http://www.reasonutah.org/Apparently, billboards such as these are popping up all over the nation. And those who do believe in god are doing what believers do best, the most un-Christian like thing possible: Death threats.
What are believers so threatened by? It is okay for them to put up their billboards threatening the whole world that they are going to hell if you believe in the wrong Jesus or go to the wrong church. They are free to publically express their opinions. Why can't atheists do the same without our lives being threatened? Atheists don't threaten believers when they post their crap, even though some of their billboards can be outright offensive.
"We want everybody to know we’re coming together as people who are atheists, agnostic or freethinking and open to discussing ideas," said Elaine Ball, director of the Utah Coalition of Reason. "We’re not trying to convert or de-convert people. We hope people will discover that we [atheists] are a legitimate part of the community."
The billboard was supposed to only be up until September 19, but it was there when I drove past it just a few days ago. It is located on the north side of westbound highway 201 just past the 5600 west exit.
"The point of our ongoing nationwide awareness campaign is to reach out to the millions of atheists and agnostics living in the United States," explained Fred Edwords, national director of the United Coalition of Reason. "Such non-theists sometimes don't realize there's a community for them because they're inundated with religious messages at every turn. We hope our effort will serve as a beacon and let them know they aren't alone. Being visible is important to us, because atheists and agnostics in our society often don't know many people of like mind. Furthermore, if traditionally religious people can be open about their views, why shouldn't we be open about ours?"
Great question! If religious people can shout their message in public, all over TV, and on everyones front porch, why can't we have one stinking billboard?
Only religion can make good people do horrible things...
22 comments:
It amazes me that the vast majority of christians will see that and get angry and upset, feeling threatened! It's pathetically sad. Especially considering it's usually the christians that have caused the most harm over the centuries...
Christianity is the most violent religion in history!
When I see such threats, I wonder exactly WHO believes in the commandment, "Thou shalt not kill, nor do anything like it."
It's funny that I see this right after seeing that disgusting new Rick Perry ad.
The hypocrisy is unbelievable. Oh well.
What a fantastic blog. As a recovering Catholic, I can only say that there must be vast unlimited numbers of us, who do not want to emerge from our societally mandated closets, and shout from the mountain tops, that organized religion, is for thems what wants it, but leave the rest of us out of your idea of what spirituality should look like. I stumbled on this blog accidentally, but shall return.
Thanks to all of you for your comments. Welcome, Mark. Come back and comment anytime!
To follow up, I was driving on I-15 today and passed a billboard that said: "Heaven or Hell... where are you going?"
Why is it that Christians can post their beliefs of imaginary far away places but atheists can't try to promote practical thinking?
Religion is dangerous.
Those who came up with the name "United Coalition of Reason" need to realize that those who have a different religious faith than theirs also rely on reason.
As for
"Christianity is the most violent religion in history!"
we need to remember that the Atheist regimes of the 20th century caused more violence and mass slaughter than the Christians, Muslims, or others.
If you are going to come here to my blog and leave comments, make sure you do some research before making such bold claims.
If atheists have been the cause of the most bloodshed during the 20th century, can you prove it? Can you give me a reference?
If not, stop spouting your wishful thinking.
Click here to read an interesting discussion on Yahoo Answers.
Click here for an interesting article by Brian Dunning where he discusses the topic and concludes that the argument is basically "childish".
Those "atheist regimes," if they can even be called that, were not basing their genocides off of a lack of religious belief. Even if they were atheist (they weren't; both Hitler and Stalin received blessings from, and remained in good standing with, the Catholic Church and Eastern Orthodox Church, respectively), their genocides and motives were not based off of a lack of religious belief/contempt for it. You can't make an association where there is none. I don't call Christianity a violent and terrible religion because many terrible leaders happened to be Christian; I call it a violent and terrible religion because many of those Christian leaders used religious beliefs to justify or even come up with their atrocities (in fact, Hitler did the former). You can't do these with atheism. No one has, and if anyone ever tried to, they would immediately be dismissed as crazy. But when Hitler used Christianity to justify his atrocities, millions of Christian Germans ate it up.
You must remember that, at its core, atheism is the lack of belief. What you're saying is like saying that because a horrible serial killer happened to not eat apples, people who don't eat apples are inherently bad people.
There, Mormon411, I did the work for you.
"If you are going to come here to my blog and leave comments, make sure you do some research before making such bold claims."
It has hardly a 'bold claim' that Stalin and Mao were the worst killers in history, and that they were both Atheist. This is actually non-controversial history, accept by all but a few hardcore Stalinists and Maoists.
I can come up with tons of links about this. But if I do, are you prepared to come up with links that Stalin and Mao were not the worst, and were not Atheists?
As for the second link, it starts off on a false premise with the "or" division. Strong Atheism is not different from religion. It is just another one.
---------------
Ionic said: Those "atheist regimes," if they can even be called that, were not basing their genocides off of a lack of religious belief."
Agreed. The strong Atheism of these regimes was an assertion of faith, not a lack of religious belief.
Even if they were atheist (they weren't; both Hitler and Stalin received blessings from..."
Stalin was indeed a devout Atheist. He was raised Georgian Orthodox but converted. Hitler wasn;t. But I wasn't mentioning Hitler. I was mentioning the two mass murderers with an even worse record than his.
"their genocides and motives were not based off of a lack of religious belief/contempt for it."
Again, their genocides included a strongly asserted religious faith, that of the strong Atheist.
This got very specific in such instances as Mao's invasion and occupation of Tibet, which targetted the Buddhist clergy there for elimination. Hundreds of thousands died.
"You can't make an association where there is none."
I agree. Therefore, I only describe associations where they exist.
"You must remember that, at its core, atheism is the lack of belief."
This is simply not true for the strong Atheist, who puts forth a religious assertion of belief; a faith that there is no God.
Your statement is true for the weak atheist or agnastic. They truly lack belief.
"What you're saying is like saying that because a horrible serial killer happened to not eat apples, people who don't eat apples are inherently bad people."
The strong Atheist is one who still eats apples, and like killer theists, hates those who eat other kinds.
There, Mormon411, I did the work for you.
Click here to read an interesting discussion on Yahoo Answers.
Click here for an interesting article by Brian Dunning where he discusses the topic and concludes that the argument is basically "childish".
It is easy to argue any point of view by looking at the other side and finding people who are "bad" in that belief system and then saying, "See, that certain belief system produces bad people, so therefore it is bad."
There are good and bad Christians and there are good and bad atheists. So this argument is weak and both sides rely on it too heavily.
However, there has never been a war fought where the leaders claimed that god didn't command them to do it. However, there have been many wars where the opposite is true.
Therefore, I must side with IonicPaul in that just because an atheist military leader might have killed people, that doesn't connect killing to atheism. But on the other hand, many wars have been fought and people killed in the name of god, so there is a direct link to religion and killing.
Atheist "regimes" don't exist. Just because the leader might be atheist, doesn't mean that atheism is their agenda. However, many wars have been fought to further the cause of Christianity.
The idea that atheist regimes have killed more people than all religious wars combined is nothing but wishful thinking on the part of religious jealots and it is used because, on the surface, it appears to be a good argument but when you disect it, it is very weak.
Indeed.
(and of course I was being tongue in cheek when I said I did all the work for you; you restated many things in better ways than I did, and mentioned things I hadn't thought of)
IonicPaul, no worries buddy. I appreciate your input and support!
Our friend dmarks seems to have vanished.
Hopefully he comes back. If he doesn't come back that means believing is more important to him than confronting the truth with logical backup.
Who is this God?
What do you mean, John Peter?
Mormon411 said...
"Dude, you love to quote scripture but that is NEVER going to convince an atheist that your god is real. Why? Because trying to prove god with the Bible is like trying to prove Superman with a comic book. The Bible was written thousands of years ago by the same people who believed the earth was flat!"
If that is so, can you tell me about this God you deny without quoting the Bible?
http://mormon411.blogspot.com/2011/12/godless-billboard-in-utah.html
Sure I can tell you about him. He is jealous, vengeful, angry, insecure, hypocritical, and imaginary. He likes to blackmail you into conformity and created a special place where you will fry forever if you dare deny him.
Does this sound like a loving god to you? It seems to me that god was invented in order to scare the living hell out of people so they would conform and obey without question.
And it seems to be working very well!
You shouldn't need an ancient book to know about "god". If god was real, why doesn't he just come down and make himself known? Why has no one ever seen him?
It's because he is imaginary!
And yes, quoting scripture will never convince an atheist to believe. There is no evidence or good reason why they should. In fact, there is evidence of why they shouldn't and I just shared on such reason in my most recent post, Religion is Bad for Society.
Mormon411 wrote "Sure I can tell you about him. He is jealous, vengeful, angry, insecure, hypocritical, and imaginary. He likes to blackmail you into conformity and created a special place where you will fry forever if you dare deny him."
And where is your proof or source?
Mormon411 wrote "You shouldn't need an ancient book to know about "god". If god was real, why doesn't he just come down and make himself known? Why has no one ever seen him?"
For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe. (1 Corinthians 1:21)
For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom: (1 Corinthians 1:22)
But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness; (1 Corinthians 1:23)
But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God. (1 Corinthians 1:24)
My proof? Where is your proof that the flying spaghetti monster isn't real? Unfortunately for you, the burden of proof is on you since you are the one who claims he's real. I don't have to prove that something doesn't exist. It just doesn't work that way.
As for the second comment, well, of course the Bible is going to say stuff like that. Only religion would have people not only not seeking proof, but feeling guilty if they do.
I prefer to base my thinking and beliefs on reality. If you want to believe in myths and magic, you go right on ahead.
Mormon411 said...
Unfortunately for you, the burden of proof is on you since you are the one who claims he's real.
You are wrong! The burden of proof is on God Almighty. It is not on you or me.
http://the-falling-away.blogspot.com/2011/12/god-is-imaginary.html
Post a Comment