Comments on: Not Happy With the Atheist Signs? Blame the Christians

By: Port Apathy » Blog Archive » Special treatment

Port Apathy » Blog Archive » Special treatment — Wed, 17 Dec 2008 19:23:50 +0000

[...] Alliance Defense Fund sued for the right to put a Christian manger in the state capital building. (Different link) This building probably had a Christian Christmas Tree in it for decades. At some point the people [...]

By: Joe

Joe — Wed, 10 Dec 2008 14:14:36 +0000

Some of you seem almost willfully ignorant of the actual issue: it has nothing to do with the sign’s atheistic nature, but with its (obviously successful) attempt to deride, belittle and offend. If you love the sign’s nasty message, or think that there should be no signs at all, or that the offended citizenry are necessary casualties in the battle for secularism, that’s fine, though I obviously disagree. But the red herring of “theists oppose atheist signs”, the dishonest framing of the issue, should be removed from the ideological rhetoric of any honest and intelligent person. Although it’s a handy way to fluff up an ideological hard-on, it’s also ideologically syphilitic.

But who doesn’t love a good lay?

And though I know that indiscriminately insulting Bill O’Reilly is a time-tested way to elicit Pavlovian Progressive applause and hand-jobs, I feel compelled to point out that this is the same basis on which O’Reilly objects–he has no problem with a non-antagonistic atheist display. He was also cool with the “Goodness’ Sake” bus ad.

There are, of course, many reactionary, vehement, ideologically-driven theists who oppose any atheistic display, and they are missing the point, too. But there’s no need to join them. There are secular theists who oppose any signs, and everone-gets-a-sign theists as well. A lot of them. Even if only a quarter of U.S. theists approve of allowing an atheist display, that’s over 60 million people who got a big, undeserved FUCK YOU.

The poem on the back of the plaque presents us with the Solstice gift of Perfect Irony:

So many Gods, so many creeds,
So many paths that wind and wind,
When just the art of being kind
Is all this sad world needs.

Someone else must have put it there when Dan wasn’t looking.

By: Bill O’Reilly and the War on Christmas « Tiny Frog

Bill O’Reilly and the War on Christmas « Tiny Frog — Wed, 10 Dec 2008 02:26:53 +0000

[...] 10, 2008 by tinyfrog I’ve been seeing this story around on some blogs [...]

By: Jamie G.

Jamie G. — Wed, 10 Dec 2008 00:26:15 +0000

About FFRF’s sign, I don’t think that they should have put it up. And I don’t think there should be a nativity scene next to it. In fact, all the displays need to be kept out, period. I’m all for our public buildings having a sterile feel and look to them. Post the Declaration of Independence on the wall. Put up portraits of Presidents (Buddha knows most American’s have no idea who the 23rd, 32nd, or 6th President was). It’s a State House, so decorate it with State-y things, but leave all the religious BS out, and back at the church house on private property.

By: Jesse

Jesse — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 23:21:28 +0000

No, If you’re not happy about the sign then blame the people responsible for creating it. It’s message is insulting and obnoxious to religious people, rather than something like Richard suggested in his previous comment. I wish that they hadn’t displayed the stupid sign at all – it can only make atheist public image worse.

By: Bruce Critelli

Bruce Critelli — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 20:29:52 +0000

I sent them a nice note.
Don’t forget to wish them a happy holiday season!

By: Miko

Miko — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 20:25:07 +0000

Actually, this kind of cross goes on more often than you’d think (at first glance), and in both directions. Probably the best example is the war on evolution being ramped up due to controversy over school vouchers for religious schools. As long as we’re intent on using government as a club (in the “big stick” sense of the word, although it’s certainly an exclusive social group as well), we shouldn’t be surprised that all sides want their equal chance to bash each others’ brains in.

By: postsimian

postsimian — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 19:32:31 +0000

I sent them a thank-you note. Thanks for the link, Hermant!

By: Step

Step — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 19:22:04 +0000

I’m not sure what I was expecting when I subscribed to this site. Maybe intelligent discourse? Or, as the name suggests, a friendly approach and chance for discussion?

Either way I have been let down. All I see in my feed lately are insults and poorly worded critiques – unless you like preaching to the (atheistic, thus figurative) choir. So I acknowledge that I, as a rational, free-thinking Christian, am quite obviously not the target for this blog. I’ve unsubscribed, but not without some sadness.

It seems there really is not much room for common discourse nor many that really seek truth at the expense of all else, on either side. *sigh*

For what it’s worth, I don’t have any problem with the principle of an Atheist sign at the display either. I think it was a poor use of the opportunity from a pure marketting standpoint (and obviously poor taste), but since I’m not an atheist that doesn’t bother me at all.

By: writerdd

writerdd — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 18:58:06 +0000

Well this certainly makes the story much more interesting. Hahaha.

I wish it was just a secular holiday greeting, like the “Be Good for Goodness Sake” bus signs, participating in the holiday celebration. Dan Barker is a big fat Scrooge.