Is the following atheist tactic good sportsmanship or not?

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I've gotta say... I'd have preferred if they had gone with more positive or humourous billboards. Maybe something like this campaign from FFRF:

Atheist Billboard Removed from Church Property in Ohio - Urban Christian News

Or some sort of billboard equivalent of the "We Are Atheism" video campaign: We Are Atheism | It's OK to be an Atheist

The American Atheists billboard does seem a bit too deliberately aggressive. Like it's trying to pick a fight or something... which I think can be okay, but is better done with humour. I think this billboard perpetuates the "angry atheist" stereotype too much.

 

[Spirited]

More like rocks having a message. Unless atheists are able to have something more than 'lack of belief' while 'preaching their word.'

The Atheist argument is very valid actually. It's suggesting that social, political, scientific progress can take place by shedding off the negative aspects of religion. I absolutely can understand this perspective, I was agnostic (leaning towards Atheism) for a long, long time. When someone supposes that God doesn't exist, a lot of religious doctrines cease to make sense, and even seem hurtful to society in certain ways.

My disagreement comes from believing that God DOES exist and that human beings have a right to celebrate his existence and let it leak into all aspects of their life.

It's all understanding and perspective really. Just try to understand that, for the most part, they want to improve the world just as much as we do. Whether it's from God or not, it's fairly apparent to me that human nature desires brotherhood and mutual prosperity.

 

[sojourner]

"xy" ? Are you not allowed to write the word "Christianity"?

It's shorthand...m'kay?

Well, I can see the appearance of myth as a signal that one has strayed off the path of reason. Other than that I see no other use of it as a "tool."

I'm sure you don't, which is why you appear to subscribe to the more two-dimensional thinking of the typical "pragmatist." You seriously don't see that myth invites deeper thinking and a more holistic approach to wrapping our heads around our reality, involving not only the head but the heart? how sad...

 

[sojourner]

Maybe they simply got tired of it all and decided to fire a shot back at the Christian armada. Like taking a swing at the school bully; while stooping to his level it's still an understandable human reaction. Would you not take such a swing, or would you simply take his abuse?

Fine. Take a swing. Bullies ought to be challenged. But please make it a bona fide swing, and not a sissy-punch like this billboard.

 

[fantome profane]

The only problem I have with this is a question of ethics and morality.
Atheists rightfully complain about Christians preaching to them, trying to convert them etc.
So why are they doing the same thing? It makes no sense and is hypocritical.

Legally they're within their rights to do this. Legally so are the Christians. But two wrongs don't make a right, and reducing yourself down to the level of your attackers is really dumb. In my opinion, Atheists just started losing the high ground regarding morality with their arguments.

Yes, many atheists do complain about preaching and attempts to convert them. But why do you say they complain “rightfully”? In what way are such complaints “right”?

I have always thought such complaints are silly and show a profound lack of understanding. If someone subscribes to a typical evangelical belief system they are going to try to convince/convert people. To expect them to do otherwise is silly and naive, to demand they do otherwise is unfair and oppressive.

I am not afraid of someone trying to convert me, bring it on, I welcome it. As long as they respect the boundaries of my privacy and operate within the limits of the law. If you want to put up billboards, bus ads, tv commercials or whatever proclaiming “Jesus is Lord”, or “there is no God but Allah”, or just “there is no God” have at it. It does me no harm. I am glad there are people in this world who feel passionately enough about their beliefs to try to convince others. What a sad milktoast world it would be if it were otherwise.

 

[sojourner]

But while punching the bully might feel good at the moment, you have to be ready for when the bully punches back. And based on the outspoken Christians that attack everyone else different already.... This could get ugly.

I maintain that a bully will always back down when adequately challenged. Therefore, instead of challenging a weak, outmoded, absolutist stance with a similar stance, why not hit back with something with a little more motor on it?

 

[sojourner]

The Atheist argument is very valid actually. It's suggesting that social, political, scientific progress can take place by shedding off the negative aspects of religion. I absolutely can understand this perspective, I was agnostic (leaning towards Atheism) for a long, long time. When someone supposes that God doesn't exist, a lot of religious doctrines cease to make sense, and even seem hurtful to society in certain ways.

My disagreement comes from believing that God DOES exist and that human beings have a right to celebrate his existence and let it leak into all aspects of their life.

It's all understanding and perspective really. Just try to understand that, for the most part, they want to improve the world just as much as we do. Whether it's from God or not, it's fairly apparent to me that human nature desires brotherhood and mutual prosperity.

The atheist argument here is no more "valid" than the fundagelical/zealot approach to the "absolute truth" of religious myth.

What harms society are viewpoints that only allow certain voices to speak, and that refuse to take other perspectives into serious conversation.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I maintain that a bully will always back down when adequately challenged. Therefore, instead of challenging a weak, outmoded, absolutist stance with a similar stance, why not hit back with something with a little more motor on it?

Like these?

These Atheist Billboards in Brazil Get Right to the Point | Friendly Atheist

 

[sojourner]

Like these?

These Atheist Billboards in Brazil Get Right to the Point | Friendly Atheist

Nope. These all employ the same elitist, absolutist kinds of positions that the fundigelical ads do.

Bullies feed off the reaction. These are all reactionary. why react and feed the bullies -- risking becoming one yourself?

Perhaps something like:
"Belief is only half the game"
"Faith and reason work together to ask relevant questions"
"We respect the world-views of all people"
"There's room for everyone in these towers"

might be better.

 

[darkstar]

Nope. These all employ the same elitist, absolutist kinds of positions that the fundigelical ads do.

Bullies feed off the reaction. These are all reactionary. why react and feed the bullies -- risking becoming one yourself?

Perhaps something like:
"Belief is only half the game"
"Faith and reason work together to ask relevant questions"
"We respect the world-views of all people"
"There's room for everyone in these towers"

might be better.

Well see that's not a haymaker punch to a bully, that's deflecting and redirecting an attack much like a social interaction equivalent to Aikido. Very effective actually as it makes the attacker either stop or look like brain dead monsters on an unjustified crusade. It also would make Atheists look better to most, and likely get their message out to more people in a more accepting light.

It's odd that an Atheist psychologist hasn't done this already, as it would be the logical thing to do.

 

[fantome profane]

Nope. These all employ the same elitist, absolutist kinds of positions that the fundigelical ads do.

Bullies feed off the reaction. These are all reactionary. why react and feed the bullies -- risking becoming one yourself?

Perhaps something like:
"Belief is only half the game"
"Faith and reason work together to ask relevant questions"
"We respect the world-views of all people"
"There's room for everyone in these towers"

might be better.

I don’t think that is what they are trying to say. If these sayings reflect your beliefs then you should perhaps put up a billboard with them. But you need to understand that the people who put up these billboards do not think that believe is half the game, they do not think faith and reason go hand in hand, they don’t respect the world-view of all people. So why on earth would they say any of those things?


The question here is do you think there is a better way for them to get their message across. The question is not do you think they should send your message instead.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Nope. These all employ the same elitist, absolutist kinds of positions that the fundigelical ads do.

Hmm. I misinterpreted by what you meant by "motor". I thought you were going for "oomph".

Bullies feed off the reaction. These are all reactionary. why react and feed the bullies -- risking becoming one yourself?

Perhaps something like:
"Belief is only half the game"
"Faith and reason work together to ask relevant questions"
"We respect the world-views of all people"
"There's room for everyone in these towers"

might be better.

Personally, I find all those lacking.

I don't think that belief has to be "part of the game" at all, and I don't think that faith works to ask relevant questions.

And I'm really not sure what you mean by "towers". You're not referring to the 9-11 billboard in my link, are you?

Anyhow, I already gave an example of a positive atheist billboard:

Atheist Billboard Removed from Church Property in Ohio - Urban Christian News

 

[idav]

The sign applies to non-christians in general and is saying to boycott the christmas myth. Well I don't think it's actually against the st nick thing but definately not fond of the nativity thing.

 

[sojourner]

I don’t think that is what they are trying to say. If these sayings reflect your beliefs then you should perhaps put up a billboard with them. But you need to understand that the people who put up these billboards do not think that believe is half the game, they do not think faith and reason go hand in hand, they don’t respect the world-view of all people. So why on earth would they say any of those things?


The question here is do you think there is a better way for them to get their message across. The question is not do you think they should send your message instead.

Their "message?" I was unaware that kerygma was part and parcel of the Atheist Movement. My point is this: If atheists want to refute the absolutist claims of fundagelical Xy, they can't do it by spouting another brand of absolutism. My point is that no one group has "all the answers." "Having all the 'answers'" is what's ******* off the atheists about the fundagelicals, so why should they turn around and "have all the the 'answers,'" themselves? It doesn't make sense. If the atheists put forth an effort to open up space for conversation, if they want to push reason, then a more tolerant stance appears to me to be more ... reasonable.

 

[sojourner]

Hmm. I misinterpreted by what you meant by "motor". I thought you were going for "oomph".

I am going for "oomph." But "oomph" doesn't come packaged in the very same argument for absolutism.

Personally, I find all those lacking.

I don't think that belief has to be "part of the game" at all, and I don't think that faith works to ask relevant questions.

Of course it's part of the game. Belief is part of the human experience, after all -- even if it's not part of your experience. What both you and the fundigelicals fail to realize is that both science and faith are constructions for the reality in which we find ourselves. Both have a valid voice. Are you willing to allow those who voice faith to have a voice, or are you stuck in the 1th and 18th century with the other Moderns, who believe that only those who voice reason should be allowed to speak?

 

[sojourner]

The sign applies to non-christians in general and is saying to boycott the christmas myth. Well I don't think it's actually against the st nick thing but definately not fond of the nativity thing.

Why should the myth be boycotted? Is it really that dangerous to the fabric of society, or is it only dangerous to the kerygma of the Atheist Movement?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I am going for "oomph." But "oomph" doesn't come packaged in the very same argument for absolutism.

I don't see how they're an "argument for absolutism". Why do you think they are?

Of course it's part of the game. Belief is part of the human experience, after all -- even if it's not part of your experience.

I meant religious belief, and it *is* entirely optional.

What both you and the fundigelicals fail to realize is that both science and faith are constructions for the reality in which we find ourselves.

I can see a few ways to parse this statement, but none of them are correct. What do you mean?

Both have a valid voice. Are you willing to allow those who voice faith to have a voice, or are you stuck in the 1th and 18th century with the other Moderns, who believe that only those who voice reason should be allowed to speak?

Do you really think that these atheist groups are trying to silence the religious? If so, then I think you have a major misunderstanding of what's going on here.

IMO, there are a few principal aims:

- church-state separation
- making it easier for atheists to "come out" and participate in society
- create an environment that allows for free discussion of issues of religious ideas and claims without the protective shell and special status our culture generally gives to religion and faith

The billboard in the OP fits into the last category (maybe inelegantly, but it still does).

None of this implies that religious people shouldn't speak. It does imply that religious people shouldn't expect to expound their positions without being challenged on them, but that's not the same thing.

 

[Tristesse]

I think it's relatively tame. I'm sure many will be offended by it, but if you honestly believe jesus was born on december 25th, then maybe you should take a day to exercise some reason.

 

[sojourner]

Do you really think that these atheist groups are trying to silence the religious?

Yes I do! The billboard in the OP ridicules belief, which serves to dismiss it, which serves to silence it. When one puts a spin on religion such as is done in the Hitler poster, it does the same thing.
I'm not sure that the groups are explicitly trying to "silence religion," but that is implicitly what they're doing. And you have to admit that some groups do actively try to silence religion.

church-state separation

Some groups use that "aim" as a vehicle for "freedom from religion," which is not a constitutional tenet.

making it easier for atheists to "come out" and participate in society

There's enough room for everyone without throwing elbows.

create an environment that allows for free discussion of issues of religious ideas and claims without the protective shell and special status our culture generally gives to religion and faith

I agree wholeheartedly. Religion shouldn't be above criticism. But you don't do that by dismissing the mythic claims out of hand (which is what the billboard does).

None of this implies that religious people shouldn't speak.

Yes it does. That's exactly what it implies. That may not be what the explicit goal is, but the actions do imply, "You're stupid -- shut up!"

In considering the billboard in the OP: Perhaps a better, more conversational way of refutation might be: This myth is beautiful for some -- but not for all. Here's what we find special about the season: ---------

 

[sojourner]

I think it's relatively tame. I'm sure many will be offended by it, but if you honestly believe jesus was born on december 25th, then maybe you should take a day to exercise some reason.

I don't believe that Jesus was born on Dec. 25, but the myth still has a lot of meaning for me, and I don't see why it should be dismissed out of hand.