I find offending that they find it offending.

So if the billboard is immoral, then they are too for being offended.

 

[InformedIgnorance]

Well feel free to complain about them complaining. After all according to the 1st amendment (though this is curtailed to an extent at times) you have the right to make those billboards, they have the right to complain about them, you have the right to complain about their complaints, they have the right to complain about your complaints about their complaints etc...

But at least attempt to understand where there complaints are coming from; otherwise (this is not directed at the people in this thread but more to the people that come up with such billboards) it merely seems ignorant and/or callous, which does not help your cause.

 

[cablescavenger]

Who said they didn't have a purpose? They have the same purpose as the atheist billboards (at least, I think so). Neither one is very effective for it's intended purpose, though. I just said that money wasn't the motivator, most likely.

It might just be the way I have interpreted your statement, my apologies if I have taken them out of context.

You said that if the Church wasn't listed my point was moot. I haven't seen the billboards so I assumed you were saying to me that the churches did not list/advertise themselves on the billboard and by implication that the advert was generic and not appealing to anyone.