Questioning God is Apparently Hate Speech

November 30, 2008 By Guest Contributor 55 Comments

Members of the Colorado Coalition of Reason (COCORE) recently paid to put up 11 atheist billboards, a variant of a common billboard being put up by local groups around the country:

Two of those billboards will not be going up, though, because Christians complained to the media company owning the billboard space, Next Media, which then said no to carrying the atheists’ message.

The obvious question: Who cares what the Christians think in this case? The billboards are not about them. They’re not even mentioning, much less attacking, their beliefs.

As one blogger implies, how can the atheist billboard be considered offensive when the following type of billboard can be found all over the place without problems?

Yet, the Christians persist. Already, there have been threats from them:

The hate mail and nasty, threatening phone messages began almost immediately.

Much of it has been directed at Joel Guttormson, who mostly has been serving as a spokesman for COCORE, as they call it.

Twenty-two and a Metro State junior majoring in theoretical mathematics, Guttormson also is president of the Metro State Atheists, one of the 11 groups that make up COCORE.

“It’s been kind of wild, kind of outrageous,” he says of days since the billboards went up.

“It has been mostly Christians who’ve been calling and e-mailing,” Joel Guttormson said, “which is strange since the message is not directed at Christians or anyone from any religion.

“You know, if you see an ad for migraine medicine and you don’t have a migraine, why would you care?”

Almost all of the feedback, he said, has been from people who say the billboards denigrate Christians. He says he still has no idea how that is possible.

…

“Have you seen the billboard? Tell me where any of them mentions evil or hate. Why is everyone so mad?”

So what kinds of Christians would get upset at the mere questioning of God’s existence?

This kind:

John Matson, of Denver, was so mad after seeing the Santa Fe Drive sign that he dashed off an angry letter to the billboard’s owner.

“It is a despicable act to allow that sign,” the 60-year-old man said in an interview, “and for just a few pieces of silver.”

He went on COCORE’s Web site, and it made him even angrier, John Matson said. It is trying to gather, he said, “a constituency of what I call mob rule.”

“I know they’re atheists, and my opinion is they want others to believe the same thing. The billboard misrepresents their purpose,” he said. “Their agenda is wolf-in-sheep’s clothing political. Why don’t they just say it.”

“They want others to believe the same thing?” Yes, and it’s a good thing Christians have never wanted that…

(Hell, anyone with an opinion wants others to believe the same thing. That’s not a bad thing.)

I wonder how upset Matson would be if the first word was removed from the billboard… (I imagine he’d be ok with that).

The problem is not that someone disagrees — that’s to be expected. It’s that people like Matson are trying to stifle speech.

Guttormson adds that some Christians have had the right perspective on this: they may disagree but they defend the rights of the atheists.

It’d be nice if the two camps of Christians would talk to one-another.

Filed Under: General 55 Comments
  • http://www.areopagus.us Derick Dickens

    We all have groups and people in our midst who go outside the bounds of decency to oppose issues of conviction. Christianity is not alone.

    Yet, this article’s headline seems to point out that the signs were opposed because this is considered “hate speech”. This does not seem to help keep cooler heads in the midst of a disagreement.

    Yes, if there is a message that one disagrees with, you can certainly petition the owner of the advertising space to take it down. That is appropriate and has been used on both sides of this debate through the years.

    We should disagree on issues and voice that opinion, but we should be quick to also have a friendly conversation in respect and dignity.

  • http://www.sheeptoshawl.com writerdd

    Two of those billboards will not be going up, though, because Christians complained to the media company owning the billboard space, Next Media, which then said no to carrying the atheists’ message.

    Although I am a strong supporter (cough) of free speech, stuff like this makes me wonder if we atheists should start complaining about Christian billboards and signs and try to get them taken down just to show them what it feels like. I also often feel the urge to call my cable company and complain about offensive religious programming every time I hear about some Christian complaining about programs that they find offensive when they could and should just change the channel and shut the frak up.

  • http://www.sheeptoshawl.com writerdd

    BTW, I love that billboard message and I think it’s great because it does not put down believers, but merely offers a positive message to those unbelievers who read it.

  • http://nautblog.blogspot.com Sean the Blogonaut

    I wonder if this is left over sentiment from the Godless communist labels arrising out of cold war politics.

  • http://blog.chungyc.org/ Yoo

    Odd how some people’s response to what they think is hate speech (but isn’t) is to make actual hate speech …

  • Brooks

    Am I the only one who thinks of Jesus porn at reading the Jesusuncensored.com link?

  • http://gaytheistagenda.lavenderliberal.com/ Buffy

    They say all manner of things (gays should burn in hell, atheists are immoral scum, etc.) and it’s not hate speech. They’re just expressing their “deeply held religious beliefs” as protected under the 1st Amendment.

    But we merely mention the fact that some people don’t believe in god and suddenly we’re engaging in hate speech. Against them.

    Can you say “projection”? I knew you could.

  • http://www.sheeptoshawl.com writerdd

    The thing is, these complainers are in the minority among Christians, but for some reason a) the media gives them lots of air time and b) political groups, corporations, and other organizations frequently cave in to their demands. How can that kind of bias towards stupidity be stopped? (That is not a rhetorical question.)

  • Epistaxis

    CoCoRe chose just about the least offensive slogan possible (and kudos to them for doing so!), but this still seems to vindicate those who probably suggested much less polite options. At least this way, the few vocal wackos look particularly silly. They seem to be halfway to declaring atheism “hate thought.”

  • http://museinvivo.blogspot.com Muse142

    Geez oh man. It’s hard to imagine anyone so isolated from real hate speech that they can claim that any differing opinion is hateful.

    Oh and also, TAG YOU’RE IT. If you’re interested.

  • http://skepticsplay.blogspot.com/ miller

    In my recent comments criticizing the D.C. bus ad, (“Why believe in a God? Just be good for goodness’ sake”) I said I liked this COCORE billboard much better. But sometimes, we ask why we should even bother trying to be nice when there’ll be controversy either way.

    But just look at the negative reactions to this billboard. They don’t have a leg to stand on! Whereas with the D.C. bus ad, I could at least understand why people would mistake it as confrontational.

  • Stephen P

    Although I am a strong supporter (cough) of free speech, stuff like this makes me wonder if we atheists should start complaining about Christian billboards and signs and try to get them taken down just to show them what it feels like.

    I’ve wondered about that as well; it does lead one into an awkward contradiction. Given however the ludicrously one-sided situation in the US at present, I think one could defend such an action. Particularly so if one complains only about religious billboards with a negative message: e.g. the ones about fearing god, or which imply that anyone who doesn’t believe in god can’t be happy.

  • Lauren

    Christians, you are mad to say no to these signs!!

    “So… what do you think of that sign? Do you believe in God?”

    Perfect opening!!

    Go the signs!!

  • http://deeplyblasphemous.blogspot.com Chris Bradley

    Although I am a strong supporter (cough) of free speech, stuff like this makes me wonder if we atheists should start complaining about Christian billboards and signs and try to get them taken down just to show them what it feels like.

    I’ve wondered the same – if we should use their tactics. Not just in this, but . . . even more aggressively. Y’know. Do stuff like stand outside of churches and look for the people coming out alone and looking confused or sad or whatever and trying to get them to see things the atheist way. Stuff like atheists going from door to door saying, “Are you dissatisfied with your religion? Have you considered that’s because god doesn’t exist?”

    So far, I have hesitated to really answer the question of whether atheists should adopt the techniques of religions because, well, I don’t want to be like them. I believe that one of the problems with religion transcends merely religion – it’s the habits that religion creates. Like, how unquestioning obedience to authority in church helps tyrants create unquestioning obedience in the state. So I hesitate to turn the tools of Christians and other religious groups on them because I am fearful that’s repeating the errors of religion with an atheist gloss.

    So, for the time being I take the, uh . . . okay, given how aggressive I am, I can’t say the high ground with a straight face. But I have so far chosen not to try to adapt what I feel to be the very often manipulative techniques of religion to religions and religious people. I feel “our way” – that of reason and the truth – is better. For what it’s worth, it’s also so overwhelmingly powerful that, in the end, there is simply no real fight between atheism and religion. I believe our victory to be a foregone conclusion because there’s nothing that religion does that can’t be done better secularly – nothing. So, since we’ve already got this overwhelmingly powerful tool on our side, the choice is, for me, made easier.

    Let them rant and rave. It’s the thrashing of a dying beast.

  • http://deeplyblasphemous.blogspot.com Chris Bradley

    The thing is, these complainers are in the minority among Christians, but for some reason a) the media gives them lots of air time and b) political groups, corporations, and other organizations frequently cave in to their demands. How can that kind of bias towards stupidity be stopped? (That is not a rhetorical question.)

    After long and deep consideration, and with only a little humor, I’ve actually come to the conclusion that fundamentalist religion is the most mainstream form of religion in America. While most Christians don’t actually engage in that kinna stuff, on some level most of them sanction it. They are terrified of us and they’re glad someone is “standing up to us”. Perhaps they feel that the rhetoric is too much, or disapprove of the specific language (such as the vulgarity) but the idea behind the inflammatory rhetoric and vulgarity – that atheists, gays, non-Christians, feminists, liberals, socialists, etc., need to be stopped now – is something they can get behind.

    I believe this retreat into fundamentalism is really because liberal religion takes a really wimpy position on things. They basically concede to the non-religious crowd the whole ballgame and keep an aesthetic belief about Christianity (or are nothing more than cultural Christians – Christians in the sense that we’re Americans, just something that they were born into and consider about as much as they consider their American-ness). To people who want their religion to really mean something, that isn’t a very good position.

    In former days, you could be this brilliant artist or even scientist within the confines of religion – now, basically, you can’t. Religion functionally eschews not just science but all modern culture. Where is the fabulous Christian music that’s modern and relevant – y’know, the Christian hip-hop, the Christian post-punk, the Christian pop music. Mostly . . . nowhere. There are a few Christian musicians out there, but modern music largely ignores (or is even hostile to) religion. The same is true in all the arts! Modern Christianity has really just given up except for this one thing, this one last bastion – fundamentalism. And even that can’t last. I believe it’s an inherently unstable construct. Like any intense outpouring of emotion, it’s exhausting to keep up.

    I am also wordy tonight, clearly.

  • Aj

    No one has the right to not be offended. Questioning religious beliefs isn’t confrontational, “not nice”, or impolite. Not that this sign was even doing that, the only idea that it is presenting is that atheists exist.

    A private company doesn’t have to facilitate free speech if it doesn’t want to. If these Christians can incentivize them to take the signs down then atheists are just going to have find ways to reverse that.

  • http://1minionsopinion.wordpress.com 1minion

    There’s a John Safran video of door to door atheists on youtube. He knocks on Mormon doors in Salt Lake City and it’s very amusing.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZT2cIpzMDY4

  • c.d.

    “Their agenda is wolf-in-sheep’s clothing political.”

    oh, the irony:

    “be wise as serpents and innocent as doves.”
    –Matthew 10:16

  • dm

    Free speech does not apply in the case of private companies, who are free to do as they please, accepting or rejecting customers at will. Having local government officials apply pressure on behalf of Christians is overstepping the bounds though, and those officials should get gone after in the worst possible way.

    The only way to control the the billboards is to own them, but I am sure than some creative contract making could transfer ownership (and therefore control) of the billboards for a limited time.

    Unfortunately, Christians have a lot more political, organizational and financial muscle than Atheists do, so unless atheists start tithing to support their nonbelief, the amount of pressure atheists can being to bear is always going to be limited.

  • http://www.sheeptoshawl.com writerdd

    After long and deep consideration, and with only a little humor, I’ve actually come to the conclusion that fundamentalist religion is the most mainstream form of religion in America.

    I was thinking something similar the other day. Actually, I think born-again or evangelical Christianity is mainstream, not the stricter fundamentalism. Still, it’s not right to call the old-fashioned Protestant denominations “mainstream” any more. They are not mainstream and they don’t represent the majority of American Christians. I would say Evangelical + Catholic = majority of US Christianity.

    (That’s just from personal observation, not from any formal survey. The Barna group has interesting data on this and they concluded that hard-core evangelicals are less than 15% of the population, which means there are as many atheists as evangelicals, but they have very strict ways of defining “evangelical.”)

  • Justin jm

    From the article…

    “It is a despicable act to allow that sign,” the 60-year-old man said in an interview, “and for just a few pieces of silver.”

    (bold emphasis mine)

    Apparently we’re all Judases now. But who did we betray?

  • http://www.sheeptoshawl.com writerdd

    We didn’t betray anyone.

    The billboard company apparently (obviously, to the reader anyway) is Christian and betrayed Jesus by taking the atheist add just to make money.

  • PrimeNumbers

    I think billboards with those lovely verses on them should be put up… “Happy shall be he, who taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones” comes to mind. Perhaps a picture of She Bears tearing apart forty children wouldn’t go amiss either….

  • tkl l

    I fail to see the issue here. Should Christians not have the right to voice their opposition ?

    This has got nothing to do with free/hate speech .

    The onus is on the billboard companies or whoever owns the ad space. Take up the issue with them. Everyone can be offended by everything and voice their approval or lack thereof.

  • http://corvustristis.livejournal.com Corvus

    The billboards turned down were the ones in my area, Fort Collins/Greely. It’s funny, because I’ve lived all over the place in CO and by my experience the Fort is one of the more secular areas of the state (which isn’t saying all that much, as this is Colorado, but compaired to the Springs we’ve got nothing). My experience is biased, of course, by the fact that I’m a university student and thus spend my time with the more liberal elements in town- this is a nice smack-in-the-face reminder of said bias.

  • http://www.asianatheist.blogspot.com gerry

    This billboard is either pro religion or pro stheist, depending on your aswer to the question. If so called christians answer the billboard with a “no, I don’t agree that there is no god,” then the billboard answer agrees with their opinion! If you answer yes it agrees with atheists.

    Doesn’t explain the irrationality of religious thinking.

  • Joost (Amsterdam)

    All religion is a fools game. I am so glad in Western Europe it’s been delegated more or less to the fringes of society and not much is heard from them because they really piss me of with their annoying morals based on “wisdom” from the ancient toilet mag they call the bible. Please get your religious beliefs out of my face and try to practice what you preach instead of throwing bullshit from the bible at me.

  • Miko

    It’s not surprising that Christians were the majority of complainers, seeing as Christians are the majority of the population. Seriously: whose first thought was “I bet the majority of complaints came from Hindus?”

    I wouldn’t recommend a counterattack (of the kind writerdd suggested). The kind of Christians who are complaining already have a paranoid persecution complex and pointing out their double standard is likely to do nothing but enlarge it. Also, we have to remember that the reason they became radicalized in the first place was their marginalization in the political process (implementing school choice would take away about 90% of their steam). No, what we should do is be unflappably reasonable and tolerant in the face of their protests, until they feel so silly that they stop caring that not everyone agrees completely with them. Besides, if you fight back you’ll end up angering a larger group of Christians that weren’t even aware of the original incident.

    This isn’t an issue of “hate speech,” since government wasn’t involved. For the same reason, this isn’t a First Amendment issue. Private companies (should) have an unlimited right to contract, and members of the public can petition or boycott for whatever reason they want, good or bad. And this is a good thing, since the alternative would be someone other than us first having to consider our reasons and give us an imprimatur.

    But here’s the thing: nine out of eleven did go up. So what do we do? In the future, groups send their billboard budgets to the companies hosting those nine and don’t both with the company hosting the two that were rejected. And then that company gets to decide whether it cares more about the message it tried to censor or the money it isn’t earning. And that’s why free markets are the greatest means ever devised for destroying racism, intolerance, inequality, etc.: people see that it’s in their own best interest to work with others regardless of group identities.

  • Marlotuck

    As a believer in and of God, I’d just like to say that I am in full support of these billboards as they a) recognize that a group of people need a cohesive voice b) recognize the need for a particular group of people to know that they are not alone in their beliefs or non-beliefs and c) because it asserts First Amendment Rights that apparently Fundamentalists believe were only granted to them.

  • Marlotuck

    Also, let us not generalize as much folks. By saying Christians, you’re talking about EVERY Christian, or believers in Christ, and let’s face it, there are some Christians out there that aren’t completely devoid of logic and love.

  • TE

    I have no problem with the billboard. But I do have a problem with the “what’d I do?” attitude of organized atheism. Don’t you think using a picture of the heavens in a message questioning the existence of God is a little confrontational?

  • http://www.sheeptoshawl.com writerdd

    I’m not really suggesting it either. It just comes to mind every time I hear about this kind of thing. Once a few years ago I said f*ck in a writer’s group bulletin board. A bunch of old lady Christians got their panties in a wad. I tried to explain to them how their constant referrals to God and Jesus were offensive to me but that I never complained because they were free to communicate in whatever style made them comfortable. They just could not get their heads wrapped around the idea that anyone could be offended by their use of language.

  • Aj

    TE Says:

    Don’t you think using a picture of the heavens in a message questioning the existence of God is a little confrontational?

    a) It’s not a message questioning the existence of God.
    b) Are you sure you know what confrontational means?

  • http://peacefulatheist.wordpress.com Lily

    Odd how some people’s response to what they think is hate speech (but isn’t) is to make actual hate speech …

    This reminds me of the Day of Silence, which was started to protest against anti-gay hate speech and hate crimes. Christians didn’t like this “promotion of the homosexual agenda” and decided to start the Day of Truth for promotion of an anti-gay agenda. Do as I say and not as I do, I guess.

  • http://www.banalleakage.com martymankins

    Thanks to 1minion for that YouTube link… very funny.

    These billboard haters appear to be threatened. If they are really secure in their beliefs, they shouldn’t have anything to be worried about.

  • Thijs

    People who think this is hate speech should burn in hell.
    I don’t believe in hell so this isn’t hate speech ;)

  • JimboB

    “Don’t believe in God? … ”

    Wait, which one are we referring to again? Why are the Christians assuming it’s their God?

  • Pingback: Do ignoramuses deserve free speech? « i get pissed

  • Miko

    An interesting comparison:

    Via Pharyngula, public complaint convinces a zoo to end a partnership with the Creation Museum. If you’re opposed to private individuals convincing a private company not to do business with another private company in the billboard case (with government involved at no stage), can you be in favor of the use of essentially the same tactic with the zoo?

  • Frank

    “And that’s why free markets are the greatest means ever devised for destroying racism, intolerance, inequality, etc.: people see that it’s in their own best interest to work with others regardless of group identities.”

    No offense to the poster of that quote but I just can’t see how that statement can be regarded as true. When have free markets ever destroyed any of those social ills listed? First of all, those social ills have yet to be destroyed and second, they’ve only been marginalized to certain degrees and often by the force of government intervention. Even private companies have to abide by certain government regulations. That’s why we have protected classes and why private companies are no longer able to operate with “Whites Only” signs and such. I don’t know if a case can be made that this billboard company engaged in religious discrimination by essentially saying “Christians Only” or “Believers Only”. Religious institutions have certain special exemptions from anti-discrimination laws, but AFIK that doesn’t apply to commercial businesses. I can agree that boycotts and other public pressure can help, but those tactics cut both ways as is evident in this case. Call me a socialist, commie, whatever, but I think that one of the main reasons to even have government is to protect the minority from the “tyranny of the majority”. I’m afraid if we’re relying on free market capitalism to protect atheists from theistic domination, we’re in serious trouble. Of course I’m open to being convinced otherwise.

  • TE

    a) It’s not a message questioning the existence of God.
    b) Are you sure you know what confrontational means?

    a) you’re right, it doesn’t question the existence of God

    b) yes I know what confrontational means, and the word aptly describes the use of a picture of the heavens in this context.

  • JSug

    b) yes I know what confrontational means, and the word aptly describes the use of a picture of the heavens in this context.

    I’m not sure you’re making yourself clear. You obviously think that a picture of a partly cloudy sky implies the idea of “heaven.” Personally, I disagree, but let’s set that aside for the moment. How does this signify confrontation to you?

  • TE

    You obviously think that a picture of a partly cloudy sky implies the idea of “heaven.”

    My favorite MST3K joke was when a movie’s credits played over a sky scene with sun beams shooting out from behind clouds and one of the characters quips “partly cloudy with chance of scattered God.” If you can see how someone might find that funny, it is legitimate for me to see “heaven” in the billboard’s background image. Artists have been using sun and clouds to signify heaven for centuries.

    How does this signify confrontation to you?

    The sky scene by itself doesn’t signify confrontation. And I see nothing confrontational in the worded message on the billboard. It is the juxtaposition of the two that strikes me as charged. Why not just the worded message on a plain white background? Or, if you insist on some visual interest, a seascape? This particular image was chosen deliberately.

    From the third paragraph of the article;

    The billboards are not about them. They’re not even mentioning, much less attacking, their beliefs.

    I think that the background image, if viewed as being “heavenly”, counts as a mention of a Christian belief system. Suggesting that no other belief system is mentioned seems willfully naive.

  • Richard Wade

    TE,
    I think the sky background was very deliberately chosen, but perhaps not for the reason of confrontation so much as for contrast. This is a billboard put up in the U.S. It is in a culture dominated by Christian beliefs and by Christian imagery, including as you said, the use of the sky to represent heaven and even to represent God.

    The atheists or the doubters this billboard is speaking to are awash in this Christian culture, and so the God they “don’t believe in” will most likely be the Christian God that they have heard about every day of their lives. The message doesn’t say “Don’t believe in gods?” It says “God,” meaning the Christian god that they have paid dearly for with isolation and even persecution for not believing. One of the most common problems among atheists in this country is isolation. They have to keep their unbelief a secret and they often do not know about any others of like mind. The sky-billboard is not attacking the Christians, it is reaching out for the non-believers who feel lost and alone in a sea of Christians who for the most part will not treat them well if they openly express themselves.

    The use of the sky background is to help the doubters or atheists see the contrast between what they see and what the, yes, Christians all around them see. When Christians look at the sky they see heaven or God. When atheists look at the sky they see the sky. They see gas, water and dust. When others look up and see God and heaven it can be a lonely thing to look up for companionship and see only gas, water and dust, so the second part of the message offers them human companionship and fellowship instead. “You’re not alone. We’re here too, and we can be your companions. Call us.”

    It is very sad that this positive offer of hope for human companionship is seen by those who don’t need that companionship as an attack on their beliefs.

  • anonymous

    I don’t want to say too much but keep your eyes on the Bible Belt over the next couple of months. We will soon be getting our own version of the Free Thought Action billboard going. I’m almost as excited as I am scared…almost!

  • humanist

    I fail to see the issue here.

    Some people wear their ignorance and inability to comprehend like a badge of honor.

    But I do have a problem with the “what’d I do?” attitude of organized atheism.

    Bully for you and your victim-blaming.

    Don’t you think using a picture of the heavens in a message questioning the existence of God is a little confrontational?

    I suppose it confronts people so stupid that they think there’s actually a fairy up in the sky, but most Christians claim that their conception of God is more sophisticated than that. The fact is that simply proclaiming oneself an atheist, or even implying that atheists aren’t demons, is viewed as confrontational by many Christians — notably, the sort who are complaining about these billboards.

  • humanist

    They see gas, water and dust.

    I see a colorless gas? I don’t think so. In this case I see clouds (not water and dust) and diffused blue light due to wavelength filtering, and of course there’s much more to see in the sky than that. Naive reductionism is an erroneous ontology.

  • http://bunda.org SDR

    You people who keep saying “THIS ISN’T A FREE SPEECH ISSUE!” need to give it a rest. No one is claiming it’s a free speech issues, that doesn’t change that fact that it is bigoted censorship. Something doesn’t have to violate the First Amendment to be censorship and/or be wrong.

  • Pingback: Message to the Religious Who Support Equal Rights - Secular Discrimination Report

  • Richard Wade

    humanist,

    I see a colorless gas? I don’t think so. In this case I see clouds (not water and dust) and diffused blue light due to wavelength filtering, and of course there’s much more to see in the sky than that. Naive reductionism is an erroneous ontology.

    Thank you for your skilled demonstration of how to miss the point. :)

  • Steve_1

    I saw the sign on Hwy 24 near Academy in Colorado Springs (Platte Ave) and it made me smile. I had heard of the signs up in Denver but hadn’t realized we had one here. Great stuff.

  • Pingback: The Language Battle (1): Discrimination Without a Retort « Homosecular Gaytheist (and friends!)

  • http://www.unindoctrinated.com/ EvilGod

    @tkl

    I fail to see the issue here. Should Christians not have the right to voice their opposition ?

    This has got nothing to do with free/hate speech .

    The onus is on the billboard companies or whoever owns the ad space. Take up the issue with them. Everyone can be offended by everything and voice their approval or lack thereof.

    The issue is hypocrisy. The complaining xtians have no problem with their use of free speech but no one else’s. And although we atheists see that the fact they feel that we have threatened their religion somehow, whilst not actually making a statement against any religion at all shows that they have doubts, we know that they’ll never see it. As for the right to complain, no one is saying they don’t have the right but a little sense would be nice. Do those with Peanut allergies complain when they see a billboard advertising Peanut Butter? We are just making the insane argument that christians should behave rationally.
    Did anybody of any other religion complain or were they strong enough in their faith that they knew it wasn’t referring to their god?

  • Monica

    This is not about believing or not believing in God; no billboard that says “I dont believe in x political party” or “I dont like x TV channel” or “I dont like x basketball player” will be taken as friendly. Why is it soooo hard to focus on sharing good ideas and love and peace, instead of being subtle at attacking each other. If it was merely about sharing a feeling, why are there no billboards saying “If you’re divorced, you’re not alone”, “If you’re fat, you’re not alone”, “If you’re a hypocrite, you’re not alone”. People waste way too much time refusing to listen, to change, to admit they’re wrong, so they defend themselves…

  • http://www.unindoctrinated.com/ EvilGod

    @ Monica
    Why would there need to be a “If you’re a hypocrite, you’re not alone” billboard? They know they’re not alone, they have a huge support network and can meet up with other hypocrites at meetings all over the country every Sunday.
    This billboard isn’t aimed at you or the other “People who waste way too much time refusing to listen, to change, to admit they’re wrong, so they defend themselves” It’s aimed at those who have rational doubts.
    Those who are strong in their faith aren’t so easily offended.